Reyginus: Lol. Let me join you in this game. Here is the question again.

Is 'why did God command genocide?' and 'what is God's intent for commanding genocide?' the same thing?


Lolol. As usual, we are back to 'running from the argument'. But I won't dumb too low as you would like me to.

Lol. Please do the honorable thing and reply accordingly.
I know your aim now is to engage me in childish exchange of words to help you escape from the pit you've seen from afar. If not, be a man and stop acting like logicboy.

Repetition.

Irrelevant.

Irrelevant.

Irrelevant.

Irrelevant to the discussion.

Still acting like logicboy. Irrelevant.

Lol.

Do you really know what it means to be a truth seeker?

Since you think the whole discussion is irrelevant, I see no point in continuing this with you.

I started by pointing out several evil actions your God did. You decided that it was too much for you to handle so you split them up. I presented you with three passages and you were only able to address one of them. Ignoring more than 90% of my argument. I then proceeded to press you on whether the actions were moral or not. You couldn't answer. Instead, you began introducing irrelevancies like asking me whether I believed the Bible and bringing up irrelevant analogies.

I then went on to ask you direct questions about the morality of the actions and you're whining about intent. If you felt intent was so important, you could have discovered the intent for yourself and used that to answer the question rather than asking me since I don't care about the intent for the actions I listed.

Basically, these were the three questions that destroyed your attempts

[size=16pt]
1. Is it moral to command a genocide?
2. Is it right to punish a child for the crimes of the parents?
3. Would it be moral to kill Charles Taylor's 5 month old grand son because Taylor himself commanded genocide?[/size]

If you think there could be good intentions behind these things, you state the good intentions and answer the question. So far, you've presented irrelevant analogies, asked me irrelevant questions and finally tried to dismiss the arguments by crying.

Your attempts have all failed so I'm done with you here. I wonder if anyone else will be willing to take up the challenge.

I knew you would be unable to defend your God as you did. You failed at it while pretending to be an atheist and you've failed even worse as a Christian. Do yourself a favour and learn how to have a discussion about your God without fear.

Good luck to you. You'll need it.

@regyinus

Is God morally bound to do good?

thehomer:

Your morality is based on evil.

Proverbs 20:17 Bread of deceit is sweet to a man; but afterwards his mouth shall be filled with gravel.

thehomer:

Since you think the whole discussion is irrelevant, I see no point in continuing this with you.

I started by pointing out several evil actions your God did. You decided that it was too much for you to handle so you split them up. I presented you with three passages and you were only able to address one of them. Ignoring more than 90% of my argument. I then proceeded to press you on whether the actions were moral or not. You couldn't answer. Instead, you began introducing irrelevancies like asking me whether I believed the Bible and bringing up irrelevant analogies.

I then went on to ask you direct questions about the morality of the actions and you're whining about intent. If you felt intent was so important, you could have discovered the intent for yourself and used that to answer the question rather than asking me since I don't care about the intent for the actions I listed.

Basically, these were the three questions that destroyed your attempts

[size=16pt]
1. Is it moral to command a genocide?
2. Is it right to punish a child for the crimes of the parents?
3. Would it be moral to kill Charles Taylor's 5 month old grand son because Taylor himself commanded genocide?[/size]

If you think there could be good intentions behind these things, you state the good intentions and answer the question. So far, you've presented irrelevant analogies, asked me irrelevant questions and finally tried to dismiss the arguments by crying.

Your attempts have all failed so I'm done with you here. I wonder if anyone else will be willing to take up the challenge.

I knew you would be unable to defend your God as you did. You failed at it while pretending to be an atheist and you've failed even worse as a Christian. Do yourself a favour and learn how to have a discussion about your God without fear.

Good luck to you. You'll need it.

Lol. Good for you. You can rant all you like. Dude now calls it a discussion. How one's words betray him?

But I leant something new. It is that, you should never argue with one who claims to use logic but has allowed the pride of perfection and possibly jealousy to ruin his intelligence.

If this is how you reason then I don't think you can have any meaningful discussion with any reasonable nairalander. I can bet on that. Even logicboy has replaced some of these qualities you possess.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Kay 17: @regyinus

Is God morally bound to do good?

No. God is not bound to do good. His nature makes it impossible for him to do evil.

To be BOUND to do anything is to be under a certain law. And if God really is God, then he cannot be under any law.

€

Reyginus: No. God is not bound to do good. His nature makes it impossible for him to do evil.

To be BOUND to do anything is to be under a certain law. And if God really is God, then he cannot be under any law.

Ok. To be divine is to be beyond morality.

Reyginus: No. God is not bound to do good. His nature makes it impossible for him to do evil.

To be BOUND to do anything is to be under a certain law. And if God really is God, then he cannot be under any law.

Erm, stating he isn't bound to any laws is a ...... law

That is ignoring other issues with statements like these, which you guys seem to revel in, then bizzarely, preen...

Eg how could your skydaddy exist before existence existed? There, a law it must kneel to.

1+1=2... Another one

Reyg, you have never known what rubbish is, as far as I can tell. You vastly overestimate your abilities to reason out these sorts of puzzles, so exactly what are you on about? The questions thehomer asks are really simple, so, can you provide straight answers? When you don't, exactly who do you think you're fooling?

Image123:

Proverbs 20:17 Bread of deceit is sweet to a man; but afterwards his mouth shall be filled with gravel.

NIV:
1 Kings 22:
23 “So now the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The Lord has decreed disaster for you.”

Looks like a bread of deceit is sweet to God too. I guess afterwards, his mouth shall be filled with gravel.

wiegraf:

Erm, stating he isn't bound to any laws is a ...... law

That is ignoring other issues with statements like these, which you guys seem to revel in, then bizzarely, preen...

Please come in, I don't know what the above is talking about

wiegraf:

Eg how could your skydaddy exist before existence existed? There, a law it must kneel to.

On a serious note, I don't understand this example too.

wiegraf:

1+1=2... Another one
Reyg, you have never known what rubbish is, as far as I can tell. You vastly overestimate your abilities to reason out these sorts of puzzles, so exactly what are you on about?

Lol. How this dude talks.

wiegraf:

The questions thehomer asks are really simple, so, can you provide straight answers? When you don't, exactly who do you think you're fooling?

I think if you are really unbiased in your observation you would have noticed that I was really in for a good argument with him before he got stuck.

If you only you can continue where he stopped, by simply admitting that the answer he expected for why God commanded genocide is wrong, and apologize, go ahead to define the intent and effect of Charles Taylor's action on his great-grand-children, then you can take it from there.

Reyginus: Please come in, I don't know what the above is talking about

Your nonsense, obviously....

Reyginus:
On a serious note, I don't understand this example too.

It's quite clear. You say god is not bound to any laws, well, the bolded is a law.

Reyginus: Lol. How this dude talks.

Bad reyg, don't ignore. 1+1=2, do show how god??!! Is above this mathematical truth

Reyginus:
I think if you are really unbiased in your observation you would have noticed that I was really in for a good argument with him before he got stuck.

I claim to be unbiased, where? This your doe eyed holier than thou, I've addressed it how many times now? Go back to the satanist thread, where you were once again monumentally lost, to see how it works.

Reyginus:
If you only you can continue where he stopped, by simply admitting that the answer he expected for why God commanded genocide is wrong, and apologize, go ahead to define the intent and effect of Charles Taylor's action on his great-grand-children, then you can take it from there.

Erm, you seem to have already come to a conclusion. So what exactly do you want to discuss? What do you want me to apologize for, not doing the same drugs you do?

What do charles taylors intents have to do with anything? Are his kids not 'free willed' according to your folklore? So, how are they responsible, or held accountable, for grand pa charles' sins? And if free will doesn't exist, how is anyone responsible for anything??

wiegraf:

Your nonsense, obviously....


It's quite clear. You say god is not bound to any laws, well, the bolded is a law.

To be bound to laws is different from to be bound by laws.

He is bound to laws in the sense that there is something He will not do, but if He is bound by it it means that his existence depends on how He responds to certain laws outside him. Kay asked if He is bound by it and I responded without changing the question. Your last sentence is different from my position.

wiegraf:


Bad reyg, don't ignore. 1+1=2, do show how god??!! Is above this mathematical truth

But 1+1=2, does not exist in the first place. So, how can God be above something that doesn't exist?

wiegraf:

I claim to be unbiased, where? This your doe eyed holier than thou, I've addressed it how many times now? Go back to the satanist thread, where you were once again monumentally lost, to see how it works.

The satanist thread?

wiegraf:

Erm, you seem to have already come to a conclusion. So what exactly do you want to discuss? What do you want me to apologize for, not doing the same drugs you do?

Lol. Smh. I think if you seriously want to employ my argument with thehomer you should be willing and able to overcome the problems that stagnated it.

wiegraf:

What do charles taylors intents have to do with anything? Are his kids not 'free willed' according to your folklore? So, how are they responsible, or held accountable, for grand pa charles' sins? And if free will doesn't exist, how is anyone responsible for anything??

Are you willing to continue from where he stopped?

thehomer:



Looks like a bread of deceit is sweet to God too. I guess afterwards, his mouth shall be filled with gravel.

God is not a man, duh. You are, re-read the verse more attentively this time.

Image123:

God is not a man, duh. You are, re-read the verse more attentively this time.

God uses deceit and is bound by his words. Except when Image123 doesn't like the implications. You read the verses you want to quote more attentively.

Kay 17: €

Ok. To be divine is to be beyond morality.

to be divine is to be the source and standard of morality. God is the author of law. He chooses to do good. Don't be like wiegraf and use foolish thinking and pretty words to twist ordinary logic.
How does me setting a law in motion according to my nature of good make me subject to the law or the law mightier than I?


And for those who actually think God would punish an innocent person for the sins of his ancestors; be careful.


Individual Responsibility
Exekiel 18:1 The LORD spoke to me 2 and said, “What is this proverb people keep repeating in the land of Israel?
‘The parents ate the sour grapes,
But the children got the sour taste.’ 3 “As surely as I am the living God,” says the Sovereign LORD, “you will not repeat this proverb in Israel any more.

4 The life of every person belongs to me, the life of the parent as well as that of the child. The person who sins is the one who will die.

Twisting scripture to suit pathetic world view.

God punishes sin, but we also reap the natural consequences of sin, our sins also affect others innocent of our sins.

An evil man, immoral, godless, will be punished all the same, but if his child refuses to be evil, God will exalt and bless him. Shame on thehomer for his poor perception and bias.

Please read the whole of exekiel chapter 18 to strengthen your knowledge and correct yourself before talking nonsense.

thehomer:

God uses deceit and is bound by his words. Except when Image123 doesn't like the implications. You read the verses you want to quote more attentively.

?? ??

Joshthefirst:

. . . .

An evil man, immoral, godless, will be punished all the same, but if his child refuses to be evil, God will exalt and bless him. Shame on thehomer for his poor perception and bias.

Please read the whole of exekiel chapter 18 to strengthen your knowledge and correct yourself before talking nonsense.

What have I done again?

Image123:

?? ??

Did I stutter?

thehomer:

Did I stutter?

Would you believe me?

Image123:

Would you believe me?

Would you die for me?

thehomer:

Would you die for me?

might be a waste, i was born in sin. Why not focus on your discussion?

^^^

its nice to see both of you getting along.

Image123:

might be a waste, i was born in sin. Why not focus on your discussion?

I thought we were composing a song or something. I'm focused on the discussion. Would you like to talk about why God did the things listed in my OP?

thehomer:

I thought we were composing a song or something. I'm focused on the discussion. Would you like to talk about why God did the things listed in my OP?

A song? Indeed, lets compose a carol. You don't want to hear me talk i'm certain. BTW, you know some of the answers i'll give already na. Na to bore you remain.

@Josh
getting alonging

Image123:

A song? Indeed, lets compose a carol. You don't want to hear me talk i'm certain. BTW, you know some of the answers i'll give already na. Na to bore you remain.

@Josh
getting alonging

Okay then no point in continuing this. I'll wait for someone else who is ready to explain why God did the things he is said to have done according to the Bible.

thehomer:

Okay then no point in continuing this. I'll wait for someone else who is ready to explain why God did the things he is said to have done according to the Bible.

you never had a point in starting na. Let me prove it to you again. Oya, all those your allegations in the OP, kindly back each one with at least one scripture passage each. After this, i will answer.

Image123:

you never had a point in starting na. Let me prove it to you again. Oya, all those your allegations in the OP, kindly back each one with at least one scripture passage each. After this, i will answer.

Rubbish. Since you're a Christian, I expected you to have been well informed on your Bible. You tell me the actions you think that God didn't perform but I listed. Those are the ones that I'll bother with providing Bible passages. Just realize that it would mean that you're quite ignorant about your Bible.

thehomer:

Rubbish. Since you're a Christian, I expected you to have been well informed on your Bible. You tell me the actions you think that God didn't perform but I listed. Those are the ones that I'll bother with providing Bible passages. Just realize that it would mean that you're quite ignorant about your Bible.

Good luck. i expected that you would be thorough enough to prove your allegations. i am not aware of God committing any crime. If you think He did, prove it or be silent.

Image123:

Good luck. i expected that you would be thorough enough to prove your allegations. i am not aware of God committing any crime. If you think He did, prove it or be silent.

I expected that you would be knowledgeable about your Bible enough to identify those acts I listed. If you already accept that those acts are crimes, then you've accepted that your God is a criminal. If you don't know where any of the acts I listed are in the Bible, please state it clearly so I can gauge the degree of your ignorance.

thehomer:

I expected that you would be knowledgeable about your Bible enough to identify those acts I listed. If you already accept that those acts are crimes, then you've accepted that your God is a criminal. If you don't know where any of the acts I listed are in the Bible, please state it clearly so I can gauge the degree of your ignorance.

The first thing you listed is genocide and i'm aware genocide is defined as a crime. i search the Bible for that word and i did not find it. You are free to state where God committed that. The ones you provide proof of are the ones i woud bother replying to. So when you show me the where, i will tell you the why. i do not have the time for copy and paste questions. Your knowledge of God remains zero having known you for years. Back up your allegations or be silent and ignored.

Image123:

The first thing you listed is genocide and i'm aware genocide is defined as a crime. i search the Bible for that word and i did not find it. You are free to state where God committed that. The ones you provide proof of are the ones i woud bother replying to. So when you show me the where, i will tell you the why. i do not have the time for copy and paste questions. Your knowledge of God remains zero having known you for years. Back up your allegations or be silent and ignored.

Well, look up the meaning of the word, take a look at the passages I cited here for Reyginus to respond to and formulate your response. If you don't know your Bible enough to know what I was referring to, then you're not qualified to tell me the reasons why since you've already demonstrated your ignorance.

You can:

1. respond to the actions I pointed out that God performed
2. state clearly that you don't know that God performed any of those actions
3. take a hike.

If in your next post, you choose to whine about more passages, I'll take to mean that you don't know that God had performed those actions and that to me is you admitting your ignorance of the Bible and thus making it pointless for me to engage you.

thehomer:

Well, look up the meaning of the word, take a look at the passages I cited here for Reyginus to respond to and formulate your response. If you don't know your Bible enough to know what I was referring to, then you're not qualified to tell me the reasons why since you've already demonstrated your ignorance.

You can:

1. respond to the actions I pointed out that God performed
2. state clearly that you don't know that God performed any of those actions
3. take a hike.

If in your next post, you choose to whine about more passages, I'll take to mean that you don't know that God had performed those actions and that to me is you admitting your ignorance of the Bible and thus making it pointless for me to engage you.

Thank you for 'pointing out' as requested. From the passages you pointed out, i did not see any case of genocide. What i saw was judgement. If you want to ask why God judged those people, i'll answer. But if you re asking about the crime of genocide, i see/saw no such thing.
Next?

Image123:

Thank you for 'pointing out' as requested. From the passages you pointed out, i did not see any case of genocide. What i saw was judgement. If you want to ask why God judged those people, i'll answer. But if you re asking about the crime of genocide, i see/saw no such thing.
Next?

Sorry you're too ignorant to discuss God's actions as written in the Bible with me. Good bye.