- Jan 17, 2005
- 44,905
- 1,259
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Look it wasn't me that brought it up. How do we determine what changed? You tell us, if you have some relevant point.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Look it wasn't me that brought it up. How do we determine what changed? You tell us, if you have some relevant point.So, in other words, you don't know and you're just quoting this because you think it sounds like something supporting your point (whatever that may be). Yep. Sounds about right.
It was not I that made a claim. I asked a question about someone else's claim. They claimed there were kids. How would he know? If wicked men killed babies, or sacrificed them, or just didn't have any in the advanced wickedness stage, why would that surprise me? They are heading that way now. Too selfish to have kids, and they kill the ones they do get, some of em. Millions of em, actually. Hundreds of millions actually. So, why would God need to end it? Well, who says that they could not have had kids at some point, if there was some reason? Or, if they were abusing the ones they did get, and killing them, maybe He had enough? How would I know?
Yep, and you are one excellent case in point of that!I just like to point out that some people don't know what they are talking about.
Once again your hubris and blasphemy is showing. So, if I accuse YOU of a ridiculous, nonsensical suggestion, like "maybe they didn't have any kids 'cause they wuz all sinners," then I am accusing God, huh? No, dad. I am accusing YOU. You are Not God!You know, call those that accuse God to task.
What babies?Just like God didn't supposedly 'murder' babies during the flood, he 'merely' killed them, right?
It is utterly ridiculous (nothing new for you) to think that maybe there weren't any kids because "wicked men killed them" or they "just didn't have any." Utter nonsense.
Someone claimed God killed the kids in the flood. That needs support. Grow some.Once again your hubris and blasphemy is showing. So, if I accuse YOU of a ridiculous, nonsensical suggestion, like "maybe they didn't have any kids 'cause they wuz all sinners," then I am accusing God, huh? No, dad. I am accusing YOU. You are Not God!
Yes it was. You brought up 'rate of evolution' and then couldn't define what it meant. You don't know, so the crap that you spew about 'faster evolution after the flood' is a load of malarkey until you can define what exactly a rate of evolution is. It will still be a load of malarkey even if you can define it, because you would then have to prove that there was in fact a flood as described in the bible. I suspect you will fail on both counts. But feel free to prove me wrong.Look it wasn't me that brought it up. How do we determine what changed? You tell us, if you have some relevant point.
Calm down. Evolving involves changes. The changes can be large or small. It happened after the flood, as well as before. Is there something in your noggin that you think is too large or small a change to have happened, that you have evidence for? If not, dry up.Yes it was. You brought up 'rate of evolution' and then couldn't define what it meant. You don't know, so the crap that you spew about 'faster evolution after the flood' is a load of malarkey until you can define what exactly a rate of evolution is. It will still be a load of malarkey even if you can define it, because you would then have to prove that there was in fact a flood as described in the bible. I suspect you will fail on both counts. But feel free to prove me wrong.
What babies?
Were you there? and can you describe them?All those babies and newborns that hadn't done anything wrong, but still drowned in the flood along with their parents, I should imagine.
Talk about reading things into the Bible that aren't there? It doesn't say every wickedness that you can imagine. It saysWere you there? and can you describe them?
Were they half-human/half-angel? did they have syphilis, gonorrhea, or various STDs? aren't they all in Heaven now? were they bred for consumption? experiments? slave labor?
Let's skip the sordid details, and let me ask you this?
Is Genesis 6 even in your bible?
Yet, we know that Sodom was destroyed for sins that included same sex relations. That doesn't make kids. How many kids were brought on the ark?? Think about it! There were several families and NO kids!!!! Noah's kids were hundreds of years old!! The evidence truly mounts. We could be onto something here.
What babies?
Were you there? and can you describe them?
Were they half-human/half-angel? did they have syphilis, gonorrhea, or various STDs? aren't they all in Heaven now? were they bred for consumption? experiments? slave labor?
All the children were killed, but they looked like William Shatner, so it was OK.
am i doin it rite?
Someone claimed God killed the kids in the flood. That needs support. Grow some.
The people of Israel are stricken. Their roots are dried up; they will bear no more fruit. And if they give birth, I will slaughter their beloved children." Hosea 9:11-16
"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all old and young, girls and women and little children." Ezekiel 9:5
Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children. Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT
Based on the above verses I'm sure God had no problem killing babies in the flood. You are just not wanting to accept the fact that God would kill babies and little children.
Richard Dawkins.The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
So if God didn't do it, who does that leave? untamed glorified apes?Based on the above verses I'm sure God had no problem killing babies in the flood. You are just not wanting to accept the fact that God would kill babies and little children.
So if God didn't do it, who does that leave? untamed glorified apes?
Does the "fact" that we are glorified apes mean we don't have the right to be feral?
Didn't Klebold and Harris go feral, while evolutionists stood around wondering what happened?
You do realize that "glorified ape" is an oxymoron, don't you?
We're all supposed to act "glorified", but when the "ape" part rears its ugly head, evolutionists scratch their hind ends and act like they don't know what caused it.
Earthquake in Haiti?
How DARE anyone suggest God did it; but mother nature did it? no problem -- we fully understand.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?