God's injustice towards Adam and Eve

[ShaMan]

<snip>

...a loving God who has a purpose for every one of His creations...

'Purpose' indeed

[Statler Waldorf]

'Purpose' indeed

In your Universe those are just poorly nourished bags of water and tissue (that should have been destroyed in the womb of course) that you are simply outcompeting for resources and the opportunity to spread your genes into the gene pool for no real reason other than to perpetuate your own line of bags of water and tissue into the pointless and uncertain future. I wonder…why that picture bothers you so much then?

[ShaMan]

In your Universe those are just poorly nourished bags of water and tissue (that should have been destroyed in the womb of course) that you are simply outcompeting for resources and the opportunity to spread your genes into the gene pool for no real reason other than to perpetuate your own line of bags of water and tissue into the pointless and uncertain future. I wonder…why that picture bothers you so much then?

Maybe you could mine my past posts to see where I've ever said the things you think I believe. Let's see...

"Bag of meat" - Never said it.

"Just water and tissue" - Never said it.

"That should have been destroyed in the womb" - Never said it.

"Out-competing for resources" - Never said it.

"Spreading genes for no reason" - Never said it.

"Pointless uncertain future" - Never said it.


I never said that the picture bothered me or whether it did not. I'm simply curious about your version of god's 'purpose' for allowing his creation [which he obviously loves ] to suffer if he's as 'loving' as you claim.

Shall I group you in with Westborough Baptist Church as you've grouped me with a narrow margin of certain atheists? Shove your prejudice up Jesus' ass!

[Ryantology]

In your Universe those are just poorly nourished bags of water and tissue (that should have been destroyed in the womb of course) that you are simply outcompeting for resources and the opportunity to spread your genes into the gene pool for no real reason other than to perpetuate your own line of bags of water and tissue into the pointless and uncertain future. I wonder…why that picture bothers you so much then?

That's quite a funny response considering how closely it follows your long and boring gishgallop asserting over and over again that, in your universe, humans are just created objects that have no more right to exist than does any fictional character or inanimate object, and that this is happening to them only because they completely deserve it.

I don't wonder why the picture doesn't appear to bother you in the slightest.

[Brakeman]

In your Universe those are just poorly nourished bags of water and tissue (that should have been destroyed in the womb of course) that you are simply outcompeting for resources and the opportunity to spread your genes into the gene pool for no real reason other than to perpetuate your own line of bags of water and tissue into the pointless and uncertain future. I wonder…why that picture bothers you so much then?

We evolved to form an advanced "herd" mentality where we don't just care for our young like most all mammals, or our nearby neighbors like elephants, but also for far away and conceptual members of our species.

All without any help from little green elves, flying fairies, evil possessive demons, or Emo christian sky gods!

[Statler Waldorf]

[pocaracas]

[Statler Waldorf]

Not everyone... you go one "truth" farther...
And that truth is not self-evident.
Not like the presupposition that 1 is not zero.

No, everyone presupposes that God exists, some explicitly some implicitly but it’s impossible to formulate a cogent conceptual scheme without Him in there.

Right here:

Come on Pocaracas, you know that the law of parsimony deals with simplicity, not elegance. I also never tried to argue that my view was true because it was more elegant, I was simply arguing against the assertion that it was somehow “screwed up”.

[pocaracas]

Not everyone... you go one "truth" farther...
And that truth is not self-evident.
Not like the presupposition that 1 is not zero.

No, everyone presupposes that God exists, some explicitly some implicitly but it’s impossible to formulate a cogent conceptual scheme without Him in there.

You sound like a muslim claiming everyone is born with the concept of god ingrained.
No, that's not in accordance with the available data. A person born and raised with no contact with any religious idea will, for the most part, have no notion of any god, hence no presupposition of it.
I say "for the most part" because someone must have come up with the notion of a god, so it's not impossible for such a child to come up with it again.

And yes it is possible to formulate a "cogent conceptual scheme" without any god in the picture.

Right here:

Come on Pocaracas, you know that the law of parsimony deals with simplicity, not elegance. I also never tried to argue that my view was true because it was more elegant, I was simply arguing against the assertion that it was somehow “screwed up”.

Very well...I missed that detail...
The way things were written in that sentence seemed to hint that you were applying Occam's Razor... my bad... carry on.

[ShaMan]

We all deserve to wake up in Hell.

Christians? Most I've met, yes.

All of your presuppositions about my worldview are borne in your mind and are most likely reflective of your overall prejudices in general. Your insistent need to wrathfully apply them to me and other Human beings whom you've never met is a sure sign of a deeply deluded mind bent on control with narcissistic tendencies that must be fed by a form of metaphysical 'justice' to make you feel superior to others.