God's injustice towards Adam and Eve

[Ryantology]

No it’s not.

To very slightly paraphrase a recently-seen retort:
"How is it not? Merely asserting that does not make it so."

Of course I can, where would your rights come from?...your creator. God created all things, including your rights.

My rights don't "come" from anywhere. They are standards groups of people agree to recognize.

Yup, and he has the right to do this because He created us. You’re conflating a necessary condition with a sufficient condition, as our creator God is more powerful than us yes, but that is not why He has the right to do with us as He pleases. He has that right because as our creator He owns us.

Who says he has that right? I have no say in it. I don't have the power to disagree. And that's precisely the point. Whatever stupid and false justification you come up with, God's status as creator means nothing on its own.

If I create an artificial heart, do I have the right to destroy it after it is installed in someone else's body? If I create a skyscraper, do I have the right to blow it up?

Actually that’s backwards; sin compels you to not “give a damn about Christianity”. Those who have been washed of this sin want to follow Christ.

Those who want heavenly rewards and/or avoid eternal punishment (but it's totally not about power!!), or those who were brought up to do so, follow Christ.

That’s also false; the unregenerate could see a dead man rise from the dead and still not believe their will is entirely in bondage to their sin (Luke 16).

Yeah, except when I'm bored and on Netflix, I see about as many dead walking as I see gods existing.

So it was morally right for the Nazis to brutally kill six million Jews? It’s morally right for men to rape women since they are more powerful? It was morally right for OJ Simpson to kill his wife and her friend since he was more powerful?

I personally do not think any of these things is morally right. Obviously, there are many who don't share my moral standards.

None of these things would be right in a Christian Universe; I’ll take that Universe any day.

All of these things are right in your mythical Christian universe, as long as God is the one doing them. All of these things are acts that are entirely unacceptable to anybody, regardless of any qualifications, in a universe alleged to contain objective and inviolable moral standards. I guess you get an exception if you make the rules, just like in a totalitarian regime.

Well you did not actually ask anything you merely made a statement.

A statement which is obviously inviting a response in the same respect as a question, Semantic Waldorf.

I already explained, you’re conflating necessary conditions with sufficient conditions, having might is not enough. It’d be like saying, “Well since fire requires oxygen anytime you have oxygen you also have fire.” “Since being a creator requires power, anytime you have power you are the creator.” That does not follow, you have to actually have the ability to create something to have the creator/creature distinction and not simply have more power.

I conflate nothing. You insist that I have no rights of any kind simply because I am a created object. You have so far justified this by referring to the relationship between creators and inanimate objects, or creators and fictional characters, justifying atrocities by dehumanizing everybody and insisting that it's okay to do these things as long as the proper relationship exists. You're insisting that God does not justify himself by his power, yet you cite God's power of creation as the justification for everything he does. A pre-schooler could spot the logical contradiction here.

That’s your example? Yes, it was quite easy to dismiss your entire OP because as you have correctly noted it was merely your opinion. Of course, your opinion does not prove anything in the realm of logical reasoning and proof. I tried to point this out, but alas.

Since you have done nothing but retort with opinions of your own, we're quite on even ground here.

God has to be the ultimate standard of justice because that’s an analytical truth that comes with being defined as a god; supremacy. If God was bound to some exterior definition of justice that did not derive from Himself then He’d not be a god.

God and I have two different ideas of justice. Since it is not his power, what objectively-observable phenomena justifies the idea that his is superior to mine?

If you’re going to start a thread completely concerning the injustice of God I am going to expect that you are at least able to prove or demonstrate that He is indeed unjust with more than your mere opinion. Too much to ask for?

Yes. Asking to objectively prove injustice is nonsensical and invalid. There is no such thing as an objective standard of justice.

No it’s “God is just by definition.” Your objection to me asking for actual proof seems to assume that, “God is unjust until proven otherwise.” You’re guilty of the very sin you’re whining about here.

Since you seem to think it is possible to objectively prove justice, it's not a 'sin' to ask you to justify your position by objectively proving that he is just. If you can't do it, it's only because it can't be done.

That’s the red herring fallacy; this thread is concerning the injustice of God not the existence of God. You have failed at demonstrating that even the concept of Yahweh-whether real or not-is unjust.

Is it really a red herring? I'm not asking you specifically to prove his existence here. I'm just pointing out that you can't prove the foundation of your assertions, and yet you make those assertions as if they are obviously and factually true.

The red herring fallacy again. You can choose whatever analogy you like- Bowerman and Knight owning Nike in the 1970s is a good one- but if you create something you own it. God created us, God owns us.

Dodge, dodge, dodge. Nike is not a human being and dismantling a company is not the equivalent of killing a human being. Can you try proving your point without comparing human beings to inanimate objects?

No, the fact that the Nazis were violating the decreed will of He who did own the Jews.

It doesn't matter what meaningless justification you come up with. Had God told Hitler to massacre Jews in death camps, you would believe it was not just okay, but a moral imperative.

According to you what the Nazis did would have not even been morally wrong if they had won the war since societies determine their own morality, pretty disgusting when you think about it.

According to me, it is immoral to harm another human being except in self-defense. My personal moral code is not the moral code of the universe. I do not personally believe that might justifies anything at all. I think people who justify actions based upon might are wrong. But, there is nothing objective which makes my morals (or anyone else's) objectively superior, or inferior, to such a person's. Unlike you, I don't pretend that my morals are the standard by which all should be judged.

It really boils down to what defines morals and justice. You define your god's morals and justice as being based solely upon his whims, where the opinions of his creations mean nothing.

One hypothetical precept of my moral code would be that, if I had the power and ability to create a being with human-level sentience, that would not give me the right to destroy it. Obviously, I have the right to destroy, for instance, the text of this post, as it is my creation. Unlike you, I don't morally equivocate human beings with objects that aren't alive, have no will and feel no pain. I don't accept that simply being a creator gives one a blanket justification to harm or destroy absolutely anything one creates, because that's just a way of saying "might makes right" without using those three specific words.