Christianity & Evolution Are Compatible...A Reflection

[AV1611VET]

is that coz the people are defined as not being innocent?

The dispensation of Innocence ended at the Expulsion.

 

[AV1611VET]

I dont know that there is anything in the bible that suggests that god "enjoyed" the slaughter of innocents. There are tho a lot of stories of god being responsible for the mass killing of innocents. Is that "uninformed rhetoric" or just a statement of fact, as to what the stories tell?

Just out of curiosity, Hespera, what would you have done differently?

(Please be specific.)

 

[marktheblake]

is that coz the people are defined as not being innocent?

No.

Lets start with an easy one. The Flood.
Gen 6:12 "God saw how corrupt the earth had become for all the people had corrupted their ways"

If you want to claim that God mass killed innocent people with this example then you are calling him a liar.

Can you point out where God killed innocent people, as i said, I know of none.

 

[Hespera]

The dispensation of Innocence ended at the Expulsion.

Taking into account that this "dispensation" stuff means no more than edicts from the 'emperor pultaeen" (sp)?.....

The implication of this "dispensation" ending is that nobody is innocent so "god" can kill anyone any time any reason and its justified because they are guilty of something?

 

[Nathan Poe]

The dispensation of Innocence ended at the Expulsion.

According to dispensationalists. But what if they're wrong?

 

[marktheblake]

so "god" can kill anyone any time any reason and its justified because they are guilty of something?

No, God will not terminate you instantly just because you committed a sin. God has mercy, he hopes that all will repent and turn back to him. Those that do not repent are served with justice.

 

[Hespera]

No.

Lets start with an easy one. The Flood.
Gen 6:12 "God saw how corrupt the earth had become for all the people had corrupted their ways"

If you want to claim that God mass killed innocent people with this example then you are calling him a liar.

Can you point out where God killed innocent people, as i said, I know of none.

Lets get this straight. I dont believe for a second that there was a "flood". I dont say 'god" killed innocent people. I said the stories tell of such things. But if the deal is to define things so that there is no such thing as an innocent person, well, thats kinda weird to me, but if that is Christianity then thats what it is. Chalk up another reason why I want nothing to do with it.

As for calling "liar" heck no. Any more than I would call "Darth Vader" a liar.

Do you think abortion is killing, or is it just uh, a procedure?

Do you think that a newborn child could be "corrupt: and deserve to die?

ALL the people had "corrupted their ways"? ALL would include Noah wouldnt it? And unborn babies. New born babies.

So basically.... the story is that god defined newborn babies as being corrupt and so he killed them all?

If thats the deal, ok, nothing more to discuss.

 

[Hespera]

No, God will not terminate you instantly just because you committed a sin. God has mercy, he hopes that all will repent and turn back to him. Those that do not repent are served with justice.

`

Well THAT is clear enough, else i would have been "terminated" some time back. Seems like an arbitrary kind of mercy and selection tho, newborns dont have much time to even enjoy a bit of sin, let along repent. So I dont follow the idea that there is a hope for "all" to repent. The lucky and the selected only.

Do the newborn babies get tossed in a lake of fire coz they didnt repent?

 

[Hespera]

According to dispensationalists. But what if they're wrong?

According to the The Doctrine of Antidisdispensationalism, the are wrong about everything.

 

[AV1611VET]

Lets get this straight. I dont believe for a second that there was a "flood". I dont say 'god" killed innocent people. I said the stories tell of such things. But if the deal is to define things so that there is no such thing as an innocent person, well, thats kinda weird to me, but if that is Christianity then thats what it is. Chalk up another reason why I want nothing to do with it.

Let me get this straight, Hespera.

You're suggesting that when Noah got off the Ark, he should have encountered homeless babies walking and crawling around crying for their mothers and fathers?

Babies who would have been miraculously protected through the Flood?

That scenario sounds morbid to me; but some time ago I brought this up to someone who was complaining about God committing infanticide in Numbers 32.

If you've got a better way, once again, I invite you to share it.

 

[Hespera]

Let me get this straight, Hespera.

You're suggesting that when Noah got off the Ark, he should have encountered homeless babies walking and crawling around crying for their mothers and fathers?

Babies who would have been miraculously protected through the Flood?

That scenario sounds morbid to me; but some time ago I brought this up to someone who was complaining about God committing infanticide in Numbers 32.

If you've got a better way, once again, I invite you to share it.

Poke everyone in the eye with a sharp stick if they dont get with the program?

But yeah, way better to kill a baby than to let it cry.

 

[AV1611VET]

Poke everyone in the eye with a sharp stick if they dont get with the program?

But yeah, way better to kill a baby than to let it cry.

Stuff like this is why I'm glad you're not God.

 

[Hespera]

Stuff like this is why I'm glad you're not God.

I take it you agree that it was way better to kill babies than to let them cry?

And death rather than persuasion for the older ones. yup, who wouldnt prefer that.

 

[BananaSlug]

There are no such stories that I know of.

Numbers 31:25-41
25 Now the LORD spoke to Moses, saying: 26 “Count up the plunder that was taken—of man and beast—you and Eleazar the priest and the chief fathers of the congregation; 27 and divide the plunder into two parts, between those who took part in the war, who went out to battle, and all the congregation. 28 And levy a tribute for the LORD on the men of war who went out to battle: one of every five hundred of the persons, the cattle, the donkeys, and the sheep; 29 take it from their half, and give it to Eleazar the priest as a heave offering to the LORD. 30 And from the children of Israel’s half you shall take one of every fifty, drawn from the persons, the cattle, the donkeys, and the sheep, from all the livestock, and give them to the Levites who keep charge of the tabernacle of the LORD.” 31 So Moses and Eleazar the priest did as the LORD commanded Moses.
32 The booty remaining from the plunder, which the men of war had taken, was six hundred and seventy-five thousand sheep, 33 seventy-two thousand cattle, 34 sixty-one thousand donkeys, 35 and thirty-two thousand persons in all, of women who had not known a man intimately. 36 And the half, the portion for those who had gone out to war, was in number three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep; 37 and the LORD’s tribute of the sheep was six hundred and seventy-five. 38 The cattle were thirty-six thousand, of which the LORD’s tribute was seventy-two. 39 The donkeys were thirty thousand five hundred, of which the LORD’s tribute was sixty-one. 40 The persons were sixteen thousand, of which the LORD’s tribute was thirty-two persons. 41 So Moses gave the tribute which was the LORD’s heave offering to Eleazar the priest, as the LORD commanded Moses.

Does God enjoy having people sacrificed to him?
I could find other verses where God commands the murder of children.

 

[AV1611VET]

I take it you agree that it was way better to kill babies than to let them cry?

No --- it is way better to let God handle the situation, rather than us.

And, by the way, you're assuming there were babies then, aren't you?

There's that uniformitarianism at work again.

 

[BananaSlug]

No --- it is way better to let God handle the situation, rather than us.

And, by the way, you're assuming there were babies then, aren't you?

There's that uniformitarianism at work again.

Are you saying that people gave birth to fully formed children? Did humans reproduce by fission? If humans were reproducing, there would be babies and children.
Such a statement has nothing to do with uniformitarianism, which is about geology.

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you saying that people gave birth to fully formed children?

Are you kidding?

Did humans reproduce by fission?

?

If humans were reproducing, there would be babies and children.

"If" being the key word here.

People back then lived multiple hundreds of years and there could indeed be gaps of time where there are no children.

Couple that with an alien race of giants on the earth doing who-knows-what here, and I don't think it's stretching it much to assume there were no babies at the time.

Such a statement has nothing to do with uniformitarianism, which is about geology.

Then geology should let go of its monopoly on the word and let us apply it to other areas.

It's an effective word.

 

[Bombila]

"Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoset."

So say those who are literalists.

 

[AV1611VET]

"Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoset."

So say those who are literalists.

Cute --- this is why I'm glad you guys don't rule the world like you interpret the Bible.

 

[Hespera]

Cute --- this is why I'm glad you guys don't rule the world like you interpret the Bible.

couldnt possibsly be more glad than we are that you dont have any interpretive power over the constitution, or enforcement power with your "interpretation".

You can rationalize how its ok for your 'god" to slaughter the innocent, no telling what you could find in the constitution. Some even found that its ok to kill the unborn...

Now, this thread was supposedly something about evolution etc, not apologetics. / thread on this topic here.