Hi, Open MInd.
Open MInd writes:
Granny Magda writes:
If God desired to end the evil of mankind, he could just have zap-poofed them out of existence, without the need for all this ostentatious flood nonsense.
I have already explained why G-d did not want to do this.
This is a dodge. You are just objecting to Granny’s use of the word “desired,” and haven’t answered the question at all. Try inserting the word “intended” in place of “desired,” and you’ll see that the central thesis of the question is not harmed in any way.
So, why did God use a Flood to kill all the people when He could have just zap-poofed them out of existence? That’s the whole point of this thread, after all.
OM writes:
OM writes:
The Torah testifies that the animals were not mating in the normal manner, and even they were engaging in sexual pleasures without the will to have children.
Now your well thought out response.
Granny Magda writes:
Where exactly does it say this?
I have already said that the Torah testifies to this. It says that all flesh had corrupted their ways on the earth. Why not read the Torah before asking me?
Okay, so this isn’t very on-topic, but I can’t just let it slide, because I find it very offensive.
"Where does it say this?" is, in fact, a very well thought-out question. It’s probably the most common question you’ll ever encounter in logical debates. This is because, if a debate does not require its participants to support their arguments, then the participants could literally say whatever they want to. Demanding support for an argument is the often the only way you to find out if it's true.
Granny wants you to provide a citation from the scriptures: what problem could you possibly have with that?
Maybe you have a problem with it because you have been caught in a complete lie: the Torah does
not say anything about changes to animals' mating practices before the Flood in response to the wickedness of mankind, nor does it say anything about animals' motivations for having sex. What it says is that, "...all flesh had corrupted their ways on the earth" (assuming your quotation is correct: you didn't supply a reference). You have inserted your own interpretation of that phrase, and Granny Magda has called you on it.
Now, instead of admitting that it was a personal interpretation, you have gotten upset at Granny for not taking your word for it. That's not the way to promote honest debate, you know.
-Bluejay
Darwin loves you.