₦airaland Forum

There is NO moral giver any where, everything about morality was learned. . . .Morality differs from place to place and it MUST be learned. . . .Morality is not objective and evolves all the time

You need to have absolute knowledge to know that there is NO moral giver any where.
Therefore since you do not have absolute knowledge the above statement is fallacious.

Sure even some animals have been shown to have a sense of morality

Animals have been shown to have communal tendencies for survival not a sense of morality.

I think anthropomorphism, the projection of human traits onto animals is what is responsible for all the clamour on animal morality.

At any rate God created Animals and Humans. Animals having morality does not say God is not Moral. I do not see your point here.

will the imaginary holy spirit come and explain and end the argument once and for all

1. If you think the Holy Spirit is imaginary then why do you expect any action?
2. The Holy Spirit does not barge into the consciousness of people. The bible says the Holy Spirit is gentle.
3. Most people are not even asking the questions. The Holy Spirit is always available to give insight.
4. The major role of the Holy Spirit is as a (paracletos) - An intercessor or a comforter.
5. The Holy Spirit is not a replacement for study and logical reasoning or else there would not be the verse telling us to "Study to show ourselves approved unto God"
6. Jesus had the Spirit of God but He studied scriptures and debated with the leaders of the Temple.

You God does not exist in reality because he can not be shown to exist on his own without human influence

The above statement is fallacious sir.

Does the fact that relativity had to be shown and explained by Einstein prove that relativity does not exist in reality?

Please take time and READ THIS

Anyone can find holes in anything. Most discoveries are not complete and there are continuous modifications.

the article at the link says Radiometric dating would suggest that the earth is younger than previously thought.
That is a general statement.
It could mean that the dinosaurs were wiped out 40 million years ago as opposed to 65 million years ago.

Let's work with definite facts as much as possible if we intend to disprove known fact.

You accused Christians of being intellectually lazy in one of your earlier posts forgetting that Jesus Himself said unless you receive the Kingdom of God as a child and it is further written that God has chosen the foolish things of this world in order to confound the wisdom of the world.

Intellectual laziness is not confined to Christianity.
Most people are intellectually lazy.

Children are inquisitive and ask a lot of questions. That is not intellectual laziness.
Receiving the kingdom of God as a child refers to we being true seekers with no hidden agendas or motives.
We should approach the search for truth without trying to justify our sexual proclivities or out passionate indulgencies.

If the fossils with their record of sin and death already existed on the sixth day (according to you)---then it would not be very good as declared in the bible.

Fossils are the remains of a creation that existed and had become extinct before the beginning of the six days.
Since they were not part of the six days creation then yes the six days creation was VERY GOOD.

Jehovah God Himself declares that He created the Heavens and the earth in six days: He doesn't say He "recreated". I 'd rather believe God than speculations

Please quote the bible verse where Jehovah God declared that He CREATED the heavens and the earth in six days.

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Worlds here refer to dispensations or periods not the physical earth.

Strongs
ahee-ohn'
From the same as G104; properly an age; by extension perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specifically (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future): - age, course, eternal, (for) ever (-more), [n-]ever, (beginning of the, while the) world (began, without end). Compare G5550.

What is the Hebrew word for "recreate" and where does it appear in the Bible

The hebrew word aw-saw is translated as exercise, fashion or finish.
It can refer to the formation of something from previous things. It is distinct from baw-raw which refers to original creation.

This is the reason why we use the word re-create. You cna choose to use the word fashion instead.

It is all in a bid to ensure clarity.
English has morphed from the time of King James.

Nehemiah 9:6

Again the reference was to aw-saw so there is no inconsistency.

Isaiah 41:20; 43:7

in 41:20, Isaiah just made an allusion to the fact that God created the earth and everything in it. (He made no mention of 6 days)

in 43: 7, Isaiah may have been referring to the various distinct parts of a Human being.
"Created him for my glory" may have refered to the unique God-like characteristic of man (which we have established as an original creation worthy of the word baw-raw)

"I have formed him; yea, I have made him" may have refered to the physical body of man that was formed from the dust. Note that our physical bodies were not created, they were formed. This would mean that our physical bodies resemble those of human-like species that existed during the GAP.

Exodus 34:10

There was no reference to creation in Exo 34:10. Please give me the correct verse. Thanks

Genesis 1:27

the word create = baw-raw.

At this point, after establishing the reason for creation in verse 26 the writer turns his gaze on Man (not just the species)
Note that even though man's physical characteristics may have been fashioned after a previous species, the essential quality that makes humans human was novel, the words IN OUR OWN IMAGE had never been used for any species before now so in its own right it should be referred to as a new and original creation.

Another defining thought here would be that the earth even during the GAP looked markedly similar to what we have now and when God said let there be lights in the firmament all that happened was that God made the atmosphere thin enough for humans to be able to view luminous bodies in space.

Genesis 1:26-27

Make in verse 26 = aw-saw (which we interpreted as recreate)

It could mean that God said "Let Us recreate the species (that looked like the humans we have now) in our own image after our likeness"
Note that even though some species in the GAP could have had many physical characteristics similar to human beings they were not human beings because the defining characteristic of humans is elucidated in the words - "IN OUR OWN IMAGE".

So God could have recreated a certain human like species in His image.

The fact that these words are used in synonymous parallelism such as in Genesis 1:26-27; 2:4; Exodus 34:10; Isaiah 41:20; 43:7 and especially in Nehemiah 9:6 shows that God created everything in the universe in 6 days and that there is no difference between barah and asah in biblical usage.

Let me address the apparent synonymous parallelism.
1. Note that the bible is composed of various books so we'll have to restrict the application of synonymous parallelism to at most individual books.

If God made everything in 6 days then where and when did He make "other things" that is not included in the "everything" ?

If God recreated everything it means He created some things before and then recreated those things.
Replacing made with recreate would make it all the more apparent.
The word to note here is RECREATE.

I don't think alethea limited creation to just an Original Human Creation, what type of creation do you think existed before Genesis 1:2 what do you mean by the Original Creation?

By the Original Creation I mean everything that was created during the GAP.
There were no humans during the Gap.
There may have been species which had characteristics similar to humans the same way apes have characteristics similar to humans today but there were no humans.

A human being is much more than just this physical shell. We have many meta-physical characteristics a notable one being the ability to imagine.
Imagination is the definitive trait that enabled research, science and most inventions.
Science has not found the existence of this type of imagination in the time before recorded history - The GAP.

If there was imagination during the GAP then most likely the beings would have conquered space considering the pace of science humans have recorded (within 6000 years - extremely short in comparison to millions of years).

Another thing you have in common is speculation and assumption that God could have created a set of beings that lived for millions of years

I wouldn't say it is an assumption despite the fact that it is not directly confirmed by the bible for the reasons below:
1. The bible is a source of truth but not the only source of truth.
2. The bible encourages us to look at nature to decipher the truth of God's existense
3. Science HAS SHOWN that there were beings that lived more than 65 million years ago and since the bible doesn't say the opposite then I accept.
4. Science is the pursuit of truth through empirical methods. It may involve guess work but it is always in the pursuit of truth
      Note that science places evolution where it should belong -  As a THEORY not a law.
      Science is not evil. Science does not oppose God. Science does not seek to replace God

The problem most people have with science can be traced to intellectual laziness. Most people are not willing to question their beliefs in the light of empirically verifiable truth. I think this is the height of HYPOCRISY.

What you have in common with evolutionists is the old age of the earth, that it is millions of years old

I think it is more correct to put it this way
What I have in common with SCIENCE is the old age of the earth.

You may not believe in the theory of evolution but don't you think that your gap theory is trying to justify the million of years that evolutionist believe their carbon dating puts the fossils and rocks as?

I do not think carbon dating was invented by evolutionists for the sole purpose of proving their theory right.

Radio-Carbon dating is based on the laws of science and Willard Libby got the nobel prize for it. This is quite in contrast to Darwin's theory of evolution which is just an unsubstantiated theory.

really? The christian thing to do is not only to wipe out Al-qaeda members but kill all their male offspring and male relations in addition to forcefully enslaving their wives and children,not so? Is this not the moral thing according to the bible?

No it's not the Christian thing to do according to the bible.
Even with Al-Qaeda, we still do not have a replica of the situation that the jews faced in those times even though it is closer than normal warfare.

These days there are many ways to avoid warfare unlike in ancient times when dialogue was not an option most times.

I believe the scripture you quoted earlier said they should take the women as their wives not enslave them.
At any rate God did not encourage the jews to maltreat their slaves.
By marrying the women from the cities they conquered they inadvertently incorporated the women into their culture and system.

Says who? We all know the Taliban which controlled afghanistan wants to exterminate Americans and american interests, not so? And we know most Muslim Afghanistanis dont care much for the welfare of America either. If the US droped a nuke bomb and wiped out the entire population, will that be moral or immoral?

It would be immoral because Muslim afganistanis are not a threat to Americans. The Taliban is. At any rate the Nuke will affect more than just Afganistan.

step 5: Establish the existence of evil

1. Humans of all tribes have a sense that something is not quite right.
2. Humans of all tribes have a word for bad or evil and there is a general agreement that people do evil things
3. There are jails all around the world for the punishment of people that commit crimes.
4. Crimes that are considered inhuman have been recorded throughout history
5. We have examples of hitler, stalin, mussollini et cetera

6. Therefore Evil is a reality that cannot be explained away.

If when America invaded iraq or Afghanistan they went ahead and murdered all the males including non-civillians, enslaved the women and children or murdered the entire country with a nuclear bomb you mean your God will tell them America you have committed an immoral act because you have borders, you dont have cannibals, you have embassy, you control international trade and you have telephones?

No it would have been immoral because they didn't have to do it.
The war against terrorism is another matter altogether where you have to kill every member of al-Qaeda until they stop terrorizing Americans.

If members of al-Qaeda were killing Americans and wouldn't stop until they wiped out every American or were wiped out by Americans then it is just to wipe them out.

It would have become a matter of survival

I'm sorry but are you saying, this is enough reason to go and wipe out entire cities with the sword, steal land, forcefully enslave people, murder civillians including innocent women and children? Just because they are "insane"?

If you had an unrepentant group of people who are bent on exterminating you and the only way out of the quagmire was to kill them or be killed yourself then you have a justification for killing the males (which would be mostly soliders)

Can you tell us these unique situations that we no longer experience today?

1. We now have globally accepted boundaries of nations everywhere as opposed to a situation where majority of the available land space was contestible and we only had small groups of people typically living in autonomous cities with the exception of the then known world powers.

2. We no longer have legalized cannibalism or sacrifice of human beings to deities in any country.

3. We now have embassies of foreign nations in most nations of the earth as opposed to a state of almost total anarchy.

4. We now have worldwide communication and a basic understanding of all the major cultures of the world if not all the cultures of the world.

5. International trade is not controlled by military might but by balance of trade and what each person can bring to the table.

In general, We have a much more sane world

In other words, It is moral and acceptable as international law?

It is as moral as killing is moral in a war situation.

In other words, there are some situations (which we do not experience today) where it is moral and acceptable as international law.

Step 4: Establish that God is Just / Morally Upright

1. Human beings have a sense of a morality and since there has always been a sense of morality in all recorded history we can conclude that humans were created with a sense of morality.

2. If we were created with a sense of morality then our creator must be moral as a moral law requires a moral lawgiver.

3. Therefore God is Just and Morally Upright.

Furthermore the universe would collapse without justice at its most basic form (Cause and effect or Newtons 3rd law)

@everyone

I started this thread to try to answer specific closed-ended questions.

Debates around creation and religion have gone on for centuries and I guess they will continue to go on.

I'd appreciate more closed-ended questions because I have limited time on Nairaland

Please do you find the injuction below immoral and will you consider it immoral if this exact same passage verbatim is written into our international law guiding warfare.

We do not have situations similar to that faced by the jews so those laws would not be fit for international law today.

On the other hand if we had circumstances similar to that faced by the jews then it would be acceptable as international law.

@mudley

Remember that you are the one that said my God is fictional.
Since you are the one that made the first statement (rather than asking me to prove that God is not fictional) you are the one who is doing the screaming here and are thus the one that is clobbered by the cartoon you posted.

Another thing worthy of note is that the cartoon would be well on point if we are dealing with tangible things that we can see touch or handle whereas we are dealing with something of an order higher than us (not just a simple baseball).

If you have read through the thread you'd have come across a particular post by pastor AIO where he was trying to elucidate how to prove to a blind man that there is a moon in the sky. That analogy is closer to the problem we are facing here.

The baseball analogy just doesn't do justice to what we are discussing in this thread.