Rejection of evolution correlates with racism

[Subduction Zone]

Go higher.

Sorry, but there does not appear to be any higher.

Would you believe any book that claimed to be the "word of God"? You need a proper method of comparing religious texts. By your failed methodology any religious text is equivalent to the Bible.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I take it you don't believe Jesus walked on water.

Of course not. It doesn't get cold enough in the Galilee.

 

[Bradskii]

Why are you bringing ME into this?

This is between you and God.

I don't believe any of this happened. Obviously. And you are the subject of recent posts because you do believe it and, more to the point of these recent posts, seem to have no concept of the magnitude of the horror and likewise find it justifiable. Hence, there surely cannot be anything that you wouldn't justify.

And your attempt to justify it by trying to convince us that God gave fair warning to every single man, woman and child (not that it would if He did) is failing quite spectacularly.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Love their enemies?

Drown their children?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ya -- the KKK comes to mind.

But academia does too, when they get on my case for not owning slaves with respect to [their interpretation of] the Bible.

It's like they want to start another civil war or something.

(And I could go on about the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Witch Hunts, all passed off in colleges as Biblically-motivated atrocities done with respect to the Bible.)

Well, they were, so thanks for the QED.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Oooo... I like playing Jeopardy!

Just say NO.

What is, "How much justification for omnicide"?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Should I switch my avatar to Norma McCorvey, so you guys will appreciate it more?

Change it if you want to; your level of appreciation will remain the same.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Except that we see the Bible being used most often in history to justify racism. Look at the arguments of the Confederate States to justify their slavery of Africans, or even the arguments used to justify the slave trade.
So to even imagine that evolution can be used to promote racism is just flat out and flagrantly wrong and idiotic.

That just a good reason why it’s important for people to know their Bible so they can expose the false professors and their errors.

 

[Astrid]

Did you just compare Jesus walking on water with drowning the entire planet? Yes...you just did.

And therein lies the problem with your position. You treat it as just a story. A story where the facts and the evidence can be twisted pretzel-like to justify your belief.

They say that one death can be a tragedy, but a million is just a statistic. And you seem to have no concept of what it is you claim happened. You seem to be totally unaware of the sheer terror of what you believe happened. The absolute horror of what it entailed. And the morality of the act doesn't seem to register. 'Hey, there must have been a good reason for it, so let's move on'.

But if killing every man, woman and child is somehow justifiable to you, then literally anything is justifiable to you.

And that's what is chilling.

Someone who apparently considered himself
a Christian told me he prays for Word that its time
for him to start killing the atheists.
Its not unusual for people to think that they get Messages.

 

[Astrid]

That just a good reason why it’s important for people to know their Bible so they can expose the false professors and their errors.

That sounds good, but in practice it dors not work out.
Whatever it is you personally think the book says, there will
be far better educated people who say you are wrong, and
go on to argue among themselves.

As we all know.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You don't have to. There's no compulsion. But if you thought omnicide was justifiable then I can't see that you could claim anything else could be deemed unjustifiable. Literally anything goes. And the very best that could be said about it would be 'Gee, there must be something that makes it morally correct but, I dunno, I just don't know what it is'.

I can see how this might be a concern, and I think it's a legitimate one with all of the crazy things that go on in our world. But in offering your evaluation of me, you now have me concerned about you. You say you can't see how an ancient account of a so-called act of “divine omnicide” doesn't actually translate into an across the board directive for any Christian simply to drop what they're doing and go and attempt to do likewise. Really?

So, tell me, Bradskii, how do you think any of us should be making moral justifications? Do you think there are any multivariate levels of social, psychological and/or ethical complexities present that we need to work through in order to discern distinctive nuances that may be at play in our moral deliberations? Or, do you instead think that “morality” is a simple thing to figure out?

At this point, I want to also bring your attention to the fact that a little earlier in this thread, I and a few other posters were originally discussing the essence of the term “genocide,” a term which I think is more readily comprehensible and more common to our historical understanding of our world than is “omnicide.” The semantic difference between these terms being not too dissimilar from that of conceptually comparing things like “The Holocaust” and “Dr. Strangelove.”

I've never really had a problem in discerning between real life and make-believe, or between my own human ethical outlook and a divine one that is clearly encased within the conceptual matrix of an ancient, foreign culture.

And that will be the justification for any atrocity: 'I'm certain it's what God wants'. So I don't have a problem with God's sense of morality. My problem is with those who will accept anything that they think His sense of morality will allow.

Whether fortunately or unfortunately, knowing what “God wants” is a complex thing, even a complicated one. This is peculiarly so where the application of moral tropes from the Bible is concerned, and in this, I think we can both acknowledge that it's those who think Christian moral deliberation is a simple thing who have the most problem in sorting out their emotional penchants for unjustified violence from authentic moral actions.

I also think that some of the social and psychological dynamics at play in the kind of religiously entangled moral discernment you're alluding to is what separates a Saul of Tarsus from a Paul of Damascus ... ... and I'm sure some amount of solid Hermeneutics plays an important part in this as well.

 

[AV1611VET]

And you are the subject of recent posts because you do believe it and, more to the point of these recent posts, seem to have no concept of the magnitude of the horror and likewise find it justifiable.

Are we done now?

 

[AV1611VET]

Drown their children?

You were there?

You saw everything He did, and the order He did it?

No preFlood rapture of any children who hadn't reached the Age of Accountability?

As I said, you guys are just jumping to the end of the story to arc and spark about the horrors.

Typical modern tactic.

Then you wonder why I'm so strongly anti-academic.

 

[AV1611VET]

Someone who apparently considered himself
a Christian told me he prays for Word that its time for him to start killing the atheists.
Its not unusual for people to think that they get Messages.

Do YOU consider him to be a Christian?

How long do you think he will have to wait before he gets his answer, in your opinion?

 

[AV1611VET]

I'd love to see one of you guys who are accusing God of omni-[pick.something] make a poll.

You know better though, don't you?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

That just a good reason why it’s important for people to know their Bible so they can expose the false professors and their errors.

Except that the Bible does have explicit instructions on slavery, and also, one groups 'false professors' is not another's.
Mark of Cain and Ham is... yeah, that's stuff that really needs to be properly hashed out, I will say.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I've never really had a problem in discerning between real life and make-believe, or between my own human ethical outlook and a divine one that is clearly encased within the conceptual matrix of an ancient, foreign culture.

What makes you think that we don't (or think that you do)? I don't have any problems reading this as the make-believe story of an ancient and foreign culture. I am bothered when people try to inject ancient and alien notions into our modern culture, which is why my original post that started this kerfuffle was a demonstration that the genetic evidence disproves the omnicide implied in this ancient (and I suggest) fictional story.

 

[AV1611VET]

I am bothered when people try to inject ancient and alien notions into our modern culture, which is why my original post that started this kerfuffle was a demonstration that the genetic evidence disproves the omnicide implied in this ancient (and I suggest) fictional story.

Adding today's science into the Bible breeds hostility, doesn't it?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Except that we see the Bible being used most often in history to justify racism. Look at the arguments of the Confederate States to justify their slavery of Africans, or even the arguments used to justify the slave trade.
So to even imagine that evolution can be used to promote racism is just flat out and flagrantly wrong and idiotic.

I would also point out that the Bible was equally quoted, most likely more so, by those who were opposed to slavery.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I would also point out that the Bible was equally quoted, most likely more so, by those who were opposed to slavery.

Oh, no, that is 100% factual and accurate.
But it was also used to justify slavery and racism and all other social ills too.