If Satan is the source of so much evil in the world

Your ignorance and projection prove that you, like Vegas, have no idea about philosophy, physics and Occam's Razor.

Yes they are. But one of them (no conscious creator) doesn't require the unproven assumption of a conscious creator. Therefore, according to Occam's Razor, it becomes the hypothesis to favor.
Occam's Razor does not say that there is no conscious creator; just that the theory that does not have a conscious creator is most likely correct. Therefore, if proponents of a conscious creator wish to convince others of their theory, it's up to them to prove it; and not up to others to prove that there is no creator.

You said that you are under no obligation to prove anything to anyone. That is correct.
And nobody is under any obligation to share your belief.
Or more precisely, nobody who does not live in a theocracy or in Iceland.

No, I want them to question it because bad things happen when people don't think.




Look who's talking. "You want them to question it because you don't like how the story was written." You wrote that, not I. Who the fuck are you to tell people what they think, Mr. Projectionist?





No, there is nothing in the text to suggest that much. What, newborns were evil, too? And that still doesn't explain the animals.



...but that's not the verse that tells us God's motives. That's in verse 6.



Because... They're animals... Who gives a shit?
That's not a reason. If the motive was to kill only the evil people, there'd be no reason to bother with the animals. God was tired of his creation and wanted to start a new savegame. Just like SimCity, you build a city and then grow tired of it. You start a new one with the exact same kind of people, but it's fun because it's new.




Then the others weren't, either.


But everybody else was? Where did Noah's sons get their wives from? What about the wives' families?



I do. You have demonstrated rather conclusively that you don't. If you mean to say that everybody except Noah and his family were tainted, then that is genetically quite impossible unless Noah and his in-laws had zero outside family. And that would make them a different species altogether. "Oh, but they only started the in-breeding after the angels mated with the humans". No. If that were the case, either they would have been the most inbred family in history, which would be quite remarkable, or there were plenty of people with no giant blood.

And let us consider your scenario. Everyone except Noah's Eight had "damaged" DNA. That means the angel/human crossbreeding must have been going on for countless generations. In all that time, God had every opportunity to put a halt to it. Why didn't he? Answer actually found in the Bible: because there came a point when God was tired of his creation and wanted to start over again.

And remember: God himself says that man is inherently wicked - be they pre flood or post flood. The Bible points out that the flood did not purge wickedness. So Noah's descendants had DNA just as "pure" or "damaged" as his contemporaries before the flood.



No, apparently that was not the case. If that were the case, there would have been an easy solution much sooner which did not involve mass murder.



Why did you quote it again, then?



Well, what? Did they or did they not have damaged DNA? If they were allowed to survive, then every single human would have damaged DNA, and so the solution only served to purge non-damaged DNA. Pretty stupid if the reason for the flood was "damaged DNA", wouldn't you say?

Occam's razor applies precisely to the unobserved - never to the observed. If it's observed, then it's settled. One applies Occam's razor to purported answers to the same question, where the answers either has no evidence in their favour, or the evidence is equally strong. Otherwise, the answer with the most evidence in its favour wins. So of course Occam's razor can be applied to creation. Not that it needs to, as non-theistic explanations already have evidence in their favour.

Karl Aksel





Take it back a notch, will ya?




I'm the person who is reading your whining about how the story was written.

- "GOD SHOULD HAVE DONE IT DIFFERENTLY!!"

- "You don't like how the story is written."

- "HOW DARE YOU TELL ME EXACTLY WHAT I AM SAYING??!"




Yeah... BUT that IS the verse that says that everybody had turned to evil... which was kinda the point.



There doesn't have to be a reason with the animals... They are animals... They are inconsequential. 
AND.. once again... They were ultimately saved in the story.


That makes no fucking sense whatsoever...  Literally.



They were probably married before the angels started fucking humans.


I mean.. Are you seriously this fucking stupid?



It wouldn't take countless generations.

Hell... According to the story this is when people were living for a few hundred years... not that it's even necessary:

It could have all happened during Noah's lifetime:  Angels bang humans, give birth to hybrids.. Hybrids start banging humans... That's 2 generations It could have all happened in 30 to 50 years time.

Meanwhile, Noah and his family stayed out of the shit.

It's not that big of a deal.



Says you, stupid.

- "THE STORY SHOULD BE DIFFERENT!!"



Because I did.... What? You gonna cry about that, too?


- "THE POST SHOULD BE DIFFERENT!!"






They didn't... How the fuck are you this stupid?




 

You want some logic? Here's some logic.

Believing in God cost you nothing. But not believing in Him could cost you everything.

Now, what's the logical choice? Why take a chance? Is it really worth losing everything just based on stubborn insistence of "But there's no proof"?

PASCAL'S WAGER??!!!





YOU HAVE JUST UNLEASHED HELL!!!

This.

Ha ha ha . . I guess I should have formatted it like this;

Believing in God cost you nothing. But not believing in God COULD COST YOU EVERYTHING !!!

Ha ha ha !!!