₦airaland Forum

Dtruthspeaker:
That is the source of his foolishness. He even thinks he is has a right to say "I no gree or I no want" to whatever his Owner does.

Yet he has not returned himself to his Owner so that he can tell the Owner I no gree o or I no want o.

Wilgrea7:
That's what I've been trying to get at from the beginning. What you're basically saying is that your god is the one who determines what is good, and what is evil. Which means the definitions of what good and evil are, are dependent on what he says they are. To you, the "fixed point" of what good and bad are, is God.

Wilgrea7:
But this very thing you see as fixed, is what I see as arbitrary. 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.

If your God can take ANY action, and that action must be considered good, doesn't that make the good and bad dependent on your God's actions? And if the actions of your god can literally be anything, then doesn't that make the definition of good and bad, which is based on the actions which can literally be anything, arbitrary?




Let me just start by saying that I think these are very good examples. That being said, I don't think they can be used to determine the arbitrariness of good and evil with respect to your God. Let me explain.

In both examples, we both judge them based on a fixed concept of what good is supposed to be. We see things that involve the child's well-being on the long run as good. That's why we can say denying them their short-term requests, for their long-term well-being, is good. Their overall well-being is the higher purpose here.

In respect to a god, who as you've said determines what good and bad is, and of which good and bad are defined by their actions, then we're not judging from a fixed point anymore.

Wilgrea7:
It would be like saying the action, of locking the child in the room, in of itself, was good, regardless of the situation, because whatever action the parent took, be it locking their child, holding them down for injection, or tossing them off a roof HAS TO BE considered good.

In your examples, good and evil are based on the long-term well-being of the child, not the actions of the parents. The actions of the parents are judged as good or bad, in respect to the fixed standard/higher purpose, which is the long-term well-being of the child. I hope you get my point.

Wilgrea7:
Sorry... Noticed my response was getting too long.. so i had to break it down into 2



Ok.. So now I'm a little bit confused. If I'm understanding you correctly, good and evil are based on the purpose/reason which God decides to do things. And his actions will always be based on his reasons. So in that sense, his actions can never be wrong, since regardless of the actions he takes, there will always be a reason behind it.

But if that's the case, then how can he also be right? If his actions are intertwined with his reasons, then how can they be viewed as right or wrong? Let me give an example.

Let's say I make a shoe. And due to something i noticed, let's say a design flaw, I decide to want to destroy the shoe. If i destroy the shoe, it is based on the purpose/reason which i chose. BUT... If i then like the shoe and choose not to destroy it, have I done wrong? I certainly have another reason/purpose, for not wanting to destroy the shoe. The new reason is because I like it. My decision to keep the shoe is because of a reason, which is me liking it. Now, regardless of what i do, there is a reason behind it.

I, the maker of the shoe, decide the reasons for which I carry out an action. No matter what action I take, there will always be a reason behind it. In that case, how can my actions ever be right or wrong?

Let's say i have subordinates, and one of them decides to destroy the shoe in accordance with my first reason. They've acted in line with the reason. If my reason is the standard of what is good, then my subordinate has done good.

But if I decided to keep the shoe, based on the reasons of me liking it, and my subordinate then destroys it, then they've acted in opposition to the reason i wanted to keep the shoe. They've done bad.

But the very actions of me keeping or destroying the shoe, regardless of whatever action I take, will always have a reason behind it. And therefore, cannot be right or wrong, since I, the maker of the shoe, will always have reasons for my actions. It is the subordinates that have to align their actions with my reasons. So they are the only ones who can be right or wrong.

For something to be right, it has to not be wrong. If something cannot be wrong, how then can it be right? If my actions can never be in opposition to my reasons, because all my actions would have reasons behind them, then how could by actions be considered good or bad based on my reasons for them?

Wilgrea7:
Once again, another wonderful analogy. I think one thing I picked up from this, is the perception of the creation, as opposed to the perception of the creator.

Sure, I would disinfect my toilets, and i would consider that a good thing. That's because my definition of good, in that context, is one which supports my health and hygiene. That's the criteria by which i define good. And the death of the bacteria is in line that criteria. In that sense, disinfecting the toilet would be good.

If the criteria by which i defined good, were to be the life of the bacteria, regardless of how small they were, then disinfecting it would be bad. But In this analogy, my actions can actually go in contrary to what the criteria for good and bad are, and therefore, can be considered either be good, or bad.

I think your analogy of purpose trumps this one, since it shows that the purpose, or reason behind an action, are the criteria by which good and bad are defined. And since the actions of God and the reasons behind the actions are intertwined and cannot be in opposition to each other, then in that sense, God cannot be seen as good or bad. As holy, or unholy

oikirodah:
.

Copyright Protected.
https://ireporteronline.com.ng/blog/verified-kashim-shettimas-emergence-as-the-golden-boy-ruffles-feathers/

Templee333:
probably they're on their way,they'll soon arrive. But if they dare to comment here, i shall... let me just not say it.

aminulive:
https://politicsnigeria.com/salary-protest-community-policing-is-voluntary-not-a-paid-job-kwara-police-command/

Dtruthspeaker:
imagine, the numbers in a Ruler are the ones complaining about how the Ruler is the standard of measurement!

Ahmback:
please try to compose better stories. This one is trash, doesn't make sense.

Templee333:
oh yes! I might be an exception. Frm my own point of view, demons & ghosts exist in the minds of people who nuture them,but once you get rid of them in ur mind,they are no more. I have my own reasons 4 saying so.I've known prophets & spiritualists who said things that i'm 100% sure they aren't true abt me,but since i didn't point out to them that they were wrong at the moment,they & the people around them believed they're right. I don't trust the words of spiritualists & prophets & will never do. And i take as a liar anybody who sees what happen to me as a demonic oppresion.

Wilgrea7:
But isn't that exactly what makes it arbitrary? If it was based on clearly well-defined parameters, then it would be a fixed thing. But you said it is measured according to God's will. Whatever God wills is considered perfect. If we wills the torture of humans, that also would be considered perfect. If he turned around and willed the enjoyment and bliss of humans, that also would be considered perfect.

That's exactly what I'm saying. I don't see how that isn't arbitrary. If perfection, or right and wrong is dependent on whatever he does, or says it is, rather than a fixed standard, then that in itself, is the definition of arbitrary.



I really love this example. You mentioned the purpose, or reason for disassembling the computer. So let's say for example, the family of computers don't know why you disassembled it. So to them, it would be evil. But the only reason that would make your disassembling of the computer good, or evil, would be your reason behind it. Let me give a few instances

1. You disassembled the computer simply because you don't like how it looks
2. You disassembled it because you found a dangerous component that could cause it to explode and destroy others
3. You disassembled it because you wanted to burn it to ash for your amusement.

In all these situations, I'm not disputing the fact that you ARE the owner of the computer and have the ability to do with it as you desire. What I'm arguing is whether or not your actions, or at least the motive behind them, would qualify you to say if you were a good computer engineer or not.

Let me take it a step further. Let's say the reason you dismantled the computer was not known to the family of computers. In that case, then on what basis would they, or anyone else call you a good computer engineer?

The word good means something. If you were to call yourself that name, there would have to be a reason behind it. If the reason is unknown, then why should anyone call you good?



I understand, but that's exactly what I'm saying. If you alone decide what is right and wrong, and whatever you do is considered right, then the words have no meaning in respect to you. If nothing you do can be considered wrong, then what then is right, and what then is wrong? If wrong cannot exist in respect to you, then how can right exist?

If whatever God does is automatically Holy, and nothing he does or could possibly do, can be considered unholy, then how can holiness and unholiness exist in respect to him? Those words can only have meaning in respect to the creation, who are bound by what he sets as right and wrong, not him.

That's why i said earlier, that the way I see it, it seems God lacks the capacity to be holy, or unholy, since nothing he does can be considered unholy. Without the possibility of unholiness, holiness has no meaning. Without the possibility of wrong, how can right have meaning?

Gistermiller3:
TATTOOED CHRISTIAN CALLED ‘DEMON’ BY FANS OVER APPEARANCE SAYS ‘ONLY GOD CAN JUDGE ME’

Read full story and see more pix@


[url=https://gistermiller.com/tattooed-christian-called-demon-by-fans-over-appearance-says-only-god-can-judge-me][/url]

Templee333:
spiritual wetin? Not now,pls, Mr TenQ, i've had enough of the spiritual shit. But for now i'm flesh & blood. I dnt have time for people who recomend spiritual solution to physical problem. If u want to do me a favour,recomend ways to make money & a generous money giver then u'll be my frnd 4 life. Thanks 4 d spiritual cleansing in advance but,sorry, it won't be usefull to me!

Wilgrea7:
Always a pleasure to hear from you



So if I'm getting this correctly (and as usual, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), Holiness is a measure of perfection. And God is perfect, not because he adheres to any defined laws, but because whatever he does, regardless of what he does, is considered perfect?

In that case, perfection, which is the measure of holiness has become arbitrary, rather than fixed, since whatever God does, is always perfect. In that case, doesn't the word lose its meaning?

If I told you I am kind for example, not because I do good things for people, but because whatever I do, has to be considered kind, wouldn't the word lose its meaning?

If i went around whipping people, beating them and destroying properties, would that be considered kind? If God "sets" the standard for perfection, and the standard is defined by "whatever he does", then how exactly is that a standard?

Mrquote:
Why doesn't the Bible tell us exactly when the Great Tribulation shall begin?

naijaboy756:
Good day All.

Please who can interpret this very strange dream. In the dream, looked like i went with some friends in a place with village settings. It was clear the place was Bayelsa.

In the village, some locals (men, women, boys, girls) came to me and my friends saying i have to go to the river and appease or do some rituals with egg in the river. Like it is a MUST. I told them i won't do it as i have phobia for river and also i don't worship the powers inside the river. They made it look like its mandatory and i don't have a choice.

I told them i will never do such and set out to run from them. They started following me till i got into a white garment church and the pastor told me NEVER to do it. I should depend on Jesus Christ for defense. While i was inside the white garment church, i didn't see them again. Some how i came outside and met one of them, a young boy with plaster on his face. I became worried and started praying saying i will never do that sacrifice.

I ran from the church to a place that looked like a valley in search for escape route. I was contemplating where to run from, also saying that just like Shedrach, Meschac and Abednego, i will never sacrifice to a river goddess.

I was reading psalm 24 reminding God that the earth is his and the fullness thereof. I later saw a ditch and was saying i would rather enter this ditch and die than going to the river.

I woke up thereafter worried and scared.

Wilgrea7:
Hey everyone,

So I've been thinking about this Holiness thing for a while. This is primarily geared towards the Christian and Muslim faiths, but other views are more than welcomed as well. Ok.. Down to business.

The claim of Holiness is one that seems to be an integral part of the abrahamic faiths. God is supposedly holy, and you should strive to be like him and whatnot.

But my question is, how exactly is your God Holy? What exactly makes Him/It holy?

Is God holy because he has/can do no evil, or is he holy because nothing he does can be considered evil?

As an example, we have stories of the Abrahamic God allegedly drowning people in floods, ordering the slaughtering of entire cities in his name, sending bears to maul children, ordering the stoning of people for little offences, planning to torch people for eternity, and so on. The list goes on and on.

These actions, if performed by any human, would be immediately deemed bad and immoral. But if your God does it, It's completely fine. Then on what basis do you award this deity the title of Holiness?

One of the most common responses I've heard, is that we're his creation, and therefore he can do whatever he pleases. If that's the case, then why call him Holy? It just seems like an arbitrary title with no much meaning behind it.

He could make every single person suffer the most excruciating pains for millions of years and still be considered Holy. He could cause all children to die from terrible diseases, and you would say he has the right, since we're his creation.

If that's the case, If your God can allegedly do whatever he wants with humans since he created them, then on what basis would you ascribe Holiness to him? What exactly would you define as Holiness?

Looking forward to your responses

Shalommy:
Chaii... Why do our men keep on disgracing this country? Loser

Kewtt:
https://www.prestigeassuranceplc.com/product.php?id=108

Kewtt:
Yes

Onyeka90210:
All android OLED screens are not cheap
Good display comes with a price.
The only reason apple’s own is a bit cheaper is because there are lots of aftermarket screens.
Well, I think you should remove Huawei and put Samsung.
Huawei and google doesn’t mix, if you use an app that requires google play service, you don’t need Huawei.
For Xiaomi
Mi 10
Mi Note 10 pro
Mi 11 lite/Redmi note 10 pro
Mi 9T pro
Poco sha
With that budget I wouldn’t advice Redmi, check out the poco series instead.
If you love android OS updates, it’ll have to be between redmi and poco, because the Mi I mentioned are probably on their last OS, but will still get security updates.
I don’t know much about the Poco line up, maybe someone would outline the best below me.

Kewtt:
Insure your device after purchase. With that rest easy

dawnomike:
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 pro... Check out the review online if you are in doubt

Kewtt:
Buy a old flagship of Samsung Note series.

dre11:
•Senior profs to earn N9m yearly, junior lecturers get N90,000 monthly



https://punchng.com/ASUU-strike-fgs-proposal-may-lead-to-lecturers-pay-cut/?amp

madridguy:
Sheikh Muhammad Goni Aisami, an Islamic Scholar, was shot dead by one soldier named John Gabriel he gave a lift in the Scholar's car and later called his friend Adamu Gideon with Recca Battalion 241 to help him convey the car to safety but the car stopped working and could not move.

The two soldiers have been apprehended and are now with the Army authority in Damaturu after confessing that they killed the Scholar to bolt with his vehicle, the car in question Honda 2006 model.

Imagine a Christian soldier killed an Islamic preacher who assisted him with a lift.
Meanwhile, Vanguard Newspaper had reported earlier that the scholar was killed by gunmen.

CAN suddenly mute on this. Imaging the other way round, a pastor being killed by muslim soldier after assisted him with a lift. Even UN, USA and UK will hear CAN.

May Allah be pleased with his soul and grant him the highest level of jannatul firdaus. Amin.

Realists:
Mr prince where were you when the Crusaders were using weapons to kill innocent people around the world?. We all know it's a fact that bandits & kiddnappers don't produce the weapons they use, but are supplied by European Christian gun runners in exchange for gold.

HonNL:
Turji is the arrowhead of killings and kidnappings around Shinkafi – Sabon Birni and Isah local government areas of Zamfara and Sokoto states.



SOURCE

Previous Threads:
https://www.nairaland.com/6893197/find-bello-turji-dead-alive#108454823
Find Bello Turji Dead Or Alive - MURIC Identifies Man Behind Sokoto Killings (Over 500 Civilians were killed)

https://www.nairaland.com/6902628/bandit-bello-turji-writes-letter#108645307
Bello Turji, leader of bandits, writes, seeking dialogue with Zamfara, Nigeria Govts

https://www.nairaland.com/6920474/new-photos-bello-turji-surface#109017237
Bello Turji spotted at a wedding in January

https://www.nairaland.com/6922319/terror-kingpin-turji-releases-52#109053552
Turji releases 52 kidnapped civilians

Uba76:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekUtohv0ITw


Opinions differ after clergyman, Kingsley Okonkwo, dismissed claims that Jesus is against divorced persons remarrying

�: @kingsleypst