PastorAIO:


And Cain violated this commandment?

malvisguy212:
he chose evil.

PastorAIO:


The commandment was not to eat. Come on! There is nothing about choosing good or evil. This your dance na wa o!

How about you sit down with a pencil and a piece of paper and you try to work out what it is you are actually saying and what you believe and then come back and post here. I won't rush you. Take as much time as you need.

PastorAIO:


The commandment was not to eat. Come on! There is nothing about choosing good or evil. This your dance na wa o!

How about you sit down with a pencil and a piece of paper and you try to work out what it is you are actually saying and what you believe and then come back and post here. I won't rush you. Take as much time as you need.

RikoduoSennin:


What REALLY are you driving at.....Do you want to know why Cain was punished to be a wanderer? Or you are just looking for faults and who to blame?

IanDiamonds:

Do you believe in God? Make up your mind before I answer you.

RikoduoSennin:



Please Define Murder. Human's kill other humans who break human laws, why should a toy maker be held accountable for destroying few of his own toys?



Interesting, what did he stole?



Hahaha, where and when?



You have two goats in our poultry, a male and a female and its expected that they multiply- how do you propose that will happen.

Tell me, who stipulates incest to be wrong? If God does not exist and humans are product of Nature- why is incest a wrong thing to you or what makes incest a bad thing.




Where is your proof, remember keyword: "Loves"



Please define Genocide.

You have a poutry of sick animals- chicken and rabbid dogs, do you have a right to put them down (kill them) or not. To protect other livestock and persons.



Show me where, because 2 Thess 3:10 "...that if any would not work neither should he eat"



What is magic? Are you admitting his existence since you refer to him doing Magic? Magic done by a living thing I suppose.



Load of crap! Who told you God slept with Mary. For someone who claimed to be a christian Minister you lack knowledge in everything. No wonder these books messed with your mind.

You understand our a paper is faxed from point A to point B, but you don't understand how Jesus became flesh from heaven to earth.



Do you have proof that any of this did not happen? Men like "Chris Angel" have done similiar things today, they are still alive, study them while you can.



Do you have proof that Jesus did not accend to the Heavens or you simply do not believe because you simply can not fathom how that is possible just like cave men can't fathom how a metal can fly for hours without touching the ground.



Do you have any proof that Paul and John did not see a vision of heaven. Remember they both did not visit there in the fresh.



All these sounds like the ranting of some "really" confused.

honourhim:


Ok bro I don't feel bad because we are discussing and I'm the one that asked you to say what you understand about God from what the bible records.

Let me start by answering your view on him from the old testament then when I'm free again I ll comment on what you wrote about the new testament.

Now you judged him outside who he is in the bible as I said before.

Muderer- God is not a muderer because he is the owner of life. He gives and takes as recorded in the bible. Nowhere did he state in the bible that everyone will die same way. Kindly show me if there is.

A thief- he can't be a thief because he created all things and he owns them all.

He cannot be said to reap where he did not sow because he owns all things.

Permits incest- in the first place he was the one who defined incest. If he did not, we all would ve been sleeping around with our sisters without finding it wrong. He is a creator and knows his concept for creation. If his concept was to allow for procreation to go on without any hindrance for sometime before placing bounds is he answerable to any of us?

Let me also ask you this- the sex outside marriage and same-sex thing that he called bad and which the world redefined as good are you still on God's side on this?
And if thhe world wakes up tomorrow and re-defines incest as good would you still accuse God of doing bad?

Commited a lot of destruction- and what if destruction was part of his concept in creation for life as it appears to be?

Did a lot of magic- what do you mean by magic? What the bible said is miracle. May be you can help explain the two to me.

For now I ll stop here because am busy. Will get back. Cheers.

honourhim:


1. There is nothimg in the birth of Jesus that suggests adultery. Your judgement contradicts biblical record. His conception was purely divine. Your believe or unbelief of this does not validate or invalidate this.

2. God did not make his son believe rather his son knows that he is the almighty and that with him all things are possible.

3. Jesus didnt fantasize anything. He walked on water, he turned water into wine, cast out demons, healed the sick, forgave people their sins, raised the dead and did many great things. If this looks impossible in your eyes thats for you. Your opinion doesnt cancel the truth about it.

4. God did not make Jesus believe he can fly to heaven. Jesus ascended to heaven and he is still there and will come back again for us. Again if this appears impossible to you thats for you. It doesnt change the truth about it.

All that you have written are contrary to the biblical account which lands back to what I said earlier on that you people just read the bible, summmarize who you think God is and conclude that that is whom he is. Thats wrong.

Again If God does something that goes contrary to what the bible records he can do that is when you people can say he did something contrary to his attributes in the bible but when his actions fall within what is written about him in the scripture then you have no case against him. He is the Almighty Jehovah, the creator of all things.

If you believe he does not exist it doesnt change anything. Its just your opinion and i dont bother my head about that. My own point is- If you want to judge his person then it has to be in line with what is recorded about him in the scripture and not what you think he should be or he is. What you think doesnt change anything about him. Thanks.

philfearon:

From your write up above,I can only deduce one thing that summarizes all your post,which is:
That God(Yahweh) is the creator of all things,and that he can do whatever he likes with his creation being an All-Knowing creator right? And that we have no right to question His actions right?

philfearon:

Yes,I believe in God!

philfearon:

All your perceived points in the post above seems to be full of affirmations and certainties bro...You seem to have witnessed how the events occurred!!
Why do you so much believe in the Four gospels message?

You may care to read my post again and ask yourself just where you got the above idea from.

sinequanon:
Well, I went to a school where I was the ONLY Black person.

sinequanon:
Talking about a "Sky- daddy" etc. has nothing to do with you avoiding "the glare and stare" of Christians. It is more likely to attract more animosity from Christians. Like most atheists (even if you do not mean to imply your are one, yourself), you seem to be in denial. Psychologically, what you are really doing is talking aloud to yourself as part of your therapy during your transition from Christianity, and you are trying to test your resilience against what Christians can throw at you, by debating the bible and rationalizing it in your new faith of science.

The denial I am talking about, is not denial of god, but denial of your residual attachment to your old faith. Fighting over the bible is your attempt to establish a sense of authority in your new perspective. Most people who leave their religion go through such a phase, and it may take several years.

(And by the way, I don't even believe in "a creator" let alone any religion, so there is no need to aim your "sky-daddy" bravado in my direction to prove to yourself that you can do it. Find a Christian who will react and partake in your therapy.)

sinequanon:
Human psychology is an excellent thing to study. You may find your own psychology particularly fascinating if you can overcome the denial.

sinequanon:
I am not sure what the order of events is. You were always inquisitive, but you didn't "explore" such questions while you were a Christian? Then at some point you "explored" them? How? You mean you read about them! Did you believe, just as you believed the bible?

Anyway, this is the vacuum I was talking about. It is no coincidence that science has provided you with the comfort needed to deal with the vacuum -- the questions about who your are and "where you came from".

RikoduoSennin:

What REALLY are you driving at.....Do you want to know why Cain was punished to be a wanderer? Or you are just looking for faults and who to blame?

malvisguy212:
what he was trying to say is this;as long as the law is not giving yet,cain are not to blame for his action because he don't know the law. But the knowledge of good and evil is being understood, he can differentiate between good and bad infect,when cain killed abel,his conscience judge him.

PastorAIO:


Thank you very mush. I was about to get unto that. in fact I was going to ask if people before the Law had consciences or not. If they did, then what is the conscience based on, the law? Or something else?

[size=14pt]Personally I believe human beings are essentially moral creatures. Law or no law, we all have an inner moral compass. Those that know me on NL know that I have always mocked all these 'before the law, after the law' arguments.[[/size]/b]

PastorAIO:


[b]My argument is that we all have a moral compass regardless of religion. Religion gives us nothing when it comes to morality.

What do you mean by Sin? I was under the presumption that you would consider violating the Law to be a sin. Therefore in order to sin you would first have to have a law. That is why I'm drawing attention to the fact that Cain was warned about sin long before 'the law'.

IanDiamonds:

Do you believe in YAHWEH the Abrahamic God..?

malvisguy212:
you keep on missing my point,the law was invincible to them but they can differentiate between good and evil.

PastorAIO:


Aw Lawd!! and if this is answered in the affirmative he will still ask: but do you believe in yahweh the abrahamic god that sent his son and rejects muslims and catholics but only has time for IanDiamonds?

PastorAIO:


What you seem to be saying, please correct me if I'm wrong, is that they may not have been conscious of the law but they knew the law unconsciously and that is what helps them distinguish good from evil.

Where I cannot agree with you is where you seem to want to separate awareness of good and evil from The Law. If however you mean that the law is not conscious but informs us on good and evil subconsciously I can agree with that.

PastorAIO:


Aw Lawd!! and if this is answered in the affirmative he will still ask: but do you believe in yahweh the abrahamic god that sent his son and rejects muslims and catholics but only has time for IanDiamonds?

PastorAIO:


What you seem to be saying, please correct me if I'm wrong, is that they may not have been conscious of the law but they knew the law unconsciously and that is what helps them distinguish good from evil.

Where I cannot agree with you is where you seem to want to separate awareness of good and evil from The Law. If however you mean that the law is not conscious but informs us on good and evil subconsciously I can agree with that.

joseph1013:


I see that your reputation precedes you and you wear it proudly like a toga. Nice! I'm not here to debate Obasanjo with you, but since you insist on using that analogy, let me indulge you a lil.

In the link you sent, it's obvious you didnt read it, but simply put it to score a cheap point.. See a statement from it:

[size=14pt]Earlier, counsel to Obasanjo, Realwan Okpanachi, had told the court that the book was published before the order was granted.

He argued that the book had been in circulation since November and the order was made on December 5.[/size]

Again, your analogy is useless.





So like I stated earlier, your link shows that your analogy is useless.
[/color]

A Federal Capital Territory High Court judge, Justice Valentine Ashi, on Wednesday ordered security agents, including the police and operatives of the Department of State Service, to confiscate the latest book of ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo, My Watch. The judge of the FCT Wuse Zone II court said the publication of the book, which was presented to the public on Tuesday in Lagos, contravened the order of the court restraining the publication. Justice Ashi also gave Obasanjo 21 days within which to explain why he should not be punished for flouting the court order. He ordered that the enrolled orders of the court be served on all media houses in the country and be equally served on the defendant by publication in two national daily newspapers. The judge held, “I hold the defendant not only in contempt of the court, but to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt and ordered to undo what he has wrongly done. “The defendant, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, shall be given 21 days, from the day this order is served on him, to show cause, via affidavit, why he should not be punished for contempt committed by publishing and distributing for sale to the public, the book, My Watch, in plain disregard of the pendency of substantive suit and the order of this court made on December 5, 2014 restraining him from doing so. “The defendant, whether by himself, agents, servants, privies or whatever name called, is hereby restrained from further publication or offering for sale or distribution, in any way or manner, the book called My Watch or the like of the visual or written materials which contains a re-publication or statement extracted from the letter referred to by the plaintiff.” The judge had on December 5 restrained Obasanjo from going ahead with the publication pending the determination of the N20bn libel suit instituted against him by a member of the Peoples Democratic Party in Ogun State, Buruji Kashamu. Kashamu’s lawyer, Dr. Alex Iziyon (SAN), had in his ex parte application before the court on December 5, argued that Obasanjo should be restrained from publishing the book since the content related to the subject matter of the libel suit. The content of the book was said to be related to a letter dated December 2, 2013 written by Obasanjo to President Goodluck Jonathan, in which Kashamu was described by the former President as a fugitive wanted for drug offences in the United States of America. Iziyon had argued that since part of the content of the autobiography related to the December 2, 2013 letter, which is the subject matter of the libel suit, it was wrong for Obasanjo to be allowed “to proceed to comment on, write books about or make publications on the issue yet to be decided by the court.” The court had after granting Kashamu’s application and by making the restraining order on December 5, fixed Wednesday for the continuation of the substantive libel suit. But Obasanjo had on Tuesday made public presentation of the book, arguing at the venue of the event that the book had been published before the court was misled into making the orders . He also said the judge ought to be punished for making such order. The court on Wednesday heard Iziyon and Obasanjo’s lawyer, Realwon Okpanach, on the plaintiff’s motion for interlocutory injunction, and motion for order to set aside the earlier interim orders. In his ruling, Justice Ashi held that it was wrong for Obasanjo to have proceeded to publish the book despite the fact that a libel suit, which subject matter formed part of the content of the book, was still pending before the court. The judge said the orders he made on December 5 were still pending. He further held that it was immaterial that the book was published before the interim orders were made. The judge said Obasanjo ought not to have published the book because he was aware of the part-heard libel suit relating to the letter he wrote to President Jonathan, accusing Kashamu of being a fugitive wanted in the USA. “The fact that the book was published in November is irrelevant. As long as the substantive suit is not yet determined, no party is entitled to publish or comment on material facts that are yet to be decided on by the court,” the court held. Justice Ashi also ordered “the Inspector General of Police, the Director General of the Department of State Services and the Comptroller of Customs to recover the published book from all book stands, sales agents, vendors, the sea and airports and deposit them with his court’s registrar pending the determination of the substantive suit.” The judge rejected argument by the defendants that the interim orders were wrongly made as the plaintiff failed to produce the book to show that it actually contained the alleged libellous materials. He held, “What I find difficult to understand is why the defendants went through the pains to depose to the ISBN number and other details about the book, which they said was published since November before the interim order was obtained on December 5, without supplying the court with copies of the book. “This would have served to disprove the claim by the applicant/plaintiff that the book contains a reproduction of the letter, which formed the subject of the libel case before the court. “The fact that the book was published in November, while the substantive case was still pending is contemptuous enough.” The court then adjourned January 13 for further proceedings.

joseph1013:

So like I stated earlier, your link shows that your analogy is useless.

Argghhh...the religionist! Always have a way of rationalizing evil in the defence of their gods! So sins, causatives and punishments are spelt out in the Adamic, Noahic, and Abrahamic covenants like the Mosaic law where each man knows his place and knows what comes after he does what?

Hadeep:

ooman
If i understood the guy very well, i don't think
that is what he is trying to insinuate.
If you everly believe in truth but do not act
according to truth then thats mean you never
believe.
Again if you believe in false but do not act
according to false then thats also mean you
don't believe in it..
because the bible also stated that our action is
what matters.

malvisguy212:
I thought you are serious? What is the meaning of christian? After someone accept jesus,he will be sinless a new creature bible say ''a refining by fire'' thank you for your time.

ooman:


Do I become sinless by work or by faith?

malvisguy212:

FAITH;
faith is believing,in who? In the word of God (jesus)
WORK;
Salvation in christianity is the free gift of God,it is not by our doing(work) ,it is the finishing work of Christ.

Ephesians 2:8-9

8 For by grace you
have been saved through faith. And this is not your
own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of
works, so that no one may boast.

You become sinless through faith in christ.

IanDiamonds:


I had to go through the stress of getting the entire story from Punch
Below is the story from punch; Note the bolded
*Plus you said my reputation preceeds me? Aww!!! That's so sweet *


Source: www.punchng.com/news/court-orders-police-dss-to-seize-obasanjos-book/

Again my analogy stands

joseph1013:


I quoted dailytimes.com where Obasanjo insists it was published before the court injunction, you are now quoting punchng.com.

How'bout you find an analogy that is not controversial. There is not a dearth of such examples. I'm not going anywhere, you can take your time.

ooman:


Good, if am sinless by faith, why should I work by not sinning?
Why not be a criminal? Afterall, I have faith.

joseph1013:
Stay on topic. I probably know more about human psychology more than you do. The length of stay in the religion section of nairaland is not a true judge of knowledge.