Rejection of evolution correlates with racism

[AV1611VET]

You seem to be blissfully unaware of what both those words imply when used to reference God.

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

This is starting to get old, chief.

Evil is here evidently put for war and its attendant miseries. I will procure peace for the Israelites, and destroy Babylon by war. I form light, and create darkness. Now, as darkness is only the privation of light, so the evil of war is the privation of peace.

Jehovah is the only God independent and sovereign. The 'evil' and the ‘darkness' here are shown by the context to mean the penal judgments by which Jehovah vindicated His own holiness and brought 'peace ' to His people.

Since God is the author of all things, he governs and sets limits to all. The good and bad actions of men and angels are so under his control that he accomplishes through them his own wise counsels, while they are left altogether free and responsible to him for their conduct.

Not moral evil, but in contrast to "peace" in the parallel clause, war, disaster.

 

[AV1611VET]

If literally killing everyone on the planet is morally acceptable then what on earth could possibly be deemed unacceptable?

Not getting saved.

 

[AV1611VET]

I think you should address the point that you actually made yourself: If abortion is wrong, how can drowning a planet full of children be right?

How do you know they weren't raptured first?

Matthew 18:10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.

Matthew 18:14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

Bottom line is: you weren't there, were you?

 

[BPPLEE]

Neither @Bradskii or I is judging God. We can't make judgements about something which, from our point of view, is non-existent.

What we are questioning is the morality of accepting genocide simply because you (i.e., many Christians) believe that it was sanctioned and done by God.

OB

I haven't answered your questions because I was unaware you had asked any. You have made statements about 'corruption' - maybe this is what you mean.

In this context I have no idea what you mean by 'corruption' and if 'DNA became corrupted' how is this the fault of those whom God obliterated?

Remember God is all powerful and is the one who created all that there is. If there was 'corruption' then God was responsible. If there was corruption God had the power to remove it without resorting to genocide.

OB

Because evil exists and man has free will and I did ask questions but if you believe it was an apple in garden of Eden there's no point in arguing with you

 

[AV1611VET]

What we are questioning is the morality of accepting genocide simply because you (i.e., many Christians) believe that it was sanctioned and done by God.

There's more to the story than just the ending, you know.

He gives us enough information to see why He did what He did, and we accept it.

Don't judge a story by its ending.

Read the whole story first.

 

[AV1611VET]

I keep having to say this, but it isn't God that is being judged. That point seems to fly straight over the heads of quite a few people in this thread.

Then you must be fishing for reasons to vent some indignation out on us.

Academia breeds hostility.

 

[Bradskii]

You can call it what you want but that is exactly what you are doing. But as OB said you can't judge something you don't believe in. So I can't argue with you.

You can't argue against my belief that God is immoral any more than you could argue against my belief that Brahma is immoral. Obviously. But, yet again, I am not discussing God's morality. I am discussing your belief about His morality. And, yet again, how that aligns with any potential command that He might give to you.

If His acts are always moral, are any acts that He commands you to do equally moral?

 

[Occams Barber]

Because evil exists and man has free will

If man has free will why did God kill them all? Nothing interferes with free will more than being killed.

and I did ask questions

Then I must have missed them. I apologise.

but if you believe it was an apple in garden of Eden there's no point in arguing with you

I don't believe there was a garden or a tree or an apple. I used 'apple' because it's the well understood reference to whatever it was Eve ate. Whatever she ate, it appears succeeding generations of man/womankind have been punished for her actions. Intergenerational punishment is yet another thing Christians appear to find morally acceptable when attributed to God. This was the point of my reference to 'eating apples?'.

OB

 

[Bradskii]

I can't speak for everyone but some believe that creation was corrupted. DNA was corrupted. Some believe that it was because man had grown so wicked. Neither of you answered my questions but that's okay

Dna was corrupted? What? But anyway, this gets you butting up against God's omnipotence. You believe that He can do anything. But you say He chose to kill everyone. And He cannot possibly have been forced into doing that. So that was His choice. To drown everyone (including women and children, the elderly etc). And you rule that as being morally acceptable. We understand that.

Following from that, what command would He give you that you would find immoral? What command would He give you that you would refuse to carry out?

 

[Bradskii]

How do you know they weren't raptured first?

Apart from the fact that it was deemed a punishment and a warning to future generations to watch their step, are you seriously suggesting that He raptured everyone and then flooded the planet?

Seriously?

 

[AV1611VET]

Apart from the fact that it was deemed a punishment and a warning to future generations to watch their step, are you seriously suggesting that He raptured everyone ...

No. Just those who hadn't reached the Age of Accountability yet.

(Am I talking over your head?)

 

[BPPLEE]

If man has free will why did God kill them all? Nothing interferes with free will more than being killed.


Then I must have missed them. I apologise.


I don't believe there was a garden or a tree or an apple. I used 'apple' because it's the well understood reference to whatever it was Eve ate. Whatever she ate, it appears succeeding generations of man/womankind have been punished for her actions. Intergenerational punishment is yet another thing Christians appear to find morally acceptable when attributed to God. This was the point of my reference to 'eating apples?'.

OB

It wasn't an apple. Yes we have free will but we will all die. To take your argument to the logical conclusion then God kills everyone because he could stop you from dying. God does not force you to do anything that is what is meant by free will. I don't hope to change your mind about anything what would be gained if you changed mine?

 

[BPPLEE]

You can't argue against my belief that God is immoral any more than you could argue against my belief that Brahma is immoral. Obviously. But, yet again, I am not discussing God's morality. I am discussing your belief about His morality. And, yet again, how that aligns with any potential command that He might give to you.

If His acts are always moral, are any acts that He commands you to do equally moral?

Everything he commands me to do is moral. Love the Lord your God with all your heart soul and mine and the second is like it love your neighbor as yourself. All the law and the prophets are summed up in these two commands

 

[BPPLEE]

Dna was corrupted? What? But anyway, this gets you butting up against God's omnipotence. You believe that He can do anything. But you say He chose to kill everyone. And He cannot possibly have been forced into doing that. So that was His choice. To drown everyone (including women and children, the elderly etc). And you rule that as being morally acceptable. We understand that.

Following from that, what command would He give you that you would find immoral? What command would He give you that you would refuse to carry out?

He only gives me two commands. Love the Lord your God with all your heart mind and soul and the second is like it love your neighbor as yourself. If I heard a voice telling me to do something evil I would see a psychiatrist or if that didn't work an exorcist

 

[Bradskii]

No. Just those who hadn't reached the Age of Accountability yet.

'Morning Jezebel. What about this rain, eh? And...what the..? Weren't you 8 months pregnant yesterday?'

Seriously?

 

[AV1611VET]

'Morning Jezebel. What about this rain, eh? And...what the..? Weren't you 8 months pregnant yesterday?'

Seriously?

Seriously.

 

[Bradskii]

Everything he commands me to do is moral.

So anything that He would ask you to do, you'd obey His command and do it. And that would include anything that you might think was evil. It wouldn't be your position to challenge God. I'm glad we got there.

Now it only remains for us to know how you actually know that God has commanded you to do something. Bearing in mind that you have lost the excuse to say 'Well, He wouldn't ask me to do that' because you've just said that He could command you to do literally everything. Nothing is off the table.

Any suggestions?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

A woman just gave birth. Do you, personally speaking, think it's OK to drown the baby for any reason whatsoever? And can you skip the name dropping? If it's an alternative to the exhibition of your credentials, I'd prefer it if you put them back in your signature.

More hypothetical scenarios, ay, Bradskii? You're sophistry is getting annoying. So is your form of questioning. As for names, I'll drop whatever names I so feel pleased to drop ... you can do the same. And I really don't care what you think or don't think about my paltry credentials.

Here is a real question for you to fathom, hopefully one that you consider very soon since your years are getting on in time: Do you personally think a Transcendent, Holy, Eternal God, Lord God Almighty, Maker of all Creation-- who gives life and takes it away --is in any way accountable to you or to me or even to the rest of the world for His clear judgments upon us? If so, by what absolute, moral criteria above and beyond God Himself do you call Him to account?

As far as I can dally about in the realm of axiology, I see NO criteria above and beyond God Himself. I'd be surprised you do IF we're going to play the hypothetical that God exists within your chosen make-shift scenario.

See? I'm not playing your game. If you don't believe in God, in Jesus, then drop the hypothetical act and start being honest with what you're really trying to imply---that religious people bother you and you're concerned because you think they're deluded. Just be honest and stop the mind games!

 

[BPPLEE]

Dna was corrupted? What? But anyway, this gets you butting up against God's omnipotence. You believe that He can do anything. But you say He chose to kill everyone. And He cannot possibly have been forced into doing that. So that was His choice. To drown everyone (including women and children, the elderly etc). And you rule that as being morally acceptable. We understand that.

Following from that, what command would He give you that you would find immoral? What command would He give you that you would refuse to carry out?

So anything that He would ask you to do, you'd obey His command and do it. And that would include anything that you might think was evil. It wouldn't be your position to challenge God. I'm glad we got there.

Now it only remains for us to know how you actually know that God has commanded you to do something. Bearing in mind that you have lost the excuse to say 'Well, He wouldn't ask me to do that' because you've just said that He could command you to do literally everything. Nothing is off the table.

Any suggestions?

You took that out of context. He only commands me to do two things and I told you what they are. I see why you only quote part of what I say totally out of context. If I heard a Voice telling me what to do I would see a psychiatrist. At least be honest in your argument

 

[2PhiloVoid]

If you place this statement in the context of God wiping out most of the human race then it's easy to see where fanaticism comes from. To suggest that genocide is OK because God said so, indicates the abdication of normal moral judgement. It's a short step from here to "I was only following orders".

This is what I mean when I say that Christianity is morally vacuous. Anything is allowable as long as you can claim God's acquiescence. Thinking becomes unnecessary.

OB

We're talking and have ONLY been talking in reference to the Great Flood. Would you like to requalify your concerns here?