(June 2, 2012 at 4:37 am)Occam Wrote: I think that in day-to-day life we seem to accept these principles:
Not all of us.
(June 2, 2012 at 4:37 am)Occam Wrote: (1) A person deserves an increasing degree of respect as his degree of knowledge increases.
No, the respect in that case is warranted only if the knowledge is self-attained. Further, no one respects someone's knowledge unless it is being applied. As for the first, we don't particularly respect the internet, which is a veritable storehouse of knowledge. And we don't particularly respect anyone who simply rattles off facts without using them.
As far as your god is concerned, the word knowledge is irrelevant to him. Further, he is never seen doing anything with whatever he knows.
(June 2, 2012 at 4:37 am)Occam Wrote: (2) A person deserves an increasing degree of respect as his degree of power increases.
Wrong. The response to that is fear. You don't respect a tyrant, you fear him.
(June 2, 2012 at 4:37 am)Occam Wrote: (3) A person deserves an increasing degree of respect as his degree of moral perfection increases.
Then your god utterly fails this criteria given the litany of crimes he has committed.
(June 2, 2012 at 4:37 am)Occam Wrote: According to my belief system, holiness is (roughly speaking) the degree of respect deserved by an entity which is all-knowing, all-powerful, and morally perfect, under principles (1)-(3).
Then your god is most certainly unholy.
