tarezulu:

Does "Image" mean that the Almighty changes His laws from time to time? If so how does that make Him perfect. A simple explanation would do and I hope " Image " understands what perfection is.

Image will say anything at any time that will try and give legitimacy to or rationalize his God definition of perfectness, God is perfect yet he decided to use a very imperfect system even by his own standard(sin of incest) to spread people around the world, when does stealing become a right thing to do?(according to the bible its ok to steal the things of non Jews during a war) what about killing(Its ok to kill non Jews according to some passages of the bible)? if stealing and killing of the innocent are wrong even before Abraham what makes incest right? Science has CLEARLY demonstrated that all men could not have descended from from one man and woman since incest will eventually lead to the extermination of the human race thereby refuting the biblical assertion, can you go ahead and tell us how all men descended from Adam? Apart from over simplifying  things with words like "let there be light and there was light" or and "God scattered the people all over the world", what detailed explanation do Christians really have to show us that their assertions are true? Have you ever read the Moslem's version of the creation story? It sure makes MUCH more sense than that of the bible but does that make it true? Every body can make simplistic assertions, I could say (and convince a large number of people) due to my ignorance that the thunder is the roar of the Gods when ever Its raining or when ever they want to pass a message across to their creation but that doesn't make it right even if billions of people the world over believe it does it?

@tarezulu
if you'd read my posts calmly and not just itching to reply,you'll see that I didn't say that God changed the law.The law against 'incest' was not changed.Why is this english not clear to you?THERE WAS NO LAW.if you find one given in the bible,please paste it.Where there's no law,there's no sin/offence.
@bindex
Please how has science clearly demonstrated that humans could not descend from Adam? Postulations and graphical extrapolations are not proofs of nothing.

A law is nothing other than the description of the relationship between two events. For instance in the event of raising the fire underneath a flask of water we find that the higher the heat the more the water in the flask expands. We therefore make a correlation. Higher heat is connected to greater expansion of water in the flask. Therefore there is a law saying that heat causes expansion of water. These are physical laws but you also have moral laws that say the event of a certain action will cause the event of another action. This is what hindus call karma, cause and effect. The event of Sin is indelibly connected to Death according to Christian doctrine. This is a law too, in other words a causal relationship.

Every system is defined by a set of laws. But you have Systems and you have Meta-systems. So you have Laws and you have MetaLaws. In a meta system there can be contained many systems which can supercede one another in turn according to meta laws.

To stick with the water analogy we have a system whereby increasing heat to the flask causes the water to expand and vice versa reducing the heat (cooling) causes the water to contract. The law therefore states that heat causes expansion. However if we keep cooling we discover that below 4 degrees celsius a curious thing starts to happen. The more we cool it instead of contracting the water starts to expand again. This goes against the law initially discovered. Below 4 degrees celsius the law has actually being inverted. Now heating the water causes it to contract while cooling it causes it to expand.

So we see that all laws are limited to a span and a set of conditions in which they are operative. Outside of that span they can even be inverted. That is why when we articulate laws we cautiously add 'all other things being equal'.

What are the Laws that determine when a law is operative or not? These are the MetaLaws. So as systems come and go they do so according to a broader metasystem. To take a law, as we perceive, conceive and articulate it, to be unchanging because it is made by a perfect God is to presume that we know not only the Law but also the Metalaws that determine when it is to be in operation. It is also to presume that the way that we perceive, conceive and articulate our experiences of the world is the same way that God sees the world too. I wouldn't be so bold.

I personally believe that all Laws, all systems, are forms and structures and like all forms and structures are subject to Change. Panta Rhei, Everything Flows. So no laws are permanent.

@m_nwankwo
i get your point,notwithstanding,let's take into consideration that some laws are made as the need arises.All laws are not 'eternal'.The laws of God are rules,commands,injunctions.We have simple ones that are just from a period or to a period.the beginning and the end has power to start laws when He pleases and end them when He wishes in accord with His nature.He who made the laws of gravity stopped it to allow the ascension of Elijah.He's not contradicting it,HE's fulfilling His will.He introduced a law to Adam when He told him not to eat of the fruit of THE tree.He introduced a law to Abraham when He told him to circumcise his household.He introduced a law to the 12disciples when He gave them a new law of love.He gave Moses the law of sabbath.He is author and finisher.He can start and He can stop.He's unlimited.No one tells Him when to introduce anything.God does what He pleases.Be blessed

The laws of God are eternal and universal. God did  not make up laws as you go around. It is human beings with their limited knowledge that do so. Omniscience is a attribute of God and what came out of omniscience cannot be modified, revised, or annuled for it came out of perfection, that means that it cannot be improved upon. The universe may pass away but not the word of God which embodies the will or the laws of God. Your argument is that until moses God did not have a law against incest. That assumption implies that law according to the way you see it is a command which may or may not be intune with the attributes of God. Now I think it is necessary to give some brief explanation of what I mean by the laws of God. Every thing God created is but a coarser reproduction of the nature of God. That means that everything outside of God has their nature and this nature is the way God made them. Thus this intinsic nature of all creations came out of the will of God. This primordial nature of things cannot be changed but can merge with other species to create new forms. The intrinsic  nature of all species including the the divine, the spiritual as well as material do not change, that is the characteristics that the manifest is an expression of the will of God who made them. Because this intrinsic nature cannot be changed even by the creator, they appear as immutable and thus laws. Thus DNA remains DNA, spirit is spirit, electron is electron, yam is yam, angel is angel etc and it is impossible to change the nature of these things. What is possible is to learn the nature and by understanding how each works, you can bring about new forms through the union of species. Without making the picture more complicated, let me keep to the DNA. The intrinsic nature of DNA requires that for a succesful replication and propagation of species, errors within the DNA should be minimal and incase of sexual reproduction, a limited level of heterogeneity is required to reduce genetic errors and increase positive selection of beneficial mutations. Thus the law of God already lies in the nature of the DNA. Thus God do not need to make a law against incest when the laws already lies in the nature of the DNA which GOD made. What prophets do is to recieve recognitions about the nature of the various species  from God and then make such revealations available to their people in forms that they can understand which if people follow they will inevitably be obeying the laws of God even when they do not understand the complexity of what is involve. Thus the commandments are simply forms of the laws of God or the will of God but they are not the will of God itself. I will expand on this if you are interested. Thus for instance the day the law of gravity was discovered is not the day God made gravity. Gravity has always be in the in the nature of matter, energy and time which are all creations of God. The discoverer simply came to the recognition of this law of God and from then till now and in future people are still working to understand how gravity works.

Thus God cannot change the nature of his creations and it is in the nature of his creations lies the laws of God. God cannot change yam to be tomato because God originanly made yam to be yam and tomatoe to be tomato. If however you understand both species, you can bring about a union between tomato and yam. Simply put the intrinsic nature of species does not change but their forms constanly change and evolve through unions. I do not want to go into Elijah story for that will divert us from the topic. Suffice to say that gravity cannot be annuled but he who fully understand the intrinsic nature of gravity can use it to fall as well as to fly. To fall or to fly are just forms of the the law of gravity but not the gravity itself. Besides, gravity is just a small part of the law, their are other parts of the law and it is only when you bring the full parts into union do the miraculous happen. Thus miracles are not an annulment of the laws of God but a fufillment. No miracle can occure outside the living laws of God. Stay blessed.

Image123:


@bindex
Please how has science clearly demonstrated that humans could not descend from Adam? Postulations and graphical extrapolations are not proofs of nothing.

You claim that it is a fact that all men decended from Adam so its up to you to show us how the people in China decended from Adam. Remember there is no mention of the people of China in the whole of the bible. The borden of proof lies on you not me.

@m_nwankwo
Hello,I've read your post.I'm aware of and understand most of what you wrote.My stand is that the word of God is infallible.Why?Because I've found God to be always right.we've earlier discussed on the fallibility of man's research and its many revisions and postulations.My arguement about incest is that God did not give man the law before Moses.and the Bible makes me to understand that where there is no law,there is no sin.some have been talking about God contradicting Himself,but I've been against that.
Incest doesn't have much to do with the attributes of God.The law was made for men,not for God.It was made to help men as you well know.now,you said 'the intrinsic nature of the creations cannot be changed even by the Creator'. I disagree with that.God is the immutable One,not the creations/creature.The clay has no say.The Potter can do whatever He pleases with it.He can turn a rod into a serpent irrespective of DNA.He can bring water from rock and from fossils.With God all things are possible.You're trying hard to make God so big that you end up limiting Him. Now also,scientists think that for successful propagation of species,errors within the DNA should be minimal.I want to tell or remind you that Adam was not created with errors of any kind.He was created very good,perfect.At present,man is in a fallen state.Infact,he struggles to live for 80years.Adam and Eve had all that was required for successful replication of species.That is not too hard for God to do.

@bindex
the burden of proof lies on me to show you that the chinese descended from Adam?you must be kidding I'm sure.Let me repeat this to help you.Neither I nor any christian owes you such explanations.You search the Scriptures.Adam gave birth to children.Some of them migrated to China,how difficult is that.And you believe the Bible must contain the name China to make it complete.How ridiculous.The Bible is not a geographical atlas or a world census document.It contains what is relevant for our relationship with God and our happy stay on earth.

m_nwankwo:

The laws of God are eternal and universal. God did  not make up laws as you go around. It is human beings with their limited knowledge that do so. Omniscience is a attribute of God and what came out of omniscience cannot be modified, revised, or annuled for it came out of perfection, that means that it cannot be improved upon.

Hello again sir. What about a scenario whereby God has a law that is to be applied only in a certain context. ie under certain conditions for a certain span of time a certain set of laws will apply, but once that period is passed another set of laws will replace them. When and how a set of laws come into play is determined by a wider Law.

You say that it is human being with their limited knowledge that make up laws. I agree, but is it not with the same limited knowledge that we attempt to discern what these laws of God are? When we discover a correlation between two events. eg. incestuous sex and deformed babies we say that there is a law that determines this. We have limited knowledge though and cannot say for certain that this law was established by God to be applicable for all time, everytime. There may be conditions unknown to us that allow for the suspension of that law.

I think it is very dangerous (and history offers many examples of it) for people to take their limited understanding of how the world works and call it God's immutable laws of the universe. This is True whether we are talking about belief that the earth is flat and the center of the solar system, or whether we are talking about our more modern conceptions of how the world works.

It is dangerous to take any laws as we perceive them as universal and true always and for all time.

I see your point that miracles are not a suspension of the laws of nature, but what I am saying is that we do not have a comprehensive enough knowledge of the laws of the nature to declare what is possible or not. Certain events will seem miraculous to us because we do not understand the natural laws behind it, but that is due to the limitations of our knowledge.

Another way of looking at it is that laws can be static or they can be dynamic. Static stays the same all the time, yet dynamic changes with time and with varying conditions. I say that the laws of the universe are dynamic and are themselves subject to change according to deeper laws in the universe. Those deeper laws determine when one set of laws will be in operation and when not.

Image123:

@bindex
the burden of proof lies on me to show you that the chinese descended from Adam?you must be kidding I'm sure.Let me repeat this to help UNeither I nor any christian owes you such explanations.You search the Scriptures.Adam gave birth to children.Some of them migrated to China,how difficult is that.And you believe the Bible must contain the name China to make it complete.How ridiculous.The Bible is not a geographical atlas or a world census document.It contains what is relevant for our relationship with God and our happy stay on earth.

Some of them migrated to China?  Do you know that the Chinese History is the same if not longer than that of the Jews? China was still a bubbling region when the Noah's Ark was written incase you don't know that is why so many christains scholars now believe that Noah's flood wasn't a global flood as portrayed in the bible. The bible contains relevant information for your relationship with the Jewish God and how he wants you to live your life end of story. See, the difference between a Christian arguing with another Christian (or anyone really) about how things happen, you automatically believe what you believe is true because it's written in the bible as being true (or pick another religion and use them as an example for their own religion against people in their own religion and against other people in other religions or non-religions) and then you have scientists who don't really know, don't say they know exactly but give out their theories on what could've happened based on present evidence that they have researched, studied, or observed. They are theories, theories can change, theories can be proven wrong but at the end of the day some scientists who thought perhaps something happened this one way won't start a war or call the other people negative things because what they thought was true seems to perhaps not be. The bible is taught as a fact when it's just a book of theories that have roots in certain facts.

@bindex
don't confuse yourself.so the chinese were bubbling during the time of Noah's ark.you were with them in spirit abi.Don't just come here and feed us with untraceable lies.are there documents to attest to that as a matter of fact?Do the times correlate?I hope you're not building on what stories even the chinese know/agree to be fables and legends.

@Pator AIO

Let me address the issues you raised albeit briefly

Hello again sir.  What about a scenario whereby God has a law that is to be applied only in a certain context.  ie under certain conditions for a certain span of time a certain set of laws will apply, but once that period is passed another set of laws will replace them.  When and how a set of laws come into play is determined by a wider Law.

The law of God as I defined it in my penultimate post is in the intinsic nature of Gods creations and I stand by my assertion that this intrinsic nature of the creations of God cannot be changed nor is it subject to time fluctions or place or similar parameters. I do not understand by what you mean by wider law. To me it only the laws of God that is immutable but the forms that these laws produce do evolve. Thus one who only knows the change of forms but not the power that give rise to those forms will make assertions that will be refuted as evolution and development progresses. You may give a specific scenario and I will tell you wheather or not it is the law of God or simply forms of the law.

You say that it is human being with their limited knowledge that make up laws.  I agree, but is it not with the same limited knowledge that we attempt to discern what these laws of God are?  When we discover a correlation between two events.  eg.  incestuous sex and deformed babies we say that there is a law that determines this.  We have limited knowledge though and cannot say for certain that this law was established by God to be applicable for all time, everytime.  There may be conditions unknown to us that allow for the suspension  

You entire point rests entirely on what is still unknown. What is unknown do not constitute an evidence. It is only an excuse in my opinion. Any person who have evidence that incestous relationship do not result in genetic errors in subsequent generations should then provide it. To simply say that their are unknown conditions is not a counter argument. Besides how do you know that their are unknown conditions? There is nothing as strong as evidence both in spiritual and material matters. Provide the evidence for the unknown condtions where incestous relationship is beneficial.

 think it is very dangerous (and history offers many examples of it) for people to take their limited understanding of how the world works and call it God's immutable laws of the universe.  This is True whether we are talking about belief that the earth is flat and the center of the solar system, or whether we are talking about our more modern conceptions of how the world works.

It is dangerous to take any laws as we perceive them as universal and true always and for all time.  

It is not dangerous to make exact claims. If the claims are not universal and true, then contradict them with evidence. In that way the pretenders will be found out as has happened in history. I maintain that the laws of God are universal and immutable. The onus lies on those whose persuation is that it is the way I percieve it to prove me wrong. A mango seed cannot give rise to tomatoes at harvest  under any circumstances. It is impossible to turn stone to bread under any circumstances. It is impossible for spirit to become matter under any circustance. It is impossible to create the human body from sand or clay, etc  It is impossible to resurrect a man who died and all that is left are only bones. All these are impossible because they lie outside the laws of God which manifests in the intrinsic nature of its species.

I see your point that miracles are not a suspension of the laws of nature, but what I am saying is that we do not have a comprehensive enough knowledge of the laws of the nature to declare what is possible or not.  Certain events will seem miraculous to us because we do not understand the natural laws behind it, but that is due to the limitations of our knowledge. 

We know enough to decalre that certain things are impossible. I have just given you above some of the things that are impossible. I wait for the time when those that claim otherwise will demonstrate the possibility of these events.

Another way of looking at it is that laws can be static or they can be dynamic.  Static stays the same all the time, yet dynamic changes with time and with varying conditions.  I say that the laws of the universe are dynamic and are themselves subject to change according to deeper laws in the universe.  Those deeper laws determine when one set of laws will be in operation and when not.   

What you call the deeper laws of the universe seems to be synonymous with  the laws of God and these laws are immutable but the forms or structures that they give rise to  constantly change. Thus the question to you is are the deeper laws of the universe immutable? If they are not, then we have contrarly views but if they are, then we have no diverging positions. A crude analogy is with energy. A look at an electrical bulb, a sprinter in motion, a turbine in a power plant, a tsunami, a hurricane appear on the surface to have no connection and yet if one looks deeper he will see that it is energy that drives the muscle of the sprinter, lights the electrical bulb, generates tornado etc. Transformation or the form in which energy manifests changes as in this crude example above but the energy remains the same. Best wishes.

Image123:

@m_nwankwo
Hello,I've read your post.I'm aware of and understand most of what you wrote.My stand is that the word of God is infallible.Why?Because I've found God to be always right.we've earlier discussed on the fallibility of man's research and its many revisions and postulations.My arguement about incest is that God did not give man the law before Moses.and the Bible makes me to understand that where there is no law,there is no sin.some have been talking about God contradicting Himself,but I've been against that.
Incest doesn't have much to do with the attributes of God.The law was made for men,not for God.It was made to help men as you well know.now,you said 'the intrinsic nature of the creations cannot be changed even by the Creator'. I disagree with that.God is the immutable One,not the creations/creature.The clay has no say.The Potter can do whatever He pleases with it.He can turn a rod into a serpent irrespective of DNA.He can bring water from rock and from fossils.With God all things are possible.You're trying hard to make God so big that you end up limiting Him. Now also,scientists think that for successful propagation of species,errors within the DNA should be minimal.I want to tell or remind you that Adam was not created with errors of any kind.He was created very good,perfect.At present,man is in a fallen state.Infact,he struggles to live for 80years.Adam and Eve had all that was required for successful replication of species.That is not too hard for God to do.

Hi again Image 123

The word of God is infallible if what is said to be the word of God is actually the word of God. You are correct that God is immutable but the laws which came from God are also immutable. There are limitation in scientific research but those limitations are known and the harmful consequences of incestous relationship is an extablished scientific fact. I maintain that the intrinsic nature of Gods creation cannot be changed even by God and I will use your example of potter and clay. Yes the potter (God) can mould the clay(creatures) to a pot, calabash, cup etc but the intrinsic constiuent of the forms pot, clay, calabash is clay. The potter who made the clay can transform the clay in any form but the forms are still clay. That is my point. If you claim that what you call Adam and Eve have perfect genes, then provide the scientific evidence. I am willing to examine it. Many things can lie but not the genes. In the genes lie the secrets of biological life. If the entire humanity came from a single man and woman, clues of that will be left in the genes of we present day humans. To simply say that God can do this or that is just a claim. If God did it provide the scientific evidence.  It is that simple. Cheers

@m_nwankwo
so i'm supposed to provide Adam and Eve's remains for DNA tests.well that's a tall order.count me out.and don't be too suprised if in 10years,an invention comes out that makes a complete mockery of the ones presently been used for DNA studies.What stories do genes tell you.all speculation.Can gene study tell you how old your grandfather was?The way scientists go about this gene thing with all the fairy tale.genes don't lie.You're looking at someone's skull and you're talking about the tools he used,where he lived and how he walked 10000yrs ago! Thats all speculation,no truth in all that but It's celebrated all over science world.So much for science fiction.

Image123:

@m_nwankwo
so i'm supposed to provide Adam and Eve's remains for DNA tests.well that's a tall order.count me out.and don't be too suprised if in 10years,an invention comes out that makes a complete mockery of the ones presently been used for DNA studies.What stories do genes tell Uall speculation.Can gene study tell you how old your grandfather was?The way scientists go about this gene thing with all the fairy tale.genes don't lie.You're looking at someone's skull and you're talking about the tools he used,where he lived and how he walked 10000yrs ago! Thats all speculation,no truth in all that but It's celebrated all over science world.So much for science fiction.

Hahhahaaaaa image 123. You seem not to understand what genes are and how the work or else you should not have said the above. Indeed genome profiling can give you the  age of your grandfather, not just your granfather but going back into people who lived in antiquity. It is such studies that traced modern humans to subsahara Africa. You have not studied the genes and yet you claim it is all fairly tale. Paradoxically those that interpret creation stories literally are daily benefiting from advances in genetics, molecular biology, cosmology, astrophysics etc. You are prepared to take an antibiotic to cure a bacterial infection, you are prepared to vaccinate babies to prevent hepatities etc and yet refuse to see that the same genetic technigues that lead to the development of antibiotics, vaccines etc are the same thing used in analysing the origin of the human body. The only argument that people like you have is to always rely on what is yet to be discovered. Be specific and mention those future discoveries that will annul the present genetic studies on the origin of the human body. Yet what is yet to be discovered is not an evidence but wishful thinking. Discover it and then it can be examined. Yes genes do not lie. A man can claim to be the parent of a child. All you need is to do a DNA paternity test and you will have 100% certainty wheather the claimant is the father or an imposter. Of all the creation stories that religions propound and interpret literally, no one has yet answered why there are no physical evidence of these events since they were claimed to happen in the physical world and involve physical bodies. Genetics is increasingly contradicting these literal interpretations and all that religious claimants have are calims without evidence. What is the evidence that God literally moulded Adam from the sand? What is the evidence that God made Eve from the rib of Adam? What is the evidence that the whole humanity came from Adam and Eve? It lies with people who have a literal interpretation of these creation accounts to do research and provide scientific evidence. So far I am not aware of any genetic study confirming these literal interpretation of creation accounts. Stay blessed.

Image123:

@bindex
don't confuse yourself.so the chinese were bubbling during the time of Noah's ark.you were with them in spirit abi.Don't just come here and feed us with untraceable lies.are there documents to attest to that as a matter of fact?Do the times correlate?I hope you're not building on what stories even the chinese know/agree to be fables and legends.

China has one of the world's oldest people and continuous civilizations, consisting of states and cultures dating back more than six millennia. It has the world's longest continuously used written language system, [/b]and is the source of many major inventions, such as what the British scholar and biochemist Joseph Needham called the "four great inventions of Ancient China": paper, the compass, gunpowder, and printing. Historically, China's cultural sphere has extended across East Asia as a whole, with Chinese religion, customs, and writing systems being adopted to varying degrees by neighbors such as Japan, Korea and Vietnam. The first evidence of human presence in the region was found at the Zhoukoudian cave and is one of the first known specimens of Homo Erectus, now commonly known as the Peking Man, [b]estimated to have lived approximately from 300,000 to 550,000 years ago. Noticeably, it is also known that the Peking Man was able to control and use Fire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China

There are some stories in the bible that the Jews and some Christians now agree/know to be fables and legends.

Image123:

@m_nwankwo
so i'm supposed to provide Adam and Eve's remains for DNA tests.well that's a tall order.count me out.and don't be too suprised if in 10years,an invention comes out that makes a complete mockery of the ones presently been used for DNA studies.What stories do genes tell Uall speculation.Can gene study tell you how old your grandfather was?[b]The way scientists go about this gene thing with all the fairy tale.[/b]genes don't lie.You're looking at someone's skull and you're talking about the tools he used,where he lived and how he walked 10000yrs ago! Thats all speculation,no truth in all that but It's celebrated all over science world.So much for science fiction.

The way scientist go about the gene things is a fairy tale but yet the Jonah's story isn't? Noah's ark isn't and the the myth that differences in language began during the time of the tower of babel is not a fairy tale? it took the jews 40years to travel from Egypt to Canaan, talking donkey's and most of the wars recorded in the old testament aren't   

m_nwankwo:

Hi again Image 123

The word of God is infallible if what is said to be the word of God is actually the word of God. You are correct that God is immutable but the laws which came from God are also immutable. There are limitation in scientific research but those limitations are known and the harmful consequences of incestous relationship is an extablished scientific fact. I maintain that the intrinsic nature of Gods creation cannot be changed even by God and I will use your example of potter and clay. Yes the potter (God) can mould the clay(creatures) to a pot, calabash, cup etc but the intrinsic constiuent of the forms pot, clay, calabash is clay. The potter who made the clay can transform the clay in any form but the forms are still clay. That is my point. If you claim that what you call Adam and Eve have perfect genes, then provide the scientific evidence. I am willing to examine it. Many things can lie but not the genes. In the genes lie the secrets of biological life. If the entire humanity came from a single man and woman, clues of that will be left in the genes of we present day humans. To simply say that God can do this or that is just a claim. If God did it provide the scientific evidence.  It is that simple. Cheers

Nice point m_nwanko, "Let there be light and there was light "explains nothing or God spread all the people of the world without naming places and regions or how they were spread around the world explains nothing too most especially when the facts are against what the bible asserts, any body can make such an assertion, the koranic explanation for the creation of the world and humans is better and sounds more logical than that of the bible.

m_nwankwo:

Hahhahaaaaa image 123. You seem not to understand what genes are and how the work or else you should not have said the above. Indeed genome profiling can give you the  age of your grandfather, not just your granfather but going back into people who lived in antiquity. It is such studies that traced modern humans to subsahara Africa. You have not studied the genes and yet you claim it is all fairly tale.

"Reason should be destroyed in all Christians."
— Martin Luther

"Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed.  Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ,  know nothing but the word of God."
— Martin Luther

These are some of the quotes from Martin Luther the founder of what is known as modern day protestantism.


"If [scientific] conclusions contradict the Word of God, the conclusions are wrong, no matter how many scientific facts may appear to back them,"
— Biology for Christian Schools, p. 1

@m_nwankwo
It seems you do not understand the basics of christians.It is faith.Believing.The evidence of things not seen.Our foundation is on believing God,walking by faith not by sight.It is scientists and people like you and bindex that depend on evidence as their chief source,their foundation,their belief.So you see,we're comfortable without physical evidence.You're the one that is not.Our faith is built on trust in God.We see what He is doing,we believe what our fathers said He did.We can easily say/infer that He did this in my time,sure He could have done what my fathers said He did.And we've found His Word infallible.On the other hand,'science' sees us as unreasonable.Suprisingly,they're building all their theories on belief,not on evidence.Please explain to layboys like me how a gene will tell you that your fathers came from subsaharan Africa.where is the evidence that you're so fast to cry out for from us.We're aware of the benefits of science,there's no point putting me up against it.But tell us,how can one see a relic,take fragments that human eye cannot see and begin to tell us that this man lived in the rocks,ate so so food,used paper.where is the proof.How scientific is that.If you say that in another religion,its understandable.But for scientists to give fairy tale stories,that's not scientific enough

Image123:

@m_nwankwo
It seems you do not understand the basics of christians.It is faith.Believing.The evidence of things not seen.Our foundation is on believing God,walking by faith not by sight.It is scientists and people like you and bindex that depend on evidence as their chief source,their foundation,their belief.So you see,we're comfortable without physical evidence.You're the one that is not.Our faith is built on trust in God.We see what He is doing,we believe what our fathers said He did.We can easily say/infer that He did this in my time,sure He could have done what my fathers said He did.And we've found His Word infallible.On the other hand,'science' sees us as unreasonable.Suprisingly,they're building all their theories on belief,not on evidence.Please explain to layboys like me how a gene will tell you that your fathers came from subsaharan Africa.where is the evidence that you're so fast to cry out for from us.We're aware of the benefits of science,there's no point putting me up against it.But tell us,how can one see a relic,take fragments that human eye cannot see and begin to tell us that this man lived in the rocks,ate so so food,used paper.where is the proof.How scientific is that.If you say that in another religion,its understandable.But for scientists to give fairy tale stories,that's not scientific enough

The problems here is that you overlook your own fairy tales and conclude that scientist are propagating fairy tales . Your post above has really explained your points and how you view and understand things, your points are well noted.

@bindex
hi,It's good to see that you're beginning to understand my point.That's the christian's way.It's the way of faith.We don't wait for God to write 'I AM GOD' boldly in the sky before we believe.we're not shaky when you ask for us to provide evidence of God.We know God,we've without doubt seen Him work in our lives and in the life of others,so much that we know that He is able to do all things.Unfortunately,your own foundation is not on faith but on sight.thats what you call evidence.What we christians call evidence is what we say you cannot understand except you're born of God.The EVIDENCE of things not seen.that is faith.It's an evidence that is more valid,clearer than things seen.I repeat,you may not understand until you're born again.Through faith,we understand.We understand that the world was framed by the word of God.That is our evidence.You're trying to counter it by evidence.Sad enough,you have no evidence but just extrapolations and possibilities.Guesswork from studies of fossils.Thats not good enough.you're the ones so particular about site evidence.The responsibility is on you to show us real evidence,not cunningly devised fables of cavemen holding spears and walking awkwardly.

Image123:

@bindex
hi,It's good to see that you're beginning to understand my point.That's the christian's way.It's the way of faith.We don't wait for God to write 'I AM GOD' boldly in the sky before we believe.we're not shaky when you ask for us to provide evidence of God.We know God,we've without doubt seen Him work in our lives and in the life of others,so much that we know that He is able to do all things.Unfortunately,your own foundation is not on faith but on sight.thats what you call evidence.What we christians call evidence is what we say you cannot understand except you're born of God.The EVIDENCE of things not seen.that is faith.It's an evidence that is more valid,clearer than things seen.I repeat,you may not understand until you're born again.Through faith,we understand.We understand that the world was framed by the word of God.That is our evidence.You're trying to counter it by evidence.Sad enough,you have no evidence but just extrapolations and possibilities.Guesswork from studies of fossils.Thats not good enough.you're the ones so particular about site evidence.The responsibility is on you to show us real evidence,not cunningly devised fables of cavemen holding spears and walking awkwardly.

Belief is all you have and thats all, every body has some kind of belief, evidence makes it a fact, that fact that you believe in something doesnt make it true, there are millions of people that believe that the Dia Lama is their God. Billions belive that Allah is their God, Just the way that Christains believe in most or all of the words of the bible regardless of weather the are true or not.

m_nwankwo:

@Pator AIO

Let me address the issues you raised albeit briefly

The law of God as I defined it in my penultimate post is in the intinsic nature of Gods creations and I stand by my assertion that this intrinsic nature of the creations of God cannot be changed nor is it subject to time fluctions or place or similar parameters. I do not understand by what you mean by wider law. To me it only the laws of God that is immutable but the forms that these laws produce do evolve. Thus one who only knows the change of forms but not the power that give rise to those forms will make assertions that will be refuted as evolution and development progresses. You may give a specific scenario and I will tell you wheather or not it is the law of God or simply forms of the law.

Hello M_Nwankwo.  Thanks for your reply.  First I think that I ought to define what I understand a Law to mean.  A Law is an articulation of the causal relationship between two events.  For example let's take Newton's 2nd law of motion.  The relationship between the acceleration of an object and the Force applied to the object is directly proportional as regards the amount of Force and Inversely proportional as regards the Mass of the object.  

Laws are usually observed.  When they are articulated this is usually done with the words 'All other things being equal . . .'.  This shows that the Laws are conditional.  If the condition changes the the Law might no longer apply.  However if we find that a law applies in one instance but not in another then Surely there must be another Law that determines when the initial law comes into effect or not.  

m_nwankwo:


You entire point rests entirely on what is still unknown. What is unknown do not constitute an evidence. It is only an excuse in my opinion. Any person who have evidence that incestous relationship do not result in genetic errors in subsequent generations should then provide it. To simply say that their are unknown conditions is not a counter argument. Besides how do you know that their are unknown conditions? There is nothing as strong as evidence both in spiritual and material matters. Provide the evidence for the unknown condtions where incestous relationship is beneficial.

I have a lot of respect for the unknown cos it can jump and bite you yansh at any point in time.  I do not state that there is not correlation between incest and deformity of babies.  What I am saying is that until all the factors involved are known no one can say that it is a solid rule that cannot be changed.  Perhaps with genetic engineering or something then the law can be broken, but that is just speculation on my part.  

My friend, if I could provide evidence of the unknown then it wouldn't be unknown then, would it?  

m_nwankwo:


It is not dangerous to make exact claims. If the claims are not universal and true, then contradict them with evidence. In that way the pretenders will be found out as has happened in history. I maintain that the laws of God are universal and immutable. The onus lies on those whose persuation is that it is the way I percieve it to prove me wrong. A mango seed cannot give rise to tomatoes at harvest  under any circumstances. It is impossible to turn stone to bread under any circumstances. It is impossible for spirit to become matter under any circustance. It is impossible to create the human body from sand or clay, etc  It is impossible to resurrect a man who died and all that is left are only bones. All these are impossible because they lie outside the laws of God which manifests in the intrinsic nature of its species.

What you call the deeper laws of the universe seems to be synonymous with  the laws of God and these laws are immutable but the forms or structures that they give rise to  constantly change. Thus the question to you is are the deeper laws of the universe immutable? If they are not, then we have contrarly views but if they are, then we have no diverging positions. A crude analogy is with energy. A look at an electrical bulb, a sprinter in motion, a turbine in a power plant, a tsunami, a hurricane appear on the surface to have no connection and yet if one looks deeper he will see that it is energy that drives the muscle of the sprinter, lights the electrical bulb, generates tornado etc. Transformation or the form in which energy manifests changes as in this crude example above but the energy remains the same. Best wishes.

I accept that the laws of God are immutable, but I deny that the Laws as perceived and articulated by humans are the immutable laws of God, but rather just temporal, temporary, manifestations of deeper laws.  

However we have to be careful with that word immutable.  Wet Clay is immutably Wet Clay however it can be formed into a pot, or it can be formed into a plate.  It would be a mistake to call either pot or plate immutable  cos plate can easily be mutated into pot.  Everything observed in this world is a translation, or transcription of a deeper reality.  This is my position and I don't think that it is so distant from yours except for the fact that you claim that observable phenomena are immutable, while I say that they can be subject to change with varying contexts.

Image123:

The Bible is not a geographical atlas or a world census document.It contains what is relevant for our relationship with God and our happy stay on earth.

This is where you should have ended your argument because that is the degree a Christian should hold the bible to. You are lambasting the Chinese history because you do not know anything about it. You were taught in school and churches about Man's history from the European point of view whilst holding the Judeo-Christian story of the origin of man firm.

The Bible was not written to compete with science or engineering. Using the bible to tell the origins of Chinese people is wrong.I would be glad if people can talk like Joel Osteen and say 'I do not know' rather than make points based on an interpretation of the Bible which other points of view can be deduced from anyway.

Until we find answers as our knowledge improves, we should try to stop behaving like the Christians in the middle ages that chastised Copernicus, Galileo and other great scientists when they put forward scientific theories that went against some interpretations of the bible that were held strongly at that time.

ow11:

This is where you should have ended your argument because that is the degree a Christian should hold the bible to. You are lambasting the Chinese history because you do not know anything about it. You were taught in school and churches about Man's history from the European point of view whilst holding the Judeo-Christian story of the origin of man firm.

The Bible was not written to compete with science or engineering. Using the bible to tell the origins of Chinese people is wrong.I would be glad if people can talk like Joel Osteen and say 'I do not know' rather than make points based on an interpretation of the Bible which other points of view can be deduced from anyway.

Until we find answers as our knowledge improves, we should try to stop behaving like the Christians in the middle ages that chastised Copernicus, Galileo and other great scientists when they put forward scientific theories that went against some interpretations of the bible that were held strongly at that time.

This is the best post on this thread so far.

m_nwankwo:

Hahhahaaaaa image 123. You seem not to understand what genes are and how the work or else you should not have said the above. Indeed genome profiling can give you the  age of your grandfather, not just your granfather but going back into people who lived in antiquity. It is such studies that traced modern humans to subsahara Africa. You have not studied the genes and yet you claim it is all fairly tale. Paradoxically those that interpret creation stories literally are daily benefiting from advances in genetics, molecular biology, cosmology, astrophysics etc. You are prepared to take an antibiotic to cure a bacterial infection, you are prepared to vaccinate babies to prevent hepatities etc and yet refuse to see that the same genetic technigues that lead to the development of antibiotics, vaccines etc are the same thing used in analysing the origin of the human body. The only argument that people like you have is to always rely on what is yet to be discovered. Be specific and mention those future discoveries that will annul the present genetic studies on the origin of the human body. Yet what is yet to be discovered is not an evidence but wishful thinking. Discover it and then it can be examined. Yes genes do not lie. A man can claim to be the parent of a child. All you need is to do a DNA paternity test and you will have 100% certainty wheather the claimant is the father or an imposter. Of all the creation stories that religions propound and interpret literally, no one has yet answered why there are no physical evidence of these events since they were claimed to happen in the physical world and involve physical bodies. Genetics is increasingly contradicting these literal interpretations and all that religious claimants have are calims without evidence. What is the evidence that God literally moulded Adam from the sand? What is the evidence that God made Eve from the rib of Adam? What is the evidence that the whole humanity came from Adam and Eve? It lies with people who have a literal interpretation of these creation accounts to do research and provide scientific evidence. So far I am not aware of any genetic study confirming these literal interpretation of creation accounts. Stay blessed.

This is a very interesting post.

@Pastor AIO

Thanks fOR your reply. I always enjoy discussing with you. I address the points as follows:

Hello M_Nwankwo.  Thanks for your reply.  First I think that I ought to define what I understand a Law to mean.  A Law is an articulation of the causal relationship between two events.  For example let's take Newton's 2nd law of motion.  The relationship between the acceleration of an object and the Force applied to the object is directly proportional as regards the amount of Force and Inversely proportional as regards the Mass of the object.  

Laws are usually observed.  When they are articulated this is usually done with the words 'All other things being equal . . .'.  This shows that the Laws are conditional.  If the condition changes the the Law might no longer apply.  However if we find that a law applies in one instance but not in another then Surely there must be another Law that determines when the initial law comes into effect or not.  

Newtons laws of motion are not the laws of God but  forms, manifestation of the laws of God. Thus the forms and structures can change and evolve. I have already said that. The law of God in this case is that invincible power thich gives the particular object in question characteristics like force, accerlation, mass etc. He who only observes the charateristics of the object like mass, force, accerlaeration as science often do and make predictions based on that can be contradicted as further studies of the nature of the body become evident. However he who understands the power or what I have called intrinsic nature that gives the object its characteristics knows all characteristics even those that science has not yet discovered. Based on knowing the intrinsic nature of these objects, that is the invincible power whose physical manifestation is the object in question it is possible to know what is impossible or possible whatever the circumstances are. Thus the laws of God as it manifests changes forms. A crude example may suffice. You can compress or stretch a rubber tubing depending on the direction of the force you apply. One force increases the length and the same force in opposite direction decreases the length. The increase or decrease in length is just a manifestation or a measure of elasticity but a measure of elasticity is not elasticity itself. He who knows the elasticity itself know the limit to which the rubber can withstand compression or stretching.

I have a lot of respect for the unknown cos it can jump and bite you yansh at any point in time.  I do not state that there is not correlation between incest and deformity of babies.  What I am saying is that until all the factors involved are known no one can say that it is a solid rule that cannot be changed.  Perhaps with genetic engineering or something then the law can be broken, but that is just speculation on my part.  

My friend, if I could provide evidence of the unknown then it wouldn't be unknown then, would it?  

Hahhahahahaa pastor. I see you point. Then we should wait when all the factors are know. When will that be? A major part of my work involve genetic manipulation of organisms and my view is that what ever will be discovered in future will only add to what we know currently of DNA but not annual current understanding. To annul our current understanding of genes and gene expression must involve a discovery that refutes that DNA OR RNA is the unit of heredity. Both my my work as a scientist and my study of the cosmic laws convinces me that DNA or RNA is the unit of hereditry for all times.

I accept that the laws of God are immutable, but I deny that the Laws as perceived and articulated by humans are the immutable laws of God, but rather just temporal, temporary, manifestations of deeper laws.  

However we have to be careful with that word immutable.  Wet Clay is immutably Wet Clay however it can be formed into a pot, or it can be formed into a plate.  It would be a mistake to call either pot or plate immutable  cos plate can easily be mutated into pot.  Everything observed in this world is a translation, or transcription of a deeper reality.  This is my position and I don't think that it is so distant from yours except for the fact that you claim that observable phenomena are immutable, while I say that they can be subject to change with varying contexts.  

It seems that we are actually saying the same thing. I did not claim that observable phenomenon are immutable but the power that give rise to them are immutable. I did not say that incest is against the laws of God just becomes of the biological observations concerning inbreeding but rather because of what I know of the both the intrinsic nature and manifestation (form) of what we call DNA. I expanded on the outward characteristics of the DNA because that is what every person can easily check out and verify. I avoided discusiing the intrinsic nature because the evidence does not lie in what is visible to the physical organs of perception. Like I told Image 123 in one of my post, clay is clay and not even the creator of clay can change clay to something else. It is however possible to mould clay into pot, plate, calabash etc. Stay blessed.

Image123:

@m_nwankwo
It seems you do not understand the basics of christians.It is faith.Believing.The evidence of things not seen.Our foundation is on believing God,walking by faith not by sight.It is scientists and people like you and bindex that depend on evidence as their chief source,their foundation,their belief.So you see,we're comfortable without physical evidence.You're the one that is not.Our faith is built on trust in God.We see what He is doing,we believe what our fathers said He did.We can easily say/infer that He did this in my time,sure He could have done what my fathers said He did.And we've found His Word infallible.On the other hand,'science' sees us as unreasonable.Suprisingly,they're building all their theories on belief,not on evidence.Please explain to layboys like me how a gene will tell you that your fathers came from subsaharan Africa.where is the evidence that you're so fast to cry out for from us.We're aware of the benefits of science,there's no point putting me up against it.But tell us,how can one see a relic,take fragments that human eye cannot see and begin to tell us that this man lived in the rocks,ate so so food,used paper.where is the proof.How scientific is that.If you say that in another religion,its understandable.But for scientists to give fairy tale stories,that's not scientific enough

Hi again image123
Keep to what you believe. I respect your faith. It was and will never be my intention to persuade you to change your religious views. Ofcourse I can give you current evidence on the origin of the human body. But what purpose will it serve? Besides, the point of my argument is genetics and if I send you scientific articles on these issues, you probably will not understand them. I have made my point as simple as possible to those who are not specialist in genetics or allied subjects. If however there is in this forum a specialist in genetics ( a PhD and publications) who share similar religious views as you, then I will be happy to engage such a person on the genetic evidence for the origin the human body. Stay blessed.

@m_nwankwo
haha,so now we're asking for real evidence from you and then you suddenly feel only a Ph.D holder in genetics engineering will understand.So its now becoming an esoteric thing.share it with us now.That's what scientists do.They try to provide undeniable evidence.Evidence to show from a 'machine' that man came from subsaharan Africa

@bindex
who turned you to a moderator?I think you should be looking for evidence to show that man was around and bubbling in China during the time of the flood.

Image123:

@m_nwankwo
haha,so now we're asking for real evidence from you and then you suddenly feel only a Ph.D holder in genetics engineering will understand.So its now becoming an esoteric thing.share it with us now.That's what scientists do.They try to provide undeniable evidence.Evidence to show from a 'machine' that man came from subsaharan Africa

Have you read any of m_nwankwo post at all? What do you have to show that all men decended from one man? Words from unknown authors? or words from ancient men that thought the whole world comprised of only their region?

here is a qoute from m_nwankwo

Paradoxically those that interpret creation stories literally are daily benefiting from advances in genetics, molecular biology, cosmology, astrophysics etc. You are prepared to take an antibiotic to cure a bacterial infection, you are prepared to vaccinate babies to prevent hepatities etc and yet refuse to see that the same genetic technigues that lead to the development of antibiotics, vaccines etc are the same thing used in analysing the origin of the human body

Image123:

@bindex
who turned you to a moderator?I think you should be looking for evidence to show that man was around and bubbling in China during the time of the flood.

What evidence do you want me to look for? Carbon dating and fossils have shown that people were living and bubbling in China, before, during and after the story of the Noah's flood was written (The original Noahs story is believed to have come from an earlier civilization). As early as 1800 BC, the Shang dynasty ruled China. They were an agricultural society and had a written alphabet, were accomplished metal workers and left written records.But seriously, its puzzling how the Chinese were able to develop the world's first writing system before the flood even happened, somewhere between 7200 and 5800 BC, since they didn't even exist yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiahu

@ow11
hello,see I'm not saying I know all.no.But they're not the only ones that studied science.All I'm doing is putting their 'talk' under scrutiny,and the lapses are clear.Let me give you a scenario of what scientists are saying about man's history.They stumble on human relics in some cave,take the rocks around the remains and go to date it.Then they get some figure which is supposed to be the age of the rock and tell us 'this relic was here when this rock was formed about 10000 years ago'.And they assert that.Imagine,something which is a speculation is turned to an assertion and printed on science reports.some get lucky,they might see a pollen grain around the relic.Then they say waoh,cavemen used to bury their dead with flowers.That's the way they build all the fables with little details around.That to me is not enough evidence,but just a creative mind who may make more money in hollywood.Then they begin to compare dates of different relics found and conclude o,the earliest man is found in Southern Africa.He was walking with his back bent and speaking pidgin.without much ado,the science world applauds the discovery.That's just about how most of this history of man is done.And I'm supposed to believe that when I have a more sure word of prophecy.It's not done

Image123:

@ow11
hello,see I'm not saying I know all.no.But they're not the only ones that studied science.All I'm doing is putting their 'talk' under scrutiny,and the lapses are clear.Let me give you a scenario of what scientists are saying about man's history.They stumble on human relics in some cave,take the rocks around the remains and go to date it.Then they get some figure which is supposed to be the age of the rock and tell us 'this relic was here when this rock was formed about 10000 years ago'.And they assert that.Imagine,something which is a speculation is turned to an assertion and printed on science reports.some get lucky,they might see a pollen grain around the relic.Then they say waoh,cavemen used to bury their dead with flowers.That's the way they build all the fables with little details around.That to me is not enough evidence,but just a creative mind who may make more money in hollywood.Then they begin to compare dates of different relics found and conclude o,the earliest man is found in Southern Africa.He was walking with his back bent and speaking pidgin.without much ado,the science world applauds the discovery.That's just about how most of this history of man is done.And I'm supposed to believe that when I have a more sure word of prophecy.[/b]It's not done.

Image 123. You disregard scientific facts and hold unto unfactual beliefs as facts. Let me repeat what m_nwanko wrote

[b]Paradoxically those that interpret creation stories literally are daily benefiting from advances in genetics, molecular biology, cosmology, astrophysics etc. You are prepared to take an antibiotic to cure a bacterial infection, you are prepared to vaccinate babies to prevent hepatities etc and yet refuse to see that the same genetic technigues that lead to the development of antibiotics, vaccines etc are the same thing used in analysing the origin of the human body

What does the bible say about the origin of black people if I may ask?

@bindex
where are the scientific FACTS.show us and stop telling stories.Leave story for religious people.Produce your well beloved facts and stop making assertions out of probability and extrapolation