When man tells God, you can't....

[JoeB131]

Here is what you do not understand. Religious practices is the wisdom that guides me through life in the twenty-first century. If it also guided Bronze Age people in their lives in past eras, it simply shows the strength of truths. God is love, and I have experienced that love. God IS. The reality of the effects of God's Way in one's life cannot be denied and therefore will not be denied by people of belief, people of faith.

I am sorry you have no wish to delve into the literature, meanings, and themes of the story of Noah. All you see is death. I understand that as death has been a great part of your life. But there is more to life, more to anyone's story than death.

Death is how everyone's life ends... We are all gonna die of something.

But you still avoid the question. How is a God who drowns babies "Good"?

 

[Meriweather]

Do you people read the book, ever?

Yes. We also read the history, culture, and languages of the time. Plus some of us have studied the elements of literature. Meanwhile, you are imploring that the story be only about God killing babies. For reasons you have already revealed to us, that idea comforts you.

 

[Meriweather]

God who drowns babies

We've done this ad nauseum now. God does not drown babies. However, if you wish to tell us more why you so persistently want God to have drowned babies, we will listen.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes. We also read the history, culture, and languages of the time. Plus some of us have studied the elements of literature. Meanwhile, you are imploring that the story be only about God killing babies. For reasons you have already revealed to us, that idea comforts you.

Actually, I've looked at the story historically (Largely cribbed from other Flood stories like Gilgamesh) and scientifically (Probably a race memory from the Ice age). but that's not the point here at all.

In the story, God exterminated most of the human race, including every last baby on Earth, because he was angry men made decisions he didn't like after he gave them free will. How does he come off as "Good" in that story?

We've done this ad nauseum now. God does not drown babies. However, if you wish to tell us more why you so persistently want God to have drowned babies, we will listen.

Um, it's in the ******* bible, Toots. I guess I was wrong. Someone could come up with an answer more retarded than what Sister Mary Butch came up with.

 

[Meriweather]

In the story, God exterminated most of the human race

Joe, who wrote the story? What was his culture? What was the known history of the time? What elements of literature are present? What conjectures did he make? On what were they based? This is not hard to figure out this story--if there is any interest at all. Your interest is God who drowns babies. Nothing more. And when told God does not drown babies, you have nothing else, it is all a blank. I am so sorry, I truly am. The author had a message. What was it?

Oh, and by the way...instead of comparing me to a nun you did not care for, ask yourself why you have learned nothing further about the story since that day.

Anything further you care to discuss, or are we done here?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

I wouldn't tell God what to do, but would ask him why he created imperfect beings and then punish them eternally for being imperfect.

He didnt create "imperfect beings". You make the choice to be as "imperfect" as you want to be, every day. Sin is your choice.

 

[LittleNipper]

Okay, that still doesn't tell me why God killed all the babies and can still be a "good" person.

There's actually nothing in the Bible that says how Noah's neighbors reacted to the crazy guy building the big boat in his yard.



Leave my parents out of it. This has to do with how you guys try to Disneyfy some nasty bronze age superstitions and impose them on the rest of us.

Now, one more time. HOW IS A GOD WHO DROWNS BABIES "GOOD"? It's a simple question. You don't have an answer. At least Sister Mary Butch had an answer, the old hag.

God obviously had/has a much better future for those babies in heaven than they would have achieved had they lived and without a doubt would have turned out worse than their parents ---- who would have trained them accordingly or not at all... Heaven is FAR better than hell don't you know... GOD is the CREATOR and HE is merciful. And honestly, the Bible gives no indication that when the FLOOD began that there were any babies. When people lived to be 900 years old, even a 20 year old would be quite young; however, not an infant.

As for the inhabitants of Sodom, Gomorrah, and the rest of those cites: Remember that the men of the City desperately wanted to rape the two angels who had traveled to Sodom to witness the lewd behavior of those evil cities. Lot offered his own MARRIED daughters dreading what the angles might be up to regarding those sexual perverts. Lot later goes to his SONS-IN-LAWS to get them to leave with him and they just laughed at him. Realize that apparently the married daughters were still virgins, because after Lot and his daughters left ZOAR (being so terrified by what had happened to the other cities) and went into the mountains. There the daughters had sex with their drunken father because they assumed they were alone. SO, it is likely that those cities had become so depraved that the men didn't hang with women anymore and there were no babies. I mean, Abraham had bargained with the LORD and GOD agreed not to destroy the cities IF a mere 10 righteous people could be found within those cites -------------------------------------------- OBVIOUSLY, THERE WAS ONLY LOT... AND it doesn't take much consideration to realize that the way LOT reacted (essentially throwing his daughters under the bus ---- why didn't he simply pray for guidance) that Lot was being corrupted. And LOT's wife had to look back ----- why? What was there that she longed for at Sodom? And LOT's daughters didn't behave like someone who witnessed the destruction of the cities of the plain. They get dad drunk and have sex with him! So, don't ever imagine that society doesn't influence people to behave badly. It only took one generation to spoil this family. Sexual perversion isn't something to ignore. It is just like cancer.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, who wrote the story? What was his culture? What was the known history of the time? What elements of literature are present? What conjectures did he make? On what were they based? This is not hard to figure out this story--if there is any interest at all. Your interest is God who drowns babies. Nothing more. And when told God does not drown babies, you have nothing else, it is all a blank. I am so sorry, I truly am. The author had a message. What was it?

I don't think ANY of that matters. The message of the Author was pretty clear, don't piss off God, because he'll straight up murder your ass. And your babies. Now, eventually, they took those negative elements and made them into a character called "Satan", but at this point, God was the author of Good and Evil.

So one more time, how can God drown every baby in the world and be considered Good?

You keep evading the question. I'm not arguing who wrote it or if the events happened, I am arguing what is written. God drowned all them babies. And puppies. And Kitties.

Oh, and by the way...instead of comparing me to a nun you did not care for, ask yourself why you have learned nothing further about the story since that day.

Oh, I've learned a lot.

I've learned it probably never happened.
I've learned the story was probably cribbed from older sources like Gilgamesh.
I've learned that a lot of it is just scientifically impossible (such as inbreeding would cause the extinction of all species saved, or there not being enough water on earth to flood the whole world, or that the boat as described wouldn't have been seaworthy.)

What I haven't learned from that story is why the God of that story can be called "Good" or any indication that he loved his creations. Because there is nothing like that in the story.

 

[JoeB131]

God obviously had/has a much better future for those babies in heaven than they would have achieved had they lived and without a doubt would have turned out worse than their parents ---- who would have trained them accordingly or not at all... Heaven is FAR better than hell don't you know... GOD is the CREATOR and HE does with mercy. And honestly, the Bible gives no indication that when the FLOOD began that there were any babies. When people lived to be 900 years old, even a 20 year old would be quite young; however, not an infant.

Okay, a few problems with this.

First, "Heaven" wasn't a thing in their mythology yet. They didn't believe in an afterlife.
Second, even in the later version, since Admission to Heaven didn't happen until after Jesus came, anyone who died unbaptized and in Catholic Theology, anyway, went to Limbo. (they've kind of gotten rid of Limbo since then, but they still talked like that was really a thing. All the unbaptized babies and the good Pagans and Jews from before Jesus were all hanging out there.

Third, all those "Begats" that happened, not everyone live to be 900 and there was a whole lot of begating going on, so there were probably a lot of babies to drown.

 

[LittleNipper]

Okay, a few problems with this.

First, "Heaven" wasn't a thing in their mythology yet. They didn't believe in an afterlife.
Second, even in the later version, since Admission to Heaven didn't happen until after Jesus came, anyone who died unbaptized and in Catholic Theology, anyway, went to Limbo. (they've kind of gotten rid of Limbo since then, but they still talked like that was really a thing. All the unbaptized babies and the good Pagans and Jews from before Jesus were all hanging out there.

Third, all those "Begats" that happened, not everyone live to be 900 and there was a whole lot of begating going on, so there were probably a lot of babies to drown.

First off, the LORD slew the first animal sacrifice and clothed Adam and Eve with the skins. Later Abel knew what kind of sacrifice the LORD wanted. So, they were aware that GOD intended to save them and that the animal sacrifice was symbolic. You are right, when the righteous died they went to Hades to a section known as Paradise. Jesus, when HE gave up HIS SPIRIT went to Paradise to preach the freeing of the captives and released the righteous dead to heaven. The other souls go to a place in Hades of torment remaining there until the day of Judgment when they are cast into the LAKE of eternal FIRE. In the story of Lazareth and the rich man this is revealed. And apparently, there was some sort of divide or chasm that once separated the souls of the just and unjust. And it seems that they may have been able to perceive each other (a very sobering thought for those who may have witnessed this). You really need to study the Bible and not just to seek out excuses. There is really a wealth of information; however, one must be willing to pray and then ponder.

 

[Meriweather]

I've learned the story was probably cribbed from older sources like Gilgamesh.

How many historical accounts, how many historical fiction accounts were written of the Civil War? OF COURSE the story was probably based on an account of a great flood! This returns us to the question of what THIS particular author wanted to present as his theme, as his perspective of the great flood. He had something to say--what was it?

Why would it bother you there was more than one story about a great event? Are you equally disturbed that there are more than one story about any other great event? Each author of such stories has a message. What was the message the author of the Noah account tries to convey? Do you truly believe the author's purpose was to inform the world that God drowns babies? Or, since you don't believe in God, was it the author's purpose to give unbelievers reason to mock believers for their trust in God?

Again, the story is about mankind. The story is about how humans put their own existence and the existence of their children in grave danger. It continues on to tell how a new beginning brings old problems along with it.

This seems to be a case of, "Listen carefully, but you will not understand..." (Isaiah)

 

[Meriweather]

In the story, God exterminated most of the human race, including every last baby on Earth, because he was angry men made decisions he didn't like after he gave them free will. How does he come off as "Good" in that story?

The story isn't about God. It is about man. We know today it was a natural disaster. From that perspective, we see how one author remembered how people recalled life before the event: Mankind was choosing what was wrong over what was right. This particular author's judgment was particularly harsh. He saw the current generation as being unfit to raise the next generation into anything but failures. (I imagine you and this author would have gotten along well together.)

 

[Meriweather]

The message of the Author was pretty clear, don't piss off God, because he'll straight up murder your ass. And your babies.

When we see a sign, "Danger, Quicksand" we do not imagine anyone was murdered for ignoring the advice. We do expect there will be consequences for those who do. The author warns against ignoring doing what is right and doing what is wrong. Remember, he lived in a time and culture who considered natural events as acts of God.

 

[Meriweather]

You keep evading the question

You keep ignoring the answer.

 

[konradv]

He didnt create "imperfect beings". You make the choice to be as "imperfect" as you want to be, every day. Sin is your choice.

If God is the First Cause of Creation, He did create imperfect beings.

 

[toobfreak]

I wouldn't tell God what to do, but would ask him why he created imperfect beings and then punish them eternally for being imperfect.

God doesn't create imperfect beings, he creates people with choice. And he doesn't punish them for being imperfect, they suffer from their own bad decisions.

If people were PERFECT beings, they'd be God.

 

[toobfreak]

Since God continues to hide from us

God isn't hiding from anyone. He stands right before you every day. You just refuse to see him.

 

[toobfreak]

If God is the First Cause of Creation, He did create imperfect beings.

Nothing in the material universe is perfect. That is material nature. Nothing temporary can ever be perfect. Quite using your finite rationale to try to limit the Infinite to only what YOU can imagine. What you see around you in the Temporal Universe is but a tiny bit of God's "creation."

 

[konradv]

I wouldn't tell God what to do, but would ask him why he created imperfect beings and then punish them eternally for being imperfect.

God doesn't create imperfect beings, he creates people with choice. And he doesn't punish them for being imperfect, they suffer from their own bad decisions. If people were PERFECT beings, they'd be God.

My quarrel wasn't with the imperfections, we're human after all. It was the threat of eternal damnation should one or a number of those imperfections lead to punishment for eternity. Seems over the top.

 

[JoeB131]

How many historical accounts, how many historical fiction accounts were written of the Civil War? OF COURSE the story was probably based on an account of a great flood! This returns us to the question of what THIS particular author wanted to present as his theme, as his perspective of the great flood. He had something to say--what was it?

Actually, you have a point here. YEs, there was a lot of "Fiction" about the Civil War, because the South was allowed to develop the "Lost Cause" mythology, which led to Jim Crow and a lot of racism and we are paying for it today. So what the writer is trying to say about it DOES MEAN SOMETHING.

When the writers of these stories were allowed to lie that the Civil War wasn't about Slavery (It was), it had a bad effect on our society because no one challenged it. Movies like Gone with the Wind and Birth of a Nation got made and for decades, that was the story told about the Civil War and Reconstruction.

you kind of inadvertently proved my point.

Why would it bother you there was more than one story about a great event? Are you equally disturbed that there are more than one story about any other great event? Each author of such stories has a message. What was the message the author of the Noah account tries to convey? Do you truly believe the author's purpose was to inform the world that God drowns babies? Or, since you don't believe in God, was it the author's purpose to give unbelievers reason to mock believers for their trust in God?

First, it never actually happened. Second, the purpose of the Author was to keep people scared. If you don't believe in my sky fairy, he'll do awful stuff to you. Don't go over to the Temple of Baal, even though they are having a lot more fun over there.

Again, the story is about mankind. The story is about how humans put their own existence and the existence of their children in grave danger. It continues on to tell how a new beginning brings old problems along with it.

Sweet Evil Jesus on a Go-Cart, you didn't just go there! This is the kid of reasoning of an abusive parent. Don't make me beat you!

The story isn't about God. It is about man. We know today it was a natural disaster. From that perspective, we see how one author remembered how people recalled life before the event: Mankind was choosing what was wrong over what was right. This particular author's judgment was particularly harsh. He saw the current generation as being unfit to raise the next generation into anything but failures. (I imagine you and this author would have gotten along well together.)

Actually, no, I really don't have much tolerance for religious nuts and their fairy tales. The point is, not what that writer wrote, but WHY IT'S IN THE BIBLE AT ALL. Generations of Church fathers thought this story told an important message, all the way down to Sister Mary Butch screaming about "WICKED WICKED BABIES" within my lifetime. It's not that the writer was harsh, it's generations of Christians kind of agreeing with it.

To me, a God who drowns babies because their parents make choices he didn't like is just plain old ******* evil.

When we see a sign, "Danger, Quicksand" we do not imagine anyone was murdered for ignoring the advice. We do expect there will be consequences for those who do. The author warns against ignoring doing what is right and doing what is wrong. Remember, he lived in a time and culture who considered natural events as acts of God.

Except that's exactly what the OT writers did. They stoned people for being witches, working on the sabbath, not being virgins on their wedding nights, being gay,. None of these actions are particularly dangerous, but God insisted people be KILLED for doing them. (Well,not God, he doesn't exist, but the people who made up the Yahweh Cult).

You keep ignoring the answer.

No, you keep evading the question.

A God who kills babies is good because _______________________/

Come on, we know you can do it!