₦airaland Forum

Gabrielshow24:
My second message to you,
Clarified immediately what I meant by objective basis😂😂😂!!!

You gave your own definition which you said was subjective 😂 😂😂

From which I asked how you could apply this your "subjective varied means👀" to all — objectively.

I do remember and those on the thread can go look it up.
I gave my discussion with the lovely damsel as an hint!!!

You just can't take an hint, don't you? 🤣🤣🤣

Gabrielshow24:
You still haven't answered my question,
How do you empirically substantiate that what you claim is good is objectively good even for you and the world (environment) you allude to? 🤨

You also mentioned inculcating several philosophical stances🤨, what's the basis for those!!!

LordReed:
LoLz. All this aggression just to ask for the source. That's a one line question, not this long unnecessary talk.

Theological backgrounds? This is a historical question not a theological one.

Here is the source: https://www.britannica.com/topic/common-law

You have at it.

LordReed:
This was your 2nd message to me:



Highlight or bolden which statement is the clarification.

Gabrielshow24:
The bible teaches that all men are equal not only in Christ!
It's the resolution of Jesus that we treat each other with love!!!
Whether they be in Christ or not, we treat them as we would treat ourselves!!!
Implying the equality of all!

Now, I said the bible condemns slavery.
I didn't say explicitly condemns it.
Some can even pick verses such as "slaves, obey your master" and spin it out of context.
What I rather allude to is that the bible implies equality of all, which thereby condemns slavery!!!

According to we christians we treat all men equally!!!
That's why early christians were convinced to free their slaves and fight against other slave owners🤔!!!

Gabrielshow24:
That's more than condemnation.
Paul made an absolute statement!
IN CHRIST there is no slavery🤤

Gabrielshow24:
Like I said, you have a feeble memory.

Gabrielshow24:
Like I said, you turned the blind eye to other theological perspectives.
Even your own source condemns you!

LordReed:
You did, see:



Oh thank you for further torpedoing your argument. Slaves obey your master is an implicit endorsement of slavery. You are the one who has to struggle to make it mean it is not an endorsement of slavery. A Christian slave owner only needs to quote this verse to invalidate your point.

Threat all men equally? Really? So why was this written in your Bible:
Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers.
If all men are equal according to your Bible then where is this inequality coming from?

LordReed:
Look again:

The common law of England was largely created in the period after the Norman Conquest of 1066. The Anglo-Saxons, especially after the accession of Alfred the Great (871), [size=16pt]had developed a body of rules resembling those being used by the Germanic peoples of northern Europe.[/size] Local customs governed most matters, while the church played a large part in government. Crimes were treated as wrongs for which compensation was made to the victim.

LordReed:
LoLz. That was your FIRST message to me. Look again.

Gabrielshow24:
Like I said, he made an absolute statement that condemns slavery implicitly!!!

As regards, being unequivocally yoke, it doesn't promote inequality.

It instead acts as a guideline to associate with like minds.
We are told to preach to all nations.
If we are preach how then won't we come in contact with unbelievers?

To further elucidate, Iron sharpens Iron!
The goal is to associate with those that will grow your faith!!!

Gabrielshow24:
Check the picture again, does that look like the first🤨?

Or better still to go the beginning of the thread it's there🤔?

Go and verify!!!

LordReed:
Look again:

The common law of England was largely created in the period after the Norman Conquest of 1066. The Anglo-Saxons, especially after the accession of Alfred the Great (871), had developed a body of rules resembling those being used by the Germanic peoples of northern Europe. Local customs governed most matters, while the church played a large part in government. Crimes were treated as wrongs for which compensation was made to the victim.

Gabrielshow24:
while the church played a large part in government

LordReed:
Dude you deliberately cut off the person you where responding to when I asked my first question to you. You were talking to jaephonix first not me. Dishonest much?

LordReed:
After they had copied the Germanic people.

Gabrielshow24:
Irrespective of your allusions, the common law was heavily influenced by the church and hence as a result CHRIST!!!

it was built on Christ's principles🤔!!!
That's the take home.
It didn't originate from Islamic countries or even polytheistic countries but rather from a Christ influenced nation.

This in no wise ridicules or downplays the laws present in other nations but rather to show the influence of Christ in the formation of common law!!!

Gabrielshow24:
🤣🤣🤣
There's nothing that can be done to satisfy human "beans" !

You brought up brittanica and it alluded to common law being influenced by the church — Christ

Yet you say they copied it🤣🤣🤣.
Where you there? 😁

Gabrielshow24:
Alright, my bad.
Must have assumed It was you.

Irrespective, I must have assumed that was the question you wanted to answer!!!

Hence you asked for a clarification.
Which prompted my follow up question which was indeed my first message to you!!!

That's settled🙃

LordReed:
Now you are changing your argument again. You claimed Christ was the source of common law. Now you are saying the Church only influenced it. LoLz.

LordReed:
So when are you going to show me where you clarified what you mean by objective basis?

Gabrielshow24:
Didn't you ask what I mean by objective basis? 🤦🏾‍♂️

Have I not replied that?
Or do you have selective amnesia?

Check some of the pictures I posted, even the one you called my attention to as regards jae, I gave you a clarification!!

What else do you want?
I gave you clues from my discussion with nicenancy🤦🏾‍♂️.
Let me know ooo🤨

LordReed:
Just show me where you answered my question.

Gabrielshow24:
Well, I even gave you the benefit of a doubt based on brittanica's article!

Even if you are not comfortable with Christ being the originator yet the common law was greatly influenced from him!!!

That's the take home, except if you want to argue with your own source of fact!!!

LordReed:
Lots of things have many influences, that was never in debate. You claimed THE SOURCE of common law was Christ and I said no. So stop switching tracks in the middle of an argument then acting like I was the unreasonable one. You are being dishonest and unreasonable.

Gabrielshow24:
Look at your own screenshot😂😂😂
You will find me clarifying your question on "what is objective basis"

🤦🏾‍♂️

Gabrielshow24:
how do you as an atheist determine what's good or bad? 🤨

Gabrielshow24:
Like I said, you want an exact word for word allusion.
I intend the concept!

We are saying different things.
On the surface, yes it looks like Christ is not the source but contrary to this, the very concept is found greatly in the common law something you can't deny.

Christ heavily influenced common law.
It might not have been traced to him but his concepts is found greatly within it!!!

LordReed:
Here is your response to my question:



Tell me how answering my question with another question clarifies my question.

LordReed:
I have showed you evidence that Christ is not the source so unless you have evidence showing otherwise, I will just say this is done and dusted.

Gabrielshow24:
That's misleading and ambiguous 🙃.
As you can clearly, "heavily influenced" 🤦🏾‍♂️.
I beg to differ.

He might not be the source in the sense of not being the one that started it or named it in the form as " common law" but all those who did used his principles!!!

In short, they gave it a "common" name🙃 —" common law"

Gabrielshow24:
🤦🏾‍♂️
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Are you this dumb?
It's self explanatory 🙃.
Or don't you know about "clarifying questions"? 🤨

LordReed:
You are just stupid, that much is clear now.

Gabrielshow24:
How then will you know wickedness? 🤣🤣🤣
What's your objective basis for morality? 🤨