thehomer:


Delusion
A false belief that is resistant to confrontation with actual facts.

You are actually deluded when you try to separate those passages from that God. When you think evil is good, you're deluded.

Again , this guy . What is evil and what makes what you see as evil evil

Irrelevant. Isn't the entire Bible inspired by your God? Or are you saying that your God is now schizophrenic? He was terrible in the Old Testament times but invented torture in hell just for us in the New Testament?

He is the same God .

Psalm 9:17

17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

Hell was mentioned in the old testament . Stop lying for void

Anyway this addresses your question

http://www.gotquestions.org/God-different.html

thehomer:


Again, you didn't answer my question. Which line in that wasted post answers this particular question.

Please tell me, do you think a man marrying someone he raped is punishment?

You never said whether or not you thought it was punishment fitting the crime.

Which line or lines answer the follow up questions.

Do you think the person who was raped would be happy living with her rapist? Do you think women living in those times were better off than women today?

Would the victim be happy to remain with the rapist? Were women back then better off than today? These are plain and simple questions that you just find so difficult answering. Please answer what was asked rather than posting a long and irrelevant response to someone else. You declared you had answered them. Please actually answer them.

He has already conceded to the existence of necessary evils.

Kay17:


He has already conceded to the existence of necessary evils.

"Necessary evils" . How did I concede to that . Where in my response to his question did I do that

PastorAIO:
If you can show me how it is pertinent to the OP then I will give you an answer.
Shalom

Abortion - killing of an unborn baby = murder , can lead to death of the woman
Homosexuality - amorous relationship with someone of the same sex - unnatural , disgusting
Prostitution - a business which involves using sex to gain money - demeaning , sexual immorality , a medium for the spread of STDs etc

An excerpt from the OP

if there is no God then everything is permitted.

Since you have the belief my God - the moral law giver - does not exist then you must be a supporter of the above . If yes why ? If no , why ?

**Grabs popcorn and soda ***

KingEbukasBlog:


"Necessary evils" . How did I concede to that . Where in my response to his question did I do that

Your link with which was supposed to assist your explanation.
https://carm.org/bible-difficulties/genesis-deuteronomy/why-were-only-virgins-left-alive-among-midianites

Some may object that the Israelites then married the virgins, the daughters of those whom they had killed and that this would be a horrible thing for the virgins. Perhaps it was a horrible thing for them. But, their lives were spared. Also, in that culture at that time, warfare and plunder was a necessary evil. The reality of taking women as wives was unfortunate but true.

Kay17:


Your link with which was supposed to assist your explanation.
https://carm.org/bible-difficulties/genesis-deuteronomy/why-were-only-virgins-left-alive-among-midianites

Go back in history , people fought wars and took spoils of wars . It was part of what the life then . Nowadays , in this dispensation , such is not obtainable . The writer obviously noted that such is seen as improper now but it was the shii then .

Same way non-virgins and adulterous people were stoned in the past but Christ changed that . Such is not condoned in Christianity and is unacceptable - horrendous , heinous in fact .

So I didn't concede in the first place .

concede
kənˈsiːd/Submit
verb
1.
admit or agree that something is true after first denying or resisting it.

Where was the denial to start with

KingEbukasBlog:


You guys kept denying that God is not the giver of moral laws . Then I constructed the question to know what/who is the source of moral laws for an atheist .

Where did I deny that God is not the giver of moral laws? The thrust of my argument has always been that that which you call god has commanded and authorised many deeds that we, today, find immoral. And that Morality is relative.

I said that Morality is instinctive while people like you often argue that one can only be moral by following your god concept as nasty as it is.

If you are not an atheist - in the general sense - what are you ? Humanist , materialist , agnostic , nihilist etc

What I am is beyond anything that you could comprehend, or fit into any of your categories.

PastorAIO:


Where did I deny that God is not the giver of moral laws? The thrust of my argument has always been that that which you call god has commanded and authorised many deeds that we, today, find immoral. And that Morality is relative.

I said that Morality is instinctive while people like you often argue that one can only be moral by following your god concept as nasty as it is.

I told you that the moral law giver is not subject to his laws . I'll create a thread by God's grace to perfectly explain that - there is now a need for that . I used the Authoritarian-and-their-kids analogy to elucidate . You failed to address it .

KingEbukasBlog:


Let me break it down .

Parents and kids

Authoritarians can give their kids strict laws which they must adhere to .

"No one leaves the house by 8 "

So if the parents should leave the house by 8 then they are not obedient ? Or recalcitrant .

Understand that God is an embodiment of moral good - he gives the laws and is not subject to the laws . His acts are justified

So I ask , is a parent wrong when he leaves his own house by 8 ?

cc : Kay17 , PastorAIO

And when I mean not subject to his laws I mean logically .

What I am is beyond anything that you could comprehend, or fit into any of your categories.

You are a 'free spirit ' right . That's what confused people say when they do not fit into any category .

Ogbeni . Talk to me you are not in my mind to decide what I comprehend or do not

PastorAIO:


Where did I deny that God is not the giver of moral laws? The thrust of my argument has always been that that which you call god has commanded and authorised many deeds that we, today, find immoral. And that Morality is relative.

I said that Morality is instinctive while people like you often argue that one can only be moral by following your god concept as nasty as it is.

For the love of God can you just address my question the way I asked you to . Stop beating around the bush , you are not a cave man . I perceive that you are circumspectly trying to avoid something . Get it out man , be a man ! Thehomer made me address his questions the way he wanted it so why can't you

The OP argues not that 'without God anything is permissible' but the opposite. To wit, it is often due to god that the most heinous acts are made permissible.

I brought the rape case up because there are instances of God permitting rape and even commanding rape in the bible.

If you can show me where God permitted or committed abortion, homosexuality or prostitution then I'll give you might views on the issue.

It shouldn't be too difficult. Let me point you in the general direction. Hosea chapter 9. Hosea chapter 13.

Hosea chapter 1. Menh, just read Hosea shaaaa!!!

And if you think your God is involved in any of these things that you've mentioned then I'll discuss with you what I think of them morally.

KingEbukasBlog:


Abortion - killing of an unborn baby = murder , can lead to death of the woman
Homosexuality - amorous relationship with someone of the same sex - unnatural , disgusting
Prostitution - a business which involves using sex to gain money - demeaning , sexual immorality , a medium for the spread of STDs etc

An excerpt from the OP



Since you have the belief my God - the moral law giver - does not exist then you must be a supporter of the above . If yes why ? If no , why ?

**Grabs popcorn and soda ***

KingEbukasBlog:


I told you that the moral law giver is not subject to his laws . I'll create a thread by God's grace to perfectly explain that - there is now a need for that . I used the Authoritarian-and-their-kids analogy to elucidate . You failed to address it .

What if the law giver sends humans to go and commit his heinous designs for him? That's the style innit? Are the agents of your god culpable in the heinous acts?

You are a 'free spirit ' right . That's what confused people say when they do not fit into any category .

Ogbeni . Talk to me you are not in my mind to decide what I comprehend or do not

I don't know what you mean by free spirit. You even put it in quotation marks. Who are you quoting?

PastorAIO:


I said that Morality is instinctive ...

Morality is not totally instinctive . Assuming that I did not know God , I wouldn't have known some things are actually wrong . I mean why is it that having consensual sex before marriage wrong ?

God - the moral law giver , in his laws indicated clearly that such is wrong . Yes it is consensual sex - involves the willful involvement by both parties unlike rape- but since its wrong in the eyes of God . Then yes it is wrong .

KingEbukasBlog:


For the love of God can you just address my question the way I asked you to . Stop beating around the bush , you are not a cave man . I perceive that you are circumspectly trying to avoid something . Get it out man , be a man ! Thehomer made me address his questions the way he wanted it so why can't you

Okay I'll address your question in such a way as it fits in with the thread.

Hosea chapter 1 verse 2

When the LORD first spoke through Hosea, he said to him, "Go marry a prostitute who will bear illegitimate children conceived through prostitution, because the nation continually commits spiritual prostitution by turning away from the LORD."

I think this is obscene to make such a triviality of a human experience as precious as the intimacy of marriage. Then what about the poor offspring of such an union. They'll be looked down upon by a society that has a low regard for their mother.

If prostitution is morally wrong then it is wrong to use it to any end, even to make an example or metaphor. There is no thought of the poor prophet who will most likely contract all manner of infections.

KingEbukasBlog:


Go back in history , people fought wars and took spoils of wars . It was part of what the life then . Nowadays , in this dispensation , such is not obtainable . The writer obviously noted that such is seen as improper now but it was the shii then .

Same way non-virgins and adulterous people were stoned in the past but Christ changed that . Such is not condoned in Christianity and is unacceptable - horrendous , heinous in fact .

So I didn't concede in the first place .

concede
kənˈsiːd/Submit
verb
1.
admit or agree that something is true after first denying or resisting it.

Where was the denial to start with

You are accepting or rejecting necessary evils?

1And the LORD said to me, “Go again, love a woman who is loved by another man and is an adulteress, even as the LORD loves the children of Israel, though they turn to other gods and love cakes of raisins.” 2So I bought her for fifteen shekels of silver and a homer and a lethecha of barley. 3And I said to her, “You must dwell as mine for many days. You shall not play the LovePeddler, or belong to another man; so will I also be to you.” 4For the children of Israel shall dwell many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or pillar, without ephod or household gods. 5Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God, and David their king, and they shall come in fear to the LORD and to his goodness in the latter days.
Hosea 3

is it that this guy just likes to knack ashewos and he is just using God for an excuse or do you really think that Yahweh sent him to go and love another man's woman.

PastorAIO:


What if the law giver sends humans to go and commit his heinous designs for him? That's the style innit? Are the agents of your god culpable in the heinous acts?

For Christ's sake . You do not impose morality of this present time upon what was obtained then . Christ in fact introduced what is obtained now .

And asked is it wrong for the parent to leave his own house by 8 since he enforced a law that demands that his kids should not leave the house by 8. Is he recalcitrant or disobedient ?

I don't know what you mean by free spirit. You even put it in quotation marks. Who are you quoting?

Ok forget it . So tell me your views since you dont fit into any of the aforementioned categories

Kay17:


You are accepting or rejecting necessary evils?

There is no such thing as necessary evil in the obvious sense you are looking at it . The writer called it a necessary evil but I explained what he meant by that

But these parents that you are talking about do not leave the home after 8 but rather send the children out after 8 to get up to all sorts of nefarious activities.

He told them 'thou shalt not kill', but he sent them to kill.

He told them 'thou shalt not covet thine neighbours wife' but he sent them to go and steal wives

He told them ' thou shalt not steal' but he sent them to steal.

etc

KingEbukasBlog:


For Christ's sake . You do not impose morality of this present time upon what was obtained then . Christ in fact introduced what is obtained now .

And asked is it wrong for the parent to leave his own house by 8 since he enforced a law that demands that his kids should not leave the house by 8. Is he recalcitrant or disobedient ?



Ok forget it . So tell me your views since you dont fit into any of the aforementioned categories

PastorAIO:
1And the LORD said to me, “Go again, love a woman who is loved by another man and is an adulteress, even as the LORD loves the children of Israel, though they turn to other gods and love cakes of raisins.” 2So I bought her for fifteen shekels of silver and a homer and a lethecha of barley. 3And I said to her, “You must dwell as mine for many days. You shall not play the LovePeddler, or belong to another man; so will I also be to you.” 4For the children of Israel shall dwell many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or pillar, without ephod or household gods. 5Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God, and David their king, and they shall come in fear to the LORD and to his goodness in the latter days.
Hosea 3

is it that this guy just likes to knack ashewos and he is just using God for an excuse or do you really think that Yahweh sent him to go and love another man's woman.

Small minded fellow . It was an illustration of God's relationship with the people of Israel, who had been unfaithful to Him because of their idolatrous lifestyle .

You should understand that Authoritarians-and-their-kids analogy - excogitate on it . Now I ask in reference to your passage . If the parent ask his kids to leave the house after its past 8 , is he making them disobey ? Or is he morally wrong asking them to do so . So has the kid exhibited disobedience in the moral sense of it for leaving the house by 8 as ordered by the parent

Plus you do realise that in every supposed depravity God engages in is for the right purpose . Same way an Authoritarian who asked his kids who were under the law not to leave the house by 8 now tells them to do so has his purpose .

KingEbukasBlog:


Ok forget it . So tell me your views since you dont fit into any of the aforementioned categories

You may get some hints from this post.

https://www.nairaland.com/335826/pastor-aio-come-teach-us#4712314

PastorAIO:


Okay I'll address your question in such a way as it fits in with the thread.

There is no thought of the poor prophet who will most likely contract all manner of infections.

And an all knowing powerful God wouldn't cure him

PastorAIO:


You may get some hints from this post.

https://www.nairaland.com/335826/pastor-aio-come-teach-us#4712314

I can't peruse through the thread . But you do believe in a God but a different concept ... right ?

Let me present a scenario from your authoritarian parent and kids illustration.

Imagine a parent who flogs his kids mercilessly for misdemeanours and one day he cause grievous bodily harm to the child. Perhaps even kills the child. Is this permissible?


Is it okay to use prostitution as an illustration of God's relationship with Israel? I mean actually engage in prostitution with the excuse that it is to make a point on God's behalf.

KingEbukasBlog:


Small minded fellow . It was an illustration of God's relationship with the people of Israel, who had been unfaithful to Him because of their idolatrous lifestyle .

You should understand that Authoritarians-and-their-kids analogy - excogitate on it . Now I ask in reference to your passage . If the parent ask his kids to leave the house after its past 8 , is he making them disobey ? Or is he morally wrong asking them to do so . So has the kid exhibited disobedience in the moral sense of it for leaving the house by 8 as ordered by the parent

Plus you do realise that in every supposed depravity God engages in is for the right purpose . Same way an Authoritarian who asked his kids who were under the law not to leave the house by 8 now tells them to do so has his purpose .

PastorAIO:
Let me present a scenario from your authoritarian parent and kids illustration.

Imagine a parent who flogs his kids mercilessly for misdemeanours and one day he cause grievous bodily harm to the child. Perhaps even kills the child. Is this permissible?

This is totally out of context but you can show me why you think I am wrong

Is it okay to use prostitution as an illustration of God's relationship with Israel? I mean actually engage in prostitution with the excuse that it is to make a point on God's behalf.

If you read through the story you'd realise that it fits excellently with the condition Israel was in . You may also ask me if it was okay for Jesus to spit in one of his miracles .

John 9:6 (ESV)

6 Having said these things, he spit on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he anointed the man’s eyes with the mud

Anyway like I told you , God is an embodiment of moral good and he is not subject to his laws . So throwing tantrums does not make it invalid . It is what it is .

Kay17:


Do you endorse necessary evils? Like Jesus's sacrifice?

You do not understand the act of Jesus' sacrifice.

When he volunteered himself for us, he became guilty, and us, guiltless.

He that knew no sin became sin, that we may become the righteousness of God.

There was no necessary evil in the crucifixion

thehomer:


Because they're simply harmful to the victims.

How do you know rape and genocide are good ideas? Is it because your God commanded them?

So any act that is harmful to others is unreasonable?

What about troops fighting terrorists? Isn't this harmful to the terrorist? Or is such an action unreasonable and evil too?

KingEbukasBlog:


I can't peruse through the thread . But you do believe in a God but a different concept ... right ?

The link is for a single post in the thread.

I don't believe in any concept of God.

My position is summed up in this post:
https://www.nairaland.com/335826/pastor-aio-come-teach-us/1#4731136


Where I quoted this:


"When your intellect conceives of God, do not permit urself to imagine that there is a God that exists as depicted by you. For if you do this you will have a finite and corporeal conception of God, God forbid. Instead, your mind should dwell on the affirmation of God's existence and then recoil. To do more than this is to allow the imagination to reflect on God as God is in Himself and such reflection is bound to result in imaginative limitations and corporeality. Put reins therefore on your intellect and do not allow it too great a freedom, but assert God's existence and deny your intellect the possibility of comprehending God" 16th century kabbalist Moses cordevero

KingEbukasBlog:


This is totally out of context but you can show me why you think I am wrong

You raised that illustration to show that while parents lay down laws for their children the parents do not have to be bound by those laws. And we find that acceptable. (this actually is a form of moral relativity.)

I'm trying to point out that there are still laws that the parents have to be bound by, otherwise we find the situation unacceptable. Sending the children out to flout their own laws is one such unacceptable thing because it sends mixed messages to the children and not having well defined boundaries is bad for children.

If you read through the story you'd realise that it fits excellently with the condition Israel was in . You may also ask me if it was okay for Jesus to spit in one of his miracles .

John 9:6 (ESV)

Oh yeah, I agree. It was a great metaphor for describing the situation. However there is more at stake than finding an apt metaphor. The actual practice of prostitution itself and adultery is in itself harmful. Why place people in harms way just because you want to make a point? This makes prostitution a relative moral thing. 'It's okay if it is for making a point'.

Anyway like I told you , God is an embodiment of moral good and he is not subject to his laws . So throwing tantrums does not make it any less valid . It is what it is .

So God is not subject to his 'body'?

thehomer:


Go home Deepsight, you're drunk.

Escapist ad hominem when caught pants down abi? Enjoy.

PastorAIO:


The link is for a single post in the thread.

I don't believe in any concept of God.

My position is summed up in this post:
https://www.nairaland.com/335826/pastor-aio-come-teach-us/1#4731136


Where I quoted this:


"When your intellect conceives of God, do not permit urself to imagine that there is a God that exists as depicted by you. For if you do this you will have a finite and corporeal conception of God, God forbid. Instead, your mind should dwell on the affirmation of God's existence and then recoil. To do more than this is to allow the imagination to reflect on God as God is in Himself and such reflection is bound to result in imaginative limitations and corporeality. Put reins therefore on your intellect and do not allow it too great a freedom, but assert God's existence and deny your intellect the possibility of comprehending God" 16th century kabbalist Moses cordevero

I thought you were something of a deist as per that thread. For you not to believe any concept of a God would make you an atheist. Why the change of heart ?

KingEbukasBlog:


There is no such thing as necessary evil in the obvious sense you are looking at it . The writer called it a necessary evil but I explained what he meant by that

Your explanation that the divinely inspired Judaism is worse than Christianity, shows relativity of morals; that God can switch from Judaic morals to a softer lenient Christian morals. But that aside, yet it seems the Israelites were ready to do anything and everything for God.

Especially when God is not subject to moral restraints likewise his agents on earth are not.

KingEbukasBlog:


Again , this guy . What is evil and what makes what you see as evil evil

The intentions and effects of actions.

KingEbukasBlog:

He is the same God .

Psalm 9:17

17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

Hell was mentioned in the old testament . Stop lying for void

Anyway this addresses your question

http://www.gotquestions.org/God-different.html

There's a difference between the mere mention of sheol and the eternal torture recommended by your other God.