₦airaland Forum

Na wa o.

You asked a simple and sensible question.

I stated clearly that I share your concern.

I gave my perspective - namely that God has set all laws in motion already.

And for this i receive this - ?

davidylan:
I truly do not understand the idiocy you keep foistering around here.

Well smile David. Life is beautiful.

Romeo4real:
You are a joker!

Smile. Life is beautiful.

The above is what I quoted, and agree with, but NOT what you said.

Since it is what you quoted and agree with, you hereby re - affirm that a person who commissions a hired assassin can be tried for murder himself.

I thank you once again for your willingness to concede and see reason with that which is obvious. A toast to your humility and willingness to learn.

I am now convinced that you are irrevocably silly

Smile. Life is beautiful.

The argument is not about whose letter it is; but if the sender, and the messenger are the same.

LAWD HAVE MERCY ! ! !

Now we must get really really stern around here.

Did you actually write this? ? ? ? ?

You dare brandish this outright lie here? ? ? ? ?

What do you mean by saying – “The argument is not about whose letter it is; but if the sender, and the messenger are the same” –

The argument is, always has been, and will continue to be about whose letter it is for Christ’s sake. Exactly because we are trying to uncover whose lie it is. I am sure you are not so befuddled as to fail to see that that is EXACTLY what the discussion has been from the point you entered right up to this very millisecond.

How dare you state that the argument is about “if the sender, and the messenger are the same? ? ? ? ? ?” Are you for real?

Is there any person on this thread that asserted that Yahweh is the same person as the spirit that came up to him? ? ?

Haba, did you not see my several references to a Principal and an Agent? ? ? ?

Did I for ONE SECOND state that the Principal is the Agent? ? ? ?

Did I not repeatedly state that the Principal remains responsible for the acts of his agent: indeed those acts are his own acts so long as he instructed the Agent to act in that regard!

This is comical.

I am sure you can now see how dreadfully you have confused the issues. Frankly I am aghast that you could assert that the issue is “not whose letter it is.”

Wake up son! That is, and always has been the issue.

Unless you are hallucinating NO ONE here EVER argued about God and the messenger being the same entity. Where the hell did you get that from? ? ?

Kindly do some study on the law of Agency and the relationship between Principal and Agent.

I positively assert to you that it is ridiculously absurd to claim as you have that the actions of an Agent who takes command from his Principal are not the actions of the Principal. For what you assert to me is that no General in history has ever fought a war – given that they issue instructions to others regarding the wars. Or that no Head of State has ever taken an action – given that they simply give orders to other people regarding such.

That is a comical statement in the extreme and should not even be heard in a nursery school.

YOUR GOD – The Jewish Pagan Deity that you worship gave AN EXPRESS INSTRUCTION AUTHOURIZING THE DISEMINATION OF FALSEHOOD AND NO AMOUNT OF SPIN ON YOUR PART CAN CHANGE THAT FACT.

Good grief.

Please if you will engage my time, up your game.

^^^ Well David, I share your concern on the general idea many Deists have that God has "departed" after creation.

In my own view it is not so much a departure in that sense.

It is rather that the laws of God permeate and sustain creation and all its workings.

Accordingly there is nothing "more" for God to do. He has set the whole thing in motion already.

If mere man is able to create machines which can fly on auto-pilot, I am sure the least we can say for God is that being a perfect being, his craetion must perforce contain all the laws required to sustain it without the requirement for further interference.

That indeed is it my Friend.

Every single Monotheistic view point in existence espouses that God is ONE and also that God is infinite/ eternal.

I am thus at a loss as to the fired-up negative reactions one receives from supposed theists once the term Oneness of Infinity is uttered.

mazaje:
Why must God be one? Why not so many Gods?

Because Infinity cannot be divided.

1. God's name is The Eternal.

2. God IS.

3. Everything that exists is a natural emanation and reflection of the mind of God - which is all things.

4. God is inifinite. Thus things will never cease to come into existence.

5. Infinity cannot be divided or separated. So God's infinity is ONE. God is ONE.

6. Since God is ONE, all things move towards unity. Thus unity and harmony are the ultimate values inherent in God.

7. These values are reflected in the thirst that we all have for harmony.

Be still.

nuclearboy:
This is some form of imagined vendetta and he doesn't realise he's actually coming across as without depth and insincere when he argues thus.

Spare me. I have no need to impress anybody with any "depth" or "sincerity."

No one will judge me when i'm done save God.

If I were interested in the opinions others have of me, I would not so publicly advertsie my stance on even the most carnal matters - which you are well aware of.

DeepSight will never do so and is ready to throw the most inane "amazing" arguments you'll hear just to "win".

You really are alarmingly biased. When the members of your gang write epistles about Paradise in Hades and God in a physical body in Heaven, you ARE NEVER TO BE HEARD making a single sound. Simply because those folks are christian you will tolerate even the most absurd contentions on their part. But Deep Sight dares whimper that all men of good will are in the right place with God and oooooo . . . .

A 20+ year search is not likely to have failed if it was a sincere search.

Now you must be omniscient to be so bold as to determine the success or failure of each man's inner and personal search for truth.

Romeo4real:
[size=16pt]According to the excerpt I posted, Yes, [/size] but it also says they can also be tried for other things -

We can end the argument here as this statement is a wholesale concession. You have absolutely acceded (as necessary by common sense and reason) that one who sends a hired assassin can be tried himself for murder. Thanks for seeing reason.

Case closed.

conspiracy to commit murder, and/or accessory to murder. You said, and I paraphrase you – "They can ONLY [/b]be tried for murder"– "[b]1st Degree Murder" to be exact.

Learn to paraphrase accurately. I never stated that that would be the ONLY thing they could be tried for. This is an outright lie on your part which is disgraceful for a Christian. Criminal charges often come with varied counts. I stated that it would amount to first degree murder and I have proven that quoting copiously from the Criminal Code Act.

You, by contrast, produced a wiki quote which only affirmed what I said – namely that a person who commits murder by proxy can be tried for murder himself.

The bout is over son.

It may have been pertinent for you to mention the caveat that you were talking specifically about Nigerian Law.

Let me throw in a sweetener for you: I positively assert that it holds true within the vast majority of jurisdictions globally.

I mean, read your statement yourself – Yes, it means you sent the letter; but through your PA; subsequently, your PA delivered the letter, and not you! By your logic, if your PA, whom you sent to deliver the letter, is now a messenger by virtue of the act, this means that you are also a messenger? Can you see how it makes no sense? Aha!

Whose letter is it? The PA’s Letter? Or Mine ? ? ? ? Aha.

Argumentun ad nauseum.

Ad nauseum, ad infinitum. . .

^^^ Your come-back is bizzarre.

You plainly admit that a principal who sends an agent to commit murder can be tried for murder - you quoted this from wiki -

The person instigating a proxy murder may or may not be legally guilty of the crime of murder; this legal distinction varies by nation (and within the United States, by state). However, all jurisdictions recognize the criminal nature of the actions taken by the instigator, and they may be charged under any of a variety of statutes, including murder,

It states - The person instigating a proxy murder may or may not be legally guilty of the crime of murder; this legal distinction varies by nation

Accordingly we are able to deduce that this is the case in some countries and not the case in other countries.

I therefore stand to be corrected when I state that when you commission a hired assassin, you thereby commit murder YOURSELF.

I am a Nigerian living in Nigeria and I see no reason to quote a foreign criminal code. The Criminal Code I quoted is the Nigerian Criminal Code Act, Cap C38, Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which happens to derive from the Criminal Law of England.

Under that Act it is VERY CLEAR –

- Section 308 states that killing may be direct or indirect

- Section 316 defines murder as the killing of a person when the offender intended to cause his death.

It thus follows that a person who commissions a hired assassin is indeed guilty of straight-up first degree murder.

This is the position of law and I stand to be corrected on that.

Now, Nigerian Law aside, the fact remains that in EVERY COUNTRY OF THE WORLD, a person who procures another person to commit an offence (murder inclusive) has himself thereby committed an offence. Thus whether you call it first degree or tenth degree is of no consequence in the context of this debate – for the very reason that the issue is whether Yahweh has done something wrong, and not the degree of the wrong

1. We must contextualize this discussion – do not try to distract attention from Yahweh’s lies by arguing about law out of context – the context in which the legal issues came up was my assertion that if a person commissions an agent to do something, it has the same effect as though he has done it himself – he is guilty of committing that very act.

2. Rationally this is not something that you can deny – I may send my PA to deliver a letter – this does not mean that I am not the one who has sent the letter! Such a contention is ENTIRELY ABSURD as it seeks to absolve a Principal from the actions of his agent – when the Principal specifically instructed his agent to carry out those acts.


3. In the Instant case Yahweh specifically instructed the lying spirit to proceed forth with the lies. It is thus comical that you will attempt to absolve Yahweh from responsibility. Absolutely comical.

Ok, I apologize.

It is better to retract something said in the heat of the moment than to leave it as said.

I am Sorry if i offended you.

Mazaje here is the link Noetic is talking about

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-411119.0.html

Quote from Romeo4real -

Em, You are confusing yourself. In Law, killing someone, and sending an assassin to do it are not the same. Whilst in both cases, the instigator may, or may not be guilty of murder, the offences, and penal/criminal codes that describe them, are quite different - and for good reason.
Hiring an assassin to kill someone is not 1st Degree Murder, it is called Proxy Murder or Murder by Proxy, and Joint Enterprise in English Law.

Sir, I am a lawyer by training and so sorry, will not be so easily mis-guided by your rhetoric.

I am surprised that you did not note within the quote below the bolded words -

Quote
The person instigating a proxy murder may or may not be legally guilty of the crime of murder; this legal distinction varies by nation (and within the United States, by state). However, all jurisdictions recognize the criminal nature of the actions taken by the instigator, and they may be charged under any of a variety of statutes, including murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and/or accessory to murder.
- Wiki

- Which underline the facts that -

1. At all events the instigation is a crime (Thus by analogy Yahweh instigating a lie is still committing a wrong act – thus the point still stands against your contention)

2. The Instigation can be tried as MURDER - just as I earlier stated. Please see the highlighted and bolded in the last line of your wiki quote above.

This is underscored by Section 308 of the Criminal Code Act, which expressly states and I quote –

[308.]. . .Any person who causes the death of another person, directly or indirectly, by any means whatever is deemed to have killed that other person.

Thus it is clear that DIRECT action or INDIRECT action “by any means whatever” are deemed to amount to an act of killing.

Section 316 goes ahead to define Murder. I quote -

[316] Definition of Murder.
A person who unlawfully kills another under any of the following circumstances –
    [1] if the offender intends to cause the death of the person killed or that of some other person. . .
- is guilty of murder.

Kindly note the operative word there – CAUSE the death. Thus I may deduce that a person who contracts another person to murder has himself caused the death of the murdered person – especially because Section 308 states clearly that the action of killing may be direct or indirect.

I therefore stand by my statement that he who procures or commands another to do an act is himself guilty of that very act – exactly because that person is acting as an agent for him.

If we were to reduce this to commercial law, the Principles of Agency also bear this out in terms of the relationship between an Agent and a Principal.

So, my friend, there is no escape for Yahweh – you statement that there is a difference between “sending lying spirits” and “lying” is illogical and eminently mis-footed.

I am surprised you would attempt such a lame defence as to state that he did not do it himself but merely sent others to do it.

What makes him different from a politician or Mob Leader then? Is this all the defence you can muster for Yaweh’s lies? ? ?

Image123:
You're not the first to feel pathetic. Everyone thinks the other is unfair and inadequate. Even my cousin's goat looked 'pathetic' the other day when it's kin was been roasted for our consumption. I noticed too that the convict's kinsmen usually find the judge's decisions pathetic. You're not the first and you may not be the last.

If a judge resorts to LIES to deliver his verdict, that is pathetic.

If a deity resorts to LIES to implement his purposes, that too, my friend, is pathetic.

This is from the same person who made the comment in quote below -

Quote
Because hanging a murderer after a court has sentenced him to death is violence as well - but justifiable.
Barging into a village and shooting everybody dead on account of their tribe or language is violence too - but EMINENTLY UNJUSTIFIABLE

Seems like Context & Perspective have taken their leave.

Exactly what does my statement have to do with anything you are trying to prove?

The court-scenario i alluded to refers to justice being meted out for a crime.

In meting out justice the Court does NOT resort to telling lies.

And yet that is a human court.

How shall we view a supreme deity who is the embodiment of TRUTH resorting to lies to deliver his purposes?

^^^ I strongly advise you to set out your points clearly and lucidly if you want them to be noted: do NOT hide behind "having respect" for anybody's intellect or other such evasive and vacant statements.

You made a statement which is clear - you stated that sending a lying spirit is different from lying.

I repeat that that is eminently FALSE. He who sends another to commit an act is guilty of perpetrating that act. This holds true even in law.

In the same way if i hired an assassin to murder you, I would be convicted of first degree murder. It would make no sense, and is a puerile argument, to suggest that I would NOT be responsible because I committed the act through another's agency. That person acted as my agent, and as such the action remains mine.

Similarly it remains indisputably true that the lying spirit referred to in the OP was sought, authourised and dispatched by Yahweh and as such the actions of that spirit in telling lies were the actions of Yahweh carried out through an agent. This is irrefutable - so would you kindly tell me what you are on about ? ? ?

How pathetic. Please look for more coherent excuses.

We see a Jewish deity issuing genocidal instructions to his people and openly admitting to consorting with demons and approving the deliberate disemination of LIES and all we can say is . . . He is God. . . so whatever he does is right.

That is what i define as pathetic.

davidylan:
I'm not sure how much coherence one can deduce from this. God sent "lying spirits" but they were ONLY SENT through FALSE PROPHETS of baal. Prophet Michaiah had already given God's perfect word to Ahab but he chose to ignore it and instead as his own self-made "prophets". Seriously its amazing how much these guys are unable to reason.

I really love this thread. Show a Christian a clear text in his hallowed book of Jewish myths and he quivers, jumps, starts, spins around, vomits, insults, creates a circus. . .

Dr. David - no amount of dubious spin can change the clear words - Yahweh procured the services of a lying spirit and expressly approved the disemination of lies to men on Earth.

How can you justify telling lies simply by saying that the person you are lying to is a liar already? ? ? Does that make any sense? And you have the nerve to come here talking about an elusive ability to reason. How doea the fact that the Prophets were of Baal justify the disemination of deliberate falsehood by a God who is defined as TRUTH.

O, I really really love this thread.

Its always so easy for you to go on and on about Allah this, Allah that. . ,   now taste the bitter pill of the ludicruous personality of your genocidal pagan semitic deity called Yahweh.

I repeat: that you worship such an entity is reprehensible, comical and embarrasing.

Romeo4real:
Surely Deep Sight, you can see yourself that these two statements are not the same? C'mon!

What is the difference between sending a lying spirit and lying? ? ? ?

The same difference between sending a hired assassin and killing someone yourself!

Give it up friend.

noetic16:
I think it is disgraceful, considering your level of education that u can deduce from that passage that Jehovah lies.

I did not deduce anything. It is there in black and white. You stop lying. Or are you taking a cue from Yahweh?

YOUR worship of a discreditted, dishonest, genocidal and barbaric Jewish deity is reprehensible, comical and frankly embarrasing.

InesQor:
^^^
I was actually waiting to see Deep Sight modify his post and remove the last line "How old are you?". Maybe I should have quoted it for future reference.

It is refreshing that you have come to have a sense that I would retract anything I say that I consider unseemly. You should appreciate that.

^^^ Please make a coherent post jaare.

What personal vendetta is there in Pastor AIO's post? ? ? Listen - there is only ONE reason you left off and that is the fact that there is NOTHING you were able to say that made any sense in terms of defending the self-confessed lying jewish tribal deity that you worship.

If at all you read Pastor AIO's post, then you have failed to show that you were capable of understanding what he wrote.

In that case i will summarize it for you as follows -

Yahweh by his own admission has stated that he tells lies - he himself admitted that he[b] "sent lying spirits."[/b]

Noetic is a person who has stated severally that he hears personally from God. This may be true, but Pastor's question is simply - when you hear from God, how do you know that he is not sending a lying spirit to lie to you? After-all he has done so in the past. Simple.

I hope you can see the reason Pastor selected Noetic for that comment. Its based on noetic's visions and personal revelations.

So its nothing to do with any "personal vendetta" as you comically asserted.

Pastor AIO:
Of course the really fascinating thing here, which it seems that no one has hit upon yet, is the fact that these people were invoking Yahweh. Do you get it? These were his prophets calling on him to give them a message. And indeed, a spirit sent from him came down, and it lied to them.

What are the implications of this?

Noetic is a man that claims to talk to God often, in his dreams. If we allow for the fact that his claims are authentic that leaves one more hurdle. Can he trust that the revelation that he receives is the truth? If he can, what I'd like to know are, what are his criteria for knowing whether or not God is lying to him?

Is he arrogant enough to claim that God can never deceive him, perhaps because he is smarter than God and can see right through God when God tries to lie to him? Or did God promise him that he wouldn't be lied to? Well how can he be sure that that wasn't a lie.

In fact perhaps all his hopes for Heaven in the hereafter are founded on a lie and the jokes on him. Come judgement day, huxley and mazaje will be there on the right hand of yahweh busting their guts and rolling on the floor laughing at him as he gets thrown into a lake of fire. Buuuuaahhahahahahahahahahahh.!!!

Brilliant!

Since Yahweh tells lies, Christians have no assurance that anything written in the Bible is true in the least!

Well since you are a Theist, I am sure you may have no problems in terms of the core argument.

Mazaje had said that it is not contended that everything came out of nothing. He referred to the big bang as an expansion from a singularity.

I seized upon that because Atheists are always too happy to respond to the question - "where did everything come from?" - by responding - "a singularity."

They state this without having any understanding of what a singularity is or could be. I am firmly convinced that even the scientific exponents hardly grasp the term.

Would you care to comment on the question of singularities?

Romeo4real:
Firstly, i take offence at this moniker. It is patronising.

You will note that I did not return your insults. A playful jibe is all i could muster.

Now i am flummoxed. I did not misquote you, and yes, i DO disagree. I paraphrased what you said, and your statement above does confirm that is what you said.

In paraphrasing me you should be careful. Because hanging a murderer after a court has sentenced him to death is violence as well - but justifiable.

Barging into a village and shooting everybody dead on account of their tribe or language is violence too - but EMINENTLY UNJUSTIFIABLE

You know very well that the god described in the bible is serially guilty of the worst form of genocidal injunctions and barbaric reprisals.

That is the god that YOU worship - the god that has been imported from a foreign land and which you now eagerly bow down to.

I reserve the right to view that god, and your worship of that god, as both reprehensible and comical.

Quite clearly, the Bible paints a multifaceted picture of God (if u believe in the Bible). You edit out the parts you don't like, or don't "agree" with, and hold on to the parts you like and "know". Just because you don't know/like something is not proof of its lack of existence. You should be glad that you do not know this facet of God, rather than denying its lack of existence.

Doubtless God being infinite must have an infinite degree of facets.

This does nothing to justify or explain the willful LIES AND ACTIVE PROPAGATION OF LIES THROUGH CONSPIRACY WITH DEMONS AS CLEARLY WRITTEN IN THE OP.

The contradiction is untenable for the simple reason that God is supposed to be TRUTH - according to that self same bible.

It seem to me that you do believe in the concept of an omnipotent, omnipresent deity, creator of all things, but not in the "God" described in the Bible. Subsequently, i can assume you do not believe in the Bible.

THE Bible is an interesting book and contains alot of valuable history, information and wise counsel.

But it is by no means undiluted Truth.

It is not my creed, and I do not live my life based on it.

Hello Sir Nwankwo. Please can you be spacing your writing as it will make your post easier to read. Right now I have to copy it into word and space it before I can read it.

And our dear friend called Romeo will call us "silly" without bothering to explain these glaring inconsistencies.

Romeo4real:
It is really a shame i came to this post so late.
I would have loved to teach Deep Shite and Mazeje or whatever his name is a thing or two regarding Einstein's Theory of relativity, the space-time continuum and Stephen Hawkins theories on quantum physics, black holes, cosmic inflation, string theories, muons, tauons, neutrinos - and how they all challenge/affect E=Mc2, and give meaning to the space-time conundrum.

Well rather than impress us with what you would have liked to do, why dont you go ahead and impress us with what you actually do?

The ball is in your court.

Mr. Romeo Lover-boy;

I would adjure you to read and contextualize a thread before posting.

I would also adjure you to take the time to study the perspectives of people before reaching hasty assumptions about them.

Romeo4real:
This is a silly statement, and the one who replied "sure" was just as silly.

Thank you. . .

You are propagating your idea of what God"cannot" and "can" be. You are defining it with your own understanding and parameters.

Actually no. I am propagating exactly what is written in the Bible as the actions of God. Its there in black and white. I did not write it.

The argument is not about what we "think" God "is", it is rather about "who" He says he is, and whether we believe that, or not! This is the difference between believers and non-believers.

Who told you I am a non-believer? This is what I mean when I say please take the time to study the perspectives of people before reaching hasty assumptions about them.

The funniest thing i come across all the time on these forums, is that so many non-believers are torn between arguing about what God really is, and what he is not, and whether He exist at all, thereby undermining the very foundation of their argument.

Assumptions again.

Dear friend every one who has read my posts on this forum is aware that I am a Deist – and that connotes belief in an Almighty and Supreme Deity – God – who created all that exists.

I have opened countless threads on this board seeking to prove the existence of God.

Here is one of the earliest –

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-315294.0.html

I mean look at the statement above. Deep Sight is arguing that the two concepts of God cannot be reconciled - Mercy & Violence (which is an impossibly silly statement in itself),

Careful Romeo – and do not misquote me. I did not say violence could not exist with mercy. I specifically stated that genocide and senseless ethnic cleansing are not compatible with the idea of a merciful God who is the embodiment of truth. Do you disagree with this?

but we remember he is talking abut something he claims does not exist. So, which one is it?

If you really believe something does not exists, there is ultimately no point in arguing about what it is , or is not.

Lawd have mercy. For the umpteenth time, I am a Deist – so I believe in God.

I do NOT believe that the Jewish tribal deity called Yahweh is God. The actions, lies, war-mongering and cruel reprisals of that Deity as well documented in the Old Testament are sufficient for me to conclude that that Deity could not be the Almighty, responsible and well-behaved God that I know and believe in myself.

Is that hard for you to grasp?

Interesting. Let me ask your own view on that -

Do you think it is possible for God to REVEAL HIMSELF in the manner claimed by Religion.

noetic16:
and what happened to your objectivity . . . . .since God called it JUDGEMENT? The same way u might receive judgement in HELL if u do not accept Him gift of mercy.

Why are you threatening me with Fire?

Jeremiah 7:31 says, "And they have built the high places of To′pheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hin′nom, in order to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart."

^^^ I am honestly dumb-founded by your post.

You assert that man - mere man - CREATED Time? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Good grief, where do i start from?

Your scientist friends do not even assert that. They assert that time was created at the moment of the big bang.

Mazaje, do you want to re-think that statement of yours before we proceed?

MyJoe:
Why is there no single theme that runs through REVELATIONS which spiritual people hold up as coming from God to serve as "proof" that their way is right?

It is beyond cavil that the essential message of virtually all revelation cutting across varied religions and worldviews is actually the same - to wit - :

Love thy Fellow Man.