God and the flood

[Davian]

Are you still driving that Dodge?

Genesis 6:12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.Not if his bloodline stood being corrupted too.

No, I was referring to the bit you added that this "corruption" would lead to 100% sterility. When did you add that to your bible?

If you lived on a planet where everyone had STDs, what are the chances that your progeny will eventually have an STD?

I am surprised that you would compare religion to an STD, but the analogy works. Historically, children typically took on the religion of their local culture, but it is not a 100% certainty.

And, in the 21st century, we have the antics of internet theologists such as yourself to assist in the inoculation of our children.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, I was referring to the bit you added that this "corruption" would lead to 100% sterility. When did you add that to your bible?

I didn't add it to the Bible.

I added it to the logic.

It's basic physics:

Since STDs can lead to sterility, if 99.999% of a planet has at least one STD, what are the chances of planetary sterility?

 

[Davian]

I didn't add it to the Bible.

It wasn't in there, was it?

I added it to the logic.

So you are adding logic to your bible. It could sure use it.

It's basic physics:

I think you mean biology. Have you ever considered familiarizing yourself with... science?

Since STDs can lead to sterility, if 99.999% of a planet has at least one STD, what are the chances of planetary sterility?

It is my understanding that STDs have been with mankind from the beginning, so I would say that the chances are virtually zero.

And, if I refer back to my earlier exchanges with the OP of this thread, the only "corruption" of note in this hypothetical is "being unconvinced of certain god claims". How you get from that to sterility I can only wonder.

Was this another of your attempted insults, trying to associate disbelief with STD's? Is that really the best you can do in defence of your beliefs?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

For an athiest to say God of the Bible is evil, is admitting they have objective definitions for evil outside of the Bible -which they don't.

Nothing can be further from the truth.

Some atheists assert an objective definition of evil that has nothing to do with the Bible. For those that don't claim objective morality, there's an implied "to me" at the end of the sentence "The god of the Bible is evil.".

That's the position I take, although I rarely use the word "evil" anymore. I prefer to say the god of the Bible is monstrous...

 

[AV1611VET]

It is my understanding that STDs have been with mankind from the beginning, so I would say that the chances are virtually zero.

Can a planet be wiped out by STDs?

If not -- then whatever it was -- it was threatening the extinction of all mankind, eventually including Noah.

Thus God intervened and "rewound the clock" so to speak, before it stopped ticking.

 

[Davian]

Can a planet be wiped out by STDs?

I would find that unlikely. I would expect that a disease that killed or sterilized its host faster than the host population could reproduce would burn itself out rather than eliminate the population.

Have you considered that arguments from a scientific standpoint might require an understanding of... science?

If not -- then whatever it was -- it was threatening the extinction of all mankind, eventually including Noah.

What "impending extinction"? The one you are adding to your bible? Is it okay for you to add stuff to your bible like that?

Thus God intervened and "rewound the clock" so to speak,

...slaughtered virtually everyone on the planet, so to speak. But, inspired some neat toys for the little ones.

ark

• Davian
• May 24, 2012

Still no luck with the "Drowning Families" expansion pack. I thought I had a lead on Ebay, but I just missed it.

before it stopped ticking.

And that's why, in your hypothetical, all the descendants of Noah are Jewish. I mean, Christian. Wait, what did this flood fix?

 

[createdtoworship]

Nothing can be further from the truth.

Some atheists assert an objective definition of evil that has nothing to do with the Bible. For those that don't claim objective morality, there's an implied "to me" at the end of the sentence "The god of the Bible is evil.".

That's the position I take, although I rarely use the word "evil" anymore. I prefer to say the god of the Bible is monstrous...

I apologize for bowing out of this debate, as my work and other things are taking priority.

but I beg you to thing about the origin of evil.

if morality is truly relative, to a humanist, and little true facts to be discernible is it really possible for the same humanist to claim objective knowledge the fact that God is evil?

they are begging the question of evil.

for example why would a God of love send people to hell to torment for eternity?

that question is one example of begging the question.

they beg the question that love exists.

love is basically the antithesis of hate or evil, and thus requires the fact of evil being present as a comparison.

and vice versa.

so you see my point, hopefully.

ta ta for now and enjoy the debates.

 

[createdtoworship]

Nothing can be further from the truth.

Some atheists assert an objective definition of evil that has nothing to do with the Bible. For those that don't claim objective morality, there's an implied "to me" at the end of the sentence "The god of the Bible is evil.".

That's the position I take, although I rarely use the word "evil" anymore. I prefer to say the god of the Bible is monstrous...

sorry I didn't see your last word,

but that would also be the same as saying evil.

all monsters are evil practicaly speaking, unless you equate the cartoon monsters as your only evidence.

 

[anonymous person]

You still haven't addressed my question regarding the infants and children. You claimed that too deserved death, not because of their wicked conduct, but because of the blood curse they inherited. I pointed out that Noah and his family inherited the same curse, yet they were spared. So why weren't the infants and children spared?

Because God chose Noah and his family to be the ones to live.

To repeat another question you also ignored: couldn't an ostensibly omnipotent and omniscient entity preserve the human species through less destructive means?

I don't know.

For posterity, could you please repeat your answer to the question below? I posed it in a another thread, but that thread has since been deleted in its entirety.

So if God commanded you to kill men, women, and children, you would do so without hesitation, and you would consider it "morally commendable" to obey such a directive?

I pray I would be willing to do His will if it included killing men women and children, yes.

 

[bhsmte]

Because God chose Noah and his family to be the ones to live.



I don't know.


I pray I would be willing to do His will if it included killing men women and children, yes.

If someone killed women and children and they claimed they did it because it was God's will, should they be prosecuted?

 

[Colter]

If someone killed women and children and they claimed they did it because it was God's will, should they be prosecuted?

It occurred to me the other day after yet another terror bombing how Christians are appalled by such unjust barbarism yet they defend the flood myth AND anticipate another world wide rapture upon the return? And ISIS behaves a lot like the Old Testiment concept of deity.

 

[bhsmte]

It occurred to me the other day after yet another terror bombing how Christians are appalled by such unjust barbarism yet they defend the flood myth AND anticipate another world wide rapture upon the return? And ISIS behaves a lot like the Old Testiment concept of deity.

Well, their God didn't command the killings, so they are appalled.

At the same time, we have a poster talking about objective morality, saying they would kill women and children, if his God commanded him to.

You can't make this stuff up.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Because God chose Noah and his family to be the ones to live.

Why, when they (like the infants and children who were drowned) also "deserved death" because of the blood curse they inherited? If they could be spared, despite this curse, then why couldn't the infants and children?

I don't know.

Can you think of any less destructive ways in which Yahweh could preserve the human species?

I pray I would be willing to do His will if it included killing men women and children, yes.

Something you have in common with ISIS.

 

[bhsmte]

Why, when they (like the infants and children who were drowned) also "deserved death" because of the blood curse they inherited? If they could be spared, despite this curse, then why couldn't the infants and children?

Can you think of any less destructive ways in which Yahweh could preserve the human species?

Something you have in common with ISIS.

You just have to hope on hope, these types of dudes don't have some kind of dream or delusion, they are getting a message from God to go kill women and children.

Scary stuff.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You just have to hope on hope, these types of dudes don't have some kind of dream or delusion, they are getting a message from God to go kill women and children.

Scary stuff.

It is deeply worrying to see someone become vulnerable to that sort of aggression due to dogmatism.