The Arborist & I: A Dialogue

treeplanter

Well-known member
At the time of the flood, we see Noah as a righteous man and the rest of the world corrupt (either by original sin or actual sin). The motivation behind the Flood was to destroy the corruption. If the desired result was to destroy the corruption that was on the earth, saving anyone outside of Noah's family would have been contrary to the purpose of the Flood and the desired end result would not have been achieved.
According to Stiggy, the motivation behind drowning babies was to save them from a fallen world and resurrect them to a better one

That said, if, as you are asserting, the entire human race {minus Noah & co} was drowned {including babies} as a means by which to eliminate corruption, then my question to you is this:

Were there other means available to God by which He could have eliminated corruption or did He have no other choice except to drown the world?
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
Nope. I Tim 4:10
"That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe." -- 1 Timothy 4:10

I am not sure how that proves God does not send unbelievers to hell. Let's check Revelations...

"But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars--they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." -- Revelations 21:8

God casts people into the fire to burn forever just for the crime of 'unbelief'. Not murder, not harming others - just people who did not worship and believe in the Christian God. That is about 5 billion people on Earth right now. They could be good, kind, loving, wonderful people - but if they worship the wrong god or just do not praise the Christian God enough then they burn. Forever.

According to The Bible God is going to burn 5 billion people because they did not worship Him.

That's an evil that would make the most ambitious psychopath blush.
 

Furion

Well-known member
The god that Christians believe in is immoral

The only reason I care about Christians believing in an immoral god is because it shapes their own moralities and morality is what determines how we interact with one another

I desire to disavow Christians of this harmful belief

It is my intention to do so by way of opening the eyes of Christians to God's immorality as described throughout scripture

How else am I to do this without stating what God, Himself, has done per His own claims in scripture?


Look at it this way, in order for an adult to communicate effectively with a young child, the adult must approach the child on the level of a child, right?

In much the same way, in order for me to communicate with you, I must lower myself to your level and, for the sake of communication, speak of your invisible sky daddy as if it were real
I can see you being immoral.

What exactly do immoral people bring to table?

Just immorality. Yawn.

And I can also tell you spend lots of time angry at others for what they believe. Who does that but skeptics?

The Christian is always sad for others who only hurt themselves. Even morality training cannot help.
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
The lake of fire is not hell.
If people are burning in a lake of fire for eternity then I think it does not much matter if it is called Hell, Gehenna, Tophet, Abaddon, Sheol or Chuck 'E Cheese. God is burning billions of people for the crime of unbelief.

That is just not defensible for a being that is supposed to be loving.

Its cool to worship a god that burns billions of people for not worshipping him properly. It is silly to say that god is loving.
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
Not eternity. The Greek word is "aonious," meaning "age long." Prepare yourself.
You somehow think this makes God loving? And are you...gleeful that I am going to burn for a very long time just because I do not worship your god? Do you say 'prepare yourself' and think I somehow deserve to burn for an 'age long' time?

Dude....reel it back in. Please don't delight at the thought of billions burning while you are in heaven. That thought is thoroughly evil. Your need to prove an immoral god is somehow moral is messing up your compassion and empathy.

Might want to look into that :)
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
Yes. He loves us so much, He hates to see how sin destroys us and wants to burn it out of us.
Yeah. Burning people is evil. That can never be loving. People who say, "I have to burn you because I love you so much" go to prison. Or a psych ward.

And the horrible 'sin' that God hate so much that he need to burn us? Simply not worshipping him. Anyone who wants to hurt someone for just not showing them attention is sick. Its like a deranged abusive husband that cannot stand not getting attention so he abuses his wife.

Dear lord man - this is just not morally defensible. But I enjoy watching you try :)
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
US? I said the sin in us. Do try to pay better attention.
I meant 'us' as the 5 billion non-Christians like me. I explained that a god who burns people in a lake of fire is not a god that is even capable of love. No loving being watches people burn for the crime of non belief. That is a psychopathic god.

This is why Christianity makes no sense. The Bible clearly describes a god that is vain, jealous, vengeful, capricious, and cruel beyond measure. He tests his followers by seeing if they are willing to stab their own children to death. He killed every human on the planet by drowning. if you do not worship him properly then he burns you in a lake of fire. Its monstrous. I know of no other ancient religion where the gods visit such cruelty on all of humanity - not Zeus, not Odin, not Buddha, not Ahura Mazda - none of the 'evil' gods in other religions even come close to the horror of the Christians God in the OT.

And despite all of that Christians try to make him a God of love. Its like saying the greatest serial killer of all time was killing people out of love. Its madness.

However, believe what you like of course. If you think it is loving to watch people burn in fire then you go for it dude!

Mazel tov!
 
D

Diogenes

Guest
So not only did God's plan not work long-term, his plan needed a band-aid later.

I wouldn't presume to know God's plans as epistemic access to the inner workings of the minds of other people is difficult enough.

Quite right and that's exactly the nature of the discussion.

The nature of the discussion is about using an external framework vs using an internal framework to judge the Christian God. If we're going to presume the Christian God exist, there's other things to consider than the mere act of God drowning babies.

Subjectivity does not preclude judgment.

It does preclude any judgement based on facts.
 
D

Diogenes

Guest
According to Stiggy, the motivation behind drowning babies was to save them from a fallen world and resurrect them to a better one

That said, if, as you are asserting, the entire human race {minus Noah & co} was drowned {including babies} as a means by which to eliminate corruption, then my question to you is this:

Were there other means available to God by which He could have eliminated corruption or did He have no other choice except to drown the world?


There were likely nearly infinite options available, but, assuming God is a rational agent, God would have chosen the optimum method to achieve the desired results within the parameters that are applicable. There's, at most, around a 36,000 day gap for any sort of missionary work assuming libertarian free will. Assuming Calvinism, God has no moral hesitancy allowing the non-elect to go to Hell, which is worse than merely drowning people.
 

treeplanter

Well-known member
There were likely nearly infinite options available, but, assuming God is a rational agent, God would have chosen the optimum method to achieve the desired results within the parameters that are applicable. There's, at most, around a 36,000 day gap for any sort of missionary work assuming libertarian free will. Assuming Calvinism, God has no moral hesitancy allowing the non-elect to go to Hell, which is worse than merely drowning people.
Rational agent?
There is nothing remotely reasonable or logical in holding an innocent accountable for the actions of the guilty

You said earlier that "At the time of the flood, we see Noah as a righteous man and the rest of the world corrupt (either by original sin or actual sin}"

Surely, you cannot possibly be maintaining that the babies who lived at the time of Noah were corrupt by their actions

No, in your estimation, these babies were corrupt by virtue of having been born with Original Sin
An Original Sin that God, alone, chose for them {and us}
God chose to create each of us automatically tainted by corruption and did so because of the actions of two individuals!

Clearly, God is not a rational agent

Are you really going to suggest that inflicting the needless harm of drowning upon babies who have done nothing wrong except to be born into the state that God selected for them was the "optimum" method to achieve the elimination of the corruption that He, Himself, caused?

C'mon, man - I don't know you, but I know you're better than that!

I don't know what you mean by this?:
"There's, at most, around a 36,000 day gap for any sort of missionary work assuming libertarian free will"

I agree, to create a human being knowing that you will not 'choose' said human being and will then eternally burn and torture said human being on the basis of not having been chosen IS infinitely worse than just drowning a person

However, this does not negate the immorality of creating babies as corrupt from birth and then drowning them for being the way that you made them to be!
 

treeplanter

Well-known member
I can see you being immoral.

What exactly do immoral people bring to table?

Just immorality. Yawn.

And I can also tell you spend lots of time angry at others for what they believe. Who does that but skeptics?

The Christian is always sad for others who only hurt themselves. Even morality training cannot help.
You can see me being immoral?
How so?

You can also tell that I am angry?
Do tell...
 
Top