even on its own terms, barton's argument doesn't make any sense. in the bible story the great flood wasn't a natural event, it was the product of divine intervention.
@upyernoz It wasn't a natural event--but even then, God smote mankind (and all the other beasts, which I always found terribly unfair!) for pissing Him off, which indicates that if the great flood wasn't "natural", it was man-inspired--at least we did something to bring it on. But as for the usual god-centric denialist obverse of his argument, that God wouldn't allow his creation to be destroyed by us--well, yeah, He would. He seems to stand back and let us wreck ourselves all the time. If Barton suffers from bad science--his theology is worse!
5 comments:
Free market Jesus was subsidized by Exxon, too!
~
even on its own terms, barton's argument doesn't make any sense. in the bible story the great flood wasn't a natural event, it was the product of divine intervention.
@upyernoz It wasn't a natural event--but even then, God smote mankind (and all the other beasts, which I always found terribly unfair!) for pissing Him off, which indicates that if the great flood wasn't "natural", it was man-inspired--at least we did something to bring it on. But as for the usual god-centric denialist obverse of his argument, that God wouldn't allow his creation to be destroyed by us--well, yeah, He would. He seems to stand back and let us wreck ourselves all the time. If Barton suffers from bad science--his theology is worse!
Holy catfish, that one magic book of dubious authorship can counter empirical evidence for anything.
?Bible? There is no mention of Fox News in the Bible either. I guess it is safe to not believe in Fox News.
Post a Comment