An invitation to Old Guy on the subject of Noah's Flood.

[Hollie]

Sir, you make marrige sound like something man invented. And if he did, why did it take thousands of years to reach this point, if only man made it up? And you wish to reduce God to the level of man.

Marriage and God are things man invented. For most of the history of Homo Sapiens, they didnt exist. And we were better off for them.

In case I didn't make myself clear, Noah's flood is a myth. I was only treating it as if it were true to spur the discussion of why a God that drowns babies because he "regretted making them*" is worthy of anyone's worship.

(*actual bible quote)

Opinions yours, not everyone has the same,there is much evidence of a great flood,archeologist ,believe they have possibly found parts of the arc,is any of it concrete proof? no but certainly there is non for the other side of the question ether.

Jesus walked this earth,the Romans have written records,the Hebrews have written records,the Muslims have written records of his life.

what do you think the mathematical probabilities of the conditions for life to spontaneously form,same conditions for it to survive,then figure out how to reproduce,and diversifies itself. those are some really big numbers.

Sorry, but to reiterate, the “global (biblical) flood” has been thoroughly debunked.

Interestingly, the biblical flood tale is one of many tales copied, embellished, re-told and embellished some more.
Here: (Flood Stories from Around the World), you can find a flood tale for any occasion.


There are numerous and insurmountable problems with the biblical flood. Here: you can read of those. (Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition)


Your comment regarding the “mathematical probabilities of the conditions for life to spontaneously form”, is boilerplate creationist agenda.

In all discussions of "chance", one must remember that the question of whether or not a given product of any process arose by chance or by intent only becomes significant if it can be shown that the product was the goal of that process, and not merely a result of the process.

It is not necessary for scientists to prove that designer gods are not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer. You are trying to shift the burden of proof. Religious advocates are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims. Scientists do not "take it on faith" that the natural answers are there... that is all they have evidence of. And those answers do very well. The laws of nature must act some way... they happen to act as they do. So what? Do you have any evidence that they could act any other way?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Sir, you make marrige sound like something man invented. And if he did, why did it take thousands of years to reach this point, if only man made it up? And you wish to reduce God to the level of man.

Marriage and God are things man invented. For most of the history of Homo Sapiens, they didnt exist. And we were better off for them.

In case I didn't make myself clear, Noah's flood is a myth. I was only treating it as if it were true to spur the discussion of why a God that drowns babies because he "regretted making them*" is worthy of anyone's worship.

(*actual bible quote)

There is plenty of proof that the Flood and Noah were very real. And without GOD, there is no logical reason man or anything exists at all. And there is no reaon for your velues, opinons, or beliefs. God is worthy because He is perfect and wonderful, and yet puts up with people pursuading others to turn away from Him, for the very sake of His elect. Just as God saved Zoar for the sake of Lot.

In which case would you please provide said "proof that the Flood and Noah were very real"?

 

[Derideo_Te]

One more time, how can a God who drowns babies be considered "Good"? - Question

How can humans assign a moral value to any act of God?

How can humans be expected to worship an immoral God who demands that they act according to some arbitrary moral code such as what animal is "clean" versus "unclean" based upon 2000 year sanitary codes?

 

[westwall]

Marriage and God are things man invented. For most of the history of Homo Sapiens, they didnt exist. And we were better off for them.

In case I didn't make myself clear, Noah's flood is a myth. I was only treating it as if it were true to spur the discussion of why a God that drowns babies because he "regretted making them*" is worthy of anyone's worship.

(*actual bible quote)

There is plenty of proof that the Flood and Noah were very real. And without GOD, there is no logical reason man or anything exists at all. And there is no reaon for your velues, opinons, or beliefs. God is worthy because He is perfect and wonderful, and yet puts up with people pursuading others to turn away from Him, for the very sake of His elect. Just as God saved Zoar for the sake of Lot.

Actually, the biblical flood myth has been thoroughly debunked.

Secondly, gawds are an irrational appeal to fear and ignorance. The natural / rational world owes its existence to fully natural / rational processes that are largely understood.

Actually there is significant evidence of a mass flood that occured around 10,000 BCE. Submarine archaeologists have found settlements along the continental shelves that would have flooded very quickly and that would certainly form the basis for the biblical flood mythos.

Is there a God? Who knows...I certainly don't. However those who choose to believe in him should be free to do so without rancor or hatred from the atheists in our midst.

 

[Derideo_Te]

There is plenty of proof that the Flood and Noah were very real. And without GOD, there is no logical reason man or anything exists at all. And there is no reaon for your velues, opinons, or beliefs. God is worthy because He is perfect and wonderful, and yet puts up with people pursuading others to turn away from Him, for the very sake of His elect. Just as God saved Zoar for the sake of Lot.

Actually, the biblical flood myth has been thoroughly debunked.

Secondly, gawds are an irrational appeal to fear and ignorance. The natural / rational world owes its existence to fully natural / rational processes that are largely understood.

Actually there is significant evidence of a mass flood that occured around 10,000 BCE. Submarine archaeologists have found settlements along the continental shelves that would have flooded very quickly and that would certainly form the basis for the biblical flood mythos.

The flood as described in the bible would have left massive sedimentary layers worldwide. Those don't exist. The flooding you describe is local.

Is there a God? Who knows...I certainly don't. However those who choose to believe in him should be free to do so without rancor or hatred from the atheists in our midst.

That advice goes both ways. Christians need to be tolerant of those who don't share their views. Westboro Baptist is perhaps an extreme example but there are plenty of others who are equally intolerant even if they are not as militant.

 

[Hollie]

There is plenty of proof that the Flood and Noah were very real. And without GOD, there is no logical reason man or anything exists at all. And there is no reaon for your velues, opinons, or beliefs. God is worthy because He is perfect and wonderful, and yet puts up with people pursuading others to turn away from Him, for the very sake of His elect. Just as God saved Zoar for the sake of Lot.

Actually, the biblical flood myth has been thoroughly debunked.

Secondly, gawds are an irrational appeal to fear and ignorance. The natural / rational world owes its existence to fully natural / rational processes that are largely understood.

Actually there is significant evidence of a mass flood that occured around 10,000 BCE. Submarine archaeologists have found settlements along the continental shelves that would have flooded very quickly and that would certainly form the basis for the biblical flood mythos.

Is there a God? Who knows...I certainly don't. However those who choose to believe in him should be free to do so without rancor or hatred from the atheists in our midst.

I could understand that following an Ice Age, there may be evidence of rising sea levels (not a global flood), that displaced coastal enclaves. However, the biblical flood would have occurred around the time of the Mayan civilization. We have no indication that the Maya vanished due to a global flood.

 

[LittleNipper]

Marriage and God are things man invented. For most of the history of Homo Sapiens, they didnt exist. And we were better off for them.

In case I didn't make myself clear, Noah's flood is a myth. I was only treating it as if it were true to spur the discussion of why a God that drowns babies because he "regretted making them*" is worthy of anyone's worship.

(*actual bible quote)

Opinions yours, not everyone has the same,there is much evidence of a great flood,archeologist ,believe they have possibly found parts of the arc,is any of it concrete proof? no but certainly there is non for the other side of the question ether.

Jesus walked this earth,the Romans have written records,the Hebrews have written records,the Muslims have written records of his life.

what do you think the mathematical probabilities of the conditions for life to spontaneously form,same conditions for it to survive,then figure out how to reproduce,and diversifies itself. those are some really big numbers.

Sorry, but to reiterate, the “global (biblical) flood” has been thoroughly debunked.

Interestingly, the biblical flood tale is one of many tales copied, embellished, re-told and embellished some more.
Here: (Flood Stories from Around the World), you can find a flood tale for any occasion.


There are numerous and insurmountable problems with the biblical flood. Here: you can read of those. (Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition)


Your comment regarding the “mathematical probabilities of the conditions for life to spontaneously form”, is boilerplate creationist agenda.

In all discussions of "chance", one must remember that the question of whether or not a given product of any process arose by chance or by intent only becomes significant if it can be shown that the product was the goal of that process, and not merely a result of the process.

It is not necessary for scientists to prove that designer gods are not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer. You are trying to shift the burden of proof. Religious advocates are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims. Scientists do not "take it on faith" that the natural answers are there... that is all they have evidence of. And those answers do very well. The laws of nature must act some way... they happen to act as they do. So what? Do you have any evidence that they could act any other way?

the Bible says that as one blesses the Jews --- one will be blessed. As one curses the Jews --- one is cursed. If this is true, there is a God. If this is not true, there is no God. Random events do not show consistancy. If events are proven to exhibit a pattern, then there is proof of God.

 

[JoeB131]

[

the Bible says that as one blesses the Jews --- one will be blessed. As one curses the Jews --- one is cursed. If this is true, there is a God. If this is not true, there is no God. Random events do not show consistancy. If events are proven to exhibit a pattern, then there is proof of God.

Not really. Frankly, if the Jews are God's chosen people, they got a pretty raw deal..

 

[westwall]

Actually, the biblical flood myth has been thoroughly debunked.

Secondly, gawds are an irrational appeal to fear and ignorance. The natural / rational world owes its existence to fully natural / rational processes that are largely understood.

Actually there is significant evidence of a mass flood that occured around 10,000 BCE. Submarine archaeologists have found settlements along the continental shelves that would have flooded very quickly and that would certainly form the basis for the biblical flood mythos.

The flood as described in the bible would have left massive sedimentary layers worldwide. Those don't exist. The flooding you describe is local.

Is there a God? Who knows...I certainly don't. However those who choose to believe in him should be free to do so without rancor or hatred from the atheists in our midst.

That advice goes both ways. Christians need to be tolerant of those who don't share their views. Westboro Baptist is perhaps an extreme example but there are plenty of others who are equally intolerant even if they are not as militant.

If by local you mean the Black Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and areas like that where mankind congregated...you know along the rivers and sea shores...then yes it was certainly local. Of course the areas described cover hundreds of thousands of square miles so I guess one persons local is another persons continent.

 

[westwall]

Actually, the biblical flood myth has been thoroughly debunked.

Secondly, gawds are an irrational appeal to fear and ignorance. The natural / rational world owes its existence to fully natural / rational processes that are largely understood.

Actually there is significant evidence of a mass flood that occured around 10,000 BCE. Submarine archaeologists have found settlements along the continental shelves that would have flooded very quickly and that would certainly form the basis for the biblical flood mythos.

Is there a God? Who knows...I certainly don't. However those who choose to believe in him should be free to do so without rancor or hatred from the atheists in our midst.

I could understand that following an Ice Age, there may be evidence of rising sea levels (not a global flood), that displaced coastal enclaves. However, the biblical flood would have occurred around the time of the Mayan civilization. We have no indication that the Maya vanished due to a global flood.

Ummmm the Mayan civilisation is fairly recent (1800 BCE for the first groups of farmers, but the classical Maya that everyone knows about, dates from 250-900) in mans history. The Epic of Gilgamesh (which predates the Bible by 1,700 years) mentions the flood and that is no doubt where the Bible got it from.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Opinions yours, not everyone has the same,there is much evidence of a great flood,archeologist ,believe they have possibly found parts of the arc,is any of it concrete proof? no but certainly there is non for the other side of the question ether.

Jesus walked this earth,the Romans have written records,the Hebrews have written records,the Muslims have written records of his life.

what do you think the mathematical probabilities of the conditions for life to spontaneously form,same conditions for it to survive,then figure out how to reproduce,and diversifies itself. those are some really big numbers.

Sorry, but to reiterate, the “global (biblical) flood” has been thoroughly debunked.

Interestingly, the biblical flood tale is one of many tales copied, embellished, re-told and embellished some more.
Here: (Flood Stories from Around the World), you can find a flood tale for any occasion.


There are numerous and insurmountable problems with the biblical flood. Here: you can read of those. (Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition)


Your comment regarding the “mathematical probabilities of the conditions for life to spontaneously form”, is boilerplate creationist agenda.

In all discussions of "chance", one must remember that the question of whether or not a given product of any process arose by chance or by intent only becomes significant if it can be shown that the product was the goal of that process, and not merely a result of the process.

It is not necessary for scientists to prove that designer gods are not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer. You are trying to shift the burden of proof. Religious advocates are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims. Scientists do not "take it on faith" that the natural answers are there... that is all they have evidence of. And those answers do very well. The laws of nature must act some way... they happen to act as they do. So what? Do you have any evidence that they could act any other way?

the Bible says that as one blesses the Jews --- one will be blessed. As one curses the Jews --- one is cursed. If this is true, there is a God. If this is not true, there is no God. Random events do not show consistancy. If events are proven to exhibit a pattern, then there is proof of God.

The bible doesn’t ‘say’ anything, it was written by fallible men, reflecting their fear and ignorance. It’s a collection of myths, legends, and religious dogma.

All the ancient fluvial civilizations had a flood myth, it was the most powerful and destructive force known at the time; consequently the men who wrote the bible used flooding in their own mythology.

 

[LittleNipper]

Actually, the biblical flood myth has been thoroughly debunked.

Secondly, gawds are an irrational appeal to fear and ignorance. The natural / rational world owes its existence to fully natural / rational processes that are largely understood.

Actually there is significant evidence of a mass flood that occured around 10,000 BCE. Submarine archaeologists have found settlements along the continental shelves that would have flooded very quickly and that would certainly form the basis for the biblical flood mythos.

The flood as described in the bible would have left massive sedimentary layers worldwide. Those don't exist. The flooding you describe is local.

Is there a God? Who knows...I certainly don't. However those who choose to believe in him should be free to do so without rancor or hatred from the atheists in our midst.

That advice goes both ways. Christians need to be tolerant of those who don't share their views. Westboro Baptist is perhaps an extreme example but there are plenty of others who are equally intolerant even if they are not as militant.

The Flood, any flood --- does not deposit sediment everywhere. In some areas rock is exposed and other areas end up buried. This is pretty much what is observed world wide.

 

[LittleNipper]

Sorry, but to reiterate, the “global (biblical) flood” has been thoroughly debunked.

Interestingly, the biblical flood tale is one of many tales copied, embellished, re-told and embellished some more.
Here: (Flood Stories from Around the World), you can find a flood tale for any occasion.


There are numerous and insurmountable problems with the biblical flood. Here: you can read of those. (Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition)


Your comment regarding the “mathematical probabilities of the conditions for life to spontaneously form”, is boilerplate creationist agenda.

In all discussions of "chance", one must remember that the question of whether or not a given product of any process arose by chance or by intent only becomes significant if it can be shown that the product was the goal of that process, and not merely a result of the process.

It is not necessary for scientists to prove that designer gods are not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer. You are trying to shift the burden of proof. Religious advocates are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims. Scientists do not "take it on faith" that the natural answers are there... that is all they have evidence of. And those answers do very well. The laws of nature must act some way... they happen to act as they do. So what? Do you have any evidence that they could act any other way?

the Bible says that as one blesses the Jews --- one will be blessed. As one curses the Jews --- one is cursed. If this is true, there is a God. If this is not true, there is no God. Random events do not show consistancy. If events are proven to exhibit a pattern, then there is proof of God.

The bible doesn’t ‘say’ anything, it was written by fallible men, reflecting their fear and ignorance. It’s a collection of myths, legends, and religious dogma.

All the ancient fluvial civilizations had a flood myth, it was the most powerful and destructive force known at the time; consequently the men who wrote the bible used flooding in their own mythology.

The Bible is one complete book and was the product of the mind of God.

 

[Oldguy]

I want to start this off by saying I have no animus towards the poster known as "Oldguy". Sometimes we agree, occassionally we disagree, but I respect him for his thoughtful opinions and the articulate way he expresses them.

That said, without going through the process of a "Bull Ring Call out", I would invite him or others to comment on the following subject- Noah's flood.

I've discussed in the past how a Nun from my childhood had rationalized the near genocide (as described in the bible) of the human race- including babies- by the "wickedness" of humanity.

I think this diminished Christianity as a moral philosophy. Surely an omnipotent God could have found another solution to the flaws of humanity that didn't involve genocide or infanticide.

So I will offer the floor to OldGuy to opine on this issue as much or as little as he sees fit.

- Joe B.

I'm sorry. I just now found this thread.

Right now, I don't have time to develop my thoughts, so bear with me. I'll be back as soon as I can.

 

[Hollie]

the Bible says that as one blesses the Jews --- one will be blessed. As one curses the Jews --- one is cursed. If this is true, there is a God. If this is not true, there is no God. Random events do not show consistancy. If events are proven to exhibit a pattern, then there is proof of God.

The bible doesn’t ‘say’ anything, it was written by fallible men, reflecting their fear and ignorance. It’s a collection of myths, legends, and religious dogma.

All the ancient fluvial civilizations had a flood myth, it was the most powerful and destructive force known at the time; consequently the men who wrote the bible used flooding in their own mythology.

The Bible is one complete book and was the product of the mind of God.

Except we know that to be false.

 

[BreezeWood]

I think this diminished Christianity as a moral philosophy. Surely an omnipotent God could have found another solution to the flaws of humanity that didn't involve genocide or infanticide.

- Joe B.

"I think this diminished Christianity as a moral philosophy".

not because of Noah, but their misunderstanding of JC.

God could have found another solution to the flaws of humanity that didn't involve genocide or infanticide.

Gods commandment is Remission to the Everlasting or Perish -

humanity chose the flaws causing expulsion and is for humanity to resolve the issue.

the choice is for each individual but in fact is for the Species and as with everything in the Garden death and life from one moment to the next is never a certainty ... be thankful.



Surely an omnipotent God could have found another solution to the flaws of humanity that didn't involve genocide or infanticide.

Noah represented the fruition to the Parable of Judgement explicit to Mankind's expulsion from the Everlasting - excluded from the Judea / Christian Bible.

Parable of Judgement: When the last good person or the last evil person on earth dies, God will return to Judge those who are remaining - they or the last to die will be granted Remission to the Everlasting.

Noah represented the last good person on earth who's death would have fulfilled the Parable and Mankind would have ceased to exist (Armageddon: the triumph of evil) - Rather, God prior to Noah's death exacted judgement beforehand on those already destined to death allowing Mankind one last chance. - The Triumph of Good over Evil.

Wow, that's really kind of a lot of nonsense that didn't come anywhere close to answering my question.

One more time, how can a God who drowns babies be considered "Good"?

One more time, how can a God who drowns babies be considered "Good"?

that is not a question related to Noah - which is it ?


generically, Mankind distinguishes its own set of values and in certain instances uses incarceration as well as Capital punishment in extreme cases - involving juveniles at young age that conceivably could extend to babies .... it is only logical for a God, particularly one that is an overseer to exercise the same behavior.


the point of the discussion is why God saw fit to exact punishment on those already that were expelled that did not seek Remittance and the reason for doing so in accordance to Noah.

as stated with Noah's death the last good person on earth would have perished and there was no longer a reason to continue the existence of an abject species. God interceded before Noah's death and gave Mankind a second chance.

to bad, but there are no guarantees to life in the Garden - evil is not tolerated, thank God.

 

[Hollie]

"I think this diminished Christianity as a moral philosophy".

not because of Noah, but their misunderstanding of JC.

God could have found another solution to the flaws of humanity that didn't involve genocide or infanticide.

Gods commandment is Remission to the Everlasting or Perish -

humanity chose the flaws causing expulsion and is for humanity to resolve the issue.

the choice is for each individual but in fact is for the Species and as with everything in the Garden death and life from one moment to the next is never a certainty ... be thankful.



Surely an omnipotent God could have found another solution to the flaws of humanity that didn't involve genocide or infanticide.

Noah represented the fruition to the Parable of Judgement explicit to Mankind's expulsion from the Everlasting - excluded from the Judea / Christian Bible.

Parable of Judgement: When the last good person or the last evil person on earth dies, God will return to Judge those who are remaining - they or the last to die will be granted Remission to the Everlasting.

Noah represented the last good person on earth who's death would have fulfilled the Parable and Mankind would have ceased to exist (Armageddon: the triumph of evil) - Rather, God prior to Noah's death exacted judgement beforehand on those already destined to death allowing Mankind one last chance. - The Triumph of Good over Evil.

Wow, that's really kind of a lot of nonsense that didn't come anywhere close to answering my question.

One more time, how can a God who drowns babies be considered "Good"?

One more time, how can a God who drowns babies be considered "Good"?

that is not a question related to Noah - which is it ?


generically, Mankind distinguishes its own set of values and in certain instances uses incarceration as well as Capital punishment in extreme cases - involving juveniles at young age that conceivably could extend to babies .... it is only logical for a God, particularly one that is an overseer to exercise the same behavior.


the point of the discussion is why God saw fit to exact punishment on those already that were expelled that did not seek Remittance and the reason for doing so in accordance to Noah.

as stated with Noah's death the last good person on earth would have perished and there was no longer a reason to continue the existence of an abject species. God interceded before Noah's death and gave Mankind a second chance.

to bad, but there are no guarantees to life in the Garden - evil is not tolerated, thank God.

There’s certainly reason to question the moral compass and ethical foundation of a god of “love and justice” who drowns the world, sends plagues, brings down civilizations, he allows maniacal generals to slay thousands upon his command. He will allow vials of death and disease and chaos and mayhem to reign supreme, and he will let you go to hell for all time for not "choosing correctly".

Well yeah, there’s a critical flaw in your reasoning there somewhere.

First, let me make an assumption that we are in agreement that god(s) have no attributes other than those that most theists apply to “him” (note, even the masculine phrasing), after acknowledging that he/her is beyond human comprehension. So how does a mere mortal apply these various attributes of a “loving”, “vengeful”, “just”, ect., etc., god(s) to the incomprehensible?

I have to acknowledge that attributes such as “Positive, negative, good, and bad”, are creations of man, no doubt about that. However, god being the creator of all ultimately makes him responsible for all. Things are the way they are because the gods want them precisely this way. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc.

If I were "infinitely merciful" there would be no act that could possibly circumvent my infinite mercy. The comparisons to humans don’t ever work, even as an illustration, because theists insist on a perfect and ultimate and unlimited god. Infinite love and mercy should be what it is-- infinite love and mercy. Eternal damnation is a contradiction to those attributes, and there is no way to reconcile a god who establishes amorality as morality.

Speaking of amorality as morality, how do you reconcile a god(s) who will wipe humanity (including little Johnny and Jane), from the planet because they were a disappointment to him and then leave only Noah and his immediate family to repopulate the planet.

Those inter-familial relationships (hint: breeding), are just a little… ummm… creepy.

 

[LittleNipper]

The bible doesn’t ‘say’ anything, it was written by fallible men, reflecting their fear and ignorance. It’s a collection of myths, legends, and religious dogma.

All the ancient fluvial civilizations had a flood myth, it was the most powerful and destructive force known at the time; consequently the men who wrote the bible used flooding in their own mythology.

The Bible is one complete book and was the product of the mind of God.

Except we know that to be false.

That is according to your judgment. Just how many times have you read the entire Bible?

 

[LittleNipper]

Wow, that's really kind of a lot of nonsense that didn't come anywhere close to answering my question.

One more time, how can a God who drowns babies be considered "Good"?

One more time, how can a God who drowns babies be considered "Good"?

that is not a question related to Noah - which is it ?


generically, Mankind distinguishes its own set of values and in certain instances uses incarceration as well as Capital punishment in extreme cases - involving juveniles at young age that conceivably could extend to babies .... it is only logical for a God, particularly one that is an overseer to exercise the same behavior.


the point of the discussion is why God saw fit to exact punishment on those already that were expelled that did not seek Remittance and the reason for doing so in accordance to Noah.

as stated with Noah's death the last good person on earth would have perished and there was no longer a reason to continue the existence of an abject species. God interceded before Noah's death and gave Mankind a second chance.

to bad, but there are no guarantees to life in the Garden - evil is not tolerated, thank God.

There’s certainly reason to question the moral compass and ethical foundation of a god of “love and justice” who drowns the world, sends plagues, brings down civilizations, he allows maniacal generals to slay thousands upon his command. He will allow vials of death and disease and chaos and mayhem to reign supreme, and he will let you go to hell for all time for not "choosing correctly".

Well yeah, there’s a critical flaw in your reasoning there somewhere.

First, let me make an assumption that we are in agreement that god(s) have no attributes other than those that most theists apply to “him” (note, even the masculine phrasing), after acknowledging that he/her is beyond human comprehension. So how does a mere mortal apply these various attributes of a “loving”, “vengeful”, “just”, ect., etc., god(s) to the incomprehensible?

I have to acknowledge that attributes such as “Positive, negative, good, and bad”, are creations of man, no doubt about that. However, god being the creator of all ultimately makes him responsible for all. Things are the way they are because the gods want them precisely this way. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc.

If I were "infinitely merciful" there would be no act that could possibly circumvent my infinite mercy. The comparisons to humans don’t ever work, even as an illustration, because theists insist on a perfect and ultimate and unlimited god. Infinite love and mercy should be what it is-- infinite love and mercy. Eternal damnation is a contradiction to those attributes, and there is no way to reconcile a god who establishes amorality as morality.

Speaking of amorality as morality, how do you reconcile a god(s) who will wipe humanity (including little Johnny and Jane), from the planet because they were a disappointment to him and then leave only Noah and his immediate family to repopulate the planet.

Those inter-familial relationships (hint: breeding), are just a little… ummm… creepy.

Have you actually read the Bible or have you merely heard this. The judgement of God was brought against people who sacraficed babies to Baal and had forced sex with anyone who walked into town. You have odd reasons to condem God.

 

[BreezeWood]

Speaking of amorality as morality, how do you reconcile a god(s) who will wipe humanity (including little Johnny and Jane), from the planet because they were a disappointment to him and then leave only Noah and his immediate family to repopulate the planet.

Those inter-familial relationships (hint: breeding), are just a little… ummm… creepy.

Noah and his immediate family to repopulate the planet.


... and his immediate family

is that a translation from the Judea / Christian Bible ? - because if it is the basis of your disapproval, your point is well taken ... of course the survivors were the last remaining Community that God preserved - for their valor against evil.

to bad the new beginning has led to the present day circumstances - however take heart, God stated for the effort there will not again be such an auspicious intervention.

the conclusion will be left uninterrupted: Armageddon: the triumph of evil - or (left out of the Bible and the story of Noah) Amageddon: the triumph of Good.