Welcome, Guest: Join Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 2,865,471 members, 6,875,953 topics. Date: Monday, 23 May 2022 at 05:25 AM

God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation - Religion - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation (543 Views)

Do You Know There Is No Single Evidence For Creation? / The Explanation For Existence / I Need An Explanation For Mark 8 (2) (3) (4)

(1) (2) (Reply) (Go Down)

God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by NnennaG6(f): 6:56am On May 19, 2021
I would like to bring up is the following from the book genesis written by Moses:

Genesis 1:20 "And EL said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that has life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open expanse of heaven. (22)And EL created great dragons (tanniyniym - a marine or land monster) and every living creature that moves, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: And EL saw that is was good. (22) And EL blessed them saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let the fowl multiply in the earth."

This explains accounts of dragons, which are dinosaurs and other monsters from the beginning.

The key point here though and what God wants you to know about creation is this:

Genesis 1:26 "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."

God goes on to explain that man was given a living soul presumably unlike the animals which simply had life. So it pleased God to make man and women because we are partakers of His nature, above created things and worthy of eternal life and this is what separates you from an animal and why humans are indeed not animals or rather above them.

So this is evidence that the creation of mankind was intentional and a process that proceeded from the logos of God and was carried out in the literal world by natural processes in accordance with His word. The part I consider relevant is that these specific things were stated before any conceptions of evolution or real ideas about how people and animals were created or what origins there are. This is a highly specific narration of what the cause of life on earth is and how it occurred.

This account is starkly different than any alien theories of creation or purely evolutionary perspectives because there is an extraordinary intention within the universe that is designed into the fabric of the human essence as reality was created for us.

I believe theory has more explanatory power. Only God could organize a structure like planet earth to bring forth creatures in abundance and humans, it is intentional and makes sense. There is really no other explanation that makes sense to me other than choosing to believe in blind reality. It also explains why we are in the situation we are in with our attitudes towards life and how we behave out of line with the cosmic order.
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 9:08am On May 19, 2021
NnennaG6, you aren’t off to a very good start at all.

Its been well established, for several hundred years, amongst Jewish and Christian academics, linguists/philologists and archaeologists following exhaustive examination of the various texts from the Jewish scriptures that Moses had nothing at all to do with the writing of the Pentateuch much less Genesis. That claim is a weary old fable and doesn’t make much sense under closer scrutiny. Scholars can show most of the earlier parts of the Torah were edited and rehashed together around the time between the Assyrian and Babylonian exiles. Friedman suggests its the combined editorial work of Jerehmiah, Baruch ben Neriah, and Ezra. It’s another opinion like yours, but better evidenced.

You claim to actually know what your god wants us to know about ‘creation’. That’s a mighty claim about an ineffable god who doesn’t seem capable of keeping to a clear script as shown in the following.

In Genesis 1 the El version of the creation of man and women does not involve giving either man or woman a soul. There is no breathing of life into nostrils. It’s in Genesis 2:7 YHWH creates man from clay and breathes life into him making him a living soul. But YHWH did not do the same for Eve. So where in the Bible did her soul come from? Are you suggesting, as ancient Hebrews most certainly did, that women are lesser creatures?

As far as animals not having souls I offer the following Bible quotes.
Ecclesiastes 3:19-21 ESV
For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity. All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust all return. Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down into the earth?

Who knows indeed? You, NnennaG6? Pope Francis is of the opinion pets go to heaven. If he is right I’ve got a truck load of dogs to take walkies and bathe and feed as my reward if I’ve been good.

Psalm 74:19 ESV
Do not deliver the soul of your dove to the wild beasts; do not forget the life of your poor forever.

You might well believe in the veracity of these highly specific narrations from Genesis about the cause and occurrence of life on earth, but that’s probably more because you don’t really understand the basics of modern evolutionary theory, in particular the biochemistry of genetic variation, which as well as being incredible in its beauty and simplicity, can alone adequately account for the vast abundance of ‘endless forms most beautiful’ and the curiously fabulous emergence of Homo sapiens sapiens an animal so vain about his own intelligence he uses the word ‘wise’ twice when he named himself and sometime lays claims to understanding the intentions of a god for whom he cannot provide substantive objective proof.

I don’t criticise you or your belief, but based on the limited information you have voluntarily presented here I would only comment it seems you have based your entire view on the garbled creation myths of the ancient Jews which does not provide any evidence for your god, or your presumptions about it, or the role you claim it had in creating the physical natural reality we share. You have merely expressed a claim. That’s not a bad thing, but the reality is your claim for the existence of an ineffable god cannot be proven and it is not the burden of others to prove it does not exist.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

3 Likes 1 Share

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by NnennaG6(f): 11:36am On May 19, 2021
Tamaratonye1:
NnennaG6, you aren’t off to a very good start at all.

Its been well established, for several hundred years, amongst Jewish and Christian academics, linguists/philologists and archaeologists following exhaustive examination of the various texts from the Jewish scriptures that Moses had nothing at all to do with the writing of the Pentateuch much less Genesis. That claim is a weary old fable and doesn’t make much sense under closer scrutiny. Scholars can show most of the earlier parts of the Torah were edited and rehashed together around the time between the Assyrian and Babylonian exiles. Friedman suggests its the combined editorial work of Jerehmiah, Baruch ben Neriah, and Ezra. It’s another opinion like yours, but better evidenced.

You claim to actually know what your god wants us to know about ‘creation’. That’s a mighty claim about an ineffable god who doesn’t seem capable of keeping to a clear script as shown in the following.

In Genesis 1 the El version of the creation of man and women does not involve giving either man or woman a soul. There is no breathing of life into nostrils. It’s in Genesis 2:7 YHWH creates man from clay and breathes life into him making him a living soul. But YHWH did not do the same for Eve. So where in the Bible did her soul come from? Are you suggesting, as ancient Hebrews most certainly did, that women are lesser creatures?

As far as animals not having souls I offer the following Bible quotes.
Ecclesiastes 3:19-21 ESV
For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity. All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust all return. Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down into the earth?

Who knows indeed? You, NnennaG6? Pope Francis is of the opinion pets go to heaven. If he is right I’ve got a truck load of dogs to take walkies and bathe and feed as my reward if I’ve been good.

Psalm 74:19 ESV
Do not deliver the soul of your dove to the wild beasts; do not forget the life of your poor forever.

You might well believe in the veracity of these highly specific narrations from Genesis about the cause and occurrence of life on earth, but that’s probably more because you don’t really understand the basics of modern evolutionary theory, in particular the biochemistry of genetic variation, which as well as being incredible in its beauty and simplicity, can alone adequately account for the vast abundance of ‘endless forms most beautiful’ and the curiously fabulous emergence of Homo sapiens sapiens an animal so vain about his own intelligence he uses the word ‘wise’ twice when he named himself and sometime lays claims to understanding the intentions of a god for whom he cannot provide substantive objective proof.

I don’t criticise you or your belief, but based on the limited information you have voluntarily presented here I would only comment it seems you have based your entire view on the garbled creation myths of the ancient Jews which does not provide any evidence for your god, or your presumptions about it, or the role you claim it had in creating the physical natural reality we share. You have merely expressed a claim. That’s not a bad thing, but the reality is your claim for the existence of an ineffable god cannot be proven and it is not the burden of others to prove it does not exist.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I did not know the earliest last remaining copies were re-printed by those authors, that is very interesting but irrelevant. It doesn’t change what’s written about dinosaurs. I believe you missed the point. I also don’t buy that argument because the torah is a verbal tradition and they most certainly kept records before their captivities in different nations and in between their captivities they still had it mentally even though their temples and documents may have been largely destroyed. That is logical is it not?
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 12:50pm On May 19, 2021
NnennaG6:

I did not know the earliest last remaining copies were re-printed by those authors
No, they werent, and I never mentioned printing, which only became available some two thousand years later (1440 AD). Traditionally copies of the Torah, aka The Law, were written on the prepared skins of ‘clean’ animals in the form of scrolls. It took over year to transcribe a single new copy.

The written Torah was used as a liturgical device and the entire Pentateuch was read over the period of a year with specific sections narrated chronologically for relevant celebrations covered in the history of the Jews beginning with the Passover in Egypt. To summarise I quote this from Wikipedia to save time:
The majority of Biblical scholars believe that the written books were a product of the Babylonian captivity (c. 6th century BCE), based on earlier written sources and oral traditions, and that it was completed with final revisions during the post-Exilic period (c. 5th century BCE)
...which agrees with your logical assessment but does not deny the great amount of editing, redaction, insertion done for any number of political and social agendas. The Torah, Bible, whatever is a written document and was copied and recopied many times and subject to the vanities and expediences of mere mortals with specific agendas. You should read Richard Friedman’s Who Wrote the Bible and anything by Ehrmand and Carrier.

It is Richard Friedman’s contention that while someone like Ezra and others might have compiled and edited the stories, a detailed analysis can show that it was not a seamless or perfect editorialisation. One example clearly shows two different stories forced together without any semblance of logical sequence or clear story telling (I shall go dig this reference up to put on display) Further the book of Deuteronomy supposedly written by Moses as the ‘second’ giving of the law is accepted as having been added to the scriptures during the reign of King Josiah before the Babylonian exile as a warning against idolatory for which their god would punish the Jews.

NnennaG6: It doesn’t change what’s written about dinosaurs.
Well no. More succinctly, it doesnt change whats written about behemoths and leviathans.

The creatures referred to in the bible are only described as large animals but not necessarily reptilian dinosaurs. Job 40 briefly mentions the behemoth as a large strong herbivore with a long big tail. Job 41 describes a large indomitable beast, a leviathan, that breathes fire (very scientific), that defies the vain attempts of puny men to subdue it but which their god can destroy without effort. In this case its an imaginary device used to illustrate the power of god. Its not part of a biological research into very big animals.

Pslam 104 only mentions a Leviathan that frolics in the sea. That could just be a whale and not a dinosaur, yes? Isaiah 27:1 compiled sometime between 800-700 BC before the Exiles, only refers to Leviathan as a gliding, coiling serpent of the sea which his god will slay at some point, which really is just a hat tip to the Babylonian creation story about the titanic struggle between Marduk and Tiamat that led to the creation of the world. The word ‘tiamat’ can still be found in the Genesis of the Jewish Torah. Bible references aside there were already as early as 1000BC many tales world wide of huge mythological creatures and it is not beyond all improbability that some dinosaur or mammoth fossils had been unearthed to lend credence to them.

However the several separate disciplines of biological sciences flatly reject the idea that men and dinosaurs ever coexisted. Creationists are keen on this fiction despite the total lack of evidence for it. It does make for neat tourist attractions like Ken Ham’s Ark and the assertion that everyone and every creature before the Flood was vegetarian, including lions and other known carnivores. It was Noah’s burnt offering that turned his god onto the savoury smells and taste of barbecued meat.

2 Likes

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Dtruthspeaker: 3:29pm On May 19, 2021
Tamaratonye1:

Its been well established, for several hundred years, amongst Jewish and Christian academics, linguists/philologists and archaeologists following exhaustive examination of the various texts from the Jewish scriptures that Moses had nothing at all to do with the writing of the Pentateuch much less Genesis.

The Jews are Liars as Proven by the Bible itself and the fact that they Do Not Deny "Moses and All" also gives support to the Truth of the Contents of the Bible, but nevertheless, your point is that no one knows who wrote it.

Now, it is not possible for the Bible to have written itself, or is it?

Therefore, who wrote the Bible since no man claims responsibility for its writing?

I think at this point we can clearly see by your analysis that, it is not "the man" who wrote the Bible.

Therefore, good reason dictates that since it is not possible for the Bible to write itself, therefore it must be written by Some Other Person Who is Not Man

And here is where He, Whom we call God, comes in.

And after all these we are more interested in the Good Food of the Bible than He who Cooked it! grin
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Dtruthspeaker: 4:09pm On May 19, 2021
Tamaratonye1:
That’s a mighty claim about an ineffable god who doesn’t seem capable of keeping to a clear script as shown in the following.

Care to explain the highlighted, if you can?

Because I disagree but you allege so you Prove first while I reasonably rebut if I can!

Tamaratonye1:

In Genesis 1 the El version of the creation of man and women does not involve giving either man or woman a soul. There is no breathing of life into nostrils. It’s in Genesis 2:7 YHWH creates man from clay and breathes life into him making him a living soul. But YHWH did not do the same for Eve. So where in the Bible did her soul come from?

Shall the Giver of the soul of the man not have power to give soul to the womb man?

If we are told in detail how a Camry is created is it necessary to be told in detail how a Corrolla is made, since both come from the same source?

Tamaratonye1:

Are you suggesting, as ancient Hebrews most certainly did, that women are lesser creatures?

Not lesser creatures only lesser to the man. Animals still retain the fear of the womb man!

Tamaratonye1:

You might well believe in the veracity of these highly specific narrations from Genesis about the cause and occurrence of life on earth, but that’s probably more because you don’t really understand the basics of modern evolutionary theory, in particular the biochemistry of genetic variation,

I do, but your proponents could not defend the Lying Theory when they presented it and I asked questions which arose from it and they could not answer.

But if you think you would fare better than they did, do present your version of understanding for due examination, if you are so confident in it!

Tamaratonye1:

I don’t criticise you or your belief, but..

Ah, so what have you been doing since in challenging her assertion?

Tamaratonye1:

..based on the limited information you have voluntarily presented here I would only comment it seems you have based your entire view on the garbled creation myths of the ancient Jews which does not provide any evidence for your god,

She is not Providing any evidence of God because she is not talking about "Providing Evidence of God" BUT "About The Cause And Occurrence Of Life on Earth as you Truly said earlier!"

So stop being FRAUDULENT And DO NOT CHEAT BY CHANGING THE ISSUE TO WHAT IS NOT IN ISSUE!
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by jamesid29(m): 5:49pm On May 19, 2021
Tamaratonye1:

Its been well established, for several hundred years, amongst Jewish and Christian academics, linguists/philologists and archaeologists following exhaustive examination of the various texts from the Jewish scriptures that Moses had nothing at all to do with the writing of the Pentateuch much less Genesis. That claim is a weary old fable and doesn’t make much sense under closer scrutiny. Scholars can show most of the earlier parts of the Torah were edited and rehashed together around the time between the Assyrian and Babylonian exiles. Friedman suggests its the combined editorial work of Jerehmiah, Baruch ben Neriah, and Ezra. It’s another opinion like yours, but better evidenced.
@bolded is actually an overstatement of the facts. It is well attested(within biblical studies) that it's unlikely that Moses wrote the entire Pentateuch alone in its final form. Even the the Bible itself makes no such claims. But saying that Christian and Jewish academics now believe that Moses had nothing to do it is to overstate or at the very least misunderstand the facts abit.
I believe you are basing your arguments of Richard Friedman's work, who in turn bases his book on Wellhausen's documentary hypothesis (J,E,D,P). Problem is the JEDP is no longer a really tenable hypothesis in academia. The past few decades of more recent discoveries, observed data and critical analysis has rendered it obsolete.

Past few decades have moved critical scholarship of the text to broadly fall somewhere between the supplementary or the fragmentary hypothesis. Basically the idea is that the Pentateuch was developed in its final form from earlier core oral and written traditions.
In broad terms(not meant to be taken as a systematic approach), we have
A) The Patriarchal tradition: which were most likely persevered orally till it was written down.
B) The Mosaic tradition: could have been recorded by Moses himself or someone close to Moses living during the time(the data itself is neither here nor there). This would include Moses’ life and leadership period, the exodus, Sinai, and the wilderness journey.
C)Deuteronomistic traditions: Part Mosaic and parts adapting from the mosaic tradition.
D)Genesis 1-11: Probably written down during the exilic period.

What percentage of the Pentateuch core traditions was written down by Moses himself is hard to tell, but saying Moses had nothing to do with it as a definite statement is not something that can be made.
What we do know is that, at the very least, from the period of the Persian empire, the authors of Ezra - Nehemiah and Chronicles attached some core of the traditions to Moses and then extrapolated it to the Pentateuch as a whole. This was actually not uncommon for the time period.

Just wanted to point that out.
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by GodHead85: 9:05pm On May 19, 2021
Dtruthspeaker:


Care to explain the highlighted, if you can?

Because I disagree but you allege so you Prove first while I reasonably rebut if I can!



Shall the Giver of the soul of the man not have power to give soul to the womb man?

If we are told in detail how a Camry is created is it necessary to be told in detail how a Corrolla is made, since both come from the same source?



Not lesser creatures only lesser to the man. Animals still retain the fear of the womb man!



I do, but your proponents could not defend the Lying Theory when they presented it and I asked questions which arose from it and they could not answer.

But if you think you would fare better than they did, do present your version of understanding for due examination, if you are so confident in it!



Ah, so what have you been doing since in challenging her assertion?



She is not Providing any evidence of God because she is not talking about "Providing Evidence of God" BUT "About The Cause And Occurrence Of Life on Earth as you Truly said earlier!"

So stop being FRAUDULENT And DO NOT CHEAT BY CHANGING THE ISSUE TO WHAT IS NOT IN ISSUE!


Please explain what you mean by "womb man" and "lying theory".
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by GodHead85: 9:09pm On May 19, 2021
Dtruthspeaker:
Therefore, good reason dictates that since it is not possible for the Bible to write itself, therefore it must be written by Some Other Person Who is Not Man

And here is where He, Whom we call God, comes in.

This appears to be the “god of the gaps” argument. Where a god is substituted for the legitimate answer.


The contents of the bible are just stories, which were written by unknown authors.

This is relevant because (for example) the new testament tales of jesus were written by unknown authors long after the crucifixion. There were no direct witnesses who documented the events of the days surrounding the crucifixion.

One should always question the source because although they maybe lovely tales, it is possible those tales were written by people with imaginations and nothing valid to support those tales.


And after all these we are more interested in the Good Food of the Bible than He who Cooked it! grin

Most atheists are skeptics, we question everything and do not take anything just because.

The source and authorship is important, in verifying the veracity of such tales.

If you went to the market and purchased meat, and the butcher would not divulge what animal it came from, would you still eat it, despite the fact it may be human flesh?

If someone gave you a glass of water, would you not make sure it came from a clean source, and was not from a well contaminated by poisons?

How do you know whether the passages you read came from the devil?

Would you blindly accept them as the word of god?

1 Like

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by NnennaG6(f): 9:30pm On May 19, 2021
GodHead85:

Please explain what you mean by "womb man" and "lying theory".
Wombman is clearly woman, and yes the point she made about the bible not specifying if women had souls is clearly silly. Thats like asking if a chicken has eggs or pineapples when it gives birth.
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by GodHead85: 9:35pm On May 19, 2021
NnennaG6:

Wombman is clearly woman, and yes the point she made about the bible not specifying if women had souls is clearly silly. Thats like asking if a chicken has eggs or pineapples when it gives birth.

Thank you, but I will wait for Dtruthspeaker to offer the definition. There may be multiple meanings for this term, which I have never encountered.
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 2:32am On May 20, 2021
@Dtruthspeaker,

Bear in mind I am an atheist so I dont beleive in gods and I dont beleive they write books of any sort.

Keeping to the theme of the Pentateuch, we know there are parallel versions of the biblical events. Historically, the division of David’s kingdom into Israel and Judah, also entailed a division in heirarchy of priests and scriptures and modes of worship and the establishment of Shiloh and Jerusalem as vying centres of politics and religion. The Assyrians and the Babylonians forced the reunion of what little was left of Israel with the survivors from Judah. From that fusion we get the duplicate versions of events. The order of creation is inconsistent between the two accounts. In the flood the number of animals required differs, from two to seven (depending on clean and unclean). Its all small biscuits but not consistent with inerrancy. Then there inconsistencies such as Moses having created a bronze snake (later kept in a temple in Shiloh) to cure those bitten, after he had delivered the Ten Commandments that forbade artwork of all creatures of any kind (which yes Josiah iIfc destroyed in his Deuteronomic panic). I think you know what I else I mean. I’d need a book to account for them all, many such books have already been written.

Dtruthspeaker: Shall the Giver of the soul of the man not have power to give soul to the womb man?
What prevents the Giver of the soul to not make mention in their story that they gave woman a soul? Such an omission testifies already to the misogyny of the Jewish patriarchy, as much as it does to a god who prefers brevity and innuendo in his inerrant writing.

I think you’d be surprised just how much the differences between Camrys and Corollas have absorbed the time and attention of those seeking to purchase one or the other. They’re similar but the literature generated over their differences might supply enough material for several bibles. I’m no motorhead but if I were considering such a costly investment, yes I would want details on production differences. None the less, I still think a deity who has time to mention they gave a soul to one of his creations could have made a direct mention of giving a soul to the other, supposedly, prized creature, being equal in every respect except that she should do as parents and man demand and keep her thoughts to herself and never think to instruct a man. This oversight of declaring the investiture of the female soul smacks of a misogynistic priestly scribe rather than an oniscient god. The same is echoed in your defence that women are only lesser in respect to men. Barnyard animals might have retained their fear of the woman, but believing that gender is a defence against any alpha predator is a grave risk as hunger invariably trumps any sort of fear. Its what drives lions to attack buffaloes and hippos even when the outcome is not guaranteed.

By the “Lying Theory” I presume you mean evolutionary theory. You suggest you understand it, but by denigrating that whole body of information drawn from many overlapping disciplines of evidenced and substantive scientific research, much of it supported by Christian researchers, its a clear indication you perhaps dont understand the basics of the methodology of science; the self correction, the constant peer reviewing of findings and the peristent admission that it’s main strength is not in proving anything but rather in its explanatory power. And one claim this so called “Lying Theory” does not make is how life began. The certainty of that claim lays with most religions despite the glaring differences in detail. Evolutionary theory concerns the reality and means by which animals and plants have devoloped into different species. Until verifirable and falsifiable evidence is presented, abiogenesis remains a postulate but in the absence of any scientific certainty of a creator god, abiogenesis remains the only other reasoned contender for explaining our biological origins. I will not subscribe to suppostions involving sentient alien lifeforms introducing life to this planet until their existence can be substantiated; its one area that deserves Occam’s Razor irrrespective of Drake’s formula.

Even the most basic expositions of modern evolutionary theory and the history of the lines of discovery takes a small book to explain. I don’t have the ability or talent to write that book here in this forum. I can only present my poor defence of having read possibly hundreds of books and papers by scientists far more qualified and gifted with articulating complex issues that involve the many fields of research that make up modern evolutionary theory. Throughout this huge body of research there are consistent and mutually supporting threads of sequential specialised knowledge and substantiated information that supports three fundamentals conclusions:

[1] All organisms are related by common descent

[2] The history of that common descent can be marked by an unbroken lineage that reveals divergent branches and resulting changes

[3] How the variations happen through biological interactions and the precise nature of genetic variations

I can only suggest you research the many scientific peer reviewed papers (there are literally millions of them) that support evolutionary theory. And guess what? None of it pretends to prove or disprove the existence of anyone’s god. It just doesnt support the idea. I freely admit that your god may have created all the mechanisms of the evolutionary process, but that again is merely a claim.

I fully understand that religious and spiritual beliefs still serve important human needs even in this sacreligious age of scepticism, but as this is a forum for discussion and NnennaG6 has freely entered and expressed her ideas, I felt obliged to challenge her on them. I have not suddenly or unreasonably attacked her. The whole gist of her OP is that her god is a rational and compatible explanation of the creation of mankind. I disagree with that idea and the implication that a god even exists. Its her perogative, and yours, to feel offended, but not my responsibility to save either of you from it. The Abrahamic biblical stories ARE garbled, they are full of contradictory and incredibly improbable information from beginning to end. I also understand that within that mythical and sometimes obscure literature are some agreeable, reasonable and general observations about the nature of living and life. Its what would be expected for a book that claims to written by a creator god. However the book and its authorship remains a claim. Its a claim that requires a confidence in unevidenced faith. I do not share that faith. I am an atheist. I did not change the issue, The claim that a god created life implies the assumption that god exists.

I forgive you for branding me a liar and a fraud. Do calm the _fuck down. I challenge her ideas as much as you challenge mine, and this is a forum expressly published for that sort of exchange.

1 Like

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 2:54am On May 20, 2021
Dtruthspeaker: The Jews are Liars...
Jews are liars, you say? LOL. And because they do not deny Moses, that proves for you the contents of the Bible are true? Are you sure they aren’t lying about that?

The Archaeology Section of the University of Tel Aviv after years of comprehensive field excavations of the Sinai Peninsula, is pretty certain the Exodus is a myth. On their first trip the then PM, Moshe Dayan, pleaded with them to find the evidence to prove the Jewish faith. But forget the lack of evidence for the 40-year long camping trip, there’s the matter that the majority of the 2 or 3 million refugees out of Egypt as decreed by YHWH had to die before their children could enter the Holy Land. The Jews were always big on preparing burial places for their dead (refer Abraham’s detailed arrangements for Sara’s burial, Genesis 23). And the Tel Aviv University, the recognised authorities on biblical excavations found nothing of the several million burial sites.

I don’t think the Jews are liars, that’s a very broad callous, and bigoted accusation. They are no more dishonest than any other group of people else I’ve met including atheists. The majority of claims of all three Abrahamic religions are simply improbable and some impossible, despite those that insist out of pure faith the god given truth of their respective books.

You are partly correct. I maintain, from my reading, that Moses was not the author of the Pentateuch or the Bible. Further again from my readings, I have doubts Moses or Aaron even existed, at least not in the manner in which they are depicted, the unwilling messangers of their god. Moses remains a mythical hero intended to serve as a unifying symbol for a nascent nation of people who otherwise had a much more mundane and less dramatic origin as a disparate collection of tribal herders and hunters in Canaan.

No book has ever edited nor redacted or added additional information by itself. “Men” produced the bible. It was an uneven, accidental, collabrative work with its compilation of oral and scriptural references taking place between 800 and 700 BC. Books do not write themselves, donkeys and snakes do not talk, the dead do not bodily walk, diseases are not cured by the laying on of hands, real love is not extracted by threats of punishment, fear is not respect.

Not caring who the cook might be is ok if you aren’t dining at Lucretia Borgia’s table, or someone like her. She had a reputation for really sumptuous finger licking delicious poisoned food and beverages grin

2 Likes

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 3:05am On May 20, 2021
jamesid29: It is well attested(within biblical studies) that it's unlikely that Moses wrote the entire Pentateuch alone in its final form.
Well attested within biblical studies? LOL. If you don't mind, would you like to buy a bridge on the moon?

jamesid29: I believe you are basing your arguments of Richard Friedman's work, who in turn bases his book on Wellhausen's documentary hypothesis (J,E,D,P). Problem is the JEDP is no longer a really tenable hypothesis in academia. The past few decades of more recent discoveries, observed data and critical analysis has rendered it obsolete
Thanks for pointing out that information. Indeed I have been referring to Friedmann. If you have any references or links I could, hopefully, if I have time, catch up on the latest considerations about Moses, Deuteronomy et al. I don’t claim my knowledge is special, complete or comprehensive.

However, the story about Deuteronomy really begins in 2 Chronicles and 2 Kings where the supposed writings of Moses were serendipitously discovered during renovations of the Temple in Jerusalem. “Deuteronomy” from the Greek means “a repetiton” and it was interpreted as a “second law giving” from Moses.

I’ve read several explanations regarding the arrangement of the various documents outlined in the structure of the book as we know it today, the irregular chronological writing of those documents, some of the earlier parts being written later than the main body, proposed constructions, and the myriad specialised interpretations of the book as a whole. All of them could be partly correct or correct in a general sense, I claim no special special understanding of it to suppose any one claim better than another. However using the Bible itself to explain the circumstances surrounding the discovery and later addition of the newly found Deuteronomy poses a few questions.

It was a very fortuitous find by the Levite priests in power at the time. Imagine, the very document that fully accorded with the Levite desire and proscribed methods to save the nation, its people, the Temple, and the priests themselves, from the depredations of the Babylonians through the destruction of the popular rival pagan religions, just happen be found while they were renovating their own temple. The sort of luck modern archaeologists can only dream of. The Levites had, since the removal of the ten tribes of Israel from history, expressed the very real possibility that jealous YHWH might use the Babylonians to repeat the Assyrian outrages. Afterall it was obvious the tribes of Israel were a bad lot.

And not only did it condemn the worship of foreign gods and goddesses, but the ancient sensuous Canaan ones as well, like the durable agricultural Baal and productive Asherah/Istah who were both full fellow members at council in YHWHs original cosmos. There was no longer any room on the block for his former co=deities even the one was once beleived to be his wife.

These found writings, which were not the fuller text we know today, were attributed directly to Moses. They contained the Mosaic insistence that no other gods be worshipped before YWHW and re-emphasised the 10 commandments and the 613 mitzvots. Of course there was a considerable advantage for the Levite priests following the earnest and violent destruction and wholesale slaughter that followed. It left them in total power. The young king Josiah was suddenly alarmed at the prospect of losing his kingdom and his god. And not least for the priests Deuteronomy, by a incredible stroke of luck, detailed the system of titheing that would benefit the Levites handsomely as well.

The Abrahamic god might well have concocted this brilliant co-incidence, the rennovations and the find, to save Josiah’s kingdom, the Temple and the Levite priesthood, but it failed. Joshiah’s unforgiving and bloody purge, the deaths and destruction delivered to his own people made no difference whatsoever. It appears the fickle YHWH still employed the Babylonians for his own ineffable agenda. Or perhaps history just played itself out just like it would if there was no god.

One story from Jeremiah (44:17-19) has the women refugees from Judah living in Egypt complaining to him that they had lived good and prosperous lives in Jerusalem offering incense and prayers to Ishtar, but now lived in want and fear because that dickhead Joshiah destroyed all her temples and killed all her priests and banned all offerings to her. The irony in this story has always tickled me despite the grave and sad background.

Anyway send me some of those links or references Jamesid29.

1 Like

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 3:08am On May 20, 2021
.
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Dtruthspeaker: 6:02am On May 20, 2021
Tamaratonye1:

Jews are liars, you say? LOL. And because they do not deny Moses, that proves for you the contents of the Bible are true? Are you sure they aren’t lying about that?

Sweet Counter grin But, here is the counter to the counter! grin

1) the Jews did not present the Bible to the world.

2) We see them denying it but not as they should properly do if it was not True.

3) The Contents of the Bible also have other players who themselves do not deny the Facts stated therein!

4) We are witnesses to at least 3 of the predictions prestated in the Bible happening right before our eyes

a) No one in the world really knew about isreal before 1941 (the Bible had said that they would have been almost utterly wiped out from the face of the earth)

b) in 1946 the state of Israel was re-placed (the Bible predicted that they shall be returned to their place)

C) No one has removed Israel from that place ever since (the Bible said that they shall never be removed from their place)

The Contents of the Bible are True because

I) A Fact Seen in Nature and Natural Living is Always True!

II) By The Law of Truth which is The Law of Evidence, A Fact is Deemed True, if He who is supposed to Deny it, does not clearly and unequivocally deny it, He Is Deemed to have Admitted it.

AND the Weight of Truthfulness is Further increased and strengthened by the fact that, that which was not Specifically Denied is Corroborated by other Extraneous Evidence whch prove the Truth of it.


Iii) The Power of the occurrence of the Specific Events in Natural Living to which the peoples of Whole World are the Present Witnesses of the Specific Events which were very long prestated in the Bible, such that no one could reasonably foresee them, can not be ignored. It is a very Powerful Proof of Truth, For The Bible made the Whole World Today and Tomorrow Witnesses of the Truth which it had Pre-stated that it shall Occur!

And Having the peoples and Nations of the World as Witnesses to A Fact is A Very Solid Proof of Truth, for the Witnesses of the world amounts to Witnesses of Nature and Nature is Always an Absolute Proof of Truth!
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Dtruthspeaker: 6:33am On May 20, 2021
GodHead85:


Please explain what you mean by "womb man" and "lying theory".

Ok! What you know and call "Woman" is By the Bible's Explanation of the creation of "the man" be reasonable described as "the man with the Womb"
which we know and have Seen in Nature that it is a very significant difference between the "male man" and the "female man" as the Bible describes us.

"lying theory" is what I call the "evolution theory or theory of evolution".

The theory is a Lie for it has no legs on which it stands on, neither does it have power create grounds.

The theory is Always Pursuing what has been created and since they attempt to say that it is a Creator why does it have serious difficulty in explaining and showing how it created?

Secondly, since it created this world which we call Nature, therefore we must see it's hand in Nature Exactly as we can easily see the connection between Steve Jobs and iPhone.

But this is completely absent in the theory, it is always pursuing what is in existence, yet it claims to make existence.

So if it made existence, it must be easy for it to explain its making of its existence and Thanks to God that existence is very very plenty, so explaining should be very very easy and not difficult.
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Dtruthspeaker: 7:22am On May 20, 2021
GodHead85:

This appears to be the “god of the gaps” argument. Where a god is substituted for the legitimate answer.

I like the fact that you used the word "appear".

We are talking about "Proof" and Proof is Always in "Appearance" which is "that which is In View and can be viewed" it would not be Proof of it is not in view.

And thus we are talking about things "In. Appearance", "Things in view", Things Seen, Things Experienced and Things in Nature"

The Origin of man and man himself is a thing in view, a thing seen, a thing experienced and a thing in Nature.

Therefore, It is legitimate for me to lay on things in Nature for the topic is about Things in Nature, and more Specifically the thing called 'the man'!

GodHead85:

The contents of the bible are just stories, which were written by unknown authors...

The issue is not really about the whole contents of the Bible but about

1) Origin of man as per the Bible which itself has not been challenged!

But what was challenged is the Author or Authors or Non-Authoured or An Author Great and Beyond the man authors that we know (Another Appearance/view/Seen in Nature), for we know and see (Another Appearance/view/Seen in Nature) that animals, plants and rock do not author nor write books, so they are reasonably exempted and removed.

2) How did we Ascertain and Verify that the Bible told the Truth and we be living on it.

So these are the Core issues of this thread at present and the contents of the as a whole are not under examination now.

GodHead85:

Most atheists are skeptics, we question everything and do not take anything just because.

Just to patronize you and no more I answer these parts

No you do not question everything! For if I told you that kidnappers are operating along your route to work, you would First Act in a safe manner.

Why? Don't worry, I am not waiting for an answer.

GodHead85:

The source and authorship is important, in verifying the veracity of such tales.

I guarantee that you do not really and truly know the importance of knowing an author, for if you really did, you would not have said this.

GodHead85:

If you went to the market and purchased meat, and the butcher would not divulge what animal it came from, would you still eat it, despite the fact it may be human flesh?

I am sure you have heard the word "Caveat Emptor"! I bet you did not know the full weight of what it means, if not you would not have said this.

GodHead85:

If someone gave you a glass of water, would you not make sure it came from a clean source, and was not from a well contaminated by poisons?

We all take water from persons without investigating the source of the water.

Why? Op cit my statement up here!

GodHead85:

How do you know whether the passages you read came from the devil?

grin Can good advice and counsel come from The-evil aka D'evil? Impossible!

GodHead85:

Would you blindly accept them as the word of god?

Flowing from the above Good Advice Always come from The Good. To think and See that when one says Good, the Word "God" is so too close to "Good," such that it feels sweet and rightful that they stay Together!

And these are the things I See and I have Seen! The blind are not capable of seeing, but I See and I have Seen!
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 10:42am On May 20, 2021
Hi again Dtruthspeaker. What have you here?

Dtruthspeaker: 1) the Jews did not present the Bible to the world.

2) We see them denying it but not as they should properly do if it was not True.
Technically you are right, it wasn’t the Bible they presented, it was the Torah, the Old Testament. It was translated from Hebrew to the koine Greek between the third and second centuries BC. The translation was named the Septuagint.

The reason was for the translation was that because of the predominance of the Greek Academies over the synagogue as a learning place for young Jewish men during the Grecian rule of the Seleucid and Ptolemy regimes (both Greek), the use of Hebrew was overtaken by Greek. It was the main global language just as English is today. If you wanted to compete and survive in the ancient business world Greek was the language to use. But the important matter is that the translators were predominantly Jewish.

The authorship of the New Testament did not begin until 200 years later and the gospels were written in Greek which was still the franca lingua despite the Latin of the Romans. From memory, I recall Matthew was the only Jewish gospel author and he may have been trained as a Jewish rabbi.

Dtruthspeaker: 3) The Contents of the Bible also have other players who themselves do not deny the Facts stated therein!
Who are these other players and what facts do they attest to in the Bible?

Dtruthspeaker: 4) We are witnesses to at least 3 of the predictions prestated in the Bible happening right before our eyes

a) No one in the world really knew about isreal before 1941 (the Bible had said that they would have been almost utterly wiped out from the face of the earth)
What on earth are you talking about? LOL. The dispersal of the Jewish nation is mentioned in Deuteronomy when YHWH makes his promise that the Jews would be returned to the land of Israel from where ever they ended up. It’s an echo of YHWH’s promise to Abraham. The Deuteronomic promise was in expectation of the Babylonians repeating the Assyrian experience of exile. It is a recurring theme in the Old Testament that Israel will be restored and become the dominant nation of the earth. It’s the heart of the prophecies found in Daniel written about 300 BC and who predicted the destruction of the Seleucid empire in Babylon by an angelic army from YHWH.

The Romans lost all patience with the Jews of Israel and sent them packing in 70 BC, they recognised Israel as the heart of all the Jewish troubles in the East and dispersed them. The old and new prophets had not foreseen that happening. They were still counting on the return of the warrior Messiah that some folks thought they had found in Jesus. The medieval Christians of Europe certainly knew about Israel and its prophesised return to power and they believed it so much they spent over 200 years fighting a string of Crusades to protect the Holy Land from the dreaded Muslims which cost them untold fortunes and lives of dead warriors and hapless pilgrims all of which proved an abject failure when they surrendered the Holy Land to Saladin. From contemporaneous histories, travel guides (yes travel guides because pilgrimage was a big money cow), and letters, it seems all of Europe knew of Israel’s predicted future as a powerhouse nation.

The English certainly seemed to be constantly aware of it. In 1566 Oliver Cromwell lifted a 300-year-old ban on Jews in England not because he liked them but as a Christian, he interpreted passages in the Bible that the Jews needed to inhabit “the four corners of the world”, including England before Jesus would recall them all to Israel for conversion to Christianity just before the end of the world and the Judgement Day. That was 500 years ago.

In 1897, in an overt political display of the Jewish belief in Israel, the first Zionist Congress (later reformed as the World Zionist Organisation in 1960) was held in Basle Switzerland to begin organising the restoration of the Jewish nation. Where I hear you ask? ISRAEL. Twenty years later it’s the British Government who formally declares a national policy for the restoration of Israel as a nation-state. Thirty years later the Jews begin the repopulation of Israel and the long persecution of the Palestinians.

So how do you justifiy the statement that no-one was aware of Israel before 1941? undecided

Dtruthspeaker: b) in 1946 the state of Israel was re-placed (the Bible predicted that they shall be returned to their place)
1948 offically, but why quibble over a few years?

Dtruthspeaker: C) No one has removed Israel from that place ever since (the Bible said that they shall never be removed from their place)
[1] No no-one has, but not for want of trying. They have lasted 73 years. Not exactly eternity and given current circumstances not fully guaranteed to last much longer. The Roman diaspora was not predicted, perhaps the next one won’t be either.

[2] 73 years compared to “never” is practically nothing. Besides, a claim or a so-called prophecy that something will never happen can never be confirmed. Thus, the claim that “they [the Jews] shall never be removed from their place” is a useless claim for truth in any circumstance.

Dtruthspeaker: The Contents of the Bible are True because

I) A Fact Seen in Nature and Natural Living is Always True!

II) By The Law of Truth which is The Law of Evidence, A Fact is Deemed True, if He who is supposed to Deny it, does not clearly and unequivocally deny it, He Is Deemed to have Admitted it.

AND the Weight of Truthfulness is Further increased and strengthened by the fact that, that which was not Specifically Denied is Corroborated by other Extraneous Evidence whch prove the Truth of it.


Iii) The Power of the occurrence of the Specific Events in Natural Living to which the peoples of Whole World are the Present Witnesses of the Specific Events which were very long prestated in the Bible, such that no one could reasonably foresee them, can not be ignored. It is a very Powerful Proof of Truth, For The Bible made the Whole World Today and Tomorrow Witnesses of the Truth which it had Pre-stated that it shall Occur!

And Having the peoples and Nations of the World as Witnesses to A Fact is A Very Solid Proof of Truth, for the Witnesses of the world amounts to Witnesses of Nature and Nature is Always an Absolute Proof of Truth!


The bible also claims there was vegetation on the earth before the sun was “created”. That humans were fashioned instantly in their current form using inexplicable magic. That a deity caused a global flood. Those claims are all erroneous. So picking out some things that you think are true, is nothing more than selection bias, based on a sharp shooter fallacy.

Though of course the bible allegedly predicting an event, even an extremely unlikely or improbable one, and it occurring exactly as predicted, doesn’t remotely evidence a deity, or anything supernatural. Why would on earth would think it does?

Quite frankly, I have a lot of trouble following your bewildering explanation as to why the Contents of the Bible are True, simply because they make no sense and I dont recognise the authority of the propositions made. They don’t read like any rules or laws of jurisprudence or even philosophy that I am aware of.

2 Likes

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Dtruthspeaker: 11:25am On May 20, 2021
Tamaratonye1:

Bear in mind I am an atheist so I dont beleive in gods

To put it in a More Accurate perspective, you are simply exercising your Natural Right and Power to Exercise your desire and your wills over any subject SEEN in this world/Nature which you have the ability to so exercise your personal power.

So, this is not a problem or an issue

Tamaratonye1:

What prevents the Giver of the soul to not make mention in their story that they gave woman a soul? Such an omission testifies already to the misogyny of the Jewish patriarchy, as much as it does to a god who prefers brevity and innuendo in his inerrant writing.

Your Answer here supports what I would have said which is "Any who freely offers any testimony of a matter, Is Free to give his testimony in the way and manner He Deems Fit"!

Tamaratonye1:

I think you’d be surprised just how much the differences between Camrys and Corollas have absorbed the time and attention of those seeking to purchase one or the other.

Ding ding! Deviation from Subject!

We are not talking about "the Purchase and the buyers"

We are talking about the "Factory and the Creation Process"!

Tamaratonye1:

None the less, I still think a deity who has time to mention they gave a soul to one of his creations could have made a direct mention of giving a soul to the other

As I said up, "He who voluntarily offers up Testimony, is Free to give his testimony in any way and manner He deems Fit" Exactly as we all do here in nairaland. We are all volunteering our testimonies too.

Tamaratonye1:

This oversight of declaring the investiture of the female soul smacks of a misogynistic priestly scribe rather than an oniscient god. The same is echoed in your defence that women are only lesser in respect to men.

Truly, The God did not declare the woman lower than the man IT IS RATHER THE PERMANENT ACTION WHICH HE IMPLEMENTED OVER HER which showed us that she was lowered.

Exactly as when a child/Student is Flogged, he is lowered at that time and the child looses a lot of Benefits (Rights) or Criminal.

Everyone sees the Loss of Rights and Acts on it and at that time the offending child and criminal is unable to do anything about it.

So also is the woman's lowering and there is almost nothing (But One) that she can do to alter her lowering.

And unlike a child's lowering, a woman's own is Almost Permanent about 99% Percent Permanent for I have seen members of the 1% who are Truly Honoured and not as lowered as the general 99%!

Tamaratonye1:

By the “Lying Theory” I presume you mean evolutionary theory. You suggest you understand it, but by denigrating that whole body of information drawn from many overlapping disciplines of evidenced and substantive scientific research, much of it supported by Christian researchers,..

I will be happy to hear your views and ask questions on them for your other representatives could not answer when they were examined.

Tamaratonye1:

Evolutionary theory concerns the reality and means by which animals and plants have devoloped into different species.

Is this your knowledge of the evolutionary theory?

I have a couple of questions I wish to ask from your knowledge above, so may I proceed?

Tamaratonye1:

Until verifirable and falsifiable evidence is presented, abiogenesis remains a postulate...

Do you mean "Verifiable" and "Unfalsifiable evidence?

Tamaratonye1:

...but in the absence of any scientific certainty of a creator god, abiogenesis remains the only other reasoned contender for explaining our biological origins.

There are Absolute Scientific Certainties Proving Someone Who we call God!

But, let's not deviate from the issue at hand.

Tamaratonye1:

I will not subscribe to suppostions involving sentient alien lifeforms introducing life to this planet until their existence can be substantiated;

Let's not deviate from the issue.

Tamaratonye1:

Even the most basic expositions of modern evolutionary theory and the history of the lines of discovery takes a small book to explain. I don’t have the ability or talent to write that book here in this forum. I can only present my poor defence of having read possibly hundreds of books and papers by scientists far more qualified and gifted with articulating complex issues that involve the many fields of research that make up modern evolutionary theory.

I'm a patient person and I like to be very Thorough, so I am okay with A,B, C's of your proposed evolution theory which I believe you presented up there and I have some questions on that A, B, C.

So with your kind permission, may I ask those questions?

Tamaratonye1:

I can only suggest you research the many scientific peer reviewed papers (there are literally millions of them) that support evolutionary theory.

My problem with reading is that the bloody papers and books never answer the questions I ask and are not able to do so.

And the person who wrote it is not in front of me at the relevant time to answer my questions.

So, I prefer human teachers, they are capable of answering any question I may put forth to them.

Tamaratonye1:

And guess what? None of it pretends to prove or disprove the existence of anyone’s god. It just doesnt support the idea.

grin In The True and Real world, you are either on the left of an issue or on the right of it or in the middle that is, you join and mix both left and right issues or you do not commit yourself to any side (in exercise of your rights).

Therefore, when you hear words like "It just doesnt support the idea.", that is a complete proof of commitment to One Side of an issue which is Complete Proof of being Against the Opposing Side of the Issue.

"You are either inside a House or Outside"

And that's what makes you statement "Double Opposing Speak or Double Speak for Short"

In Law we say "Aprobating and Reprobating" at the same time, in one breath.

Tamaratonye1:

I freely admit that your god may have created all the mechanisms of the evolutionary process, but that again is merely a claim.

Wow! Great to hear this for you have admitted our whole case.

For it is Settled Natural Law, "HE Who Owns the Land Must Always own the Trees on the Land"

Tamaratonye1:

I fully understand that religious and spiritual beliefs still serve important human needs even in this sacreligious age of scepticism, but as this is a forum for discussion and NnennaG6 has freely entered and expressed her ideas, I felt obliged to challenge her on them. I have not suddenly or unreasonably attacked her.

No, you have not unreasonably acted I am also challenging your challenge.

Tamaratonye1:

The whole gist of her OP is that her god is a rational and compatible explanation of the creation of mankind.

And save for excessive talk and a little unimportant issues, I agree with her and I stand with her the way you said it up there that is rational explanation of the creation of mankind, which you did not challenge but you rather challenged the "Packaging" called the. Bible and the "Delivery man", known, suspected or unknown!

Tamaratonye1:

I disagree with that idea and the implication that a god even exists.

There you are! See the One Side that I spoke about earlier that you must be on if you are committed to an issue?

If you disagree that God does not exist, it therefore means that you are on the side that says "God does not exist" as affirmed by your statement "Bear in mind I am an atheist so I dont beleive in gods"

You are one One Side Already and Anti-the Opposing Side

Tamaratonye1:

The Abrahamic biblical stories ARE garbled, they are full of contradictory and incredibly improbable information from beginning to end.

Now you have deviated from the issue at hand as I told your brother Godhead85

Tamaratonye1:

However the book and its authorship remains a claim. Its a claim that requires a confidence in unevidenced faith.


Like I answered earlier we buy Gala and La Cassera and all kinds of fruit drinks and wines and meat pies, sausages, egg rolls, puff-puff etc and we do not know who cooked it.

So also can we certainly live without knowing the Cook of the Bible, as long as it Sweet and Good and Available!

Tamaratonye1:

I do not share that faith. I am an atheist. I did not change the issue, The claim that a god created life implies the assumption that god exists.

This is Truly a change of Issue and you should have commenced from this issue at the relevant time for proper address, if you care to be addressed on it.

Tamaratonye1:

I forgive you for branding me a liar and a fraud. Do calm the _fuck down. I challenge her ideas as much as you challenge mine, and this is a forum expressly published for that sort of exchange.

Thanks for the forgiveness, I did not foresee that you would contend evenly and fairly (based on our history which I am not raising up) it is a result of the fact that most people do not contendly fairly, most especially your kind.

But I do give it to them that these days, they are contending cleanly and fairly, to wit FatherofJesus, IMAliyu, LordReed, Godhead 85 etc!

So I apologize for being hastily presumptive!
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by FatherOfJesus: 12:28pm On May 20, 2021
NnennaG6:
I would like to bring up is the following from the book genesis written by Moses:

Genesis 1:20 "And EL said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that has life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open expanse of heaven. (22)And EL created great dragons (tanniyniym - a marine or land monster) and every living creature that moves, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: And EL saw that is was good. (22) And EL blessed them saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let the fowl multiply in the earth."

This explains accounts of dragons, which are dinosaurs and other monsters from the beginning.

The key point here though and what God wants you to know about creation is this:

Genesis 1:26 "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."

God goes on to explain that man was given a living soul presumably unlike the animals which simply had life. So it pleased God to make man and women because we are partakers of His nature, above created things and worthy of eternal life and this is what separates you from an animal and why humans are indeed not animals or rather above them.

So this is evidence that the creation of mankind was intentional and a process that proceeded from the logos of God and was carried out in the literal world by natural processes in accordance with His word. The part I consider relevant is that these specific things were stated before any conceptions of evolution or real ideas about how people and animals were created or what origins there are. This is a highly specific narration of what the cause of life on earth is and how it occurred.

This account is starkly different than any alien theories of creation or purely evolutionary perspectives because there is an extraordinary intention within the universe that is designed into the fabric of the human essence as reality was created for us.

I believe theory has more explanatory power. Only God could organize a structure like planet earth to bring forth creatures in abundance and humans, it is intentional and makes sense. There is really no other explanation that makes sense to me other than choosing to believe in blind reality. It also explains why we are in the situation we are in with our attitudes towards life and how we behave out of line with the cosmic order.
Nothing makes sense here, all I see is a scientifically illiterate convulsions and fallacious philosophical presumptions.
Your conclusion has woefully failed to explain the process of evolution, which is by the way a fact. It has also failed to factor in the radiometric dating result of the oldest rocks on earth which gives good room for evolution to happen.
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Dtruthspeaker: 2:02pm On May 20, 2021
Tamaratonye1:

...Technically you are right...

Yippee! grin

Tamaratonye1:

Who are these other players and what facts do they attest to in the Bible?

Egypt, Ethiopia, Athens (from where you get your atheism), Rome etc, have maintained their names as mentioned in the Bible and the same Law of Denial Affects them too.

Tamaratonye1:

The Romans lost all patience with the Jews of Israel and sent them packing in 70 BC, they recognised Israel as the heart of all the Jewish troubles in the East and dispersed them.

You have Proven the Truth of the Bible by the Highlighted via Moses Curse in Deuteronomy. "Troubles", "disperse"!

You have proven The Truth of the Bible when Moses Cursed that Israel's enemies will over run them anytime they rebelled against God, which they did.

And Moses Cursed that they would have been utterly destroyed if not for Abraham's Contract Deuteronomy 4:30-31.

Tamaratonye1:

In, in an overt political display of the Jewish belief in Israel, the first Zionist Congress (later reformed as the World Zionist Organisation in 1960) was held in Basle Switzerland to begin organising the restoration of the Jewish nation.

Where I hear you ask? ISRAEL. Twenty years later it’s the British Government who formally declares a national policy for the restoration of Israel as a nation-state. Thirty years later the Jews begin the repopulation of Israel and the long persecution of the Palestinians.

Here you Prove again the Truth of the Bible in which it had declared that "Israel will return to their place and shall never be removed"

We are all watching the "shall never be removed" part!

Tamaratonye1:

So how do you justifiy the statement that no-one was aware of Israel before 1941? undecided

My point was not about justifying the awareness of Israel but about Proving that if the world did not know about Israel, which as you have done for me.

Thus, where the whole world did not know about Israel and the Truths contained in the Bible, MOST CERTAINLY BY 1942-46 AND THEREON, THE WHOLE WORLD, EVEN BLACK AFRICA KNEW ABOUT ISREAL AND THE BIBLE'S PROPHECIES!

Tamaratonye1:

[1] No no-one has, but not for want of trying.

I am happy with your admission of the Truth that "No-one has"!

Tamaratonye1:

The Roman diaspora was not predicted, perhaps the next one won’t be either.

See Ojoro! What Moses Cursed was eternal and Procedural, which Specifically Commemces from Deuteronomy 27 to the end of chapter 28. Covering Everything which happened to Insreal.

Tamaratonye1:

[2] 73 years compared to “never” is practically nothing.

That's why it's an ongoing never. But I know you and I and the world is watching the never!

Tamaratonye1:

Besides, a claim or a so-called prophecy that something will never happen can never be confirmed. Thus, the claim that “they [the Jews] shall never be removed from their place” is a useless claim for truth in any circumstance.

That is the essence of spectators, since we are the first spectators of the "never"

This is no issue.
Tamaratonye1:

The bible also claims there was vegetation on the earth before the sun was “created”. That humans were fashioned instantly in their current form using inexplicable magic. That a deity caused a global flood. Those claims are all erroneous. So picking out some things that you think are true, is nothing more than selection bias, based on a sharp shooter fallacy.

Change of Post and Deviation from Issue, for we are not talking about the earth or about vegetation, flooding and co but about the origin of man/Author of the Bible.

Tamaratonye1:

Though of course the bible allegedly predicting an event, even an extremely unlikely or improbable one, and it occurring exactly as predicted, doesn’t remotely evidence a deity, or anything supernatural.

Sweet! You have just Admitted Proof of Prophecy and they Great Weight of the Confirmation of Prophecies can not be waived aside.

It is Good and Solid Proof of Another Greater than man and Beyond the man, Whom we call God.

Which is still Coupled and Supported by Other Extraneous Evidence which you yourself have given Admission to, Therefore, The Weight of The Proof of God has Greatly Increased! grin

So we Already have Before Us,Great Evidence in Proof of God, yet we have not Entered into the Inquiiry of the Proof of God

However, I will abide by the same Law I hold over you, the topic is not about the Proof of a God but about the origin of man/author of the Bible!

Tamaratonye1:

Quite frankly, I have a lot of trouble following your bewildering explanation as to why the Contents of the Bible are True,

Yet, you have been following it up to its final conclusion! grin

Tamaratonye1:

Simply because it makes no sense and I dont recognise the authority of the propositions made.

Remember I told you about your personal powers and ability to do what you desire and you are able to do?

Rebellion and stubbornness is one of those powers, no matter how reasonable an instruction or advice or counsel is!

Tamaratonye1:

They don’t read like any rules or laws of jurisprudence or even philosophy that I am aware of.

grin Ah! You Enter my World here and I Authoritatively state that They Are The Very Law of laws, Jurisprudence and Philosophy and read as One.

I am sure you have observed how I put some legal principles down (only a little), I would have said more and I can exclusively answer by Legal Principles Alone but, you and other ordinary men here will call on me to explain those principles.

So I have to explain first, while waiting for someone like you to ask me The Laws backing my Answers.

It is even because I am A Lawyer that is the reason I am a Follower of Christ and a lover of God, for I used the Law to Find The Various Proofs and Evidence of God and Truth.

Which is why I stand here and Everywhere, Representing God as His Personal Lawyer and Challenging Anyone by All Reasonable Doubt, that God Exists and that He is Truly True Indeed and in Fact!

And I am very Angry with the Lawyers on this Forum for Not Standing Up for God, for all the things I know, they know it too.

For It is even rather that when I called, they fled and those who I saw previously speaking on this forum, are silent!
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by GodHead85: 10:00pm On May 20, 2021
Dtruthspeaker:


I like the fact that you used the word "appear".

We are talking about "Proof" and Proof is Always in "Appearance" which is "that which is In View and can be viewed" it would not be Proof of it is not in view.

And thus we are talking about things "In. Appearance", "Things in view", Things Seen, Things Experienced and Things in Nature"

The Origin of man and man himself is a thing in view, a thing seen, a thing experienced and a thing in Nature.

Therefore, It is legitimate for me to lay on things in Nature for the topic is about Things in Nature, and more Specifically the thing called 'the man'!



The issue is not really about the whole contents of the Bible but about

1) Origin of man as per the Bible which itself has not been challenged!

But what was challenged is the Author or Authors or Non-Authoured or An Author Great and Beyond the man authors that we know (Another Appearance/view/Seen in Nature), for we know and see (Another Appearance/view/Seen in Nature) that animals, plants and rock do not author nor write books, so they are reasonably exempted and removed.

2) How did we Ascertain and Verify that the Bible told the Truth and we be living on it.

So these are the Core issues of this thread at present and the contents of the as a whole are not under examination now.



Just to patronize you and no more I answer these parts

No you do not question everything! For if I told you that kidnappers are operating along your route to work, you would First Act in a safe manner.

Why? Don't worry, I am not waiting for an answer.



I guarantee that you do not really and truly know the importance of knowing an author, for if you really did, you would not have said this.



I am sure you have heard the word "Caveat Emptor"! I bet you did not know the full weight of what it means, if not you would not have said this.



We all take water from persons without investigating the source of the water.

Why? Op cit my statement up here!



grin Can good advice and counsel come from The-evil aka D'evil? Impossible!



Flowing from the above Good Advice Always come from The Good. To think and See that when one says Good, the Word "God" is so too close to "Good," such that it feels sweet and rightful that they stay Together!

And these are the things I See and I have Seen! The blind are not capable of seeing, but I See and I have Seen!

Please bro climb down from whatever imaginary horse you are straddling and use language that is precise and what can be comprehended.


You are using theistic buzzwords and a collage of words that make no sense.

That may work in a congregation where all are eager supplicants hanging onto the ravings of a foaming-at-the-mouth preacher, but most of us just don’t buy into that con game, and prefer logical and rational words and phrases.

3 Likes 2 Shares

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Dtruthspeaker: 10:43pm On May 20, 2021
GodHead85:


Please bro climb down from whatever imaginary horse you are straddling and use language that is precise and what can be comprehended.


You are using theistic buzzwords and a collage of words that make no sense.

That may work in a congregation where all are eager supplicants hanging onto the ravings of a foaming-at-the-mouth preacher, but most of us just don’t buy into that con game, and prefer logical and rational words and phrases.

grin That was plain english language written up there and rather than keep silent, you wish to feign lack of comprehension when in truth, you do comprehend.

You are only shocked that suddenly you have run out of reasonable questions and you could not proceed to say that we followers of God are wrong for following God and you were further shocked that you did not have anything reasonable to say! grin

That is the True meaning of your complaint up here! grin

If you truly did not comprehend, you would have asked questions not crying out "I do not understand English".
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Dtruthspeaker: 10:46pm On May 20, 2021
FatherOfJesus:
You are about to have the most childish argument of your life as Dtruthspeaker doesn’t have firing brain cells to argue coherently. I admonish that your ignore, he doesn’t have the mental capabilities to debate without fallacies.

Translation: we atheists have tried our very best, with tricks and frauds to take the Dtruthspeaker down but we have all failed woe fully!

Sorry for the loss you suffered at Dtruthspeaker's hands grin
Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by GodHead85: 11:46pm On May 20, 2021
Dtruthspeaker:
grin That was plain english language written up there and rather than keep silent, you wish to feign lack of comprehension when in truth, you do comprehend.

You are only shocked that suddenly you have run out of reasonable questions and you could not proceed to say that we followers of God are wrong for following God and you were further shocked that you did have anything reasonable to say! grin

That is the True meaning of your complaint up here! grin

If you truly did not comprehend, you would have asked questions not crying out "I do not understand English".

Alright, I'll put it like this:

I've purposely avoided your posts on this forum because I've observed that you're a dogmatic, unreasoning fanatic.
I only felt the need to quote you because I truly wanted to know your meaning of "lying theory" and "womb man"

Just because you believe that your writing was "plain English" does not mean it actually is.

I merely requested that you make yourself clear. Your vague sophistry is wearying and tiresome. A lot of what you post on this forum has little to no actual meaning.


You engage in deliberate obfuscation of issues, you use capital letters in a senseless manner, lacking any context, and worst of all, when asked to be more clear and articulate in your presentation, you become patronising, arrogant, condescending, hateful and insultive.

You use a lot of deepities and vague assertions that are supported by you and you alone. I dare you to mention any other Christian on this website that asserts your principles as true.


You left me stumped alright, because I have never seen a more deluded nutcase in my entire life on this website. It's ok if you think you "won". Apparently "winning" is the aim here, and not having a proper meaningful conversation to establish mutual understanding. Alright bro, you got me Lmao grin

I just take solace in the fact that everybody that reads these threads is not as mentally hampered as you.
They'll have their own impressions of our correspondence on this thread


The only reason any atheist bothers engaging with you here is because more competent, more capable and more intelligible apologists are no longer present on this board. Yes, you're not even up to scratch when it comes to defending your god.

It's not that you're smart. It's just that "wetin man go do?"


All you offer in debates is meaningless sophistry and constant trolling to wear down your fellow discussants



You are hands down the most brain dead Christian poster to comment on this forum since it's inception.

I've been on here longer than you may know, and truly I haven't seen any as clueless, delusional, deceitful and unintelligent as you.


Have fun with your weird beliefs and convictions. But i have to tell you the truth and that truth is you make Christianity look repulsive. Keep to your beliefs and I'll keep to mine. smiley

Sayonara! wink

3 Likes 1 Share

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by GodHead85: 11:56pm On May 20, 2021
Dtruthspeaker:
Truly, The God did not declare the woman lower than the man IT IS RATHER THE PERMANENT ACTION WHICH HE IMPLEMENTED OVER HER which showed us that she was lowered.

So also is the woman’s lowering and there is almost nothing (But One) that she can do to alter her lowering.

And unlike a child’s lowering, a woman’s own is Almost Permanent about 99% Percent Permanent for I have seen members of the 1% who are Truly Honoured and not as lowered as the general 99%!

This is just an illustration of the craziness and eccentricity of your beliefs that makes you look like an unhinged animal in the eyes of any normal thinking human being .

Your "belief" crosses a line. Your "belief" could be racist in nature - but alas, it is targeted to women. Same shit, different pile.

It is a claim without evidence; hurtful, hateful, degrading, disrespecting and a peek into the shallow thinking of your perverted mind. As I said earlier, you make Christianity look repulsive.


I wonder where your hollow, belittling misogyny is accepted in any advanced and enlightened society .

I rest my case.

3 Likes

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by GodHead85: 11:58pm On May 20, 2021
FatherOfJesus:
You are about to have the most childish argument of your life as Dtruthspeaker doesn’t have firing brain cells to argue coherently. I admonish that your ignore, he doesn’t have the mental capabilities to debate without fallacies.

Duly noted. Thanks

1 Like

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 4:00am On May 21, 2021
GodHead85:


Please bro climb down from whatever imaginary horse you are straddling and use language that is precise and what can be comprehended.


You are using theistic buzzwords and a collage of words that make no sense.

That may work in a congregation where all are eager supplicants hanging onto the ravings of a foaming-at-the-mouth preacher, but most of us just don’t buy into that con game, and prefer logical and rational words and phrases.
begin sarcasm


You can’t possibly understand Godhead85; Insight is the driver of faith and wonder a universal constant. The universe is bursting with expanding wave functions that vibrate the meridians of consciousness in the quantum infinite. As human beings we can no longer afford to live in stagnation. The nexus is electrified with four-dimensional superstructures and planet is buzzing with morphogenetic fields. Nothing is impossible. The seeds of complexity can free your mind from bondage. We are the mere travelers of this world. We are the warriers of totality. Life is a vector of cosmic will. And our will is a product of consciousness which consists of electrical impulses of quantum energy and the “Quantum” is a summoning of the spiritual.

How is this not completely obvious? tongue

end sarcasm

1 Like

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 5:02am On May 21, 2021
Hi Dtruthspeaker. I’m going to keep answers and further discussion to a minimum. My contributions yesterday were lengthier than usual and only possible because I had a free day to spend on them. I do not always have that advantage. Let's examine some important issues here:

Dtruthspeaker: To put it in a More Accurate perspective, you are simply exercising your Natural Right and Power to Exercise your desire and your wills over any subject SEEN in this world/Nature which you have the ability to so exercise your personal power.

So, this is not a problem or an issue
I'm glad this is not an issue. From this point moving forward, I would implore you to not misconstrue my words. I am an atheist. Gods are merely an idea, a complex concept. That’s my consistent and freely given testimony. Don’t misconstrue my words if I seem to be conferring attributes or abilities to any god. The English language is extremely flexible. I can speak of Harry Potter, Rumpole or Batman as if they were real, but they remain firmly fictional as do all gods.

Dtruthspeaker: Ding ding! Deviation from Subject!

We are not talking about "the Purchase and the buyers"

We are talking about the "Factory and the Creation Process"!
LOL. Please read my previous post again carefully. The differences I'm talking about are incidentally a function of the " Factory and the Creation Process"

Dtruthspeaker: Truly, The God did not declare the woman lower than the man IT IS RATHER THE PERMANENT ACTION WHICH HE IMPLEMENTED OVER HER which showed us that she was lowered.

Exactly as when a child/Student is Flogged, he is lowered at that time and the child looses a lot of Benefits (Rights) or Criminal.

Everyone sees the Loss of Rights and Acts on it and at that time the offending child and criminal is unable to do anything about it.

So also is the woman's lowering and there is almost nothing (But One) that she can do to alter her lowering.

And unlike a child's lowering, a woman's own is Almost Permanent about 99% Percent Permanent for I have seen members of the 1% who are Truly Honoured and not as lowered as the general 99%!
I understand your explanation about the lower status of women, but I can’t accept the validity of any of it. You will claim it is my hubris on display to challenge the social order demanded by a god and its implementations of hierarchy. You have presented this permanent implementation as equating women with criminals and unruly children and defined it as a punishment. Equal but not quite.

How do you recognise the difference between 100% truly honoured women and the lower 99%? Do they glow? How does that 1% manifest itself? Aren’t you judging others?

Dtruthspeaker: grin In The True and Real world, you are either on the left of an issue or on the right of it or in the middle that is, you join and mix both left and right issues or you do not commit yourself to any side (in exercise of your rights).

Therefore, when you hear words like "It just doesnt support the idea.", that is a complete proof of commitment to One Side of an issue which is Complete Proof of being Against the Opposing Side of the Issue.

"You are either inside a House or Outside"

And that's what makes you statement "Double Opposing Speak or Double Speak for Short"

In Law we say "Aprobating and Reprobating" at the same time, in one breath.
My only response here will be to advise you to Google search "False Dichotomy", "Splitting Fallacy", and/or "Either/or Fallacies", to have a better understanding of the illogic of this post.

Dtruthspeaker: Wow! Great to hear this for you have admitted our whole case.

For it is Settled Natural Law, "HE Who Owns the Land Must Always own the Trees on the Land"
I was wondering how long it would take before your usual dishonesty will surface. You have hastily jumped to conclusions and I will attempt to clarify: While I accepted that your god may have been the initiator of the evolution mechanism, I also stated that it is still a claim. There's no evidence to suggest your god is involved in the evolution process.

You jump on this pronouncement and gleefully proclaim “you have admitted our whole case!” (word salad to follow).

Dtruthspeaker: There you are! See the One Side that I spoke about earlier that you must be on if you are committed to an issue?

If you disagree that God does not exist, it therefore means that you are on the side that says "God does not exist" as affirmed by your statement "Bear in mind I am an atheist so I dont beleive in gods"

You are one One Side Already and Anti-the Opposing Side
Again, do the Google search

Dtruthspeaker: My point was not about justifying the awareness of Israel but about Proving that if the world did not know about Israel, which as you have done for me.
LOL! I honestly burst out in laughter here. From this “gem” is seems that being skeptical of a claim is proof that it is true! Why with those rules of inference, we could prove anything we want true, on demand at any time. Anything sound suspicious about that?

Well if it sounds suspicious to you, thanks! That means it’s true! Right? LOL grin

Dtruthspeaker: Change of Post and Deviation from Issue,
An attempt to ignore valid objections to your superstitious wares. You've started telling lies so soon.

Dtruthspeaker: we are not talking about the earth or about vegetation,
I certainly was, and so was the creation myth in the bible, and since you are peddling that religious tome as a message from an omniscient omnipotent deity, the relevance is manifest. Try showing some integrity here. It won’t validate your superstitious beliefs, but you might at least earn some respect.

Dtruthspeaker: but about the origin of man/Author of the Bible.
Humans evolved, that’s an objective fact, the bible, like all books, is man made, the evidence you just failed to understand, and tried to dishonestly dismiss, demonstrates that your claims for divine authorship are both unevidenced and risible.

Dtruthspeaker:
Tamaratonye1:
Though of course the bible allegedly predicting an event, even an extremely unlikely or improbable one, and it occurring exactly as predicted, doesn’t remotely evidence a deity, or anything supernatural.
Sweet! You have just Admitted Proof of Prophecy
LOL. You’d embarrass yourself less if you learned to read, but I’ve emboldened the text from my post that demonstrates you’re either an illiterate or a liar.

Dtruthspeaker: they Great Weight of the Confirmation of Prophecies can not be waived aside.
The use of hyperbole and rhetoric doesn’t strengthen your unevidenced claim, and the only thing “waived aside” was the known logical fallacy you used, that I explained, and you have now ignored. Demonstrating your dishonesty for all to see.

Dtruthspeaker: It is Good and Solid Proof of Another Greater than man and Beyond the man, Whom we call God.
It’s solid proof you’re an atrocious liar, and don’t have, nor do you care to learn or understand, the most basic grasp of informal logic. Which paranthetically demonstrates again how dishonest your discourse is. One wonders what you hope to gain by such dishonesty, here of all places?

Dtruthspeaker: Which is still Coupled and Supported by Other Extraneous Evidence which you yourself have given Admission to
Liar. Scroll up to see the evidence

Dtruthspeaker: However, I will abide by the same Law I hold over you, the topic is not about the Proof of a God but about the origin of man/author of the Bible!
You mean by you lying, and dishonestly ignoring the rationale presented, that a message from an omniscient omnipotent deity can’t rationally be expected to contain any errancy, let alone the ubiquitous errancy in the bible and koran?

What I find strange and funny is how desperate you are to latch onto your preconceived bias(es), even going as far as quotemining me dishonestly just to find proof to reinforce these bias(es), or telling bare faced lies. You, on the other hand, are not willing to concede an inch of ground. I wonder what hidden agenda is at play here.

A busy day, thats all I can offer for now. You are free to ask whatever questions you like. Keep them to a minimum and I will answer what I can.

2 Likes

Re: God Is Well-suited For A Rational Explanation For Creation by Tamaratonye1(f): 5:08am On May 21, 2021
GodHead85:


Alright, I'll put it like this:

I've purposely avoided your posts on this forum because I've observed that you're a dogmatic, unreasoning fanatic.
I only felt the need to quote you because I truly wanted to know your meaning of "lying theory" and "womb man"

Just because you believe that your writing was "plain English" does not mean it actually is.

I merely requested that you make yourself clear. Your vague sophistry is wearying and tiresome. A lot of what you post on this forum has little to no actual meaning.


You engage in deliberate obfuscation of issues, you use capital letters in a senseless manner, lacking any context, and worst of all, when asked to be more clear and articulate in your presentation, you become patronising, arrogant, condescending, hateful and insultive.

You use a lot of deepities and vague assertions that are supported by you and you alone. I dare you to mention any other Christian on this website that asserts your principles as true.


You left me stumped alright, because I have never seen a more deluded nutcase in my entire life on this website. It's ok if you think you "won". Apparently "winning" is the aim here, and not having a proper meaningful conversation. Alright bro, you got me Lmao grin

I just take solace in the fact that everybody that reads these threads is not as mentally hampered as you.
They'll have their own impressions of our correspondence on this thread


The only reason any atheist bothers engaging with you here is because more competent, more capable and more intelligible apologists are no longer present on this board. Yes, you're not even up to scratch when it comes to defending your god.

It's not that you're smart. It's just that "wetin man go do?"

You are hands down the most brain dead Christian poster to comment on this forum since it's inception.

I've been on here longer than you may know, and truly I haven't seen any as clueless, delusional, deceitful and unintelligent as you.


Have fun with your weird beliefs and convictions. But i have to tell you the truth and that truth is you make Christianity look repulsive. Keep to your beliefs and I'll keep to mine. smiley

Sayonara! wink
grin grin grin cheesy grin

(1) (2) (Reply)

Women In Old Testament Vs Women In New Testament. / My First-time Experience In A Living Faith Church / Jesus Is Not Coming

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2022 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 855
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.