Well, no. But I understand your paranoia.
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
Well, no. But I understand your paranoia.
Tyrathca
New member
Some of this is denomination dependent but the mass torture of people in hell for all eternity would seem to fit what I was saying. Then there is also much of the Old Testament where God is either directly responsible for intentionally indiscriminate genocide including children and infants (e.g. the flood & killing Egypt's first born sons) or commands people to commit genocide in his name +/- mass rape of the survivors (Balaam, Amalek, Babylon etc).
Rosenritter
New member
I acknowledge that mass torture of people for eternity would fit your statement, but as you acknowledged, that is "denomination dependent" and not necessarily defining of either the Bible or Christianity. The earliest Christians had no such doctrine, and it's rather absent from the Bible. It took a couple hundred years for such to be grafted in from the Greek and pagan religions, adding assumptions that humans are naturally immortal (whereas the Book itself says that we are mortal and shall die), and so forth. I'll simply say that true Christianity obtains no such doctrine from the Bible.
If you are considering the question of whether God is unjust for when he chooses to kill people, you need to also consider this in the light that he is the reason anyone has life to begin with. The same God that creates us also has the right to destroy us if necessary. But besides that, he has also said that he will bring the dead back to life. For consistency's sake, if you were to fault God for deciding when someone would die, you might as well fault him for making man mortal in the first place, or taking away the Tree of Life which granted continued life. God isn't under the obligation to give mankind immortality, especially considering the evil man has proven himself capable of.
Your last description is inaccurate. There are no commands from God to commit mass rape. Slaughter of peoples, or even an entire race of people like the Amalekites, but that again goes back to the fact that God, as the creator of mankind, and the giver of life, has the right to say when people shall die and when he shall raise them again. If you allow for God to exist in the first place (which you must allow in order for your criticism to have a chance to find a target) then you have to allow that he is as the Bible describes in those ways, as well.
If you kill someone, you have taken something that does not belong to you. You had no right over their life, and you are unable to undo what you have done. If God kills someone, he is the reason that they were alive in the first place, that life belongs to him, and he is going to speak to him directly when he raises him in that next moment. That same God has the power and ability to heal age, disease, mental deficiency, harm, and trauma... even ignorance and stupidity. The damage we inherited from this world that we chose for ourselves six thousand years ago when we would not have God rule over us can be fixed.
Just to put this in perspective, according to Evolution Theory, I would have the perfect right to kill whomever I wanted whenever I please, or to show any amount of cruelty to any degree capable. Nothing matters as long as I produce viable offspring.
Last edited:
Rosenritter
New member
That post even made one of the "representative graphics" for the thread. Ask Six Days to repost it. The letter from the carbon dating lab returned his samples and said they would refuse to process them because they found out he was a Creationist, and they didn't like at all that the previous samples he had submitted of soft dinosaur tissue was in the 20,000 year range.
Tyrathca
New member
Which is why I said it was a useful document.
That would be relevant if we knew Josephus relied on such documents for this part of his history.
Because Josephus did not know it was a creation? It's not even certain that he was actually talking about the same Jesus you are (though yes most scholars conclude he probably was)
For the record I actually think that on the balance of probabilities that Christianity probably was founded by a man rather than a complete fabrication. My point is actually that we have little to no reliable knowledge about him, we're meant to base our understanding what is supposed to be the fundamental nature of reality on the writings of people who were at best children when the events occurred. There is so much uncertainty and vagueness, this is fine and necessary to accept in normal history studies since no one makes important decisions based on it (its interesting and educational but ultimately not life changing).
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
gcthomas
New member
They had assumed that the standard collection and handling procedures had been used that would have allowed for reliable dating. The sneakiness that was used undermines confidence.
Rosenritter
New member
No, that's not the story. The truth is that the lab proved that dinosaur soft tissue, if dated, dates young. An evolutionist wouldn't try to date the soft tissue. Because you don't get praised or famous for challenging or disproving that Theory, you get fired and ostracized.
Rosenritter
New member
You said you weren't certain it was the same Jesus. How many Jesus were there that were called Christ that had a brother named James? That seems pretty specific to me.
But as for the histories, its not reasonable to exclude the Gospels seeing as they were written for the purpose of recording that history. Those were written by four different people, which is far more than what we have for many other historical figures or events that we accept as factual.
gcthomas
New member
Why have you rejected the multiple lines of evidence of great age, including several independent nuclear decay methods that aren't hindered the errors introduced the tiny samples of C14 in these dunno samples?
Why have you pinned your hopes on the odd out?
Rosenritter
New member
I seem to remember prompting someone to describe these so called methods, so that I could expose how they were error ridden and descended into a pool of circular logic. They backed out. Would you like to explore that angle now?
gcthomas
New member
Look up argon dating, Uranium dating. Theoretical and empirical studies of evolution rates. Sedimentology, stratigraphy and continental drift. Dendrochronology. Dating of planetary surfaces. Simulations of solar system development. Etc
Cross Reference
New member
Look up how a sphincter muscle functions . . and why? Think about how it may have "evolved" into such perfection and how long it would have taken for a mindless entity to discover it needed one. . .
gcthomas
New member
Look up how a sphincter muscle functions . . and why? Think about how it may have "evolved" into such perfection and how long it would have taken for a mindless entity to discover it needed one. . .
A sphincter is just about the simplest structure to produce given a muscular digestive tract.
How about picking apart at the multifarious dating methods?
Tyrathca
New member
I'm not sure who this argument is for... me or yourself? Clearly as you acknowledge I am aware this is not relevant to all Christians, furthermore you acknowledge it is relevant to some too. Remember the context that my original comment you were querying was directed at someone (Michael Cadry) who DOES believe in hell and regularly threatens others with it in a mistaken belief it will convince us to convert. I did not know your opinion on the matter which is why I made sure to add the acknowledgement of other denominations do not believing such things in an (unsuccessful) attempt to avert the otherwise inevitable "but that's not MY Christianity" retort.
If I restricted my comments about Christianity to only those beliefs which are held by all Christians I wouldn't be able to say much would I?
The whole argument is moot however as below you then make an argument that would essentially mean even if God did have such a hell that would be OK anyway (your argument regarding god killing is nonspecific and can be extrapolated to basically anything your god does)
No such "right" exists, it's simply an invention on your part. Sure an omnipotent god CAN do such a thing (what's to stop him?) but that boils down to little more than "might makes right". This claim would fit perfectly in a B grade monster movie with the mad scientist telling his creation that he created him so he must do as he says then is perplexed when his creations/others disagree. It's a silly plot device/trope at the best of times.
Problem is if such a right exists you've done nothing to explain why it would only apply to god having the right. What about parents? They too are the reason anyone has life to begin with (no parents getting busy = no you). Or what about doctors? If they save someones life do they then have the right to later end it whenever they want? And so on.
First of all regardless of any claimed "right" the idea that someone/thing will arbitrarily kill you based on merely circumstance (i.e. born with the wrong parents) does not seem compatible with the idea of that someone/thing loving you which is the context in which I made the original statement to Michael.
Furthermore there are instances where God appears to condone rape, eg Deuteronomy 20:10-14 basically says if a city rejects a peace offer you can slaughter all the men and take the women and children as plunder, Deuteronomy 21:10-14 then says that these women can then be forced into being their wives with the acknowledgement that they have been coerced into such an arrangement (which is why you're not allowed to enslave/sell them if you don't think they're hot anymore, how generous...).
I always have been perplexed by Deuteronomy ever since I read bits of it as a child, there are so many odd and questionable things packed within one little chapter yet it's like most Christians have never even heard of it yet alone read it. Anyone would think most Christians never read their bible cover to cover...
Uhhhh no.....
Evolutionary theory is not a set of instructions and moral code like your bible is meant to be. Evolutionary theory says NOTHING about what is "right", it only talks about what is much like the Theory of Relativity. It tells us why things occur (if X then Y) but not what should (morally) occur. I have no more right to kill to reproduce based on Evolution than I do the right to detonate a nuclear device based on Relativity. You'd stop making such silly claims if you'd just stop trying to shoehorn evolution into the religion box.
Dear Rosen,
John of Patmos, was one of the early Christians. He wrote Revelation and I believe he was the disciple John, banished to that island. I don't want to disagree with you, but yes, a soul, and spirit, does not die. It lives eternally, whether good or bad. When God created them, He made them to live forever. Of course, humans die an earthly death, but their spirit pops out of their body and is still alive for eternity. And the soul it leaves also lives eternally. The soul goes to heaven or hell, and in certain instances, the lake of fire {our Sun}. Hell is in the center of the Earth. That is why it's called the bottomless pit. Everyone thinks they are on top of the Earth because of gravity, and the center is Hell. There is no bottom. That's why it is called the bottomless pit. And it is very hot there. As hot as magma and lava. The Lake of Fire is our own Sun, which is even hotter than Hell. That is where the really bad souls go. Like Hitler, Mussolini, the antichrist and false prophet, etc. This is clearly written in our Bible.
See Luke 16:23-25KJV. Jesus mentions the word hell, and how it is like fire there, and that there are souls there. He speaks of a rich man being sent to hell. How much more then, an atheist?? Read some of the verses before it if you want to know the whole story. Those in Hell will not burn in Hell eternally. But those cast into the Lake of Fire will burn there eternally. It is even hotter than Hell, and may I mention that lightning is 5 times hotter than the Sun. Also see Rev. 20:15KJV, "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the Lake of Fire. See Rev. 20:13KJV, "And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and Hell delivered up the dead which were in them; and they were judged every man according to their works." An angel made me aware of these things written, or I would not know about them. I'm not making this stuff up on my own. It's too difficult!
Whether Tyrathca will end up in Hell for a while, only God knows. I am no judge. He is. After Hell will give up those souls there and some will be cast into the Lake of Fire. I would doubt that Tyrathca will be cast into the Lake of Fire for eternity, for as great as his sin of being any atheist is, I cannot say whether it is worthy of the Lake of Fire for eternity. There is a lot more that I know about these things and other things, but I cannot type them all in this thread. I just tell what I know as the need or time arises. See also Rev. 19:20KJV, which tells of the antichrist and false prophet being cast into the lake of fire. I'm just trying to tell you some of what I know about the subject, as it was told to me.
Will close for now. God's Best 4 U!!
Michael
Last edited:
Cross Reference
New member
You just mean you, as expected, have no answer. But that is okay. Perhaps you can explain how "mindless evolution" deals with "multifarious dating methods"?
You received an answer, but it involves some work on your part other than reading your holy book.
Cross Reference
New member
Yeah, I know. I read it.. :loser:
Rosenritter
New member
Done and did that over a decade ago. It's rather absurd, depends on circular logic, and produces wildly different results. Numbers that are liked are kept, all the others that conflict or are all over the place are thrown out.
Rosenritter
New member
Disagreeing with you, when God created Man, he warned them that they could indeed die. When he did issue the sentence of death, he was very specific as to what death meant, that Man would return to the dust from whence he came, that Adam was indeed dust. Authors throughout the scripture describe death as the cessation of being, of thought, that the dead have no more being or even knowledge that they are dead. When God promises destruction, that is also defined as a destruction, as silence, as darkness, where the remains are burnt up and consumed, not preserved and tortured without end.
Tyr is right to protest that a different gospel, not of resurrection to life and a final destruction of that which is evil to eliminate human suffering for ever, but a curse of eternal life so that eternal misery might indeed be infinite, is a wrong message. You aren't doing God a favor by perpetuating that type of misconception. Honestly, I believe that "Eternal Conscious Torment" doctrine from within Christianity to be far more harmful than anything that any atheist has done.
Talk to me about this elsewhere by private message or board thread?
- Status