₦airaland Forum

jesusjnr2:
I believe you're the best of the atheist bunch here, and in my own opinion even better than most Christians here,

That sounds familiar! I wonder where I heard it before and if what followed then would follow it now. My money is on, it will, in time.

johnydon22:
A clone obviously is alive, whether it is human or not remains to be seen.

Lets split the scenario into two

1. It can make choices

2. It can.

How does this affect your judgement on its moral value?

If my clone can make choices, it may choose to tell me to fuq off when I need the heart I created in it! What do I do then? Say, "I created you and can therefore do to you as I wish"? I guess if the law allows that (and I'm talking we go court so I can tell my clone it's my pot and I can smash it if I wanted despite all it's resistance), then hey, I got me a heart and would take it if only because I don't want to die yet. But what exactly do I do when I need a kidney two years later? Take it out of my heartless very likely dead rotten clone? And that's just the practical problem. Currently, the law (depending on where one is of course), does not allow one to take out the heart of a dog so I can't see how they'd allow me to take out a vital organ from my living clone. But if I go to India or some other poor nation, I can at least buy someone's kidney I suppose.

So, moral or not? The question really should be 'legal or not' because if I create and own a clone and can legally do to it as I wish, then I'm certain that if I need a heart I'd harvest me a heart. However, I might see my clone as my child and nurture it as such. If I convince myself I created my child and can do to it as I wish, would I rip out my child's heart and put it in me if I were legally allowed to? I wouldn't, but let me say I hope I wouldn't, especially if I could go to India to buy someone else's child and rip their heart out and put it in me instead.

But. Education! That's the bee in this ointment. If I have been educated that, say, a god thing created all human beings, or all human have an equal right to life, and I should love my neighbours, and must not kill humans and covet them and such like, and if I have taken this education on board, then the only issue with my harvesting my clone would be whether it thinks like me and poos like me, and if it does, then I just might see it as human like me, then it does become a case of killing another human being to prolong my life and whether I think its moral or not to do so.

The law, thankfully, does not permit me to kill another human being for my own selfish needs regardless of my moral stance or need, is my opinion.

LordReed:
Even the gospel god is a wimp. It waits for wolves to break in and enter to kill steal and destroy. What powerful well meaning shepard waits for wolves to come to his door instead of hiring hunters to go kill the wolves?

I didn't find that in my Gospel! Mind telling where you read this please so I can too?

You'd have done much better if you'd said it turns the other cheek, mind.

johnydon22:
Ok, fair enough.

What if they have no thinking capabilities, just dummy copy of us.

(E.g; A clone of you will look exact my like you, no difference, only wouldn't possess your mind)

So, it would only look like one. Would it have a mind of its own or not? Can it make choices or not? Is it human or not? In fact, is it a living thing or not!?

johnydon22:
If it does breathe, poo or have a mind. Does this in anyway make it less your creation?

Is my creation human is the point here, and not, whether it's my creation.

Factories, traffic lights and mobile phone connections sputtered across South Africa on Monday as the indebted state-owned electricity monopoly imposed a third day of severe outages.

Eskom said it was “working round the clock” to restore multiple units that broke down and choked Africa’s most industrialised economy.

The unusually fierce, so-called stage four blackouts have been met with dread by South Africans and — two months before national elections — have embarrassed the governing African National Congress of President Cyril Ramaphosa.

FT

We twist Scripture to take on meanings that suit us, is what I think. Evidence suggests the humans race began in Africa, so how they could have only existed after naked Ham cursed his innocent grandson is rather comical. But then, the whole of the first few books is rather comical sometimes. Imagine God hardening the hearts of the Egyptians just so the "Egyptians will know that I am the Lord when I stretch out my hand against Egypt and bring the Israelites out of it.”

It reads like badly written propaganda to me!

johnydon22:
For me personally, i think the most important question to this is; Are human clones humans?

That, precisely, is the question. Are "photocopies of the original human", human? Does it breath, poo, have a mind and can tell its creator to fuq off when it wants as I its original can, or is it my creation, as in one that I have "full inalienable right over", "to do with however it pleases me"?

HellVictorinho:
God's identity is that of a heartless being that is ever-ready to involve Man in his childish games with Satan despite knowing that Man is an amateur.

Really? If you take your version of God from the Book of Job perhaps and completely disregard everything else written about God.

Have you tried a Gospel God, where God appears to have grown up and satan is said to "depart from him" when confronted with superior reasoning?

jesusjnr:
So now it's not about God, but between pots now, that makes one to think that he had the right to call the other pot egoistic, while the other pot does not have the same right?

My saying as such about you has hence been justified.

You really are amusing. I'm sure it isn't your ego that makes you think whatever you may think about buda matters a tiny ounce worth to anyone.
You sound like one who on buda's judgement day would be standing beside God going, "God, that's buda! Throw buda in hell for buda has an ego". Why you don't think God might tell you to mind the forest in your own eye, is what's amusing.

jesusjnr:
I still recommend that you humble yourself though and heed the wise words of johnydon22, even if you still think that that makes me egoistic. SMH.

You can recommend whatever you want but I guess you think you are recommending it to a pot who hasn't got a choice and not to a human being with a God given mind and an ego and an ability to choose. All I can say is, good luck with that.

HappyPagan:
And those who wrote the Bible laughed....

Actually, those who wrote the Bible did not laugh since they were all long dead!

jesusjnr:
Yeah keep deceiving your highly egoistic self to thinking that someone calling you to humbly learn from the saying of another johnydon22, means to humble yourself before him.

Inflated ego indeed!

What I do before God is surely between God and I, and has absolutely nothing to do with you! Or did God ask you to go about measuring the size of the ego he put in my pot?

jesusjnr:
Yeah good!

Let the truth all come out!

Instead of thinking that someone now believes in God, but the God they truly believe in, is the one that is within their control.

It's got nothing to do with controlling God. I'm saying your representation of God is not the merciful loving non-destroying send its only begotten son God I've read about in my God book.

If God were as you describe I wouldn't even have a say in the matter, which I appear to clearly have. Your God would just smash an imperfect pot while my God seems to love me warts and all.

jesusjnr:
You mean your perfect, merciful, loving etc., God is different from the God that destroyed the Earth with a flood, and that destroyed all the living souls in Sodom and Gomorrah etc.?

It would seem so, unless that God you think is God is going to destroy earth despite covenanting to destroy earth no more and after sacrificing its own only begotten son to save that same earth. It would be a waste if after all that that same God decides to give up on us all now, don't you think?

jesusjnr:
Budaatum humble yourself and come and learn, even from the logical point of view but unfortunately your potty pride just wouldn't let you.

Humble myself to you? You must have a very inflated ego, jnr!

johnydon22:
Again, the argument here is; if you were created by something or someone, it appeals to logic that this something or someone has full inalienable right over you, to do with you however it pleases. Similarly like we as humans have over every creations we have made.

the same moral constraints to do not apply to both you and the creator, No, it obviously is above any petty morals that may govern you by its own prescriptions or yours.

Surely, if my creator had this so called inalienable right over me its creations we wouldn't even be having this discussion would we? Or where do you get to see anything you created talking not to talk of even talking back to you or going against you its creator's will? If you created something, say like a pot, and it decided to insist it be governed by its petty morals, wouldn't you just smash the damn thing to bits? I don't see my creator being petty as you seem to somehow believe it is.

As to God's moral or immoral constraints, that's way above my paygrade except my creator seems to have created me with a mind and freewill and the freedom to exercise one and fully enjoy the other, and if my creator didn't want me to do either, my creator could very possibly have just created a pot without either or smash me to bits, which it doesn't seem to appear to be in a hurry to do.

jesusjnr:
Just that bolded distinguishes us, because my God can never be a tyrant regardless of what He does, but would always be perfect.

And if you ask me, for a mere pot to call God his Creator a tyrant because of what He does, is only possible when that mere pot views himself to be more than just the dust and ashes that he really is without the breath of Creator, and is to that extent a waste of the God's breath.

I think you can learn a think or two how to be less of a waste of God's breath, from johnydon22 perfect summation of the truth.

For the Creator has every right to create and to destroy that which He creates at any point in time, and He'd yet be perfect and never a tyrant.

But obviously you a mere pot that has never created anything think you have any right to call your Creator a tyrant when He chooses to destroy His own Creation, because of the breath that He gave to you, makes me think of a very proud pot, and pot's pride goes before pot's destruction.

It is your destroying God that I call tyrannical, jnr, and not the perfect, merciful, loving, stick to his word and not just create unquestioning pots Almighty God.

Please do not mistake the one for the other.

20 [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+2%3A20-26&version=NIV]You foolish person[/url], do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? 21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”[e] and he was called God’s friend. 24 You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

25 In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? 26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

It can't be put much clearer!

TVSA:
You just described a criminally insane person that should be detained in a mental asylum. You justified your God behaving like Hannibal.

I assure you, most of us would want nothing to do with such a God unless we want to justify our own hannibalistic behaviour!

jesusjnr:
The God that did sent His only Begotten Son, is still the perfect God that destroyed all of mankind with the flood, and still rained down the fire and sulphur from heaven to destroy all those in Sodom and Gomorrah and turned them to salt, remember lot's wife.

Thank God that God never changes for He remains the same perfect God that He had always been and would also be even till eternity.

Except that perfect God then decided not to destroy earth anymore and made a covenant to that effect.

To be honest, if you really did think God was the tyrant you describe God as, you would not be so bitter at the unbelievers and atheists as shown by the numerous threads you've opened to express that bitterness. You be rejoicing that their days were numbered instead. But you know the perfect God is longsuffering, hence your impatience like the prophet who asked God to come and destroy everyone but God never listened to.

Thankfully, we just need tell God to "Turn from Your burning anger and change Your mind about doing harm to Your [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+32%3A12-14&version=NASB]people[/url]" and the Lord will "change His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people". Except, God even promised to do no harm to his people anymore, changing from a wrathful quick to anger God to a God so loved the world God who is worthy of being worshipped, thank God.

solite3:
yes we obey Jesus but it is his blood she'd for us that saved us not our doing.

even for us to do the will of God, it is God that does it .

Philippians 2:13
For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.


so you can see that it is God that saves not our works.

Ephesians 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Not a lot of people like James' "show me you faith and I will show you my work done with faith", many would rather be Paul's "faith with no works". Would God have use for unsalty salt, or a lamp without NEPA? Should your light not shine before others, that they may see your [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A13-16&version=NIV]good deeds[/url] and glorify your Father in heaven? Or is it not by you works, your deeds, that your father in heaven is glorified?

God must have standards and can't, or at least, doesn't, arbitrarily save people with no criteria being fulfilled. In order to receive that so called grace, you must at least fulfil the criteria which is doing the will of God and which is way more than mere believing. And yes, by grace. The grace that you happen to be opportuned to have heard God's word and know what is required of you.

I just don't understand how you could think believing is sufficient since it is clearly written that "even the devil believes"! If one doesn't do God's will despite the grace of having heard the Word, all ones believing will not save you, or you'd be as saved as the devil is saved, which last time I checked was not much saved at all.

jesusjnr2:
You have been saying God, God and yet God again, and yet when the same God decides to destroy His own creation because they have proven themselves a waste of His breath, you would forget that He's God and that He has every right to do whatsoever He decide to do, and would yet remain perfect as He is.

Man is the pot, and God is the potter, so the potter has every right to destroy the pot whenever He chooses and however He chooses and He would yet remain perfect as He is.

What a permanently perfect God I serve!

It's not about whether God has rights, but about whether God will destroy God's own creations which when God created them were seen as perfectly created and good even with the freewill to disobey and question! Besides, as I already stated, God said God ain't destroying anymore!

If God goes against God's own perfect word that God will just stop being perfect God, and we human beings who God created with freewill will be taking that God to the bottom of the river and bashing its head against a rock as we rightly should since it can't even stick to its own perfect word!

Thankfully, God ain't nothing like you seem to be describing since God did the opposite of destroy by instead sending his only begotten son to die for us so we would live, thank God.

solite3:
if you believe that Jesus died for your sins and raised from the dead by God, you will be saved.

You are very welcome to completely disregard the teachings that say believing alone is not sufficient. I'm sure though that you know many believers who if seen in heaven would be a surprise. The armed robber who prays to God that this stealing they are about to do be fruitful, springs to mind. The fact that they pray shows they believe.

Not succumbing to the will of the flesh, implies, and is in fact, followed by "succumb to the will of God", which Jesus stated as "Do my will", and not, "just believe" as satan even does, and which the Levite and the priest also did. Or does that parable not clearly show who shall enter paradise?

ifenes:
Op you are right. A creator can destroy his/her creation as he/ her so wishes. But fortunately we are not the creation of the dude you call god.

At least not of his understanding of God, I'd say.

jesusjnr2:
That's why it is called grace for it has absolutely nothing to do with who man is even the mere pot and dust and ashes and a waste of God's breath, but what God makes of man because of who He is.

And you can see what the waste of God's breath are doing and keep doing to His sacrificial efforts for the useless wastes of His breath, for they have also proven themselves to also be a waste of His sacrifice.

Of course thank God that not all have been so wasteful of His breath, grace and sacrifice, even those few who have made God's efforts to be worthwhile.

As for those the instance of Sodom, the waste of God's breath would have been spared if there were ten who were not wastes of God's breath.

Because of the value God places on those who are not a waste of His breath, but there were no such one there and hence God destroyed all the waste of God's breath in the land, and yet He remained the perfect God that He is!

And any mere human pot that thinks otherwise, is wasting God's breath to that extent, hence should desist from such rebellious tendencies, before they completely turn to a full blown case of a waste of God's breath.

"Nothing to do with who man is", yet for the sake of a mere ten, God will not destroy Sodom? Sounds to me that God places way more value on God's creations than you think God does.

For me, my neighbours, whom I am supposed to love, cannot be waste of spaces. If I thought they were, I'd become like you, calling the creations of God, "waste of spaces" and justifying myself for so doing just because they believe in or worship other gods or no gods at all. I'm sure if Jesus meant "love only those who believe in God", he would have said precisely that. He himself loved lots of non-god believers and was specifically sent on behalf of those unbelievers and not the 'believers'.

Please consider this thread by jesusjnr, and also MrPresident1's thread of a similar nature.

One can believe as much as one wishes to believe but if ones fruits are rotten, one is no better than the teeth gnashing believing [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+10%3A25-37&version=NIV]priest and Levite[/url]. “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”, Jesus asked. You hopefully know that Samaritans worshipped other Gods. And there's another parable about the Pharisee who thought he was better than the tax collector. Both parables were specifically "To some who were confident of their own righteousness and [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+18%3A9-14&version=NIV]looked down on everyone else[/url]".

The blood of Jesus is the ink the Way to be righteous is written in. If Jesus' blood were not shed for you you'd have nothing to teach you how. Righteousness is the fruits you produce by having been washed in that blood, as in, read it, understood it, and act it, and we clearly know what they are. If one does not at least try to be righteous, one has clearly failed in being righteous.

frank317:
So tell me, will ur foolish God put me in hell and put a pot in heaven?

Why blame God for the ignorance and stupidity of one individual? Did jnr claim God was saying what he wrote?

Please consider saying "will your understanding of God make God put you in hell and put a pot in heaven?" Or, ask God!

johnydon22:
I do not think same moral constraints apply to a creator and the created.

And a creator have 100% right to do whatever it pleases with its creation.

That's common sense.

How is it common sense for God to constrain me to love my neighbours then for that God not to show me how by leading by example? Would I not love my neighbours just as much as my God shows me to?

jesusjnr2:
When God after He had put breath into all those pots, and afterwards, He regrets and it pains Him greatly that He had put breath into those pots, by the rebellious outcomes of those pots, and decides to destroy them in all of His perfection, it shows that those pots have been a waste of His breath.

God could not possibly have considered God's own creation a waste of space and then sent his only begotten son to die for those waste of spaces! "For God so loved the world" after all goes scripture, and not "because you are a waste of space"!

Besides, For the sake of ten, God will not destroy humans”, and even made a [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen+9%3A12-17&version=YLT]covenant[/url] not to destroy humans again. If God changes God's mind, it would be very appropriate to question God, why.

jesusjnr2:
The pot have shown themselves to have been a waste of God breath, that made Him to regret ever putting His breath into them.

Such a waste and my God certainly deserves better, but there are those few pots who have proven themselves to be worthy of God's breath.

And you know this because God told you that some of God's creations are "a waste of God breath" and also pointed those God regrets "ever putting His breath into"?