ARCHIVE: God's mass-murder in the flood

[smothers]

Axiom: Evil exists.

Scenario 1) God is able to create a universe in which evil does not exist. God is aware that creating the universe will likely result in evil.
Conclusion 1) God is responsible for evil through an act of commision.

Scenario 2) God is NOT able to create a universe in which evil does not exist. (Knight's position?). God is aware that this limitation will likely result in evil.
Conculsion 2) God is responsible for evil through an act of commision.

Scenario 3) God is able to create a universe in which evil does not exist. God is not aware that creating the universe will likely result in evil.
Conclusion 3) God is responsible and will hopefully clean up the mess later. (Noah's flood.) He is powerful but not qualified to create universes.

Scenario 4) God is not able to create a universe in which evil does not exist. God is not aware that creating the universe will likely result in evil.
Conclusion: God is unqualified and reckless.

Scenario 5) God does not exist.
Conclusion: This thread is an interesting thought problem with no eternal consequences.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

smothers.... its polite to take the time to respond to those who have spent time responding to you.

 

[Aimiel]

Using your logic, when God creates a child with severe birth defects, he didn't make a mistake. He created a being to suffer or die early on purpose?


______________________________________



He designed every soul that will ever live. Whether they have defects or diseases (brought on by the fall, in the Garden of Eden) or not. His Plan is at work. He designed everything that will ever happen. He is The Great Architect, and no one can second-guess Him or call Him on the carpet. If He found that bringing eight people across the water in a boat, and allowing the rest of humanity to drown, to be right, we can find no fault with that. We don't yet know the extent of the evil that was in the earth at the time. I believe that if He had not allowed this flood, that the earth would have been destroyed, or at least the race of men.

I also believe that we would not be having this conversation if Sodom and Gomorrah had not been destroyed. The evil that was embedded in those cities would have polluted the entire human race, and perhaps have wiped it out with AIDS more than three thousand years ago. If God knows anything, He knows how to protect His Sheep from evil men. One way that He does this is by saving them from their own ways and giving them a new outlook. Another way is by allowing the evil that they practice to rain down upon their heads. Which do you prefer?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Aimiel
He designed everything that will ever happen.

I believe that to be a severe overstatement.

For instance....
We know people are tempted.

Yet we also know from God's word that He does not tempt men.

Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. - James 1:13

Therefore God did not "design" these temptings of men. These temptings are by their own design. Christians need to be careful to not overstate their case or place credit in places where it does not belong.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

 

[taoist]

Originally posted by deardelmar

I like the way George Burns said it in OH GOD 2

I never figured out how to make things without an opposite. You know up without down, a back without a front, hot without cold...

Hold that thought, it's where I'm trying to go here.

 

[One Eyed Jack]

Originally posted by Jukia
God is not tempted by evil? Did not Satan tempt Christ?

Well, he tried anyway. It doesn't appear to have worked.

 

[Delmar]

Originally posted by taoist


(Can't do that or deardelmar might call me sarcastic and I'd have to have Jukia come in and rescue me from you big meanies.)

Oh come now Iv'e been playing nice

 

[Jukia]

Jack: I was responding to a statement by Knight that God could not be tempted by evil. Was Christ not tempted and is there another Bible verse that says God cannot be tempted by evil? I am not (and before anyone else says it--"obviously") a Bible scholar, so if there is a conflicting verse or verses will someone please point them out to me. Thanks.

And back on the general topic of God making mistakes---instead of typing "Thanks" I usually first type "Thansk" and have to go back to fix it. Would God make the same mistake or would His typing always be perfect?

 

[One Eyed Jack]

Originally posted by Jukia
Jack: I was responding to a statement by Knight that God could not be tempted by evil.

And I was responding to your response.

Was Christ not tempted

No, I don't think He was. If I offered to let you keep your car in exchange for worshipping me, would you be tempted? How can you be tempted with something you already own?

and is there another Bible verse that says God cannot be tempted by evil?

I believe the verse already provided says it all. What more do you want? Does something have to be said multiple times before you'll believe it?

I am not (and before anyone else says it--"obviously") a Bible scholar, so if there is a conflicting verse or verses will someone please point them out to me. Thanks.

How about you point out some conflicting verses, because I'm not seeing any.

And back on the general topic of God making mistakes---instead of typing "Thanks" I usually first type "Thansk" and have to go back to fix it.

You're not perfect. God is.

Would God make the same mistake or would His typing always be perfect?

Have you ever known Him to go back and correct something He did wrong?

 

[drbrumley]

One Eyed Jack,

No, I don't think He was. If I offered to let you keep your car in exchange for worshipping me, would you be tempted? How can you be tempted with something you already own?

Excellent Observation. I am making a response along these lines as well in another thread to Eloyhim(sp?) in The Forgiveness of sins thread. Just wanted to post here real quick and say good post that you made. :thumb:

 

[Jukia]

HMMM, if the flood really occured seems to me He was starting over.
"The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain...I am grieved that I have made them" Genesis 6:6-7. And because of this He was willing to destroy "men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air" Genesis 6:7. Sounds to me like He said, "What a mistake, these men are not worth it, time to start over."

Chapter 1 of Mark and Chapter 4 of Luke discuss Christ's temptation. If as God Christ was unable to be tempted what is the point of those passages?

 

[One Eyed Jack]

Originally posted by Jukia
HMMM, if the flood really occured seems to me He was starting over.

If He was 'starting over,' then why did He leave a remnant? Why not just wipe everything out and start over from scratch?

"The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain...I am grieved that I have made them" Genesis 6:6-7. And because of this He was willing to destroy "men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air" Genesis 6:7. Sounds to me like He said, "What a mistake, these men are not worth it, time to start over."

Then why didn't He destroy every single one of them? Why spare eight people?

Chapter 1 of Mark and Chapter 4 of Luke discuss Christ's temptation. If as God Christ was unable to be tempted what is the point of those passages?

Perhaps, in part, to demonstrate that very fact.

 

[Jukia]

Jack: I can buy your comment on the temptation.
But you are really ignoring the issue of whether God went back and corrected something with the Flood. I was responding to a post by Aimiel (#105) and your comment about not going back to correct anything. Why did he leave a remant? First, because He left something does not mean He was not correcting something. Secondly it would appear that He changed His mind in mindstream by allowing Noah to live cause first He wanted to wipe out everyone. (Note I do not have a Bible w me so that last is from memory). Biblically it would seem that at the very least He changed His mind a couple of times. Hard to reconcile w the idea of a constant perfect God.

 

[One Eyed Jack]

Originally posted by Jukia
Jack: I can buy your comment on the temptation.
But you are really ignoring the issue of whether God went back and corrected something with the Flood.

Was He correcting His mistakes, or was He exercising His judgement against ours? There's a difference.

I was responding to a post by Aimiel (#105) and your comment about not going back to correct anything.

If He corrected His mistakes, then how are we different from the people that existed before the flood? It seems to me that, as a whole, we're just as messed up as they were.

Why did he leave a remant? First, because He left something does not mean He was not correcting something.

Ok. What do you think His mistake was, and how do you think He corrected it?

Secondly it would appear that He changed His mind in mindstream by allowing Noah to live cause first He wanted to wipe out everyone. (Note I do not have a Bible w me so that last is from memory).

I'm sure you know what hyperbole is.

Biblically it would seem that at the very least He changed His mind a couple of times.

Well, it does seem like Moses talked Him out of wiping out all the Israelites after they worshipped the golden calf. Or maybe He was just testing Moses to see what he would say.

Hard to reconcile w the idea of a constant perfect God.

Do you not believe God is perfect?

 

[Aimiel]

Originally posted by Jukia
But you are really ignoring the issue of whether God went back and corrected something with the Flood. I was responding to a post by Aimiel (#105) and your comment about not going back to correct anything. Why did he leave a remant? First, because He left something does not mean He was not correcting something.

You seem to be ignoring the implications of the flood upon A Perfect God. He is Perfect, and if not, would try to hide the fact that He is not, by either re-starting creation, so that no memory of it would exist in His new 'test tube.' He used the facts of the flood to affect generations. One way that it has affected everyone on this earth is the promise, which is symbolized by the rainbow. If He made a boo-boo in man, why would He not start over with a perfected being, I believe, was what Jack was driving at, by asking about the remnant.

Secondly it would appear that He changed His mind in mindstream by allowing Noah to live cause first He wanted to wipe out everyone. (Note I do not have a Bible w me so that last is from memory). Biblically it would seem that at the very least He changed His mind a couple of times. Hard to reconcile w the idea of a constant perfect God.

Not at all, since He knew these things were going to come to pass, before they happened. He saw the end of time when He started the first second of this temporal realm, the big 'flash' where light was created.

 

[Aimiel]

Originally posted by Knight
I believe that to be a severe overstatement.

For instance....
We know people are tempted.

Yet we also know from God's word that He does not tempt men.

Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. - James 1:13

Therefore God did not "design" these temptings of men. These temptings are by their own design. Christians need to be careful to not overstate their case or place credit in places where it does not belong.

:chuckle:

:doh: God is NOT The Tempter.

Thank you, Knight. I see what you are saying, and agree that He did not design the temptation, but did design the being(s) that brought it about, and even those who give themselves totally to the enemy. He is not out to destroy anyone, but His Plan (when fully revealed) will be not only clear, just and perfect, but absolutely the BEST Plan ever conceived. We (then) will also see the reasons for such things as the flood, sin and even why we have to have such things as mosquitoes, poison ivy, rap music and homosexuality; all of which would seem to be totally useless.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Aimiel
:chuckle:

:doh: God is NOT The Tempter.

Thank you, Knight. I see what you are saying, and agree that He did not design the temptation, but did design the being(s) that brought it about, and even those who give themselves totally to the enemy. He is not out to destroy anyone, but His Plan (when fully revealed) will be not only clear, just and perfect, but absolutely the BEST Plan ever conceived. We (then) will also see the reasons for such things as the flood, sin and even why we have to have such things as mosquitoes, poison ivy, rap music and homosexuality; all of which would seem to be totally useless.

OK fair enough :up:

Although I would state that we already know why God flooded the earth....

Genesis 6:5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”

 

[smothers]

Quote:

He is not out to destroy anyone, but His Plan (when fully revealed) will be not only clear, just and perfect, but absolutely the BEST Plan ever conceived. We (then) will also see the reasons for such things as the flood, sin and even why we have to have such things as mosquitoes, poison ivy, rap music and homosexuality; all of which would seem to be totally useless.

--------------

Why are obvious questions such the existance of evil, God's childish and cruel temper tantrum and flood placed in the category of "mystery"? Why is the Bible, which obviously borrows its contents from other sources, taken at face value. Even in the light of contradictions, scientific inaccuracies, barbaric murder of entire cities by God's chosen wandering nomads, the whole fairy tale is taken seriously.
I just don't get it. Trusting a diety who refuses to show himself in ANY objective manner is simply wishful thinking. The obvious contradictions implied in the classic argument against God from evil have NEVER been explained without nonsense about an omnipotent being constrained by free-will. Since when is onmipotence constrained by anything?
I urge everyone to seriously think and examine their spiritual beliefs in the light of reason. Don't be afraid of stepping out of your comfort zone. Most here seem rather intellegent, but refuse to directly face the obvious reality that Christianity is patently false.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

smothers... it is not polite to ignore the responses and questions of those that have taken the time to respond to you.