Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Thy shall not kill but then God floods the earth, killing billions of people.

I just was wondering, an explanation for this one, and what do you guys think.

Not me.....boat.....God told me to build a boat too....

Originally posted by debbiejo
Not me.....boat.....God told me to build a boat too....

Originally posted by Gotham Girl
Thy shall not kill but then God floods the earth, killing billions of people.

I just was wondering, an explanation for this one, and what do you guys think.

He's good...he can do what he wants.....he is just not "good" by societies standards nowadays.....

The answer is in Legos.

When you build something with Legos, nobody is allowed to demolish your creation except for yourself. Same goes with God. It is wrong for us to kill his creations, but he is allowed to do do whatever he wants with what he built.

difference is that you dont make rules for what your lego creation is able to do, feel and believe

Originally posted by Myth
The answer is in Legos.

When you build something with Legos, nobody is allowed to demolish your creation except for yourself. Same goes with God. It is wrong for us to kill his creations, but he is allowed to do do whatever he wants with what he built.
Well, that's the first I've heard of that one.

"Thou shalt not kill" is (from what I've gleaned from the Bible) aimed towards murder/vengeance rather than justice.

Justice, to kill children and infants (like the flood story) is just..........

The "great flood" was judgment to those who have sinned. The death of the innocent ones who have died with the sinners because of the flood were inevitable. But they have just received God's promise... The sinners who died on that flood will still face on Judgment Day and yet to face the second death... but the innocent ones will live with God forever for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.

you can try to squirm the way, any way you want, out of this it still stand that this story is of a butcher god who doesnt blink before killing the innocent.

And you'll soon be following them.

Well, that's God.

Originally posted by Jury
And you'll soon be following them.

You'll see....

That's the worst truth the Bible is telling us.

And you'll soon be following themQUOTE] yeah right

Originally posted by Jury
That's the worst truth the Bible is telling us.

What would you ever have done if the printing press wouldn't have been invented?

Originally posted by finti
Justice, to kill children and infants (like the flood story) is just..........
At the time, the whole Earth was considered wicked. (I would assume that this is when the Anakim and the like first appeared.) Therefore, everyone but Noah was to be destroyed--even the animals, but they don't really count--and Noah (and his family), the only good people who had stayed true to God, would be spared. I don't mean to downplay the infants' plight, but, it would seem to me, that if they were born from angels and humans, they would be an abomination that would only cause evil. We don't know how everything was at the time of Noah, except that things were bad.

Originally posted by finti


What makes you so sure that you are right? But I forgot that when people leave god they also leave their common sense behind. Don't be so sure you won't be in hell, cos you wouldn't be thinking that when it happens.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
What makes you so sure that you are right? But I forgot that when people leave god they also leave their common sense behind. Don't be so sure you won't be in hell, cos you wouldn't be thinking that when it happens.

I used to be like you....Oh, poor souls...they have NO clue......

Study....then by a vowel...I mean a clue.

Originally posted by Bardock42
He's good...he can do what he wants.....he is just not "good" by societies standards nowadays.....

the first goos should be God....cause God is obviously n ot good.....by my standards....

Originally posted by Bardock42
the first goos should be God....cause God is obviously n ot good.....by my standards....


there is no good and bad...there are only experiences....we label them good or bad....of course we all have that inner wisdom that tells us what would benefit us all as individuals and as a human race....Just many don't listen....No god needs to tell you that....It's something we all know.

There are people who have never heard of a god and still live a very loving life....just like you.... ...did I just say that...

Originally posted by Bardock42
the first goos should be God....cause God is obviously n ot good.....by my standards....

I think i'd choose god over a mass murderer(the devil) who does it for fun, not for YOUR sake (unlike god). If god didn't flood them people nearly everyone today would be in poverty, not just people in Africa etc.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
I think i'd choose god over a mass murderer(the devil) who does it for fun, not for YOUR sake (unlike god). If god didn't flood them people nearly everyone today would be in poverty, not just people in Africa etc.

Where'd you get that info.?

Originally posted by FeceMan
At the time, the whole Earth was considered wicked. (I would assume that this is when the Anakim and the like first appeared.) Therefore, everyone but Noah was to be destroyed--even the animals, but they don't really count--and Noah (and his family), the only good people who had stayed true to God, would be spared. I don't mean to downplay the infants' plight, but, it would seem to me, that if they were born from angels and humans, they would be an abomination that would only cause evil. We don't know how everything was at the time of Noah, except that things were bad.

Indeed, God deemed Noah, his wife, three sons, and the wives of his three sons to be the only righteous people on earth. So righteous in fact, that they committed incest to repopulate the earth.

Originally posted by Gotham Girl
Thy shall not kill but then God floods the earth, killing billions of people.

I just was wondering, an explanation for this one, and what do you guys think.

Personally for me the message means that God can destroy and re-create whatever he desires. And when God tells humans don't kill each other is because the other person is a creation of God. And since God is the creator therefore a human killing another human is basically destroying God's creation.

That is why you see Jesus preaching to love and care for your brother and sister and not to harm each other. Basically God was a primitive creator with no love and bias to a certain people. And in his own perfection he realise that he was shifting away from his creation by being cruel to them. Thus, he gave us his son Jesus so that he can connected himself with humanity. Take it or leave it thats the way I see it.

Originally posted by WindDancer
Personally for me the message means that God can destroy and re-create whatever he desires. And when God tells humans don't kill each other is because the other person is a creation of God. And since God is the creator therefore a human killing another human is basically destroying God's creation.

That is why you see Jesus preaching to love and care for your brother and sister and not to harm each other. Basically God was a primitive creator with no love and bias to a certain people. And in his own perfection he realise that he was shifting away from his creation by being cruel to them. Thus, he gave us his son Jesus so that he can connected himself with humanity. Take it or leave it thats the way I see it.

That was beautifully stated. nice Job wind

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Indeed, God deemed Noah, his wife, three sons, and the wives of his three sons to be the only righteous people on earth. So righteous in fact, that they committed incest to repopulate the earth.
Righteousness does not mean to be without sin, and incest, at the time, was not forbidden as sexually immoral.

Originally posted by debbiejo
What would you ever have done if the printing press wouldn't have been invented? That's impossible. It would still be a God's will afterall.

The "rumors of war" as Jesus mentioned wouldn't come possible if radio and telegraph was not invented before the first great war. Read what I have not posted.

I know that if I was to go to hell I had to wait in line to enter it, and the line in front of me would be made up by christians or so called god followers............and that line would be loooooooooooooooooooooooooong

when ever did rumors become dependent on modern technology?

then I m interesting to know why the view on sexual immoralty changed so that incest became forbidden

Originally posted by finti
when ever did rumors become dependent on modern technology?You should have read what I have not posted.

God has license to kill. You see like..... eeee.......James Bond!!!

which means I can make that to be whatever actually.
Point is without the printing press I doubt you would have gotten a chance to see whats in the bible, which actually Debbijo`s post refered too

I have answered debbie regarding that one.

well you tried too, but your answer didnt reflect to her intention with her post

That's what you think. That's how you see the Bible, too.

no I know what she aimed at with her post, you on the ohter hand clearly missed out on it

Ok then, that's not what you think.

right its what I know

Originally posted by debbiejo
there is no good and bad...there are only experiences....we label them good or bad....of course we all have that inner wisdom that tells us what would benefit us all as individuals and as a human race....Just many don't listen....No god needs to tell you that....It's something we all know.

There are people who have never heard of a god and still live a very loving life....just like you.... ...did I just say that...

Yes I know..that's why I said by my standards.....

Originally posted by Jury


So you agree with that....So, then no need for the Bible to tell you so...
It's an inner thing that we all possess..

sorry, my last response is supposed to be a response to finti.

he just understood I was right

No, I just understood what kind of person you are.

dont flatter yourself into showing off as one able to understand the kind of person people are............cause you are clueless on this one

Originally posted by finti
dont flatter yourself into showing off as one able to understand the kind of person people are............cause you are clueless on this one Say it to
1. Adam
2. Noah
3. Abraham
4. Isaac
5. Jacob
6. Moses
7. David
8. Solomon
9. Elijah
10. Ezekiel
11. Isaiah, and
12. Jesus.

Otherwise, you're just facing a mirror.

you smoked something you shouldnt?

Originally posted by finti
you smoked something you shouldnt? That's all you can say. Thank you and have a nice day.

thats all there needs to be said to stupidity thats all

Originally posted by Jury
Say it to
1. Adam
2. Noah
3. Abraham
4. Isaac
5. Jacob
6. Moses
7. David
8. Solomon
9. Elijah
10. Ezekiel
11. Isaiah, and
12. Jesus.

Otherwise, you're just facing a mirror.

What the hell is that even supposed to mean....that's why I don't like to debat4e with you...you jsut make no sense....as do most christians....

...stupidity which you have started. Thanks for being honest.

But Jury....you never did answer the question about what if there was no printing press and no Bibles distributed.....What then....?

What if God speaks now...and people don't believe it cause it differs from what the Bible said, cause that been tampered with?

Originally posted by Bardock42
What the hell is that even supposed to mean....that's why I don't like to debat4e with you...you jsut make no sense....as do most christians.... You don't understand it. You'll never understand it. I'm not debating with somebody else here. You just said you don't... so why quoting my post?

yeah cause talk to
was anything but stupid.

Originally posted by debbiejo
But Jury....you never did answer the question about what if there was no printing press and no Bibles distributed.....What then....?

What if God speaks now...and people don't believe it cause it differs from what the Bible said, cause that been tampered with? I have answered. You just simply didn't get it, did you?

Originally posted by Jury
You don't understand it. You'll never understand it. I'm not debating with somebody else here. You just said you don't... so why quoting my post?

I didn't say I don't, I said that'S why In dont like to....but as you said ...You don't understand it. You'll never understand it.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I didn't say I don't, I said that'S why In dont like to....but as you said ...You don't understand it. You'll never understand it. You don't want to debate with me, yet you keep quoting my post.

the only one in here dont getting it is actually you

Originally posted by Jury
You don't want to debate with me, yet you keep quoting my post.
I don't like to debate with you...but in this case I want to.....you understand that?...No?...well you are christian so I guess things need to make no sense for you to believe them....

Originally posted by finti
the only one in here dont getting it is actually you You didn't get it, that's why you want me to clarify my answer, or ask for the answer that itches your ear. But we're talking about the Bible - the Bible which you people used to mock - having no spiritual wisdom to obtain the truth. All you have is only yourself. Other than that... no more.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't like to debate with you...but in this case I want to.....you understand that?...No?...well you are christian so I guess things need to make no sense for you to believe them.... So, what you used to say regarding me is wrong. Because NOW, you want to debate with me. Oh, yes... very human. Well, that's good.

signing off

Originally posted by Jury
So, what you used to say regarding me is wrong. Because NOW, you want to debate with me. Oh, yes... very human. Well, that's good.
No I still don't like debating with you generally but I wanted to know because of the sheer stupidity of your debating style and your flawed logic....but good for you to sign off...you are a real hero my friend.....

your answer was no where near the question asked, and as for having only myself for spiritual wisdom is enough for me, unlike you I dont need others to tell me what and how to believe.

Originally posted by debbiejo
But Jury....you never did answer the question about what if there was no printing press and no Bibles distributed.....What then....?

What if God speaks now...and people don't believe it cause it differs from what the Bible said, cause that been tampered with?

Jury....you still didn't answer the above question...

Signing in again for deb.
Originally posted by debbiejo
Jury....you still didn't answer the above question... So, you haven't figured it out yet, deb? You may ask the question again, deb, for the sake of the discussion.

She asked it again...Thrice...what the hell else do you want....here I'll ask it too:

What if there was no printing press and no Bibles distributed.....What then....?

Originally posted by Jury
Signing in again for deb.
So, you haven't figured it out yet, deb? You may ask the question again, deb, for the sake of the discussion.

Ahhhh...you're signing in for me...... ....maybe I missed your answer...could you state it again....It is morning here...I have brain fog.

Okay, deb I'm quoting your question.
Originally posted by debbiejo
What would you ever have done if the printing press wouldn't have been invented?
MY OWN OPINION says, then, it should have been difficult for God's people to discover the truth. It should have been difficult to preserve the original letters and books, otherwise... the original Scriptures would have been distributed in a handwriting.

On the other hand, businesses and communications industries would have been too slow to develop.

why it would be hard to find a bible let alone read one so discover the truth would be easy

Originally posted by Jury
Okay, deb I'm quoting your question.

MY OWN OPINION says, then, it should have been difficult for God's people to discover the truth. It should have been difficult to preserve the original letters and books, otherwise... the original Scriptures would have been distributed in a handwriting.

Then if there was no printed word for people to follow...how would god judge them if they never heard?...wouldn't be fair would it...If the only way to heaven is through Jesus....

But if no printed word....no knowledge of Jesus....what then?

Originally posted by debbiejo
Then if there was no printed word for people to follow...how would god judge them if they never heard?...wouldn't be fair would it...If the only way to heaven is through Jesus....

But if no printed word....no knowledge of Jesus....what then? If God knows that printing press will never be invented in the world He created and He will know what the result will be, we all have different bases for JUDGMENT. Not the one you are suggesting like: how would god judge them if they never heard?...wouldn't be fair would it...If the only way to heaven is through Jesus.

That's why God has made a solution for that. That's why the Bible proclaims "Many shall run fro and tro... and knowledge shall increase".

Originally posted by Jury
If God knows that printing press will never be invented in the world He created and He will know what the result will be, we all have different bases for JUDGMENT. Not the one you are suggesting like: how would god judge them if they never heard?...wouldn't be fair would it...If the only way to heaven is through Jesus.

Some countries don't have Bibles today....what does that say....

If the only way to heaven is through Jesus....then that would leave only a small amount of people there while the rest of the billions of people are eternally burning....

What about the people that lived before the word got out...where are they?...

What do you think as you described above that gods plan would be...

Originally posted by Jury
That's why God has made a solution for that. That's why the Bible proclaims "Many shall run fro and tro... and knowledge shall increase".

Like the Internet?....or what do you mean by that...I've heard many interpretations for what that means.

Originally posted by Myth
The answer is in Legos.

When you build something with Legos, nobody is allowed to demolish your creation except for yourself. Same goes with God. It is wrong for us to kill his creations, but he is allowed to do do whatever he wants with what he built.

I love your lego connotation.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Righteousness does not mean to be without sin, and incest, at the time, was not forbidden as sexually immoral.

First, ethics are not arbitrary to the will of God. Things are not right or wrong because God says so. Rather, God says things are right or wrong because they are.

Second, please explain how incest can be moral.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
First, ethics are not arbitrary to the will of God. Things are not right or wrong because God says so. Rather, God says things are right or wrong because they are.

Second, please explain how incest can be moral.
Explain why incest is immoral.........

Originally posted by debbiejo
Some countries don't have Bibles today....what does that say....

If the only way to heaven is through Jesus....then that would leave only a small amount of people there while the rest of the billions of people are eternally burning....

What about the people that lived before the word got out...where are they?...

What do you think as you described above that gods plan would be...

Means they would be forgiven has they had been sinned against, meaning the person/people who owned the country would get their punishment.

"What about the people that lived before the word got out...where are they?..." There has always been a word of god, before Jesus was born there was others who told of god, it just wasn't written in a book.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
Means they would be forgiven has they had been sinned against, meaning the person/people who owned the country would get their punishment.

"What about the people that lived before the word got out...where are they?..." There has always been a word of god, before Jesus was born there was others who told of god, it just wasn't written in a book.

BULLSHIT....there has NOT always been a word of God....it has been there for some thousand years but not always.....

Originally posted by Bardock42
BULLSHIT....there has NOT always been a word of God....it has been there for some thousand years but not always.....
I think you'll find the old testament was about what happend BEFORE Jesus was born, meaning that people heard of god then too. And everyone knew about god when Noah was around, they just didn't want to believe he was there like many today.

Originally posted by Myth
The answer is in Legos.

When you build something with Legos, nobody is allowed to demolish your creation except for yourself. Same goes with God. It is wrong for us to kill his creations, but he is allowed to do do whatever he wants with what he built. LMAO!

The Judaism came before Christianity, so there we go, that's where Christianity began.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy

"What about the people that lived before the word got out...where are they?..." There has always been a word of god, before Jesus was born there was others who told of god, it just wasn't written in a book.



This is not true...a very small geographical location had the stories...India, China, the Americas, Europe, Australia, South Africa, Russia....etc...didn't have the stories.....They believed in other gods or One god...but never heard of Jesus...And even before Jesus, the OT was only in the areas of Palestine and surrounding areas...So, they didn't hear it either...

Where are they now? Where are all these billions of people who never heard?

They were forgiven if they were good in gods eyes, they were not judged for their not-knowing of god, they were judged by how good they were because they had no warning. Most went to heaven.

And also, when Jesus was aroundhe told his disciples to spread the word to other countries around the world.

Wait, I'll correct myself, ALL went to hell untill Jesus died for the people. The world was evil and Jesus death prevented them and more from going to hell. After that when not many knew God did as I said before.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
Wait, I'll correct myself, ALL went to hell untill Jesus died for the people. The world was evil and Jesus death prevented them and more from going to hell. After that when not many knew God did as I said before.

So everyone before Jesus went to hell and are there now for not ever hearing?

Originally posted by debbiejo
Then if there was no printed word for people to follow...how would god judge them if they never heard?...wouldn't be fair would it...If the only way to heaven is through Jesus....

But if no printed word....no knowledge of Jesus....what then? That's why the Bible said: "Anyone who sinned under the law will be judged by the law... and those who sinned apart from the law they will be judged apart from the law."

But those who reached by that law, yet still ignored the law and continued sinning... they will still be judged by that law.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Some countries don't have Bibles today....what does that say....

If the only way to heaven is through Jesus....then that would leave only a small amount of people there while the rest of the billions of people are eternally burning....

What about the people that lived before the word got out...where are they?...

What do you think as you described above that gods plan would be... The words of God started from the Creation as narrated in the Bible. If you don't agree with that, then we have nothing to talk about.

As I said, "Everyone who sinned under the law will be judged by the law."

Originally posted by debbiejo
Like the Internet?....or what do you mean by that...I've heard many interpretations for what that means. Like what everything we had today.

People who lived before Jesus will be judged by the law that existed before Jesus. That's from the old covenants of God to His chosen people.

The covenant with Jesus is what the Bible called the "everlasting covenant"... that's where the people of Christian era will be judged.

God's people of Old and of New had an obligation to spread the words of God to the whole world and those who will live by it will have an eternal life. ... And those who have ignored the words of God will be condemned.

But those who were not reached by the same words of God, therefore those who lived apart from the law.... they will be judged apart from the law that God has given to His people.

So, what you are saying Jury...is that all these people I've referred to are now in hell? Yes..? Because according to scripture "No one can keep the Law perfectly"...the Old Covenant.

Well, everyone has sinned, yes I am aware of that. But the people whom God had chosen since the time of Adam who died faithful to God's commandments and covenant with them shall receive the promise on Judgment Day... not right after their death. The same with the sinners who died before the time of Jesus will receive their punishment at the same Day... not right after their death.

But at the time of Jesus, God made an everlasting covenant with God's followers in Christ's time. This is a new covenant. New priesthood. New law. ... which also stipulate a new way of salvation... and this is through Christ.

But there was a universal law regarding judgment, which states that "one will not be punished because of other's sins"... This goes the same with Christ.

Christ cannot die for the sins of others. He will violate that universal law if He does so. That's why He has to build a church. and He considered this Church as His body. and anyone who will become a part of His body will be saved in Judgment Day.

Christ, being the Head, and the Church, His body - becomes a "one new man" as exposed in the letter of Paul to the Ephesians. This "one new man" really a ONE MAN in the sight of God... so Christ has to die, not for the sins of the whole world but for the sins of His body... ONLY His body.

But being a part of Christ's body, one should remain faithful and obedient to God's everlasting covenant.

What Universal law are you talking about...I don't understand that you say "Christ can't die for the sins of others, it would go against this universal law." ...So, you have to become part of a certain body of His?...The Protestant one? What about the other believers...Or is it a certain type of church or belief? .And are you saying that these people are now sleeping or unconscious now in their graves, and not anywhere yet?..Not until Judgement Day? Do you believe in predestination of some sort?

I prefer to use universal law when that certain law is used or applied for all covenants of God in different times... like "don't kill anyone"... "don't eat blood"... worship God alone"... etc.

Law like "the father will not be punished because of his child's sin" (or vise versa). This is the same with Christ. Christ cannot die for the sins of any people but only the sins of His followers... or part of His body.

This body is the Christ's Church which He built in the first century. I'm not saying it's the Protestant. It is Christ's Church. The description of this Church is described in the Bible. That's the one I am referring about. And yes, in order to be saved, one should be part of this body or Church. What about the other believers? This was the same with God's first nation - the Israel. It was stated in the Old Covenant that "No other land in the world has the true God - only Israel".

The Bible says that when a person dies, his body perishes to the ground or grave, his soul clings to the dust, and his spirit goes back to the One who gave it - God. "The dead will remain in their grave till the heavens are no more." They will never rise until the Day of Judgment has come.

Predestination like what? Purgatory? If only the Bible tells, then I would.

Let's just say that if god didn't do that you would live in a land of evil where everyone would take drugs(and i mean EVERYONE) the police wouldn't exist, you'd wish that superheroes existed , Everything in the shop would be worth over $1000 etc etc.
Those people were evil and if it was to save your family I beleive you would get rid of the evil members too(the ones which kill other members of the family)

Atleast he didn't hit them with a bolt of lightning.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Explain why incest is immoral.........

He is making a positive claim, e.g. incest is moral. Therefore, the burden of proof is on him to substantiate that claim.

I am making a negative claim, e.g. incest is immoral, meaning "not moral." Since a negation cannot be proven, I do not have to provide evidence for my claim.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
He is making a positive claim, e.g. incest is moral. Therefore, the burden of proof is on him to substantiate that claim.

I am making a negative claim, e.g. incest is immoral, meaning "not moral." Since a negation cannot be proven, I do not have to provide evidence for my claim.

No, this is different I asked you to explain...I didn't demand a proof of your claim I juist asked you how you think that incest is immoral.....


By the same standard you would havbe to prove why homosexuality is moral while someoen can just say that its not.....this is wrong because either side has to back up their statemeants neither is better both are basically the same....

So could you say why you believe incest is immoral?

God didn't flood the earth, the sun melted the polar ice caps, the Noah and the Ark thing was a mythology written by Babylonions with a moral to it.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I have done so in a number of threads.

You surely did not because morals are not proofable....morals are not absolut.....

Originally posted by Bardock42
You surely did not because morals are not proofable....morals are not absolut.....

Morality may be culturally relative, but I would argue tath ethics are absolute.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Morality may be culturally relative, but I would argue tath ethics are absolute.

Don't mind me hnitting my head on a brick wall.........

ok I'm done...I don't agree but that is a different matter...I just want to know why you think that Incest is immoral...just why.......

I may add also that.. the Great Flood is not a question of God's kindness and mercy. It only shows that God must prevail over all. What God has proclaimed, no one can stand against.

Another thing, god made the rule of no killing AFTER the flood.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Don't mind me hnitting my head on a brick wall.........

ok I'm done...I don't agree but that is a different matter...I just want to know why you think that Incest is immoral...just why.......

Perhaps you would also like me to explain why one who is innocent is "not guilty"?



Originally posted by Chibi Boy
Another thing, god made the rule of no killing AFTER the flood.

It is does not matter that God waits until after He kills every living thing on the planet to mandate that killing is wrong.

We do not look back at the African slave trade in American and say, "This happened before the Emancipation Proclimation so it was okay to keep slaves." :

the ten commandments are the rules for us humans. god has his own set of rules which involves killing when he deems necessary. hey, he's god. wanna argue with him? that's what i thought

Originally posted by Adam_PoE

It is does not matter that God waits until after He kills every living thing on the planet to mandate that killing is wrong.

We do not look back at the African slave trade in American and say, "This happened before the Emancipation Proclimation so it was okay to keep slaves." :

I know, but god said it ISN'T ok to kill AFTER the flood, i have already said that we'd be in a much worse world anyway if he hadn't done it.

We might not look back at the African slave trade in America and say, "This happened before the Emancipation Proclimation so it was okay to keep slaves." But god chooses the rules around here.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
I know, but god said it ISN'T ok to kill AFTER the flood, i have already said that we'd be in a much worse world anyway if he hadn't done it.

We might not look back at the African slave trade in America and say, "This happened before the Emancipation Proclimation so it was okay to keep slaves." But god chooses the rules around here.

Is killing innocent babies in the flood OK then.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Is killing innocent babies in the flood OK then.

Good point, but no. Floods are probably the most less violent way of killing, how else would he get rid of them? If he bolted them down with lightning it would be a painfull death. Could you think up any suggestions on how you would rid them without the spill of blood?

Save all the babies? So once the flood ends they would have no parents and would die of starvation?

Why the flood at all....why not just wish them away......

Warning one....warning two....warning three......BLINK!!...All nice and neat..

Originally posted by fruits
the ten commandments are the rules for us humans. god has his own set of rules which involves killing when he deems necessary. hey, he's god. wanna argue with him? that's what i thought

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
I know, but god said it ISN'T ok to kill AFTER the flood, i have already said that we'd be in a much worse world anyway if he hadn't done it.

We might not look back at the African slave trade in America and say, "This happened before the Emancipation Proclimation so it was okay to keep slaves." But god chooses the rules around here.

So it is "do as I say and not as I do," then? One set of rules for God and another set of rules for human beings? I did nto realize that God is such a hypocrite.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Is killing innocent babies in the flood OK then. Well, it wasn't okay. It's not okay for God either. But God has proclaimed it and He couldn't change it. To show that He is still powerful over all things.

But babies for sure, even though was killed by the Great Flood, will still receive the promise God intended for them. And that is eternal life.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Why the flood at all....why not just wish them away......

Warning one....warning two....warning three......BLINK!!...All nice and neat..
Wish them away? WISH THEM AWAY? If you mean get rid of their souls also then definatly not.
If you mean just killing them then it wouldn't make much of a difference anyway, yet all of the dead bodies would be everywhere. If he just got rid of their bodies altogether than it would be the same as a flood.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
Wish them away? WISH THEM AWAY? If you mean get rid of their souls also then definatly not.
If you mean just killing them then it wouldn't make much of a difference anyway, yet all of the dead bodies would be everywhere. If he just got rid of their bodies altogether than it would be the same as a flood.
You do realise that a flood wouldn't make the bodies just disappear either. There should have been bodies floating everywhere during the flood and bodies littering the ground when the waters receded.

Did the water just dissolved the bodies?

An all-powerful god should be able to kill everyone instantaneously and painlessly. If he can't then he isn't all-powerful. If he just decided it would be fun to drown them instead then he's not a benevolent god.

Originally posted by Jury
Well, it wasn't okay. It's not okay for God either. But God has proclaimed it and He couldn't change it. To show that He is still powerful over all things.
Oh I get it then... it's like Homer said...
"Well, Ak, it's because God is powerful, but also insecure, like Barbara Streisand before James Brolin."

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
You do realise that a flood wouldn't make the bodies just disappear either. There should have been bodies floating everywhere during the flood and bodies littering the ground when the waters receded.

Did the water just dissolved the bodies?

An all-powerful god should be able to kill everyone instantaneously and painlessly. If he can't then he isn't all-powerful. If he just decided it would be fun to drown them instead then he's not a benevolent god.


Oh I get it then... it's like Homer said...
"Well, Ak, it's because God is powerful, but also insecure, like Barbara Streisand before James Brolin."

"An all-powerful god should be able to kill everyone instantaneously and painlessly. If he can't then he isn't all-powerful. If he just decided it would be fun to drown them instead then he's not a benevolent god."
1. He has his reasons, god made plans for everything, he put a large amount of water vapour(But it wasn't a cloud, even science has proven this correct) around the earth in the beginning and it let people live longer because less rays were getting through from the sun, he probably planned to get rid of this layer of vapour to shorten human kinds life-span because he thought it was slightly too long, not forgetting that just making them dissappear wouldn't have gone with his plan.

2. Does it matter how he killed them? All the people on earth in those days(except Noah) deserved such punishment as drowning, they were very bad people. Just like when the tsunami hit, some christians were saved after being forced on to a hill by another religion because they wasn't aloud to have christmas in the town, all the people in the town was hit by the tsunami but the Christians were safe on the hill.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
1. He has his reasons, god made plans for everything, he put a large amount of water vapour(But it wasn't a cloud, even science has proven this correct) around the earth in the beginning and it let people live longer because less rays were getting through from the sun, he probably planned to get rid of this layer of vapour to shorten human kinds life-span because he thought it was slightly too long, not forgetting that just making them dissappear wouldn't have gone with his plan.
Seriously what are you when you cook up this random gibberish?
Originally posted by Chibi Boy
2. Does it matter how he killed them? All the people on earth in those days(except Noah) deserved such punishment as drowning, they were very bad people.
Yes, the evil babies deserved to die. Kill all the children too, they deserve drowning. All the other animals and most of the plantlife deserved to die as well.
Funny how an omnipotent omniscient god didn't have the forethought to tell Noah to gather samples of all the single celled organisms, fungi and at least one or two of every plant that would never survive being submerged for such a prolonged period. Oh well they were probably evil bacteria and evil plants.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy


Along with other religions and beliefs...It wasn't only Christians that survived...

That sounds like a story a Pastor would tell.....Much like this

and the infants

and the christians that fell victim to the tsunami fits in how?

Originally posted by finti
and the christians that fell victim to the tsunami fits in how?

God loved them and was chastising them?

Here's an analogy. It's basically equivalent to someone sculpting a castle out of sand, then not liking the look of it and destroying it instead of even attempting to fix it.
All the story shows is that the god in The Bible has the psychological maturity of a 2 year old.

Originally posted by finti
and the infants

and the christians that fell victim to the tsunami fits in how?

1. I have already explained this, the infants would have died a worser death if he didn't kill them all in the flood, they would have died of starvation.

2. They fit in because it was their time to go, anyways how'd you know that most of them who survived weren't Christians?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Here's an analogy. It's basically equivalent to someone sculpting a castle out of sand, then not liking the look of it and destroying it instead of even attempting to fix it.
All the story shows is that the god in The Bible has the psychological maturity of a 2 year old.
No, It shows you have the psychological maturity of a 2 year old. They were impossible to fix, it was stuck in their heads, just like the non-existance of god is stuck in yours. People weren't bad when god first made man but changed by eating from the Tree Of The Knowledge Of Good And Evil. So the sand castle became dodgy and was unfixable so he had to start again with the best part of it.

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
No, It shows you have the psychological maturity of a 2 year old. They were impossible to fix, it was stuck in their heads, just like the non-existance of god is stuck in yours. People weren't bad when god first made man but changed by eating from the Tree Of The Knowledge Of Good And Evil. So the sand castle became dodgy and was unfixable so he had to start again with the best part of it.

So, there is something even God can't do?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Here's an analogy. It's basically equivalent to someone sculpting a castle out of sand, then not liking the look of it and destroying it instead of even attempting to fix it.
All the story shows is that the god in The Bible has the psychological maturity of a 2 year old.

This is an insult to every 2 year old I've ever met......

Originally posted by Chibi Boy
No, It shows you have the psychological maturity of a 2 year old.
That's like the pot calling the fridge black.
Originally posted by Chibi Boy
They were impossible to fix, it was stuck in their heads, just like the non-existance of god is stuck in yours. People weren't bad when god first made man but changed by eating from the Tree Of The Knowledge Of Good And Evil. So the sand castle became dodgy and was unfixable so he had to start again with the best part of it.
The fiction of The Bible is the conclusion I've come to. Nothing is stuck in my head.
Shakyamunison asked a good question.

God doesn't give his creations knowledge of good and evil - of right and wrong.
The naive are egged on by one of god's prior creations to do something that god considers wrong.
They do something that he considers wrong, of course how would they know it's wrong - they have no knowledge of right and wrong - it gives them knowledge of right and wrong.
God blames them.

I can just picture a sign on god's desk that reads "The buck doesn't stop here."

And Bardock, I apologise to the 2 year olds you know. An oversight on my part, I too know of 2 year olds more psychologically developed.

Originally posted by Bardock42
This is an insult to every 2 year old I've ever met......

But we still talk to you....especially on a bunny bright moon.

cause it happen in a part of the world were christians are a minortity even if they have loads of tourists where many must be considered as christians

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Here's an analogy. It's basically equivalent to someone sculpting a castle out of sand, then not liking the look of it and destroying it instead of even attempting to fix it.
All the story shows is that the god in The Bible has the psychological maturity of a 2 year old.
Or maybe things were so ****ed that the people living then didn't even deserve a second chance? I'm betting it was Sodom and Gomorrah ten times over.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Or maybe things were so ****ed that the people living then didn't even deserve a second chance? I'm betting it was Sodom and Gomorrah ten times over.
So an omniscient god didn't have the foresight to see that this would happen, or the sense to intervene earlier or the compassion to forgive? Or an omnipotent god didn't have the power to fix them, or didn't have the power to kill only the adults and spare the innocent infants and children, or only kill the humans and not the animals?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
So an omniscient god didn't have the foresight to see that this would happen, or the sense to intervene earlier or the compassion to forgive? Or an omnipotent god didn't have the power to fix them, or didn't have the power to kill only the adults and spare the innocent infants and children, or only kill the humans and not the animals?

The other possibility is this is what god wanted, this is perfecting. That would mean that god made sin.

God made sin, god made sin......Cause he likes to watch..

well acording to the bible god indirectly made sin

Originally posted by debbiejo
God made sin, god made sin......Cause he likes to watch..
I would imagine if someone lived forever the boredom would either drive them to become insane, malevolent or insanely malevolent.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I would imagine if someone lived forever the boredom would either drive them to become insane, malevolent or insanely malevolent.

Insanely voyeuristic.

I have not read any of the recent postings--I am tired and have little time right now--but I'll take an on-topic stab at the heart of the issue:

What is killing?

That isn't some Clintonian "definition of 'is'" question, it is asking not for the definition of killing, but how one interprets "You shall not kill".

Is it killing anything at all, animals included? Is it killing humans? Is it murder, self-defense, capital punishment?

That's the question. My answer? Murder is a no-no, self-defense/capital punishment are okay. But not everyone will agree with that. However, I believe the Bible gives enough examples of justice being served to warrant capital punishment as being fine.

by taking lives

Originally posted by FeceMan
Is it murder, self-defense, capital punishment?
That's the question. My answer? Murder is a no-no, self-defense/capital punishment are okay. But not everyone will agree with that. However, I believe the Bible gives enough examples of justice being served to warrant capital punishment as being fine.
I'm guessing your American...
Capital punishment is okay? Tell that to the families of people who have been executed and later been found innocent due to advances in modern forensic science.

Well, when is it OK to kill????....just curious....besides for self protection...Or is that it....

Circumstances may arise when it is necessary to take a life. Punishment and vengeance are not things that falls within these circumstances.
However as with all things it depends upon the situation.

Originally posted by finti
by taking lives
How so?

Taking the lives of what? Plants? Animals? Mammals but not reptiles? Animals but not microorganisms? Clean things? Unclean things? Black people, white people, mentally retarded people?

just answering your question on how to interpreter "thou shall not kill".
And that should include whatever you hold sacred, what is life to you.............but the commandment in question involve humans, I thought that was pretty obvious though,..... but then again maybe not to all

I think the Bible mean "Do not commit murder"...not taking lives of the innocent, but then again in the OT...innocent lives were taken by gods instructions.....Then again...what is considered "Innocent"...But to me I think that's obvious...

I think the Bible meant intentional premeditated murder. But if god knows all, then god did that also...

Originally posted by finti
just answering your question on how to interpreter "thou shall not kill".
And that should include whatever you hold sacred, what is life to you.............but the commandment in question involve humans, I thought that was pretty obvious though,..... but then again maybe not to all
The commandment tells humans not to kill...but not to kill what? That's the question. Kill other humans? But what about X reason in Y scenario? Kill animals?

Why do you think there was the constant debate about keeping the Sabbath holy in the New Testament? It's because of the interpretations of the rabbis and their individual teachings.