Hughes wrote: He didn't just punish all of their offspring, but all of creation. I guess you don't believe there should be consequences to evil actions?
Well evil, like sin, is a religious concept that I don't believe in, but I know what you're asking, and yes, there should be consequences. But does the punishment really fit the crime here? That's what's vastly out of whack here.
It's like the idea that what we do in this short lifetime determines our fate for all of eternity! That's not justice in any sense of the word I know. It's outrageous, to say the absolute least.
I don't see it as childish in the least though, but rather justice.
How is killing everything justice for a single act of disobedience?
So, what is the Bible to you?
Fiction. Poorly written, contradictory fiction with an occasional nugget of wisdom.
Interesting you jump to something like this. Do unicorns have historical evidence?
Historical evidence? Heh... About as much as god does.
Do unicorns make claims to be God?
Well, since unicorns don't exist, it would be difficult for them to make any claims, no?
But let's put this in perspective... I've heard unicorns make claims of being god the exact number of times I've heard god make them.
Having read the book and had a 4 year old boy myself at one time, I don't see what you're claiming in this situation. The boy simply wanted to be better so he could play and eat and have fun. No different than anyone else. To him, it wasn't that big of a deal, he thought everyone had the same experience he had. His parents had to ask him questions to get him to reveal what happened.
And as I mentioned before, I have a feeling the story is way more the fathers than the boy's.
I'm sure it was a fun book to read (I'd likely find it entertaining myself - I like a good ghost story too), but it's just got way too much in the way of contrived and dubious circumstances surrounding it for me to take it seriously.
The big bang for instance. My understand is that the big bang 'singularity' was so unique that our understanding of time and space don't apply. There are different theories or models on the subject, but that's the point. It's all highly speculative.
Well, I'm not a big bang science expert, but my understanding is that, like any other scientific theory, while their may be differences of opinion on the details, there's pretty solid agreement on the big picture.
But let's just say for the sake of argument that it is all just baseless speculation: you don't hear scientists claiming to know the big bang is true, do you? Why is it reasonable to assume scientists should admit "it's all highly speculative" but I can't get you to admit you're really only speculating about the existence of god?