Would you want to know?

Then you are justifying the lies and deception used by Hovind and his ilk. It protects those with weak faith from losing it when they find out that the Bible is not literaly accurate in its coverage of the creation events.

What I suggested is that to any decent human being anyone who condones the killing of babies is pure evil.I never mentioned objective anything.Would you condone the murder of an innocent child Robin?Brian.

I see that you believe when the Bible says "...all have sinned..." it means everyone literally.
If there is no such thing as an innocent human being then:
1. All the babies who die before they can understand the Gospel are condemned to hell.
2. Crazy people are condemned to hell.
3. Mentally handicapped people are condemned to hell.
4. The babies in Jerico were condemned to hell.
5. The babies who die in the God-ordained tribulations described in Revelations will be condemned to hell.
6. All aborted or miscarried babies are condemned to hell.
7. All persons who did not hear the Gospel before they died are condemned to hell.Perhaps I am not quite understanding all the details, but from what you are saying this god of yours is not very nice or just. That is unless open rejection of His son is required to be sentenced to hell as hinted at in the last line of the quote above.

Excellent point, Robin. Those who condemn God's judgments with such resounding indignation do so from an apparently perfect objective position of lofty moral superiority over God Himself. Yet wait, he won't recognize that he is treating his own personal judgment as objective and perfect.What I suggested is that to any decent human being anyone who condones the killing of babies is pure evil.

Yup, you claim absolute objective moral authority to judge this and then deny that it's objective. Of course not, nobody would.Most particularly not God.But I bet most of those who get so indignant about God's judgment against the Amalekites condone murdering the unborn in the womb.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

God saves whom He saves. I do not know whom all He will save. He may save many babies, many mentally handicapped. It's not for me to judge. Though I see you have no qualms about judging God.

No, I'm not condoning lying about science. But I doubt Hovind has lied although I haven't studied up on the particulars. I showed many months ago that some creationist or other wasn't lying though accused of it but nevertheless those who accused the person were believed.

In reality, it was a silly point.But keep buttering him up, you may save a soul yet.Personally, I don't think the positive reinforcement technique that cults such as yours use will work on Robin.Brian.

Quite apart from whether Robin ever comes to believe or not, I admire his thinking above all others' here. He sees through the fuzzy logic and the moral posturing. He has the best BS detector of anyone here.He saw the implication of what you were saying, that you put your own personal moral judgment above the moral judgments of God shown in the Bible. This implies you believe there is an objective morality and you alone can determine what it is.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Your reading comprehension skills are about as poor as Robin's.I didn't mention anything objective.Whether it is objective or subjective is immaterial, murder is outlawed in all civilised societies.I think even in America your courts condemn murder. I think he can answer for himself. But in your fantasy world God doesnt believe that any baby is innocent because 6000 years ago a woman ate a fruit that passed on knowledge to her In your fantasy world, all babies are rancid with sin, even the little baby Jesus must have been putrid with in.If only a tiny bit of Christianity was believable it wouldn't de so sad.Brian.

Why? That makes no sense at all. The whole message of Jesus life and the whole reason that He became MAN was to teach us just the opposite.We are all born with a great big SAVED on our forehead. Only our own personal behavior can damn us.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I certainly do.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

"This will not do."Logic is logic. You can't have you're own logic. I know we're all waiting for Robin to attack your fuzzy illogical religious logic ... Oh wait.

He must be keeping tight lipped about you then So, why is what God considers evil any less objective that what I consider evil. Of course there is an objective morality! It may be a different morality for everyone but it is definitely objective.It may be subjective, but isn't it strange that so many people agree with my morality?Brian.

I was speaking of morality, not legality. And just because an idea is popular, this does not mean it is true. Christianity is popular too.Whether an idea is subjective or objective is extremely important if you are trying to use that idea as evidence of something, as you were trying to do. If our morals are subjective, based on our feelings, then our moral judgments are evidence of nothing except to show that that is how we feel. If true, they could only be so by a fluke, not as a result of a logical process.Now we can't prove that any action is morally right or wrong. If we judge an action morally, we have done so illogically. Of course it's something we do all the time, but it's still illogical. It's really an emotional matter, this matter of morals.My morals are conventional, based on nothing but my feelings.Our moral judgments prove nothing at all.