Our vision and mission in this group is to reintroduce Jesus Christ to our generation. Equipping the saints to know
1. Who they are in Christ
2. What they have in Christ and
3. What Christ can do through them...
Please if you are blessed by any of our posts here, do well to share it to your friends and loved ones, let's spread the fragrance of his grace through all the earth ����

Please drop your WhatsApp number or email address below to get the link to the group...

Welcome to this new morning, its God's gift to us. Endeavour to make good use of it. Do not be tired of sharing the gospel to your friends and neighbours. Every moment counts, use it to drop a nugget. A word encapsulating the Love of God to us....

*In this platform, we only permit the sharing of the WORD of God. Please use other groups to share other topics*...thanks

There is no such thing as the word of God, they are all tales and myths written by men to control dumb people like you....

The creator of the world is not a man or human being, it is consciousness... It is the personification of this consciousness that is referred to as "god"...

sonmvayina:
There is no such thing as the word of God, they are all tales and myths written by men to control dumb people like you....

The creator of the world is not a man or human being, it is consciousness... It is the personification of this consciousness that is referred to as "god"...

Have you taken time to observe the earth? The order, the precision, the perfection and imperfections (if you like). The asthethics, the performances, the intelligence in even the most minute creatures.

Just look at little things like ants, or even invisible animate organisms like amoeba etc. Look at all creations, both living and non living from the smallest to the greatest. Have you taken a look at the constitution of your own body, see how everything is arranged and organised?. Do you believe that all creatures just manifested like Charles Darwin's theory proposed. They have no origin, no maker.... I sincerely believe that only the gullible will be lead into believing that no body created or masterminded all these things..

emxglas:

Have you taken time to observe the earth? The order, the precision, the perfection and imperfections (if you like). The asthethics, the performances, the intelligence in even the most minute creatures.

Just look at little things like ants, or even invisible animate organisms like amoeba etc. Look at all creations, both living and non living from the smallest to the greatest. Have you taken a look at the constitution of your own body, see how everything is arranged and organised?. Do you believe that all creatures just manifested like Charles Darwin's theory proposed. They have no origin, no maker.... I sincerely believe that only the gullible will be lead into believing that no body created or masterminded all these things..

I am not denying the existence of a creator of the universe, my point is that the creator is not a man or human being.. So what you refer to as "word of God are tales and myth written by men to control dumb people... They are stories and parables meant to teach spiritual truth..

sonmvayina:

I am not denying the existence of a creator of the universe, my point is that the creator is not a man or human being.. So what you refer to as "word of God are tales and myth written by men to control dumb people... They are stories and parables meant to teach spiritual truth..

From the beginning of time, no man has ever been ascertained perfect. If the bible was written by imperfect men, yet so accurately with such tremendous precision, surely it would have beeninspired by someone perfect. I challenge you today to prove to me through out history one area or point where the bible has been sufficiently proven to be incorrect. If none, then, It has been written under the inspiration of God for only God is perfect. He actually speaks to us including you, the problem is that your own personal beliefs makes it difficult to discern it. God can't be a creator that intelligent, who would create something and abandon his creation. Would you do that?

emxglas:


From the beginning of time, no man has ever been ascertained perfect. If the bible was written by imperfect men, yet so accurately with such tremendous precision, surely it would have beeninspired by someone perfect. I challenge you today to prove to me through out history one area or point where the bible has been sufficiently proven to be incorrect. If none, then, It has been written under the inspiration of God for only God is perfect. He actually speaks to us including you, the problem is that your own personal beliefs makes it difficult to discern it. God can't be a creator that intelligent, who would create something and abandon his creation. Would you do that?

Not just the Bible, there are a lot more, the Enuma elish, the cybil Oracle, the vedas, the Egyptian book of the dead etc.. They are meant to teach us spiritual truth, the ifa odus, the igbo omenani etc are our indigenous books.. They are meant to lead us in the right path as light on our journey.

emxglas:

Have you taken time to observe the earth? The order, the precision, the perfection and imperfections (if you like). The asthethics, the performances, the intelligence in even the most minute creatures.

Just look at little things like ants, or even invisible animate organisms like amoeba etc. Look at all creations, both living and non living from the smallest to the greatest. Have you taken a look at the constitution of your own body, see how everything is arranged and organised?. Do you believe that all creatures just manifested like Charles Darwin's theory proposed. They have no origin, no maker.... I sincerely believe that only the gullible will be lead into believing that no body created or masterminded all these things..

It takes an even bigger fool to believe that all these incredibly complex things were created by something INFINITELY more complex, but, hey please, this entity that is way more complex than the Universe cannot have a creator.

You can't make an argument, and then turn around to destroy it yourself by making special pleading. If complex things must have a creator, then God, who definitely must be more complex than the Universe, is in more need of a creator than the universe.

The argument from complexity is the most stupid argument in the incredibly limited intellect-disgracing arsenal of the theist.

It is as moronic as it is self-defeating. It's very own internal contradiction destroys and illegitimizes it.

And did you just dismiss Darwinism in a few arrogant, cretinous letters organized into stupid words? What do you think evolution is? An idea thought up by mischievous atheists on one random afternoon after an ego-massaging, back-scratching ideological party? Or a sophisticated, standard, research-based scientific theory, supported by overwhelming evidence accumulated over years of consistent and indepth probing, and widely recognized and generally accepted by professional biologists with impeccable credentials to show for it, who are the custodians and final authority on the subject of Biology, the central theme of which is the theory of evolution, which you're so bumptiously, and arrogantly poking fun at?

Where are your biological credentials? Where is the proof of your intellectual credibility? What peer-reviewed scientific paper have you written exposing your findings on evolution and showing how biologists have gotten it all wrong? You put yourself on an intellectual pedestal above biologists who you consider fools, because you consider yourself a higher authority on matters concerning the study of life and its origins, yet you have nothing to show for it?

Aren't you pygmies a quite peculiar breed of impudent nutcases and irritating headfucks? What the fück do you know?

Evolution is false? Go ahead and prove it. But know this in advance: you will have to be an extraordinary idiot if you think you can quote verses from dusty ancient books to refute the evidence-backed interpretation of reality currently held as valid by the more knowledgeable biological community.

You guys are an insult to the intellect. Arm-chair "scientists" who became experts by watching 2 minute YouTube propaganda videos, and viola! they can boast of more knowledge than PhD scientists and all of the world's evolutionary biologists.

Fücking beats me.

Tozara:
It takes an even bigger fool to believe that all these incredibly complex things were created by something INFINITELY more complex, but, hey please, this entity that is way more complex than the Universe cannot have a creator.

You can't make an argument, and then turn around to destroy it yourself by making special pleading. If complex things must have a creator, then God, who definitely must be more complex than the Universe, is in more need of a creator than the universe.

The argument from complexity is the most stupid argument in the incredibly limited intellect-disgracing arsenal of the theist.

It is as moronic as it is self-defeating. It's very own internal contradiction destroys and illegitimizes it.

And did you just dismiss Darwinism in a few arrogant, cretinous letters organized into stupid words? What do you think evolution is? An idea thought up by mischievous atheists on one random afternoon after an ego-massaging, back-scratching ideological party? Or a sophisticated, standard, research-based scientific theory, supported by overwhelming evidence accumulated over years of consistent and indepth probing, and widely recognized and generally accepted by professional biologists with impeccable credentials to show for it, who are the custodians and final authority on the subject of Biology, the central theme of which is the theory of evolution, which you're so bumptiously, and arrogantly poking fun at?

Where are your biological credentials? Where is the proof of your intellectual credibility? What peer-reviewed scientific paper have you written exposing your findings on evolution and showing how biologists have gotten it all wrong? You put yourself on an intellectual pedestal above biologists who you consider fools, because you consider yourself a higher authority on matters concerning the study of life and its origins, yet you have nothing to show for it?

Aren't you pygmies a quite peculiar breed of impudent nutcases and irritating headfucks? What the fück do you know?

Evolution is false? Go ahead and prove it. But know this in advance: you will have to be an extraordinary idiot if you think you can quote verses from dusty ancient books to refute the evidence-backed interpretation of reality currently held as valid by the more knowledgeable biological community.

You guys are an insult to the intellect. Arm-chair "scientists" who became experts by watching 2 minute YouTube propaganda videos, and viola! they can boast of more knowledge than PhD scientists and all of the world's evolutionary biologists.

Fücking beats me.

The unfortunate thing is that both of us are here breaking our heads over a truth we have no power to change. Indeed no matter how powerfully you argue your point based on acclaimed logic and reason, it won't even scratch the truth one bit let alone change it.

The best we can do for our own sake is to humble our spirits and learn. The scientists you are bragging about are humans whose knowledge is both progressive and limited in any age even to tomorrow.

When you talk about peer reviewed scientific discovery I laugh. Don't you know that there is a difference between facts and truth. That a fact may not be the truth and the truth may not be supported by the facts. You expose your level of ignorance when you concluded that it is on the bases of non validation of Scientists that you proved that the word of God is a myth and therefore I am berift of wisdom. Can your scientist tell me the composition of palm wine and who mixed it. Why do scientist need things existing in nature to create theirs and not create theirs by themselves. Why in all their knowledge they can not produce a natural life nor even animal flesh or even blood from the scratch. Why haven't they the knowledge to bring peace and tranquility to the raging and complaining nature. Why is there not yet peace in the land. Why is all their creation fallable since the world began since they have enough knowledge to review others. Which of the creations of God has changed since it was first made..is it the stones, the night/day, the little living and non living things, the environment, the natural resources all around us. But your scientists that have unquantifiable knowledge has been forming and reforming knowledge since the world began....can you tell me about that.

Even the devil that deceived you knows there is God and he trembles before him. It is basic that on the matter of truth, you can deceive some people sometime, but you can not deceive all the people all the time.

If you do not know, Charles Darwin's theory of Evolution was not challenged by anybody because no body knew any better. Don't you argue only what you know? Scientists don't talk if they don't have the facts since Darwin decided to delve into obscure area (beyond human comprehension), no one did challenge him. Doesn't mean his claim was not challengeable. If you yourself today can come up with clearer picture today, You will just puncture that stupid self acclaimed picture. Charles Darwin is not the only one with proposition on that subject. In fact theories are as many as there are people on earth Darwin was only lucky to be a well known and respected scientist at the time and no scientist of his own calibre came forth to challenge him.

Be careful on matters that are beyond what the physical eye can see, you need God to show you and you can not get it arguing him

sonmvayina:


Not just the Bible, there are a lot more, the Enuma elish, the cybil Oracle, the vedas, the Egyptian book of the dead etc.. They are meant to teach us spiritual truth, the ifa odus, the igbo omenani etc are our indigenous books.. They are meant to lead us in the right path as light on our journey.

“they are all meant to lead us in the path as light on our journey “ or ...they are meant to lead us away from the light. You see my friend, God is light. I am pleased that you at least do not doubt his existence. There would not have been two persons who owns and built the earth. At worst a group agreeing and working as one for one purpose for example. If that is true, then why do we have many books containing different ways by different authors speaking contrary to each other. Would they really be speaking for the same person who should normally be the light. Think.... If so be the case then I should say that deity has a multipolar nature. He has identity crisis or is mentally agitated, has some inferiority complex and is also afraid. I can go on and on but no need for too many words here. We don't fight for God. He is capable of defending himself.

To break my point down, I am saying that all these books you are mentioning are not coming from God and as is not speaking of the almighty God. They are directing people to other gods and if so be it, their stories will be correct as far as its about their gods. Beyond that, those books will fall with a great fall. But we are not talking about that here now, we are talking about the Almighty God, creator of all things. He does exists my friend and he is beside you now even as you are reading this piece, he is watching you and praying that you understand and recognise him. You said he doesn't speak, but he is the one telling me now what I am writing to you. If you can open up to him and listen deeply into your spirit, he will speak to you right now...just listen..try it now...

emxglas:


“they are all meant to lead us in the path as light on our journey “ or ...they are meant to lead us away from the light. You see my friend, God is light. I am pleased that you at least do not doubt his existence. There would not have been two persons who owns and built the earth. At worst a group agreeing and working as one for one purpose for example. If that is true, then why do we have many books containing different ways by different authors speaking contrary to each other. Would they really be speaking for the same person who should normally be the light. Think.... If so be the case then I should say that deity has a multipolar nature. He has identity crisis or is mentally agitated, has some inferiority complex and is also afraid. I can go on and on but no need for too many words here. We don't fight for God. He is capable of defending himself.

To break my point down, I am saying that all these books you are mentioning are not coming from God and as is not speaking of the almighty God. They are directing people to other gods and if so be it, their stories will be correct as far as its about their gods. Beyond that, those books will fall with a great fall. But we are not talking about that here now, we are talking about the Almighty God, creator of all things. He does exists my friend and he is beside you now even as you are reading this piece, he is watching you and praying that you understand and recognise him. You said he doesn't speak, but he is the one telling me now what I am writing to you. If you can open up to him and listen deeply into your spirit, he will speak to you right now...just listen..try it now...

You are still a baby... When you grow up you will know.. There is only one creator of all.. It is the nomenclature that is different.. The igbos call it Chukwu, the Bini calls it osanobua, the Egyptian calls it Ra, the Romans calls it Jupiter, the yoruba calls it olodumare, the Indians calls it vishnu... Etc, same being, but different names in different languages.. The mistake you are making is that you are looking at the stories rather than the message in the story which is the most important part.. The igbos might use ifeanyi and Ngozi in there story and the jews use David and goliath.. End of the day, the message In both story is that the God inside of you is greater than the obstacle or giant in front of you..
God is responsible for both light and darkness, as there is no separate God for light and another for darkness...
Read Isaiah 45, I know that is what you are familiar with..
The devil or esu or ekwensu is not a dual opposite of God, everything that the devil does is what God tells him to do...

You have much to learn..

sonmvayina:


You are still a baby... When you grow up you will know.. There is only one creator of all.. It is the nomenclature that is different.. The igbos call it Chukwu, the Bini calls it osanobua, the Egyptian calls it Ra, the Romans calls it Jupiter, the yoruba calls it olodumare, the Indians calls it vishnu... Etc, same being, but different names in different languages.. The mistake you are making is that you are looking at the stories rather than the message in the story which is the most important part.. The igbos might use ifeanyi and Ngozi in there story and the jews use David and goliath.. End of the day, the message In both story is that the God inside of you is greater than the obstacle or giant in front of you..
God is responsible for both light and darkness, as there is no separate God for light and another for darkness...
Read Isaiah 45, I know that is what you are familiar with..
The devil or esu or ekwensu is not a dual opposite of God, everything that the devil does is what God tells him to do...

You have much to learn..

From the onset, we have established that God exists. The argument being that he does not speak, that what we refer to as the Word of God is mere human fabrications and therefore they are myths.

If that is the truth, how is it then that these religion claim to be communicating to their gods if they don't speak. How did even you know that these gods are one and the same except in their stories. That must also be your own fabrications too which makes you as guilty as them too.

I have been deliberately avoiding quoting the bible since you have been a aversed to it but now that you have started quoting let me refer you to some of the verses where God spake to men....Gen 3:8, Ex. 6:10, Gen 17:3, Gen 46:2, 1Sam. 16:4 etc

I love the way you handled them, God bless you op, more grace

emxglas:


From the onset, we have established that God exists. The argument being that he does not speak, that what we refer to as the Word of God is mere human fabrications and therefore they are myths.

If that is the truth, how is it then that these religion claim to be communicating to their gods if they don't speak. How did even you know that these gods are one and the same except in their stories. That must also be your own fabrications too which makes you as guilty as them too.

I have been deliberately avoiding quoting the bible since you have been a aversed to it but now that you have started quoting let me refer you to some of the verses where God spake to men....Gen 3:8, Ex. 6:10, Gen 17:3, Gen 46:2, 1Sam. 16:4 etc

God is not a man or human being.. God is the personification of universal consciousness.. I guess you know what personification means from English language.. That is giving human attributes to inanimate things..

Those passages you quoted they are not eye witness accounts, it is somebody telling or narrating a story...

The person expect you to learn the message or lesson at the end of it.. It is not a historical narrative... But a spiritual one..

If you see a passage like " I was standing by, when God told so so and so" or "I was with Abraham when God said he should sacrifice his son" then you will know.. It is an eye witness account,

Tozara:
It takes an even bigger fool to believe that all these incredibly complex things were created by something INFINITELY more complex, but, hey please, this entity that is way more complex than the Universe cannot have a creator.

You can't make an argument, and then turn around to destroy it yourself by making special pleading. If complex things must have a creator, then God, who definitely must be more complex than the Universe, is in more need of a creator than the universe.

The argument from complexity is the most stupid argument in the incredibly limited intellect-disgracing arsenal of the theist.

It is as moronic as it is self-defeating. It's very own internal contradiction destroys and illegitimizes it.

And did you just dismiss Darwinism in a few arrogant, cretinous letters organized into stupid words? What do you think evolution is? An idea thought up by mischievous atheists on one random afternoon after an ego-massaging, back-scratching ideological party? Or a sophisticated, standard, research-based scientific theory, supported by overwhelming evidence accumulated over years of consistent and indepth probing, and widely recognized and generally accepted by professional biologists with impeccable credentials to show for it, who are the custodians and final authority on the subject of Biology, the central theme of which is the theory of evolution, which you're so bumptiously, and arrogantly poking fun at?

Where are your biological credentials? Where is the proof of your intellectual credibility? What peer-reviewed scientific paper have you written exposing your findings on evolution and showing how biologists have gotten it all wrong? You put yourself on an intellectual pedestal above biologists who you consider fools, because you consider yourself a higher authority on matters concerning the study of life and its origins, yet you have nothing to show for it?

Aren't you pygmies a quite peculiar breed of impudent nutcases and irritating headfucks? What the fück do you know?

Evolution is false? Go ahead and prove it. But know this in advance: you will have to be an extraordinary idiot if you think you can quote verses from dusty ancient books to refute the evidence-backed interpretation of reality currently held as valid by the more knowledgeable biological community.

You guys are an insult to the intellect. Arm-chair "scientists" who became experts by watching 2 minute YouTube propaganda videos, and viola! they can boast of more knowledge than PhD scientists and all of the world's evolutionary biologists.

Fücking beats me.

Yes, evolution is false, I will prove it:

Most people, including most atheists, have an inadequate understanding of the scientific contention inherent in Darwin's "Theory" of Evolution (henceforth ToE).

Most adherents to ToE only have a religious attachment to it, and they like to "beat up" people who know even less than they do about the issues. To this end, they would seek out people who say things like,

A) If ToE is true, why aren't chimpanzees turning into people?

B) Why are there still monkeys if they evolved into humans?

C) The Earth is only 6000 years old -- no time for ToE.

These are straw man statements that adherents of ToE like to knock down in order to bolster their own confidence.

Most adherents to ToE do not know the real problem with it:

Absence of a STATISTICAL MODEL.

Let me explain.

I enter a room and see a large table with 50 fair coins on it. I hypothesize that the coins were NOT place there by an intelligent agent, but landed randomly on the table (perhaps, thrown carelessly). That is an HYPOTHESIS.

To support my hypothesis scientifically, I need a STATISTICAL MODEL and statistical analysis of the situation.

Without it, my HYPOTHESIS cannot become a SCIENTIFIC THEORY.

In the situation of the coins on the table, I could come up with a statistical distribution to model how the coins have landed (a binomial distribution). I could then work out the probability of the coins landing the way they have. If, out of the 50 coins, 47 are heads and 3 are tails, my hypothesis that the coins landed randomly would be scientifically rejected, because the chance of so many heads happening randomly is vanishingly small. My hypothesis must pass the statistical test (say 23 heads vs 27 tails) in order to possibly become a theory.

Now, replace your table by DNA, your coins by genes, and your coin placement by "mutation".

ToE HYPOTHESIZES that the mutations ARE random. It doesn't say that they could possible be random. It CONCLUDES that they ARE random. But it does so with no statistical model or statistical analysis. Therefore, Darwin's "Theory" of Evolution remains only an HYPOTHESIS.

Some work has been done to start on the long, long road of creating a model, which could turn the HYPOTHESIS into a THEORY. But unfortunately, this work is being led by religious folk with the agenda of disproving ToE. This situation has been allowed to happen because scientists themselves have tried to avoid the science and the real scientific questions. They have gone instead for the "what else could it be?" argument, and indulged in an unscientific squabble with religion.

sonmvayina:
If you see a passage like " I was standing by, when God told so so and so" or "I was with Abraham when God said he should sacrifice his son" then you will know.. It is an eye witness account,

Most of the writers are not witnesses of some events. That's true and it was because literacy did not start early enough with civilisation. How ever some of these stories were passed on from generation to generation by word of mouth. Do you want a people to dismiss their culture and history on the alter of illiteracy? Secondly right from civilisation, the main authors in the Bible, like Moses, Joshua, David, Elijah, Daniel etc wrote their books by themselves. What is that: Eye witness account. Even if you doubt this would you also dismiss Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as not being an eye witness account?

solite3:
I love the way you handled them, God bless you op, more grace

Bless you brother

emxglas:


[s]The unfortunate thing is that both of us are here breaking our heads over a truth we have no power to change. Indeed no matter how powerfully you argue your point based on acclaimed logic and reason, it won't even scratch the truth one bit let alone change it.

The best we can do for our own sake is to humble our spirits and learn. The scientists you are bragging about are humans whose knowledge is both progressive and limited in any age even to tomorrow.

When you talk about peer reviewed scientific discovery I laugh. Don't you know that there is a difference between facts and truth. That a fact may not be the truth and the truth may not be supported by the facts. You expose your level of ignorance when you concluded that it is on the bases of non validation of Scientists that you proved that the word of God is a myth and therefore I am berift of wisdom. Can your scientist tell me the composition of palm wine and who mixed it. Why do scientist need things existing in nature to create theirs and not create theirs by themselves. Why in all their knowledge they can not produce a natural life nor even animal flesh or even blood from the scratch. Why haven't they the knowledge to bring peace and tranquility to the raging and complaining nature. Why is there not yet peace in the land. Why is all their creation fallable since the world began since they have enough knowledge to review others. Which of the creations of God has changed since it was first made..is it the stones, the night/day, the little living and non living things, the environment, the natural resources all around us. But your scientists that have unquantifiable knowledge has been forming and reforming knowledge since the world began....can you tell me about that.

Even the devil that deceived you knows there is God and he trembles before him. It is basic that on the matter of truth, you can deceive some people sometime, but you can not deceive all the people all the time.

If you do not know, Charles Darwin's theory of Evolution was not challenged by anybody because no body knew any better. Don't you argue only what you know? Scientists don't talk if they don't have the facts since Darwin decided to delve into obscure area (beyond human comprehension), no one did challenge him. Doesn't mean his claim was not challengeable. If you yourself today can come up with clearer picture today, You will just puncture that stupid self acclaimed picture. Charles Darwin is not the only one with proposition on that subject. In fact theories are as many as there are people on earth Darwin was only lucky to be a well known and respected scientist at the time and no scientist of his own calibre came forth to challenge him.

Be careful on matters that are beyond what the physical eye can see, you need God to show you and you can not get it arguing him[/s]

You sure have a penchant for making jests, don't you? Although this is more pathetic than amusing.

emxglas:


[s]Yes, evolution is false, I will prove it:

Most people, including most atheists, have an inadequate understanding of the scientific contention inherent in Darwin's "Theory" of Evolution (henceforth ToE).

Most adherents to ToE only have a religious attachment to it, and they like to "beat up" people who know even less than they do about the issues. To this end, they would seek out people who say things like,

A) If ToE is true, why aren't chimpanzees turning into people?

B) Why are there still monkeys if they evolved into humans?

C) The Earth is only 6000 years old -- no time for ToE.

These are straw man statements that adherents of ToE like to knock down in order to bolster their own confidence.

Most adherents to ToE do not know the real problem with it:

Absence of a STATISTICAL MODEL.

Let me explain.

I enter a room and see a large table with 50 fair coins on it. I hypothesize that the coins were NOT place there by an intelligent agent, but landed randomly on the table (perhaps, thrown carelessly). That is an HYPOTHESIS.

To support my hypothesis scientifically, I need a STATISTICAL MODEL and statistical analysis of the situation.

Without it, my HYPOTHESIS cannot become a SCIENTIFIC THEORY.

In the situation of the coins on the table, I could come up with a statistical distribution to model how the coins have landed (a binomial distribution). I could then work out the probability of the coins landing the way they have. If, out of the 50 coins, 47 are heads and 3 are tails, my hypothesis that the coins landed randomly would be scientifically rejected, because the chance of so many heads happening randomly is vanishingly small. My hypothesis must pass the statistical test (say 23 heads vs 27 tails) in order to possibly become a theory.

Now, replace your table by DNA, your coins by genes, and your coin placement by "mutation".

ToE HYPOTHESIZES that the mutations ARE random. It doesn't say that they could possible be random. It CONCLUDES that they ARE random. But it does so with no statistical model or statistical analysis. Therefore, Darwin's "Theory" of Evolution remains only an HYPOTHESIS.

Some work has been done to start on the long, long road of creating a model, which could turn the HYPOTHESIS into a THEORY. But unfortunately, this work is being led by religious folk with the agenda of disproving ToE. This situation has been allowed to happen because scientists themselves have tried to avoid the science and the real scientific questions. They have gone instead for the "what else could it be?" argument, and indulged in an unscientific squabble with religion.[/s]

Bollocks.

Please does anyone want to join us, let's share the word of God.. Write your WhatsApp number and or email on comment area. I will get back to you...