Saturday, May 24, 2008

Does my "punishment or prevention?" post justify the alleged flood?

     From someone's comment on another blog: "Also, I read on your blog under your 'punishment or prevention' post and I thought it was very interesting that you were arguing against God from the other side of this issue. If the world is full of very, very wicked (free-willed) people is God evil for removing them or evil for letting them live and reproduce? You can’t have it both ways."
     Let's leave aside the fact that I think the flood was fictional. We have only this god's word that the people were wicked. It seems far more plausible that it was the god in question who was wicked. What was the wickedness that he had to kill people to prevent? (Even in trying to prevent a murder, killing the murderer should be a last resort.) The bible is remarkably silent on this.
     It gets worse. The "new testament" refers back to the flood when talking about the last days. It speaks of how people were marrying and "giving in marriage." I see no wickedness there. As near as I can determine the only "wickedness" the biblical god claims on the part of the people is failing to kiss his great behind.

No comments: