"alen" <alen1@westserv.net.au> wrote:

That whole argument is a hostile construct, and not an obvious
or only interpretation.

Of course it is not the only interpretation. There must be an
alternative interpretation available, otherwise there would not be
believers in that sense.

I could say to you that you sent your son to school, which he didn't
like,
but then punished him if he ran away, or did no work. Therefore you
are not a father, but a torturer, who set a child up for punishment by
engineering a situation you understood, but he didn't.

It is common amongst those who seek to explain why God does things to
advance comparisons between God's relationship with humanity, and
humans' relationships with each other.

However, these analogies are invariably inadequate, simply because no
human is God. Humans operate within various limitations. We are
governed to a large degree by physical laws, by social mores and accepted
behaviour, and by social laws. God, however, as defined by Christians,
does not operate within any restrictions whatsoever. He is free to do
whatever He wishes, and has the power to do whatever He chooses to do.

Telling me to consider human relationships as an illustration of how God
works is pointless until humans become gods.

But that interpretation, however logical, is nevertheless not true, is
it? It is
really a hostile and malevolent interpretation of your good intention
as a
father, as if you are to be blamed for not letting your son enjoy his
natural
ignorance.

I am not a father and am, I assure you, most unlikely to become one.
However I take your point. But you are still mistaken in your analogy.
If I, as a parent, chose to impose punishment on my children because of
their disobedience, that would be one thing. I, after all, as a parent,
do not have direct control over how my child perceives the world, and how
s/he thinks. God however, DOES have such control - or the choice to
relinquish it.

Additionally, as a parent, I would be unlikely to subject my child to
*eternal* punishment, no matter how disobedient they might be.

have a concept of proportionality - yet God, according to many Christian
traditions, recognised no such idea. He considers it quite acceptable to
punish us all with fire for all eternity.

remembered, is only the default punishment that He threatens us ALL with
based purely on the supposed disobedience of some mythical mother and
father thousands of generations ago.

"alen" <alen1@westserv.net.au> wrote:

I could say to you that you sent your son to school, which he didn't
like,
but then punished him if he ran away, or did no work. Therefore you
are not a father, but a torturer, who set a child up for punishment by
engineering a situation you understood, but he didn't.

It is common amongst those who seek to explain why God does things to
advance comparisons between God's relationship with humanity, and
humans' relationships with each other.

However, these analogies are invariably inadequate, simply because no
human is God. Humans operate within various limitations. We are
governed to a large degree by physical laws, by social mores and accepted
behaviour, and by social laws. God, however, as defined by Christians,
does not operate within any restrictions whatsoever. He is free to do
whatever He wishes, and has the power to do whatever He chooses to do.

Telling me to consider human relationships as an illustration of how God
works is pointless until humans become gods.

But that interpretation, however logical, is nevertheless not true, is
it? It is
really a hostile and malevolent interpretation of your good intention
as a
father, as if you are to be blamed for not letting your son enjoy his
natural
ignorance.

I am not a father and am, I assure you, most unlikely to become one.
However I take your point. But you are still mistaken in your analogy.
If I, as a parent, chose to impose punishment on my children because of
their disobedience, that would be one thing. I, after all, as a parent,
do not have direct control over how my child perceives the world, and how
s/he thinks. God however, DOES have such control - or the choice to
relinquish it.

Additionally, as a parent, I would be unlikely to subject my child to
*eternal* punishment, no matter how disobedient they might be. We humans
have a concept of proportionality - yet God, according to many Christian
traditions, recognised no such idea. He considers it quite acceptable to
punish us all with fire for all eternity. And that, it should be
remembered, is only the default punishment that He threatens us ALL with
based purely on the supposed disobedience of some mythical mother and
father thousands of generations ago.

Eric Brze <brze@no.spam.mail.com> wrote:

God never allows the existence of sin. Sin exists because people is
deceived to believe that it exists. In truth and reality, sin does not
exist at all.

Then sin does not exist, and in condemning any of us to eternal damnation
God creates the ultimate injustice: He punishes us for something you say
cannot exist.

The free will to sin and to suffer in sin is nothing but an illusion,
and it is never given by God.

Then it has not been given, and it does not exist. Therefore none of us
can sin or suffer.

How determinedly blind to the state of the world do you have to be in
order to maintain this belief, Eric?

He created Hell.

False.

Then there can be no Hell, and Christian dogma is meaningless.

He designated sin.

False.

Then there is no sin, and Christian dogma is meaningless.

False again. There was no Satan in the Garden of Eden. IOW, there was
no Satan before human sinned.

And yet we are taught by the very same Christian tradition that humans
sinned because they were tempted by the Serpent who - we are told - is
none other than Satan. Which way do you want to have it, Eric? Because
as I said, you can't have it both ways.

Besides, you claim that humanity sinned in the Garden of Eden - but by
your own argument that is not so. You have already said that sin is
merely an illusion. Thus Original Sin is equally illusory and therefore
Jesus had no purpose.

God's creations are always good. That includes the tree of knowledge
of good and evil.

This is a nonsense, as a moment's thought should show you. In order to
know good and evil, there must exist good and evil. Yet God created
everything, and you tell us that God's creations are always good. Thus
there cannot BE any evil, and therefore the tree cannot grant knowledge
of evil. And since humanity had not yet sinned at this point, the evil
cannot have come from us.

Since sin does not exist, all beliefs in sin must be burned one way or
the other in the end. That maybe God's judgment, but it is also the
truth which no one can ignore.

Indeed - but it IS God's judgement, and it is HIS truth. Those who burn
will burn because God wishes it so, and for no other reason. If there is
nothing beyond God's control then He bears responsibility for everything.
And if there are things beyond His control then He is not what He is
advertised as being.

Yet you deny that He bears the responsibility for this.

Yes. Sin is the result of abandoning God. No one can sin without
forsaking God in the first place. God is not responsible for something
that can only happen without his presence.

Yet God is responsible for creating us, and designed the natures which
lead us away from Him. We, like any programmed intelligence, do what we
were coded to do, and no matter what choices we are granted, we will
still choose in accordance with our programming.

The only way I can accept responsibility for my sin (and I do accept
responsibility for the wrong I do to other people, by the way) is if you
were to tell me that I have no responsibility to God - but at that moment
you release me from any requirement to answer to Him, and His punishing
me then would be unjust.