The Most immoral Act in the History of the Earth

[Danmark]

I submit that the single greatest act of immorality is recorded in the sixth chapter of Genesis:
'So the Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.�'

In the 20th century, the most serious acts of genocide involved less than 1% of the human population. Examples are: the extermination of the Armenian minority in Turkey, the extermination of Jews, Roma (Gypsies) and others by the Nazis, the extermination of the ethnic Albanians by the Serbs in Kosovo in the former Yugoslavia. The perpetrators have become the most hated of people. But the genocide resulting from the great flood is far more serious. It is recorded as having destroyed over 99% of the human race, leaving only eight humans alive.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/imm_bibl3.htm#noah

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 40:

IF we consider our conception/birth as our creation then this is one of the most unanswerable questions in all of Christian theology.

Right up there with, "Can you show your claims are truth?"

There is NO equitable answer especially considering it was supposedly the GOD who is loving holiness who supposedly created / birthed us as sinners.

Indicative of there being there ain't no god there to fret about it.

Since we are clearly taught that we are sinners at birth and from conception, then it is a great joy to have the mystery solved by understanding that our conception/birth on earth was NOT our creation but that we lived in sheol as spirits before our conception as humans and in sheol we made free will choices to accept or reject GOD for eternity and earthy life just reflects these choices of ours as we live them out.

While I contend it's an even greater "blessing" to know the Christian is incapable of showing he speaks truth about so many matters - whereby we can all set about being humans, and not frettin' about what some unprovable, unproven god has to allow.

So your proposal is indeed what happened and you are very astute except it happened after our creation in sheol, not after our birth on earth after we have already chosen to be evil in HIS sight.

I'm curious to see what data might possibly support such a conclusion, and how much it suffers from confirmable.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 38 by ttruscott]

The problem I have with this whole scenario Ted, is not these nitpicking apologetic arguments about whether or not people or animals were "evil". But rather, how in the world did this come to be?

This God is supposed to be omniscient. Did he not know that his entire creation was going to become so evil to the point where he would need to drown them out?

If he didn't know then he could hardly be omniscient. On the contrary he would have been completely unaware that things would ever get this bad. It also states that he was sorry that he ever created them. Again this implies that the Creator is actually sorry that the he did something because things didn't work out the way he had hoped they might, or as he had planned.

That already implies a God who clearly has no such thing as a "Master Plan". If he had a Master Plan, then it would need to include drowning out his creation. But if this was all part of his Master Plan, then why would he be sorry since everything is going according to the plan?

It's simply doesn't add up Ted.

[ThePainefulTruth]

[Replying to post 40 by ttruscott]

Even if it were true that it is written that we are born evil, and I know of no biblical verse where God declares that to be so, I wouldn't believe it because it goes against our free will and would make our self-awareness superfluous.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 40 by ttruscott]

Even if it were true that it is written that we are born evil, and I know of no biblical verse where God declares that to be so, I wouldn't believe it because it goes against our free will and would make our self-awareness superfluous.

I don't buy it either. It's pretty much baloney, but the verse by Paul is in Romans 3:23: "... for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God...."
But even that verse does not claim we are sinners from birth.

The lines Paul quotes before that verse would earn him a warning here for making a "blanket statement."

“None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.�
13 “Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.�
“The venom of asps is under their lips.�
14 “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.�
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 in their paths are ruin and misery,
17 and the way of peace they have not known.�
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.�

On a side note, Paul is supposedly quoting from Psalms 14 and 53, but the words don't match up well, just the general idea. Have the words of the "Old Testament" changed that much from Paul's time to ours? Is Paul just going off on his own again? Or is he taking quotes from several different places and pasting them together as if there were one source. I think our brother Paul was not too careful to distinguish what ideas are his, and which supposedly from God.

[bjs]

This argument comes up semi-regularly on this forum, but I have never been able to make much sense of it.

If we take the account in the sixth chapter of Genesis as worldwide flood or as a more localized event, it clearly describes God killing a specific group of people. But then, God kills everybody. Anyone who dies does so because God, at the very least, allows them to die. If someone dies in a flood sent by God, or dies in a flood when a dike breaks, or dies in childbirth, or dies from a heart attack, or dies in any fashion at all it is because God allowed it.

So what specifically is the issue you are upset with? Is it:

1. There is death at all?
2. Death is caused by drowning?
3. A large group of people died at the same time?
4. Some people die at a younger age than other people?
5. God sometimes explicitly states that He had a hand in certain deaths instead of sitting back and assuming that we will remember that He has a hand in all deaths?
6. This specific set of deaths as opposed to all others, and if so what makes this different in your mind?
7. Something else entirely, and if so what?

Without knowing what specifically you upset with it is hard to give a complete response.

[Freddy_Scissorhands]

Yes, human babies are all criminals against GOD's law by their own free will. As aeons old they are only new to earth and human bodies.

To all the people who constantly ask: "What's so bad about religions? Let people have their own believes, if it makes them feel happy. It doesn't harm anybody!"...
THIS is why people like me are against religions! Because it is very, very hard to make an actually sane, and otherwise moral person, to make such inhuman and scary statements like that... unless you have a religion that forces you into that position! Then, suddenly, people will say such horrible things, and will actually be backed up, or at least protected by other people who say "Well, it's their personal faith"!

Imagine under any other context, somebody would say: "Human babies deserve a horrible death by drowning. That's justice"!
Would you respect such a person? Would you even consider such a person to be sane?
Of course not!

If you wonder what harm religions can do, read the entire poste by this guy. It will open your eyes, about what harm religions can do to your brain.

[Danmark]

This argument comes up semi-regularly on this forum, but I have never been able to make much sense of it.

If we take the account in the sixth chapter of Genesis as worldwide flood or as a more localized event, it clearly describes God killing a specific group of people. But then, God kills everybody. Anyone who dies does so because God, at the very least, allows them to die. If someone dies in a flood sent by God, or dies in a flood when a dike breaks, or dies in childbirth, or dies from a heart attack, or dies in any fashion at all it is because God allowed it.

So what specifically is the issue you are upset with? Is it:

1. There is death at all?
2. Death is caused by drowning?
3. A large group of people died at the same time?
4. Some people die at a younger age than other people?
5. God sometimes explicitly states that He had a hand in certain deaths instead of sitting back and assuming that we will remember that He has a hand in all deaths?
6. This specific set of deaths as opposed to all others, and if so what makes this different in your mind?
7. Something else entirely, and if so what?

Without knowing what specifically you upset with it is hard to give a complete response.

I think this has been addressed in previous posts.
1. Killing off all the animals in the entire world, including man, is an immoral act, no matter who does it.
2. Many think this simply never happened at all, because the whole story is a myth and there is no actual "God" that is being referenced; no god to be responsible for this claim that God did it.
3. This issue really only affects the Biblical litteralists who think it really happened and that it was not a local flood, but world wide.

The point is that either the Genesis myths should not be believed, and certainly not taken litterally, but for those who do, Genesis paints a picture of a horrible, immoral, monster God, at least into the first 4000 or so years of his "young Earth creation."

[ThePainefulTruth]

[Replying to post 44 by Danmark]

Well, I'm pretty much in agreement with all the last few comments here, and would only like to add about Danmark's statement that, " I think our brother Paul was not too careful to distinguish what ideas are his, and which supposedly from God": I think he thought they were one and the same. It's hard to decide who has had a greater negative impact on human history, Paul, Mohammed or Lyndon Johnson. Now there's a Trinity for ya.

[bjs]

This argument comes up semi-regularly on this forum, but I have never been able to make much sense of it.

If we take the account in the sixth chapter of Genesis as worldwide flood or as a more localized event, it clearly describes God killing a specific group of people. But then, God kills everybody. Anyone who dies does so because God, at the very least, allows them to die. If someone dies in a flood sent by God, or dies in a flood when a dike breaks, or dies in childbirth, or dies from a heart attack, or dies in any fashion at all it is because God allowed it.

So what specifically is the issue you are upset with? Is it:

1. There is death at all?
2. Death is caused by drowning?
3. A large group of people died at the same time?
4. Some people die at a younger age than other people?
5. God sometimes explicitly states that He had a hand in certain deaths instead of sitting back and assuming that we will remember that He has a hand in all deaths?
6. This specific set of deaths as opposed to all others, and if so what makes this different in your mind?
7. Something else entirely, and if so what?

Without knowing what specifically you upset with it is hard to give a complete response.

I think this has been addressed in previous posts.
1. Killing off all the animals in the entire world, including man, is an immoral act, no matter who does it.
2. Many think this simply never happened at all, because the whole story is a myth and there is no actual "God" that is being referenced; no god to be responsible for this claim that God did it.
3. This issue really only affects the Biblical litteralists who think it really happened and that it was not a local flood, but world wide.

The point is that either the Genesis myths should not be believed, and certainly not taken litterally, but for those who do, Genesis paints a picture of a horrible, immoral, monster God, at least into the first 4000 or so years of his "young Earth creation."

God does physically kill off all animals that live, including all people. To be clear, are you saying that you that consider death on the whole to immoral and that all animals, including man, should be immortal in this world?

For the purposes of this discussion I’m not sure that I see the difference between a worldwide flood and localized one. Either way, God states that He took an active role in the death of a great number of people. Even if the event was localized God still killed everyone else in the world who was alive at that time, just not as quickly.

[bluethread]

Either homo sapiens were created in God's image, or God was created in the image of homo sapiens.

We create computers in our own image, does that make the destruction of all Commadors a brandist holocaust?