₦airaland Forum

striktlymi: Does this apply to both the life we have now and the life after?

Rossikk: If You Were God, Would You Demand To Be Worshiped?

Would you command all men and women to bow at your feet and do your bidding at every instant?

Would you decree grievous, deathly, torturous, everlasting punishment for those humans who failed to worship you or otherwise obey your dicates?

NO?
.
.
.
.
.
.


THEN NEITHER DOES THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE.

Candour: Let others see Jesus in you, Let others see Jesus in you.
Keep telling the story, be faithful and true:
Let others see Jesus in you

Deep Sight: In answer to your title, LB, the following are acts of high treason and blasphemy which are deeply offensive to Christians -

1. Claiming that virgins do not get pregnant.

2. Claiming that people do not walk on water.

3. Claiming that donkeys do not talk.

4. Claiming that human sacrifice cannot redeem anyone.

5. Claiming that a certain Jewish Rabbi/ Carpenter who lived 2000 years ago is not God.

So please stay away from these offences upon pain of death.

fifa456n: I am an Atheist. I was raised up by my mom only as my Dad was abroad in Canada and Later United States. Growing up, i went to church just like many other kids in Nigeria, I was honestly curious about God and i asked my mom questions about God, but i was quickly shunned and told the usuall bs answer, God is Mysterious, dont question God and such. Later, i repressed these curious questions and feelings about God, especially after stories of hell, and i started to believe and worship God. I moved to the United States in 2007, and around my junior year in high school, it all changed. I had a friend who was brought up in a christian household just like i was and he eventually became an Atheist, i started to question to, but was still sort of a theist, until i met a guy who lived closed to me, we started talking and he mentioned stuff about islam and how Jesus is not really a divine God or anything, he also criticized christianity and he made some good points, so i started doing research online and before i know it, i realized that it was all a lie. Fast forward to my freshman year in College, I reached the conclusion that I am an Atheist, free from dogmatic principles, Free at Last!

Finally.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
Epicurus

bigoduni: Deut 29:29

plaetton: C'mon Anony, to whom are you trying to sell this giant whopper?
Nigeria should be a good example for you since we probably have the highest number of professed born again Christians in the kdown universe.

plaetton: Clearly that is what many of us see.

plaetton: Oooh yes I do. They become hypocrites, narrow minded, delusional, and very corrupt.
We have millions of examples in Nigeria.
I fear for heaven.

mazaje: What happens when a person gets born again?. . .

mazaje: Then some people can use their free will to disobey god just as satan did . . .

Kay 17: It seems there is a direct proportionality btw freewill and sin.

And frm what I have heard, freewill isn't diminished in Heaven.

thehomer: I didn't miss it, what you tacked on was simply irrelevant to the idea of well-being. Or do you once again wish to use some mystical notion of well-being?

LightningLord: You say an action cannot be judged moral without reason. What determines the reason? What motivates man?

Pastor AIO: Not quite.

I know I exist. I know I have experiences. I believe various things about my experiences with varying degrees of certainty. I realise that at the heart of all thought systems I've come across is paradox. Leading me to believe, with fairly high certainty, that all thought systems are bounded by paradox.

Let's move on, indeed. I'd rather talk about stuff that can be spoken about.




I hear what you said. And this is what I said earlier in this thread and elsewhere which I believe is not too far away from what you are saying.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I was referring to the abandoning of twins actually. Worldview has a great effect on what you think is morally right or wrong.

In other words the attitude to dead, whether it is murder, or suicide, or illness, of a person depends a great deal on his worldview. If for instance he believes in life after death, or reincarnation then death is a much more trifling affair. If he thinks that he will be going to a party in Valhalla if he dies in battle that is going to affect how he will fight.
If he thinks he is going to paradise to have sex with 72 virgins if he blows himself up, then he is not going to consider that move such a waste of life.

It is actually the Atheist/materialist viewpoint that sees a life as a one off 'miraculous' event that considers it more preciously. You hear them say things like, 'you only have one life' 'live life to the max cos one day you'll just die'. The man who is hoping for an afterlife is going to live this life with an eye to 'making heaven' even to the extent of compromising the fullness with which he lives this life. It'll even be okay to burn a heretic at the stake so as to eventually 'save his eternal soul'.

Logicboy03: Have checked it out.


By the way, I know you dont have any chance to spin any counterarguments here

thehomer: Then you have implicitly accepted that genocide for the purpose of taking people's lands is not immoral.

This is you just getting confused on the use of objectivity. The point of view of the "designer" isn't objective, it is his point of view. Necessity is something else entirely. Necessity implies that it cannot be any other way.

See the end of my response yet again.
No, I'm asking you for a link to where I made the claim you're attributing to me.

Asked and answered.

Now can you tell me why God's views are objective but not the alien's?

Logicboy03: Fail



The robots in the matrix were very physical. Neo was shown physical proof. Try again



However, this is a hypothetical situation. I do not believe that we are controlled by robots. The point is that we can not disprove that we are humans in capsules that are fed delusions by robots to believe that we are in the real world

thehomer: What you're getting wrong right now is that you didn't ask the question you've asked now. Go and look through your posts. Secondly, when I was talking about complex thoughts, I didn't say "in the context of morality".

By your reasoning, your God had the choices of creating the universe and not creating the universe. Both of them should have either been equally perfect. Try not to shift your own burden to me.

That isn't what I've said either. I said I'm judging X immoral because it requires Y. If you think Y isn't actually immoral, you're welcome to say so.

And your evasions begin once more. I've asked you to tell me by your own standards whatever they may be whether or not commanding a genocide for the purpose of taking other people's land is right or wrong. It doesn't even require me to say anything despite the fact of what I've told you about the relevance of human well-being at the very least. Just say whether or not commanding genocide for the purpose of taking other people's land is right or wrong.

Logicboy03: Objectivity is based on logic and not the way a human ought to be.



please stop this falsehood.


Chain-smoking will always be objectively bad because it is damaging to the human body-

thehomer: That accusation was apt because as I'm sure you saw, you weren't answering the simple question I was asking. In fact on another thread, your inability to respond dragged on for multiple pages.

There's no irony there because unlike yourself, I didn't refrain from presenting my view, neither did I present something irrelevant.

I gave that short response for the discussion to have a starting point but since you want an explanation, then you're welcome to read these articles.

I hope you're also ready to have your views questioned as this discussion proceeds.

Happy reading.

thehomer: I'm sorry but this is just dishonest. This is what you said on that thread.

Objective good is dependent on an objective human well-being (i.e. the way a human ought to be). We can only legitimately say that there is way humans are supposed to be if there is a designer who has purposely designed humans to be a certain way.

Logicboy03: That is what this thread is for....explain why the matrix philosophy is more for theism.....why?

LightningLord: Goot. Now you get it. Yes

Logicboy03: Will do that! I will check it out because I know that you have some good philosophy stuff.

Anyway, please comment on your thoughts about the op

LightningLord: Obviously no, as she's evil simply because she offends someone's values.

thehomer: I don't care about how it discovers that knowledge, I said if it had that knowledge, then it would be able to understand that for a human, certain actions would be wrong. You're about to hitch your argument to something irrelevant.

thehomer: No you didn't. You're yet to actually show me contradicting myself. It looks like you've forgotten how long you dragged previous threads we engaged in simply because you refused to answer basic questions.

thehomer: If his purpose for them was that they should act morally, then he cannot be giving them immoral commands.

Yes objective moral principles don't need a designer since the presence of the designer doesn't make them objective, it just makes it subjective from the point of the designer. Yes humans are animals do you disagree with that fact? If you do, then you're saying humans are not animals. If they aren't, then I'd like to know where they belong in biological taxonomy. Where did I make the third claim you've attributed to me?

I've answered this several times already. I think you should now explain how God's views are can be considered objective but not this alien's views.