The Extraordinary Contrast is - like most things biblical - Unbelievable.

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 20
Topic's author
#1
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,620
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2


" For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life". John 3:16



 "So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” Genesis 6:7  So then the god of this verse went on to destroy all of the earth and its inhabitants.

How do the apologist square these two contradictory biblical verses? Even to the atheist reading these text as ancient mythology, it would not go unnoticed that these two verses speak of two different gods. Yet the Christians will have it that these beings are one and the same. 

 I suppose if one was to look hard enough we could say, at a push,  that sending your  only son to die an unnecessary death on behalf of others would qualify as a barbaric act and therefor equal  the callous barbarity of the Genesis verse. But that would really be pushing it. As  one appears to be an act of some kind of warped and twisted benevolence and the other a straightforward case of violence murdering millions of innocent men women and children.
 
 
#2
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,209
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@Stephen
And queue ethang. 

No but that's just crazy hey? 

In the second verse you can see God elaborating. 
This is very helpful  of him, because if he didn't.
When he says,   ' I will wipe from the face of the earth all the humans and all the animals.
( if God had stopped the verse there, people would  be all like.) 
why didn't god kill all the birds and all them other things that move along the ground ? 

So God is elaborating, and whilst he is elaborating , I can't help but feel that he wants to use the word serpents / snakes, ( a grey area ) so he reverse elaborates.  Is that a thing?
He refers to them as,  ' All the creatures that move along the ground.     
This then gives him the word " Creatures " to fall back on. 
Very well played indeed.


What I suppose  I can take from this is.  Some clarification. 
When God says ' ALLLLLLLLLLLLLL THE ANIMALS. '   he infact means even the birds and the snakes. 
Oh and all the creatures too.  

It's almost like God knew nothing more then what humans knew back then. 
It is very strange. 




Topic's author
#3
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,620
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
' I will wipe from the face of the earth all the humans and all the animals.

But then we are told - " " For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life". John 3:16

#4
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Stephen
Whats the issue? God regretted that he made them after the fall
Topic's author
#5
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,620
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Dr.Franklin
But "he so  loved us and the world". give me a break!
#6
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Stephen
he did and he knew the consequences if we wasted it
Topic's author
#7
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,620
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Dr.Franklin
..................if we wasted it



Oh stop with your contradictory nonsense. 

The sons of god came down and raped the daughters of men and then he punished mankind for the sinful and taboo deed committed my his own offspring.. This is no different to Muslims who stone a rape VICTIM to death.

One minute this god is telling us that he has had his fill of HIS creation and so murders everything alive and the next they are telling us how much he loves us and wants to have "everlasting life". There is not a single mention or thought given to the millions of innocents that were slaughtered. Humans were ten a penny to this psychopathic clown and you just want to pretend everything was ok. 

#8
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Stephen
wrong
#9
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
"So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” Genesis 6:7 

a straightforward case of violence murdering millions of innocent men women and children.
It is always careless to pick a verse out of scripture, and out of context, as done above, and then make a claim as Stephen did that these were innocent lives lost. In context, in verse 5, we find the rebuttal to Stephen's claim of innocence: "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." [Genesis 6: 5] In what interpretation of verse 5 declares that these people were innocent? The Bible, both Old and New Testaments, is replete with caution that the continued conduct of wickedness results in destruction. Of course, one would need to read and carefully study, always, what is being written, and to not pick and choose as if this were a cafeteria menu, as Stephen is wont to do. Until he decides to do a proper job of research, his questions will be fruitless to answer.

The sons of god came down and raped the daughters of men
Verse 2 says the sons of God married the daughters of men. Rape is not mentioned but by your interpretation. Dense.
Topic's author
#10
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,620
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@fauxlaw
Verse 2 says the sons of God married the daughters of men. Rape is not mentioned but by your interpretation. Dense.
 Oh  yes, I am sure that these innocent illiterate daughters of mere humans freely went with these gods sons.  It was taboo for the sons of god to lay with humans; they defiled themselves. They were forced to marry these daughters because they had defiled themselves, The union/marriage was their  punishment.  
AND I didn't quote a biblical verse as you so densely assumed.  Try reading the book of Enoch or any other extra biblical literature concerning these sons of god and stop pretending that you are well read on these matters when you are clearly not.

And to persistently refer to me as "dense" will not win you an argument.

#11
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
And to persistently refer to me as "dense" will not win you an argument.
Them don't be dense. That is entirely on and up to you. I'm not interested in "winning an argument." That is one more fallacy you cannot seem to escape. I'm interested in the truth, and I don't care who reveals it. Be part of that conversation. Not part of doubt of ancient languages and their understanding. Know more than your mother tongue; expand your understanding of your mother tongue. From antiquity. Longer than your lifetime and mine.
#12
Tyrone_Rexx
Tyrone_Rexx's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3
0
0
0
Tyrone_Rexx's avatar
Tyrone_Rexx
0
0
0
-->
@Stephen
But "he so  loved us and the world". give me a break!
I'm just being the Devil's advocate here but isn't it a human trait that if you can love, you can hate? And, as much as you can love, you can hate to the same degree.

Therefore we are really looking at one God who, like the best of us, loves and hates.
Topic's author
#13
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,620
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@fauxlaw
 I'm interested in the truth,

Presenting your opinions or even a theory as fact is not truth seeking. 


Know more than your mother tongue;

You certainly make a lot of assumptions about people you don't even know, don't you?  You should take your own advice on that score. You claim to be familiar with ancient languages yet cannot grasp even basic English. You say I say things that I haven't even said and then attempt to wrap an ARGUMENT around a false premise of your making. You are a deceitful. 
#14
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
When you become parent you will understand loving and regretting having children. Love outweighs regret though.
Topic's author
#15
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,620
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tyrone_Rexx
Therefore we are really looking at one God who, like the best of us, loves and hates.

The Christian will have us all believe that they are indeed one and the same god. 

But the biblical evidence seems to show the contrary:

" For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life". John 3:16

 "So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” Genesis 6:7


#16
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Stephen
Oh  yes, I am sure that these innocent illiterate daughters of mere humans freely went with these gods sons.
That is a quote from your #10. Not what I said; it's all yours. Yes, what YOU said. Get it? Innocent, illiterate daughrers? You're willing to pass out exoneration like candy. Your statement reeks of ignorance of young women of the same ilk as thousands of years ago. Take one poster child of poundmetoo. She said, of Weinstein, effectively, in trial against him, "He told me to take my clothes off, so I did. Is that what your "innocents" of yesteryear were? https://www.vulture.com/2020/01/jessica-mann-harvey-weinstein-trial-testimony.html. Some women, and men, too, are just born victims, and even work on it. You would know that by reading and study. Tell me how many times you've read the Old Testament, word for word. Even once? Or is it your cafeteria? Sorry to be patronizing

Topic's author
#17
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,620
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@fauxlaw

@Stephen wrote; Oh  yes, I am sure that these innocent illiterate daughters of mere humans freely went with these gods sons.
That is a quote from your #10. Not what I said; it's all yours.

That's correct. I wrote that.  I didn't say you said that, have I ? 



Yes, what YOU said. Get it? Innocent, illiterate daughrers?

Yes I said that too.  I should have also added  - corrupted and defiled by the son's of god who had broken a serious heavenly taboo by copulating with these female human children.


But non of this squares these two verses concerning your gods contradictory behavior, which  happens to be the actual theme of this thread.

Here have a go. I would be interested to see how you make these one and the same being.



" For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life". John 3:16



 "So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” Genesis 6:7  So then the god of this verse went on to destroy all of the earth and its inhabitants.







#18
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Stephen
Points you continue to make, ad nauseam. Something new?
Topic's author
#19
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,620
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@fauxlaw
Points you continue to make, ad nauseam. Something new?


And points that you continue to avoid.  But I don't expect that you would want to tie your fluffy god Jesus to that old ancient god of the Hebrews if it can be avoided.
#20
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Stephen
You don't even know what you're spot on. Ignroance is a beautifully useless thing, isn't it?