God's incompetence - 2nd try

I may not be taking this argument to seriously, as I am an atheist, but I'm not sure if you are actually following my arguments."Adam and Eve: Christianity's goal is not to be more powerful than God - it is literally not possible."CHRISTIANITY'S goal isn't to be more powerful than God- that is obvious. This portion of my argument was that early man had a natural tendency of jealousy, and a want to be equal to God. Christianity is defined as [1] 'the religion that is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ' and Jesus hadn't even existed at this time. Man is often ambitious, and they learned their place with exile, but later on the tower of Babel provides proof that man's ambitions may lead him to see a deity as an equal."Flood: God isn't vain either. " Need I remind you that you are destined to Hell forever if you choose the wrong God? Noah wasn't without sin, [2, read the question for reflection.] and the only reason why he was spared was that he worshipped God. Even if "God being vain" is false, he still kept Noah alive so he could be worshipped."Babel: How does Noah seeing a rainbow prevent him from killing everyone all over again. "The "Rainbow Promise" God makes to Noah says he does not plan to use floodwaters to kill everyone, that on it's own doesn't promise much, so I assumed that he meant he would not fully eradicate mankind again."I didn't say God was stupid - I said he was incompetent. And being killed is not really a punishment!"If you even read my initial argument, I pointed out the meaning of competence and what it means to be a god, you would know that he fits this criteria meaning he is in fact, competent enough to be a god. He meets standards that all other gods meet, supernatural strength, power, and the ability to shift reality. You stated that he is incompetent because:1) He doesn't control free-will, he understands that he can't control thus he put down laws and rules to govern them. (Where it becomes their choice whether or not they follow.) He can't control it, and mankind continuously got more evil so he wiped it out to start again. God didn't freely grant them Free-Will, they were tricked into taking it, as they did things off instinct until they ate the fruit of Good and Evil from the tree of knowledge.As for killing being a punishment, this is before Jesus died for man, they still had the sins on them thus they would not go to paradise, they may either go into oblivion (my name for nothingness) Purgatory (A waiting place) or Hell. In any case, it seems more of a punishment than anything so unless you can provide proof rather than your personal thoughts on death (I like the idea of oblivion) then I think my statement stands.2) "There are many ways to control free-will." Is your statement about how God should have done it. What you are saying is 'God can find ways to control Free-Will.' The definition I provided for Free-Will is "the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or god."'There are many ways for God to control the ability to make choices that are not controlled by god.' I'm pretty sure there is a problem here, either your ideology is wrong, or you have a different idea of free will, but I gave it the definition for use in the argument, so it should be irrelevant, but I will allow you to defend it provided you explain your definition of it.If you are talking about force, forcing people to good doesn't make them good. My argument here is that people decided to change their beliefs to where it'd suit them, they form their own ideas of good. Different ideas are not a bad thing, God didn't make the Holy Books completely vague, he left room for people to interpretation and for people to create their own ideas of Good and evil."God only cast miracles on those he likes, I don't think that's how miracles have worked out!"The exact words I used for this were pretty bad, but I was attempting to state that miracles don't happen to everybody, if they did, they wouldn't be miracles, they would be everyday things. I wrote this to counter your ideas of "He also can't even keep his physical creations consistent, having to work around its limitations with special miracles and one-off events that cannot be explained and indeed are contradictory to known science." So your right, he doesn't cast miracles on those he likes, he will cast them when he wishes, almost randomly. That miracles part was the beginning of my statement, but it wasn't actually that important to it. The point I was attempting to get across was that a constant universe is not a feat of strength, and you seem to ignore this.1. http://www.merriam-webster.com...2. http://christianity.about.com...3. http://www.biblegateway.com...