₦airaland Forum

solite3:
believing in Jesus goes deeper than mere confession, It is totally dependence on him and his finished works on the cross.

A truly saved person cannot lose his salvation because God preserves him by his word and by his Spirit.

hope this answers your question

You know of well known atheists, in on here, some formerly pastors, some pastors/deacons kids, who thought they were a saved person.

So ought to be, a truly saved person cannot lose his salvation because God preserves him by his word and by his Spirit

Maamin:
OK, can you tell me what is responsible for this extra size looking beings?

Maamin, I recall remarking that your earlier post has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.
Now in this new post, you're digging bigger holes to the already present ones in your previous post
I dont even know where to start from, as you've presented too many holes for me plug

I will try and curtail my post, so not to cause information overload

Now, you earlier asked me, by typing:
"This giants were they physically big?"

At which I replied:
"Yeah now
Of course, they're physically big, as big, if not bigger than the original and previous Nephilims"

"The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well,
when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men.
And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown."
- Genesis 6:4

"We even saw the Nephilim there—the descendants of Anak that come from the Nephilim!
We seemed like grasshoppers in our own sight, and we must have seemed the same to them!”"
- Numbers 13:33

"Some of these nations are descendants of the Anakim.
You know how tall and strong they are, and you've heard that no one can defeat them in battle."
- Deuteronomy 9:2

As I earlier said, the giants truly were wiped out during the Noah flood.
but guess what again Maamin, the giant (i.e. the Nephilim) gene survived.

The gene survived the flood, to re-produce Nephilims (i.e. still extra size looking beings)
Aside Numbers 13:33 and Deuteronomy 9:2, we know, anyway from Genesis 6:4, that giants were on the earth in those days and afterwards.

So, the gene surviving, is what is responsible for the still extra size looking beings

I know what your next question will be or should be

Maamin:
Humans procreate after their own kind.
All animals are mandated to procreate after their own kind.
Plants and trees and vegetations.
But then comes in cross breeding of two different species to produce another special one.

Yes, it is only God capable of physically impregnating humans.
Angels are only said not to be given in marriage or marry in heaven.
They are not specifically said not to be able to do so on earth.

1/ How, where and when has God impregnated humans?
2/ How do you mean " they are not specifically said not to be able to do so on earth"?

Maamin:
Angels that left their original estate and took daughters of men, are likely to be taking a human form to do just that not spirit.

1/ What verses are you basing "Angels that left their original estate and took daughters of men..." on?
2/ Who do you think angels in "angels that left their original state" are?

Maamin:
Yes she is right about nollywood/hollywood and all fantasy fictions you can think of...
but this particular teaching of the fallen angels is not.
I might term snake and donkey speaking as Hollywood inspired too...
since we don't see such in our day to day living.
In fact Isn't Satan crafty enough to had made a snake to speak?

You should know better, not to repeat the narrative that it is a snake that spoke
You also should know better, that Satan hasnt the power to make smallest animal to speak, talkess making a "snake" sic to speak
Get the facts right.

Maamin:
I couldn't agree with you more on this.
But the perfect natural order of angelic beings cohabiting with humans was not until the sons of God took in daughters of men.

Please stop doing this, it feels like hearing fingernails on a chalkboard

Bearing in mind, that the sun and moon are called sons of God,
I half expect you to say, the sun and moon took the daughters of men

Maamin:
It is even more of fantasy to even think the falling angels can't procreate since it was not categorically stated about them.

I hear you Maamin
even though Genesis 1:26-28, identifies categorically, clearly and definitely, who is to procreate
and knowing that angels when dispatched for a mission, dont have sexual designs, when they are sent and/or when they appear

Maamin:
It is..and it is very explicit about it.
Tell me what was the sin of these angels.

"²The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose.
³So the LORD said,
“My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.”
⁴The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well, when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men.
And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown. "
- Genesis 6:2-4

"Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God."
- Luke 3:38

I sure hope you clearly can see this, that, they are no celestial beings (i.e. angels) involved anywhere in Genesis 6:2-4
You're asking an invalid question, when you ask of the sins of imaginary celestial beings (i.e. angels)

Watch this. You're like asking a single man "Are you still beating your wife?"
That's an invalid question, as he has no wife,
just as, there were no celestial beings (i.e. angels) involved anywhere in Genesis 6:2-4, for you to be asking what where the angels sins.

The question shouldnt be what was the sin of these angels (i.e. celestial beings that are angels or messengers)
but it should have been what were the sins of these human beings

Maamin:
2 Peter 2:4-5
4For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Jude 1: 6
"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day."

You will wonder what this their first estate and own habitation is exactly.

You got caught up in the metaphors used in the bible.
The bible does this quite a lot,
using figure of speech that directly refers to one thing (e.g. human beings) by mentioning another (e.g. celestial beings) for rhetorical effect.

Maamin:
You will have to tell me the very sin of these falling angels or Sons of God in Gen. 6

"³Never marry any of them. Never let your daughters marry their sons or your sons marry their daughters."
⁴These people will turn your children away from me to worship other gods.
Then the LORD will get very angry with you and will quickly destroy you.
- Deutronomy 7:3-4

Did I notice you, in there above, capitalised the s, in sons of God?

Mobilia succinctly on Page 1 and I on Page 3, had already told you, their very sins were intermarrying
The giants were already on the earth before and after, produced by the sons and daughters of men
but when the sons of men decided to begin having sex with the daughters of men too,
then the children born turned out to be famous with plenty of brains, as well as not just only brawn.

Read Genesis 6:4-7 slowly but loud out, to see how because of their infamy, wickedness and warrior fixated attitude they met their waterloo.

Maamin:
While this falling angels are bound it is obvious that Satan and his cohorts are the demons wrecking havoc on humanity.
Ichuka said angels or falling angels don't possess, and that demons are different from falling angel which I also strongly disagree.
Well, Luke 22:3 says
"Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve."

All fallen angels are demons of some sorts
The word angel, designates messenger, beings whether celestial or human, who is given work to carry messages or do a task

I disagree along with you too

You get possessed by whatever you expose yourself to.
You can be possessed by whatever you permit yourself to come under its influence.
All it takes is, a lapse of judgement, drop in guard, error of judgement, metal lapse, being emotionally vulnerable for possession to take place

Satan has a free pass, and so with it, enters everywhere on earth with it.

Satan doesnt really need a green light before popping head in or around
Satan is already being and still is here on this thread, reading aptly with keen interest

Satan enters you, I and everyone.
It's not just Judas, remember the serpent, remember Peter
(i.e. when and where in Matthew 16:23, Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan!'')

Maamin:
I did not see much questions in your replies, may be I did not notice.
But I will reply them as best as I can.

Thank you. I am grateful to you for replying back as best as you can.

Maamin:
Sons of God is not used for angels alone.
But that of Genesis was not speaking about human sons of God but angelic sons of God.

I am sorry to be the one bursting your bubble
but your beliefs believing that Genesis was not speaking about human sons of God but is speaking of angelic sons of God are false and wacky.

Maamin:
John 1:12 is after Jesus came for redemption.
That we are born into the body of Christ and given the power to also become sons of God

"Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God."
- Luke 3:38

Luke 3:36-38 goes back, to men, before the period of the flood and its happening.
and then verse 38, tracing to the very beginning, says about Adam, that he was the son of God.

The sons of God, are descendants of Adam, but more specifically that of Seth, who had high regard for God.

Maamin:
Why make an exception in this particular sons of God in Gen 6.
While all older scriptures in the Torah refers to sons of God as no other than angelic beings.?

You are making a fallacy of equivalence.

Paste here each or all these older scriptures in the Torah that refers to sons of God as no other than angelic beings
and I'll prove you wrong, that not all the so called older scriptures in the Torah, refers to sons of God, as angelic beings (i.e. celestial beings)

Maamin:
We read,
"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh..." (Jude 6-7).

The first estate of the angels was to serve the purpose of God, not their own lusts for power, a lust for the daughters of men, or a lust to do their own will. Their "own habitation" is the spirit world as they were made "ministering SPIRITS" (Heb. 1:13-14).

They were not made "ministering flesh." They (the sons of God) were not to use their transformation powers to put on the flesh of men, which was "strange flesh" for them, in order to sire children with the daughters of men (mortal women).

Nowhere in scripture do we read of demons being able to do this.
However, the holy angels of God are still able to appear as men (Luke 24:4, Mark 16:5).

Although the holy angels of God tend to appear in shining garments, scripture reveals that they look like adult males to people.
Some of them look totally like ordinary men.
This is how it's possible to entertain them without being aware that they are an angelic being (Heb. 13:2).

Now It is no wonder that demons/devils now crave possession of a body.
In their chains under darkness, they no longer have the power to transform themselves into ordinary looking adult males as the holy angels of God can do.

Written up the way you've done, I have just come across and read a discombobulated post
I am sorry Maamin, but just you have to improve and do better than this

Maamin:
No sir! All the verse you put forward are weak in supporting your teaching. So no!

I am not teaching.
We havent, even with all I've put forward, scratched the tip of the iceberg, for it to even to be called teaching

Maamin:
Things of God are even more than reality for a spiritual mind.
Trust me they are spiritually discerned.

Buff up and start pushing the envelope then

Maamin:
Yet he was not called Son of God in Genesis, but a righteous man

"In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil:
whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother."
- 1 John 3:10

If Adam is called a son of God in Luke 3:38, what do you think makes Noah?

Why repeat a known and unnecessary fact, huh?
Look at 1 John 3:10 now.
Maamin, anyone practising righteousness, is of God, and by default, is a son of God.

Maamin:
You don't want fiction/fantasy doctrine. But this is what it is all about right now...
O Yes! angels took human females for themselves. It is possible.
And this is what the scripture teaches.

You whats the issue here?
You're too carnally minded, thats why you're clinging on to "angels" (i.e. incubi) taking human females for themselves
Where were and what were the succubi doing?
Painting their feet and finger nails?

Maamin:
No amount of sugar quoting or length you can water this down to say other wise.

1/ Maamin, why is it that its the men, as in human beings, that God singled out to punish for the sins of the daughter of men, committed with your supposedly "angels" with overly-imaginative and unrealistic tendencies?
2/ Why is it, that its man, that God mentions repeatedly, as having concerns over and so the reason He is going to destroy them?
3/ Why isnt there is a single mention of your supposedly randy "angels" being at fault as why He wants to clear up the earth with flood?

Mobilia:
I know brother. I deeply apologize.
I'm not running, it's just that I want to take a little time to go a little further into this subject since this is a discussion.

Just give me a few more days...and I'm gonna be able to focus and try to present this in the best way possible.

Pick your battles, those who fight and run, live to fight another day.

Mobilia:
I'm looking for a specific thing..so please bear with me

Just tell, what it is you're specifically looking for, darling.
You know what they say:
"a problem shared is a problem halved"

Mobilia:
Folks are more than likely, gonna disagree...
but I want to at least give an alternate interpretation of (beliefs) that many of us Christians have always held so dear.....

Are finger lengths equal?

Mobilia:
Ultimately we want to have the correct scriptural interpretation..led by the Holy Spirit
(although I don't know that we, humans, can ever come to that agreement).

It's not going to happen as long as "the jacket, shirt/blouse, trousers and shoes look too big on some of us" remains

Mobilia:
CC: MuttleyLaff
(Are you a theology major? Just wondering..)

Psalm 119: 97-176

solite3:
speaking tongues in social media?
how possible

Yes!.
Speaking tongues in social media, speaking and praying in tongues, written out on Facebook to be precise, is how possible.

Have you ever heard of Juanita Bynum?

solite3:
1/there are human tongues and there are non human tongues
2/no they are not
3/ no Jesus didn't but he prayed in the Spirit.

It is necessary, that I appreciate your fair and generous behaviour in answering these questions
I also want to say that I am grateful to you for answering them all and answering them in a neatly or easy to follow manner too.
Thank you

1/ Please list a few human tongues tongues
2/ Please list the non human tongues tongues you're talking of
3/ I am glad, we have established that speaking tongues or groanings are not the same thing, so what is speak in tongue?
4/ Is speaking in tongue not that good enough for Jesus to not speak it ni?
5/ Do you speak in tongue? When and where are all the places you speak in tongue?

solite3:
I m not talking of tongues

OK, I hear you, my hands in the air.
So does your long praying, span, say 2-3 hours or at max, 6 hours then?

solite3:
how did you come to the conclusion that I speak in different human languages

You're writing in English here, arent you?
So from that evidence, I safely concluded you, at least, speak in English

Now, I dont know what other languages you speak or can speak,
and so that is why, the earlier questions repeated below for you again, were asked:

1/ How many languages do you speak?
2/ Please list the names of the languages you speak, the ones you gave the number of, in #1 above.

Please answer the two above questions, for me then, to after, clear up what 1 Corinthians 14:14-19 means

solite3:
just because you have not experienced something doesn't mean it is false.

How did you come to the conclusion that I havent experience "something"?
How did you come to the conclusion that "something" is regarded to be false?

solite3:
have you heard of praying in tongues?

Of course, I have heard of praying in tongues.
I havent just heard of praying in tongues alone, I actually, do know about, praying in tongues, misunderstood.

How about you?
Have you heard about praying in tongues on social media, Facebook, as the example of this?

solite3:
there are things human language cannot express,
it can only be expressed through speaking tongues or even groanings

1/ Hang on, isnt human language speaking in tongues?
2/ Are speaking tongues or groanings the same thing?
3/ Did Jesus speak in tongue?
4/ Why did or did not Jesus speak in tongue?

solite3:
hahaha I don't count hours when I m praying, I can start praying from evening, when I m done I realize it's already night.

So, say 2-3 hours or at max, 6 hours?

solite3:
tongues can be used in prayers, songs and even teachings

What tongues, specifically, are you talking of here?

solite3:
when praying with people it's better to pray with understanding to carry them along.

God responds to the Spirit not to the flesh.

the inner man is the spirit man and it communicates to the God.

the spirit's language is unknown to humans.

Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities:
for we know not what we should pray for as we ought:
but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

I have never read nor come across a discombobulated post written up like this before
I am sorry solite3, but just you have to improve and do better than this

solite3:
Paul himself is an example

1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
14:16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
14:17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
14:18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
14:19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.

Please answer the two below question for me to clear up what 1 Corinthians 14:14-19 means

1/ How many languages do you speak?
2/ Please list the names of the languages you speak, the ones you gave the number of, in #1 above.

JeromeBlack:
Hitler was also a Christian

Was he now
Touche. "Ọrọ pari".

orisa37:
Hitler was Satan Incarnate.

Hitler was a tool
and a pair of idle hands in the devil's workshop

Maamin:
This giants were they physically big?

Yeah now.
Of course, they're physically big as big if not bigger than the original and previous Nephilims

Maamin:
What I understand is that so much has been restricted from those falling angels after their rebellion. Though they are still powerful and a little higher than man

Human beings are the only ones permitted and mandated to physically impregnate themselves

It is only God that is capable of physically impregnating humans.
Not angels, whether fallen or non fallen, who are 110% incapable of physically impregnating humans.

Maamin:
I think they can transform or rather shape shift physically at will...
the bible says "..even Satan has transform into angel of light".
This are higher ability inherent of these spirit beings.

But may be it has been bound and taken away from them in other not to keep replicating and perverting the natural order.

Show me one incident of fallen angel shape shifting in the bible.
None. Nada, not even one

Mobilia is right, about the effect of all these fantastical/Hollywood-inspired influences

The neatly arranged perfect natural order with its serene and systematic functioning set up was disrupted the instant the fruit was shared.
The world's already is and still is, in disorder.

Maamin:
You never know what their mandate is/was when they were created,
because bible did not mention it either.
I only perceive that a boundary was set for them perhaps in the aspect of procreating or mingling with human which they did not keep.

Be my guest, if you want to live in that fantasy world of fallen angels humping humans

Maamin:
Gen 6:1-6

Is that the only scripture for your fallen angel transforming into or appearing in physical human forms and performing fleshly activities?

I can list you lots of, a not fallen angel transforming into or appearing in physical human forms and performing fleshly activities

Maamin:
Here is what you fail to understand.
Jesus came as flesh, it was as God's plan, that is the divine will of God.
I'd just like God firming Adam earlier in Genesis.
Jesus can not be a mutated or extra physically different in appearance as compared to the perverted union between angelic brings and daughters of men.

Is like wanting a complete breed of goat or human from let's say a union of a man who had sex with a goat.
Trust me the outcome will not look like a normal kid/goat or a normal human child.

You need to back up the bolded for me with scriptures

I will and more, after you have answered the 5 questions listed,
and answer them one after the other the same manner I asked

Maamin:
His question stem from the use of the word "sons of God" and "Daughters of men". But I completely understand where he is going with it.

Like I said earlier, the Sons of God in Genesis 6, are no other than angelic beings.

sons of God is not an exclusive title for angels
It is not used only for angels

The bible, in John 1:12, says:
"But as many as received Him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,
(i.e. she, daughters of God, as well) even to them that believe on his name"

The word received, in John 1:12, refers to "regard",
as in, "regarding someone's power, authority, position etcetera"
adding up to mean, as many as have regard of/to Him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God.

It is not fallen angels but it is the human beings that had high regard for God, that went further down the slippery slope
by lusting after women (i.e. daughters of men) who had no high regard for God

Maamin:
Yes
Technically asserting that the mention of these sons of God were not just righteous men of God per say.
But higher spirited beings.
The very once referred to in Job, as rejoicing when the foundation of the world was being laid.

Why dont you drop the bible verse here.
Lets, together, do a peer review of it

Maamin:
All these are just assumption no concrete verse to foot the stand of this your speculation to.

Assumption, no concrete bible verse and outright speculation.
This is exactly what you are doing.

On the other what you read there, is reality, miles more and away from being assumption or speculation

Maamin:
Noah was still termed as a MAN who found grace and favour in the eyes of the lord.

ROTBL.
You know why "Noah was still termed as a Man and favour in the eyes of the lord" sic?
It is because he didnt think with his head. He thought with his other, better and correct head

solite3:
praying with the Spirit means praying as the spirit leads
but then we also pray with the understanding,
meaning praying with the interest of those around you in terms of their understanding.

How do you mean:
"we also pray with the understanding,
meaning praying with the interest of those around you in terms of their understanding"?
Particularly the latter ... meaning praying with the interest of those around you in terms of their understanding part

solite3:
personally I can pray for hours non stop but you may not understand my prayers.
prayers are not necessarily uttered words or understandable words
but what matters is that the inner man is connected and communicating.

1/ What does "I can pray for hours non stop" means?
2/ What is the longest hour you've done "I can pray for hours non stop"?
3/ Why mayn't me understand your prayer?
4/ If you arent praying in an earthly & human language, then in what language do you say these marathon prayers in?
5/ What is the "inner man"?
6/ What else, what word, what expression, what phrase can be used to describe the "inner man"?
7/ What is the "inner man" connecting to?
8/ What and how does the "inner man" communicate?

solite3:
praying in the spirit is praying with the awareness of God's presence.
this is just a summary

Give an example of this in the bible and with its scriptural reference

budaatum:
It doesn't mean that because you have consent you can go ahead and perform unethical procedures!
If the procedure itself is considered unethical, you can't perform it legally even with consent of the person being experimented on.
Current issues related to this is the argument we're having over here about canabinoids.
No doctor can currently prescribe it even if they want to except illegally, or the law is changed
or you're given special dispensation by the home secretary.
(MuttleyLaff informs me this is changing soon).
Another is abortions over a certain gestation period after which you can't get a normal abortion, consent or not.

Then there's the ongoing stem cell controversy where ethics is of immense consideration.
Different countries even have Stem Cell Laws stating whether they can be used and to which extent.
Stem cell research using the human embryo is permitted in Sweden, Spain, Finland, Belgium, Greece, Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands;
however, it is illegal in Germany, Austria, Ireland, Italy, and Portugal.
And where it is not permitted, consent is a rather mute point!

I just don't see the reason why you insist that consent is a waiver for ethics in experimental procedures, vaxx.
That's what you seem to be saying. If so, you are very wrong!

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cannabis-derived-medicinal-products-to-be-made-available-on-prescription
I am still lost for words, how you weren't aware of this

budaatum:
I have not claimed there is anything democratic about ethics! India, today, decriminalised homosexuality but I bet if they had to vote on it, it would still be a crime!

Yeah heard on LBC, this evening, that India has decriminalised same sex relationships
Whey Hey!

vaxx:
i like the way you pushed the question back to him....

He's a L-plate holder

LordReed:
LoL! Don't take it so hard, English can be difficult to understand sometimes. LMFAO!

[img]https://s1/images/MuttleysGato.gif[/img]
We all have demon(s)
but I choose not to feed mine.
My sympathy for you.
Hahahaha haaa.

LordReed:
LoL, English is really hard for you today.
So because I asked you a question it makes it that I hold it as true?
I think the airhead allusion is appropriate to you.

All you've been doing from #36 is running after shadows
Hopping from Machiavelli to fairky objective morality, then to and fro one poxy snide remark and the other or obsession with a fictional wall

Why didnt you leave a disclaimer saying you do not hold it as true?
Why were you trying to get me involved with fairky objective morality?

I wrote:
"I dont mind such remarks if coming from an airhead."

I wouldn't have minded, if you're an airhead or I allude you're an airhead
but I do mind those remarks because I know you arent an airhead
and you cant write better or classy posts without needing to resort to snide remarks

Idle hands are the devil's workshop, that's how the devil always finds some mischief for idle hands to do.

You're a recently certified mischief maker,
thats why lately you've been opening up Religion thread topics upandan the place that has no substance, head and/or tail

LordReed:
Why must I explain every detail like you are 2? It's boring you know.
I have a 3yr old here I can easily go and converse with.

It is Albert Einstein who famously said:
"“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”"

You're either inadequate, you're scared, you dont understand yourself or you're all of them.
I have not asked you to explain every detail like I am 2.
Even if I have or I am, what you afraid of?

I remember the last time I was with a 2 year old. It was marvel and fun galore
The intensely inquisitive, open and enquiring mind blew me away

I can relate, after Jesus, in Luke 18:16 and/or Matthew 19:14, saying:
"Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not:
for of such is the kingdom of God"

LordReed:
Oya come and force me to list it. LoLz.
I declare it unnecessary, go and bring police. LMAO.

I am compassionate and a lover.
I am not unnecessarily violent and do not force people to do things

Go and bring police to come to do what.
Are you alright.
I dont mind such remarks if coming from an airhead. SMH

LordReed:
It seems English is hard for you today.
Dude I DO NOT BELIEVE IN OBJECTIVE MORALITY.
Is that clear enough for you?
You need Igbo or Yoruba translation?

Seems someone is temporarily suffering from amnesia
Please do a complete re-reading of all your posts done today
You've forgotten about telling me this:
"I take it you do not believe in an objective morality"

You tried to embroil me in to fairky objective morality
but without giving it much of a sniff, I threw it, immediately back in your face

Now if you're claiming you dont believe in fairky objective morality, why for fairk's sake then, did you bring fairky objective morality up?
You even went further, to give me an example plus explanation of it.

Water don pass garri be dat, when people yield to the strong need to resort to posting with snide remarks

LordReed:
What truth am I not facing up to?
Where have I ever said I don't have a choice or that I am being forced?

So you accept and agree that you're free to do or not do whatever you like?


I will tell but after you've gone first, to tell where I have ever shouted "You will see!"
and you list the alleged claims I've made that I cant support

LordReed:
That's an assignment for you to figure out.

Cat got your tongue

LordReed:
Unnecessary to list them out so I won't.

What you afraid of revealing?
I'll be judge of whether it's unnecessary to list or not to list.
Budaatum doesnt know I can judge, that I am a god.

LordReed:
What the heck are you on about?
Is not clear that I think morality is relative?
That incest at some point in human history was necessary and so moral?
Damn, you just like dribbling your own shadow.

"What is objective morality?
The idea that morality is inherent in the universe,
that in any situation it will either be always true or always false."
- LordReed ©

You cant have your cake and eat it
Incest according to your objective morality explanation, that you voluntarily gave and/or gave without being duress, cant be immoral and moral
Your explanation says, it has to be always true or always false. Not switching from being moral to immoral
Going along with your objective morality explanation,
if incest was moral to begin with, then it has to be always moral, and be moral till and/or after kingdom come.

LordReed:
It's OK to admit you were a bit flustered and thought I was questioning your intelligence.

I wasnt a tad flustered nor did I at any moment think you are questioning my intelligence

I actually was, as a matter of fact, amused,
and so decided to borrow & unleash on you Einstein's "If you can't explain it to a six-year-old, you don't understand it yourself" remark

LordReed:
LoL! It is so obvious when you have driven yourself to a wall.
Dude as I said, don't be making claims you cannot support, this is where it always ends.
You, back against a wall, shouting "You will see!" LoLz.

Sekem sekem! Sekem, sekem, sekem!!
If only you have relevant understanding

Why cant you, for once, face up to the truth?
Is it not true, that you have a choice?
Are you being forced, against your will, to do something and/or at all do anything?

OK, for the sake of argument, I am driven with my back against a wall.
Seems you arent well acquainted with rope-a-dope.
Watch out, you'll get caught off guard and/or by surprise

LordReed:
I dunno why you like dribbling your shadow.

So if an atheist shows compassion he is doing pure and faultless religion?

MuttleyLaff:
Bwahahahaha ha.
He is talking about himself. Kikikiki ki.

Bingo!
Wow, hes finally got it

LordReed:
As I see it, this completely negates the need to plead allegiance to any god or faith institution.

You're free to do or not do whatever you like

Besides, no one is advised to, no expects anyone to, plead allegiance to any god or faith institution

All I'll will say, is, when push comes to shove, you might review, what and how you earlier have, "As I see it..."

LordReed:
Not really.
It'll be like me asking why in the parable of the sower that Jesus told, the sower did not weed the ground or provide fertilizer or put the plants in a greenhouse to prevent the sun from destroying the crops. All of that is extraneous to the idea being passed across as it is not a complete representation of reality

What is "Not really"?
"Not really" about what?

Everyone except you knows, parables are moral or spiritual lessons.
What is and where is the lesson in your wannabe parable?

LordReed:
This explains a lot about your views, quite different from the usual religious person.

Explains a lot about what views of mine?
List a couple of them

You mean quite different from the blindspot view of what the world and you think religion really is?
I am a religious person, but not in same way/manner, what you deem being religious is

LordReed:
Incest may have been necessary at some point in human history,
maybe not parent-offspring or offspring-offspring type but some of the closer relations we may object to today, aunty-nephew for instance.
For the survival of the human species or society at the time it may be considered moral
but now we have a luxury in the sheer amount of diversity when it comes to who to mate with, it is unnecessary to indulge in incest.
Indeed I would call it immoral, simply because there is no need for it and it may cause harm

"What is objective morality?
The idea that morality is inherent in the universe,
that in any situation it will either be always true or always false."
- LordReed ©

Now you see why I pushed your "objective morality" back at you and said I am not buying it.
That incest has dropped a fly in your definition of objective morality oil ointment
As much as you wouldnt like to admit to, the human race sure kicked off with the offspring-offspring type

You declared that you'll call incest immoral, simply because there is no need for it and it may cause harm
How about, incest that acccording to your words, may have been necessary at some point in the early human history?
How would you categorise that incest?
Moral or immoral?

LordReed:
Dude, it was a joke.

I dont need you to tell me it was a joke
Of course, it was a joke.
It was a joke of a rhetorical question, I played along with.

LordReed:
You know that parables are meant to be short right?

You know parables are lessons
and are quizzed for clarity, right?

LordReed:
For example, if you kill you are wrong, doesn't matter what the situation.

BTW are you 2 yrs old? LoLz

I am pleased I asked you so grateful for your example and teeny weeny explanation.

Well, if with that example, that is what objective morality is, then I don't buy that.

Where and/or how does incest, during its passage in time, fall with you?

No, I am not 2 years old,
but I know that if you are unable to explain a thing enough well for a two years old to understand, you really then don't know anything about what you are talking about

LordReed:
I dunno why you like dribbling your shadow.

Bwahahahaha ha.
He is talking about himself. Kikikiki ki.

LordReed:
So if an atheist shows compassion he is doing pure and faultless religion?

Bingo!
Wow, hes finally got it

LordReed:
They were warned not to kill the dogs.

1/ Why would the scientist warn them against killing the dogs?
2/ Did the scientist, at all, warn them the dogs will kill them?
3/ Was there anything in the line of the people being told "kill or be killed"?

LordReed:
The idea that morality is inherent in the universe, that in any situation it will either be always true or always false.

Break it down for a two year old to understand this

LordReed:
Well you brought up God not me, don't be making claims you can't support.

Yeah, because I can smell your motive from miles away mate.

LordReed:
You should have said you wanted a metaphysical discussion.

Religion as I see it, is first, man's attempt to reconcile his experience with the complexity of his environment. Secondly, it is an institutionalization of a society's moral code and given divine imperative in other to make it sacrosanct and immutable.

That's exactly what Paul was going about doing when he was Saul

Guess what, the word "religion" has changed its meaning from what is originally was, being about benevolence, thoughtful consideration and generosity for other people in need

Having compassion makes you or lets you become less prejudiced, less extreme, less intense or violent to want to antagonise or fight wars with another

Yup, compassion cuts right through Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, New Age etcetera

Watch this, do you ever ask about someone's belief or unbelief first before offering or extending your compassion to them, especially when in time of need?

If anyone wants to do religion, then compassion, is the religion, on record, deemed pure and faultless by God

Whatever the front, however it is painted and how you've just described religion to be,
the truth and fact is, what is fronted as pure and faultless religion in today's world, isnt it.

Religion, that is pure and faultless, is about, not, how regular one prays, is not about regular congregated attendance.
Religion, that is pure and faultless, is not, about wearing hijab or burka

Before what the world has become today, a priest & levite (i.e. "church" worker) had been known to slip up on what pure and faultless religion is

Anything less than practising, pure and faultless religion, is not true and so thereby is false religion.
If it's not compassion centric it is false impure and faulty religion

LordReed:
It was by inference

Wow, thats interesting to note.
So I take it you do not believe in an objective morality?

So, if as you now claiming, it is inferred in the OP, that the people were warned about the dogs, especially the alpha male dog, why then didn't the people take heed of the scientist's warning?

I also am interested in knowing how and what the scientist warned them about.

Lastly, what is objective morality?

LordReed:
LoL, were the title deeds for all of the land extending from Sinai(?) to Syria? And yes I expected it to be a walk in the park.
It was God who promised, why are men killing other men for it? Like if you can't see how bleeped up that is, you truly are blind.

LordReed, I don't know what bee you have in your bonnet.
I sure do see how fairked up it is, men are killing other men for this modern day patch of land, but guess what, it has nothing to do with God mayne.
You didn't know that, did you? Kikikiki ki.

LordReed:
LoL, this is just typical. When ever asked for actual evidence for the claims people like you make, they chicken out and start talking out of both ends of their digestive tract. Lemme iterate for you maybe it'll penetrate this time, GIVE EXAMPLE OF A SOCIETY MODERATED BY RELIGION WHICH REDUCED WAR.

Maybe if you stop shouting and stop being graphical, we can compare notes to see what is, how you see religion
and what is, how I know religion to originally have been.

You go first LordReed.
What is religion, exhaustedly and to the best of your understanding?

LordReed:
I believe these are properly answered in the OP.
LoL, how very Machiavellian, by inference I take it you subscribe to Machiavelli's principles.

I'll let you off with the first two questions, the third question however wasnt in anyway addressed in the OP

Machiavelli might have some principles similar to mine

Budaatum, you really are singing a different part of the hymn book
Now, again, please provide the bible verses that supports that "gods" means "spirit of power, love and a sound mind".
Let's have the bible verses that says, gods means spirit of power, love and sound mind

LordReed:
LoL, I wonder if even the ancients in their less advanced legal systems would have entertained such a spurious claim. Why did they now have to kill the Canaanites? God should have used his power, the same way he gave Abraham the land

".... even the ancients in their less advanced legal systems..." you said.
What sheer ignorance.
Abraham was given land title deed for purchase of wells etcetera. Go check that information out

So you really expected it to be a stroll in park, just turn up and announce to the Canaanites saying
"Hello, we're home honey ...." and the Canaanites will just roll on their back, handing over the land to the Israelites on a platter of gold.

People usually have to fight for what rightfully is theirs.
The Canaanites will kill them first, if given half a chance, so whatever is needful needed to be done.

LordReed:
Well you certainly haven't shown any knowledge of what you are talking about.

Very simple point, show where religion has moderated man's nature and reduced (not even eliminated, lemme be fair) war.

Please don't find excuses for you finding it intellectually demanding to see the knowledge of what I am talking about.

True, pure and faultless religion that God approves of, centres and revolves around compassion.

No need for being fair, moderation, as I earlier said before, means reduction.

Now, if there is more of compassion among and/or between humans, wars considerably will be reduced.
An increase in compassion will bring a reduction of fighting wars
This isn't difficult to understand

LordReed:
LoL, given to him by who?

I recommend you read parts of Genesis to get yourself up to speed,
especially for starters, the parts where God repeatedly promised Abraham Canaan.

This is called getting education in a compelling way

LordReed:
I don't know what you arguing for because you have not shown where this moderation has made nations not go to war.

I dont do arguing, meaning I dont share nor exchange ignorance(s)

Just as the poor will always be with us, so nation up till tomorrow will always go to war
Compassion, however, if existing, can and will moderate nations going to war
Moderate, in this context, as you know, means reduction

LordReed:
Men and their greed cause war.
Religion we are told will cause men to no longer follow their baser instincts so the question is where is this moderation?
In the bible we are told of Israel's wars to conquer Canaan driven by their belief that God told them to exterminate all who would not bow the knee to God.
Leaving the middle east for a moment...

Not so fast Jose.
You seem to forget that Abraham, over 430 years ago before the Israrelite set foot on Canaan, had the land title deed for the place

LordReed:
Constantine the Emperor who adopted Christianity as the Roman empire state religion, said he received a vision while on the battlefield from Christ, telling him to conquer in his name.
The Holy Roman Empire established some time after Constantine was involved in at least 22 wars.
There is no record of religion moderating the thirst for war on the other hand we have distinct examples of people fighting wars in the name of religion.

Actually, the word "religion" has changed its meaning from originally being benevolence, thoughtful consideration and generosity for other people in need

It is compassion that moderates.
It makes you or lets you become less extreme, intense or violent to want to fight wars with another

Yup, compassion cuts right through Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, New Age etcetera
Also I doubt you've ever asked about someone's belief or unbelief first before giving your compassion?

If anyone wants to do religion, then compassion, is the religion, on record, deemed pure and faultless by God

Whatever the front, however it is painted
the truth and fact is, what is fronted as pure and faultless religion in today's world, isnt it

Religion, that is pure and faultless, is about, not, how regular one prays, is not about regular congregated attendance.
Religion, that is pure and faultless, is not, about wearing hijab or burka

Before what the world has become today, a priest & levite (i.e. "church" worker) had been known to slip up on what pure and faultless religion is

Anything less than practising, pure and faultless religion, is not true and so thereby is false religion

A lot of misguided spurious and/or unsubstantiated claims have been committed under the guise of a religion that's true, pure and faultless

budaatum:
The "gods" Jesus and David at the very least meant are those who have a "spirit of power, love and a sound mind".

Bud, you seem to be singing a different part of the hymn book
so please provide the bible verses that substantiates that "gods" means "spirit of power, love and a sound mind".

budaatum:
Nonsense! That's simply your understanding of the Bible, at level 101!

Its a lot of sense fact and truth brother.
Learn to suck it up, dont struggle, dont fight it

budaatum:
Not true!
Jesus is not claimed to have lost respect for God or treated God's "thou shall not eat...." with "total contempt" when he disobeyed his parents, worked on the Sabbath and said there were other gods!
Not except for by those who dislike him and crucified him.

What time is it now?
Bud, I think you should have a nightcap and then hit the sack

Bible 101, Jesus, is God being on earth

He didnt "disobey his parents". He was going about the God business, the synagogue should have being the first place they should have searched looking around for Him

The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, takes care of "worked on the Sabbath"

You keep shouting from the rooftop "said there were other gods"
Why not, lets once & for all, settle the gods
in this "... said there were other gods" wrong end of the stick, you keep grabbing hold of?

What is the context and your understanding of the meaning of gods, as used by Jesus and David prior to Jesus'?