No, I didn’t watch Bill Nye dissect Ken Ham in the science vs. creationism debate. I share with many other science-loving people a conviction that “debating” creationists is wholly irrelevant, and tends only to build the glory of the creationists who cannot manage to set up a single scientific observation or experiment to provide evidence for creationism, but can stand on a stage and crack bad jokes and lie, against a mumbling scientist.
But I have looked at some of the commentary, and some of Nye’s remarks and rebuttals. Nye did very well.
Nye tended to develop clear, non-scientific explanations for the issues. Ham and creationists aren’t ready for that.
In that vein, J. Rehling tweeted this astonishingly clear explanation for why it’s just impossible to “believe” that the fabled ark of Noah could carry even most of the species alive, in one boat (and, mind you, the San Diego Zoo is neither the world’s largest collection of species on display in a zoo, nor displaying a significant percentage of all species):
http://twitter.com/JRehling/status/430875205917876224
Two pictures that tell the story.
How big was Noah’s Ark? Not big enough, especially compared to the San Diego Zoo and the USS Nimitz.
San Diego Zoo and USS Nimitz, the largest ship in the U.S. Navy; clearly, no ark built by Noah could have been big enough to carry all land animals. Image mashup by JRehling
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 
Flag: “Is there a comprehension issue you suffer?
Nowhere do I say “nature”.”
Speaking of comprehension: Nature…i.e. one’s own character. God does not contradict His own character/nature.
LikeLike
Is there a comprehension issue you suffer?
Nowhere do I say “nature”.
Read the words carefully.
Can God break his own laws?
LikeLike
Your concept of “rational” and “irrational” is faulty.
Men define their own actions as rational or irrational but that has nothing to do with the Universe.
“Rational” in the terms of the Universe is an absolute consistency to natural law. “Irrational” in terms of the Universe is a contradiction to natural law.
There is no irrationality as such in the Universe. Natural law operates everywhere the same. Gravity on a star millions of light years away operates the same as it does here on Earth.
What men’s review of other men’s action is irrelevant.
LikeLike
BF, “It is not “mad” – it is telling that you cannot reconcile your own contradiction.”
I really, really don’t understand what’s so hard about this nor why you keep pressing for a yes or no answer. Once more time I will try…It’s YES in that God never does anything to contradict His own nature and it’s NO in that God is under no obligation to obey laws that He gives to humans because He’s not on that side of the law. Similar to a judge not having to carry out the sentence that he hands out to a criminal, God is not obligated to live under the rules that He decrees. But He does not decree laws that are in not keeping with His nature.
Is it Yes or no? The answer is that it is both!
What’s the issue here????
I suspect you have found a nice packaged rebuttal if I say yes and a nice packaged rebuttal if I say no. But since the answer is both/and, you’re attacking my character as suspect and ready to dismiss the conversation.
I suspect from our dialogue that you are a person who struggles with control issues. You like to control discussions and shape debates because it makes you feel intelligent. You like to always correct and refuse to back down. You are seeking to justify the worship of your intellect by debating those who you think are inferior to your rationalistic mind. You have your principles. You have your reasoning. You are your god.
What happens when you get Alzheimer Disease or some form of dementia? Truth is, Flag, your god will eventually fail you. You’re finite and your reasoning is limited. What then?
LikeLike
BF, “Look, you are steeped in nothing but nothingness. You cannot present reality.”
It’s ironic that you say it just that way. Here’s how God responds to such a statement:
“For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth.For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are,so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.” (1 Cor. 1:25-29)
Your viewpoint makes perfect sense in my worldview. Yet in your worldview you see my viewpoint as irrational. Yet you cannot even tell me how something that is irrational can possibly even exist in a world that is governed by rationality. Nor have you attempted to even try or acknowledge the question.
LikeLike
So, Joe, is slavery immoral and evil or is it not?
Is killing people in the name of God immoral and evil or is it not?
Oh before you answer those questions..I suggest you remember what you said about moral absolutes.
LikeLike
BF, “You obviously have no clue to what the word means.”
It is not an insult.
It is obvious you do not know what “objective” means.
You pretend you can make up fairy tales, pander about faith, offer up nothing but ghost stories as if they are fact.
Look, you are steeped in nothing but nothingness. You cannot present reality.
Your mind is lost, sir, in a world of make believe.
LikeLike
Of course it is that simple.
Either God obeys his own laws or he does not. There is no third.
It is not “mad” – it is telling that you cannot reconcile your own contradiction.
LikeLike
BF, “You obviously have no clue to what the word means.”
Your petty insults aside, God’s existence does not depend on argumentation. Neither does mine and neither does yours. He exists or He does not, outside of our belief. This is what I mean by objective. I was not objectively trying to prove His existence, but merely stating that He exists, or does not, independent of whatever argumentation might be presented.
LikeLike
BF, “It is not whether I like or dislike your answers.
It is that you simply refuse to answer the question presented.”
That’s because it’s not a simple “yes or no” question. You are offering me A or B and I am choosing C. And you’re mad because I won’t fall into your fallacious line of argumentation, though I’m doing my best to accommodate you.
But in turn you have yet to even acknowledge my questions. You are challenging God on ethics and you won’t even give the courtesy of acknowledging the questions sent your way. Unbelievable. :-)
LikeLike
“Objectively”???????
You obviously have no clue to what the word means.
You cannot declare “objective” when you have no proof. Objective requires fact and presentation – things that are absolutely void in your missive.
LikeLike
We are not talking about nations. Keep to the topic – not your irrelevant red herrings.
Does God obey his own laws?
It is not whether I like or dislike your answers.
It is that you simply refuse to answer the question presented.
LikeLike
BF, “I am not a creation of a ghost. Don’t bother assign some ghastly authority over me based on your myth.”
Objectively speaking, God either exists and you are subject to Him whether you recognize it or not, or He does not exist, in which case none of this matters and you are free to eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow you die. In the end, if God does not exist then I lose nothing for believing in Him, you lose nothing, and we both end up in the grave forgotten by our descendants who will likewise die and be forgotten for eons.
I have a message of hope to give you of a God who is not only just but also love. He sees your evil and mine and did something about it! You see the message of judgement and are repulsed, but did you see the 400 years of God’s patience with the Canaanites, warning them of their destruction if they refused to repent? Did you see the hundreds of years of God’s warning of Israel to turn from their evil before He sent them into captivity? Did you see hundred plus years that God warned the people of a coming flood? God is merciful giving people every opportunity to turn away from their evil! In warning Israel God said, ” Say to them, As I live, declares the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel” (Ezek. 33:11). 2 Peter 3:9 states it this way, “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
God gave us Jesus to take our evil upon Himself. Trust Him and live. Reject Him and perish. Jesus said, “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.” (John 3:36). Jesus offers peace with a just God to a people who are evil. You’re not going to get a better offer anywhere by anyone for anything! He took your death penalty! Why would you reject that for your own stubborn fallible reasoning?
Your offer? You have nothing to offer anyone but the death of every life form’s existence for all time. You have no purpose…only to eat, breath, and die. Huzzah!
LikeLike
Ed said, “But, Joe, you need to hop over to Carl Zimmer’s blog and give a serious read to his discussion of the newer findings on the fused #2 chromosome in humans, and how it is traced back to the common ancestor we share with chimps and gorillas.”
I’m not a biologist so a lot of that stuff is over my head. I do know that the link is way off in left field for the discussion. Perhaps you’re losing this argument and seek to bring another in to mix things up a bit? More fuel for the fire if you will?
I do know that if the creation account is true, then you would expect very close similarities between species that would indicate a common creator who used the same building blocks for life for animals as He did with humans. I didn’t see anything that would be at odds with that viewpoint and I have no problem with there being similarities in our DNA. Beyond that, there’s not a lot that I can offer to the discussion since I’m not a biologist.
LikeLike
Ed, “Still no serious evidence that all those animals could have fit into a boat a fraction of the size of a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, which itself is just a fraction of the size of the San Diego Zoo, which doesn’t begin to have a complete catalog of animal life on Earth.”
Now we’re rehashing old arguments. Math, Ed. Math. This is 6th grade stuff. I have already given the math. In case you weren’t reading here are the dimensions: The total cubic volume would have been 1,518,000 cubic feet [462,686.4 cubic meters] –that would be equal to the capacity of 569 modern railroad stock cars.
At most, Noah would have had to take roughly 30,000 species…at most…on the boat considering he wouldn’t have had to take many of the invertebrates, plants, lichens, etc. Also, he would not have needed to find the biggest of each species. Young, small animals would have done fine. At 25,000 species, there would have still been 60% of the boat left for food and water. They weren’t building a zoo for enjoyment. They were building a life raft to survive!
All I need to demonstrate is that it is mathematically plausible for the ark to have been big enough to prove you are wrong. I have done that. You have given no math whatsoever. You’ve shown me a diagram of a zoo and a picture of a carrier and said…”See?”! See what? Give me dimensions and math.
Where’s your math in regard to the Nimitz? Where is your math on the San Diego Zoo. Have you seen the enclosures there?? They are huge! The entire zoo is huge – for the animal’s enjoyment and to be able to hold the 16 million visitors each year. That’s over 3,000 an hour for operating hours! Your picture shows that the zoo does not have all land animals, but could it house them in a crisis if needed? Where’s your math?
LikeLike
BF, “There is no “yes and no”. Either he does or he does not”
Flag, explain to me how lasting peace can be gained between the Palestinians and Israel using only the word “yes” or “no” as your entire answer?
Sometimes, the answer to a question is not a simple yes or no. I have given you several different answers that I believe fully answer your question. God is not locked into man’s responsibility of the covenants that He made. As such, He made the covenant but the agreement was not for Him to keep man’s side of the covenant but His own side. Several covenants are all on God (God’s Covenant with Abraham being one). Others were divided between God and the nation of Israel who would be blessed by God if they kept the covenant and would be cursed if they did not. Never once did God violate His character but kept His word to all people’s of all times.
Interestingly, Jesus (who I believe is God come in the flesh as the perfect man to die in our place) did keep man’s side of the Mosaic Covenant. So in that sense the answer is yes as well.
It’s not my fault that you don’t like my answers. At the same time, not once have you even addressed the fact that I have asked you many questions, let alone attempted to answer them. So, if you don’t like my answers then you’ll have to wait until you address questions from me before I more fully respond.
LikeLike
Still no serious evidence that all those animals could have fit into a boat a fraction of the size of a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, which itself is just a fraction of the size of the San Diego Zoo, which doesn’t begin to have a complete catalog of animal life on Earth.
But, Joe, you need to hop over to Carl Zimmer’s blog and give a serious read to his discussion of the newer findings on the fused #2 chromosome in humans, and how it is traced back to the common ancestor we share with chimps and gorillas. It’s in four parts, but the first one may be all you can stand; your fellow-traveler creationists show all their old, shoddy, dishonest tricks:
https://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2012/07/19/the-mystery-of-the-missing-chromosome-with-a-special-guest-appearance-from-facebook-creationists/
LikeLike
“Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed,
for God made man in his own image (Genesis 9:6).
Yet, God sheds the blood of innocent men.
I am not a creation of a ghost. Don’t bother assign some ghastly authority over me based on your myth.
BF, “Does God obey his own laws.”
There is no “yes and no”.
Either he does or he does not.
LikeLike
Here’s what God said to Noah:
“Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed,
for God made man in his own image (Genesis 9:6).
Capital punishment. As Creator, God has the right to judge nations.
Does God, as Creator, have the right to do whatever He wants with His creation? Yes or no?
BF, “Does God obey his own laws.”
Here’s how I got the idea of natural law. You said, “perverting natural law would invalidate the premise”
The straight answer is yes and no. Yes, in that Isaiah 55:11 says God cannot lie. God cannot be tempted by evil and He cannot tempt anyone to do evil says James 1. No, in the sense that God is not obligated to fulfill the human responsibilities of the covenants that He makes with His people, such as not eating shell fish for the Jews. As such, Jesus called Himself “Lord of the Sabbath” because He was on the “God” end of the covenant with Israel.
How does God holding up His end of His covenants with His people invalidate His Deity?
LikeLike
The question, just one more time or otherwise I will dismiss you as utterly insincere and puerile:
Does God obey his own laws.
Note: there is no word of “nature” in the question.
LikeLike
Flag, “Again, you refuse to answer the question.”
I did answer the question, didn’t I? God never contradicts His nature. He hates murder and does not not commit murder. He judges sin and sinners as only the judge of the entire world can do.
And you don’t even think that He exists, so how can He commit murder if He doesn’t even exist?
It is you who are refusing to answer about your universe that kills everything.
LikeLike
What is quite clear, Joe, is your moral compass is badly twisted.
As long as the name of God is pronounced, the slaughter is blessed.
LikeLike
BF said, “First, my question is very clear and unamiguous. Your inability to answer the clear question with a clear answer is telling.”
. I wasn’t thinking laws of nature.
Again, you refuse to answer the question.
“It means to murder.”
So, to you killing innocent people legally is not murder to you…. hmmm…
LikeLike
BF said, “First, my question is very clear and unamiguous. Your inability to answer the clear question with a clear answer is telling.”
You’re sounding a lot like my wife when I misunderstand what she says. :-) When I think of God’s law, I think His commands to His people. Moral commands. I wasn’t thinking laws of nature.
BF, “Second, as I pointed out before, you merely define whatever God does is moral – even if he out-and-out slaughters thousands of innocent people – the fallacy of “Duelistic morality” at its worse.
“Thou shalt not kill” and a few pages later, slaughters a multitude.”
You’re reading as an American. The command is not to “רָצַח” or “rä·tsakh'” would be the transliteration. It means to murder.
And yes, I am saying that God has never murdered anyone. Handed out death sentences as a just judge should? Yes.
Moralistic Dualism in your eyes. Yet I have demonstrated that you are in no position of authority to judge anyone on morality, let alone God. Who should care about your decree of “dualism” in someone you do not even believe existed?
You accuse God of murder and yet the universe you believe in has killed everything that has ever lived. Without a just God, I would not accuse your universe of dualism – just evil. You never defended the existence of death in the universe. Go back to my questions on the subject and answer them. I gave you the courtesy of answering your accusations whether you like my answers or not.
Even if it were true (for sake of argument) YOU are a dualist yourself as you commit acts that you know are wrong. And you would stand in judgment of God? Wow! Humanity’s rebellion knows no bounds! Dude, all I got to say is repent and believe while you still have breath!
LikeLike
BF said, “Do you always obey the dictates and definitions of others?”
No I don’t. That’s why I’m wondering why you think I should care about yours, or anyone else’s. Or even mine.”
You shouldn’t, as I do not care about yours, either.
The problem only arises when you preach yours as superior to mine.
It is not.
You can’t even reason your principles – they are based on rote, myth and past preaching by others. Hence, you live with huge mass of contradictions.
There is no “God” as you make him, nor is there a consensus nor a requirement for such a thing.
LikeLike
“I framed the question to mean, “Does He ever do anything immoral?”” The answer in my view is “no.”
First, my question is very clear and unamiguous. Your inability to answer the clear question with a clear answer is telling.
Second, as I pointed out before, you merely define whatever God does is moral – even if he out-and-out slaughters thousands of innocent people – the fallacy of “Duelistic morality” at its worse.
“Thou shalt not kill” and a few pages later, slaughters a multitude.
LikeLike
BF said, “Do you always obey the dictates and definitions of others?”
No I don’t. That’s why I’m wondering why you think I should care about yours, or anyone else’s. Or even mine.
This is one reason I believe in God. It’s because I know enough about man that all of us are screwed up. Morality is just an inherited trait learned from our ancestors (Darwin’s view – thanks Ed for the read)? Do you really believe that?? All of us make moral absolute judgments on a daily basis. And all of us break our own moral judgments on a daily basis. Why?
If there is no God, Flag, and everything is just a consensus of the masses (summarizing Darwin’s view), or pragmatism ,then why should I care a whit about what you or anyone else have to say regarding morality?
Let me ask all of you this way: What do you have to offer that says conclusively that Hitler was evil? I read Darwin’s chapter looking for something that would prove Hitler was evil. Nothing he tried to do was contrary than what “tribes” have been doing for eons – destroying other tribes that they bump into and letting his seed be the one that evolves.
I also saw how racist Darwin was to look to the Aborigines and Africans as the lesser evolved savages to illustrate how man used to be when they were less evolved. He seemed like a good imperialist looking at the other people groups through the lens of an empire nation. Common view at the time, so I don’t single him out there. No one could come away from that chapter and coin the term “all men created equal” from it.
LikeLike
BF, “Let me clarify once again.
If God as you claim obeys his own laws, he cannot be supernatural, for perverting natural law would invalidate the premise.”
I see the point you were trying to make about natural law and so I clarified what I believe by saying that God never does anything contrary to His character. Does He obey His own laws? I framed the question to mean, “Does He ever do anything immoral?” The answer in my view is “no.” He never does anything that would violate His own character. In addition, I assume you know that I believe that Jesus is God come in the flesh. As such, He perfectly obeyed God’s Law as God intended it to be obeyed. It made the Pharisees furious because He refused to obey the Law as they interpreted it. This is the reason for my “yes” answer.
Does that mean that He always “obeys” the laws of nature? In one sense He can’t and retain His deity. In another sense, He can choose to veil His deity from use and conform to His own laws (i.e. Jesus). I agree with you there though that if He always obeyed the natural laws then He would not be God. What is your point?
James said, “WOuld you care to explain that if you want to believe that morality only comes from believing in God?”
I didn’t say that nor do I believe that Christians are the only ones who are moral or immoral. I’m making the case that our inbred sense of morality is there from birth because we are created in the image of God (moral beings). The fact that we choose to depart from morality is an outcropping of our rebellion against Him. But even moral acts done legalistically are sinful to God. That’s why the Pharisees got so mad at Jesus. He wouldn’t obey their rules.
LikeLike
Joe, I know atheists with more morals then quite a few Christians I know.
WOuld you care to explain that if you want to believe that morality only comes from believing in God?
LikeLike
How did morals arise?
Can there be philosophy without Christianity?
Not questions for short answers, but not questions to be asked lightly, without looking around for answers outside the Bible. Greek philosophers didn’t seem to be hampered by lack of Biblical scholarship, for example, and consequently one might rationally wonder how they did it — and not assume they were idiots.
Darwin discussed the rise of morals in humans in Chapter V of Descent of Man. I’d prefer to discuss Darwin’s views after you’ve had a chance to read that:
https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/why-study-evolution/darwin-on-the-evolution-of-morality-in-humans/
LikeLike
Yes, Groucho was making fun of the Pragmatics – a group he did not adhere to…
LikeLike
Totally off topic; don’t assume this has more than humor intent:
Which caused me to hear Groucho Marx (playing Rufus T. Firefly? Which movie?):
(Now I’ve gotta find that line . . .)
LikeLike
BF, “I am a man, existing in reality. I do not submit to any man, let alone a ghost.”
Joe: “Good luck with that argument next time you come to a stop light or get pulled over because no one is going to tell you what to do! Good luck when you refuse to pay your taxes because you refuse to submit to anyone.
I don’t need your luck.
I have my principles.
Principles are actions that create consequences. There is no point in having a principle that has no consequences – “pointless”.
I do not submit to arbitrary dictates of other men. On what principle should I do so? They are merely men as I am – what makes them “my betters”?
BF, “Is slavery good or evil? You have to define good and evil first.”
Joe: “That’s the point. Who gets to make the definition? “
You use the words, so you have to define them. Why do you assume that others definitions are “right”?
Do you always obey the dictates and definitions of others?
LikeLike
BF, “So if God obeys his own laws, he cannot be supernatural, as to contradict his own laws, right?”
Joe: Let me clarify: God never contradicts His own nature.
Let me clarify once again.
If God as you claim obeys his own laws, he cannot be supernatural, for perverting natural law would invalidate the premise.
LikeLike
Despite no evidence for such a thing occurring, I have faith that it did. Irrational.
LikeLike
IF Jesus was dead, no. Death is final.
Lots of people, even today, are declared dead who are not.
LikeLike
Spencer was a creationist when he came up with what we now call “social Darwinism” (and for all I know, he remained so his entire life. Not a guy much open to new ideas).
Yes, humans invent all sorts of ideas outside of evolution, all the time.
LikeLike
Ed said, “It comes from the elitist British sociologist Herbert Spencer, who said that rich people are rich because they are good, and poor people are poor because they are immoral.”
And elitist British sociologist Herbert Spencer is a product of…wait for it…evolution! As such, can he say or do anything outside of the realms of evolution?
If you were to do a study of goldfish, could you ever find goldfish doing something that goldfish don’t do? Nope. Because if a goldfish is doing it, then it is something within the sphere of something goldfish do!
When you study evolution, everything that happens in that bowl is within the sphere of evolution. As such, social Darwinism is within the sphere of Darwinian evolution because those who thought up social Darwinism are said to be products of evolution. Anything that we observe of human behavior is within the sphere of evolution, no? If not, how can you have something produced within the sphere doing something outside of the sphere?
Interestingly to this discussion is that Spencer makes a claim of principle that Darwin rejected as false. Who is to say that Spencer is wrong? Who is to say he is right? Hitler acted out Social Darwinism by using race as a guide to what ethnicity was best. Who do you think you are to say that they were wrong? Again, you have no claim to moral absolutism. You have just as much right to call Spencer wrong as Spencer had the right to claim he was correct. Mutually exclusive propositions. Both cannot be right. Who gets to decide?
You keep making moral judgments but never answer the question as to how you get to be the one to do that.
But you didn’t answer my other question either. Did Jesus physically rise from the dead?
LikeLike
It comes from the elitist British sociologist Herbert Spencer, who said that rich people are rich because they are good, and poor people are poor because they are immoral.
Spencer’s stuff was published a few years before Darwin. Darwin thought Spencer a misanthrope, and he was right.
It’s tragic to see modern Christians seize on the Spencer’s anti-Christian teachings for their economic philosophy, and then falsely blame Darwin for it.
LikeLike
BF, “So if God obeys his own laws, he cannot be supernatural, as to contradict his own laws, right?”
Let me clarify: God never contradicts His own nature. As such, His moral attributes (such as love, justice, holiness, etc.) are always consistent in the way that He acts. Yet each characteristic defines the other. God is love. Yet God is also just. As such, He is lovingly just and justly loving. You cannot isolate one characteristic of God and define Him by that characteristic but have to take Him as a whole. As such, sometimes God acts in ways that are beyond our understanding.
Can God exist outside of the laws of gravity? Yeah. Defying gravity does not contradict His nature. Overriding the rules of nature to do something supernatural are not outside of His creative characteristics.
To me though, it sounds like it is not God’s existence that you question, but His character. Yet since you do not have any moral compass outside of your own opinion to decide what is good character and what is evil character, and since you are finite in your understanding of everything (including morality), you have no authority by which to judge God’s character.
He did it for me. When I was only a couple days old my blood cells were fighting and killing each other. Doctors were going to have to perform a complete blood transfusion or I was going to die. The night before the transfusion, my parents and their pastor gathered by my bed and prayed over me, giving me into God’s hands. The next morning before the surgery they checked my blood one more time. Not only were there no problems, my blood type had completely changed. No, you don’t understand. My blood type had completely changed!!! So, if you want to convince me that it is impossible for God to step in and do something supernatural at times…by all means try. I am living proof that some things are beyond explanation from science.
Beyond even this, and this is to James and Ed…if God is not capable of ever doing anything outside of the laws of nature, then Jesus is still dead, and you are still in your sins with no hope.
I ask you two to plainly answer this question. I’m not asking Flag because I don’t think he claims to be a follower of Christ. But I ask you, did Jesus physically raise from the dead?
LikeLike
James said, “Joe, social Darwinism has nothing to do with biological evolution.”
Then where does social Darwinism come from James? If nothing exists outside of biological evolution, then everything we observe in humanity is a product of nature…including social Darwinism. As such, it is a product of evolution, no?
If I am wrong, explain to me how it came to exist in humanity if humanity is product of nature?
LikeLike
BF, “I am a man, existing in reality. I do not submit to any man, let alone a ghost.”
Good luck with that argument next time you come to a stop light or get pulled over because no one is going to tell you what to do! Good luck when you refuse to pay your taxes because you refuse to submit to anyone.
I could more respect your sentiments if at least you were honest enough to admit you just don’t like the idea of having a Creator who says that He is in charge. What you are saying is totally in line with what the Bible says is true about humanity – that all of us resent the idea of being subject to God because we want to be our own deity.
BF, “Is slavery good or evil? You have to define good and evil first.”
That’s the point. Who gets to make the definition? Do you? Me? Society as a whole? Which society of what time? Why do our forefathers get to decide morality for us and not we ourselves? For you to write definitively that slavery is always evil and then not even know how to describe what evil even is, or even how it is even possible for evil to exist in a rational world, is absurd.
Yet here you are definitively stating something as evil when at the other side of your mouth you declare that no such thing as definitive statements on morality can exist. So, which is it?
BF…”If you do not subscribe to violence done upon you, you cannot equally claim that it is ok to use such violence on others.”
Who is subscribing such a thing? If you’re referring to God, then explain to me how any judge can hand out a sentence to any criminal? How can a jury of someone’s peers hand out a sentence of life in prison to a murderer and then not expect the same sentence given to them – after all, they just sentenced someone to their death in prison. If you look merely at the sentences given out to rapists, murderers, etc. and see what punishments we give to them, then you would think we live in an evil country that randomly sends people to their deaths in jail. Yet if you look at the crimes committed against society by these criminals, then you would see that their punishments are just.
The same is true with God. If you merely look at how he punishes those who are evil then you would wager that God too is evil. If you look at the crimes of evil done by these people that God judges then that changes the perspective a bit.
Look at what we are doing to our planet right now, let alone what we have done in history. Think of how we are treating each other globally, let alone how we are stewarding this planet – 60 million slaves. Intentional murders – almost 500,000 a year! Rapes – over 200,000 reported each year…statistics indicate that between 75% to 95% of rapes go unreported. 8 wars in the world right now where over 1,000 people die every year. In Afghanistan alone over 2 million have died since the 60s. 34 ongoing fights within nations or between nations (with Ukraine just being added to the list this year). Historians estimate that there have been over 4 billion deaths because of wars over the past 3,500 years.
The point? God would not be unjust to kill off the human race entirely. You say we are essentially good. And yet you cannot even define good and cannot even claim to be free from evil yourself. The only reason we still are on this planet is because God is merciful and giving every person the opportunity to repent of their evil and turn to Jesus. Apart from that….well, we’re all screwed if God should choose to just leave us to our own devices.
LikeLike
Joe, social Darwinism has nothing to do with biological evolution.
And you should probably bother to remember that Christianity and the bible was used to justify slavery.
You are the one suffering from a lack of morality here…you’re the one jumping through hoops to try and justify the bible, which you think was written by God, condoning slavery.
You are lowering God to a mere human standard and you think you’re the better Christian? oh please.
At least Ed and I expect God to have a higher moral standard…you expect Him to have a lower one.
LikeLike
Joe,
There are an infinite number of right answers to any question.
How many numbers add to 4? Infinite.
Principles are statements, not proof.
Is slavery good or evil? You have to define good and evil first.
If you do not subscribe to violence done upon you, you cannot equally claim that it is ok to use such violence on others.
It is moral fallacy called “Dualistic moral attribution” – that is, you apply one set of morals upon others and another upon yourself.
LikeLike
Who am I to question God?
I am a man, existing in reality. I do not submit to any man, let alone a ghost.
So if God obeys his own laws, he cannot be supernatural, as to contradict his own laws, right?
LikeLike
So, again answer the question.
Does God obey his own laws?”
Short answer: yes. God’s answer from Romans 9? Who do you think you are to question God? What gives a pot the right to question the potter?
LikeLike
Flag, have you ever heard of the law of non contradiction? A is not B and B is not A. In classical logic, two opposing principles cannot both be true at the same time.
Principles are either true or not. Are we created equal or aren’t we? Jefferson made the point as if it were a statement of fact. Was he right or not?
So is saying that men “should” be free to make decisions about their own lives an absolute. For sake of argument, what if I said I disagree? What if I said slavery was a good thing and we should re enslave the black race? That would make you upset wouldn’t it? It should! Why? Because I am countering your moral compass. A compass that has no bearing.
You yourself say principles cannot be proven, just lived. What if someone else disagrees? Does might make right? Is slavery only wrong because the South lost? Was Hitler only evil because the Allies won? What would we think of Jefferson’s proposition if we had lost our war for freedom?
Again…you have no claim to any moral absolute yet here you are seeking to condemn God. On what grounds are you anyone’s judge of morality?
LikeLike
Telling Noah to build a boat is not an example of a “law”.
So, again answer the question.
Does God obey his own laws?
LikeLike
Did God condemn his own evil acts?
Or do you simply define that no matter what God does, it can’t be evil?
LikeLike
Joe
“How do you know Jefferson was not wrong? ”
He isn’t wrong nor is he right.
This is where you mistaken a statement of PRINCIPLE to be a FACT.
Statement of Principles are just that – they stand alone.
Another statement “Men should be free to make choices about their own lives” – you can’t prove nor disprove it.
But you can live it.
LikeLike
Did you realize that today, in 2014 there are still 60,000 slaves in the USA alone? Worldwide there are 30 million slaves in 162 countries. The problem is global.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/10/17/this-map-shows-where-the-worlds-30-million-slaves-live-there-are-60000-in-the-u-s/
The question is, where does this desire to own another human as a piece of property come from? Even in this country where we have generally agreed that it is wrong,we still have enslaved 1 out of every 5,000 of us to the sex trade.
Evil is alive and well in this country and so very prevalent in this world. Slavery may be illegal, but so is murder. Murder has not been eradicated either. Neither has rape or assault, etc. etc. And none of you can even explain to me why or even how evil exists, let alone give any authority on what is moral and what is immoral.
Again, you get on me for what I have…when you in turn have nothing to offer in return but humanism…which is the source of evil on this planet in the first place!
LikeLike
Ed said, “How about this one: All humans are created equal.
It’s not like the scriptures provide a better, organic, or clear justification for saying slavery is wrong.”
1) The statement presupposes a creation and a creator – something which you deny happened. We can talk details of how it happened, but you at least have to believe that we are created in order to have been created equal. Evolution knows nothing of equality. Only survival, death, and repeat for eons. There is no equality in the process of evolution…the only thing equal is death.
2) How do I know that the statement presupposes a creator? Because he said that we are endowed by our Creator. not by the process of evolution, with certain unalienable rights. Take away our creator, you take away equality.
3) How do you know Jefferson was not wrong? He was, after all, just a man. Maybe that was just the opinion of the time and he assumed the sentiment was just reserved for white people? Ironic after all, is it not, that the person who wrote those words was an owner of slaves himself? What moral authority do you have to say that Jefferson’s sentiments were either right or wrong? Good thoughts, and I agree with him. But I think his statement reflects the Anglican viewpoint sent to a British Monarch, don’t you? Maybe we’ve evolved since then. Who are you to say one way or the other?
God has a way of one-upping our morality. You say that slavery is wrong and yet cannot free your own self from evil within, let alone eradicate evil from this world. God is more interested in redeeming all of creation instead of just freeing slaves from one master so they fall into slavery of another. This is why Jesus said the prophecy from Isaiah was fulfilled in Him: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
I have a hope that all wrongs will one day be judged and all crooked paths will be made straight. What is your hope beyond living a few more years without pain before death?
Jesus came to free slaves. He came to free masters. He came to make right all things wrong, not just slavery. This is how it can be declared in a Roman culture where 30-40% of the population were slaves and women were seen as property: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28)
LikeLike
How about this one: All humans are created equal.
It’s not like the scriptures provide a better, organic, or clear justification for saying slavery is wrong.
LikeLike
James said, “Sorry, joe, you’re still running into the same problem. For your claim to be true that God wrote the Bible then God turned a blind eye to a great evil and said nothing about it.
Or you can admit that humans, not God, wrote the Bible.”
God turned no such blind eye. He has condemned every evil act that has ever happened on the entire planet and went so far as to pay the price in His own blood so that we could receive repentance for those evils? I dare you to do more to fight and overcome evil than He.
The problem is that the itemized list of evil on this planet is too long to hold in a book. You want him to condemn slavery. Jesus came to set the captive free from our own evil. Freedom not just in body, but in spirit. What are you doing to end slavery? More than Jesus?
Beyond this, slavery is not always evil if it is willful servitude out of gratitude. For this reason, you could say that I am a slave of Jesus. This is how Paul identified himself – a bond servant of Christ. Someone who willfully chooses to spend their entire life in servitude of another. If it is for Jesus…well, you could say I owe Him my life.
LikeLike
BF said, “So let me get this straight.
You believe God’s law are …. not immutable? You mean what was right in the Universe 1,000 years ago is not right today?”
God told Noah to build a boat. He built it. God’s purposes for that boat have been fulfilled. Why should His commands stay the same for me? Should every person be required to build an ark? That’s absurd. What God wanted to do with the flood has already happened. God also commanded Jonah to go to Nineveh and preach repentance. Am I also commanded to go to Nineveh or did God’s commands change? No. God’s commands didn’t change. Jonah was literally supposed to do what He was commanded to do. The command was fulfilled. I see no reason why I am obliged to obey something I was never commanded to do but was specifically commanded of someone else. Same with the Mosaic Law that was perfectly fulfilled by Jesus. It’s not disregarding the law. It’s properly understanding that those commands were given to someone else for a different time and purpose.
Are God’s laws immutable? They are to the person of whom they are given until they are completed. God told Abraham to go to a land that God would show him. Once God led him there and the command was fulfilled, there was no reason for Abraham to keep traveling. Did that mean that God’s command to go was not immutable? The command was fulfilled. That doesn’t men the laws of nature changed. It means that God is able to give specific commands to specific people at specific times.
What laws of nature do you see changing from the Old Testament to the New?
Were the Old Testament laws bad? No. They were given by God for a specific reason and for a specific people. Were they the same commandments that were given to me? A lot of them are. Love God. Love your neighbor. Those are Old Testament commands that are repeated by Jesus and by the writers of the New Testament as the most important commands to follow. 9 out of 10 of the 10 Commandments are repeated in the New Testament. Dietary laws? Nope. The New Testament tells me that all things are lawful to eat and I am not bound by those rules because they were specifically given to the Jewish nation for a specific purpose. That purpose has been fulfilled – just like God’s purpose for telling Noah to build an ark has been fulfilled. I could go on, but hopefully…I am being optimistic here here…hopefully you get the picture.
LikeLike
Ed said, “I think we get better mileage, Joe, if we simply confess that the American fundamentalists’ views on slavery were wrong-headed and immoral, and repent.”
I completely agree that those in the US who held to the inequality of races and the subjection of black to people to whites in all areas were wrong. It wasn’t just slavery in the US that was wrong, it was also the view that whites were a superior race that was wrong.
The Bible, the Koran, evolution, practicality, you name it, are used on a daily basis to justify evil. I remember one guy using the Bible to try to justify him breaking up a family so that he could run off with a deacon’s wife. He was a pastor’s kid. So yes. The people who use the Bible to justify evil are wrong.
As far as repentance? I don’t hold those beliefs and neither does anyone here. I do not see how the sins of our nation’s forefather’s on all sides are my fault? My forefathers were abolitionists who fought for the North to free the slaves. I would have been right next to them. But even if they were cruel slave holders, it doesn’t mean that their sin was my fault.
What is especially interesting to me though is that from a strictly evolutionary perspective, none of you have any moral absolutes by which you can claim that slavery is wrong.
I find this new conversation on slavery to be a divergence from the fact that you all refuse to answer my questions regarding the existence of evil and the fact that the only thing your faith has to offer anyone is death. You have nothing but your own opinions to offer your judgment. Who do you think you are to definitely declare what is morally right and morally wrong? Especially since that moral compass seems to change in cultures, locations, and times, what as a 21st century American gives you the arrogance to say that you are always the authority for all mankind of what is moral and immoral? I find that the epitome of arrogance. Especially since you know you are guilty of committing evil acts that you know are wrong in your own life. Let’s add hypocrisy to the list.
My moral compass has to be derived from outside of myself because I know I am biased. I know I tend to be arrogant. I know I am a hypocrite when I hold to one thing and do another. I am no source of authority on morality. Only someone with perfect knowledge who is not evil Himself, can authoritatively give out a detailed list of what is right and what is wrong. Any moral absolutes must come from someone who has absolute morality. Is that you? By claiming absolute authority on any given subject you are declaring yourself to be THE authority? If not you, then who? Society? Slavery used to be acceptable in the South and tolerated in the North. Was it morally OK then and not now? Did our morality evolve? If so, was it really wrong or just not as evolved as now? If we’re more evolved then why are there more slaves in the world now than at any point in history? Why is slavery STILL existent in the US sex trade?
You say God has a lot to answer for? He has big shoulders. He can take it. I would say HUMANITY has a lot of evil to answer for! Especially using God’s name to justify their evil! That’s the worst kind of perversion!
LikeLike
To quote: Any other kind of slavery (like what happened to Joseph) is not condoned, but merely recorded. I
In other words you’re saying that God didn’t condemn what you call other forms of slavery..He only wrote about it.
Sorry, joe, you’re still running into the same problem. For your claim to be true that God wrote the Bible then God turned a blind eye to a great evil and said nothing about it.
Or you can admit that humans, not God, wrote the Bible.
Take your pick.
I find it hilarious that I expect God to hold to a higher moral standard then you do and actually think that God had a higher moral standard then you think God does.
and yet you think you have greater faith and are a better Christian.
LikeLike
I think we get better mileage, Joe, if we simply confess that the American fundamentalists’ views on slavery were wrong-headed and immoral, and repent.
LikeLike
“This is what the Bible condones.”
Of course the Bible condones slavery and slaughter. You cherry-pick, using the bizarre excuse your God changes his mind on a yearly basis.
LikeLike
So let me get this straight.
You believe God’s law are …. not immutable? You mean what was right in the Universe 1,000 years ago is not right today?
You mean the laws of Nature change?
LikeLike
James said, “And yet you won’t apply that concept to the story of Noah’s ark..that it no longer applies.
Nor does your side apply that concept to homosexuality.
So you are still, Joe, cherrypicking the bible and pretending you’re not.
Make up your mind..you can believe that God wrote the Bible or you can cherry pick the Bible..but you can’t do both. Which will it be?”
Seriously??? James, I totally believe about Noah’s ark in the same way that I believe about the law of Moses. It really existed as a historical fact but no longer applies to the believer. Three major rules here. Context. Context. And more context. Who was the command to build an ark given to? Noah! Not me! Noah fulfilled the commands. Thus, it no longer applies today. Who were the commands of Moses given to? Israel…not me. Jesus fulfilled the commands. Thus, it no longer applies today.
Homosexuality is condemned as sin in both Testaments.
I fail to see my inconsistencies here.
LikeLike
James said, “Well, Joe, the law that allowed slavery was evil. So therefor if you want to believe that God wrote the Bible the fact that the Bible condones slavery then means that God is evil.”
The Bible condones a system where you paid your debts off. It was a system designed for those who owed a debt to someone else to work for them until their debt was paid. Similar to how I am working for Wells Fargo and Chase right now to pay off my mortgage and my car loan. :-) This is what the Bible condones.
Any other kind of slavery (like what happened to Joseph) is not condoned, but merely recorded. If a reporter accurately told what happened on 9/11, would you say they were condoning it, or merely telling what happened? Many times, this is what the Bible does. It merely tells the events of what was going on – not condoning, but recording. Big difference. The fact that you refuse to see that difference shows your willful blindness to the facts. I hope you’ll see.
LikeLike
To quote: Radiometric dating results give old ages for recent rocks, so we cannot accurately “know” the age of rocks. Also, the finding of carbon-14 in coal and diamonds means that these deposits must be less than 100,000 years old, indicating insufficient time for supposed evolution.
You do realize, Michael, that radiometric dating is not the only method of dating objects…right?
To quote: finding of carbon-14 in coal and diamonds means that these deposits must be less than 100,000 years old, indicating insufficient time for supposed evolution.
Oh hello logical fallacy. So lets get this straight…because I am 38 years old that means that absolutely noone else is older than I am?
Want to know the proof behind evolution? Your dna, Michael. Human dna is 95% the same as the dna of the pongoids. Which means that we are related to them. Which means we are descended from a common ancestor that they share..the same as you and your first cousin are descended from a common ancestor you share…one of your sets of grandparents.
LikeLike
Well, Joe, the law that allowed slavery was evil. So therefor if you want to believe that God wrote the Bible the fact that the Bible condones slavery then means that God is evil.
Or you can admit the Bible wasn’t written by God. Which will it be?
LikeLike
To quote: You’re right. I don’t. But God can say that Jesus fulfilled the law and as a result, I am not under the law but under Jesus’ authority. This is why Paul spends so much time explaining in Romans the purpose of the law and why Jesus sets us free from the law. The law is not evil…we are. Just like a mirror cannot fix our blemishes, the law could only reveal our evil. We needed rescued. Jesus rescued us and the purpose of the law was fulfilled. Now we have a new Master.
And yet you won’t apply that concept to the story of Noah’s ark..that it no longer applies.
Nor does your side apply that concept to homosexuality.
So you are still, Joe, cherrypicking the bible and pretending you’re not.
Make up your mind..you can believe that God wrote the Bible or you can cherry pick the Bible..but you can’t do both. Which will it be?
LikeLike
Making up a set of questions -most merely those you don’t know there are answers to – does not disprove one theory and promote your myth in its place.
Prove God. That’ll be the trick, huh?
God can’t be seen, exists in myth, lives outside of reality. Yet, this is the thing you seize.
Fossils exist. DNA has been shown to change. Mutations occur. Dinosaurs existed. These things are real, yet, your make believe holds sway.
LikeLike
1. Mutations do not produce new purposeful genetic information
Nonsense. DNA has been shown to change with the environment – it “learns” success.
2. Evolution of a new species as a result of new genetic code arising has never been observed.
No one has lived that long, except in your myth stories.
3. There is no known proven mechanism that can explain how new purposeful genetic information could arise, and statistically it is impossible.
You do not know “statistics” and misuse it’s purpose. It has been explained and your lack of knowledge does not make an argument.
“Fallacy of Ignorance”.
4. There is no known proven mechanism that can explain all the steps for a living cell to form from nonliving molecules (abiogenesis), and statistically it is impossible.
“Fallacy of Ignorance” – just because all the mechanisms have yet to be described does not make your myth story a truth by default.
With your belief, since we did not know in the past how the planets moved about the sun, gravity did not exist and it was all God.
5. Abiogenesis has never been observed and all experiments to initiate it have failed.
See 4
6. The fossil record is a record of extinction of fully formed animals and plants — not a record of the evolution of life forms.
I guess you don’t know what dinosaurs are.
7. There are no fossils of proven mutant evolutionary intermediate organisms, yet there should be millions and millions of fossils of such mutations. That is, we have no evidence of actual evolution in the fossil record.
There tends to be decomposition after death – to expect every organism left a fossil is bizarre
8. Some of the oldest fossil-bearing rocks contain fully developed advanced animals such as trilobites, with no evidence of evolutionary ancestors.
See 7.
9. Erosion rates for the continents are too fast for the continents and their fossil content to be old enough for supposed evolution to occur.
I guess those dinosaurs are a myth, huh?
10. There are not enough ocean sediments or volcanic deposits for the continents to be old enough to allow for supposed evolution.
See 9
11. Radiometric dating results give old ages for recent rocks, so we cannot accurately “know” the age of rocks. Also, the finding of carbon-14 in coal and diamonds means that these deposits must be less than 100,000 years old, indicating insufficient time for supposed evolution.
Why must it be less than 100,000 years? You do not believe diamonds existed before then?
12. The rate of mutation of DNA currently observed suggests that DNA must be less than 100,000 years old, which is not enough time for supposed evolution.
Utterly false. Generational DNA change has been observed.
LikeLike
[Management note: We copied this comment from another thread; we think it was intended to go here.]
Sorry, I do not have that much faith to believe in evolution it’s just too impossible and improbable.
If I take my watch and break it down into its parts, place it in a bag for a million years I do not have enough faith to believe it would come back together let alone tell me the time. It occurs to me that you’ve been set up: 1 Corinthians 1:27
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
12 reasons why Evolution is impossible?
Open Your Mind – Ecclesiastes 7:29 asked 1 year ago
1. Mutations do not produce new purposeful genetic information.
2. Evolution of a new species as a result of new genetic code arising has never been observed.
3. There is no known proven mechanism that can explain how new purposeful genetic information could arise, and statistically it is impossible.
4. There is no known proven mechanism that can explain all the steps for a living cell to form from nonliving molecules (abiogenesis), and statistically it is impossible.
5. Abiogenesis has never been observed and all experiments to initiate it have failed.
6. The fossil record is a record of extinction of fully formed animals and plants — not a record of the evolution of life forms.
7. There are no fossils of proven mutant evolutionary intermediate organisms, yet there should be millions and millions of fossils of such mutations. That is, we have no evidence of actual evolution in the fossil record.
8. Some of the oldest fossil-bearing rocks contain fully developed advanced animals such as trilobites, with no evidence of evolutionary ancestors.
9. Erosion rates for the continents are too fast for the continents and their fossil content to be old enough for supposed evolution to occur.
10. There are not enough ocean sediments or volcanic deposits for the continents to be old enough to allow for supposed evolution.
11. Radiometric dating results give old ages for recent rocks, so we cannot accurately “know” the age of rocks. Also, the finding of carbon-14 in coal and diamonds means that these deposits must be less than 100,000 years old, indicating insufficient time for supposed evolution.
12. The rate of mutation of DNA currently observed suggests that DNA must be less than 100,000 years old, which is not enough time for supposed evolution.
This list is not exhaustive.
LikeLike
James said, “Sorry, Joe, if you want to maintain the position that 100% of scriptures is true and the Bible was written by God you don’t get to cherry pick which parts of the bible you follow and which ones you don’t.”
You’re right. I don’t. But God can say that Jesus fulfilled the law and as a result, I am not under the law but under Jesus’ authority. This is why Paul spends so much time explaining in Romans the purpose of the law and why Jesus sets us free from the law. The law is not evil…we are. Just like a mirror cannot fix our blemishes, the law could only reveal our evil. We needed rescued. Jesus rescued us and the purpose of the law was fulfilled. Now we have a new Master.
Jesus.
LikeLike
BF said after many examples, “The Bible reeks with these stories – it is a poorly written psycho training guide.”
To the contrary – the Bible portrays humanity as it is. It does not dress it up but shows our depravity. That is the point of the Old Testament after all – to demonstrate that even if God Himself educated us with a list of rules for us to keep, we would still rebel against Him. The whole point of the Law of Moses was to show humanity that rule keeping does not change the heart -we need someone to rescue us…from us. We are the problem. David got this. He was forgiven. Abraham understood this and believed. He was forgiven. Those who understood and rejected were not forgiven.
One of the greatest reasons to show that the Bible is true is because it does not make the characters in it look like saints. Rather, it condemns them and shows them in the worst possible light. It demonstrates that these are accurate chronicles of what actually happened – not a dressed up mythology that makes good saints out of screwed up people. If I wrote a book about myself or my national heros, I think I could find a way to gloss over some of those finer details that show me and my heros to be screwed up. The Bible doesn’t do this at all. It doesn’t condone it or prop it up as the ideal, but it accurately portrays what happened. Our faith’s heros are screw ups. Screw ups who believed that God would rescue them.
God would be right to wipe us all off of the face of the earth because we cannot even govern ourselves, let alone steward the planet He gave us to manage. This planet would be better off without the human race, no? Why is that? It’s because we are evil. God in His wisdom has chosen at times to judge different people groups…including His own chosen people, Israel (see the Babylonian captivity for more) who knew they were screwed up but didn’t care. They liked being screwed up and chased after evil as much as they could find. God judged. But God is patient. He does love us. He does want to redeem us from our evil. He made a way through Jesus to have forgiveness for our sins against ourselves and Him.
We need Jesus to rescue us from evil, Flag. Adam did. Noah did. Moses did. Abraham did. Jesus said that Abraham rejoiced to see the day when Jesus would come…which almost got Jesus stoned by the Jews when he said, before Abraham was, “I AM.” God is just and as such hates sin. Hates death. Hates evil. He is right to do so. He, as Creator, is the only one who has a right to judge us. He does so and will ultimately judge every person who has ever lived. This is good news. It means that Hitler will be judged. Rapists who think they got away with it, will still be judged. It means that serial killers who were never caught will be judged. But it also means that you and I too will be judged. Jesus offers forgiveness and redemption. That is why it is called “Gospel.” It means “good news.” It means that screw ups can have peace with God through Jesus. That’s amazing news!
Are Christians still screw ups? Yes. I know I am. But my redemption is not based on what I have earned. It is only based off of what Jesus has earned on my behalf. Christians are just honest enough to admit that we are screw ups and need to be rescued from our evil. Christianity is about a beggar telling other beggars where to find bread.
Continue to mock if you will. You are on the way to death in who knows how long. What happens then when you face your righteous Judge who sees every deed and every thought? Will you stand as perfect or will you be righteously condemned for your own evil?
Your alternative? Just death. Death of your children. Death of their children….and a continued cycle of death. Good luck with that!
LikeLike
BF, “Pretty easy, no?
Killing innocent people is bad.”
I’m not arguing that point. I’m trying to get you to think. I’m arguing the point that you have no moral authority to make that claim beyond your own opinion. What if someone else has a different opinion on ethics? Hitler seemed to think that the extermination of “inferior” races was the best thing for our species. What makes you right and him wrong? That we were on the winning side of history? Is it the old adage that “might makes right”? Is populism the correct way to determine morality? If so, then if in Nazi Germany when the majority hated Jews, it was OK for Hitler to kill them because it was the will of the people. C’mon man, where do you get your moral compass?
How can you stand in judgment of God when you have no standard beyond you decreeing this absolute judgment…from your opinion no less. Who makes you the decider for all mankind of what is right and wrong? Beyond even this…do you always follow your moral compass? Have you ever done something that you think is morally wrong, justified it to yourself, and then did it anyway? If you haven’t you’d be the first I’ve met. You more than likely aren’t even consistent in your own morality and you stand in judgment of God?
Beyond opinion, do we look at nature as our guide for morality? You could logically look around at this universe where animals kill the innocent on a regular basis. Would you feel better if murders were cannibals and use their victims for food like sand sharks, polar bears, spiders, squirrels, hamsters, etc.? In aquatic communities, at some point in the life cycle, 90% of organisms engage in cannibalism. We would go to jail for animal cruelty, but wolves are known to tear a baby elk out of the mother’s womb, eat it, and leave the mother to bleed to death. Hurrah for the moral compass we find in nature! But humans are even worse! As I’ve said before in 3,500 years of recorded history, this planet has not even known 1 collective year of peace from war. When it comes to morality…humans are the worst! And you want to say humans are essentially good. Just because evil is relegated to the shadows doesn’t mean that we’re essentially good. It just means that we’re good at hiding our evil. Look at the sex trade in the US alone as an example. Look at the explosion of the drug trade. Look at how many children are taken from their families and put into child custody. Look at how many are in jail for violent crimes. Look at the porn industry and how many are willing to become an object of lust for evil eyes of men – fueling the sex trade. No, Flag, we are not a “good” people. We are good at pretending and masking our evil with good deeds to make ourselves feel better about our evil. Shoot – we even plant a tree to cover up our carbon footprint so we’ll feel better about ourselves!
Look at this planet you place your faith in. There is not one individual in the history of earth that has come out of here alive. Apparently, the universe that you place your faith in is evil because it kills EVERYTHING that tries to live in it! Shoot, the only way that we exist is by the death of something else, whether it be plant life or animal life. What a cruel system that your evolution has developed for our survival – the death of the innocent. Beyond this…what is your explanation for the death of the innocent who die in infancy by disease, etc.? What a cruel universe to evolve such a system that life is snuffed out so quickly with no purpose to it. You have nothing but death in your system. Nothing to look forward to but to cease existing and be forgotten. No hope. No joy. No purpose. You see life when you look at this planet…and you’d be right in one way. But this is a planet of death…countless, endless death.
And you have no answer for its existence in the universe. You mock what I have…but you in turn have nothing but eternal death to offer. Attack my faith in a perfect, loving, holy God who stepped into a history of evil people (which is accurately recorded in the Bible – you got that point right), and died on a cross so that he could take God’s wrath for our evil and then rose again so that we might find life through Him. The only way we are not exterminated by God for our great evils is because of redemption in Jesus. Mock him all you want…but you only offer death and hopelessness.
Flag said, “It appears you do not understand the difference between humans and rocks.”
Sometimes…sometimes I wonder with some people.
Apparently, you do not understand the difference because you have failed to give the explanation of how a massive explosion of matter evolved into a thinking human being with a moral compass and an ability to reason. In addition, you have failed to demonstrate how this universe produced a reasoning being that exists in such a way that it chooses irrationality rather than reason on a regular basis. A universe that is built on unreasoning cannot function you said (paraphrase)…and yet here we are…being unreasonable. How could reason produce the unreasonable? That would be…irrational.
Again, it makes perfect sense if a perfect God created a rational being who had a will. This being rebelled against His authority and chose rather to be their own master rather than to worship Him. Since He is the source of life then walking away from Him produces death. What you see in nature is exactly what you would expect if what I believe is true. What you find in your own heart is in line with what I believe to be the reason for our evil – a rebellion against the idea that you were created to worship God. What you observe in nature is completely contrary to what you believe to be true and you have no explanation for it. Which one of us is being irrational?
LikeLike
Joe,
I mean just look at the story of Abraham.
He thinks he is the chosen one, but doesn’t have kids, so he knocks up his servant woman and gets a son.
Then he has another by his wife, and throws his first son out into the wilderness to die with his mother.
Then this crack head drags his second son to a mountain so to plunge a dagger through his heart!
What a Dad!
This lunatic needs to be tossed into a jail cell for life, but oh no, this is the root of your religion!
Look at the utterly bizarre story of Moses.
Here is this all powerful God, huh? Splits the sea, rains frogs, pests devour crops, destroys drinking water, kills baby boys… all so that Moses can free “his people”.
But no so powerful to go “Hey, Pharaoh, free them Jews or *bang* your dead”. And if Pharaoh laughed, where is the lightening bolt from heaven?
I mean, then after that puff of smoke dissipated that was Pharaoh #1, say to #2, “..Next!”. Pretty darn easy.
But oh no. Thousands of innocent people had to die instead – I guess this God measures his power in the number of dead innocents, huh?
how about David? So much for “coveting another man’s wife”? God is merely disappointed, but forgives David so easily…
Noah tries to rape his own daughters…
The Bible reeks with these stories – it is a poorly written psycho training guide.
Any study of the Bible finds this God and the characters envious, murderous, duplicitous, conniving, a sadist, hypocritical and insanely evil. And you “pray” to this thing?
Now, contrast that with the Testaments.
Where is God? Except for a cameo voice over, no where – unlike the Bible. Not even a burning bush, just a couple of sing-a-longs with angels.
And where is the slaughter? Where is the envy? Where is the insanity and evil? Where is the mass death in his name? Darn absent….
It appears when God is away, a whole lot of evil goes away too.
There is an excellent comic book called the “Preacher” you should read… it is kinda uses the characterization of the God of the Bible…. and in that story, when finally God is killed, peace returns to the Earth….
The Bible is good for one thing – toilet paper.
If you are a Christian, that is how you should use it, and not preach from it.
LikeLike
Now, Joe, if you are a Christian and not a Jew, you do not condone any of this.
No where in the testament of the Nazarene does he either. He says, instead:
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’
39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.
41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.
42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?
47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Throw away the trash called the “Bible” as your claim to morality. No moral man disagrees with the Testaments in general, but the Bible – worthless.
LikeLike
You forgot “No matter whose deity it’s done in the name of” BF
LikeLike
Joe,
Slaughtering men, women and children is evil – no matter who does it, no matter when it happens, no matter who suffers it.
Enslaving men, women and children is evil – no matter who does it, no matter when it happens, no matter who suffers it.
Those the condone this manifest evil.
Get the picture?
LikeLike
And yet, Joe, you’re not willing to apply the position of “it was a different time with a different level of knowledge and understanding” to such things as the Noah’s ark story. I find it humorous that you quote that apologist with what he/she says about the Old Testament..but you blithely ignore the fact that he/she was also talking about the story of Noah’s ark..which is in the old testament.
Sorry, Joe, if you want to maintain the position that 100% of scriptures is true and the Bible was written by God you don’t get to cherry pick which parts of the bible you follow and which ones you don’t.
So again..how many farmers have you killed for planting two different crops side by side?
Or will you finally be honest and apply the same standard to the Noah’s ark story that you’re applying to the OT with regards to what BF mentioned or what I mentioned?
Pick one of the other, Joe, you don’t get to pick both. No more playing both sides against the middle in a grand game of intellectual hypocrisy.
LikeLike
From the 700s to the 1100s the Muslim world led the world in science. They inherited the learning of the Greeks and Indians and built upon it. Then they decided that the Quran and the writings up to that time were all that anyone ever needed to know about science (exception: architecture). Meanwhile, Europe was sunk in ignorance in the years 700-1100, also called the Dark Ages. Then Europe woke up and started taking an interest in science. By the 1600s Europeans took the lead in science which lasted until the late 20th century. But there’s no guarantee that Europeans (and their American cousins) won’t reject science and become stupid again.
So why are you repeating the same mistakes that the Muslims did near a thousand years ago, Joe?
LikeLike
So it’s really possible, Joe, to live inside a whale?
What? Jonah kept on running until he was pooped out?
LikeLike
It appears you do not understand the difference between humans and rocks.
LikeLike
” he or she must provide a standard by which such judgments can be made. ”
Pretty easy, no?
Killing innocent people is bad.
It appears you do not agree.
I suppose if Moses came back today, and ordered the slaughter of innocent people, claiming “he was told by God” you would march right behind him chopping of heads, right?
LikeLike
This says it better than I can:
http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-law.html
I like how one apologist put it:
In order for someone to raise a valid objection against the moral statutes of the Old Testament, he or she must provide a standard by which such judgments can be made. While people may not agree with the moral judgments of the Old Testament, not agreeing does not invalidate them or mean they are wrong; nor does simply saying “they were obviously barbaric rules” mean that they were. Likewise, saying that “society has evolved” is a meaningless statement. By what standard does the critic offer morally objective criteria by which he or she can judge another culture’s morals?
We have to ask what right does a person in a present-day culture have to judge any ancient culture which existed in a completely different economic, militaristic, judicial, and geographical configuration? Of course, people are entitled to their opinions and they don’t have to like what the Bible teaches, but not liking it has no bearing on whether or not it is good. So, those critics who insist that the Old Testament laws were wrong need to provide an objective standard (not their own opinions) by which they can make moral judgments.
LikeLike
So when we conquered Iraq and Afghanistan, Joe, we should have killed all their men and took their women to force them to be our wives?
If your wife dies are you going to marry her sister as scripture commands?
LikeLike
To quote: “what Scripture has always said to be true”
And I’m sure Muslims say the same about their scriptures. And Hindu’s about theirs.
Scripture says you’re to kill your father if he touches your mother’s bed during her period. Have you done that, Joe? Have you sold your daughter into slavery? Have you killed any farmers for planting two different crops side by side? Do you refuse to eat pigs, Joe? Do you refuse to eat shellfish, Joe?
Those are all in scriptures. So are they all true, Joe?
Also scriptures said that the sun is younger than the earth..which is patently false.
LikeLike
To put it another way: In a universe that is always governed by rationality, how do we observe irrational behavior in humanity if we are a product of the universe? How can the universe produce something that is different than what is observed in the universe? How can the universe produce evil? Is the universe evil? If not, how can humans commit acts of evil worthy of judgment?
It is ironic that the only rational explanation for the existence of evil and death is found through faith. The answers to all these questions make total sense when you choose to trust in the rationale of God rather than the logic of men. Through giving up of independent rights of logic, the choice to respect God’s knowledge brings wisdom. It seems backwards, but many things in Christianity are like that. Die to yourself so that you might live. Give away so that you might find gain. The poor are more often more powerful than the rich. The weak are strong. I think this is why the Bible says, “God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.” (1 Cor. 1:27-29)
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom…said the wisest man who ever lived – Solomon. The reason we refuse to bow to His wisdom? Arrogant pride that refuses to be ruled by God. We want to be our own gods. Enter Humanism…The very definition of evil. Jesus said that when He returns it will be like the days of Noah…seems like we’re getting there pretty quick. Repentance of rebellion against God seems to be in order, though I’m sure the call will be as heeded now as it was in Noah’s day. I pray that God grants the readers of this post repentance.
LikeLike
Flag said, “Men are not rocks.
Choices exist.”
How then do we have the choice to choose irrationality? How is it not just a chemical reaction of our brains? If we do have a real choice, why do we not always choose what is the rational? Beyond this, how is it that our perception of what is reality is sometimes off kilter?
LikeLike
Flag said, “My “ethics” are superior over any who live in irrationality. Otherwise, all sorts of evil is justified – as you have provided.”
Then, in your ethical economy, can you explain the death of every living thing that has ever existed over the course of 4.5 billion years? Why did that first life die and not live forever? Explain death to me, if you can. Explain the justice behind it?
In my economy, God gave His son to die so that we might have life and so that this planet might be redeemed. You have nothing but purposeless death for unforeseen eons.
In my economy, each death happens for a reason. In yours, it is pointless.
LikeLike
Men are not rocks.
Choices exist.
LikeLike
1. God slaughtered His own Son on your behalf.
So you agree this God of yours slaughters innocent people all the time. And you “pray” to this thing, thinking this is good and just, huh?
6. How, in your economy, do you have the moral objectivity to say something is good or evil?
Evil exist where ever irrationality exists.
My “ethics” are superior over any who live in irrationality. Otherwise, all sorts of evil is justified – as you have provided.
LikeLike
Flag said, “Man makes choices based on his own whims and desires.”
Irrationality exists. How is that possible in a universe governed by rationality? How is man, as a product of a rational universe, able to make decisions that go contrary to that rationing? A planet cannot decide to not obey the laws of gravity. How can we go against rational thought and where did these decision making abilities that are able to go against rational thought come from? It’s almost like our thinking…is outside of what exists. Almost like…a soul created by God that rebelled and brought evil to this planet.
LikeLike
Flag asked, “How do YOU justify the slaughter of children?
Good old Moses…”
1. God slaughtered His own Son on your behalf. His name is Jesus. Before looking at why He would order the death of children, you have to understand that God knows what it’s like to see your son die because of the sins of others…your sin to be exact, and mine.
2. Effects of our choices affect our families. For example, when Israel refused to go into the promised land because of fear of huge armies in Canaan, God commanded them to wander in the wilderness for 40 years until they all died out. The children of those people also were forced to wander for 40 years. They bore the natural consequences of the choices of their parents. The same is true of those babies in Noah’s day as well as the children of the Canaanites. Their parent’s fate affected their fate.
3. God gave over 400 years of warning that if they did not repent He would judge the Canaanites with their death. He is merciful in letting them know exactly the consequences for failure to repent.
4. God is just and as God has every right and responsibility to judge evil. As God, He has every right to do whatever He wants with His creation. He actually is the only one has that right.
5. God never calls the children evil. They are spared the eternal fate of their parents by their innocence. Only God would be able to grant them eternal peace with Him instead of following in their parents footsteps of rebellion. This is something no human could grant.
6. How, in your economy, do you have the moral objectivity to say something is good or evil? What makes your ethics superior to anyone else’s, including God’s? As the article I quoted states: “Sartre, admitted: “Everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist…. Nor…are we provided with any values or commands that could legitimize our behavior” (1961, p. 485). “
LikeLike
Look, leavell
Holding onto a myth is harmless. You can believe in Peter Pan for all that matters.
But when such a irrational belief imposes upon the reality, then the trouble starts.
Islam was the greatest culture on Earth in the 8th Century. What we have as science, astromony, mathematics, navigation, biology, disease control (taking regular baths!) etc. etc. comes from them.
Al Ghazali, a religious nut case, wrote an essay arguing that arithmetic was the work of the devil. Because he was the religious leader, people like you believed him.
In less then a century, the culture of Islam was turned upside down and became backward…. still suffers this disaster today.
“Christianity” and your anti-science is no different. If it takes hold, it will spell doom for the Western Civilization.
This is religion once it leaves “never-never” land. It is a disaster upon humanity.
LikeLike
Exactly.
You hold a belief system that has no basis in reality, and bizarrely believe it has some influence on reality!!
Bizarre.
LikeLike
Man makes choices based on his own whims and desires.
LikeLike
How do YOU justify the slaughter of children?
Good old Moses…
LikeLike
Flag said, “Everything your “God” is does not exist in the Universe.”
Exactly! You are trying to explain the existence of the box by things that are inside of the box. Something or someone outside of the box, greater than the box itself must cause the box to exist. If God is real, then He MUST be outside of the box, not within. What you said about God is exactly what is needed for God to exist. Thanks for logically demonstrating the point.
LikeLike
If the universe exists on rationality, and mankind is a product of the universe, can you explain the existence of irrationality to me? How can it exist and why does it?
LikeLike
Did you read the article?
LikeLike
So you admit your God slaughters innocent children, and that’s your definition of “good”.
eek
LikeLike
Did any children die if God flooded the entire globe? Yeah. Why would He do that? Did God use Israel to enact His judgment on a nation? Yeah. He did. Did God in turn use evil nations such as Babylon and Assyria to judge the evil in Israel? Did babies die as a result? Yeah, they did. Why would God do that?
https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=2810
LikeLike
“Flag says, “The universe exists on reason.” Why is that?”
Because a Universe based on irrationality – the realm of “faith” – simply could not exist. If 1+1=”whatever I read in a myth” the Universe falls apart.
There is no requirement for the Universe to have a God, something that is utterly non-existent to the human experience.
God is supposedly omnipresent – yet, nothing in the Universe is
God is supposedly all powerful – yet, nothing in the Universe is
God is supposedly eternal – yet, nothing in the Universe is
God is ethereal, vaporous – yet, everything in the Universe is either matter or energy
Everything your “God” is does not exist in the Universe.
“Beyond this, humans are evil.”
Bull. Humans are essentially good. When man attempts to apply IRRATIONAL beliefs, that is when evil is manifest.
Evil does not grow out of reason. Reason dispels evil.
Evil grows where a man, irrational, tries to manifest that irrationality into reality.
LikeLike