[AGL] reply to Michele's statement

[Michael Eisenstadt]

Michele,

You have often spoken to me on this subject but never at such
length. Permit me to reply interlinearly to some of what you've written.

>I believe that God (or whatever name you choose) made us
because He/She needed love—that in some way He was lonely
and because He had a need to "see Himself"

According to Hegel, the attempt "to see Himself/Oneself" is the
ultimate exercise of human consciousness. This suggests to me
that the attributes you have identified as God's are merely
human projections.

>He placed us in a perfect place where all our needs were met (without
spilling a drop of blood). He gave us free will—otherwise how would we
be like Him and what would our love be worth if we didn't choose it?

Once again, why does free will require a God? Logically, in assuming
the existence of God, you are committing the error of petitio
principii (assuming the conclusion as your starting point).

Now I know that you will remind me of your personal experiences
with you know who. That solves the petitio principii problem. But
that brings up the veracity of testimonial or testifying. Would that I
could accept testimony. Testimony is worthless unless confirmed.

>Then came curiosity. Had things progressed in the way He wanted, we
would have been good, obedient students, matching knowledge with wisdom
and growing towards oneness with Him.
The Tree of Knowledge was not all about sex, it was about sex and
everything else. Seduced by instant gratification, we transgressed—not
waiting to learn wisdom as He intended to teach us.

You are assuming that "seduced by instant gratification" is a bad
thing. You may know this from personal experience. But that is
not my personal experience. I see absolutely no reason why instant
sexual or other gratification is bad.

As for wisdom which we all crave, to believe that the deity desires
that we pursue it, that too is a human projection, an admirable
one to be sure. There has been a little progress in the human
pursuit of wisdom. A necessary condition was the invention of
writing. Part of our progress towards wisdom consists of
practicing the ascesis of avoiding logical errors. Part of it has
been the realization that received beliefs (about God and on
other subjects) are to be examined closely for possible errors.
Then we can try to think through the issues. If there is no
reason and no evidence for a belief in God (my viewpoint),
it is best abandonned as an impediment to the pursuit of
wisdom.

That's as far as i got in your letter at this time.

Mike