₦airaland Forum

toba:
Malachi 3 is part of his commandments.

Yes, Malachai 3 is part of God's commandments. The question is who is Malachai 3 directed at?

It is apparent that Malachai 3 is directed specifically at the Jews for the following reasons:
1. Verse 4 refers to the offering of Jdah and Jerusalem.
2. Verse 6 refers to them as the sons of Jacob.
3. Verse 9 refers to them as a nation that had robbed God.
4. In Chapter 4:4, they are enjoined to remember the law of Moses

The distinction becomes apparent when you consider that there are many commandments for example the keeping of the sabbath that are not for christians as they were laws of moses.

As Christians, we operate on the promises of God to Abraham, ot the laws of God to moses.

Jeses has fulfilled (i.e. completed, executed, accomplished) the laws and the prophets therefore they have passed away. Matthew 5:17
We are to serve God in the newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter (laws of moses) Rom 7:7

toba:
However what i understand from mark 12 vs31 32 is more than just loving your neighbor & God. loving God should make u obey his commandments in the bible.

Yes, I agree with this.

toba:
The OT serves as a basis for the NT which is why its very relevant.

Yes, I agree completely with this.

toba:
@logic, what u should understand is that different pple( believers & non believers) give interpretations to the bible according to their own understanding, just like u are doing now.

In a sense, I guess interpreting the bible according to our understanding is the best we can do.
The difference between me and a lot of people is that I open my understanding of the bible to criticism from everybody so I can be sure about what I understand and believe.

thehomer:
What I was asking is if this is justice to Job's children.

God didn't do anything to Job's children. Satan did.

God did not send satan to do any of the things he did. Sata had tried to do them in the past and only complained to God that Job was enjoying special privileges. God suspended those privileges and satan did what he had been trying to do.

The question is why satan was able to do all these terrible things. Answer: Man disobeyed God and in doing so corrupted the earth and gave satan the authority to do terrible things as a result of obeying him.

So in the case of Job's children, the answer is that they were born into a world where the devil does crazy things and they were victims of the corruption of the world. Note that the responsibility for their birth was on Job not on God.

toba:
How do u mean? if my uncle is right then i should follow is path&vice versa. is tithe not supposed to be 1/10th of everything u earn at the end of a period? If i earned £20(inclusive of salary, allowances+gifts) and then paid £2 as tithe where im i placed compared with my uncle that earned same thing and decided to deduct £2 as expenses and pays £1.8 as tithe?
Did we do the same thing? yes both are tithing but both arent same %. So who have done correct thing.

Get me well. I know i may pay 3/4 £ but not lesser than £2. what gives justification to anyone that does otherwise i.e paid less?

Tithe = 10% by definition. We can have tithe of something (your profits or your gross income, et cetera)
If you consider that tithing is a principle not a commandment then you would recognize that either you or your uncle can be right based on your convictions.

I have done a thorough search of the bible on this matter and I don't think there is any place in the bible where christians are commanded to pay tithes.
The only kind of giving in the early church were offerings (as one was prospered by God). 1 Cor 16:2

toba:
I dont agree with the bolded. So i can refuse to pay tithe& nothing will happen to me?
are  the curses inmalachi 3 not applicable to modern day believers?

Malachai was talking specifically to the jews.
Christianity was not even in existence. Jesus had not been born!

As christians, we are not under the law.
The reason we read the law is that it is a shadow of things to come so we can draw principles from the mosaic laws which is what paul was doing in his epistles to the Romans and to the Hebrews.

If you do not have any personal convictions concerning paying of tithes, I suppose you can skip it without fear!
The only commandments that apply to christians are these:
You should love the lord with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and
You should love your neighbour as yourself

thehomer:
We can demonstrate that these stories are mythological with knowledge of comparative religion, scientific knowledge, anthropology etc.

You keep forgetting that all you can establish with all the knowledge you have is that there is a high PROBABILITY that something (which you do not have sufficient knowledge about) is mythological.

I keep reminding you that you cannot make categorical assertions, the best you can make is conjectures. If you do not realise this fact then NO ONE can help you because it is a well known fact that data can prove anything.
You can derive all sorts of conclusions from the data that is available. If you take one of the possible conclusions and affirm categorically that that is the truth then you are most probably simply living in self deceit.

The reason why this does not apply to me is that I AM NOT MAKING CATEGORICAL STATEMENTS.

thehomer:
If you don't agree with what I've already demonstrated, then I guess you're implying that God has already judged everyone when he allows them to be collateral damage especially when one considers that people occasionally change their mind.

We as humans have committed many sins and we will be judged for each of them ONE BY ONE!
Judgement is not complete here on earth and the final judgement can only be after death. According to the bible, final judgement comes after death!

As for the collateral damage you are talking about. It only appears to be collateral damage because the story is being told from the perspective of Jonah. If the story had been told from the perspective of one of the sailors other people except that particular sailor may appear to be collateral damage. If the story had been told from the perspective of one of the other passengers other people except that particular passenger may appear to be collateral damage. If you continue this line of thought it would becoome apparent that in reality maybe no one was really collateral damage as each person may have rightly deserved that fate.

Also a criminal who has committed an offense (say murder) cannot decide to change his mind and alter his past. The past is the past and He will be judged for what he did in the past whether he regrets his actions or not!

thehomer:
So humans are judged based on their abilities and not what they've done, not done or could do?
Then how does he judge the 1 year old child that dies? Or he doesn't?

Humans are based on what they did in the light of what they could have done (i.e. their abilities) or in other words the possible choices they could have taken.

I do not think a 1 year old child that dies will be condemned by God because a 1 year old child does not have the abilities and thinking faculties of an adult and indeed cannot commit the sins that most adults commit.

thehomer:
Hmm. I'm asking if you consider such an act just. Also, please remember that his children also died during this test. Yet you consider this a just act.
No you claim it is the sin of Adam. The question is whether this is just. Punishing all humans for Adam's sin.

Ok imagine that a father and his children are in a car and the father is driving. If the father overspeeds and drives the car off a cliff what do you think will happen to the children and whose fault is it?

The answer is that it is the fault of the father and the children bore the brunt because they were in the same environment. This is not God's fault.
The world is a connected place and the actions of one person affect other people. That is how God designed it.

What you are experiencing is called hindsight bias, blaming God for creating the world since he knew there was the possibility of human suffering if Adam (the FATHER of humans according to the bible) did something wrong. What you have not considered is that Humanity would also have enjoyed great benefits had Adam done the right thing.

A father is responsible for His children not GOD!
God gave man the ability to reproduce so it is not God that actively makes a baby to be born into a war zone. It is the human beings that are responsible for the birth of the baby not God.

In the case of Job, his children were afflicted by satan not God. Satan presumably had done the same thing to other people. Other people had experienced natural disasters and other terrible things. What happened to Job's children was not unprecedented. It could have happened to them even if God was never in the picture.

In the story of Job, the only action God took was to withdraw His protection which He was not obligated to give in the first place. How does that make him an accomplice?

Your line of reasoning reminds me of a well known characteristic of people that makes them to complain when certain privileges (which they do not deserve) are withdrawn from them forgetting that they do not deserve those privileges and that the privileges are just privileges and not rights.
This line of reasoning is flawed and makes people weak!

Even Job who was experiencing the pain knew that it was a certain privilege that he had that was withdrawn not that his rights were violated.

toba:
Are Muslims also supposed to pay tithe?
Eg I have an uncle who's a legal practitioner. He told me in April this year that from whatever fee he earns, he deducts all expenses first before paying his tithe from the residue. His he right?
Myself based on the teachings i received, i pay directly 1/10th of salary+allowances. If u logic give me £10, i will still drop 1/10th. Now, im i right or is my uncle correct.

Well no one except the Jews (by the laws of moses) is commanded to pay tithes so I wouldn't say muslims are supposed to pay tithes but I guess they can also apply the principle of thanksgiving which is what they do with the zakat and the sadaqah.

Neither you or your uncle is necessarily wrong.

@toba , Tithe issue continued,

How did Abraham pay tithes?

Tithe paying by Abraham was only recorded once and it was paid by Abraham to melchizedec who Abraham saw as a messenger of God on account of Abraham winning a particular war.

Drawing an analogy to the present day, If we have a particular project or program then out of the profit ( spoils of war in Abraham's case) we can take a tenth and give it to someone who we acknowledge as God's messenger (Melchizedek in Abraham's case).
Tithe = 10% by definition.

Abraham did not pay tithes as a rule but out of conviction in a particular situation (we do not know the exact reason Abraham gave tithes).

In summary then, I think we should pay "tithes" as a result of a personal conviction or covenant we have with God.
Personally, I put more than 10% of my monthly salary in the tithe envelope but it is because of a personal conviction in response to God's blessings on me as opposed to just following rules.

I don't think any special punishment will be meted out to someone who does not pay tithes.

toba:
Are we to pay tithe as believers?
Are Muslims also supposed to pay tithe?

Paying of tithes was first recorded when Abraham gave tithes to melchizedec the king of Salem.
Paying of tithes was a statute for the Jews according to the mosaic law but the mosaic law does not apply to christians as it was given to the Jews as a stop gap and a shadow of things to come. Heb 10:1
The promise of God concerning tithes in malachai was to the Jews under the mosaic law.

Paying of tithes in my opinion should be done the way Abraham did it as we are heirs of the covenant of God given to Abraham. Note that the covenant was to Abraham and to his seed (Not of many but of one - Jesus Christ). Gal 3:16
Since we are Joint Heirs with Jesus then we are heirs of the same covenant of promise.

In summary, tithe paying is a principle not a commandment.

thehomer:
No you have it the wrong way around. It's if there is one illogical train of thought then that idea is inconsistent.

That law only affects those who make categorical statements. You are the one who said (categorically) that the God of the bible is inconsistent and therefore cannot be believed.

To prove that not all swans are white (or God may not be inconsistent) all I have to present is one black swan (or provide 1 train of thought that can prove God's consistency in a given situation).
to prove that all swans are white (or God is inconsistent) then I will have to examine ALL the swans on earth (prove that there is no single train of thought that can prove God's consistency in a given situation).

thehomer:
Evolution is not based only on the physical appearance of two organisms.

By saying look alike, I mean physically, genetic, and in every other sense!

I think it will do some good if you summarize the the theory of evolution and the basis for the theory because as far as I know the major basis for evolution is the similarity between various organisms which suggest common ancestry (of course it could suggest other things as well!)

thehomer:
I already said this. I believe these things because that is what the evidence points to.
The decision is that I agree with the theories formulated based on this evidence.
As for summaries of the evidence, I have presented you with some on evolution. And you can look up the evidence for the Big Bang. I think it's up to you to present what you think is wrong with them.

Please state the evidences and the conclusions you have drawn from them in a systematic manner. (In the format below)

Assume x. If x then y. If y then z. Therefore if x then z.

thehomer:
Ok. I was speaking of Achan in Joshua 7.

What Achan did caused 36 men to die!
His family knew about what he did and did not stop him even though they knew about God's command therefore they were liable!

One other thing to consider is that if humans are not exterminated at death (i.e. they continue to live in another realm) then many of the things that seem cruel may not be so cruel in the light of the fact that they may receive some form of compensation after death. This is the bible's position.

It is not uncommon for people to live long and commit so many atrocities without any apparent judgement here on earth. These people will receive judgement after death.

(Heb 9:27 MKJV) And as it is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment,

thehomer:
Then high collateral damage is acceptable especially in a fight since this is just punishment for their probable sins.

Well so should you and so should God since all he knows are probabilities.

Where did the high come from? Remember that none of the sailors lost their lives.

God does not punish people for future sins. We are talking about judgement for PAST sins! If the sins have been committed then God has COMPLETE knowledge about the situation because it has already happened!

thehomer:
So what you're saying is that Jonah had no freewill? I ask because it was my understanding that God chose his prophets and not the other way around.

Yes God chose certain people to be His prophets but they could have declined the offer!
God does not bend people's will.

If God was used to bending people's will then we wouldn't have the story of Jonah in the first place because God could simply have made Jonah do His bidding without first running away.

thehomer:
Yet you see this as justice.

Sorry I do not operate in this way. If someone is giving me a very implausible story e.g like the person met a talking snake, I would still be skeptical.

Yes I agree but this does not mean one should simply accept any story they hear because the person saying it was known to be reliable. After all, the person may simply be mistaken.

If Adam had the ability to do the right thing and He knew what the right thing was he should be punished if He does the wrong thing.
Do you think otherwise? What excuse would Adam have considering the statement above?

We are not saying you should simply accept the story. What I'm doing is to give reasons why that story may be correct even though it looks credulous!

thehomer:
I meant you were speaking specifically of Adam and Eve not humanity in general.

All I'm saying is that a lot of it is mythological.

Of course this is why I say that posting such arguments are better done when one also considers counters to it and effectively dismisses them before going too far into the arguments.

You don't know for certain that the stories are mythological. They may sound mythological but that doesn't make them mythological.
You can prove that the stories are mythological by assuming a priori that they are mythological. That would constitute a fallacy!

thehomer:
I thought I had made this clear. Since you have pointed out that God does not know everything only probabilities, and to this one adds emergent properties, and the fact that God does not know what it's like to be human, how then can he actually be a just judge even if one were to accept that he created humans?

God is a JUST Judge because judgement in this case is based on the knowledge of the abilities Human beings have (and God knows our abilities if He created us).

For you to prove that God is not a just judge then you have to prove that God does not have the knowledge about the abilities Human beings have.

toba:
@logic1, i suggest u change your name to logical lol. Im enjoying your responses.

I still have lots of questions regarding the christian faith to ask( tithing,sowing,)and also on a particular message i heard on TBN not too long ago, but i wouldn't want to intrude into the flow of your frequency. I May have to, if i run out of patience

Keep it up God bless

I think you can start posting your questions. You have waited for a long time already. Thanks

thehomer:
My point is that giving Job these things then setting him up for the Devil to torment makes him an accomplice and he becomes partial if others are not given these opportunities but were still tortured. I'm still baffled that you consider these permitted tortures to be some sort of just.

1. The earth had been corrupted before Job came into the picture.
2. If God had not specially protected Job then Job may have gone through all the things he went through after God lifted the special protection he had been enjoying.

You have to realise that God does not always specifically afflict people on the earth. There is already suffering on the earth and that suffering was caused by the corruption of the earth due to the SIN of humans. IT IS NOT GOD's FAULT!!!

thehomer:
I already presented them during this discussion. Here is a summary for clarity.

I agree with the best evidence we have for making my decisions. So;
I agree with the Big Bang Theory of the beginning of the universe.
I also agree that humans evolved on this planet sharing common ancestry with other organisms on the planet.
I see no reason for holding any particular books as holy especially when one considers the conditions of the times when they were written.
I am also skeptical about this God of yours who is so inconsistent and seems more like a character invented during the times he was written about.

I'm not asking for what you agree with I am asking you to summarize WHY you agree with what you agree with.
Also please summarize the evidences and decisions.

Read up on randomness, skewness and assymetry. (You can start with Nicholas Taleb's Fooled by randomness).
You will discover that the fact that 2 things look alike does not mean that they have common ancestry.

Yes you can be skeptical about God's existence but you cannot declare that He is inconsistent if you do not have a thorough knowledge about the situations you refer to as making Him inconsistent. If there is even 1 logical thought train that can prove consistency then you do not have enough evidence to say categorically that God is inconsistent.

thehomer:
I think this is how we make some of our very important decision. You consider the pros and cons of an argument. Besides, what we're talking about here is not just about making a decision but also about justifying it with reasons in a sort of short writing form.

Should I then assume that you have filled all the[b] holes and gaps [/b] in your what you believe?

I seriously doubt that you have filled all the holes.
If you have not filled all the holes in your theory you shouldn't then require someone else to fill all the holes in theirs. That would be hypocritical and would prevent you from really discovering the truth.

I have said before that the best way to make any comparisons would be to examine the logical conclusions of the various theories since all theories have holes because of the fact that as humans, we do not have infinite knowledge (at least not yet!).

thehomer:
Another bad analogy. There are instances where God orders the deaths of families for the supposed crime of one person.

The analogy was of Justice not being about niceness. It is therefore not bad as it illustrates the point quite clearly.

As I have said before it is better that you actually state the instances rather than making blanket statements or else you could be making your decisions based on what you think rather than the FACT of what happened.

thehomer:
I know he didn't. I was just illustrating a fact of collateral damage. We as humans when punishing people or even in wars in these modern times, we consciously try to avoid collateral damage and genocide. People who do not are considered criminals. Why does God not try to avoid collateral damage?

Ah! but I said what could have been considered as collateral damage could in fact have been just punishment for some other things the sailors may have done.

Once you do not have complete knowledge of a situation you should refrain from passing conclusive judgement.

thehomer:
Hey but he has free will. He can choose to renege on an agreement. Though I don't recall Jonah having a say in his becoming a prophet.

This is a weak analogy. We're talking about what a person with a mind would do not about laws of nature.

God's laws should be as infallible as the laws of nature.

The laws of contract! You cannot choose to renege on an agreement when one party has given due consideration!

What my analogy was pointing out is that if you have enjoyed the benefit of a position (Jonah being a prophet or the choice to jump off the 30 storey building) then you cannot run away from the responsibilities (Jonah having to do what God told him to or getting killed as a result of falling from a great height).

thehomer:
No, my conclusion is that there are no good reasons to believe in this God of yours.

I don't understand what sort of law you're referring to because I don't see how a man eating a fruit lead to bacteria and viruses being pathogenic.

Yes you do not understand, and yes maybe Adam did not understand HOW eating the fruit would lead to bacteria and viruses being pathogenic but inspite of his not understanding it He could still have refrained from eating it.

You do not need to understand HOW something happens for you to believe it.
If you believe a particular person then you can believe what the person is telling you and indeed this is how most humans including you and I operate. There is simply not enough time to understand the HOWs of everything and in truth we cannot understand the HOWs of everything.

thehomer:
You're not talking about humans, you're talking about Adam and Eve.

Adam and Eve were HUMAN BEINGS.
You can be skeptical about the authority of the Bible but[b] remember [/b] that you do not have enough evidence to prove that the Bible is false!

At any rate, we have not even gotten to that part of the argument.
If you do not take things one at a time you will NEVER be able to truly understand complex logical arguments.