> Like much of Christian thought, this is lazy to the extreme.
> But it nonetheless fits this idiotic definition.
Your personal bias is showing, to the point of going against the site guidelines; both 'When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."' and, y'know, literal religious flame warring.
Also, you're either wrong or at least not correct;
> Is ice cream that has thawed evil? No, rather obviously.
You are of course welcome to argue that it's not, but yes, there are Christians who would/do make this exact argument; they might not claim that ice cream has the capacity to be willfully evil, but they would absolutely argue that ice cream melting is Wrong and a symptom of a Fallen world (in the sense of "fallen creation"), and that in a Good world ice cream would not melt.
> But it nonetheless fits this idiotic definition.
Your personal bias is showing, to the point of going against the site guidelines; both 'When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."' and, y'know, literal religious flame warring.
Also, you're either wrong or at least not correct;
> Is ice cream that has thawed evil? No, rather obviously.
You are of course welcome to argue that it's not, but yes, there are Christians who would/do make this exact argument; they might not claim that ice cream has the capacity to be willfully evil, but they would absolutely argue that ice cream melting is Wrong and a symptom of a Fallen world (in the sense of "fallen creation"), and that in a Good world ice cream would not melt.