thehomer:

Actually, premise 2 covers it. God's desires trump yours. Just ask Jonah.

It doesn't even mention killing. It DOESN'T cover it. Knowing you, I'll safely assume you'll contest this clear fact.

thehomer:
Their grief isn't as important as God's will being done. Their talents aren't lost, they'll be able to express themselves in Heaven. Note that what I'm ultimately saying which is that one who does this is the ultimate altruist.

Their talents are lost to earth. And an altruist considers the points I've raised before concluding killing children in the name of going to heaven is right.

Uyi Iredia:

It doesn't even mention killing. It DOESN'T cover it. Knowing you, I'll safely assume you'll contest this clear fact.

Do you think that the Christian God's desires trump yours as a Christian?

Uyi Iredia:
Their talents are lost to earth. And an altruist considers the points I've raised before concluding killing children in the name of going to heaven is right.

Which is better going to heaven after death or going to hell?

thehomer:
Do you want to? That would mean God made that person kill the young children.

God does nt specifically command or make people kill kids....kids are vicariously affected(killed) as a result of there parents disobedience or actions.......

thehomer:

Okay. Would you say that world is infinitely better than this one?

Yes ofcourse.....

thehomer:

God's view isn't needed here just as it isn't needed to define what football is.

Are you sure??.....

thehomer:

Is the Bible a good source of information? I mean it talks about a global flood, plants existing before the sun, talking animals, a person living in a big fish and zombies roaming a city.

When the owner of the book is all powerful and the creator of the univers why shouldn't his book be a good source of information...and you forgot to add information like the earth is spherical and hanging on nothing....and please which scripture suggests plants existed before the sun??...

thehomer:

You need to show some evidence that you actually know. The mere claim isn't good enough. Why was your God unable to save those children in Sodom and Gomorrah?



God could have done it the same way he saved some people bitten by a snake from dying by looking at a bronze snake. I don't think they made that agreement.

And you think earlier warnings that was propagated by Gods servants wasn't enough or at par with the bronze snake that was raised up for those who chose life??.......you forget that before God carries out Judgement he warns the people and gives them time to choose between life and death.......

It was up to the parents of those kids(that's if there were kids) to save there kids by obeying God and choosing life.....
____________________________
Deuteronomy 30:19-20
New International Version (NIV)
19 This day I call the heavens and the earth
as witnesses against you that I have set
before you life and death, blessings and
curses. Now choose life, so that you and your
children may live 20 and that you may love the
LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold
fast to him. For the LORD is your life, and he
will give you many years in the land he swore
to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob.
____________________________
Please read up the bolded....we wouldn't be discussing this issue if the inhabitants of sodom listened to God and turned around....they and there kids would have lived....God had warned them......blame the parents of those kids and not GOD....

thehomer:

NATO isn't the supposed creator of every life now is it?

I am asking you for the last time to describe NATO's action on gadaffi and his cohorts and link that to Gods judgement on the unrighteous.......

Answer me.....

thehomer:

Do you think that the Christian God's desires trump yours as a Christian?

Where's the evidence that you know God's desires ?

thehomer:
Which is better going to heaven after death or going to hell?

You're diverting from the argyments I posed.

ijawkid:

God does nt specifically command or make people kill kids....kids are vicariously affected(killed) as a result of there parents disobedience or actions.......

That was the option you chose and found favourable.

ijawkid:
Yes ofcourse.....

Okay so they would be better off in that world than this one.

ijawkid:
Are you sure??.....

Yes I am. Or do you think God determines what football is?

ijawkid:
When the owner of the book is all powerful and the creator of the univers why shouldn't his book be a good source of information...and you forgot to add information like the earth is spherical and hanging on nothing....and please which scripture suggests plants existed before the sun??...

The fact that the so-called creator of the universe that is all powerful somehow doesn't really know what is on this little planet earth. The book of Genesis tells us that plants existed before the sun.

ijawkid:
And you think earlier warnings that was propagated by Gods servants wasn't enough or at par with the bronze snake that was raised up for those who chose life??.......you forget that before God carries out Judgement he warns the people and gives them time to choose between life and death.......

It was up to the parents of those kids(that's if there were kids) to save there kids by obeying God and choosing life.....
____________________________
Deuteronomy 30:19-20
New International Version (NIV)
19 This day I call the heavens and the earth
as witnesses against you that I have set
before you life and death, blessings and
curses. Now choose life, so that you and your
children may live 20 and that you may love the
LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold
fast to him. For the LORD is your life, and he
will give you many years in the land he swore
to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob.
____________________________
Please read up the bolded....we wouldn't be discussing this issue if the inhabitants of sodom listened to God and turned around....they and there kids would have lived....God had warned them......blame the parents of those kids and not GOD....

Yet you miss my point. God could have separated the children from the adults but he didn't. Why didn't he?

ijawkid:
I am asking you for the last time to describe NATO's action on gadaffi and his cohorts and link that to Gods judgement on the unrighteous.......

Answer me.....

Is NATO God? What would be the relevance of any answer I give? I just showed you that answering yes or no won't save your God or is there some other answer I can give besides yes or no?

thehomer:
So you're sitting on the fence? Really? Who better than a child with a childlike mind can have childlike faith?

When Jesus urges us to have faith like little children, he is referring to that trusting nature little children have as an example of how our faith ought to be like. This does not automatically mean that all little children go to heaven because they are little children in much the same way that when Paul urges Christians to emulate the endurance of athletes doesn't automatically mean that therefore all athletes automatically go to heaven because they are athletes either.

Let me go with something even simpler. How about one year olds?

How about them?

The mere presence of God doesn't grant him authority.

If God is by definition almighty creator and sustainer, then it does.

Genocide has a certain meaning. Unless you wish to redefine it, I think we should stick to well known meaning in English. So, are you saying it isn't genocide when God commands people to commit what is defined as genocide?

Would you like to define genocide and tell me exactly why it is wrong?

And many theologians and Christians would disagree with you. Now who is ignorant about Christianity?

And the question remains "what does the bible teach?"

Again, my assessment (and that of many other Christian theologians) is that those children go to heaven. Now if you don't know, then you're not qualified to participate in the debate until you do know.

Lol, appealing to authority now are we?

By arbitrary, I mean what you mean with your examples of people just destroying whatever they create without justification basically on a whim. If he had a fixed character, then he cannot be permitting genocide on the one hand and according to you, now disallowing it on the other.

You are yet to show the genocide.

No I'm not, you seem to be when you say that since man cannot create some life, they don't have a right to destroy it. I'm not saying that either. In fact, what I said before was the opposite of that. Now, do you think man has the right to kill?

Man does not have the right to murder another man because he neither creates nor sustains the other man's life who he wishes to kill.

If men don't have that ability, then how do you know he is good? Or even all knowing? I don't have to know as much as he does to know that allowing children to die of malaria, when he can do something about it, isn't a sign of goodness.

You are assuming that there is a good separate from God. upon what is this good of yours based? How do you know that allowing children to die of malaria is objectively evil?

I don't think the government or the police works that way unless of course it is a very corrupt system. In which case, you cannot contest what they say or you too will be punished. I don't think you want to make that comparison with a corrupt system otherwise, one can simply say that it is exactly how your God is arbitrary. He claims authority because he thinks might makes right but obviously we as humans disagree.

Once again you purposely miss the point when it suits you. You know full well that the analogy was to show you that the intelligence available to the government about the activities of Mr Okon are more than that of yours as a low ranking policeman simply ordered to arrest him. As I said earlier, in order to challenge the governments judgment, you ought to at least have equal or greater knowledge of the case.
Please feel free to conveniently misunderstand the analogy again.

God commanded the Israelites to commit genocide.

Really?

In my OP, I stated that it was a variant of the Christian God. Now since you claim to be ignorant of the fate of those children, I don't think you're qualified then to participate in the argument until their fate is sorted out.

Perhaps by variant you meant you created a straw god and attacked it. Of course I'm not qualified to know the rules of your "variant". I can only tell you about the God as much as I know of Him.

Uyi Iredia:

Where's the evidence that you know God's desires ?

It looks like you have no idea of how to challenge an argument even when they're stated as syllogism. I stated premise 2. If you would like to challenge it, please go ahead and lay out your argument or you can answer my question.

Uyi Iredia:
You're diverting from the argyments I posed.

Why don't you answer the direct question I posed? The answer you give shows whether or not you understand the argument you're trying to criticize.

To put this simply, you first answer my questions before you try to pose any.

@thehomer, here's a variant of your argument. Tell me if you think it is essentially the same thing as the original.

Premise 1: God exists and cares about humans.
Premise 2: God would prefer it if most or all humans go to heaven.
Premise 3: All born-again christians who die will go to heaven.
Conclusion: It would be right to kill all born-again christians so that they can go to heaven immediately. Following from this, the person who does this is the ultimate altruist.

Mr anony:
When Jesus urges us to have faith like little children, he is referring to that trusting nature little children have as an example of how our faith ought to be like. This does not automatically mean that all little children go to heaven because they are little children in much the same way that when Paul urges Christians to emulate the endurance of athletes doesn't automatically mean that therefore all athletes automatically go to heaven because they are athletes either.

So what actually happens to the little children who actually the faith being presented as an example not a metaphor? Paul was using the endurance of athletes as a metaphor just as he described the Christian journey as a race. You're really confusing things here just to avoid answering a direct question.

Mr anony:
How about them?

Do you think they have a will?

Mr anony:
If God is by definition almighty creator and sustainer, then it does.

How exactly does it grant him any authority over sapient creatures? You really need some justification for your assertion.

Mr anony:
Would you like to define genocide and tell me exactly why it is wrong?

Here you go.

Wiktionary:
2. Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or a significant portion of, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.

Let's first determine whether or not the Christian God committed genocide.

Mr anony:
And the question remains "what does the bible teach?"

I just told you what the Bible teaches and pointed out to you that many Christians disagree with you. i.e once you've actually taken a position on it.

Mr anony:
Lol, appealing to authority now are we?

An appeal to authority isn't a fallacy if the authority is qualified to speak on the issue. Now do you have any justification for your position?

Mr anony:
You are yet to show the genocide.

Check out Deuteronomy 2:33 and 34 for a taste.

Mr anony:
Man does not have the right to murder another man because he neither creates nor sustains the other man's life who he wishes to kill.

Does any man have the right to kill another man for any reason? Despite the fact that he neither creates nor sustains the other man's life.

Mr anony:
You are assuming that there is a good separate from God. upon what is this good of yours based? How do you know that allowing children to die of malaria is objectively evil?

You're again trying to evade a direct question I asked. Like we said, the issue of objective goodness can be sorted out on another thread. In fact, I've started it here. Now can you tell me how you know the Christian God is actually good?

Mr anony:
Once again you purposely miss the point when it suits you. You know full well that the analogy was to show you that the intelligence available to the government about the activities of Mr Okon are more than that of yours as a low ranking policeman simply ordered to arrest him. As I said earlier, in order to challenge the governments judgment, you ought to at least have equal or greater knowledge of the case.
Please feel free to conveniently misunderstand the analogy again.

Your analogy is fatally flawed and cannot be helped. It isn't my fault that your analogy was flawed. I think you should have done a better job in constructing an analogy.

Mr anony:
Really?

Yep. See Deuteronomy above.

Mr anony:
Perhaps by variant you meant you created a straw god and attacked it. Of course I'm not qualified to know the rules of your "variant". I can only tell you about the God as much as I know of Him.

So many real world Christians worship a straw God? Or do you think that your idea of Christianity is the one that all Christians must obey?

Mr anony: @thehomer, here's a variant of your argument. Tell me if you think it is essentially the same thing as the original.

Premise 1: God exists and cares about humans.
Premise 2: God would prefer it if most or all humans go to heaven.
Premise 3: All born-again christians who die will go to heaven.
Conclusion: It would be right to kill all born-again christians so that they can go to heaven immediately. Following from this, the person who does this is the ultimate altruist.

No it isn't because the so-called born-again Christians have been known to sin and beg for forgiveness. Children are more innocent so the issue there is much clearer.

If a God cannot welcome Children that young, then I'm sorry but he has no business being a judge.

thehomer:
So what actually happens to the little children who actually the faith being presented as an example not a metaphor? Paul was using the endurance of athletes as a metaphor just as he described the Christian journey as a race. You're really confusing things here just to avoid answering a direct question.

I'm not, they were both used in the same way.

Do you think they have a will?

Same as the answer I gave for 3 year olds

How exactly does it grant him any authority over sapient creatures? You really need some justification for your assertion.

Do you mean sapient creatures that he made sapient and keeps sapient?

Here you go.

Let's first determine whether or not the Christian God committed genocide.

Good. Now why exactly is genocide wrong?

I just told you what the Bible teaches and pointed out to you that many Christians disagree with you. i.e once you've actually taken a position on it.

Many christians disagreeing with me doesn't give your point automatic validity

An appeal to authority isn't a fallacy if the authority is qualified to speak on the issue. Now do you have any justification for your position?

Lol, the bible doesn't give theologians the authority you are giving them.

Check out Deuteronomy 2:33 and 34 for a taste.

Interesting. and why is genocide wrong again?

Does any man have the right to kill another man for any reason? Despite the fact that he neither creates nor sustains the other man's life.

Again we come back to authority. Does a citizen of a country have the right to arrest another citizen if he is not empowered by the state?

You're again trying to evade a direct question I asked. Like we said, the issue of objective goodness can be sorted out on another thread. In fact, I've started it here. Now can you tell me how you know the Christian God is actually good?

that's like asking me how I know that 2+2=4. As I have said before, there is no such thing as a "christian God", there is just God and Goodness is His nature.

Your analogy is fatally flawed and cannot be helped. It isn't my fault that your analogy was flawed. I think you should have done a better job in constructing an analogy.

This is how you conveniently evade the points of an argument. It has become your trade mark.

Yep. See Deuteronomy above.

See my answer above

So many real world Christians worship a straw God? Or do you think that your idea of Christianity is the one that all Christians must obey?

Lol, then what use is your whole argument against Christianity if you want to reserve the right to redefine it to take hits from you.
It is funny how you not only want to argue a strawman but you insist I subscribe to you strawman as well.

thehomer:

No it isn't because the so-called born-again Christians have been known to sin and beg for forgiveness. Children are more innocent so the issue there is much clearer.

If a God cannot welcome Children that young, then I'm sorry but he has no business being a judge.

Lol interesting, you would deny the very people the bible makes absolutely clear that they will go to heaven in favour of those the bible is silent about?

As I said earlier, the reason you brought up little children is not because of their innocence (born-again christians are 100% innocent according to scripture). You only brought up children because "killing babies" has more emotional power than "killing born-again christians"

Your motives have been exposed. Come back when you are ready to argue honestly and biblically. For now it is obvious that all you want to do is pursue a strawman.

thehomer:

That was the option you chose and found favourable.

YES.....and now I'm giving you the right retort.......

thehomer:

Okay so they would be better off in that world than this one.

Perfect!!!!......YES ofcourse.....

thehomer:

Yes I am. Or do you think God determines what football is?

And you compare football to the critical issues we have at hand??.....

thehomer:

The fact that the so-called creator of the universe that is all powerful somehow doesn't really know what is on this little planet earth. The book of Genesis tells us that plants existed before the sun.

And who gives you such information??.....did you miss that thread on genesis where mazaje and Co. Had similar notions but were clearly shown the truth about the genesis account??.....you never understood the genesis account from the start that's why you run into false conclusions.....and I asked you:what about vital information like the earth being spherical and literally hanging on nothing??....I was thinking you would call that false too....

thehomer:

Yet you miss my point. God could have separated the children from the adults but he didn't. Why didn't he?

And God offered that seperation technique by inviting the parents of those kids(that's if there were kids) to choose life which in turn would affect there little kids....you think God just works the way you think he should work??...you forget that when ever parents chose life there kids enjoyed life as well...if that happens with life why not with judgement.??.....the life of those kids were hanging in the hands of there wicked parents and not God....read that deuteronomy again I quoted......

thehomer:
Is NATO God? What would be the relevance of any answer I give? I just showed you that answering yes or no won't save your God or is there some other answer I can give besides yes or no?

Lol....I just need YES or NO....ok let's assume NATO or GEJ is GOD...would there all out attack on the incessant practicers of wickedness(after so much warning) make them genocidal??......

Mr anony:
I'm not, they were both used in the same way.

No they weren't. Children were an example, Paul was using a metaphor. Very different ideas entirely.

Mr anony:
Same as the answer I gave for 3 year olds

In that case, you're actually wrong. 1 year old children don't have a volition or a will because they can't actually choose.

Mr anony:
Do you mean sapient creatures that he made sapient and keeps sapient?

I mean sapient creatures. Claiming that he keeps them sapient to makes no more sense than saying he makes water wet. Now can you tell me how his mere presence grants him any authority?

Mr anony:
Good. Now why exactly is genocide wrong?

You're yet to actually answer my direct question. Let's take this one step at a time. Did the God actually command genocide?

Mr anony:
Many christians disagreeing with me doesn't give your point automatic validity

Maybe not but I am presenting a valid Christian view and if you have no position on it, then you can actually say that those who have the view I'm presenting are wrong and go ahead to defend your claim.

Mr anony:
Lol, the bible doesn't give theologians the authority you are giving them.

Is anyone qualified to speak about the Bible?

Mr anony:
Interesting. and why is genocide wrong again?

A step at a time. Did God command it? Whether it is right or wrong?

Mr anony:
Again we come back to authority. Does a citizen of a country have the right to arrest another citizen if he is not empowered by the state?

Please try to answer my direct question before trying to throw a curve ball. As a sign of good faith, I'll answer this one but please try to answer my own questions too.

The other citizen can be arrested depending on whether or not the person is wanted by the state.

Mr anony:
that's like asking me how I know that 2+2=4. As I have said before, there is no such thing as a "christian God", there is just God and Goodness is His nature.

It isn't axiomatic that God is good. When you assert that goodness is his nature, that means it is possible that evilness can also be his nature. My question remains how do you know his nature is goodness and not evil?

Mr anony:
This is how you conveniently evade the points of an argument. It has become your trade mark.

It is up to you to fix your own flawed analogies.

Mr anony:
See my answer above

One step at a time. Did God command genocide? You asked for a definition, I provided it at some point, you'll need to start trying to have a conversation you know.

Mr anony:
Lol, then what use is your whole argument against Christianity if you want to reserve the right to redefine it to take hits from you.
It is funny how you not only want to argue a strawman but you insist I subscribe to you strawman as well.

That's just it. You haven't shown it is a strawman, you're only claiming that you disagree with the views other Christians have. Despite the fact that we began with you actually accepting the first two premises and claiming ignorance on the third. Now, you're claiming the third premise is a false construct despite the fact that it is a view actually held by Christians.

If you disagree with that view that is actually held by Christians, then you need to actually say why those Christians are wrong and actually be committed to some point of view otherwise you're just trying to obfuscate something that is pretty clear.

Mr anony:
Lol interesting, you would deny the very people the bible makes absolutely clear that they will go to heaven in favour of those the bible is silent about?

On the contrary, the Bible doesn't make that absolutely clear since born-again Christians can actually sin and it appears that what happens to them when they die in a sin is that they go to hell. The Bible is silent about abortion yet you seem to have pretty strong views about it for some reason. But Jesus wasn't really silent about the acceptance of children (who are the best examples of people who have a childlike mind) into heaven.

Mr anony:
As I said earlier, the reason you brought up little children is not because of their innocence (born-again christians are 100% innocent according to scripture). You only brought up children because "killing babies" has more emotional power than "killing born-again christians"

Your motives have been exposed. Come back when you are ready to argue honestly and biblically. For now it is obvious that all you want to do is pursue a strawman.

Wow. are you now a mind reader? I told you why I brought up little children, backed it up with biblical reasoning and now you declare that isn't what I "really" think? Come on. You should address what I actually say rather than addressing what you imagine I think.

When you claim the position I presented is a strawman, you're ultimately saying that a lot of Christians hold on to the wrong belief. Are you qualified to make that assessment?

Damn! Am loving this thread!

ijawkid:
YES.....and now I'm giving you the right retort.......

So you're seriously saying that if God made someone go ahead to kill 3 year old children, that would be right?

ijawkid:
Perfect!!!!......YES ofcourse.....

Okay.

ijawkid:
And you compare football to the critical issues we have at hand??.....

It isn't a comparison between the issues, it is to show you that God isn't needed for the definition of those two issues.

ijawkid:
And who gives you such information??.....did you miss that thread on genesis where mazaje and Co. Had similar notions but were clearly shown the truth about the genesis account??.....you never understood the genesis account from the start that's why you run into false conclusions.....and I asked you:what about vital information like the earth being spherical and literally hanging on nothing??....I was thinking you would call that false too....

I only need to show you wrong information in the Bible to let you know that it contains some inaccurate information. So, even if the Bible contains the information you're talking about (not that it really does) the presence of inaccurate information means you need some way to verify the information in it.

ijawkid:
And God offered that seperation technique by inviting the parents of those kids(that's if there were kids) to choose life which in turn would affect there little kids....you think God just works the way you think he should work??...you forget that when ever parents chose life there kids enjoyed life as well...if that happens with life why not with judgement.??.....the life of those kids were hanging in the hands of there wicked parents and not God....read that deuteronomy again I quoted......

Is it right to kill those children when God could have directly separated them from their parents?

ijawkid:
Lol....I just need YES or NO....ok let's assume NATO or GEJ is GOD...would there all out attack on the incessant practicers of wickedness(after so much warning) make them genocidal??......

I don't see what the point is but I'll play along and see what you're trying to do.

No NATO didn't commit genocide. For reference, look up the meaning of genocide.

thehomer:

The fact that the so-called creator of the universe that is all powerful somehow doesn't really know what is on this little planet earth. The book of Genesis tells us that plants existed before the sun.

"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light." (Genesis 1:2-3).
..................................

^, is it a reading problem or a "heart" problem?

If it is a reading difficulty, get glasses.

Peace.

thehomer:
No they weren't. Children were an example, Paul was using a metaphor. Very different ideas entirely.

Same thing to me. In both cases Jesus and Paul were referring to a particular attribute to be emulated

In that case, you're actually wrong. 1 year old children don't have a volition or a will because they can't actually choose.

fine.

I mean sapient creatures. Claiming that he keeps them sapient to makes no more sense than saying he makes water wet. Now can you tell me how his mere presence grants him any authority?

Are you sure you are talking about the Christian worldview. . .or are you just cooking up anything you like as long as it suites you?

You're yet to actually answer my direct question. Let's take this one step at a time. Did the God actually command genocide?

Is it Genocide to destroy your own creation?

Maybe not but I am presenting a valid Christian view and if you have no position on it, then you can actually say that those who have the view I'm presenting are wrong and go ahead to defend your claim.

The important thing is: Is your position biblically based?

Is anyone qualified to speak about the Bible?

Of course.

A step at a time. Did God command it? Whether it is right or wrong?

As I have asked many times, how do you determine right and wrong?

Please try to answer my direct question before trying to throw a curve ball. As a sign of good faith, I'll answer this one but please try to answer my own questions too.
The other citizen can be arrested depending on whether or not the person is wanted by the state.

Good, in the same way the state has authority over her citizens and has the right to empower any of her citizens as an enforcer of her will, so does God have absolute authority over His creations and therefore has the right to empower any of His creations as an enforcer of His will

It isn't axiomatic that God is good. When you assert that goodness is his nature, that means it is possible that evilness can also be his nature. My question remains how do you know his nature is goodness and not evil?

The same way I know that the laws of logic are universal and binding without asking if the laws of logic are logical.

It is up to you to fix your own flawed analogies.

fair enough, perhaps I should start throwing in irrelevant answers so that we see how you enjoy explaining and re-explaining your arguments.

One step at a time. Did God command genocide? You asked for a definition, I provided it at some point, you'll need to start trying to have a conversation you know.

Is it genocide to destroy your own creation? You'll need to start having a conversation too.

That's just it. You haven't shown it is a strawman, you're only claiming that you disagree with the views other Christians have. Despite the fact that we began with you actually accepting the first two premises and claiming ignorance on the third. Now, you're claiming the third premise is a false construct despite the fact that it is a view actually held by Christians.

Question remains: Is the view biblical?

If you disagree with that view that is actually held by Christians, then you need to actually say why those Christians are wrong and actually be committed to some point of view otherwise you're just trying to obfuscate something that is pretty clear.

Christians have one standard, it is called the bible. All you have to do is biblically support the stance you have been claiming "most christians" have.

truthislight:

"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light." (Genesis 1:2-3).
..................................

^, is it a reading problem or a heart problem?

If it is a reading difficulty, get glasses.

Peace.

Was that light the sun?

thehomer:
On the contrary, the Bible doesn't make that absolutely clear since born-again Christians can actually sin and it appears that what happens to them when they die in a sin is that they go to hell. The Bible is silent about abortion yet you seem to have pretty strong views about it for some reason. But Jesus wasn't really silent about the acceptance of children (who are the best examples of people who have a childlike mind) into heaven.

And here you have shown your bible ignorance. It is precisely born-again Christians that get to go to Heaven.

"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Jesus Christ(John 3:3)

Wow. are you now a mind reader? I told you why I brought up little children, backed it up with biblical reasoning and now you declare that isn't what I "really" think? Come on. You should address what I actually say rather than addressing what you imagine I think.

That's why it is curious to me why you reject the same bible that clearly says that born again people make heaven. Why are you so intent on rejecting an unambiguously stated fact in favour of a conjecture?

When you claim the position I presented is a strawman, you're ultimately saying that a lot of Christians hold on to the wrong belief. Are you qualified to make that assessment?

Argumentum ad populum. The Christian worldview is based on THE BIBLE. By the way who are these "many Christians" you keep talking about?

thehomer:

So you're seriously saying that if God made someone go ahead to kill 3 year old children, that would be right?

Let me remind you that God does not directly target kids when he makes his judgements....it is the sins and consequences of the sins of parents that affect kids.......

thehomer:

It isn't a comparison between the issues, it is to show you that God isn't needed for the definition of those two issues.

How can you say God isn't needed for the definition of what genocide really is??....your comparing the issue here with a leaisure sport like football just to prove what God should be involved in or not just doesn't fit....
He is our creator and giver of life so every life and what happens to it is his business and he has the ultimate right to define what genocide is or what it is not......

thehomer:

I only need to show you wrong information in the Bible to let you know that it contains some inaccurate information. So, even if the Bible contains the information you're talking about (not that it really does) the presence of inaccurate information means you need some way to verify the information in it.

So start showing the inaccurate info...as for the one you brought up,poor understanding of the scriptures is what has led you to your conclusion....

thehomer:

Is it right to kill those children when God could have directly separated them from their parents?

I am telling you that it was the parents who killed there kids and not God.....you are trying to force your subjective thoughts on this issue....

Now I have asked you earlier:::what if there were no kids in the first place??.....after all LOT never had lil kids running around the place....what if God made it in a way that no inhabitant of sodom had kids below the age of independence??...

thehomer:

I don't see what the point is but I'll play along and see what you're trying to do.

No NATO didn't commit genocide. For reference, look up the meaning of genocide.

See the definition of genocide...
___________________________
gen·o·cide
[jen-uh-sahyd]

-n.
1. the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.
___________________________

Why would you say NATO did not commit genocide??....

Mr anony:
And here you have shown your bible ignorance. It is precisely born-again Christians that get to go to Heaven.

"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Jesus Christ(John 3:3)

Wrong yet again. That is one of the requirements not the only requirement. Otherwise, even someone who used to be a born again Christian who becomes a Buddhist would still get into heaven.

Mr anony:
That's why it is curious to me why you reject the same bible that clearly says that born again people make heaven. Why are you so intent on rejecting an unambiguously stated fact in favour of a conjecture?

How do you know it is a conjecture? Once again, you have to show me that the idea is wrong and you're yet to do that.

Mr anony:
Argumentum ad populum. The Christian worldview is based on THE BIBLE. By the way who are these "many Christians" you keep talking about?

Once again, you're missing the point and misusing the fallacy. Take a look at this person's write up. Is that view wrong? Is that person a fake Christian? Or don't you think that his views are based on the Bible? Despite his references?

Once again, what is your view of what happens to them? I've presented a valid Christian view. Can you present your own view and show that this Christian's view is wrong?

ijawkid:
Let me remind you that God does not directly target kids when he makes his judgements....it is the sins and consequences of the sins of parents that affect kids.......

The thing is that he could have saved the children even when he doesn't target them directly because he is omnipotent.

ijawkid:
How can you say God isn't needed for the definition of what genocide really is??....your comparing the issue here with a leaisure sport like football just to prove what God should be involved in or not just doesn't fit....
He is our creator and giver of life so every life and what happens to it is his business and he has the ultimate right to define what genocide is or what it is not......

Can you please define genocide?

ijawkid:
So start showing the inaccurate info...as for the one you brought up,poor understanding of the scriptures is what has led you to your conclusion....

I already did that here. Is the information presented there accurate or not?

ijawkid:
I am telling you that it was the parents who killed there kids and not God.....you are trying to force your subjective thoughts on this issue....

Now I have asked you earlier:::what if there were no kids in the first place??.....after all LOT never had lil kids running around the place....what if God made it in a way that no inhabitant of sodom had kids below the age of independence??...

Was it the parents that sent the fire and brimstone? Your "what if" is just special pleading unless you can tell me of a regular city without children.

ijawkid:
See the definition of genocide...
___________________________
gen·o·cide
[jen-uh-sahyd]

-n.
1. the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.
___________________________

Why would you say NATO did not commit genocide??....

What is God's role based on that definition of genocide? I said that to humour you. Now since you think it is genocide, what is the relevance of that conclusion?

thehomer:
Wrong yet again. That is one of the requirements not the only requirement. Otherwise, even someone who used to be a born again Christian who becomes a Buddhist would still get into heaven.

Lololol, you truly are ignorant of the bible. Perhaps that's where we should have started from. It is clear that you don't know what it means to be born again. A christian who becomes a buddhist was never born again.

Take some time to study the gospel of John chapter 3 also study the first epistle of John so that you can get some basic understanding of what you are talking about. I'm happy to discuss those passages with you if you would like.

How do you know it is a conjecture? Once again, you have to show me that the idea is wrong and you're yet to do that.

A conjecture doesn't necessarily mean wrong, it only means that the view is drawn from inferences and not a stated fact.
I am still curious as to why you prefer to argue based on conjectures instead of fact. Are you sure you are serious about accurately expressing the christian worldview that you want to argue against?

Once again, you're missing the point and misusing the fallacy. Take a look at this person's write up. Is that view wrong? Is that person a fake Christian? Or don't you think that his views are based on the Bible? Despite his references?

Once again, what is your view of what happens to them? I've presented a valid Christian view. Can you present your own view and show that this Christian's view is wrong?

As I said from the onset, I don't know that to be true. What I know to be true is that those who are born-again go to heaven. Would you like to argue along that line?

ijawkid:
And who gives you such information??.....did you miss that thread on genesis where mazaje and Co. Had similar notions but were clearly shown the truth about the genesis account??.....you never understood the genesis account from the start that's why you run into false conclusions.....and I asked you:what about vital information like the earth being spherical and literally hanging on nothing??....I was thinking you would call that false too....

You never showed any body any truth any where. . The genesis creation account is there for itself. . .It cleary says that the earth was created before the sun and the stars, spin all you wantbut that is what is written inside the bible. . .And as for the creation account written in genesis chapter two, it was written by some one else and it was actually written before the account in genesis one, the genesis one account is the priestly commentary on genesis two. . .Watch some of rabi Botech's videos on youtube, he is a professor of Jewish religious history and a practicing Jew himself(he is a Rabi), that knows the history much more than you or any Nigerian christian. . .Even he acknoledges that the creation accounts are just allegories. . .

truthislight:

"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light." (Genesis 1:2-3).
..................................

^, is it a reading problem or a heart problem?

If it is a reading difficulty, get glasses.

Peace.

And where did the bible say that the light was from the sun or the light has anything to do with the sun?. . .Where??. . .I thought the bible said the sun, moon and stars were all created on the 4th day of creation?. . .It only said god said let there be light, it doesn't say god created the sun and said it should produce light, it actually said that god created the sun, moon and stars on the fourthday to give light unto the earth. .it is there in your bible. . .

Mr anony:
Lololol, you truly are ignorant of the bible. Perhaps that's where we should have started from. It is clear that you don't know what it means to be born again. A christian who becomes a buddhist was never born again.

And you just keep stumbling from fallacy to fallacy. What you've given above is the No True Scotsman fallacy. Being born-again isn't determined by going to heaven. How do you tell that someone is born again?

Mr anony:
Take some time to study the gospel of John chapter 3 also study the first epistle of John so that you can get some basic understanding of what you are talking about. I'm happy to discuss those passages with you if you would like.

Nah. You can open a thread here to discuss those passages with your fellow Christians and we can take a look at the views that would be expressed.

Mr anony:
A conjecture doesn't necessarily mean wrong, it only means that the view is drawn from inferences and not a stated fact.
I am still curious as to why you prefer to argue based on conjectures instead of fact. Are you sure you are serious about accurately expressing the christian worldview that you want to argue against?

Wrong yet again. You think it is merely conjecture but like I've said over and over again, that idea is supported as fact from the Bible by people who are supposed to be experts in the Bible. I've presented an accurate view that you don't agree with while failing to actually critique the view actually held by your fellow Christians.

Mr anony:
As I said from the onset, I don't know that to be true. What I know to be true is that those who are born-again go to heaven. Would you like to argue along that line?

Well what you "know" to be true is actually not true unless your line of reasoning is fallacious. Just take a look at [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_again_%28Christianity%29]the discussion[/url] Christians are having with each other and tell me how it is that Mr anony is the only one who knows what the truth is.

Since you don't seem to have your own view, please tell me why Christians who claim to know are actually wrong.

thehomer:
And you just keep stumbling from fallacy to fallacy. What you've given above is the No True Scotsman fallacy. Being born-again isn't determined by going to heaven. How do you tell that someone is born again?

You need to know what it means to be born again first before you can legitimately accuse me of that fallacy. I have provided passages for you if you are interested.

Nah. You can open a thread here to discuss those passages with your fellow Christians and we can take a look at the views that would be expressed.

Lol, so you don't even want to know what being born again means yet you want to shout "Fallacy! Fallacy!" at the top of your voice? Your willful ignorance of denies you the right to make that call

Wrong yet again. You think it is merely conjecture but like I've said over and over again, that idea is supported as fact from the Bible by people who are supposed to be experts in the Bible. I've presented an accurate view that you don't agree with while failing to actually critique the view actually held by your fellow Christians.

And I've presented you a clear unambiguous bible verse stating precisely who gets to go to Heaven. Feel free to ignore it and hug your strawman tight.

Well what you "know" to be true is actually not true unless your line of reasoning is fallacious. Just take a look at [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_again_%28Christianity%29]the discussion[/url] Christians are having with each other and tell me how it is that Mr anony is the only one who knows what the truth is.

Are you interested in looking it up for yourself in scripture?

Since you don't seem to have your own view, please tell me why Christians who claim to know are actually wrong.

Why are you bent on defining what the Christian worldview is apart from the bible which all Christians ascribe to? Let us go to the bible and leave strawman worldviews alone.

thehomer:

It looks like you have no idea of how to challenge an argument even when they're stated as syllogism. I stated premise 2. If you would like to challenge it, please go ahead and lay out your argument or you can answer my question.

And you have comprehension problems. Because premise 2 simply states a preference it doesn't solve the moral quandary your conclusion presents.

thehomer:
Why don't you answer the direct question I posed? The answer you give shows whether or not you understand the argument you're trying to criticize.

To put this simply, you first answer my questions before you try to pose any.

Your question has no bearing on my argument. I stated that moralizing killing of children for the sake of going to heaven ignores certain factors (e.g the loss to the parents). You merely rephrased your earlier claim with the addition of one being altruistic. I countered by restating my argument. Instead of bringing a counter-point, you ask a needless question.

Mr anony:
You need to know what it means to be born again first before you can legitimately accuse me of that fallacy. I have provided passages for you if you are interested.

I know enough to know that being born again isn't determined by whether or not a person goes to heaven and that is enough to accuse you of committing that fallacy.

Mr anony:
Lol, so you don't even want to know what being born again means yet you want to shout "Fallacy! Fallacy!" at the top of your voice? Your willful ignorance of denies you the right to make that call

I said I'm not interested in playing around in those passages with you. Open another thread and I'll consider joining you and other Christians there. If Christians actually hold the view I'm presenting, then you need a better justification than merely asserting that I'm ignorant.

Mr anony:
And I've presented you a clear unambiguous bible verse stating precisely who gets to go to Heaven. Feel free to ignore it and hug your strawman tight.

And I've shown you that it is neither clear nor unambiguous because your entire premise rests on a fallacious line of reasoning. Keep in mind that you're also accusing your fellow Christians of following a straw religion.

Mr anony:
Are you interested in looking it up for yourself in scripture?

That person has looked it up in scripture and it is an accepted line of thought in Christianity.

Mr anony:
Why are you bent on defining what the Christian worldview is apart from the bible which all Christians ascribe to? Let us go to the bible and leave strawman worldviews alone.

Christians have determined what the Christian worldview is from the Bible already. I'm just showing you what they've already said. You keep accusing your fellow Christians of having "strawman worldviews" without justification. Surely you can do better than that.

Uyi Iredia:

And you have comprehension problems. Because premise 2 simply states a preference it doesn't solve the moral quandary your conclusion presents.

It states your God's preference. Do you think God's preference doesn't matter?

Uyi Iredia:
Your question has no bearing on my argument. I stated that moralizing killing of children for the sake of going to heaven ignores certain factors (e.g the loss to the parents). You merely rephrased your earlier claim with the addition of one being altruistic. I countered by restating my argument. Instead of bringing a counter-point, you ask a needless question.

Those questions are important in determining what is actually important in the Christian worldview. After all according to you Christians, God's desires trump all. If you don't think that God's desires trump all, then please say so.