butterflylion:


You mean the thread where a ladies scar riddled leg was shown? Na u be dat?

Yes sir. That's me.

hopefulLandlord:

When you say Non human you mean animals right? But we are not talking about animals here. We are talking about imaginary beings.

Can an imaginary god suffer from Bipolar syndrome?

hopefulLandlord:


okay, you're right

Am right on what again?

This is how a discussion shd be. We don't agree, but agreed to disagree.

Hopefullandlord, talk to your atheists friends, they are messing themselves up big time. Tell them being atheists doesn't make one stupid. Although the Bible says they are foolish, that's becos they see God clearly but deny him, on this note, they are calls fools, that doesn't mean they should indeed act foolishly the way they do here.

I met atheists here, they were far from what is here today. O well. Those ones were grown ups. These here are teenagers with smartphones.
It's disheartening.

701ecilana:

Yes sir. That's me.

Eyaah! Sorry about that but what the devil orchestrated for your doom God used to his glory. Lovely geh! See as you fine for dia.

I bless Oluwa for you o

701ecilana:
This is how a discussion shd be. We don't agree, but agreed to disagree.

Hopefullandlord, talk to your atheists friends, they are messing themselves up big time. Tell them being atheists doesn't make one stupid. Although the Bible says they are foolish, that's becos they see God clearly but deny him, on this note, they are calls fools, that doesn't mean they should indeed act foolishly the way they do here.

I met atheists here, they were far from what is here today. O well. Those ones were grown ups. These here are teenagers with smartphones.
It's disheartening.

Epic!

Another take home quote:

I met atheists here, they were far from what is here today. O well. Those ones were grown ups. These here are teenagers with smart phones.

------- 701ecilana

butterflylion:


Epic!

Another take home quote:

I met atheists here, they were far from what is here today. O well. Those ones were grown ups. These here are teenagers with smart phones.

------- 701ecilana

Lol.

butterflylion:


Eyaah! Sorry about that but what the devil orchestrated for your doom God used to his glory. Lovely geh! See as you fine for dia.

I bless Oluwa for you o

Thank you for your kind words sir. The agent of satan taught to insult me ,but ended up praising God

701ecilana:

Pls make sense. Am having a reasonable discussion here so that it can fit in.

That your post no enter.

that pressumes you are the only reasonable being or species.

look at this from the point of (1) a living being, (2) intelligent being.

point (1) is self evident, unless you are saying animals are not.
point (2) is where our ego misleads us to assume humans are the only intelligent species. Dolphins are not humans but are intelligent enough to communicate using sonar, a means humans can't use.

Is it okay to kill Dolphins?

701ecilana:

Thank you for your kind words sir. The agent of satan taught to insult me ,but ended up praising God

"As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.” Genesis 50:20

menxer:

that pressumes you are the only reasonable being or species.

look at this from the point of (1) a living being, (2) intelligent being.

point (1) is self evident, unless you are saying animals are not.
point (2) is where our ego misleads us to assume humans are the only intelligent species. Dolphins are not humans but are intelligent enough to communicate using sonar, a means humans can't use.

Is it okay to kill Dolphins?

What is this one saying? Ema Gbami ke!

Is it Okay to kill ants? Is it Okay to kill chickens? Is it Okay to kill rabbits? Is it Okay to kill goats? Is it Okay to kill cows? Is it Okay to kill fish? Is it Okay to kill pigs? Is it Okay to kill lizards?

All animals have one means or the other by which they use to communicate it's just that dolphins make use of sonar. Would you say it's wrong to kill the other creatures I listed above simply because they are not dolphins and do not communicate via sonar?

butterflylion:


Speak within your scope of perception if you want to be taken seriously. You wish to talk about a God you claim does not exist as if he is some character in a novel yet you relate the same character you term as fictional to real issues and expect people to think you are sane?

701ecilana Is very right with her position. How can she/he even begin having a serious discussion on a character who happens to be fictional to you when same character isn't fictional to him/her?

Where is the meeting point?

Actually, he wishes to talk about a book and the inconsistencies within it.

If it helps, we can begin with the bible being real as there are many copies about, it is tangible and whatever is said to originate from within its pages can be verified (I. E referenced).

Now you do not need to be a Christian to read the Bible, there are multiple translations just like there are for many other the books, Lord of the rings etc

So op and hopefullandlord are talking about the inconsistencies within this bible book. Whether one chooses to treat it as a biography or fiction is entirely irrelevant.

However for those who believe it is non fiction, how do they reconcile inconsistencies like "thou shall not kill" and kill babies etc

butterflylion:


What is this one saying? Ema Gbami ke!

Is it Okay to kill ants? Is it Okay to kill chickens? Is it Okay to kill rabbits? Is it Okay to kill goats? Is it Okay to kill cows? Is it Okay to kill fish? Is it Okay to kill pigs? Is it Okay to kill lizards?

All animals have one means or the other by which they use to communicate it's just that dolphins make use of sonar. Would you say it's wrong to kill the other creatures I listed above simply because they are not dolphins and do not communicate via sonar?

You refused answering my question, why bother asking yours?

shaybebaby:

Actually, he wishes to talk about a book and the inconsistencies within it.

If it helps, we can begin with the bible being real as there are many copies about, it is tangible and whatever is said to originate from within its pages can be verified (I. E referenced).

Now you do not need to be a Christian to read the Bible, there are multiple translations just like there are for many other the books, Lord of the rings etc

So op and hopefullandlord are talking about the inconsistencies within this bible book. Whether one chooses to treat it as a biography or fiction is entirely irrelevant.

However for those who believe it is non fiction, how do they reconcile inconsistencies like "thou shall not kill" and kill babies etc

He wishes to gossip! The book is as irrelevant to him as the God mentioned in it which does not exist to him.

How can we discuss a fictional character to one while being a real character to another and you expect everyone to speak within the realms of reality when one of them is already coming from the angle of fiction.

Get it?

menxer:

You refused answering my question, why bother asking yours?

I already answered yours. If those other creatures can be killed why set aside a dolphin? Are you deifying the dolphin?

butterflylion:


He wishes to gossip! The book is as irrelevant to him as the God mentioned in it which does not exist to him.

How can we discuss a fictional character to one while being a real character to another and you expect everyone to speak within the realms of reality when one of them is already coming from the angle of fiction.

Get it?

But we can discuss fiction based on what is written. Remember, we can discuss romeo and Juliet without referencing Shakespeare at all. That is what literature does.
Discussing it does not hinge on them being real characters. Same way we can discuss a biography on JFK.
So why is the bible exempt from this scrutiny?

shaybebaby:

But we can discuss fiction based on what is written. Remember, we can discuss romeo and Juliet without referencing Shakespeare at all. That is what literature does.
Discussing it does not hinge on them being real characters. Same way we can discuss a biography on JFK.
So why is the bible exempt from this scrutiny?

Read my last comment to you again. The answer to your question is there. Let me post it again.

How can we discuss a fictional character to one while being a real character to another and you expect everyone to speak within the realms of reality when one of them is already coming from the angle of fiction.

The Bible isn't Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet.

butterflylion:


I already answered yours. If those other creatures can be killed why set aside a dolphin? Are you deifying the dolphin?

What do you mean by that?

Is it that you don't know when something is used as an example?

I used Dolphin, it could any other living thing.

I guess you read the OP.

menxer:

What do you mean by that?

Is it that you don't know when something is used as an example?

I used Dolphin, it could any other living thing.

I guess you read the OP.

And you have been responded to. Did God not say all animals are to be for meat to you?

Genesis 9:3 - Every animal that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

butterflylion:


And you have been responded to. Did God not say all animals are to be for meat to you?

Genesis 9:3 - Every animal that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

Exodus 20:13 (KJV) "Thou shalt not kill."

How are you to achieve Genesis 9:3 without contravening Exodus 20:13?
That is the question this thread seeks answers.

menxer:


Exodus 20:13 (KJV) "Thou shalt not kill."

How are you to achieve Genesis 9:3 without contravening Exodus 20:13?
That is the question this thread seeks answers.

Genesis 9:3 gives a clear separation from Exodus 20:13. It sheds light to what God intends us not to kill. If he already permitted animals to be killed by us for food including all green herbs then you already know that Exodus 20:13 was not referring to same animals he already authorised us to kill.

This is simple. All his commands in exodus were directed at man's inhumanity to man and reverence to him and not man's inhumanity to animals.

1. You shall have no other gods before Me. (reverence to God)

2. You shall not make idols.( reverence to God)

3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain. (reverence to God)

4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. (reverence to God)

5. Honor your father and your mother. (honour to man in reverence to God)

6. You shall not murder.(No inhumanity to our fellow men)

7. You shall not commit adultery. (no inhumanity to our fellow men)

8. You shall not steal. (no inhumanity to our fellow men)

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. (no inhumanity to our fellow men)

10. You shall not covet. (no inhumanity to our fellow men)

I wonder why you wish to argue when you are the one ignorant here.

butterflylion:


Genesis 9:3 gives a clear separation from Exodus 20:13. It sheds light to what God intends us not to kill. If he already permitted animals to be killed by us for food including all green herbs then you already know that Exodus 20:13 was not referring to same animals he already authorised us to kill.

This is simple. All his commands in exodus were directed at man's inhumanity to man and reverence to him and not man's inhumanity to animals.

1. You shall have no other gods before Me. (reverence to God)

2. You shall not make idols.( reverence to God)

3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain. (reverence to God)

4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. (reverence to God)

5. Honor your father and your mother. (honour to man in reverence to God)

6. You shall not murder.(No inhumanity to our fellow men)

7. You shall not commit adultery. (no inhumanity to our fellow men)

8. You shall not steal. (no inhumanity to our fellow men)

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. (no inhumanity to our fellow men)

10. You shall not covet. (no inhumanity to our fellow men)

I wonder why you wish to argue when you are the one ignorant here.

It's better to be ignorant and seek answers, than put words in another Being's mouth.

The command said "thou shall not kill" not "thou shall not kill your fellow man"
The former is a more universal statement worthy of a universal being than the latter that speaks to man's ego.

"Thou shall not kill" is applicable in any dimension of existence, biological, emotional, mental, spiritual.

menxer:

It's better to be ignorant and seek answers, than put words in another Being's mouth.

The command said "thou shall not kill" not "thou shall not kill your fellow man"
The former is a more universal statement worthy of a universal being than the latter that speaks to man's ego.

"Thou shall not kill" is applicable in any dimension of existence, biological, emotional, mental, spiritual.

Calling you a mumu is an understatement! It's your type who would go to court and fail right from your opening arguments.

If the very first command talks about animals and plants specifically and the second command simply says thou shall not kill shouldn't common sense prevail on you that the second command was not about the first command which was specifically about animals and plants with no human mentioned therein?

I tire for some of Una.

menxer:

that pressumes you are the only reasonable being or species.

look at this from the point of (1) a living being, (2) intelligent being.

point (1) is self evident, unless you are saying animals are not.
point (2) is where our ego misleads us to assume humans are the only intelligent species. Dolphins are not humans but are intelligent enough to communicate using sonar, a means humans can't use.

Is it okay to kill Dolphins?

Lol. The one who created all created all for his pleasure and decides what shd be done with what. He decided animals shd be food for men but you say no, now what are you going to do about that? Our proselytizing here won't change anything.

Humans came up to reject meat and eat only Vegies, my God is not against them, He only calls them 'weak', but never condemned them.


Good News Translation Romans 14:2-3
Some people's faith allows them to eat anything, but the person who is weak in the faith eats only vegetables.

The person who will eat anything is not to despise the one who doesn't; while the one who eats only vegetables is not to pass judgment on the one who will eat anything; for God has accepted that person.

butterflylion:


"As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.” Genesis 50:20

Yes sir, that's it.

And if the enemy knew what Christ will achieve in death and resurrection, they wouldn't have killed him, they thought they were eliminating him, but they ended up multiplying him into little spirits across the Nations of the earth. Today Jesus lives in every Christian all over the world.

shaybebaby:

Actually, he wishes to talk about a book and the inconsistencies within it.

If it helps, we can begin with the bible being real as there are many copies about, it is tangible and whatever is said to originate from within its pages can be verified (I. E referenced).

Now you do not need to be a Christian to read the Bible, there are multiple translations just like there are for many other the books, Lord of the rings etc

So op and hopefullandlord are talking about the inconsistencies within this bible book. Whether one chooses to treat it as a biography or fiction is entirely irrelevant.

However for those who believe it is non fiction, how do they reconcile inconsistencies like "thou shall not kill" and kill babies etc

A new guy in the block. This discussion is yet to begin. We were only trying to establish a premise with which to stand and have the discussion. The problem was that hopefullandlord spoilt everything by saying there's no God, so it became difficult for us to settle the matter you just raised (The inconsistency of thou shall not kill, and thou should kill babie). But am glad someone else is here to carry this discussion further.

Shall we pls proceed?

Pls begin by posting where Yahweh commanded babies to be killed. Let's start from here.

shaybebaby:

But we can discuss fiction based on what is written. Remember, we can discuss romeo and Juliet without referencing Shakespeare at all. That is what literature does.
Discussing it does not hinge on them being real characters. Same way we can discuss a biography on JFK.
So why is the bible exempt from this scrutiny?

Okay, am up for discussing this fictional character called Yahweh, shall we?

Oh, and, this babies the fictional God commanded to be killed, were fictional too?

menxer:


Exodus 20:13 (KJV) "Thou shalt not kill."

How are you to achieve Genesis 9:3 without contravening Exodus 20:13?
That is the question this thread seeks answers.

Hahahahaha. Ha this guy. That refers to human beings not animals. i have answered this how many times now?

menxer:

It's better to be ignorant and seek answers, than put words in another Being's mouth.

The command said "thou shall not kill" not "thou shall not kill your fellow man"
The former is a more universal statement worthy of a universal being than the latter that speaks to man's ego.

"Thou shall not kill" is applicable in any dimension of existence, biological, emotional, mental, spiritual.

Hahahahahahahahahha. Do you realize people are reading what you are typing?

menxer:

"Thou shall not kill" is applicable in any dimension of existence, biological, emotional, mental, spiritual.

Says who? God who gave the command or you who don't believe in Him?

But you kill plants for food, Yeah?

butterflylion:


Calling you a mumu is an understatement! It's your type who would go to court and fail right from your opening arguments.

If the very first command talks about animals and plants specifically and the second command simply says thou shall not kill shouldn't common sense prevail on you that the second command was not about the first command which was specifically about animals and plants with no human mentioned therein?

I tire for some of Una.

use of expletives is not my aim for the thread.

There is no point shouting, other species were given the same command to use other animals for food, how does that make you feel?
That is crux of this thread.

701ecilana:

Hahahahahahahahahha. Do you realize people are reading what you are typing?


Says who? God who gave the command or you who don't believe in Him?

But you kill plants for food, Yeah?

It's like you didn't read the OP or are mixing up your discussion with another person.

701ecilana:

Hahahahaha. Ha this guy. That refers to human beings not animals. i have answered this how many times now?

I guess you know that that also applies to the "animals" too.
Do lion tracks and kills another lion or any member of the cat family for food?