The Fallacy of the God/Parent Apology

[Divine Insight]

Christians are often trying to make excuses for their God by proclaiming that their God is just as helpless, inept, and unintelligent as human parents. They try to make an analogy between how some human parents might treat their children and why they think it makes sense to think that an omnipotent creator God should have the same limitations. These apologies fail miserably because human parents are not infinitely intelligent, wise, omnipotent, or omniscient. Neither did they design their children.

If human parents have stupid kids that can hardly be blamed on the parents. On the other hand if an omnipotent creator God creates stupid humans than this is entirely on him. There can be no one else to blame. The stupid humans most certainly can't be blamed for being stupid. It wasn't their fault that this is how God created them.

Human parents cannot know what's going on in the mind of their children.

An omniscient God knows every thought his children have.

Human parents can easily fail as being effective teachers, and often do fail at this in extreme ways.

A God cannot fail at being an effective teacher because there can only be two possible reasons for him to fail. Either he's a lousy teacher, which would mean that he's inept. Or his children are lousy students, in which case this can only be because he failed to design intelligent children.

If a human parent has a child who has psychological or mental problems it can often be quite difficult for the human parent to even know that this is occurring. And even if the human parent suspects this to be the case, it's is next to impossible for a human parent to be able to heal the child. Even professional psychologists and psychiatrists have great difficulty in trying to diagnose and help people who have psychological or mental problems. In fact, we are currently aware that there are many different potential causes for the same types of psychological symptoms.

An omniscient God who knows every thought the child has, and who also has also numbered every hair on their head would not only know that the problem exists, but he would also know precisely what it would take to remedy the situation and heal the child from this aberrant condition.

Trying to excuse a supposedly omnipotent omniscient God by pointing to how inept human parents are is hardly an apology for the failings of a supposed "Creator God" who actually creates every child that exists.

Question for Debate:

At what point should apologists be willing to recognize and concede that some of their apologies for their imaginary God simply don't hold water?

Surely there needs to be some criteria for being able to recognize when an apology is dead and no amount of repeating it will ever bring it back to life.

[William]

[Replying to post 1 by Divine Insight]

Question for Debate:

At what point should apologists be willing to recognize and concede that some of their apologies for their imaginary God simply don't hold water?

From years of experience, I do not think that the idea of a Father GOD in a parental role who is omni-omni, is negotiable to most Christian faith based beliefs. IOW, there is no point where such would be willing to recognize and concede that some of their apologies for their God simply don't hold water.

Even that you or I might belief their GOD is imaginary, this would not be debatable.

The most one could expect in the way of any such Christians entering into argument would be for the purpose of taking advantage of the opportunity to proselytize.

Surely there needs to be some criteria for being able to recognize when an apology is dead and no amount of repeating it will ever bring it back to life.

I think as long as the opportunity is given for the chance to proselytize, it will continue to be taken.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Divine Insight]

All you've done here is demonstrate that God as Father is an imperfect metaphor. Sure the metaphor does not match point by point. But what Chrisian says it does? And what Christian, (as you claim) "makes excuses" for God by pointing out that He is Father?

The metaphor is meant primarily (if not only) to convey the idea that God loves like a Father does, (or should, it is presumed he is at least as loving as a good loving Father).

To suggest that Christans make exuses on the basis that God is our Father, seems a straw man argument.

Personally, I take the metaphor to mean that God's love does not need to be bought with blood, animal OR human. What good Father desires blood from His children?

[Divine Insight]

All you've done here is demonstrate that God as Father is an imperfect metaphor. Sure the metaphor does not match point by point. But what Chrisian says it does? And what Christian, (as you claim) "makes excuses" for God by pointing out that He is Father?

This is a constant staple in Christian apologetics. They often even compare Jesus dying for their sins as being akin to a solider who gives his life to save his comrades. That apology fails for the very same reasons. A human soldier would sacrifice his life as a last resort. An act of desperation where there are no other options available.

We can't have Jesus being a desperate God who has run out of options.

So the apology fails miserably. Yet it is continually used repeatedly like as if it has some sort of merit.

The metaphor is meant primarily (if not only) to convey the idea that God loves like a Father does, (or should, it is presumed he is at least as loving as a good loving Father).

Even as a metaphor it appears to fail miserably. I don't see where it helps to claim that it's just a metaphor.

To suggest that Christans make exuses on the basis that God is our Father, seems a straw man argument.

Where have you been? Christian apologists are always making analogies between what they think a good parent might do as an "excuse" for why it makes sense that their God would do the same. But the problem is that parents are inept, they are not omnipotent. So parents do what they do because of their limitations. That can hardly be used as an excuse for an omnipotent God.

Personally, I take the metaphor to mean that God's love does not need to be bought with blood, animal OR human. What good Father desires blood from His children?

In that case you must reject the Hebrew God entirely. The Hebrew God has been asking for blood sacrifices since very early in the OT. Where do you think the Christians came up with the idea of having Jesus be the blood sacrifice to end all blood sacrifices?

They didn't come up with this idea out of thin air.

And even so, I never mentioned anything about blood sacrifices in the OP. I simply pointed out that human parents do not DESIGN their own offspring and therefore cannot be responsible for what the children are like. This can't be said of a Creator God who is said to have DESIGNED humans.

I also pointed out that most of what human parents do is done because of ignorance or other practical restrictions due to the the fact that they are neither omnipotent nor omniscient. There is no excuse for an omnipotent omniscient God to be behaving as human parents behave.

[1213]

Christians are often trying to make excuses for their God by proclaiming that their God is just as helpless, inept, and unintelligent as human parents. They try to make an analogy between how some human parents might treat their children and why they think it makes sense to think that an omnipotent creator God should have the same limitations. These apologies fail miserably because human parents are not infinitely intelligent, wise, omnipotent, or omniscient. Neither did they design their children.

If human parents have stupid kids that can hardly be blamed on the parents. On the other hand if an omnipotent creator God creates stupid humans than this is entirely on him. There can be no one else to blame. The stupid humans most certainly can't be blamed for being stupid. It wasn't their fault that this is how God created them.

Human parents cannot know what's going on in the mind of their children.

An omniscient God knows every thought his children have.

Human parents can easily fail as being effective teachers, and often do fail at this in extreme ways.

A God cannot fail at being an effective teacher because there can only be two possible reasons for him to fail. Either he's a lousy teacher, which would mean that he's inept. Or his children are lousy students, ....

But who are really God’s children? By what the Bible tells, not all are God’s children, only those who are righteous.

He who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. To this end the Son of God was revealed, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whoever is born of God doesn't commit sin, because his seed remains in him; and he can't sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the devil. Whoever doesn't do righteousness is not of God, neither is he who doesn't love his brother.
1 John 3:7-10

And there is really no problem with the righteous people.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 5 by 1213]

But who are really God’s children? By what the Bible tells, not all are God’s children, only those who are righteous.

He who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning.

By this reasoning, Adam and Eve can't be considered God's children, rather children of the devil, since they performed the original sin of eating the forbidden fruit!
Yet, remind us please 1213...who created Adam and Eve? Who created the devil?

and he can't sin, because he is born of God.

So...Adam and Eve weren't 'of God'...hmm...

[bjs]

Christians are often trying to make excuses for their God by proclaiming that their God is just as helpless, inept, and unintelligent as human parents.

I have literally never, ever heard any Christian say this in any setting.

[rikuoamero]

Christians are often trying to make excuses for their God by proclaiming that their God is just as helpless, inept, and unintelligent as human parents.

I have literally never, ever heard any Christian say this in any setting.

They don't say it like that of course, using those words, but they often frame God as such, once you pay attention to what it is they are saying.
An oft-used analogy by Christians (one I myself used back in the day, mentioning it to one of my teacher-priests who nodded with approval) is that the reason for so much evil in the world, all the pain and suffering, is that God is like the parent who lets a child get hurt climbing trees, or while skateboarding. We are those children, and apparently we have to 'skin our knees' otherwise we don't learn.
Thing is, if a human parent were standing idly by while his child was destroying his environment or committing genocides, with the ability to stop what that child is doing, you and I would have something to say about that parent.
If my son goes off halfway around the world and joins a violent genocidal army, there's little to nothing I could do to stop that. I would disapprove...but I can't stop him, as in I don't have that ability.
If my son goes off halfway around the world, joins a genocidal army and kills his sister, but I had every opportunity to stop him, but didn't...what am I supposed to say?

Thing is, apologists do give apologies for God the Father being just like that. We are his children according to them, and some of these children are going off joining violent armies, and killing their brethren. How is God acting like a parent in that situation? If I could prevent my son from killing my daughter, I'd do something about that. Or as atheist Tracey Harris says
"That's the difference between me and your God. Your God says you can do what you want, I'm gonna shut the door, but then I'm gonna punish you. If I said that, people would think I was a freaking monster"

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 5 by 1213]

But who are really God’s children? By what the Bible tells, not all are God’s children, only those who are righteous.

He who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning.

By this reasoning, Adam and Eve can't be considered God's children, rather children of the devil, since they performed the original sin of eating the forbidden fruit!
Yet, remind us please 1213...who created Adam and Eve? Who created the devil?

and he can't sin, because he is born of God.

So...Adam and Eve weren't 'of God'...hmm...

Exactly.

Not only this, but then Jesus could not have been born of God either since it was of extreme importance that the lineage of Jesus go back to David, and ultimately to Adam and Eve who were born of Satan.

This is what I mean about the obvious fallacies of Christian apologetics.

Every apology they have to offer results in the destruction of their own theology.

Let's face it, this theology simply cannot be true because it contradicts its own claims.

If Adam and Eve were born of God they could not sin because according to this theology anyone who is born of God cannot sin. Yet they did. Therefore they must have been born of Satan. A direct contradiction.

The whole theology is based upon a primal contradiction.

Not only this, but as Rikuo asks, "Who created Satan?" Satan couldn't have been born of Satan. He had to originally have been a child of God. But then he could not sin according to this theology because those who are born of God cannot sin.

This entire theology is based on impossible contradictions that could never be resolved.

The only way to resolve these contradictions would be to rewrite the entire theology starting from scratch.

Perhaps we could start with two Gods. One benevolent and one malevolent. And then have them get into a battle of trying to co-create a universe. But that's NOT the Biblical story. And there's no going back to rewrite it now. It's just a clearly failed mythology. There's no saving it at this point.

No amount of apologetics could ever save this theology. It needs to be rewritten from scratch. But then it would be a whole different story and thus a whole different theology.

So there's no saving Biblical theology no matter what we try to do.

[Divine Insight]

Christians are often trying to make excuses for their God by proclaiming that their God is just as helpless, inept, and unintelligent as human parents.

I have literally never, ever heard any Christian say this in any setting.

Of course you have never heard them say this literally. They aren't about to openly confess that comparing God with the behavior of human parents is precisely the same thing as proclaiming that their God is just as helpless, inept, and unintelligent as human parents.

But the very moment they try to apologize for their God's behavior by comparing him with the behavior of human parents that's precisely what they are arguing for whether they realize this or not.

So just because they don't realize what they are arguing for, doesn't mean that this isn't exactly what they are indeed arguing for.

A human parent has no real control over anything. Therefore to try to excuse the behavior of your God by comparing him with a human parent is to demand that God too has no real control over anything.

The fact that Christians don't "get this" is basically irrelevant. Perhaps they should stop and think about it for a while until they realize how utterly useless this kind of apologetic argument truly is.

This is why I ask at what point do they come to realize the fallacy of their own apologies?

Based on your reply, some of them clearly don't even realize they are doing this. They think that comparing their God's behavior with the behavior of human parents somehow makes sense. But it doesn't.