ManyShadesofGray
New member
- Jan 28, 2011
- 2
- 0
- 1
This is for those who believe that God is morally perfect, and that all morality flows from God. In the book of Genesis, God wiped out all of humanity except for Noah and his family by sending a great flood. Unless there was a period of at least a decade or more before the flood where God made the human race sterile and unable to reproduce, it is safe to assume that there were families who had babies during this time, especially since such a phenomena is unrecorded anywhere in human history, including in the bible. If you try to claim that there were no babies around during this time period, please provide extra-biblical support for your argument.
Based upon this observation, if the belief that God is morally perfect is valid, does this mean that you can actually think of an instance in which it is morally acceptable to drown babies? If so, why?
Take in to account that the argument that God was justified in drowning babies because they were "sinful" is not valid, as Noah was not without sin. He was only described as "righteous." The only person in the bible who was said to be without sin was Jesus. If sin was not the deciding factor in who lived and who died during the flood, but the babies were still found to be unrighteous, then what acts of unrighteousness could they possibly have committed that would make them worthy of a painful and terrifying death by drowning?
If you cannot think of an instance in which drowning babies is moral, doesn't that mean you must admit that God committed an immoral act, and thus is not morally perfect?
What is the moral justification for drowning babies?
CREDIT: This question was inspired by a telephone conversation I had the other night with the R&S regular dé ƒåç†ø. Thank you as always for being an inspiration buddy
Based upon this observation, if the belief that God is morally perfect is valid, does this mean that you can actually think of an instance in which it is morally acceptable to drown babies? If so, why?
Take in to account that the argument that God was justified in drowning babies because they were "sinful" is not valid, as Noah was not without sin. He was only described as "righteous." The only person in the bible who was said to be without sin was Jesus. If sin was not the deciding factor in who lived and who died during the flood, but the babies were still found to be unrighteous, then what acts of unrighteousness could they possibly have committed that would make them worthy of a painful and terrifying death by drowning?
If you cannot think of an instance in which drowning babies is moral, doesn't that mean you must admit that God committed an immoral act, and thus is not morally perfect?
What is the moral justification for drowning babies?
CREDIT: This question was inspired by a telephone conversation I had the other night with the R&S regular dé ƒåç†ø. Thank you as always for being an inspiration buddy