Why Would Noah's Flood Have Been the Best Way for God to Cleanse the Earth?

[nPeace]

I'm actually writing this a second time, because I accidentally deleted it.
So please take time to read it.

Of course it's possible because according to scripture, God's way are supposed to be perfect, therefore, any decision that he makes would always be the best decision or the best way at doing something.

click here: 41 Bible verses about God, Perfection Of (knowing-jesus.com)

Yes, we know that God's way is always best, but that's different to knowing why he chooses a particular action.

But why would God need to give everyone an opportunity when he is supposed to already know people's heart and minds?

Or at least according to these Bible verses:

Hebrews 4:13 ESV - And no creature is hidden from his - Bible Gateway

Acts 1:24 ESV - And they prayed and said, “You, Lord, - Bible Gateway

Isaiah 46:10 ESV - declaring the end from the beginning - Bible Gateway

Psalm 139:4 ESV - Even before a word is on my tongue, - Bible Gateway

God does read hearts. Note. Does read.
Just in case you doubt that...
(Jeremiah 17:10) I, Jehovah, am searching the heart, Examining the innermost thoughts,. . .
(1 Chronicles 28:9) ...Jehovah searches through all hearts, and he discerns every inclination of the thoughts...
(Proverbs 17:3) Jehovah is the examiner of hearts.
(Proverbs 21:2) Jehovah examines the hearts.

So seeing the heart and examining and searching the heart is not something automatic, as though Jehovah cannot help himself from knowing, but it's something he manually does.
In other words, God does not know what a person is on the inside, unless he wants to know, and does so.
Does he want to know what's in our heart? Of course, because he wants to draw honest-hearted ones to himself. (Haggai 2:7)

Does God search the heart every step of one's life? No.
Take the example of Saul. When Jehovah chose him as king, Saul was humble. However, Saul changed - allowing pride to dominate him. (Hope you are familiar with that account)
So hearts can change, and persons can resist wrong inclination of the heart.
God can examine hearts whenever he chooses to. Or, he can just judge from your actions. He does what he pleases. Romans 9:18

So who really hardened Pharaoh's heart... Pharaoh himself, or God? Exodus 8:15
Pharaoh's heart was hardened. God let it remain hard, by not softening it.
He could have, but didn't, because Pharaoh was obstinate.

Because the earth was supposed to no longer have the Nephilim around. See my post #36(hyperlink). Too many quotes to quote it.

After the flood. Not before.
The Nephillim were wiped out by the flood.

David Davidovich said: ↑
So, was that the best and most efficient way for God to suppress the excessive evils around at that time, considering that God's actions caused the earth to have excessive 'evil' weather, extremes at the north and south poles, and deserts that have extreme heat and cold and little water? And not to mention the supposed rearranged continents.


Huh??? How old are you, nPeace? Also, I don't see how your answer is remotely related to my quote that you are replying to.

I'm not a kid. If that's what you are asking.
How old are you? Didn't you understand the example?

I'll simplify it.
There's nothing 'too difficult' for the creator.
God is able to wreak the earth, and make it as good as new... better than it has become.
How is it you did not see the connection to Flash or Superman, dismantling the Brooklyn Bridge, and putting it back together?

Interesting that you should ask me that because you seem to know what Atheists teach quite well. Is that because you were an Atheist?

I don't know what particular Atheists believe, but I get your point.
I just wanted to know if you got your knowledge from association with JWs, because the specific things you know well are usually known only through having a Bible study, and it's not usual for those who just soar the internet, to understand these things. Usually the person is in contact for quite some time.
Do you prefer not to divulge that information? Okay.

David Davidovich said: ↑
Um, okay, but none of that addressed what I said in the part of my quote that you responded to:

That's all that I could think of without becoming repetitive, but by doing something other than a flood, then that would have prevented the horrible weather that we often have on this planet and the extreme cold at the poles and the extreme heat and the lack water in the deserts.​

Okay, the Amazing Kreskin. But any who, are you saying that God caused things to be so bad (including the storms and the deaths and the tragedies, etc.) that it would foster hope in people? And conversely, does that mean that without all the horrors that you seem to be implying that God unleashed upon the world, then people would not put hope in God?

What would you say God caused David?

God did not cause the rebel angel to tempt Eve, and he certainly did not cause Adam to fall, so I don't see how people say God caused chaos.
I understand that God allowed Satan and Adam to live, thus allowing the chaos that he knew would ensue.

So I understand the verse to be saying that God subjected mankind to futility, by allowing mankind to go through all the suffering and calamity that was imminent.

(Romans 8:20) For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but through the one who subjected it, on the basis of hope

On the basis of hope, refers to his "plan of salvation", or his purpose to redeem mankind by means of the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus, bringing them to perfection, and paradise, which Adam lost.
God knew that there would be people who hope in him, even if they were few.

He never causes bad things on people... and especially for them to turn to him.
(James 1:13-15) 13 When under trial, let no one say: “I am being tried by God.” For with evil things God cannot be tried, nor does he himself try anyone. 14 But each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin; in turn sin, when it has been carried out, brings forth death.

LOL How could the Bible be valid, if it copied other flood myths that came before it?

Copied? Who said anything about copied?
If I write an account after you gave yours, does it mean I copied you?
So the NWT is a copy? Which translation was it copied from?

Well, I'm going to be like you were in another thread: Jesus referred to the Noachian flood story because he was a Jew and that is what he was taught and that is all that he knew. (And please don't apply double standards and say in this thread that Jesus existed in heaven as an angel during the Noachian flood, therefore, he knew about it firsthand. )

You are asking me to dismiss this, and this, and this, and... you know, practically everthing the Bible says about Jesus.
To do so, and tell persons I believe what's written in the Bible, would be double standard.

Jesus didn't rely only on what he was told by men.
(John 8:26-27) 26 I have many things to speak concerning you and to pass judgment on. As a matter of fact, the One who sent me is true, and the very things I heard from him I am speaking in the world.” 27 They did not grasp that he was talking to them about the Father.

Hmmm. Well, I'm just wondering why God would even allow an evil-hearted angel to speak through a snake and to deceive Eve in order to plunge the world into all sorts of chaos. But I guess God wasn't paying attention.

You guessed wrong,
When wondering about something, guessing is not the wise course.
Taking a leaf from the Ethiopian Eunuch's book might help.

(Acts 8:30-31) 30 Philip ran alongside and heard him reading aloud Isaiah the prophet, and he said: “Do you actually know what you are reading?” 31 He said: “Really, how could I ever do so unless someone guided me?” So he urged Philip to get on and sit down with him.

I am sure the definition for that is humility. The opposite is pride - the negative kind.
Do you understand why God would even allow an evil-hearted angel to speak through a snake and to deceive Eve in order to plunge the world into all sorts of chaos?

nPeace, if you have time, I would like to invite you to participate in a spin-off thread that I created, which deals more with the issues above. Even though, this thread keeps coming back to the issue of A&E and the Garden of Eden.

click here: Love and Rebellion | Religious Forums

I took a glance at it David, and it looks like another essay... or book. Can you post a more succinct version, and give me a mention?
I'll take a look at it, and respond.

 

[David Davidovich]

I'm actually writing this a second time, because I accidentally deleted it.
So please take time to read it.


Yes, we know that God's way is always best, but that's different to knowing why he chooses a particular action.

So, I guess you didn't understand the thread title: Why Would Noah's Flood Have Been the Best Way for God to Cleanse the Earth or the similarly worded question in my OP: Why would the flood have been the best and the most efficient way for God to have cleansed the earth of the saturated evil that existed at that time?

But work on your reading comprehension, nPeace, because I know that you have any entirely different world view from other people who are not Jehovah's Witnesses, however, it's to the extent where you are not even understanding what other people are saying. Because the above questions show that I never asked "why" he chose a particular action. Also, everyone else who posted in this thread understood the OP question/s. (Although, I don't know about the person who I have on my Ignore list who just aimlessly rambles throughout threads.) Plus, read #post #103(hyperlink), which answers my OP question perfectly. However, I will quote the part of the quote that I want you to see:

If I were omnipotent and smart and I wanted to destroy humans, I'd just snap my fingers and all the humans would disappear. Or if I felt like it, all the humans except Noah and tribe. That way all the animals could stay where they are, and no one would have to invent an embarrassing explanation how eg the capybaras got back to South America without stopping and settling along the way and so being found in all intervening points along its track. Or the kangaroos to Australia, the lemurs to Madagascar.​

Or in other words, it wouldn't have been the best way for God to cleanse the earth. Also, if you still don't understand my OP question(s), then I can't break it down any further for you.

God does read hearts. Note. Does read.
Just in case you doubt that...
(Jeremiah 17:10) I, Jehovah, am searching the heart, Examining the innermost thoughts,. . .
(1 Chronicles 28:9) ...Jehovah searches through all hearts, and he discerns every inclination of the thoughts...
(Proverbs 17:3) Jehovah is the examiner of hearts.
(Proverbs 21:2) Jehovah examines the hearts.

So seeing the heart and examining and searching the heart is not something automatic, as though Jehovah cannot help himself from knowing, but it's something he manually does.
In other words, God does not know what a person is on the inside, unless he wants to know, and does so.

LOL LOL LOL LOL I'm sorry, but I couldn't help myself from laughing after I read what you said. Also, even though Jehovah's Witnesses want Yahweh to be God, at the same time they constrain him into being in "our" own image. However, what I really think the issue is, is that Jehovah's Witnesses and other apologists bend over backward to try to make the more ancient Hebrew scriptures that mention God's prescience compatible with later scriptures that reflect the writers' viewpoints of how God evolved when it comes to his prescience.

Also, what you're saying is in direct contradiction of three of the verses I referenced before:

Hebrews 4:13 ESV - And no creature is hidden from his - Bible Gateway

Isaiah 46:10 ESV - declaring the end from the beginning - Bible Gateway

Psalm 139:4 ESV - Even before a word is on my tongue, - Bible Gateway

I mean, how would anyone get around those three verses? Plus, click on the links below of the almost silly verses in the Hebrew scriptures that depict the writers' perception of God's prescience at that time:

Genesis 3:9 ESV - But the LORD God called to the man and - Bible Gateway

Genesis 11:5 ESV - And the LORD came down to see the city - Bible Gateway

And probably the worst scriptural verses are the next ones because it's basically conveying the idea that Abraham had to haggle with Yahweh about the destruction of Sodam as if Abraham didn't trust or didn't think that Yahweh was going to make a just decision in regard to destroying the people in that city. I mean, it makes no sense:

Genesis 18:22-33 ESV - Abraham Intercedes for Sodom - So the - Bible Gateway

But, anyway, I will continue reading your post.

Does he want to know what's in our heart? Of course, because he wants to draw honest-hearted ones to himself. (Haggai 2:7)

Does God search the heart every step of one's life? No.
Take the example of Saul. When Jehovah chose him as king, Saul was humble. However, Saul changed - allowing pride to dominate him. (Hope you are familiar with that account)
So hearts can change, and persons can resist wrong inclination of the heart.
God can examine hearts whenever he chooses to. Or, he can just judge from your actions. He does what he pleases. Romans 9:18

So what about the supposed prophecy about Judas Iscariot betraying Jesus at Psalm 41:9 NIV - Even my close friend, someone I - Bible Gateway? How did Yahweh know about that if he didn't already know that Judas was going to betray Jesus?

So who really hardened Pharaoh's heart... Pharaoh himself, or God? Exodus 8:15
Pharaoh's heart was hardened. God let it remain hard, by not softening it.
He could have, but didn't, because Pharaoh was obstinate.

How could God have softened the heart of Pharoh if Pharoah's heart was too obstinate to be soften? Therefore, that doesn't even make any sense.

Whew! You are a handful, nPeace. But I will continue.

After the flood. Not before.
The Nephillim were wiped out by the flood.

I was just trying to answer your question about the altered model because the model prior to the flood, the earth was filled with violence and the Nephilim, but after the flood that particular model was altered.

I'm not a kid. If that's what you are asking.
How old are you? Didn't you understand the example?

I'll simplify it.
There's nothing 'too difficult' for the creator.
God is able to wreak the earth, and make it as good as new... better than it has become.
How is it you did not see the connection to Flash or Superman, dismantling the Brooklyn Bridge, and putting it back together?

Because I don't understand why the Flash or Superman would dismantle the Brooklyn bridge in the first place.

I don't know what particular Atheists believe, but I get your point.
I just wanted to know if you got your knowledge from association with JWs, because the specific things you know well are usually known only through having a Bible study, and it's not usual for those who just soar the internet, to understand these things. Usually the person is in contact for quite some time.
Do you prefer not to divulge that information? Okay.

Actually, you're right. You don't know what Atheists believe. But as far as your question about me is concerned, I think that I divulged that information already in one of the other threads.

But I'll have to continue with your reply some other time because your posts are just too long.

 

[rational experiences]

If you tell the story not as data and just a human. You have to be a human. A living human. A conscious human and a natural human.

Not any theist owning a greedy or powermongering human motivated pre want. Like a lot of you are writing as BS on forums. Pre formed ideas.

A human living is first.

Position natural human to be called a man.

So already the man has used two words as named. The human and the man.

As just a human also. Equal as a species on God the planet earth. Inside it's heavens. Could care less what other name you quote you own.

Man human. As you are naturally just a man and a human as quote a scientific self review. The human.

The human.

Now if you choose to start telling stories. Your Choice.

If you claim I'm aware of earths body as products you could change. It is your human man's confession.

What exists naturally before you a human egotist starts theorising ....
O the planet exact. Natural.
The heavens exact. Natural.
The garden nature natural.
Animals natural.
Two types of humans natural.

So you the human and man two name owner say two of every species exists.

As just a man a human man thinking. Two.

Now your thoughts about two aren't God.

As everything first in a story is natural.

Why as a book interpreter you don't seem to read it as the egotists who wrote it.

Might be the very reason why.

 

[David Davidovich]

nPeace, if you have time, I would like to invite you to participate in a spin-off thread that I created, which deals more with the issues above. Even though, this thread keeps coming back to the issue of A&E and the Garden of Eden.

click here: Love and Rebellion | Religious Forums

Bump!

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Adam was perfect.
There is a word called relative. It means not absolute, but "considered in relation or in proportion to something else".

Adam was perfect in the way that God made him - that is, Just right as a human, capable of doing what a human is made for.
After God made Adam and Eve, he said of his work, everything was very good.

We can think of it, this way.
The baker makes a bread, and goes, "Perfect!"

It's perfect for the purpose the baker made it - to be edible, delicious, and aromatic.
The fact that the ingredients the bread is made from will spoil after some time, does not make the bread less perfect.

Similarly, the fact that Adam could make a decision that would be disastrous, does not mean he was not made perfect.

@Fallen Prophet God said his creation was very good. In his view it was perfect, in that it was to his satisfaction. Perfect in a relative sense.
The only one absolutely perfect is Jehovah.
Everything else is perfect only relative to the standard of perfection set for it.

perfect :-

1. having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be.
2. absolute; complete (used for emphasis).

Pretty sure the OP was using the second definition.

And still - the Genesis account said "very good" - not "perfect".

If you want to argue that Adam and Eve were made just as God intended - that they perfected reflected what He had intended them to be - then I cannot argue against that.

Yet - that understanding would support all the claims I have made thus far.

 

[David Davidovich]

Pretty sure the OP was using the second definition.

And still - the Genesis account said "very good" - not "perfect".

If you want to argue that Adam and Eve were made just as God intended - that they perfected reflected what He had intended them to be - then I cannot argue against that.

Yet - that understanding would support all the claims I have made thus far.

No, the OP was saying that very thing all along. However, it seemed like you just wanted to see what you wanted to see and that is why I seemed a bit perturbed with you.

 

[David Davidovich]

Pretty sure the OP was using the second definition.

And still - the Genesis account said "very good" - not "perfect".

If you want to argue that Adam and Eve were made just as God intended - that they perfected reflected what He had intended them to be - then I cannot argue against that.

Yet - that understanding would support all the claims I have made thus far.

Fallen Prophet, I don't think that nPeace is coming back to this thread because I don't think that she liked my
post #402(hyperlink).

 

[David Davidovich]

What would you say God caused David?

God did not cause the rebel angel to tempt Eve, and he certainly did not cause Adam to fall, so I don't see how people say God caused chaos.
I understand that God allowed Satan and Adam to live, thus allowing the chaos that he knew would ensue.

Here is a small fraction of a quote from an article:

thunderstorm, a violent short-lived weather disturbance that is almost always associated with lightning, thunder, dense clouds, heavy rain or hail, and strong gusty winds. Thunderstorms arise when layers of warm, moist air rise in a large, swift updraft to cooler regions of the atmosphere. There the moisture contained in the updraft condenses to form towering cumulonimbus clouds and, eventually, precipitation. Columns of cooled air then sink earthward, striking the ground with strong downdrafts and horizontal winds. At the same time, electrical charges accumulate on cloud particles (water droplets and ice). Lightning discharges occur when the accumulated electric charge becomes sufficiently large. Lightning heats the air it passes through so intensely and quickly that shock waves are produced; these shock waves are heard as claps and rolls of thunder. On occasion, severe thunderstorms are accompanied by swirling vortices of air that become concentrated and powerful enough to form tornadoes.

Therefore, based on the Bible's Noah ark story, thunderstorms and bad weather didn't exist until after God angrily flooded the earth with water. Therefore, I don't know how you can deny that.

here is the link to the article: thunderstorm | Definition, Types, Structure, & Facts | Britannica

So I understand the verse to be saying that God subjected mankind to futility, by allowing mankind to go through all the suffering and calamity that was imminent.

(Romans 8:20) For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but through the one who subjected it, on the basis of hope

On the basis of hope, refers to his "plan of salvation", or his purpose to redeem mankind by means of the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus, bringing them to perfection, and paradise, which Adam lost.
God knew that there would be people who hope in him, even if they were few.

So, God allowed hell to be released upon the earth, or else people wouldn't be able to hope in him? ...Okay, got it!

He never causes bad things on people... and especially for them to turn to him.
(James 1:13-15) 13 When under trial, let no one say: “I am being tried by God.” For with evil things God cannot be tried, nor does he himself try anyone. 14 But each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin; in turn sin, when it has been carried out, brings forth death.

But I guess in the case of Job, it could be said that God kept his hands clean while Satan did all the dirty work, right?

Also, I don't want to go through all the details, but the links to these two article demonstrates that the Bible shows differently concerning God bringing evil to come down on people:

Old Testament Mass Killings - bethinking.org

12 Craziest, Most Awful Things God Did in the Old Testament - Alternet.org

Therefore, I don't understand why James 1:13-15 contradicts other scriptures.

Copied? Who said anything about copied?
If I write an account after you gave yours, does it mean I copied you?
So the NWT is a copy? Which translation was it copied from?

You have so much to learn, grasshopper. But your post is still too long, so I guess I might finish the rest of your post some other time.

 

[rational experiences]

If a human man's theist visionary advice told me. His origin earth science owned returned causes.

He had destroyed all life on earth origins by a machine reactive. Nuclear science.

It came back destroyed by causes cosmic the first dinosaur life. As he had already previously destroyed all human life on earth.

I saw the vision. Described the type of dinosaur I'd never seen. Researched it. It was in the first eradicated dinosaur.

The vision said a scientist man had caused the attack.

Next moment new dinosaur life lived. By science memory visionary also human aware wouldn't you believe you man scientist invented the new dinosaurs?

Memory would infer it falsely.

Then it was also eradicated by huge atmospheric fallout attacks.

Ice and four seasons what earth life had never previously owned now existed. An encoded + cross of causes.

Told that advice. It's not evolution of a man's scientific model. You are not involved whatsoever.

Then you look at next man's nuclear science caused life attacked.

Does a nuclear conversion in nature mess with your mind? Man caused.

Yes.

Noah ark story proves it does. By themed story reviewed. Told by thinking humans.

Yet scientists knew they had actively caused the attack of life.

Today frankly you would have to be a human idiot if you don't agree. It was proven twice. Human Scientists lie.

How many attacks does it take to prove a human scientist who argues he's cosmic controller wrong? The claim as I theme cosmic is where a human man came from.

Lying. It's. Direct taught human lie.

Biological human lives only on earth inside an earths heaven protective iced condition.

 

[David Davidovich]

You are asking me to dismiss this, and this, and this, and... you know, practically everthing the Bible says about Jesus.
To do so, and tell persons I believe what's written in the Bible, would be double standard.

You poor thing. Unfortunately, you totally missed the sarcasm that I was using with you, and there's no way that I can keep digging back into the thread to find what you said beforehand so that I can explain to you the sarcasm that I was using. SMH

You guessed wrong,
When wondering about something, guessing is not the wise course.
Taking a leaf from the Ethiopian Eunuch's book might help.

(Acts 8:30-31) 30 Philip ran alongside and heard him reading aloud Isaiah the prophet, and he said: “Do you actually know what you are reading?” 31 He said: “Really, how could I ever do so unless someone guided me?” So he urged Philip to get on and sit down with him.

HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!! So what does that have to do with what you were responding to, which was:

David Davidovich said: ↑
Hmmm. Well, I'm just wondering why God would even allow an evil-hearted angel to speak through a snake and to deceive Eve in order to plunge the world into all sorts of chaos. But I guess God wasn't paying attention.

But I'm glad that I'm finishing up reading your post because I didn't know that I would get such a good laugh out of it. HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!

I am sure the definition for that is humility. The opposite is pride - the negative kind.
Do you understand why God would even allow an evil-hearted angel to speak through a snake and to deceive Eve in order to plunge the world into all sorts of chaos?

HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!! I have no idea. However, I did start a thread discussing that, however, you seemed to have tucked tail and ran away.

David Davidovich said: ↑
nPeace, if you have time, I would like to invite you to participate in a spin-off thread that I created, which deals more with the issues above. Even though, this thread keeps coming back to the issue of A&E and the Garden of Eden.

click here: Love and Rebellion | Religious Forums

I took a glance at it David, and it looks like another essay... or book. Can you post a more succinct version, and give me a mention?
I'll take a look at it, and respond.

Sure you will. HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!

 

[Fallen Prophet]

No, the OP was saying that very thing all along. However, it seemed like you just wanted to see what you wanted to see and that is why I seemed a bit perturbed with you.

I don't think so.

I think you just realized that your original position is untenable, and you have finally found an easy out.

You often used the term "perfect" to describe both God and His Creations (ways) - you never claimed a different "perfect" for His Creations (ways).

You used this logic to justify the idea that the Flood was the "best" way of cleansing the Earth - or rather - you were using that idea to debunk the idea of the Flood - or rather - you are using the idea that God supposedly used a Flood to argue that He isn't perfect - I'm not sure.

For example - "Well, since it is believed that God is perfect and that all his ways are perfect, then that would dictate that the flood was the best way for God to cleanse the earth at that time." (Post #33)

If God and His ways are "perfect" - then the Flood was "the best" method of cleansing the Earth at that time.

When I asked you - "Where is it claimed that any of God's creations are "perfect"? - in Post #85 - you said in response (Post #112),

"Well, actually there are verses in the Bible that believers view as conveying the idea that God is perfect and so are all his ways.

click here: 41 Bible verses about God, Perfection Of (knowing-jesus.com)"

None of those verses claimed that God's Creations were "perfect" - by the way.

Anyways - you definitely were claiming that God's Creations were "perfect" as He is "perfect" - and you are just trying to squirm out of it.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Fallen Prophet, I don't think that nPeace is coming back to this thread because I don't think that she liked my
post #402(hyperlink).

I also feel no desire to remain - you ask people to share their personal beliefs and then you tell them that they are wrong - without explanation - and then laugh at them.

Reprehensible behavior.

 

[nPeace]

I also feel no desire to remain - you ask people to share their personal beliefs and then you tell them that they are wrong - without explanation - and then laugh at them.

Reprehensible behavior.

Don't be fooled by the show.
You know those superfine apostles Paul contended with. They were trying to prove superiority. People who desire superiority tend to exhibit these kinds of behaviors.

Actually now that you brought it up... in another thread, I said this to David... I'm not looking to convince you. That's why I asked the question, because if you wanted a point of view, and one is given, and everytime one is given, you go, "...but...", it's more than asking for a point of view. Is that true?
It's more like "prove to me..." Or "convince me...". Not true?

You know, even though he claimed he just wanted to hear different viewpoints, he came later and said I haven't proved what I said.

For the record though, the reason I stopped talking to David, has nothing to do with anything he said in this thread.

I didn't even see what he said here, until after I decided to stop speaking to him, after he attacked me for no apparent reason, in the other thread, and I believe that happened after he discovered I'm a JW.

I don't think David likes JWs, and that's the other reason I made a decision to end my conversations with him, because though he does not want to say, I believe he did more than study the Bible with JWs..
Which would explain why he's lashing out at me.

 

[David Davidovich]

I don't think so.

I think you just realized that your original position is untenable, and you have finally found an easy out.

HA-HA-HA-HA-HA! Joke of the day. Thanks, I needed the laugh. Also, I'm going to have to take the Amazing Kreskin crown from nPeace and give it to you now. LOL

You often used the term "perfect" to describe both God and His Creations (ways) - you never claimed a different "perfect" for His Creations (ways).

You used this logic to justify the idea that the Flood was the "best" way of cleansing the Earth - or rather - you were using that idea to debunk the idea of the Flood - or rather - you are using the idea that God supposedly used a Flood to argue that He isn't perfect - I'm not sure.

For example - "Well, since it is believed that God is perfect and that all his ways are perfect, then that would dictate that the flood was the best way for God to cleanse the earth at that time." (Post #33)

If God and His ways are "perfect" - then the Flood was "the best" method of cleansing the Earth at that time.

When I asked you - "Where is it claimed that any of God's creations are "perfect"? - in Post #85 - you said in response (Post #112),

"Well, actually there are verses in the Bible that believers view as conveying the idea that God is perfect and so are all his ways.

click here: 41 Bible verses about God, Perfection Of (knowing-jesus.com)"

None of those verses claimed that God's Creations were "perfect" - by the way.

Anyways - you definitely were claiming that God's Creations were "perfect" as He is "perfect" - and you are just trying to squirm out of it.

Fallen Prophet, your beliefs are so ingrained in your mind, you kept looking at things in a one dimensional way through the prism of you own beliefs. However, I'll have to give nPeace credit for being able to say the same thing that I was saying to you all along, but differently so that it could finally be able to penetrate through to your mind.

 

[David Davidovich]

I also feel no desire to remain - you ask people to share their personal beliefs and then you tell them that they are wrong - without explanation - and then laugh at them.

Reprehensible behavior.

Well, just like I said to YoursTrue, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

[David Davidovich]

Don't be fooled by the show.
You know those superfine apostles Paul contended with. They were trying to prove superiority. People who desire superiority tend to exhibit these kinds of behaviors.

Actually now that you brought it up... in another thread, I said this to David... I'm not looking to convince you. That's why I asked the question, because if you wanted a point of view, and one is given, and everytime one is given, you go, "...but...", it's more than asking for a point of view. Is that true?
It's more like "prove to me..." Or "convince me...". Not true?

You know, even though he claimed he just wanted to hear different viewpoints, he came later and said I haven't proved what I said.

For the record though, the reason I stopped talking to David, has nothing to do with anything he said in this thread.

I didn't even see what he said here, until after I decided to stop speaking to him, after he attacked me for no apparent reason, in the other thread, and I believe that happened after he discovered I'm a JW.

I don't think David likes JWs, and that's the other reason I made a decision to end my conversations with him, because though he does not want to say, I believe he did more than study the Bible with JWs..
Which would explain why he's lashing out at me.

nPeace, you probably won't agree with this, but I think that the problem was with both of us because I didn't really want to go into depth reading your posts and watching your videos, and you didn't really want to go into depth reading my posts and information and watching my videos, because that is a characteristic of Jehovah's Witnesses. And that's because since they already believe that they have the true interpretation of the Bible and the true version of Christianity, it's basically a waste of time listening to others' point of view because Jehovah's Witnesses feel an obligation to preach, teach, and reach other people before Armageddon comes since you all believe that only Jehovah's Witnesses will be saved during Armageddon, Therefore, please don't try to pin this on me because I haven't had any problems talking to anyone else at this forum except for you and Fallen Prophet. And both you cling very tightly to your own interpretation of the Bible where it's difficult to talk to either one of you.

And if you don't agree with that and want to remain with how you feel, then...

 

[idea]

Many Christians make the attribution error.

Rather than help others, seek to understand backgrounds and why people act as they do... it is easier to get rid of problems by imagining they can be washed away in flood, just dunk them in water to fix? Doesn't work.... then, when prayer and faith healing doesn't work, blame the victim for lack of faith.

 

[David Davidovich]

Many Christians make the attribution error.

Rather than help others, seek to understand backgrounds and why people act as they do... it is easier to get rid of problems by imagining they can be washed away in flood, just dunk them in water to fix? Doesn't work.... then, when prayer and faith healing doesn't work, blame the victim for lack of faith.

That was perfect, idea, post.

 

[David Davidovich]

I don't think David likes JWs, and that's the other reason I made a decision to end my conversations with him, because though he does not want to say, I believe he did more than study the Bible with JWs..
Which would explain why he's lashing out at me.

Also, I wanted to say that it's not that I don't like JWs, it's just that I don't like JWs such as you. Because I was getting along just fine with YoursTrue (and I thought that she was a very nice person), but she totally misunderstood that I was actually agreeing with one of her viewpoints in this thread and she decided to leave this thread. Therefore, please don't go spreading false assumptions about me.

 

[David Davidovich]

because though he does not want to say, I believe he did more than study the Bible with JWs..
Which would explain why he's lashing out at me.

I know that you made a decision to end your conversations with me, but what in the world is that supposed to mean? Also, I'm sure that the rest of the forum would like to know also.