₦airaland Forum

Scholar8200:
Chronological order? No! Even the books are not chronologically arranged. eg Job came centuries before Ruth, Samuel etc. Reading that passage, you will notice that the part of Jephthah's vow came in like a parenthesis. Try this without the aspect of the vow:

29 Then the Spirit of the Lord came upon Jephthah, and he passed over Gilead, and Manasseh, and passed over Mizpeh of Gilead, and from Mizpeh of Gilead he passed over unto the children of Ammon.

32 So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon to fight against them; and the Lord delivered them into his hands.

33 And he smote them from Aroer, even till thou come to Minnith, even twenty cities, and unto the plain of the vineyards, with a very great slaughter. Thus the children of Ammon were subdued before the children of Israel
Judges 11:29,32,33

Scholar8200:
The highlighted shows that it was a prescription not a direct command against a named Tribe/City etc


Now, can you show us ONE instance when this was done to one of the Tribes of Israel? And, is this prescribed action (which was never carried out) done for pleasure or as a retribution for unfaithfulness to a covenant which they willingly entered into?

Scholar8200:
The ellipses inserted there omits what happened after the Spirit came and links it to the wrong vow.

Then the Spirit of the Lord came upon Jephthah, and he passed over Gilead, and Manasseh, and passed over Mizpeh of Gilead, and from Mizpeh of Gilead he passed over unto the children of Ammon.
Judges 11:29

The vow was made before this time:
Then Jephthah went with the elders of Gilead, and the people made him head and captain over them: and Jephthah uttered all his words before the Lord in Mizpeh.
Judges 11:11

yemixi4real:
I am not saying he disobeyed being fully aware the vow he made was voluntary and not ordered by God, the misconception I will love to clarity on is how he redeemed his vow... Taking the bible passage as reference

tempem:
What's your level of education?

Here is a Prof who was formally an Atheist. You could read what later made him changed his view.



PROFESSOR František Vyskočil of Charles University, Prague,
is internationally known for his research in neurophysiology.
Once an atheist, he now firmly believes in God. In an
interview with Awake! Professor Vyskočil explains why he
changed his viewpoint.
What was your view of religion before you started your career
in science?
I was raised an atheist, and my father often made fun of the
clergy. I graduated from college in 1963 with degrees in
biology and chemistry. In my school years, I believed that the
theory of evolution explained life’s diversity.
Tell us a little about your career in science.
In my postdoctoral work, I studied the chemical and electrical
properties of nerve synapses. I also studied neurons,
membrane pumps, transplantation, and drug desensitization.
Many of the results have been published, and some articles
have been selected as classical. In time, I became a member
of the Learned Society of the Czech Republic, a community of
scientists chosen by their peers. After the December 1989
“Velvet Revolution,” I became a professor at Charles
University and was allowed to travel to the West to meet with
colleagues, some of whom were Nobel laureates.
Did you ever think about God?
In a sense, yes. At times, I wondered why many highly
educated people, including some of my professors, believed in
God—albeit quietly because of the Communist regime. To me,
however, God was a human invention. I had also been
outraged by atrocities committed in the name of religion.
How did you come to change your view of evolution?
My doubts about evolution began when I was studying
synapses. I was deeply impressed by the amazing complexity
of these supposedly simple connections between nerve cells.
‘How,’ I wondered, ‘could synapses and the genetic programs
underlying them be products of mere blind chance?’ It really
made no sense.
Then, in the early 1970’s, I attended a lecture by a famous
Russian scientist and professor. He stated that living
organisms cannot be a result of random mutations and
natural selection. Someone in the audience then asked where
the answer lay. The professor took a small Russian Bible from
his jacket, held it up, and said, “Read the Bible—the creation
story in Genesis in particular.”
Later, in the lobby, I asked the professor if he was serious
about the Bible. In essence, he replied: “Simple bacteria can
divide about every 20 minutes and have many hundreds of
different proteins, each containing 20 types of amino acids
arranged in chains that might be several hundred long. For
bacteria to evolve by beneficial mutations one at a time would
take much, much longer than three or four billion years, the
time that many scientists believe life has existed on earth.”
The Bible book of Genesis, he felt, made much more sense.
How did the professor’s comments affect you?
His observations, along with my own nagging doubts, moved
me to discuss the subject with several religious colleagues
and friends, but I found their views unconvincing. Then I
spoke to a pharmacologist who was one of Jehovah’s
Witnesses. For three years he explained the Bible to me and
my wife, Ema. Two things amazed us. First, traditional
“Christianity” actually has little in common with the Bible.
Second, the Bible, though not a science book, actually
harmonizes with true science.
Has your change of view hindered your scientific research?
Not at all. Every good scientist, regardless of his beliefs, must
be as objective as possible. But my faith has changed me.
For one thing, instead of being overly self-confident, highly
competitive, and unduly proud of my scientific skills, I am now
grateful to God for any abilities I may have. Also, instead of
unfairly attributing the amazing designs manifest in creation
to blind chance, I and not a few other scientists ask
ourselves, ‘How did God design this?’

KingEbukasBlog:
k bro

johnydon22:
Christians be going disturbingly desperate and retard_ed... this is serious ... Church On Mars .. haaaaaa!!! **Carries hand on head** ..

KingEbukasBlog:
Will I also get 99 likes for the photo below ?

Speechless3:
Good good. Do we have logical laws established in humans too?

Speechless3:
Looooooooool ive found an atheist who would not believe logical laws exist. So how do we recognise an illusion?

OLAADEGBU:
We are not accountable to the allah of the qur'an but we are all accountable to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob either you like it or not.

OLAADEGBU:
We are all accountable to our Creator, hence the need to know whether homosexuality is a sin or not.

Weah96:
One has to first know what a contradiction is before she can identify them.

PastorAIO:
Hey, you won't see animals doing praise worship either, so there!

Speechless3:
Laws of logic are human construct?? Rotflooooooooooooool

Speechless3:
Laws of Logic are abstract and not material but atheists say they exist! funny. I mean you cant see logical laws but you believe they exist. How so?

Why are they not consistent in their reasoning when it comes to God? God cannot be seen too but atheists say he must be seen first before they believe? Loooooooooooool

Atheism is unreasonable and illogical if you ask me.

espn:
E church..very soon we will have E-sin..E-death..E-god..E-devil..E-heaven..E-hell..

Okworigeorge:
Sorry but u didn't answer the question?

beau49:
@bolded what defines a right or wrong conviction?

KingEbukasBlog:
There are old earth creationists , theistic evolutionists , progressive creationists and there are young earth creationists . Cold , aint you the one that claimed that atheists know about our Religion even more than we do Looks like you told a blatant lie cos every damn time I see none sense I can't even care to respond to

misterbear:
The third and fourth points are correct: It is Christians that tend to be opposed to stem cell research and abortion. Those things do not contravene Islamic doctrine.

As for the other points: being against equality in marriage and imposing your beliefs on others; other religions particularly Islam are guilty of that as well. In fact, Islamic culture is guilty of these things in some ways even more than Christian culture is (especially in the west). Nevertheless, as a man of science, it is to be expected that Dawkins would be particularly focused on those areas where science is threatened especially in his own part of the world. (Note that Muslims also tend to be opposed to evolution.)

misterbear:
No Speechless3 is right. Atheists - especially in the west - do tend to concentrate exclusively on Christianity and often appear to give other religions a free pass. If you listen to the public speeches of Richard Dawkins during the past decade, and if you read his book The God Delusion, his blows are largely if not exclusively directed at Christianity and Christians in particular (even the old testament Judaic text is attacked only in the context of it being part of the Christian bible). While this may be easily explained by the fact that Christianity is the religion that has traditionally dominated western culture and thus is the one western atheists are most likely to attack, it doesn't explain the relative apathy they often seem to display towards other religions even when they are prominent in public consciousness and even when they are characterized by violent extremism. Islam is the most obvious example. Many Christians have pointed out that secular liberals in the west are often extremely tolerant and even protective of Islam and tend to excuse Muslims of behaviors that they would attack Christians for if they were the ones doing it. These are legitimate complaints that even atheists like Richard Dawkins have recognized:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a7igsWpPSQ.

By the way, it is also true that atheists do often attack Christians (not just Christianity) as being "stu.pid", "du.mb", "mentally ill" etc etc...

Pidggin:
Most athiest are depressed. All those things the OP mentioned only gives temporal excitement.

KingEbukasBlog:
. Do you believe your Nairaland's username is CoolUsername ?

KingEbukasBlog:
I'm comparing the eternal nature of God and energy

KingEbukasBlog:
Hello ? The second coming of Jesus ... remember? The christian belief you and your crew always mock . Why is Jesus coming back ? Won't his coming back seal the fact he is the creator ?

Again , mister , you are not making sense . If you cannot prove that the universe needs no creator , then better wait for Christ's second coming



You are missing the point . If you can agree to the eternal nature of energy and its properties you cant tell whence they came from , it is rational not to question the intelligence , powerful and existence of an eternal being - God .

Cheers bro

Muafrika2:
I think the net has been cast too wide. According to Wikipedia. ..


Homosexual behavior in animals is sexual behavior among non-human species that is interpreted as homosexual or bisexual. This may include sexual activity, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same-sex animal pairs.

The only thing that should be considered, in my opinion, is sexual activity. It's like interpreting human and animal loving and close friendships as bestiality. Animals are very loving.

Muafrika2:
Ok. Must be one of the reasons why they were considered unclean in the old covenant's laws of Moses.