The point of the thought-exercise is that this robot DOES have free will, what we call Artificial Intelligence, based on its programming. An omniscient programmer would know, then that his code would go awry when the robot took control of its own decisions, resulting in the murders. Blaming the AI is pointless, if the programmer is omniscient.
How long will it take you to reason it through, and see that there is no "higher purpose" but what we create, and that the sins are all stuff clearly made up by human beings and attributed to God, not the kinds of things a being greater than the entire universe would care about?
How and why and with whom we have sex? REALLY!? That's exactly what I'd expect a group of evolved-intelligent chimpanzee cousins to obsess about, not God.
Death for non-obedience? REALLY?!? That's exactly what I'd expect tribal warrior-shepherds to worry about, not God.
I actually considered listing about a dozen more that are clearly the work of man and not of an eternal being I could respect, but my point is already made, I trust.
You're quite correct; I don't think The Problem of Evil is a valid argument against God, except in the specific context of claiming that sins (or the nature to do so) are something we "inherited" somehow from our forefathers, as told in the founding mythologies of Christianity. You make few testable claims about your deity, but when you do (as here), we can compare them to our understanding of reality, and find them lacking. According to the story, God created the first man and then placed temptation for greater knowledge in front of him, knowing that man was likely to reach out and take it, then feels the need to destroy us all for the fruits (geddit?) of that decision, unless we pledge undying devotion to the blood-sacrifice savior (himself) he had to send to be murdered in our place.
Okay, Robot, you killed all those children by following the program I put into your head. I guess I shouldn't have put them into your test-area before I was sure you were ready. Normally, I'd have to destroy you for doing what your programming allowed, but instead I'm going to shoot my son, Jimmy, in your place, so I don't have to destroy you. As long as you tell me that you accept that Jimmy died in your place, then I'll let you live. And I'm not going to change your program... but if you accept Jimmy's sacrifice, you should stop wanting to slaughter children. Good luck!
How long will it take you to reason it through, and see that there is no "higher purpose" but what we create, and that the sins are all stuff clearly made up by human beings and attributed to God, not the kinds of things a being greater than the entire universe would care about?
How and why and with whom we have sex? REALLY!? That's exactly what I'd expect a group of evolved-intelligent chimpanzee cousins to obsess about, not God.
Death for non-obedience? REALLY?!? That's exactly what I'd expect tribal warrior-shepherds to worry about, not God.
I actually considered listing about a dozen more that are clearly the work of man and not of an eternal being I could respect, but my point is already made, I trust.
You're quite correct; I don't think The Problem of Evil is a valid argument against God, except in the specific context of claiming that sins (or the nature to do so) are something we "inherited" somehow from our forefathers, as told in the founding mythologies of Christianity. You make few testable claims about your deity, but when you do (as here), we can compare them to our understanding of reality, and find them lacking. According to the story, God created the first man and then placed temptation for greater knowledge in front of him, knowing that man was likely to reach out and take it, then feels the need to destroy us all for the fruits (geddit?) of that decision, unless we pledge undying devotion to the blood-sacrifice savior (himself) he had to send to be murdered in our place.
Okay, Robot, you killed all those children by following the program I put into your head. I guess I shouldn't have put them into your test-area before I was sure you were ready. Normally, I'd have to destroy you for doing what your programming allowed, but instead I'm going to shoot my son, Jimmy, in your place, so I don't have to destroy you. As long as you tell me that you accept that Jimmy died in your place, then I'll let you live. And I'm not going to change your program... but if you accept Jimmy's sacrifice, you should stop wanting to slaughter children. Good luck!
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
