MacDaddy01:





Explain how? Le me give you one simple contradiction;

The bible says that incest is bad. However
-Abraham married his step-sister
-Adam was Eve's biological parent from rib cloning. Therefore, their relationship was incestuous
-The only way Adam and Eve could have had grandchildren is through incest of their children

jayriginal: ^^^
Aww how cute. The baby is name calling again.

Deep Sight:

SHADDAP! I have ALWAYS been a baby. And only babies inherit the kingdom o' Gad. . . hic. . . need to finist off this brandy, an get more polite. . . hic. . . .

jayriginal:



The thing tire me oh.

Uyi, about the fallibilty issue, I am still not sure about what you mean. Are you asking for fallibilty in a work of a human ?

Do you need to even ask ?

What kind of fallibility ?
If you say his work is not based on science, lets put that aside. Are you asking for typos ? What ?

I'm still wondering why you are asking if its infallible. Who the hell refers to The God Delusion as a monumental piece of literature (even here on nairaland). I'm yet to hear of an atheist who says reading The God Delusion was a major milestone for him.

In any case, until you are more specific, I'll have to be general. If you are asking for "infallibility", I havent scrutinized the book with a mind to discovering these. If one were to do so, there might be found errors in the book. That would not be surprising seeing as he is a human being and not "God".

Uyi Iredia:

When I say infallibility I'm talking about the correspondence with hard facts and internal consistency and soundness of literary style. If the book fulfills this requirements then you can say it is infallible. I've been specific now so answer the question.

I'm asking the question because the doctrine of infallibility of the Scriptures is contested by atheists. I was trying to draw an analogy to other works in this case The God Delusion to show that some books while not divinely inspired could be said to be infallible_or not.

Uyi Iredia:


That was after some time. Incest was proclaimed bad in the Mosaic laws documented in Exodus & Deuteronomy. By that time the population had grown enough so in-breeding couldn't occur. It would have been a contradiction if God said incest was bad then created Adam & Eve only. I hope you're thinking clearly now.

MacDaddy01:


List of Uyis epic fails

1) You admit that God changes his morality. What a fake guy
2) You evaded the fact that there are more cases of incest in the bible

Uyi Iredia:

Nonsense. You have the burden of showing how God changing his moral stance in this instance makes the Bible contradictory. It seems you're too lazy to do that. So what if there were other cases of incest. Does that now make the Bible wrong. So Ammons incestuous affair with his half-sister Tamar makes the Bible contradictory !?

Deep Sight:

SHADDAP! I have ALWAYS been a baby. And only babies inherit the kingdom o' Gad. . . hic. . . need to finist off this brandy, an get more polite. . . hic. . . .

jayriginal:

MacDaddy01:


I always knew that you are 2 chromosomes away from being retarded.

MacDaddy01: God allows Adam, Abraham to commit incest then goes 180 degrees to ban incest,

Uyi Iredia:

You are the slow one.




so what ? How is His changing the laws on a moral stance wrong ? Or do you suppose he should have left it that way for consistency ? Besides he wouldn't be omnipotent if he could not effect changes. There are instances where God changed his mind on an issue (eg the destruction of Nineveh)and there is nothing wrong with that. Lemme ask you a question. Given man's evolutionary history will inbreeding not have occurred ?

mkmyers45: I could also smile after reding this.....THE LOGICBOY EFFECT

Ptolomeus: Logicboy is my friend.
I respect him a lot ...
He has a sense of humor ...
We can all have a moment of aggression. but Logic is even funny ...

My respect for him!

musKeeto:
Religion is killing itself in Nigeria and Nairaland is supplying the weapons..

MacDaddy01:



We keep saying the same things but you always want to distance yourself from me.

We are both humanists at the end of the day

MacDaddy01:


If Logicboy was God, he would have created millions of people in the first place instead of two.


But Alas, the story of Adam and Eve is a myth.

2 people repopulating the earth? If that were true, we would be retard.ed mofos right now

Ihedinobi:

Here's this one question: what is the biological relationship in terms of genes between the parent(s) and the offspring?

MacDaddy01:



lol....how does this reduce the age of Methuselah?

You dont know that you inherit genes from your parents?

Ihedinobi:

Don't worry, your very answers will clarify relevance.

What would you define as the genetic relationship between siblings?

Ihedinobi: ^

Are they then the same genetic entities? If yes, how? If no, how?

MacDaddy01:


They are only the same if they are identical twins (boy-boy or girl-girl). They are then clones

Ihedinobi:

So, except identical twins, siblings are essentially different genetic entities. That's what I understand you to be saying. Now, how is this so? Since they have the same parents and derive their genes from them, how are they different from one another?

MacDaddy01:


I did not study science. Berra get to your point quick!

Basically, siblings inherit different traits at different levels from their parents. Some get recessive genes some get the dominant. Some Mendelian stuff here.

Ihedinobi:

lol.......really, man. You're real funny. Perhaps you should study it up a bit.

Your answer amounts to this: the offspring are each unique combinations of the parents' genes and essentially subsets of said genes. Have I got you right?

MacDaddy01:


yes

Ihedinobi:

If this is so, would you say that which each successive generation there is a reduction is dispersion of genes such that siblings grow closer and closer in identity genetically?

MacDaddy01:


Your statement is only valid assuming that the family marries within themselves. Yes.

Ihedinobi:

Could you explain your answer a little?

MacDaddy01:


It is as clear as daylight.


Maybe you should have gotten your point across earlier.