kingxsamz:


So how does that concern Jesus?
If he's not the one sending those things, why bring it up?
You're trying too hard to find a point you can run with.

Nostradamus made 700 plus prophecies about the world even to hundreds of years after his death. It's even said that he correctly foretold the death of Queen Elizabeth in 2022.
What concern's Nostradamus with Queen Elizabeth's death if he's not the one to kill her?

All the weather forecasters and meteorologists predicting rain and this and that nkor? What concern's them with the weather and the rain if they're not the ones to cause the rain?.

Argument here is very weak . My advice: abandon ship

kingxsamz:



Even you acknowledge the flaws but you're hiding the pain behind those emojis.
Imagine an unbeliever kills your children, only for you to die one day and end up in hell because you told a lie, and then you see your children in hell, while the murderer is in heaven dancing and rejoicing.
Like I asked, if someone kills your children, your mother and your husband but the government decides to let him go free because he said "sorry please forgive me", you go dey shine teeth abi? Answer.

I hope you're not one of those people that'll look out the window to confirm that their neighbour doesn't have light as well whenever the lights goes out?

If I go to hell for sinning, is it okay as long as another murderer is also in hell

True life story: Someone killed my father and boasted about it to my own hearing, beat up my mother with thugs before my eyes because she tried to stop them from seizing my father's property, attempted severally to kill my mother, sent assasins after my siblings (my baby sister escaped by hiding in a drum of water in the bathroom), and did alot more terrible things I won't talk about. But God I serve bear me witness that I pray for the safety, forgiveness and conversion of these men almost every day of my life.
My God taught me that if I don't forgive, I won't be forgiven. I don't visit them, I haven't seen them in over 20yrs but I have forgiven them. If they were dying and I have the power to heal them, I would do it without thinking twice.

kingxsamz:


You didn't say anything abeg.
You said they're wrong. Point blank.

There's no escaping this.
You must explain why you contradicted yourself.

Unprovoked killing is wrong.
Self defense is not wrong

You went from asking me a general question to talking about what happened during war

kingxsamz:


If you like lie about what I never said, the fact will always stare at you in the face.


Madam explain why genocide, infanticide and slavery now became good since you said they're wrong.
Or you just say anything that comes to your mind without much thought? You don enter trap today.

If you didn't say that, what was your answer to my question?

kingxsamz:


Even if you're told ten times, you'll never understand.
Atheism is the lack of belief in a god and it has nothing to do with evolution. Not every atheist agrees with it, believes it or understands it.
There are theists who believe in evolution also.
What ever anyone says that isn't "no, I don't believe in a god" has nothing to do with atheism.

Even the person I quoted admitted that there are several forms of atheism like the Gnostic and the agnostic.

Which type of atheist are you sef

uche40:


From the content of your posts on this thread, it's clear to me that you consider the Christian God to be the source or arbiter of moral values. Ignoring the fact that morality is easily explained by evolutionary psychology, let us assume you are correct for the sake of argument. Unfortunately, by assuming that anything God orders is good or right, you have unwittingly admitted that God's morality cannot be objective and/or universal.

Euthyphro's Dilemma encapsulates this problem perfectly and it has yet to be answered satisfactorily: Is an act right because God says it's so, or does God say it's so because it's right? If it is right just because God says so, then morality is subject to his whim and has no real grounding except "might makes right". In other words, if tomorrow he declares that rape is good, does it actually become moral in any objective sense. On the other hand, if God commands it because it is right, then he is just a "middle man" and does not determine what is moral.

I am a Christian and will answer this question as a Christian.

It's right because God said it's right. He's wiser and knows more than me so I can never understand all the factors he considered before arriving at His conclusion. But if I'm confused, I'll pray and He'll help me to understand why He made that decision.

That's the difference between a theist and an atheist. Where there's confusion between logic and trusting God blindly, the Theist trusts God blindly while the atheist waits for logical convincing logic.

I've suffered terrible things, but today, I'm grateful to God for everything I suffered. Each blow taught me lessons my parents didn't teach me because they loved and sheltered me too much. Initially it was a cross but now it's a crown. This is after 20+yrs. I achieved something very big months ago something I first attempted about 12yrs ago and while discussing with my sister, she asked me if I was sad about the delay and sad experiences, I told her that if I had the power to go back in time, I'll willingly face each problem again. Some problems stripped me of fake friends, some problems made long time secret enemies reveal themselves, some taught me bluntness of life and the human nature, some taught me practical business, some taught me marketing, some taught me forgiveness and patience and it's made me who I am today which I am grateful for. For example, someone tried to marry me but the plan was to kill me after our wedding because of what I was pursuing, only after it supposedly fail did the person mock my failure and tell me that that was what attracted them to me. Lol. I later found out that the person knows people that can make a senator disappear . Let me stop here for privacy reasons.
So why won't I trust Him blindly at my next crossroad?

Back to your question, God is the originator of morals, through the ancient times, the moral people were always those who served and obeyed his word. Before He began to speak to man, who would have taught man right from wrong? Nobody.
Go through the bible, God taught men to wash their clothes, wash their bodies, shave their hair or oil their hair, to not eat blood, to dig the ground before they defecate and cover it up, he taught men to cook food, to be kind to their animals, to be kind to strangers, to respect elders, to give to the poor and to Him, to be moderate in everything. He taught the laws for people who commit a crime and what to do for someone who mistakenly committed a crime. He even introduced the first polygraph test (the Urim Thurim) and what to do when the Urim Thurim is not there.

Everything you call humanity or morals has been written in the bible thousands of years ago.

Let me shock you a bit, ancient Britain was a pile of dirt, they didn't bathe or have sewage systems, the Europeans were appalled at the stench from the British when they first arrived Britain , Britain was pagan then. The missionaries then began to teach them Christianity, Islam etc and hygiene.

jasminer:


Nostradamus made 700 plus prophecies about the world even to hundreds of years after his death. It's even said that he correctly foretold the death of Queen Elizabeth in 2022.
What concern's Nostradamus with Queen Elizabeth's death if he's not the one to kill her?

All the weather forecasters and meteorologists predicting rain and this and that nkor? What concern's them with the weather and the rain if they're not the ones to cause the rain?.

Argument here is very weak . My advice: abandon ship

You're not even making any sense. Did you read what you even typed?
Abandon what ship? I don't even understand your point.

jasminer:


I hope you're not one of those people that'll look out the window to confirm that their neighbour doesn't have light as well whenever the lights goes out?

If I go to hell for sinning, is it okay as long as another murderer is also in hell

True life story: Someone killed my father and boasted about it to my own hearing, beat up my mother with thugs before my eyes because she tried to stop them from seizing my father's property, attempted severally to kill my mother, sent assasins after my siblings (my baby sister escaped by hiding in a drum of water in the bathroom), and did alot more terrible things I won't talk about. But God I serve bear me witness that I pray for the safety, forgiveness and conversion of these men almost every day of my life.
My God taught me that if I don't forgive, I won't be forgiven. I don't visit them, I haven't seen them in over 20yrs but I have forgiven them. If they were dying and I have the power to heal them, I would do it without thinking twice.

And if those men come back to kill off your remaining family members, you'll shine teeth instead of getting them arrested?
So if pesin kill all your family, you go dey pray for their safety, instead make you call police?
Ah, omo. Government should probably release all terrorists, ritualists and kidnappers so we can pray for them to change. I mean, that's what you'd do, right?

jasminer:


Unprovoked killing is wrong.
Self defense is not wrong

You went from asking me a general question to talking about what happened during war

Story story, story.
Is genocide, infanticide and slavery wrong?

jasminer:


Yes they are wrong.

End of story.
No need to struggle. You don already enter trap.

jasminer:


If you didn't say that, what was your answer to my question?

Show me where I answered you na, madam.
Show me.

jasminer:


Even the person I quoted admitted that there are several forms of atheism like the Gnostic and the agnostic.

Which type of atheist are you sef

Atheism is the lack of belief in a god/gods.
Any other thing is pointless. It has nothing to do with evolution, planets or anything that has to do with science.
The earlier you know this, the better.

jasminer:


I am a Christian and will answer this question as a Christian.

It's right because God said it's right. He's wiser and knows more than me so I can never understand all the factors he considered before arriving at His conclusion. But if I'm confused, I'll pray and He'll help me to understand why He made that decision.

That's the difference between a theist and an atheist. Where there's confusion between logic and trusting God blindly, the Theist trusts God blindly while the atheist waits for logical convincing logic.

I've suffered terrible things, but today, I'm grateful to God for everything I suffered. Each blow taught me lessons my parents didn't teach me because they loved and sheltered me too much. Initially it was a cross but now it's a crown. This is after 20+yrs. I achieved something very big months ago something I first attempted about 12yrs ago and while discussing with my sister, she asked me if I was sad about the delay and sad experiences, I told her that if I had the power to go back in time, I'll willingly face each problem again. Some problems stripped me of fake friends, some problems made long time secret enemies reveal themselves, some taught me bluntness of life and the human nature, some taught me practical business, some taught me marketing, some taught me forgiveness and patience and it's made me who I am today which I am grateful for. For example, someone tried to marry me but the plan was to kill me after our wedding because of what I was pursuing, only after it supposedly fail did the person mock my failure and tell me that that was what attracted them to me. Lol. I later found out that the person knows people that can make a senator disappear . Let me stop here for privacy reasons.
So why won't I trust Him blindly at my next crossroad?

Back to your question, God is the originator of morals, through the ancient times, the moral people were always those who served and obeyed his word. Before He began to speak to man, who would have taught man right from wrong? Nobody.
Go through the bible, God taught men to wash their clothes, wash their bodies, shave their hair or oil their hair, to not eat blood, to dig the ground before they defecate and cover it up, he taught men to cook food, to be kind to their animals, to be kind to strangers, to respect elders, to give to the poor and to Him, to be moderate in everything. He taught the laws for people who commit a crime and what to do for someone who mistakenly committed a crime. He even introduced the first polygraph test (the Urim Thurim) and what to do when the Urim Thurim is not there.

Everything you call humanity or morals has been written in the bible thousands of years ago.

Let me shock you a bit, ancient Britain was a pile of dirt, they didn't bathe or have sewage systems, the Europeans were appalled at the stench from the British when they first arrived Britain , Britain was pagan then. The missionaries then began to teach them Christianity, Islam etc and hygiene.

In all of this, you still avoided one question she asked you.
If the Christian god should declare that rape is okay tomorrow, will that make it right?
You're good at burying certain things in between words and stories. But that can't work for me sha. You must answer that question.

Uche40:
In other words, if tomorrow he declares that rape is good, does it actually become moral in any objective sense.

Answer the question and stop running.

jasminer:



But I like the aspect of consent you gave. But what happens when an animal itself like a chimpanzee touches a woman sexually or an animal like a dog who has been exposed to sexual acts before attempts to ride a woman. In such a case, the animal made the first move, in such a case, it can't be rape can it?

lol

jasminer:


I am a Christian and will answer this question as a Christian.

It's right because God said it's right. He's wiser and knows more than me so I can never understand all the factors he considered before arriving at His conclusion. But if I'm confused, I'll pray and He'll help me to understand why He made that decision.

That's the difference between a theist and an atheist. Where there's confusion between logic and trusting God blindly, the Theist trusts God blindly while the atheist waits for logical convincing logic.

I've suffered terrible things, but today, I'm grateful to God for everything I suffered. Each blow taught me lessons my parents didn't teach me because they loved and sheltered me too much. Initially it was a cross but now it's a crown. This is after 20+yrs. I achieved something very big months ago something I first attempted about 12yrs ago and while discussing with my sister, she asked me if I was sad about the delay and sad experiences, I told her that if I had the power to go back in time, I'll willingly face each problem again. Some problems stripped me of fake friends, some problems made long time secret enemies reveal themselves, some taught me bluntness of life and the human nature, some taught me practical business, some taught me marketing, some taught me forgiveness and patience and it's made me who I am today which I am grateful for. For example, someone tried to marry me but the plan was to kill me after our wedding because of what I was pursuing, only after it supposedly fail did the person mock my failure and tell me that that was what attracted them to me. Lol. I later found out that the person knows people that can make a senator disappear . Let me stop here for privacy reasons.
So why won't I trust Him blindly at my next crossroad?

Back to your question, God is the originator of morals, through the ancient times, the moral people were always those who served and obeyed his word. Before He began to speak to man, who would have taught man right from wrong? Nobody.
Go through the bible, God taught men to wash their clothes, wash their bodies, shave their hair or oil their hair, to not eat blood, to dig the ground before they defecate and cover it up, he taught men to cook food, to be kind to their animals, to be kind to strangers, to respect elders, to give to the poor and to Him, to be moderate in everything. He taught the laws for people who commit a crime and what to do for someone who mistakenly committed a crime. He even introduced the first polygraph test (the Urim Thurim) and what to do when the Urim Thurim is not there.

Everything you call humanity or morals has been written in the bible thousands of years ago.

Let me shock you a bit, ancient Britain was a pile of dirt, they didn't bathe or have sewage systems, the Europeans were appalled at the stench from the British when they first arrived Britain , Britain was pagan then. The missionaries then began to teach them Christianity, Islam etc and hygiene.

I see. So you consider to be good, any act that God tells you is good? That's interesting.

Given that you are Christian -- at least, in the traditional sense -- you already believe that God exists. And his existence is not just in the writings of the scriptures. He exists and will continue to exist for eternity. So it stands to reason that God keeps issuing commands and instructions to his people. If God insists that you kill your parents tomorrow, you'd have to do it. And don't tell me "God can't ask me to do such a thing" because you have no existing independent moral basis to assess and/or decide what God can or can not command you to do. You really have no right to condemn anybody on anything. If someone you've never met before raped your sister tomorrow, how can you tell for a fact that it wasn't God who commanded that rapist? You have lost ALL rights to make moral judgements. Your morality rests solely on whatever God desires. All things are permitted including sleeping with animals, killing of babies, stealing money from people etc. It all depends on God's plan, his will and his objectives at that point in time.

Let me also add that I found it a bit comical how you presented "blind trust" as a virtue or something that seemingly gives you an advantage over the atheists. I know you are one of those Christians who think they're close to God and have a special relationship with him. You talk to him and he responds to you, right? Here are some examples below of individuals who "trusted God blindly". Please note that you have stripped yourself of every moral right to condemn them or claim that they did not receive commandments from God.

May 2008 in Wisconsin...God told me if i prayed hard enough she would come back to life...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354849,00.html

August 1993 in Texas, 20 naked people emerge from a car that struck a tree
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-961214.html

San Antoni, TX...God tells man to ram another vehicle at 100mph
http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/428252-god-told-man-to-ram-vehicle-at-100mph

March 2004, Texas...God told me to kill my 3 sons...
http://articles.cnn.com/2004-03-29/justice/children.slain_1_deanna-laney-insanity-defense-luke-laney?_s=PM:LAW

There's many more where that came from but anyhoo, that's by the way. I think we've ignored the elephant in the room for long enough now. It's time we finally addressed it. Your assertion that God is the originator of morals contains an unsupported claim: GOD EXISTS. Please support this claim with objective and empirical evidence. Give it your best shot. Don't be scared.

jasminer:


Genesis chapter 2 vs 5-6
... : for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

I've read the full chapter in its entirety and the only thing I can infer from this passage you've cited is that up until the creation of Adam -- which I think is the main focus of Genesis 2 -- rain had not yet fallen. The passage seems to be describing the status quo PRIOR to Adam's creation. It says nothing about the atmospheric conditions existing between Adam's creation and the Flood of Genesis. So I think it's a bit of a stretch to extend this phenomenon to the period where Noah built his ark.

However, the part (which I emboldened) about mist going up from the earth strangely resembles the Water Cycle phenomenon.

The water cycle describes how water evaporates from the surface of the earth, rises into the atmosphere, cools and condenses into rain or snow in clouds, and falls again to the surface as precipitation. The water falling on land collects in rivers and lakes, soil, and porous layers of rock, and much of it flows back into the oceans, where it will once more evaporate. The cycling of water in and out of the atmosphere is a significant aspect of the weather patterns on Earth.
https://gpm.nasa.gov/education/water-cycle

That's a bit weird, but then again it's just speculation.

jasminer:


Firstly, I've watch documentaries on children who were rescued from terrorist camps. It took some two years to gain any form of normalcy. I saluted the courage of one particular mother where even her own society turned their backs on her and her son but she didn't give up till she found an equally determined children behavioral therapist and they both after about 2yrs restored some normalcy to the child.
Before his rehabilitation, the boy loved to kill and destroy anything he could. Cut off head of toys, strangle pets and watch them die with rapt attention, capture little creatures and slice them open, destroy the toys of other kids, beat up smaller kids, throw stones at vehicles, rejected the name his parents named him and insisted they call him what the terrorists used to call him, hated cartoons, screamed at adults and hit or bite them if they try to correct him. No respect, no fear, even urinated on his mother for scolding him. So, as a military decision maker, if you have two hundred thousand children like this, what do you do?

Then the issue of the new Borns, can they survive without their mothers? Who is going to breastfeed ten thousand day old children at the war front? Who will bathe them? Change their diapers?

Is leaving them alive and orphaned your idea of justice? Vultures and wild animals will eat them up either way.

Do you spare their mothers who are actively involved in their husband's terrorism by their own freewill? Who even raised their husbands to be terrorists if not the mothers of the husbands?

Some things are easy to say than doing it. I've never seen American soldiers bring back orphaned children, does that mean no child was in the terrorist camps ?
As noble as it sounds, you may not even be able to carry back your weak friend who is still alive talkless of a random child as innocent as it is.

That's even apart from the high risk that those children will grow to harbor resentment for the Israelites even if the Israelites save them. Afterall didn't Pharaoh's daughter save Moses? Didn't Moses grow up to side his own people and even killed an Egyptian?

It's easy to write noble stories but if you are not a military personnel, you haven't been in a war, you didn't even live in the times we're talking about, it's easy to misjudge

You've veered off on an absurd tangent my dear. Recall that my question to you was "what possible threat could a day old infant pose to your life?" I haven't seen you demonstrate any such threats yet. When neighboring villages, towns or countries that are at conflict start attacks on each other, infants below 1 year old are most likely to become casualties of war and far from remotely being active participants in it, so your reference to war as an example of infants being a threat to your safety is skewed and misleading. Plus, I already told you that I agree with you on the ethics of killings in war being a messy subject where it's hard to establish which murders are morally permissible or not, so your perambulations here are largely unnecessary.

The first paragraph in this dizzying riposte in particular is quite amusing as well. Correct me if I'm wrong but your entire rejoinder seems to be making the argument that innocent children and parents should be spared the misery of being alive to deal with all sorts of pain, suffering and PTSD that results from devastating war incidents -- insisting that there isn't any other option for them. In your first paragraph, you brought up an example of a young boy who was apparently dealing with mental trauma from war-related crimes which led to him exhibiting anti-social behaviors. Curiously, you shot yourself in the foot in that same paragraph when you affirmed that he was eventually rehabilitated. This seems to deflate your argument that "mercy-killing" of these infants is the only option.

Meanwhile, since the issue of war seems to interest you so much that you bring it up every five seconds, I'd really like you to explain to me why an omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent deity relies on wars and petty violence to impose his will on mankind:

uche40:

What does your God really stand to gain from engaging in pissing contents with nations who defy him or go against his "divine" will? Why is he so bloodlusted and obsessed with wars in the Old Testament? If indiscriminate killing in any conflict or war scenario is to be justified, at least two conditions have to be met. The killings have to prevent calamities worse than it will cause. And, as a means of prevention, it has to be the last resort. Killing random people or infants should not be considered until ANY and ALL alternative means have been tried -- and have failed.

As the all-powerful, all-knowing deity of peace and love that your God is, is it so inconceivable for him to design a perfect blend of diplomacy and continuous examination to deal with any and all possible threats? Is war and violence the only means he can devise? Then why is he called all-knowing and all-powerful? Why is he called all-good (omnibenevolent)?

Even in the books of the Old Testament, it is proven time after time that your God's constant attacks and subjugation of the enemies of the Israelites are mostly ineffectual. His defeat of these nations only seems to contribute to temporary safety and long-term enmity between these nations and his chosen people since these nations will only view the Israelites' victory as a humiliation to be avenged.

jasminer:


Please quote the other scenarios so I get a clearer understanding of where you're coming from. I mean provide the exact place in the Bible God commanded such

I'm sorry but you seem to have gotten your logic backwards. Let me refresh your memory on how this discussion evolved. I could have included links but I don't want to trigger the anti-spam bot, so I'll just give a summary of our correspondence using bullet points.

• kingxsamz asked you if genocide, infanticide, incest, slavery and rape were wrong.

• You affirmed that these acts were wrong.

• I pointed out the fact that some of these acts seemed to be endorsed by God at certain moments in the Bible.

• You then re-affirmed that killing people is an offense, except this time you suggested that it wasn't morally wrong if it took place in the context of a war. In light of my previous response about some acts in Bible appearing to resemble genocide and infanticide, this statement implies the hidden assertion that if genocide and infanticide was truly committed by God in the Bible, then it must have happened by him being provoked in an instance of war.

I haven't made any positive claims that other scenarios exist where genocide and infanticide are endorsed by the Christian God. You are the one who implicitly restricted genocide and infanticide to war scenarios. That's why I need you to confirm -- for the sake of clarity: Are you positive that ALL instances of genocide and infanticide carried out by God in the Bible only occurred when God was provoked in an instance of war? A "Yes" or "No" will suffice.

kingxsamz:


You're not even making any sense. Did you read what you even typed?
Abandon what ship? I don't even understand your point.

You claimed is Jesus wasn't the one causing the floods, why should he make a prophecy about it.

So I gave examples of other people who forecast what they didn't cause and I adviced you that this argument is weak, focus on the other stronger arguments

kingxsamz:

And if those men come back to kill off your remaining family members, you'll shine teeth instead of getting them arrested?
So if pesin kill all your family, you go dey pray for their safety, instead make you call police?
Ah, omo. Government should probably release all terrorists, ritualists and kidnappers so we can pray for them to change. I mean, that's what you'd do, right?

Lol, I'll defend myself and my family if anyone threatens my life, after defending me and them, I'll forgive and pray for their salvation

kingxsamz:


Story story, story.
Is genocide, infanticide and slavery wrong?


End of story.
No need to struggle. You don already enter trap.

My partner in crime, Answer your own question

kingxsamz:


Show me where I answered you na, madam.
Show me.

That's what I'm saying ... You haven't answered my only question... Why you dey fear?

Answer na

kingxsamz:


Atheism is the lack of belief in a god/gods.
Any other thing is pointless. It has nothing to do with evolution, planets or anything that has to do with science.
The earlier you know this, the better.

Oga, you saw another atheist say that she believes there could be spiritual activities and the likes. What's your own inside it now?

kingxsamz:


In all of this, you still avoided one question she asked you.
If the Christian god should declare that rape is okay tomorrow, will that make it right?
You're good at burying certain things in between words and stories. But that can't work for me sha. You must answer that question.

Answer the question and stop running.

You are asking me an impossible question. Tomorrow if the devil becomes a saint, will I be friends with him?
The devil can never become a saint same way God can never do a thing like declare rape as moral, instead of that to happen, heaven and earth will pass away.

You're an atheist right? If you fall in love with a swine tomorrow, will you marry it and have s*x with it? Am I not insulting you with this question?

Even suggesting that my God can do that is an insult to me and my religion. If we will keep having this discussion you must respect my beliefs and opinions.

It's not by force for you to become theist, but you have to respect me and my choice

uche40:


I see. So you consider to be good, any act that God tells you is good? That's interesting.

Given that you are Christian -- at least, in the traditional sense -- you already believe that God exists. And his existence is not just in the writings of the scriptures. He exists and will continue to exist for eternity. So it stands to reason that God keeps issuing commands and instructions to his people. If God insists that you kill your parents tomorrow, you'd have to do it. And don't tell me "God can't ask me to do such a thing" because you have no existing independent moral basis to assess and/or decide what God can or can not command you to do. You really have no right to condemn anybody on anything. If someone you've never met before raped your sister tomorrow, how can you tell for a fact that it wasn't God who commanded that rapist? You have lost ALL rights to make moral judgements. Your morality rests solely on whatever God desires. All things are permitted including sleeping with animals, killing of babies, stealing money from people etc. It all depends on God's plan, his will and his objectives at that point in time.

Let me also add that I found it a bit comical how you presented "blind trust" as a virtue or something that seemingly gives you an advantage over the atheists. I know you are one of those Christians who think they're close to God and have a special relationship with him. You talk to him and he responds to you, right? Here are some examples below of individuals who "trusted God blindly". Please note that you have stripped yourself of every moral right to condemn them or claim that they did not receive commandments from God.

May 2008 in Wisconsin...God told me if i prayed hard enough she would come back to life...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354849,00.html

August 1993 in Texas, 20 naked people emerge from a car that struck a tree
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-961214.html

San Antoni, TX...God tells man to ram another vehicle at 100mph
http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/428252-god-told-man-to-ram-vehicle-at-100mph

March 2004, Texas...God told me to kill my 3 sons...
http://articles.cnn.com/2004-03-29/justice/children.slain_1_deanna-laney-insanity-defense-luke-laney?_s=PM:LAW

There's many more where that came from but anyhoo, that's by the way. I think we've ignored the elephant in the room for long enough now. It's time we finally addressed it. Your assertion that God is the originator of morals contains an unsupported claim: GOD EXISTS. Please support this claim with objective and empirical evidence. Give it your best shot. Don't be scared.

If Christianity is a game, there are rules to the game.
The fact that someone said God said this, does it automatically mean God said it?
1. Rules of Christianity include the facts that God is righteous and an upholder of righteousness
2. We should love our neighbours like we love ourselves and only do to our neighbours what we would like someone else to do to us
3. God's word never breaks. As a Christian I believe that we have day and night because God has commanded it, before day and night seize maybe there'll have to be an apocalypse. God said that there'll be floods but He also said that water will never destroy the world again. If His word fails, He seizes to be God. That's what He said. And that's what I am holding on to. In my not so many years, I can testify that His word has Never failed me.
4. God declared that what a man sows he'll reap. There's no changing or escaping it.
5. We have the new testament because Jesus lived and died fulfilling the Old testament so anyone who believes in Jesus automatically has fulfilled the Old testament. This is because God saw that man can't follow laws because of our fall from grace. The only law in the new testament now is Love and if you fail this commandment, no heaven for you.
6. God is not partial, God is a father and creator to all humanity which is why His rain falls on me the Christian, you the atheist and even the religious fanatics.

The Bible has warned everyone that we must not believe every spirit but first test them if they are of God because there'll be many impersonators after Christ leaves the earth.

Any spirit that agrees that Jesus was born of a virgin, lived on earth, died, resurrected and is right now ruling in heaven, and confirms that this Jesus is his master is the spirit you should obey.

No demon can make this statement without being destroyed. If a demon makes this statement and nothing happens then God isn't God.
I have used this test on a demon before and it vanished, it knew I had caught it red handed.

So I can't just obey anyone parading as an angel of light when the bible says that demons will perform great miracles and even call down fire from heaven. But still they were sent by the antichrist. So my dear, christianity can't be held liable for the carelessness of some individuals.

God never commanded those things, He never will.

uche40:


I've read the full chapter in its entirety and the only thing I can infer from this passage you've cited is that up until the creation of Adam -- which I think is the main focus of Genesis 2 -- rain had not yet fallen. The passage seems to be describing the status quo PRIOR to Adam's creation. It says nothing about the atmospheric conditions existing between Adam's creation and the Flood of Genesis. So I think it's a bit of a stretch to extend this phenomenon to the period where Noah built his ark.

However, the part (which I emboldened) about mist going up from the earth strangely resembles the Water Cycle phenomenon.

The water cycle describes how water evaporates from the surface of the earth, rises into the atmosphere, cools and condenses into rain or snow in clouds, and falls again to the surface as precipitation. The water falling on land collects in rivers and lakes, soil, and porous layers of rock, and much of it flows back into the oceans, where it will once more evaporate. The cycling of water in and out of the atmosphere is a significant aspect of the weather patterns on Earth.
https://gpm.nasa.gov/education/water-cycle

That's a bit weird, but then again it's just speculation.

The tilling of the ground by Adam doesn't trigger rain does it?
The mist being described in Genesis is what we now call dew. Then there was no continents or seas and oceans, there was land and there was water on one side. There were no seasons either, no rainy or dry season or winter. There was sun everyday, there was dew everyday.

Rain which later resulted in hurricane, tornadoes etc all came as a result of man's sin and God's anger but since it has been created, it will continue till the end of the world.

That's partly why nobody believed Noah's story about so much water coming down from the sky until the whole world is flooded. Can you imagine it? Someone who has never seen rain in about 1600years of the Adamic world being told that so much dew will fall that the whole world will be like a sea But once the rain started, they immediately realized that it was possible but by then it was too late because God had shut the door of the ark and even Noah couldn't let them in.

uche40:


You've veered off on an absurd tangent my dear. Recall that my question to you was "what possible threat could a day old infant pose to your life?" I haven't seen you demonstrate any such threats yet. When neighboring villages, towns or countries that are at conflict start attacks on each other, infants below 1 year old are most likely to become casualties of war and far from remotely being active participants in it, so your reference to war as an example of infants being a threat to your safety is skewed and misleading. Plus, I already told you that I agree with you on the ethics of killings in war being a messy subject where it's hard to establish which murders are morally permissible or not, so your perambulations here are largely unnecessary.

The first paragraph in this dizzying riposte in particular is quite amusing as well. Correct me if I'm wrong but your entire rejoinder seems to be making the argument that innocent children and parents should be spared the misery of being alive to deal with all sorts of pain, suffering and PTSD that results from devastating war incidents -- insisting that there isn't any other option for them. In your first paragraph, you brought up an example of a young boy who was apparently dealing with mental trauma from war-related crimes which led to him exhibiting anti-social behaviors. Curiously, you shot yourself in the foot in that same paragraph when you affirmed that he was eventually rehabilitated. This seems to deflate your argument that "mercy-killing" of these infants is the only option.

Meanwhile, since the issue of war seems to interest you so much that you bring it up every five seconds, I'd really like you to explain to me why an omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent deity relies on wars and petty violence to impose his will on mankind:

Humans started war, perfected the art of war not God.

A country committed genocide against another country, God ordered that the favour be returned exactly the same way. God didn't start it but he made sure that they reaped what they started.

You're welcome to prove otherwise.

Apart from being repaid the same thing they did to another, who could have taken care of the children? And what guarantee to dou have that those children won't grow up to seek revenge after learning how their parents died?

My veering off if to illustrate for clarity sake. I told the story of the boy to show how mentally scared children unfortunate enough to be in such situations are and how difficult it is to rehabilitate them successfully. My point is that it's that difficult to rehabilitate one child, how much more a thousand children like that or even ten thousand like that.

uche40:


I'm sorry but you seem to have gotten your logic backwards. Let me refresh your memory on how this discussion evolved. I could have included links but I don't want to trigger the anti-spam bot, so I'll just give a summary of our correspondence using bullet points.

• kingxsamz asked you if genocide, infanticide, incest, slavery and rape were wrong.

• You affirmed that these acts were wrong.

• I pointed out the fact that some of these acts seemed to be endorsed by God at certain moments in the Bible.

• You then re-affirmed that killing people is an offense, except this time you suggested that it wasn't morally wrong if it took place in the context of a war. In light of my previous response about some acts in Bible appearing to resemble genocide and infanticide, this statement implies the hidden assertion that if genocide and infanticide was truly committed by God in the Bible, then it must have happened by him being provoked in an instance of war.

I haven't made any positive claims that other scenarios exist where genocide and infanticide are endorsed by the Christian God. You are the one who implicitly restricted genocide and infanticide to war scenarios. That's why I need you to confirm -- for the sake of clarity: Are you positive that ALL instances of genocide and infanticide carried out by God in the Bible only occurred when God was provoked in an instance of war? A "Yes" or "No" will suffice.

You mean commanded by God. Yes

jasminer:


You are asking me an impossible question. Tomorrow if the devil becomes a saint, will I be friends with him?
The devil can never become a saint same way God can never do a thing like declare rape as moral, instead of that to happen, heaven and earth will pass away.

You're an atheist right? If you fall in love with a swine tomorrow, will you marry it and have s*x with it? Am I not insulting you with this question?

Even suggesting that my God can do that is an insult to me and my religion. If we will keep having this discussion you must respect my beliefs and opinions.

It's not by force for you to become theist, but you have to respect me and my choice

But he already declared rape normal when he told the Israelites to take the women of their enemies as wives, which means he also condoned slavery.

jasminer:


Humans started war, perfected the art of war not God.

A country committed genocide against another country, God ordered that the favour be returned exactly the same way. God didn't start it but he made sure that they reaped what they started.

You're welcome to prove otherwise.

Apart from being repaid the same thing they did to another, who could have taken care of the children? And what guarantee to dou have that those children won't grow up to seek revenge after learning how their parents died?

My veering off if to illustrate for clarity sake. I told the story of the boy to show how mentally scared children unfortunate enough to be in such situations are and how difficult it is to rehabilitate them successfully. My point is that it's that difficult to rehabilitate one child, how much more a thousand children like that or even ten thousand like that.

Let’s see, the canaanites were on their enjoying their land, did they provoke the Israelites before they were wiped out

jasminer:


The tilling of the ground by Adam doesn't trigger rain does it?
The mist being described in Genesis is what we now call dew. Then there was no continents or seas and oceans, there was land and there was water on one side. There were no seasons either, no rainy or dry season or winter. There was sun everyday, there was dew everyday.

Rain which later resulted in hurricane, tornadoes etc all came as a result of man's sin and God's anger but since it has been created, it will continue till the end of the world.

That's partly why nobody believed Noah's story about so much water coming down from the sky until the whole world is flooded. Can you imagine it? Someone who has never seen rain in about 1600years of the Adamic world being told that so much dew will fall that the whole world will be like a sea But once the rain started, they immediately realized that it was possible but by then it was too late because God had shut the door of the ark and even Noah couldn't let them in.

Don’t be offended, you sound really stupid if you think rain never fell before Adam. You can think of Adam’s curse that he has to till the ground to make, so your common sense didn’t tell you need rain for vegetation to grow. Abi na dew was make crops go. The way some of you look so pathetic when trying to twist the Bible to your narratives.

I know you’ll still try to defend that illogical notion

suicidesheep:


But he already declared rape normal when he told the Israelites to take the women of their enemies as wives, which means he also condoned slavery.

In those days, many women were married to men they didn't want because their parents said so. Is that rape? Is that slavery?

suicidesheep:


Let’s see, the canaanites were on their enjoying their land, did they provoke the Israelites before they were wiped out

The Amalekites killed thousands of Israelites including women and children unprovoked.

Tens of countries in Canaan came to fight and attack Israel unprovoked.