| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"quibbler" |
| Date: |
09 Sep 2007 11:41:19 AM |
| Object: |
Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
This is fairly obvious, but that still means that most Christers won't be
able to come up with it on their own.
In response to the Problem of Evil, judeo-xian-muslim apologists often
try to counter that evil is necessary because otherwise man would lack
free will, and would just be a robot who could not genuinely choose to
follow god. But, according to the Edenic story, Adam exercised plenty of
free will before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (ToK).
For example, Adam was free to name animals, and bug god to make him a
girlfriend. So apparently God could make a world where there was no evil
and yet free will still existed.
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
The upshot is that the FreeWill Defense will not help out judeo-xians or
muslims who claim to believe in the story of Eden.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
09 Sep 2007 02:12:16 PM |
|
|
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.214dd006a5ffb1e998a063@news.readfreenews.net...
This is fairly obvious, but that still means that most Christers won't be
able to come up with it on their own.
In response to the Problem of Evil, judeo-xian-muslim apologists often
try to counter that evil is necessary because otherwise man would lack
free will, and would just be a robot who could not genuinely choose to
follow god. But, according to the Edenic story, Adam exercised plenty of
free will before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (ToK).
For example, Adam was free to name animals, and bug god to make him a
girlfriend. So apparently God could make a world where there was no evil
and yet free will still existed.
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
The upshot is that the FreeWill Defense will not help out judeo-xians or
muslims who claim to believe in the story of Eden.
Screw that, the Jesus-character by itself is the Christian proof of concept
that you can have a sinless person with free will.
Why didn't the god-character make us all like the Jesus-character? Because
it's either stupid, or malicious, or both.
Luckily, it's all fiction.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
10 Sep 2007 08:43:41 AM |
|
|
On Sep 10, 7:12 am, "Denis Loubet" <dlou...@io.com> wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.214dd006a5ffb1e998a063@news.readfreenews.net...
This is fairly obvious, but that still means that most Christers won't be
able to come up with it on their own.
In response to the Problem of Evil, judeo-xian-muslim apologists often
try to counter that evil is necessary because otherwise man would lack
free will, and would just be a robot who could not genuinely choose to
follow god. But, according to the Edenic story, Adam exercised plenty of
free will before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (ToK).
For example, Adam was free to name animals, and bug god to make him a
girlfriend. So apparently God could make a world where there was no evil
and yet free will still existed.
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
The upshot is that the FreeWill Defense will not help out judeo-xians or
muslims who claim to believe in the story of Eden.
Screw that, the Jesus-character by itself is the Christian proof of concept
that you can have a sinless person with free will.
Why didn't the god-character make us all like the Jesus-character? Because
it's either stupid, or malicious, or both.
Maybe its' omnipotence was in for repairs the day it made humans;-).
Luckily, it's all fiction.
It's extraordinary that so many people with access to a modern
education grow up believing the bronze age mythology they get
indoctrinated with as children.
--
Denis Loubet
dlou...@io.comhttp://www.io.com/~dloubethttp://www.ashenempires.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
23 Sep 2007 03:56:56 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 06:43:41 -0700, Llanzlan Klazmon
<bill.m.thomas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 10, 7:12 am, "Denis Loubet" <dlou...@io.com> wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.214dd006a5ffb1e998a063@news.readfreenews.net...
This is fairly obvious, but that still means that most Christers won't be
able to come up with it on their own.
In response to the Problem of Evil, judeo-xian-muslim apologists often
try to counter that evil is necessary because otherwise man would lack
free will, and would just be a robot who could not genuinely choose to
follow god. But, according to the Edenic story, Adam exercised plenty of
free will before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (ToK).
For example, Adam was free to name animals, and bug god to make him a
girlfriend. So apparently God could make a world where there was no evil
and yet free will still existed.
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
The upshot is that the FreeWill Defense will not help out judeo-xians or
muslims who claim to believe in the story of Eden.
Screw that, the Jesus-character by itself is the Christian proof of concept
that you can have a sinless person with free will.
Why didn't the god-character make us all like the Jesus-character? Because
it's either stupid, or malicious, or both.
Maybe its' omnipotence was in for repairs the day it made humans;-).
Nah. It had the hypocrite option.
Luckily, it's all fiction.
It's extraordinary that so many people with access to a modern
education grow up believing the bronze age mythology they get
indoctrinated with as children.
Not really. Stark gibbering raving terror has the tendency to
generate that response.
Alikhat got it right:
What do I dislike about theism?...Let me count the ways...
I dislike the hypocrisy,
the corruption,
the greed
and the lies.
I dislike the veneration of ignorance,
the glorification of idiocy,
the wild-eyed hatred of progress
and the fear of education, which send the faithful shrieking,
vampire-like, from the light of knowledge.
I dislike the way in which prejudice
is passed off as piety.
The way superstition is peddled as wisdom.
The way intolerance is raised to the lofty heights
of "Truth".
I dislike how hatred is taught as love,
how fear is instilled as kindness,
how slavery is pressed as freedom,
and how contempt for life is dressed up and adored as spirituality.
I dislike the shackles religions place on the mind,
corrupting, twisting and crushing the spirit
until the believer has been brought down to a suitable state
of worthlessness.
So lost and self-loathing, so bereft of hope or pride,
that they can look into the hallucinated face of their imaginary
oppressor
and feel unbounded love and gratitude for the additional suffering
it has declined,
as yet,
to visit upon them.
I dislike people's need for a communal delusion,
like drug addicts who unite just to share the same needle.
I dislike the way reason is reviled as a vice
and reality is decreed to be a matter of convenience.
The way common sense and ordinary human decency
get re-named "holy law" and advertised as the sole province
of the faithful.
I dislike religions' wholesale theft of any number
of ancient mythologies,
only to turn around and proclaim
how "unique" their doctrine is.
I dislike how intelligence is held as suspect
and inquiry is reviled as a high crime.
I dislike the pillaging of the impoverished,
the extortion of the gullible,
the manipulation of the ignorant
and the domination of the weak.
I dislike the invention of sins
for the satisfaction of those who desire to punish.
I dislike the demonization of unbelievers,
The ill-concealed hate of proselytizers,
The hysterical rants of holy rollers,
The wigged-out warnings of psychic healers,
The dismantling of public education via religious school vouchers,
The erosion of civil rights by theocratic right-wingers,
The righteous wrath of gun-toting true believers,
The destruction wrought by holy warriors,
The blood-drenched fatwas of ayatollas,
and the apocalyptic prophesies of unmedicated messiahs.
Most of all, though, I dislike the certain knowledge
that religion,
in one grotesque form or other,
will be with us so long as there is a single dark, cobwebbed corner
of the human imagination
that a believer can stuff a god into.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
23 Sep 2007 03:51:57 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 13:12:16 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.214dd006a5ffb1e998a063@news.readfreenews.net...
This is fairly obvious, but that still means that most Christers won't be
able to come up with it on their own.
In response to the Problem of Evil, judeo-xian-muslim apologists often
try to counter that evil is necessary because otherwise man would lack
free will, and would just be a robot who could not genuinely choose to
follow god. But, according to the Edenic story, Adam exercised plenty of
free will before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (ToK).
For example, Adam was free to name animals, and bug god to make him a
girlfriend. So apparently God could make a world where there was no evil
and yet free will still existed.
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
The upshot is that the FreeWill Defense will not help out judeo-xians or
muslims who claim to believe in the story of Eden.
Screw that, the Jesus-character by itself is the Christian proof of concept
that you can have a sinless person with free will.
Uh uh. The fictional headcase sinned often.
Why didn't the god-character make us all like the Jesus-character? Because
it's either stupid, or malicious, or both.
Both. Plus add terminally ignorant, and a weakling as well.
Luckily, it's all fiction.
Yes.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
24 Sep 2007 10:47:22 AM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:t6acf39rl5p11l53kc66jjg1qgk6kanir2@4ax.com...
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 13:12:16 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.214dd006a5ffb1e998a063@news.readfreenews.net...
This is fairly obvious, but that still means that most Christers won't
be
able to come up with it on their own.
In response to the Problem of Evil, judeo-xian-muslim apologists often
try to counter that evil is necessary because otherwise man would lack
free will, and would just be a robot who could not genuinely choose to
follow god. But, according to the Edenic story, Adam exercised plenty
of
free will before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (ToK).
For example, Adam was free to name animals, and bug god to make him a
girlfriend. So apparently God could make a world where there was no
evil
and yet free will still existed.
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
The upshot is that the FreeWill Defense will not help out judeo-xians or
muslims who claim to believe in the story of Eden.
Screw that, the Jesus-character by itself is the Christian proof of
concept
that you can have a sinless person with free will.
Uh uh. The fictional headcase sinned often.
Gasp! You mean you don't agree with all the ad-hoc EXCUSES Christians have
offered over the centuries?
You heartless cynic!
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http//www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
28 Sep 2007 08:21:42 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 10:47:22 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:t6acf39rl5p11l53kc66jjg1qgk6kanir2@4ax.com...
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 13:12:16 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.214dd006a5ffb1e998a063@news.readfreenews.net...
This is fairly obvious, but that still means that most Christers won't
be
able to come up with it on their own.
In response to the Problem of Evil, judeo-xian-muslim apologists often
try to counter that evil is necessary because otherwise man would lack
free will, and would just be a robot who could not genuinely choose to
follow god. But, according to the Edenic story, Adam exercised plenty
of
free will before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (ToK).
For example, Adam was free to name animals, and bug god to make him a
girlfriend. So apparently God could make a world where there was no
evil
and yet free will still existed.
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
The upshot is that the FreeWill Defense will not help out judeo-xians or
muslims who claim to believe in the story of Eden.
Screw that, the Jesus-character by itself is the Christian proof of
concept
that you can have a sinless person with free will.
Uh uh. The fictional headcase sinned often.
Gasp! You mean you don't agree with all the ad-hoc EXCUSES Christians have
offered over the centuries?
Of course not.
You heartless cynic!
Nah. Their 'fruit' is constantly rotten and they're quite proud of
that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
23 Sep 2007 03:49:22 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 10:41:19 -0600, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com>
wrote:
This is fairly obvious, but that still means that most Christers won't be
able to come up with it on their own.
In response to the Problem of Evil, judeo-xian-muslim apologists often
try to counter that evil is necessary because otherwise man would lack
free will, and would just be a robot who could not genuinely choose to
follow god.
Correct about the latter section.
But, according to the Edenic story, Adam exercised plenty of
free will before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (ToK).
Uh uh. Zero, according to the perverse superstition.
For example, Adam was free to name animals, and bug god to make him a
girlfriend. So apparently God could make a world where there was no evil
and yet free will still existed.
Nope. For one, 'God' admitted creating evil. Secondly with the
stated/claimed omni characteristics Adam could only follow the script.
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
The upshot is that the FreeWill Defense will not help out judeo-xians or
muslims who claim to believe in the story of Eden.
Of course not, since that was lacking.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josef Balluch" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
09 Sep 2007 03:36:14 PM |
|
|
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in news:MPG.214dd006a5ffb1e998a063
@news.readfreenews.net:
....
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
Correct. It seems to be a common misconception amongst theists that will is
a synonym for ability. However, I can have the will to leap tall buildings
at a single bound even though I lack the ability to do so.
A deity could easily arrange matters so that we have the will to do evil
without the ability to do evil. If the deity doesn't do so then it is
either incompetent or malevolent.
Regards,
Josef
Which is it: is man one of God's blunders, or is God one of
man's blunders?
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
23 Sep 2007 03:59:29 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 22:36:14 +0200 (CEST), Josef Balluch
<josef.balluch@sympatico.can> wrote:
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in news:MPG.214dd006a5ffb1e998a063
@news.readfreenews.net:
...
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
Correct. It seems to be a common misconception amongst theists that will is
a synonym for ability. However, I can have the will to leap tall buildings
at a single bound even though I lack the ability to do so.
A deity could easily arrange matters so that we have the will to do evil
without the ability to do evil. If the deity doesn't do so then it is
either incompetent or malevolent.
It's both as well as fictional.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
10 Sep 2007 08:36:24 AM |
|
|
quibbler wrote:
This is fairly obvious, but that still means that most Christers won't be
able to come up with it on their own.
In response to the Problem of Evil, judeo-xian-muslim apologists often
try to counter that evil is necessary because otherwise man would lack
free will, and would just be a robot who could not genuinely choose to
follow god. But, according to the Edenic story, Adam exercised plenty of
free will before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (ToK).
For example, Adam was free to name animals, and bug god to make him a
girlfriend. So apparently God could make a world where there was no evil
and yet free will still existed.
It likewise becomes obvious then, that god did not have to make it
possible for Adam to actually be able to eat from the ToK. Adam's free
will still would have been present if gawd had proactively guarded the
ToK with the fiery sword-weilding angel from the very beginning, until
waiting until it was too late.
The upshot is that the FreeWill Defense will not help out judeo-xians or
muslims who claim to believe in the story of Eden.
Yep. There is the problem of heaven too. If there is free will in
heaven and no evil then free will can't explain why there is evil on
Earth. Epicurus has poor old Yahweh skewered no matter which way he
tries to turn ;-).
Klazmon.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Eden Contradicts Freewill Defense |
10 Sep 2007 10:47:24 AM |
|
|
[Default] On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 06:36:24 -0700, Llanzlan Klazmon
<bill.m.thomas@gmail.com> wrote:
Yep. There is the problem of heaven too. If there is free will in
heaven and no evil then free will can't explain why there is evil on
Earth. Epicurus has poor old Yahweh skewered no matter which way he
tries to turn ;-).
Not even the "free will but no desire to do evil in heaven" argument
escapes that problem.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
