₦airaland Forum

Wilgrea7:
1. This thread is about the ascribed holiness of your God.. so it's more than enough to discuss the things you want

2. Are you now accepting that your God is subject to the standards by which we judge good and bad?

It was a response to your response to

If God is Timeless (exist before time), can he Cease to Exist?

Your argument is like saying:
Since God lacks the capacity to Cease existing, does it mean that He cannot Exist?
Compare with:
If God lacks the capacity to DIE, does it mean that He is not ALIVE

You summarily dismissed it without looking at the reasoning behind it: this taking me back to the basics of the Eternal nature of God!

Wilgrea7:
Don't try to rope me into this.

My concept of right and wrong is irrelevant here. It can be likened to your example of the child crying because his mother held him down for a rabies shot.

What i consider right or wrong is irrelevant to what God, who is the authority on it does or says it is.

I'm like the bacteria in the toilet analogy you gave. My perspective is irrelevant. Only God's perspective is.

It was a simple question!

If a person follow all the teachings of Christ, will such a person be good or evil?

LordReed:
I want verifiable evidence for a god. To leap from that to saying "whatever you can't measure doesn't exist!" shows just how disingenuous you are.

Sorry!
God doesn't fit into anyone's mold!

Okay!
Whatever you can't physically verify doesn't exist!

Wilgrea7:
No your analogy does NOT stand. Not even slightly. You seem to have completely missed the part where I said hitler's actions, as well as his assistant's actions, are not the criteria by which we determine good and bad. How many times do I have to repeat it?

It's not a matter of knowing who he is. It's a matter of whether good and bad can get their definition from him, to which the answer is no. So the argument really doesn't compare to the one about God.

Also, your argument about God existing before time, and ceasing to exist really doesn't hold up. The very definition of existence is not determined by what God is, in this scenario. You have subjected God to your definition of existence.

Same with death. Life and death do not get their meaning from what God is. You're the one trying to subject God to the definition of life and death. If the definition of life, death, existence, nonexistence, good and bad all have to get their definition from God, then your arguments break down immediately.

Sorry, there is nothing I can do about you position!

You've just concluded indirectly that either an Uncaused First Cause doesn't exist or the Universe has always been there

Wilgrea7:
I've explained why this source analogy doesn't make sense in respect to a God who's actions and will determine what right and wrong are... But you insist on using it. I don't know what else to tell you at this point

Bias aside!
If someone lives by ALL the tenets of Christ, would such a person be seen as Good or Evil?

Wilgrea7:
If your God is greater than the rules he created, and cannot be subject to them, then why do you insist on giving him titles based on the very rules he is not subject to?

If God is above the criteria by which we determine what good and bad is, then why call him either good or bad, if he is not subject to the criteria that defines them?

Because people who follow His general guidelines are Good people. Therefore their source must be GOOD! (I speak only for Christians)

Wilgrea7:
Wrong analogy.

Adolf Hitler, and his actions are not the criteria by which we judge good and evil. Good and evil do not depend on the actions or will of hitler to get their definition. If we see his assistant as evil, it is because we have another external and higher standard, by which we judge good and evil.

We know hitler, as well as his assistant were evil, because how we define those terms were not dependent on their actions. Rather, their actions were judged based on our own objective criteria for what good and evil should be.

That was why I said: assume we don't know who Adolf Hitler is just as mostly people don't know who God is.

The analogy stands!

I also said:

If God is Timeless (exist before time), can he Cease to Exist?

Your argument is like saying:
Since God lacks the capacity to Cease existing, does it mean that He cannot Exist?
Compare with:
If God lacks the capacity to DIE, does it mean that

EmmaxKeys:
I have a one-year old REDMI 9T for sale. The RAM is 4gb and the ROM is 128gb.

Issue: Deadboot and minor cracked screen, nevertheless no touch issues at all. Nothing else.

I still have the receipt and package intact. Every other required info will be supplied including pictures and videos.

LOCATION: Lagos and nationwide delivery if interested.

PRICE: 35k (negotiable)

Contact me through calls or Whatsapp on 090three 1 8 2 one 3 3 2

If you need the parts, you can contact me with a good deal. Thank you.

Thanks!
Appreciated but I always by my phones new because I use them for an average of three years before replacement.

Thanks anyways

just2endowed:
Check out Huawei P30 pro

Thanks bro!

Kewtt:
Buy a old flagship of Samsung Note series.

Hello
Please can you give me some specific makes?

Sorry for the troubles!

Wilgrea7:
You cannot simultaneously claim I'm trying to force God into a "mold" and then try to prove reasons for God's alleged holiness with inductive, deductive or other logical methods.




I do not disagree with this.



It cannot simply be so. Just as 50 cannot pass or fail in the absence of any other higher criteria, the your source of good and evil, cannot be seen as inherently good or evil, in the absence of any other higher criteria.



To both questions, it depends on your criteria, or definition of what it means to be weak/strong, and what it means to be dead/alive. But my answer to both questions, is still YES.

One thing I think you're missing here, is that the thing that makes God unable to be good for example, isn't just the fact that he cannot do bad, but the fact that whatever he does, determines what good and bad are.

Good and bad will always be determined in light of what your God does, similarly, for your analogy to work, strength will have to be determined in light of whatever your God does, irrespective of what he does.

I'll start with strength. Let me use MrX in in place of a God in this situation. If the criteria for strength is how many tons MrX can carry, and whatever MrX carries has to be the criteria for what strength is, then MrX can never be thought of as strong or weak, because it is what he carries that determines how we define strength and weakness.

God can never be strong, if he can never be seen as weak. If whatever he does automatically becomes the criteria for what strength and weakness are, then strength and weakness have to draw their definition from him, and not him from them.

You cannot simply define God, based on the very parameters that HAVE TO get their definition from him. To define God as anything, is to subject him to the definition of that thing. If the definition of that thing is dependent on God, and not the other way around, then it makes no logical sense to define God based on it.

It's like this

God's actions/will --> good and bad ---> Human actions.

Human actions can be defined in relation to good and bad. But good and bad have to be defined in relation to God's will and actions. God cannot then be defined in relation to good and bad, which are defined in relation to him.

I'll say it again. It is not just that God cannot do any wrong. It is that whatever God does, no matter what he does, are the very things that determine what good and bad are.

I think your problem is that you want to set a standard of attributes of goodness or Evilness OUTSIDE the Creator.

Unfortunately, God Himself is the YARDSTICK to which every action is Measured.

Let's assume we don't know who Adolf Hitler is but we know his Special Assistant.

The Special Assistant does everything his boss want and we can see that this special assistant is Evil.

By induction, what kind of person is his Boss?

This is simply what you refuse to see.

If God is Timeless (exist before time), can he Cease to Exist?

Your argument is like saying:
Since God lacks the capacity to Cease existing, does it mean that He cannot Exist?
Compare with:
If God lacks the capacity to DIE, does it mean that He cannot be ALIVE!?

Hermes119:
The above boldened is wrong
I already gave an instance
If a human weighing 100kg is considered heavy it doesn't make the weight 100kg itself qualified to be described as heavy, the term can only be used with reference to a human
Because
For whales weighing 100kg may be regarded as severely light
You get my point now

Meaningless unless personal attributes such as goodness or Evilness can be quantified by a numeric values

Hermes119:
Yes @ the boldened
To describe someone or something as alive means it has the capacity to die
For instance
Can you describe air as alive ?
Can you describe water as alive ?
Can you describe a shoe as alive ?



Yes
If he lacks the capacity to be weak then he can't be strong,if you disagree then give me an instance of something that doesn't have the capacity to be weak but is described as strong


Your argument was refuted with utmost ease

Unfortunately for you, infinite regress of Cause and Effect is Logically and Scientifically impossible. Meaning that the ball of all the chains of causes, effects and systems must terminate at the Enigma: the Uncaused First Cause of Everything who brought EVERYTHING into being.

Such is infinitely powerful if we compare Him to the total Energy of the Universe.
Such is timeless: as He must have existed before TIME!
Such must be intelligent: as rules, laws and multiplicity of INTERDEPENDENT SYSTEMS can only be from an intelligent MIND!



Your argument in another form:
The Universe lacks the capacity to reduce itself to a gravitational singularity
Your conclusion:
Therefore the Universe cannot be infinitely BIG!

Wilgrea7:
You've listed a number of reasons why you follow the bible. And that's great. But I don't see how, apart from number 4, any of these other reasons are related to God's will/purpose, which is supposed to be the criteria for judging good and bad.

Before we even proceed, I would need to ask. What IS the purpose/will of God? You've said it is important to separate God from religion, and I'd like us to do so in this discussion.

For the sake of argument, I'd accept that a single, male creator deity exists, which we call God. Now, how do you know his will/purpose, to be able to know if the 6 things you listed above, can be used to judge if the bible is to be trusted as being in accordance with his will?

What is his will, and how do you know it, to be able to tell if your conscience, and logic/common sense are to be used to judge what right and wrong are?

I was born BLANK of knowledge. However, my conscience was prewritten within me. My logical ability grew as I interacted with my environment. Looking at my environment, through the eyes of my logic and conscience, I concluded that there is a FORCE behind everything.

What that Force was, I concluded could not be a PHYSICAL force because the Universe consists of several multiple INTERDEPENDENT SYSTEMS. This this FORCE (for want of better words) is INTELLIGENT and thus a Living Being. The fact that all living things seem to have a Hardware (their bodies, brain, sensory organs etc) and a Software part (Soul- Intuition, Conscience, Will, Emotion, Instincts etc). It is impossible for a Software to develop from chaos. A program is a product of Intelligence.

Almost Half a million religions exist in this world. My conscience and logic helped me to filter out the noise to reduce them to just three religions. Religion is what man do in their attempt of pleasing their Deity!

The three religions that agree with my conscience and logic are
1. Judaism
2. Christianity
3. Islam

Their common grounds:
1. Monotheistic
2. Gives some Purpose of Creation
3. Destination of Humans

I had a choice between Christianity and Judaism. Judaism seem to be narrow whole Christianity makes more sense as it explains and extends Judaism.
Islam has too many problems and internal contradictions that made me discard it.

From this point the rest of the items mentioned follows through.

Yes, I was predisposed to Christianity because my parents were Christians. But in my 200Levels, I independently logically made my choice.

My experience within my path I cannot trade for even my life.

Wilgrea7:
I disagree with the third postulate, and I sincerely do not see how it is in line with the first and second one. We seem to be going in circles here. Changing the narrative from "the right" to "his right" barely makes any difference.

There has to be a basis for him to call something right, or else the word will lose its meaning. You've previously said the basis/criteria was his will/purpose.

I agreed with it and showed you how even in that situation, his will/purpose, as well as his actions cannot be seen as inherently good or bad, because to give something such title, there has to be a higher criteria to judge it against, which doesn't exist in this scenario.

I think what you're trying to say is this

What makes something good?
Something is good because it is in line with God's will
Why is God's good?
Because everything he does, is in line with his will
What makes God's will good?
Because God says so
On what basis does God say so?
His will.

It's a long line of reasoning, but it is still circular. This circular logic fails to take one very important detail or question into account. Which is,

Can God do something against his will?
No, because no matter what he does, it will always be according to what he wants to do.

The only thing that can make something right, is if it had the capacity to do wrong, but didn't. If someone lacks the capacity to do one thing, it makes absolutely no sense, to imply that the person willfully does the opposite of that thing.

We've shown that God lacks the capacity to do wrong, because everything he does, will be done based on what he wills, and his will is what determines good and bad.

If God lacks the capacity to do wrong, then he cannot do right. Because right implies you could've done wrong, but didn't. And God can do no wrong according to you. Therefore, he can do no right either. I don't think it should be such a difficult thing to grasp.

As an example, let's say I set an exam.

To pass, you need to score 50 or above. If you get below 50, you fail. 50 is the criteria by which i determine who passes and who fails.

The students who scored 50 and above passed, and the ones who scored 49 and below failed. But did 50 pass? I don't mean the students who got that number, but the number itself. Does the number 50 pass?

You see how the question immediately turns nonsensical. For 50 to pass, it needs to pass against something. There has to be another higher criteria, or cutoff mark to compare it to. If there isn't, then saying that 50 (the number itself) passes, or fails, just doesn't make any sense.

Now let me take it a step further. Let's say the cutoff mark, is whatever score I, (the exam setter) gets. No matter what score I get, that's automatically the cutoff mark. That means the cutoff mark is decided after I get graded. Not before.

If i get 20, 80, 10, or 99, that's officially the new, highest criteria for passing. If i get graded and score 25, that officially becomes the new cutoff mark.

But can you then say my score, which the definition of pass and fail is dependent on, passed? How can you say I passed or failed when the criteria for passing and failing could only be decided after I got my score. How can you honestly say I passed when the pass mark has to be decided by whatever score I got, regardless of the score that I got? The whole point of me passing ceases to make sense if nothing I did could have been considered failure. Even if i got 0.000001, that would still be the highest possible criteria for passing.

It doesn't even make sense to compare me with the rest of the students, since I am the one that set the exam, as well as the cutoff mark. I cannot possibly pass or fail. I can only set the cutoff marks by my grade. My grade cannot be seen as pass or fail, because it is the literal definition of pass and fail.

I really don't know how else to break it down for you

I understand you but you are the one trying to force God into a mold.

But you fail to look at an induction process.

If what I do is in line with the purpose of the Creator, such thing is declared as GOOD!

That means the Source from which I obtained my guide must be Good.

Your argument is that If God lacks the capacity to do wrong, then he cannot do right.

I beg to disagree!

If God lacks the capacity to DIE, does it mean that He cannot be ALIVE!?

If God lacks the capacity to be WEAK, does it mean He cannot be STRONG?

Same way,
If God lacks the capacity to be EVIL, does it mean He cannot be GOOD?

Wilgrea7:
Permit my interjection, but there's something i noticed with your reply here.

You said the our conscience, scripture, and common sense are the things tools with which we can live our lives in line with God's purpose.

You also went on to say that no man should be completely trusted, and that man can sometimes be unreliable. You gave examples of pastors, prophets and evangelists.

My question to you now is, on what basis do you trust your bible/scripture to be in line with God's purpose?

We can both agree that the bible was written by the hands of men. The claim of divine inspiration does not change that fact. It wasn't beamed down from heaven by God.. it was written by the hands of men and was claimed to be inspired.

If men are not completely trustworthy, then on what basis do you trust the bible?

If there is another standard against which you trust it, then why not just cut out the middle man, and use the standard as the sole arbiter of what good and bad is?

How can I trust the bible as it is written by human hands?

The question does not have a simple answer,however there are some factors that predisposes me to trust the words.

1. The writers have no ulterior motives with respect to me
2. Most of the writers lived by the preached messages and paid the supreme price for it.
3. The summary of the message leans towards
- Pleasing God by Loving Him and Loving my fellow man
- Understanding God's purpose and instructions on how to align with His will and Purpose
4. My Conscience and Logic about the message is clear and deep
5. My experience of Following the message is highly positive. I live a meaningful life stewed in love and joy.
6. I have a relationship with my Heavenly Father which I cannot trade with ANYTHING in this Universe. I will rather lose my life than lose my relationship with Him.

I'm not sure I've said everything, but the above is basic

Wilgrea7:
How can you honestly say this after I've just explained to you why this cannot be the case?

The “logic" you're trying to use here does not work, and I've explained several times why.. and you still insist on saying the same thing?

If God can never be wrong, then He is ALWAYS right in whatever He does!

If God can never be Evil, then He is ALWAYS good in whatever He does!

It is simple logic!

1. Postulate 1:
God is the Creator of Everything
2. Postulate 2:
He can legally do whatever He wills with His creations
3. Whatever God does with His creations will thus be His Right to Do

Meaning:
God cannot be wrong in whatever He does according to His will and Purpose!

If God cannot be WRONG, then He is ALWAYS Right in whatever He does.

If God is always right, He can never be Evil and thus He is ALWAYS good in whatever He does!

Maynman:
Your deity is a tyrant. Anything he does is blindly term good by Chrestians bwahahahah

I actually don't need to respond to you because it doesn't change anything.

The Creator need no permission to do and undo with His creations!

Swallow this truth or jump into the lagoon!

LordReed:
There we go, jumping to unfounded conclusions, like clockwork.

Do you not desire a physical verifiable evidence for God?

Hermes119:
My analogy is meant to show you why you need a reference,comparison or parameter to define"holy" or "good" and I got think I achieved that


If it is impossible to define God's holiness or goodness with respect to a standard parameter or reference then his holiness or goodness looses it's meaning and becomes arbitrary
What you are saying is akin to saying you can't measure God's height, so how can we determine if he's tall or short, because any height he is is "tall" so the word tall looses it's meaning with respect to God


Yes but it doesn't mean it can't be determined.
My argument is not that we can measure Goodness or evilness with numbers or ranges the aim of the analogy was to show you that you need a reference point or comparison to define "Good" or "holy" just the same way we need a reference point or comparison to define "tall" or "short"


I don't have an issue with what you stated above.
My analogy is simply to show you that without a reference point or comparison the word "Good","evil","holy" would not possess any meaning. EOD
If there is no way to distinguish good and evil,love or hate then those words loose there meaning. I never argued how to quantify or measure the level love or hate, I'm arguing that there has to be a way to determine its presence and distinguish one from another


Very good point
How about another religion uses there God as the standard of morality and what there God demands or deems good is to kill infidels, what would you make of that
What if a Christian kills a witch and tells you he received direct instruction from God to do so, remember the bible said "suffer not a witch to live" and on an occasion when Israel was praying to God and the sone of a priest took a woman to the back of the temple to fornicate someone killed both and God was appeased,so this isn't something beyond the purview of Christianity besides you can't proof the person didn't get the instructions from God
You see why we can't use religion as the basis to inform our morality

1. I think we can both agree that qualities of Goodness or Evilness are not Quantifiable
2. Even though they are not Quantifiable, they can be rated with respect to a Relative standard which also is not Quantifiable.
3. As per God: I am sure you've never ever heard any Christian give a value to God's nature. If any value is to be used by Christians, it would be INFINITY (which of course is no objective number).
4. I think you should separate God from Religion. Why?
a. God is the Reference to morality, goodness or Evilness. His decision is always perfect. He gives us guidelines by which we should live our lives in alignment with His purpose through
-Our Conscience
-The Scripture (direct commands and guides)
-Common sense
b. Religion is what men do in their attempt to walk according to God's purpose and Will. Many times, because man is unreliable, he invents activities in his attempt that has nothing to do with God's will and Purpose. No man can be completely trusted (including Pastors, Prophets, Evangelists...) to be in alignment with God's will and Purpose.

In other words, God the Creator can be a standard but religion cannot!

The basic guides of God ingrained in all humans lead people to tend towards being good as long as they don't kill their conscience and their purpose is geared to honouring God the Creator.

Hermes119:
This argument is age long, I remember reading Bertrand Russell's take on the subject
What the Op is saying is very simple, but you know when you've held a belief all your life it's difficult to change it especially if you are egoistic

Let me use this analogy

With respect to height,we could come to a consensus that anyone below 170cm is short and between 170cm to 180cm is average while those above 180cm are tall. Now the parameter for classifying a person as short, average and tall is clear
Scenario 1 So you can say that God is tall because he is 185cm (above 180cm)

Scenario 2 But if you claim that God is tall regardless of his height then that means that there is no parameter to determine his height because whether he is 190cm,177cm,150cm,135cm,70cm,100000cm,0.0004cm he is tall. So using the term tall is arbitrary because we can't imagine what short or average is since whatever height God is is tall hence the terms "tall" "short" and "average" loose there meaning,but you can use them with respect to humans if you use God's height as the parameter, so you can say that a person whose height is above,the same or less than God's own is tall, average or short respectively.

So in like manner
If you say that God is good because there is an established definition of Good and evil and his actions always concur with the definition of good,then it's similar to scenario 1

If you equally say that whatever God does is good without reference to a parameter to measure good or evil then you can't determine what Good or evil is with respect to God,just like the instance in scenario 2, hence the term "Good", "evil" becomes arbitrary or meaningless with respect to God, but you can use it with humans defining Good as "acting according to God's will" and bad as the reverse

I don't know how simpler to break this down.

Your analogies and examples are faulty.

1. You have set a standard of measurement or external parameters for God which is impossible.

2. Using your example:
Goodness or Evilness is not Quantifiable with numbers, values or ranges.

Who is more evil?
A person who murdered one person or the person who murdered two people? It is possible to say that a person who murdered 1000 people is more evil that a person who killed 2 people. Even then, the answer is still subjective?

In other words, some things are not Quantifiable.

Another example:
How do you rate or grade Love as a percentage? Is it even possible to repeatedly quantify love objectively?

Such it is with states of Goodness or Evil.

3. Lastly:
Goodness or Evilness makes sense relative to a standard that is not a measure of number or quantity!

Whose Standard?

Christians will say God the Creator's standard: as whatever aligns with His purpose is good and whatever does not align with His purpose is evil

Atheists may need to find a Standard that is not Quantifiable yet is a Reference!

Wilgrea7:
I don't understand. I never said God was evil based on this discussion. It's something we have agreed on several times.

If God is the final and highest authority on good and evil, and whatever he does cannot be considered evil, then it can't be considered good either. It is only humans who can be considered good or evil with respect to God's criteria.

I think what you're trying to say, is that since a deviation from God's will/purpose is seen as bad, then God's purpose/will has to be perfectly good which would make God's actions, by default, good.

I disagree. And I'll explain why.

Good and bad can only be determined when compared against a standard. The reason why humans can be good or bad, is because the standard, which in this case is set by God's reason, is the highest authority against which we measure our morality.

To say that God's will or purpose is good is try to measure the standard (which is God's will) against another standard. And as you've already pointed out, God's reason/purpose is the highest possible standard. Because of that, it cannot be inherently bad or good, since there is nothing to compare it to.

As always, let me give an example.

Imagine for a second that i am the highest possible authority, and arbiter of right and wrong. Now, i pass a rule

“Do not eat after 9pm"

Anyone who eats after 9pm has done wrong. Those who eat before have done good. But to say if my law is good or not, there has to be some higher standard to compare it towards, like FDA guidelines for eating or something.

But if i am the highest possible authority, the FDA guidelines are not above me. I am above them. And if there is no higher criteria by which you can judge my law, then my law cannot be seen as good, or evil. Only those who abide by, or disobey it can be seen as such.

On the issue of Holiness, I went by the commonly held definition, that seems to imply that a God is free from all sin/wrongs.

Edit: By virtue of the inductive method, the only way to reject the conclusion is to reject one of the premises.

So in that case.. I'll attack the first one

God can never be wrong OR right in whatever he does

If God can never be wrong, then He is ALWAYS right in whatever He does!

If God can never be Evil, then He is ALWAYS good in whatever He does!

It is simple logic!

LordReed:
I dunno, you are the one who says such a thing exists.

So, whatever you can't measure doesn't exist!
What an excellent deduction and conclusion!

Wilgrea7:
It's funny how we can agree on almost every single point... and still come to different conclusions



I don't think you got my point. We've agreed that good and bad are dependent on the purpose/reason of God, which is the highest possible purpose. Not on the 3 criteria.. but on his purpose.

For the sake of this discussion.. i will agree that good and bad are dependent on the 3 criteria which are in turn based on the purpose/reason which he set.

And if you remember, i said that no action taken by your God can ever be seen as good or bad.. because the action will always have a reason/purpose behind it.. and that reason/purpose will automatically be the highest possible purpose.. for which good and bad derive their meaning from.

I also made reference to the shoemaker example, where we can see how the purpose or reason of the shoemaker can change from wanting to destroy the shoe, to wanting to keep it.. and it is up to the subordinates or 3rd parties to align themselves with the new “highest purpose"

The fact that the actions of your God NO MATTER WHAT THEY ARE will always have a reason behind them, which will then become the new arbiter of right and wrong.. is the exact reason, why i say it's arbitrary



I think you misunderstand what i meant by arbitrary. Here's what I said earlier

"Not arbitrary in the sense that they are not defined at all, but arbitrary in the sense that they HAVE to be defined in the light of whatever actions your God takes."

It means that whatever actions your God takes, as well as the reason/purpose behind them, can, and will become the new standard for good and evil.. and in that sense.. the standard for good and evil become arbitrary.. because it is dependent on the purpose/reason of your God's actions, which can literally be anything He decides

Just look by law of induction
1. God can never be WRONG in Whatever He does
2. A man Does Good whenever he aligns himself with God's will: this is called GOOD!
3. A man does Evil whenever he misaligned himself with God's will: this is called SIN/EVIL
Induction:
If a Man is good whenever he aligns himself with God's purpose, then God cannot be EVIL for if God is Evil, then man must by extension will be evil.

The Issue of Holiness is another matter entirely

Holiness has several definitions:

Merriam-Webster's definition of "holy": http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy


holy adjective


Definition of holy
1: exalted or worthy of complete devotion as one perfect in goodness and righteousness
2: DIVINE
for the Lord our God is holy
— Psalms 99:9 (King James Version)
3: devoted entirely to the deity or the work of the deity
a holy temple
holy prophets
4a: having a divine quality
holy love
b: venerated as or as if sacred
holy scripture
a holy relic
5—used as an intensive
this is a holy mess
he was a holy terror when he drank


More Definitions for holy
holy adjective
ho·​ly | \ ˈhō-lē \
holier; holiest
Kids Definition of holy
1: set apart for the service of God or of a divine being : SACRED
a holy temple
2: being a deity
the holy Lord God
3—used in exclamations to indicate surprise or excitement
Holy mackerel! You won!

SHINJA:
Go for redmi note10 pro 5g...


That's what I use. .

Thanks bro!
I'll check out the specs!

Have you replaced the screen or charging port before?
Are there original parts?
How much did you replace them?

Thanks

LordReed:
Well what use is a god that can't show up in any way?

You can measure His size!
You know His location!
You estimated His weight!


Just like Jupiter: how can such be God!?
How can He be unlimited!?

Sorry bro!

Wilgrea7:
Not my intention. Sometimes I'm in a hurry when I'm typing.. and don't bother to capitalize G's... But also, I thought God was more of a title than a name. Anyways.. point taken

Okay. But please be more careful next time.

Wilgrea7:
I think this goes back to the analogy of perception of the creator vs perception of the created.

On one hand, you have good and evil being based on the reasons/purpose of the creator

And on the other hand, you have good and bad being based on the 3 rules you listed above.

Do you realize that it is entirely possible, for the thing we consider good, based on your 3 rules.. to be considered bad if the reasons/purpose of your God by any means runs in opposition to them? Let me explain.

If your God can take any action, and those actions will always have reasons behind them, and the reasons are the final and highest criteria for what good and evil should be (as you've said), then it is entirely possible for your God to take an action which would change the definition of good and evil, and therefore make something we consider good, based on the 3 rules, to be considered bad.

As far as the 3 criteria go.. at least 2 of them .. conscience and reason, can be used to justify a number of things from our perspective. The case of the 2 adolescents are a good exmaple.

And the 3rd reason.. which are the words in scripture.. are words written based on his reasons/purpose at a point in time. Since he can take any action which will be based on reasons which must be considered the new highest authority, then his new purpose or reasons could in fact counter what was previously written in the bible.

It is like the story of the shoemaker which we both gave, where they can later decide to keep, or destroy the shoe. Whatever reason they finally agree on, becomes the criteria to judge if the subordinates or 3rd parties were right or wrong



For the sake of this discussion, I'm willing to grant the first paragraph. But i think we need to clearly define what we mean by “highest purpose".

From what I've gathered in this discussion.. the highest purpose is not some fixed thing that all actions have to measure themselves up to.

The highest purpose, is whatever reason is behind whatever actions your God takes. No matter what purpose or reason he bases his actions on, that automatically becomes the highest purpose.. and that's why I said it's arbitrary.

There is nothing arbitrary with God.
1. You must at least know that as the Creator,he has the right to do and undo with His creations.
2. God has set forth laws by which humans can live according to His will and Purpose for them. I spoke about
-Conscience
-Scripture
-Common sense.

These three lead you to just one conclusion: Goodness.

Also:
God as the Creator cannot be subject to any rule.

It is we humans who are subject to rules.

If God was arbitrary, there would not be RULES or LAWS!

Maynman:
That’s the point.
Since you want to use that logic, you must use it to the end.
Now, you are not talking about bacterias but unharmful bacterias. As an educated man are unharmful baterias found in the toilet?

Once again, you are not talking about bacterias but unharmful bacterias, get that clear.

Are ALL bacterias found in the toilet?

Is you killing ALL bacteria in your toilet Evil?

LordReed:
Wilgrea7 has repeatedly said he is not an atheist.

My response was to Dthruthspeaker and generic in nature.

Atheists want a God that can be reduced to the level of laboratory instruments:

Maynman:
Are this non harmful bacterias found in the toilet? Name them.
Did humans create the harmful bacteria?

That's not the point!

Are ALL bacteria harmful?
If the answer is no!

Then are you Evil by commiting genocide against ALL bacteria in your toilet?

Dtruthspeaker:

if ONE bacteria out of a million decided to commit genocide against other bacteria in the colony: this would be EVIL!

What if LordReed decides to murder hundreds of millions of Bacteria in his toilet, would that be Evil?

Maynman:
What do you mean innocent bacterias? Don’t you know what happens when bacterias are in your toilet? What makes them innocent?

And besides humans didn’t create the “innocent bacteria”. Why create it when you’ll eventually kill it?

I am sure you know that only a few families of bacteria are harmful to humans.

Unfortunately, in disinfecting a toilet, we don't do selective "genocide" we completly exterminate ALL bacteria; good or bad.

Are Humans wicked?

LordReed:
Really? So it wasn't your god supposedly speaking here:

Leviticus 11:45
For I am the Lord that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.

My error please!

Thanks