(December 21, 2015 at 2:05 pm)Delicate Wrote:(December 21, 2015 at 1:54 pm)Cato Wrote: Where is the requirement to do so?
It's in Dawkins' quote. He's working under the assumption that people have to take responsibility for their actions. Actions which, in the context of "belief in a sacrifice", clearly refer to moral actions.
Now if you reject this requirement, you reject Dawkins' point. Which I do too. Just for slightly different reasons.
Another fine demonstration of you either not getting the point or being intentionally obtuse. Dawkins suggests that people take responsibility for their actions, hardly much to argue with there. But, this doesn't stop you from swooping in with this moral edict that all moral transgressions be rectified 100%, something Dawkins never claims.
Since I'm forced to address your inanity again, you fail to provide meaning for what you mean by 'rectify'. Any normal meaning of the words can't possibly apply to the Christian moral system since the victim is left out of the exchange. There's no rectification for wrongs in Christian morality, only vicarious atonement; they're entirely different.
