I think the definition provided in the Christian sources I have provided are good. I don’t believe any persons other than human beings actually exist. But if, say, Yoda from Star Wars actually existed I would not hesitate to consider him a person even though he is not human.
What about C-3PO, you ask? Now that’s a tough one.
Hmm. I tend to think of genocide as the attempt to wipe out a group of people based on their religious or cultural identity. If so, then the flood may not qualify.
But there are plenty of examples in the Bible where God does commit genocide, even by that narrower definition, so no biggie.
So all mass extinction events are genocide?
Here’s what Wikipedia says:" Genocide is the intentional action to destroy a people—usually defined as an ethnic, national, racial, or religious group—in whole or in part."
God didn’t destroy the world in a flood to destroy a certain people group. It was a judgment. But I also see all consequences of sin (death, pain, diseases, natural disasters, the end times, and hell as judgments). The flood as a mass extinction event is just one part of all of God’s judgment. If I want to tell God, He is not good because of these judgments, I wouldn’t be a Christian. Instead, I’m grateful He loves me and has saved me from my sin.
You may as well as be asking me how I justify COVID or the bubonic plague or any death.
Oh, well, would you look at that. Look at what is given as definition #3 in THE VERY SOURCE YOU USED TO GET YOUR DEFINITION:
3 Christian Theology
Each of the three modes of being of God, namely the Father, the Son, or the Holy Ghost, who together constitute the Trinity.‘The same idea must be carried further and applied not only to the Logos himself, but to the other persons of the holy Trinity.’
FFS, do you think we’re all idiots here? I’m not sure anyone should take you seriously anymore.
So, I apologize, I was clearly reading a different article that I summarily dismissed, don’t know which one…
However, after reading the article you posted, my stance has not changed. Is God personal, sure. Would I define God as a person, no. The distinction is that something can be personal to me without being a person…like my dog or my car. Being personal does not define something as a person.
Umm. you are acting like you still have any shred of credibility left here. Maybe you should read my previous post, just above yours.
Just did. I’m learning…not stupid.
OK. So you’re saying you made an honest mistake, and just didn’t keep reading the definition to the end?
All right, I’ll buy that.
OK, but you’d have absolutely no curiosity why they were lying to you? You wouldn’t try to determine their motivations for lying to you - especially as a psychiatrist?
Based on your description, you’d also assume someone was playing a trick on you. You do not believe anything improbable can happen. That’s why I keep saying you’re not open-minded.
But those can be easily explained as a hallucination. Is this story as easily explained: twelve people claiming they saw Bigfoot at once (or writing a story that such a thing happened and convincing people that those twelve people existed and also saw Bigfoot), spending money and time trying to convince everyone that Bigfoot is indeed real, or making up a story that you did so, and making people believe that story about convincing everyone was real), and either making up stories of or actually getting jailed or killed for talking about Bigfoot as well.
Yeah, I’m not like most here, I have nothing to prove, I am here to learn. I admittedly have no credibility other than what I know of the Word through revelation. I feel like I have been pretty consistent in stating that. I have no affiliation and no denomination. I am not trying to sell anyone anything, just seeking truth.
Apparently the dictionary sees the triune God as three persons, I’m gonna have to chew on that.
It could also be based on their ethnicity. If we consider “human” as an ethnicity, I think it fits. Still, we could substitute the term “mass murder” if you prefer.
OK.
No, genocide is traditionally limited to killing people. Killing other species is clearly a crime of some sort, but I don’t know if it has a name. Further, mass extinctions aren’t generally attributed to divine action. In fact you don’t even believe that mass extinctions have happened, as the evidence is not compatible with YEC.
Yes he did. “All the people” is a group.
Why can’t a judgment be a genocide too? And really, even if all the adults were deserving of capital punishment, what about all the babies? What about the animals? You’re just making excuses for God’s evil behavior.
So he didn’t love the people he killed in the flood?
Not unless you think God did that. Do you? If so, yes, I would ask you to justify causing the deaths of millions.
Genocide would involve a crime perpetrated by an individual or individuals against something like a people group. You really don’t have an argument here when it comes to God, so you really just need to drop that accusation if for nothing else but to somewhat retain your intelligence.
Why not?
Really? Two reasons immediately come to mind. 1. God is not an individual, 2. there is no fault found in his character. You won’t believe #2 but hopefully you can agree with #1.
Do you refer to the trinity? But according to that idea, he’s both one individual and three.
What does that have to do with whether the Flood is genocide?
We’ve included all the people except 8. Not sure why you’re restating things.
No, not if they were not his children.
Sin caused the deaths of millions and still does. Why do you think I’m a YEC? It’s not because I dislike science. I believe the Bible is clear there is no death before the fall into sin. Otherwise that would make suffering and death arbitrary or natural. It is all the result of sin.
The only God you can understand is an evil one. The only one I can understand is a good God. So I’m not sure why you’re interested in this conversation. I care because it is relevant to your eternal state. Why do you care what I think?
You are blustering again. The request was made that you cease using genocide and God in the same sentence. If you can just follow that directive/request, we may be able to have a conversation. If you cannot, I don’t see how we will really be able to rise above such display of non-intelligence.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to say there.
I thought God loved everyone. You’re saying he doesn’t love sinners?
We don’t really want to go there.
I’m always interested in understanding others’ points of view. Yours is a bit tricky because you obfuscate so much, perhaps unintentionally at least some of the time. Also, I can handle my own eternal state, thank you very much.
So, back to the flood. Do you think all the babies and all the animals sinned and so their deaths were justified? Would God be justified in killing off all the people and animals in the world today?
Genesis 6 calls all flesh corrupt, so that would be the defining characteristic…Noah was not corrupt and “walked with God”.
I don’t think you’re too far off calling it genocide, or even mass murder, but take it a step further and all of creation is a perpetually occurring genocide…can denial of immortality be considered genocide? Stretch time out long enough and all things die, so does that make God evil because He does not allow for immortality. Can we as the creation criticize the creator for making us this way or that?
Isaiah 29:16 - Surely you have things turned around!
Shall the potter be esteemed as the clay;
For shall the thing made say of him who made it,
“He did not make me”?
Or shall the thing formed say of him who formed it,
“He has no understanding”?
We probably could, but that’s a whole separate issue from whether divine genocide is justified. “They all would have died eventually anyway” is hardly justification, but if you are ever on trial for murder, feel free to attempt that defense.