Do you think a God who drowns innocent babies from ppl before the flood is loving?

kiwimac · Feb 13, 2018

atpollard said:
You want physical evidence of metaphysical Truth ... good luck with that one.
So what color IS gravity?
How much does a thought weigh?

Of a global flood.

Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk

atpollard · Feb 13, 2018

Do you think a God who drowns innocent babies from ppl before the flood is loving?

Let's break it down ...
"Do you think": Romans 9:20 NASB On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? ... what we think about God's decisions is irrelevant.

"innocent babies": Psalm 51:5 NASB Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.; Romans 3:10-11 NASB as it is written, “THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD;; Romans 5:12 NLT When Adam sinned, sin entered the world. Adam’s sin brought death, so death spread to everyone, for everyone sinned. ... there are no innocent people, adult, children or babies.

"before the flood": Genesis 6:5-8 NASB Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. The LORD said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.” But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD. ... asked and answered. God told you the status of the heart of the people living on the Earth before the flood. God saved EVERY person that God knew was not completely consumed by the desire for evil.

"loving": Hebrews 12:25-29 NASB See to it that you do not refuse Him who is speaking. For if those did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, much less will we escape who turn away from Him who warns from heaven. And His voice shook the earth then, but now He has promised, saying, “YET ONCE MORE I WILL SHAKE NOT ONLY THE EARTH, BUT ALSO THE HEAVEN.” This expression, “Yet once more,” denotes the removing of those things which can be shaken, as of created things, so that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we receive a kingdom which cannot be shaken, let us show gratitude, by which we may offer to God an acceptable service with reverence and awe; for our God is a consuming fire. ... God is loving, but he is more than just loving, God is also Holy and the dispenser of Justice.

atpollard · Feb 13, 2018

kiwimac said:
Of a global flood.

Respectfully, it is there. You would simply choose to reject it.
There is no evidence of macro-evolution, just conjecture based on similarities in fossil records and assumptions about micro-evolutionary morphological adaptations ... but no one demands 'physical proof' of evolution.
There is evidence of rapid crystallization of granite that calls into question the dating of the Earth ... but no one demands proof of a multi-billion year old Earth.
There is evidence of sedimentary deposits and fossilization that suggests a rapid cataclysmic event, but this is dismissed because every scientist "knows" that the Bible is fiction and to think otherwise is academic suicide.

Frankly, I am not even a strong believer in a young Earth. I am just a strong critic of double standards. Look up the technical data if you are really interested and judge it for yourself. I have ample evidence of the reliability of scripture in other areas (including divine inspiration) so I am willing to give things like the Flood and 6 day Creation the benefit of the doubt. You can believe whatever seems true to you.

kiwimac · Feb 13, 2018

atpollard said:
Respectfully, it is there. You would simply choose to reject it.
There is no evidence of macro-evolution, just conjecture based on similarities in fossil records and assumptions about micro-evolutionary morphological adaptations ... but no one demands 'physical proof' of evolution.
There is evidence of rapid crystallization of granite that calls into question the dating of the Earth ... but no one demands proof of a multi-billion year old Earth.
There is evidence of sedimentary deposits and fossilization that suggests a rapid cataclysmic event, but this is dismissed because every scientist "knows" that the Bible is fiction and to think otherwise is academic suicide.

Frankly, I am not even a strong believer in a young Earth. I am just a strong critic of double standards. Look up the technical data if you are really interested and judge it for yourself. I have ample evidence of the reliability of scripture in other areas (including divine inspiration) so I am willing to give things like the Flood and 6 day Creation the benefit of the doubt. You can believe whatever seems true to you.

And that, I'm afraid, is fertiliser. There is no evidence of a global flood but there is plenty of evidence of human societies continuing to grow and function during the time that the flood is supposed to have occurred. Further no geological evidence supports the idea of a global flood.

MennoSota · Feb 13, 2018

https://youtu.be/4Jt0cqRtCxA

Pedrito · Feb 14, 2018

From Post #5:

I thought Satan was cast down before Adam and Eve were created? I also heard that the serpent was made on the 6th day so these theories always spin me about.

My understand is, that it is not only in English that words that are translated “serpent” and “snake” can carry meanings such as “a treacherous person; an insidious enemy” and “a wily, treacherous, or malicious person”.

If that significance is seen to apply in the Hebrew language as well (which it does if you look), then the normally perceived problems relating to a physical snake disappear, and compatibility with the passages in Ezekiel 28:11-19 and Isaiah 14:12-14 is established. And something else is clarified: the rendering “more clever than” rather than “most clever [of]”, relative to the then-existing land-based creatures, is shown to be correct.

The word play relating to the sentencing – “upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life” – is also graphic. It vividly expresses Satan’s banishment from God’s intimate presence, and his confinement to the physical realm (where he now is “the god of this world”).

So once again we can see that by allowing ourselves some latitude of sensible perspective, problems relating to traditional, rigid “religious” ideas, disappear like ephemeral morning mist.

Pedrito · Feb 17, 2018

From Post #8:

Well, if the angels in Heaven ( or fallen angels who lost their place in Heaven) do not need to reproduce because they wouldn't need to be replaced, who's to say that these " sons of God" weren't descendants of Adam's son, Seth and the daughters of men did not descend from Cain, the world's first fratricide and murderer?

The equating of “sons of God” with righteous, God-fearing descendants of Seth, and “daughters of men” with unrighteous, God-rejecting descendants of Cain, is as old as the hills, and demonstrably lacking in wisdom.

The normal rendition has the two populations segregated, with one living in the mountains and the other living on the plains. Finally, in some sort of implied unholy mingling, males of the Seth line cohabit with females of the Cain line. Not vice versa, note. Were the Seth females a little more choosy? Or perhaps the Cain males?

But what is the main and patently obvious problem with the Seth-Cain scenario? And why is that problem so assiduously overlooked?

==============================================================================================

The problem is that, according to Holy Scripture (Genesis 5:4): And the days of Adam after he had fathered Seth were eight hundred years. And he fathered sons and daughters.

Adam fathered sons other than the first three, and daughters as well.

Where did those sons and daughters and their descendants live? Were they righteous or unrighteous? Did they band together as a third segregated group? (Apart from the wives of Seth and Cain, that is.) Why are they not mentioned as a group? What label should be given them? “Sons and daughters” it says – multiple sons and multiple daughters. Would their descendants not have greatly outnumbered the other two groups? Did they never intermingle with the others? Ever?

==============================================================================================

The obviously contrived nature of the segregated Seth-Cain scenario is thus laid bare, once other relevant Scripture is included in the evidence set.

Do you think a God who drowns innocent babies from ppl before the flood is loving?

kiwimac

Well-known member

atpollard

Well-known member

atpollard

Well-known member

kiwimac

Well-known member

MennoSota

Well-known member

Pedrito

Well-known member

Pedrito

Well-known member