₦airaland Forum

DoctorAlien:
No. They did not save the infants. They only deprived them of life on this earth which was meant to be enjoyed in a holy way, and after which an unending life would be enjoyed with GOD. The infants now sleep in their graves, awaiting resurrection to life, because they have no sin in them.

really? did you see the word "unwittingly"?

bruh, this is simple logic, I'm not saying they killed to save

they killed the infants and deprived them of life on earth but at the end of it all, are they saved or not?

hopefulLandlord:
really? did you see the word "unwittingly"?

bruh, this is simple logic, I'm not saying they killed to save

they killed the infants and deprived them of life on earth but at the end of it all, are they saved or not?

Who said you said they killed to save? Can't you read well again?

Or did they unwittingly take the lives of the children too?

For the umpteenth time, yes: the children are saved.

DoctorAlien:
Who said you said they killed to save? Can't you read well again?

Or did they unwittingly take the lives of the children too?

For the umpteenth time, yes: the children are saved.

hmmm

that's all I wanted to hear bro!

I can just go to the middle east, kill as many infants as possible and viola! they all get to enter heaven rather than grow up in this sinful world especially with their high chance of choosing Islam or atheism

this was Andrea Yates' logic and it worked even if you totally disagree with her methods

"They get saved"

hopefulLandlord:
hmmm

that's all I wanted to hear bro!

I can just go to the middle east, kill as many infants as possible and viola! they all get to enter heaven rather than grow up in this sinful world especially with their high chance of choosing Islam or atheism

this was Andrea Yates' logic and it worked even if you totally disagree with her methods

I don't know what worked but certainly it wasn't GOD's will.

You can go to the middle east and kill as much infants as you want. On the last day, the full recompense of your deeds will be given to you.

DoctorAlien:
I don't know what worked but certainly it wasn't GOD's will.

You can go to the middle east and kill as much infants as you want. On the last day, the full recompense of your deeds will be given to you.

yeah, I go to hell, probably put in the hottest part of hell but thinking about the thousands of soul enjoying in heaven for my infanticide make it all worth it especially for the fact that they would've most likely chosen Islam which would've made majority of those thousands of children go to hell

hopefulLandlord:
hmmm

that's all I wanted to hear bro!

I can just go to the middle east, kill as many infants as possible and viola! they all get to enter heaven rather than grow up in this sinful world especially with their high chance of choosing Islam or atheism

this was Andrea Yates' logic and it worked even if you totally disagree with her methods

"They get saved"

No credit goes to the murderer for "saving the kids." Instead of Andrea Yates, disease or a wild animal could have killed the infants too. The disease or the wild animal hasn't saved the child.

hopefulLandlord:
yeah, I go to hell, probably put in the hottest part of hell but thinking about the thousands of soul enjoying in heaven for my infanticide make it all worth it especially for the fact that they would've most likely chosen Islam which would've made majority of those thousands of children go to hell

No bro. Nobody's gonna have time to think of anything in hell. Hell is simply the destruction/annihilation by fire which will happen to sinners at last. Sinners will cease to exist!

DoctorAlien:
No credit goes to the murderer for "saving the kids." Instead of Andrea Yates, disease or a wild animal could have killed the infants too. The disease or the wild animal hasn't saved the child.

I already made it clear that whatever reason an infant dies, it goes to heaven be it Herod style or Yates style or my hypothetical style; dying guarantees salvation for infants either way doesn't matter how it comes

hopefulLandlord:
I already made it clear that whatever reason an infant dies, it goes to heaven be it Herod style or Yates style or my hypothetical style; dying guarantees salvation for infants either way doesn't matter how it comes

Erm... so?

DoctorAlien:
No bro. Nobody's gonna have time to think of anything in hell. Hell is simply the destruction/annihilation by fire which will happen to sinners at last. Sinners will cease to exist!

okay, that explains the story of Lazarus and the rich man who apparently still remembered how he lived his life despite being in agony or maybe that's just a parable and you won't remember anything

anyways, I can always keep count and feel fulfilled right on earth with every infant I impale




oh! "cease to exist?" pretty sure Anas09 disagrees totally with that, according to her we'll burn forever and so do many Christians, many even believe we'll still have our memories

hopefulLandlord:
okay, that explains the story of Lazarus and the rich man who apparently still remembered how he lived his life despite being in agony or maybe that's just a parable and you won't remember anything

anyways, I can always keep count and feel fulfilled right on earth with every infant I impale

I knew you were gonna bring up the story of the rich man and Lazarus. Anyways, that parable wasn't about the fate of the dead. It was about the relation between the Jews and the Gentiles.

we'll burn forever and so do many Christians, many even believe we'll still have our memories

That is not what the Bible teaches. See Psa. 37:10

DoctorAlien:
I knew you were gonna bring up the story of the rich man and Lazarus. Anyways, that parable wasn't about the fate of the dead. It was about the relation between the Jews and the Gentiles.



That is not what the Bible teaches. See Psa. 37:10

I'll leave both of you to it!

DoctorAlien:
I knew you were gonna bring up the story of the rich man and Lazarus. Anyways, that parable wasn't about the fate of the dead. It was about the relation between the Jews and the Gentiles.



That is not what the Bible teaches. See Psa. 37:10

on a second thought I decided to read the verse and it says

"A little while, and the wicked will be no more; though you look for them, they will not be found."

this just talks of "wicked" are Buddhist monks also wicked? are Muslims also "wicked"?

and then even if we assume its talking about them ceasing to exist, it doesn't say much in that direction because even in heaven "you'll look for the wicked and you'll not find them", that doesn't negate the fact that they might be somewhere in hell burning forever

basically that verse might be referring to heaven after all you can't cross over to hell from heaven or vice versa so you can't see any wicked in heaven

I'm just thinking aloud

hopefulLandlord:
on a second thought I decided to read the verse and it says

"A little while, and the wicked will be no more; though you look for them, they will not be found."

this just talks of "wicked" are Buddhist monks also wicked? are Muslims also "wicked"?

I'm just thinking aloud

"The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God..." Psa. 14:1

"Now consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear you in pieces, and there be none to deliver." Psa. 50:22

You can now decide whether buddhist monks who know the truth about GOD are wicked or not.

DoctorAlien:
"The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God..." Psa. 14:1

"Now consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear you in pieces, and there be none to deliver." Psa. 50:22

You can now decide whether buddhist monks who know the truth about GOD are wicked or not.

pls, I've edited my post

but being a "fool" doesn't necessarily make you "wicked" because even the bible said "We are fools for Christ"

hopefulLandlord:
on a second thought I decided to read the verse and it says

"A little while, and the wicked will be no more; though you look for them, they will not be found."

this just talks of "wicked" are Buddhist monks also wicked? are Muslims also "wicked"?

and then even if we assume its talking about them ceasing to exist, it doesn't say much in that direction because even in heaven "you'll look for the wicked and you'll not find them", that doesn't negate the fact that they might be somewhere in hell burning forever

basically that verse might be referring to heaven after all you can't cross over to hell from heaven or vice versa so you can't see any wicked in heaven

I'm just thinking aloud

"But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away." Psa. 37:20

hopefulLandlord:
pls, I've edited my post

but being a "fool" doesn't necessarily make you "wicked" because even the bible said "We are fools for Christ"

We are fools in the eyes of the world(or are we not foolish in the sight of you atheists again?) for Christ.

We know, however, that the fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom.

DoctorAlien:
"But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away." Psa. 37:20

can't argue much with this

hopefulLandlord:
can't argue much with this

There are lots of verses that agree with it:

"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch." Mal. 4:1

"And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts." Mal. 4:3

"Thou shalt make them as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger: the LORD shall swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour them." Psa. 21:9

I'm on the verge of totally losing my faith in Christ...the deeds of God in the bible seem barbaric..(God forgive me o)

4everGod:
He does not have any idea about the relevance of communism to an atheistic driven government who wants to ensure that atheism becomes the norm. Perhaps he thinks the word just dropped from the sky.

Relevance of communism to an atheistic government?? U have it confused... Atheism is not the end, it's a means... So it should be relevance of atheism to a communist government...

KingEbukasBlog:
It tells you how ignorant they are

How can you be arguing on what you know nothing of

Asking irrelevant questions and accusing anyone falsely

Atheism is an integral part of Marxist-Leninist ideology which the communist state pledge allegiance to . And somehow this eludes him

He knows that this is a lost battle and he is just struggling to breathe

U are the one being ignorant... Please look for the definition of communism and then atheism and show me how they are the same ideology... Just stop avoiding my questions

KingEbukasBlog:
What is the point of asking me if they are the same thing ?

If something is an integral part of another thing , does that mean they are the same thing ?

You are here calling some else a laggard , yet this seems abstruse to you

Wow... So they are not the same thing??... I just want u to say it

ScepticalPyrrho:
Let me give you another food for thought.

1Kings 21:29 - See thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me? Because he humbleth himself before me, I will not bring the evil in his days, but in his sons days I will bring the up his house. KJV

That there is an excited God, who was satisfied with Ahabs display of humility after threatening his household.

This character best describes a vicious man.

This god na petty bastard ooh... So Ahab sins and he goes scot free but his sons will be the one suffering

Anas09:
Can God say thou shall not kill and at the same time.tell her to.kill?

Yes... He did it with the Israelites. He said thou shall not kill and next thing, "go and kill all the amalekites, including children and animals"... You see your god has bi-polar disorder

RosaConsidine:
Aaaaaactually, speaking from a pure computer/robotics perspective, if you programmed a robot and it starts following other instructions, it could mean two things: there was an unforseen side-effect from the code you wrote that you overlooked while programming the robot OR there is some external or alternate body tampering with the source code. Neither outcome lets you off the hook though. In the case of the first outcome, it shows you were not careful enough to make sure that the robot acts as programmed. In the case of the second outcome it tells that you did not do enough to protect the program the robot runs on from external influence - like making sure there are no backdoors or loopholes and possibly installing anti-malware.

If a robot you programmed is not acting the way you expected, the choice is on you to reprogram the robot or destroy it. Neither would, however, mean the robot is at fault for it's malfunction.

Who is this absolute genius?!!!

RosaConsidine:
Aaaaaactually, speaking from a pure computer/robotics perspective, if you programmed a robot and it starts following other instructions, it could mean two things: there was an unforseen side-effect from the code you wrote that you overlooked while programming the robot OR there is some external or alternate body tampering with the source code. Neither outcome lets you off the hook though. In the case of the first outcome, it shows you were not careful enough to make sure that the robot acts as programmed. In the case of the second outcome it tells that you did not do enough to protect the program the robot runs on from external influence - like making sure there are no backdoors or loopholes and possibly installing anti-malware.

If a robot you programmed is not acting the way you expected, the choice is on you to reprogram the robot or destroy it. Neither would, however, mean the robot is at fault for it's malfunction.

Not when d.robot has the intelligence to make decisions on its own.

felixomor:
Not when d.robot has the intelligence to make decisions on its own.

True... But if the robot is not intelligent enough to make the right decisions, it means it has not been programmed well enough

randomperson:
True... But if the robot is not intelligent enough to make the right decisions, it means it has not been programmed well enough

Nah. It means it made wrong decisions backed up by its consciousness.

felixomor:
Nah. It means it made wrong decisions backed up by its consciousness.

It was given intelligence by the programmer. But it was not intelligent enough to make the Right decisions... That means there was a flaw with the programming, an imperfection..

Profkenny1:
I'm on the verge of totally losing my faith in Christ...the deeds of God in the bible seem barbaric..(God forgive me o)

don't mind the atheists who deny the obvious... don't draw conclusions just because of what you saw here... Jesus is the foundation of your faith... not the jews.. i don't like to draw conclusions on issues like this simply because i don't have enough info on the subject... all we have are a few scriptures.... so no need to lose your faith

randomperson:
It was given intelligence by the programmer. But it was not intelligent enough to make the Right decisions... That means there was a flaw with the programming, an imperfection..

No, it abdicated its responsibility.
Why because in addition to intelligence, it has a consciousness.