Hahaha! Brilliant hypothetical.

God is merely a superstitious version of parenting, and not even good parenting, but dictatorial parenting.

The younger the child the more parameters and rules they need. However, the more they grow up, responsible parents don't just scare the shit out of them with threats, or bribe them. They expose them to the options and explain why things happen and raise them to chose for themselves.

The god character is a a dictator that even when you grow your own brain and chose for yourself, still threatens you with violence and at the same time tries to bribe you with utopias even when you are an adult.

It is a horrible way to raise a child because it sets the child up with the same "my way or the highway" mentality of the god the child is sold. So when they as adults run into someone who is an "outsider" they lack the very ethical conflict resolution skills it takes in problem solving in reality. It is abusive to humanity because it sets us up automatically as a species for division.

Good leadership is not dictatorial. It is not abusive. And in westernized governments those governed chose their leaders and can change their leaders if they don't like them. The god of the bible does not display any semblance of modern civility.

The god of the bible cannot be reasoned with. Those under him cannot change his laws. They cannot vote him out of office. And this fictional character uses the same tactics modern parents use at Christmas to get their kids to behaive, "He sees you when you are sleeping, he knows when you're awake. He knows when you've been bad or good".

The god character is cosmic Big Brother. You have no privacy under this concept as a claim. He sees everything, according to the believer. So according to that model, this fictional character by proxy of claim, is watching you even when you have sex or pee.

It is a horrible concept of morality.

Better morality does NOT employ threats or bribes.

Think about the workplace. There is change on your co-worker's desk. Do you leave it there because you fear you are being watched? Or, do you leave it there even if you are not being watched?

Of course this only address the moral motifs as written in that book of myth. But this alone, even without addressing the absurd claim of a magic brain with no location and magical super powers, alone, is enough to reject such a god concept as a claim.

 

 

I imagine that any Christian who reads this will already have a vision of heaven and hell in their mind so I didn't get specific.  

Ok here are the three questions.

1. Are you willing to give your brain to me without question?

2. Are you willing to give your brain to me without question?

3. How does it feel to be owned like property?

 

Do you actually believe this makes logical sense? 
Same old game of omnipotence paradox- for this to work the story you presented has to taken to be
 truth by construction. Responses will only go against limitations you placed on God’s ability to
know everything.  FYI -  by starting off with an illogical question, you cannot deduce any logical
conclusions. Any answer requires the doing of nonsense.
Any believed truth needs to be held to logical contradiction to be disproven.

I will go with  C) Wait till a logical question is asked

 I wonder how believers react to it. When they believe, they shut their brain off, so they need no logic or system in their worldview, so they can't even distinguish agreements from contradictions. They could not get away with such a nonsense at work or school. I wonder what they do when they're forced to use the brain and see the nonsense.  

The problem is, I can't get any believers for debate, taking faith away from them is like taking lollipop from a baby. I'm pretty sure makes their mothers angry. Yes, the elder youth group leaders REALLY try to talk some sense and critical thinking into them, but at the same time, they put a lot of Jesus and bible talk into that, probably to keep it kosher. So I wonder if anything reaches the kids' ears. They all just sit and keep silent, they don't ask questions, they don't give original answers and snicker when they hear long words. But they show a plenty of activity when the songs are sung, during prayers and games. 

Rational activism in there would probably have a bomb drop effect. Unless, of course, I'd find some time to consult with some elder group leader (about in his 30's or so) about what he's doing and where's the group supposed to end up.

I would choose B of course.  

God in his infinite wisdom has sent me to heaven, even though I have not kissed his ass.  Assuming that you're attempting to do well in the eyes of god at this point.  Since there is no personal consequence at this point, the only positive outcome would be favour (as in brownit points). I would choose B because:

1.  Going against my nature would be dishonest, and god may see this as a flaw in character.

2.  Sending an innocent child to hell just because of said god's opinion is an asshole thing to do, and he can shove his brownie points up his ass.

3.  I wouldn't be able to sing cumbaya out of my asshole in heaven, knowing I sent an innocent to hell for any reason.

 

 

Quite simple. Infinite wisdom sucks. God sucks. I can choose better with limited wisdom. Sarah goes to heaven. I tell god to go to hell reminding him judge not that ye be not judged. By what measure you judge so shall ye be judged.  My act of sending Sarah to heaven is a judgement of god by default. Human wisdom and justice is compassionate and offers a true "spirituality" that legalistic divine judgement lacks. 

Thanks my man. I've got my big orange Gretsch Rancher acoustic here in my room and a bunch a songs to scream out.  They still will not serve scotch with dinner and will not allow conjugal visits. . Otherwise this like a vacation. I've got tons of DVD's and watched Adjustment Bureau last night.

the only reason its illogical to you is because you have to think for yourself for a moment.