Dtruthspeaker:


See it! See turning up and down like earthworm on which salt has been poured on.

You just said this was irrelevant after I answered you,

"There you go again... Picking irrelevant things and trying to make a big deal out of them. I said whether you or your God say it.. it doesn't change the basic rule behind words

And now you have twisted your way back to what you said, was "irrelevant" and we have left behind.

Congrats

Nope. He is not subject to our standard of good and evil. BUT THE STANDARD OF GOOD AND EVIL HE GAVE TO US!

This should be fun... Do you mind sharing the standard of good and evil he gave to us so we can determine if he himself is holy or not

TenQ:

It was a simple question!

If a person follow all the teachings of Christ, will such a person be good or evil?

It's not a simple question. It's a subtle attempt to try to prove a point which has already been debunked.

I am not the arbiter of good and evil. My perception of what good and evil is here, is irrelevant.

Wilgrea7:


1. This thread is about the ascribed holiness of your God.. so it's more than enough to discuss the things you want

2. Are you now accepting that your God is subject to the standards by which we judge good and bad?

It was a response to your response to

If God is Timeless (exist before time), can he Cease to Exist?

Your argument is like saying:
Since God lacks the capacity to Cease existing, does it mean that He cannot Exist?
Compare with:
If God lacks the capacity to DIE, does it mean that He is not ALIVE

You summarily dismissed it without looking at the reasoning behind it: this taking me back to the basics of the Eternal nature of God!

Wilgrea7:


It's not a simple question. It's a subtle attempt to try to prove a point which has already been debunked.

I am not the arbiter of good and evil. My perception of what good and evil is here, is irrelevant.

I said: Separate God from Religion.

If following ALL the Teachings of Christ will make you inherently good, doesn't that mean that Christ is good and His purpose Noble!?

If following ALL the Teachings of Christ will make you inherently evil or bad, doesn't it mean that Christ is evil and his purpose bad!?

Take your pick and let only the TRUTH and your CONSCIENCE guide you.

Wilgrea7:

This should be fun... Do you mind sharing the standard of good and evil he gave to us so we can determine if he himself is holy or not

Lay out any case where you feel good or evil applies and then I will apply His Standard!

TenQ:

I said: Separate God from Religion.

If following ALL the Teachings of Christ will make you inherently good, doesn't that mean that Christ is good and His purpose Noble!?

If following ALL the Teachings of Christ will make you inherently evil or bad, doesn't it mean that Christ is evil and his purpose bad!?

Take your pick and let only the TRUTH and your CONSCIENCE guide you.

The same logic goes for teachings of irumila and ifa.
Plato, Aristotle, Buddhism too, there are other thousand teachings, before jesus and Christianity created? There was no good people then?

TenQ:

I said: Separate God from Religion.

If following ALL the Teachings of Christ will make you inherently good, doesn't that mean that Christ is good and His purpose Noble!?

If following ALL the Teachings of Christ will make you inherently evil or bad, doesn't it mean that Christ is evil and his purpose bad!?

Take your pick and let only the TRUTH and your CONSCIENCE guide you.

Jesus man. Have you been ignoring everything I've been saying?

We both agreed that God is the final and highest authority on good and evil... And every other subjective concept is irrelevant.

This isn't about religion.

You are the one who gave the analogy of the microbes in the toilet and the person cleaning the toilet, and how one thing can seem good or bad depending on the reference point.

You also gave 2 examples.. one of the obese child and the other of the child receiving rabies injection to prove your point.

I'm going by the point you tried to prove, and now you're trying to avoid it.

My perception of what good and bad is, is as irrelevant as the child when he was held down to receive his injection, or the boy who was locked up to save his life, or the microbes in the toilet.

You further said something along the lines of "if God appeared, we would be much smaller than bacteria or microbes to him" or something along those lines..

Stop asking the microbe what he thinks is good or bad. I am not the arbiter of good and bad. Whatever answer i give is irrelevant.

Only what God determines to be good can be good. That has been your stance since the beginning of our discussion. So stand by it and leave my subjective opinion out of it.

Dtruthspeaker:


Lay out any case where you feel good or evil applies and then I will apply His Standard!

Tell me the standard... Let's judge it together

Wilgrea7:

Tell me the standard... Let's judge it together

Ọmọ atheists aren't open to any agreement {2Timothy 3:3} regarding setting standard for right and wrong so you will continue to shift the goal post!

TenQ:

It was a response to your response to


You summarily dismissed it without looking at the reasoning behind it: this taking me back to the basics of the Eternal nature of God!

I'm running out of ways on how to explain this thing to you.

You asked

"Since God lacks the capacity to Cease existing, does it mean that He cannot Exist?
Compare with:
If God lacks the capacity to DIE, does it mean that He is not ALIVE"

And i said, it depends on the criteria on which you define existence, or being alive.

I know the argument seems similar to you, but it simply isn't. And I've tried several times to explain why.

We have a fixed definition of what it means to exist, or at least, what it means to be alive.

We can define God existing or being alive based on these criteria... God, as far as i can see, seems to be subject to how we define these things.

That is why you can use this logical step to prove a point.

BUT ... God is not subject to how we define right and wrong. We've said it a hundred times and agreed on it.

Whatever God does, regardless of what it is, becomes the criteria for what good and bad are, not the other way around.

Because of that, the analogies you're trying to use there, simply break down.

God lacking the capacity to die, is viewed as immortality. It is NOT that whatever God does, whether he ceases to be alive or not suddenly changes the meaning of what being alive and dead are.

In the case of right and wrong, God not being able to do wrong isn't a case of him just doing good, based on an objective standard of good and bad. It is that whatever he does, become the new rule for what good and bad should be.

It's like this

Standard for being alive ----> God

God ----> standard for good and evil

I sincerely, don't know any easier way i can explain this to you

Wilgrea7:


Jesus man. Have you been ignoring everything I've been saying?

We both agreed that God is the final and highest authority on good and evil... And every other subjective concept is irrelevant.

This isn't about religion.

You are the one who gave the analogy of the microbes in the toilet and the person cleaning the toilet, and how one thing can seem good or bad depending on the reference point.

You also gave 2 examples.. one of the obese child and the other of the child receiving rabies injection to prove your point.

I'm going by the point you tried to prove, and now you're trying to avoid it.

My perception of what good and bad is, is as irrelevant as the child when he was held down to receive his injection, or the boy who was locked up to save his life, or the microbes in the toilet.

You further said something along the lines of "if God appeared, we would be much smaller than bacteria or microbes to him" or something along those lines..

Stop asking the microbe what he thinks is good or bad. I am not the arbiter of good and bad. Whatever answer i give is irrelevant.

Only what God determines to be good can be good. That has been your stance since the beginning of our discussion. So stand by it and leave my subjective opinion out of it.

Okay!

MaxInDHouse:


Ọmọ atheists aren't open to any agreement {2Timothy 3:3} regarding setting standard for right and wrong so you will continue to shift the goal post!

I asked him to tell me the standard so we can judge it together ... and I'm the one who's not open?? Seriously?

Wilgrea7:


I'm running out of ways on how to explain this thing to you.

You asked

"Since God lacks the capacity to Cease existing, does it mean that He cannot Exist?
Compare with:
If God lacks the capacity to DIE, does it mean that He is not ALIVE"

And i said, it depends on the criteria on which you define existence, or being alive.

I know the argument seems similar to you, but it simply isn't. And I've tried several times to explain why.

We have a fixed definition of what it means to exist, or at least, what it means to be alive.

We can define God existing or being alive based on these criteria... God, as far as i can see, seems to be subject to how we define these things.

That is why you can use this logical step to prove a point.

BUT ... God is not subject to how we define right and wrong. We've said it a hundred times and agreed on it.

Whatever God does, regardless of what it is, becomes the criteria for what good and bad are, not the other way around.

Because of that, the analogies you're trying to use there, simply break down.

God lacking the capacity to die, is viewed as immortality. It is NOT that whatever God does, whether he ceases to be alive or not suddenly changes the meaning of what being alive and dead are.

In the case of right and wrong, God not being able to do wrong isn't a case of him just doing good, based on an objective standard of good and bad. It is that whatever he does, become the new rule for what good and bad should be.

It's like this

Standard for being alive ----> God

God ----> standard for good and evil

I sincerely, don't know any easier way i can explain this to you

Me too!

TenQ:

Meaningless unless personal attributes such as goodness or Evilness can be quantified by a numeric values

Since you want to go this route let me indulge you on this once and for all
There are four types of data
Nominal
Ordinal
Interval
Ratio

Nominal can't be counted or described with numbers e.g political party,sex, religion
Ordinal can be ranked but can't be counted e g first position, second position......,
Interval can be counted with numbers but has no absolute zero e.g temperature values 0°c is still a temperature value
Ratio can be counted and has an absolute zero e.g height,weight

Now good and evil falls under nominal data,we can't describe them with numbers just like you said but we have a reference point or basis for saying that a thing is good or bad. For instance you can say that a person is good if he acts a certain way, "acting in a certain way" is the basis for describing the person as good or bad. I used examples with ratio data because it is easier to relate to what I'm saying when I use numbers but it's still the same point that I'm making,there has to be a reference point !!!
But then to rove to you that my argument is still valid I will use a nominal data for my analysis.
Suppose to be regarded as male the reference point is possession of the XY chromosome,has a pënis and tësticles,produces testosterone and female as possession of YY chromosomes, a vågina and womb, production of oestrogen, then that means that anyone who possesses the former features are male and the latter person female. Now if you say that a particular person is male whether the person possess Yy chromosome or XY, whether the person produces testosterone or oestrogen, whether the person has a pënis or vågina then the word male looses it's definition and becomes arbitrary because there is no reference point to distinguish between male and female.
I used nominal data in this instance and I still passed the same message I've been passing so find another excuse

Unfortunately for you, infinite regress of Cause and Effect is Logically and Scientifically impossible. Meaning that the ball of all the chains of causes, effects and systems must terminate at the Enigma: the Uncaused First Cause of Everything who brought EVERYTHING into being.

Such is infinitely powerful if we compare Him to the total Energy of the Universe.
Such is timeless: as He must have existed before TIME!
Such must be intelligent: as rules, laws and multiplicity of INTERDEPENDENT SYSTEMS can only be from an intelligent MIND!



Your argument in another form:
The Universe lacks the capacity to reduce itself to a gravitational singularity
Your conclusion:
Therefore the Universe cannot be infinitely BIG!

I'm lost
How is this related to what you quoted

Maynman:


Then you don’t need to call the creators and lawmakers good or bad just call them as they are.

Period.

TenQ:

Because people who follow His general guidelines are Good people. Therefore their source must be GOOD! (I speak only for Christians)

Good people by the standards of their religion
Hindus believe you shouldn't eat cow so christians who eat cow are bad people by there own standard
As an atheist who should I regard as good or bad

TenQ:

Bias aside!
If someone lives by ALL the tenets of Christ, would such a person be seen as Good or Evil?

I know you must be feeling that your Christ is so wonderful,I wonder why you didn't say the tenets of God or the tenets of the bible,I guess you know that that one is a no go area
Anyways let me remind you of some of the tenets of Christ

give to everyone that asks
if someone slaps you on the right side turn the left (I didn't say it's literal or not but whether I think the literal meaning is more bearable than the figuraty meaning)
when you organise a feast invite the beggars and wretched
if you lend money to someone and he refuses to pay don't ask further
loving your neighbor as yourself
Anyone who lives by these tenets above especially the last one(which isn't even practical by the way) is not good or bad, the person is STUPID

And the icing on the cake,Mathew 10 from vs 34
"do not think that I have come to bring peace to the world....."

Wilgrea7:


This should be fun... Do you mind sharing the standard of good and evil he gave to us so we can determine if he himself is holy or not

If you want to get a decent response from him you better remove the part boldened if not you are giving him a good reason to dulge your question,not that he wouldn't invent one himself

Hermes119:

I know you must be feeling that your Christ is so wonderful,I wonder why you didn't say the tenets of God or the tenets of the bible,I guess you know that that one is a no go area
Anyways let me remind you of some of the tenets of Christ

give to everyone that asks
if someone slaps you on the right side turn the left (I didn't say it's literal or not but whether I think the literal meaning is more bearable than the figuraty meaning)
when you organise a feast invite the beggars and wretched
if you lend money to someone and he refuses to pay don't ask further
loving your neighbor as yourself
Anyone who lives by these tenets above especially the last one(which isn't even practical by the way) is not good or bad, the person is STUPID

And the icing on the cake,Mathew 10 from vs 34
"do not think that I have come to bring peace to the world....."

Mt10: is a verse that teaches that the followers of Christ will be hated by people!

The teachings of Christ is what Christians follow: would a person who followed all the teachings of Christ be good or evil?

Hermes119:

Since you want to go this route let me indulge you on this once and for all
There are four types of data
Nominal
Ordinal
Interval
Ratio

Nominal can't be counted or described with numbers e.g political party,sex, religion
Ordinal can be ranked but can't be counted e g first position, second position......,
Interval can be counted with numbers but has no absolute zero e.g temperature values 0°c is still a temperature value
Ratio can be counted and has an absolute zero e.g height,weight

Now good and evil falls under nominal data,we can't describe them with numbers just like you said but we have a reference point or basis for saying that a thing is good or bad. For instance you can say that a person is good if he acts a certain way, "acting in a certain way" is the basis for describing the person as good or bad. I used examples with ratio data because it is easier to relate to what I'm saying when I use numbers but it's still the same point that I'm making,there has to be a reference point !!!
But then to rove to you that my argument is still valid I will use a nominal data for my analysis.
Suppose to be regarded as male the reference point is possession of the XY chromosome,has a pënis and tësticles,produces testosterone and female as possession of YY chromosomes, a vågina and womb, production of oestrogen, then that means that anyone who possesses the former features are male and the latter person female. Now if you say that a particular person is male whether the person possess Yy chromosome or XY, whether the person produces testosterone or oestrogen, whether the person has a pënis or vågina then the word male looses it's definition and becomes arbitrary because there is no reference point to distinguish between male and female.
I used nominal data in this instance and I still passed the same message I've been passing so find another excuse



I'm lost
How is this related to what you quoted

I said:

If God lacks the capacity to DIE, does it mean that He cannot be ALIVE!?

Your response was:

Hermes119:




Yes @ the boldened
To describe someone or something as alive means it has the capacity to die
For instance
Can you describe air as alive ?
Can you describe water as alive ?
Can you describe a shoe as alive ?



Yes
If he lacks the capacity to be weak then he can't be strong,if you disagree then give me an instance of something that doesn't have the capacity to be weak but is described as strong


Your argument was refuted with utmost ease

Thus, I took you back to the basics

Wilgrea7:


Tell me the standard... Let's judge it together

Lay the case where you feel good or evil applies and then I will apply His Standard!

When I apply His standard then you can judge, so lay out a case

Hermes119:

Period.

Do you not call a person who has done something or given you something good, good eh?

Hermes119:

If you want to get a decent response from him you better remove the part boldened if not you are giving him a good reason to dulge your question,not that he wouldn't invent one himself

I'm used to Drtruthspeaker at this point. When he can't face my arguments, he proceeds to tell me how atheists are apparently stupid, or whatever insult he can come up with at the time. It's honestly funny to see.

Wilgrea7:

I asked him to tell me the standard so we can judge it together ... and I'm the one who's not open?? Seriously?

The truth i revealed to you in the Bible about right and wrong in God's action did you attend to it?
Well the true God has an organization and it's only within this group that questions such as these can be answered adequately!

Dtruthspeaker:


Lay the case where you feel good or evil applies and then I will apply His Standard!

When I apply His standard then you can judge, so lay out a case

That's not how this judging thing works. I wouldn't want you to, i don't know, maybe distort the criteria, or twist it to fit the narrative.

So if you're sure of the criteria, and you're sure your God is innocent/holy based on them, then kindly share them here for all to see. Let the truth about how your God is Holy based on the standards he has set for right and wrong be known to everyone.

You love truth don't you? Then show it to everyone. I'll be waiting.

MaxInDHouse:

The truth i revealed to you in the Bible about right and wrong in God's action did you attend to it?
Well the true God has an organization and it's only within this group that questions such as these can be answered adequately!

I'm sorry. What truth did you reveal to me? Because I seem to have missed it.

The last discussion i remember was me asking you how your God is Holy, based on your "good for all" or "fair for all" criteria, even though he did several things which i listed. And you failed to show me how, other than telling me that it was his plan to restore some sort of "sanity".

Wilgrea7:

I'm sorry. What truth did you reveal to me? Because I seem to have missed it.

The last discussion i remember was me asking you how your God is Holy, based on your "good for all" or "fair for all" criteria, even though he did several things which i listed. And you failed to show me how, other than telling me that it was his plan to restore some sort of "sanity".

There you go again!

You know that there is evil everywhere and you won't take it lightly if someone should rape your daughter to death but when justice is rendered by the authorities to restore sanity in the society by exterminating such evildoers and also eradicate traits leading to it you don't want to reason, all you're after is blame! blame!! blame!!!

TenQ:

Mt10: is a verse that teaches that the followers of Christ will be hated by people!

The teachings of Christ is what Christians follow: would a person who followed all the teachings of Christ be good or evil?

Depends on your definition of good and evil

Dtruthspeaker:


Do you not call a person who has done something or given you something good, good eh?

I do

MaxInDHouse:


There you go again!

You know that there is evil everywhere and you won't take it lightly if someone should rape your daughter to death but when justice is rendered by the authorities to restore sanity in the society by exterminating such evildoers and also eradicate traits leading to it you don't want to reason, all you're after is blame! blame!! blame!!!

Justice?? You want to talk about Justice?? Ok Sir. Let's talk about justice.

Tell me how it is just that your God would send bears to maul children for simply making fun of a bald man
Tell me how it is just that your God would harden the heart of Pharaoh, and then punish him for it.
Tell me how it is just that the innocent children of Egypt had to die for the decision of Pharaoh, who God hardened his heart
Tell me how it is just, that a person should be killed, by stoning, simply for working on a sunday, or not being a virgin at marriage
Tell me how it is just, that your God would hate Esau from the womb, even before he was born
Tell me how it is just, that your God would order his people to commit genocide
Tell me how it is just to punish someone for the sins of their far ancestors

But most of all

Tell me, how in any conceivable way, it is just, that your God would kill an innocent person, who happened to also be himself, to save us from himself, for a crime we didn't even commit in the first place (I'm talking about the alleged sacrifice of Jesus)

Please, tell me again about this justice. I'm all ears.

Wilgrea7:

Justice?? You want to talk about Justice?? Ok Sir. Let's talk about justice.
Tell me how it is just that your God would send bears to maul children for simply making fun of a bald man

The so called children were ISRAELITES who knew that the man they're insulting was sent by the God of Israel, they're not babies but teenagers and their parents who are supposed to scold them were watching and laughing knowing fully well that it'll attract a CURSE!
“‘CURSED is the one who treats his father or his mother with contempt.’ (And all the people will say, ‘Amen!’) Deuteronomy 27:16

Wilgrea7:

Tell me how it is just that your God would harden the heart of Pharaoh, and then punish him for it.

This means God did not inflict pain on the man's body yet expecting him to reason. So when the Bible say "HARDEN" it doesn't mean the same God blocked Pharaoh's heart from doing the right thing.

Wilgrea7:

Tell me how it is just that the innocent children of Egypt had to die for the decision of Pharaoh, who God hardened his heart

Right thinking Egyptians were camping with the Israelites after noticing that the God in question meant business this Egyptians turned their own backs on their stubborn king and left Egypt with the Israelites {Exodus 12:38} the actions of these ones shows that my God is just because He approved them as His people!

Wilgrea7:

Tell me how it is just, that a person should be killed, by stoning, simply for working on a sunday, or not being a virgin at marriage

In a place where there's no law punishment is unjust but once the Israelites have the laws then my God is justified for dealing with defaulters. That's logical!

Wilgrea7:

Tell me how it is just, that your God would hate Esau from the womb, even before he was born

My God used His power to read the traits of the unborn child that he will despice the heritage that Abraham and Isaac cherished so much {Genesis 25:34} this is right no human even you will prefer the child that love what you cherish so much more than the one who despice your heritage.

Wilgrea7:

Tell me how it is just, that your God would order his people to commit genocide

It is well justified as He has sent a warning message to all the nations through what happened in Egypt and how He parted the red sea before His people, so any nation standing in their way supposed to be exterminated logically. Even you as stupid as you can be will flee for your life when calamity is approaching!

Wilgrea7:

Tell me how it is just to punish someone for the sins of their far ancestors

It's justified that after your ancestors have done what is evil and you heard of their past deeds but chose to follow their footsteps. In fact your own punishment supposed to be triple because your ancestors never had any past lessons unlike you who have heard about their past evil deeds. That's why my God said He will bring the punishment of your evil ancestors on you if you follow their footsteps {Exodus 34:7} but if you choose virtue then my God will prove to be loyal to you and your children for a thousand upon thousands of your generations as long as they're all following your virtuous deed! Deuteronomy 5:10

Wilgrea7:

Tell me, how in any conceivable way, it is just, that your God would kill an innocent person, who happened to also be himself, to save us from himself, for a crime we didn't even commit in the first place (I'm talking about the alleged sacrifice of Jesus)

Please, tell me again about this justice. I'm all ears.

Misinterpretation!
My God was willing to allow His only begotten Son (Jesus) pay for the debt that His first human son (Adam) owe in order to justify why Adam's descendants could enjoy everlasting life which Adam forfeited.
Remember that thousandth upon thousandth of Adam's descendants are doomed because as long as they're following Adam's rebellious footsteps but because Jesus was ready to pay the debt as he taught us how to reconcile with the true God so that we can gain what Adam lost.
So instead of arguing blindly all you need is ask in order to know who to blame! Matthew 7:7-8

Hermes119:

I do

We all do!

Therefore, we can call God Good because Hie did good things!