Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm retracting nothing. So far all you have to offer is a really poor analogy as to why God is more moral then me.
its not laughable, you have been found to be wanting, you must retract your assertion that you are more moral than God. You have no power over life or death so you cannot even begin to juxtapose yourself alongside God in this manner, in order for it to be fair, you would need to have the power of life and death, which you don't.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm retracting nothing. I'm certainly not going to do it because you say so. I want some substantive arguments and reasons. So far all you have proffered is a terribly poor analogy and a lot of hot hair.
you do not have the power of life or death. You cannot therefore compare yourself to God in this regard, retract it!
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBollocks. I could put a bunch of wild dogs and cats and tigers and snakes in a cage and see which die first, but - unlike god - I wouldn't do that because it would be cruel. I'd have the power to let animals die in a cruel way, but I wouldn't do that.
you do not have the power of life or death. You cannot therefore compare yourself to God in this regard, retract it!
Hence, morally superior to Gosh.
Originally posted by Proper Knobhardly, my arguments are irrefutable, neither you or the atheist hordes can do so. In order for you to measure your morality against God you would need to have recourse to the same power, in this instance life or death, who is to say that had you this power you would not exercise it, but because you don't we shall never know and the argument that you proffer therefore is essentially flawed, so sad for you.
I'm retracting nothing. I'm certainly not going to do it because you say so. I want some substantive arguments and reasons. So far all you have proffered is a terribly poor analogy and a lot of hot hair.
Originally posted by Great King Ratanother epic fail, why, because you are not acting by yourself, you are creating the conditions whereby instinct for survival lets those animals kill themselves rather than by a direct act of your will, the argument that you are therefore more moral than God is flawed, until you can prove that you have the power of life and death over humans and that you have the possibility of exercising that power.
Bollocks. I could put a bunch of wild dogs and cats and tigers and snakes in a cage and see which die first, but - unlike god - I wouldn't do that because it would be cruel. I'd have the power to let animals die in a cruel way, but I wouldn't do that.
Hence, morally superior to Gosh.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIrrefutable? LOL!!!!!!!!
hardly, my arguments are irrefutable, neither you or the atheist hordes can do so. In order for you to measure your morality against God you would need to have recourse to the same power, in this instance life or death, who is to say that had you this power you would not exercise it, but because you don't we shall never know and the argument that you proffer therefore is essentially flawed, so sad for you.
Your arguments have been spanked round the park, that you fail to see this is hardly unexpected.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieDoes it say somewhere that there was no guarantee he would be resurrected? Can you give a reference? Not saying there isn't, just that I am unaware of it.
yes he was but there was no guarantee that he would keep his integrity and therefore the analogy is absolutely sound, googlefudge doesn't know anything, hes a blind man leading the blind, retract your assertion that you are more moral than God or send your only son.
Also, if there was no guarantee of a resurrection, that's a pretty crap 'omnipotent' god!
--- Penguin.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo why is it that I can't compare myself to God yet you're asking me to compare myself with him in your analogy?
hardly, my arguments are irrefutable, neither you or the atheist hordes can do so. In order for you to measure your morality against God you would need to have recourse to the same power, in this instance life or death, who is to say that had you this power you would not exercise it, but because you don't we shall never know and the argument that you proffer therefore is essentially flawed, so sad for you.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyou are creating the conditions whereby instinct for survival lets those animals kill themselves rather than by a direct act of your wil
another epic fail, why, because you are not acting by yourself, you are creating the conditions whereby instinct for survival lets those animals kill themselves rather than by a direct act of your will, the argument that you are therefore more moral than God is flawed, until you can prove that you have the power of life and death over humans and that you have the possibility of exercising that power.
Which is exactly what Gosh did when he (allegedly) chucked us out of paradise (in fact, he already did it when he first created us). But I wouldn't do that, because I'm not cruel.
until you can prove that you have the power of life and death over humans and that you have the possibility of exercising that power
Sorry, can't do. See, I'm not going to kill someone just to prove a point to you. For you know, I'm not Gosh, I'm not cruel.
I'd never do all that crap to Job just to tell Satan "Told you so!"
Hence, morally superior.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI think your argument here has several flaws. First is the idea that one individual act defines morality. If I did the ultimate moral act (whatever that might be), and also did some bad things (like blowing up an orphanage full of children), would I still rank first in morality? Second is your notion that sending your son to die for a cause is the ultimate moral act. As others have pointed out, sending yourself to die for the cause would be a more moral act. Third is the idea that sending one's son to die is unique. There have been countless parents that have sent their sons off to die for various causes in all the wars of history.
fine you are the ultimate source of morality, greater than God. Congratulations. No doubt your wisdom will span the centuries, your pithy saying fill the earth giving life to all!
Lets test you out, if there was a train on course to cross a ravine where a bridge was bust and you had the opportunity to send your son knowing it would mean his death but the saving of a few passengers would you send him to his death for these strangers?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNonsense.
hardly, my arguments are irrefutable, neither you or the atheist hordes can do so. In order for you to measure your morality against God you would need to have recourse to the same power, in this instance life or death, who is to say that had you this power you would not exercise it, but because you don't we shall never know and the argument that you proffer therefore is essentially flawed, so sad for you.
To use a biblical parable...
Mark 12:41-44
41 And he sat down with the treasury chests*+ in view and began observing how the crowd was dropping money into the treasury chests, and many rich people were dropping in many coins.+ 42 Now a poor widow came and dropped in two small coins of very little value.*+ 43 So he called his disciples to him and said to them: “Truly I say to you that this poor widow put in more than all the others who put money into the treasury chests.+ 44 For they all put in out of their surplus, but she, out of her want,* put in everything she had, all she had to live on.”
A being with gods powers and invincibility can be as moral as it likes with extreme ease, it has
nothing preventing it acting in whatever way it seems fit.
Even the laws of physics dance to it's tune.
Being moral is easy for such a being as it comes with no cost.
However a 'lesser' being without gods powers and resources and isn't immortal and invulnerable
can face great, indeed ultimate, costs for being moral.
Standing up against Hitler's regime was often fatal, just as one example.
Being less powerful, certainly does not preclude a being from being as, or more moral.