₦airaland Forum

so what's your point?

no advice can help you. your case is completely hopeless.

italo: I don't see how I'm not "accepting things as they actually are." How are things actually? And I wasn't implying that the creation story in the Bible is wrong, its most likely misunderstood, so the fact that St. Paul corroborates it doesn't contradict my belief.

I don't know at which point God created the human soul, but I know that the soul will live beyond this earthly life. Is that proof that God didn't create the human soul, the world and everything in it? No. Do you know everything about evolution? No. Does that mean there is nothing like that? No.

You take Genesis too literally, that's why you think that evolution makes a mockery of it, but it doesn't. Whether we evoled or we were specially created, it was God that caused it all to happen, that's what I'm saying. Let us then consider other parts of Genesis.

Gen 2:7: Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of LIFE, and the man became a LIVING being.

Verse 17: but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will CERTAINLY DIE.”

Do you think the author meant that literally? Adam and Eve ate of the tree, but did they die (literally)?

Maybe you should read Genesis 3 to judge wether the author was writing in a literal sense or not.

Let me make somethings clear to you. I'm Catholic. No Catholic has the freedom to interprete scripture on his own, contrary to the interpretation of the Church. Its a pity you don't seem to have learnt that in your 'Catholic days.' Only the Church is infallible in its interpretation of scripture and other teachings of faith and morals. That does not mean that it knows everything, at least not yet, but that anything it declares it knows to be true, either by divine revelation or otherwise, cannot and has not ever been found to be false.

So I do not pick and choose what part of the Bible suits my doctrine. I simply adhere to Catholic interpretation (if there's one) of all parts of scripture.

My arguments are weak? I thought you said this is not an argument. Frustration? With what?

I can't remember promising not to "pander to my belief system and giving answers to satisfy my doctrine instead of accepting facts", even though that is not what I am doing. Here's what you said initially:



I am sure of my belief, that's why I refer to it. I'm not JUST "pretending" and "repeating", I'm saying it because I was told and I believe it, rationally and reasonably.

The same way you and I were told about evolution and we are here repeating it...because we believe it (I believe partly). Were you there when Darwin was going around the world, picking fossils? If I came to your house now, would you be able to prove to me that man all of creation came from one ancestor, without repeating what you were told by someone else? No.

And what facts am I not accepting? Be prudent with what you say. You asked me if I thought there was any truth to the evolution theory, I said I thought there was at least some truth to it (you don't even know which part of the evolution theory I think firmly is true). So what fact are you talking about here.

The major point of disagreement is, you think it disproves the Bible's creation story, I don't think it does.

I appreciate that you are at least engaging in this discussion and not running away as most christians usually do when put in difficult position. You at least accept that you don't know certain things. This is by no means an "argument" as nigerians usually do to while away time but, I hope, a serious discussion on belief and faith when compared to hard scientific and verifiable evidence. I try to base my arguments on facts even though I admit sometimes I digress. I sincerely hoped that you would base yours on concrete verifiable fact and not "what we told". I was sincerely hoping that your knowledge were much stronger than your opinions.

What exactly does believing partly in evolution mean? You cannot pick and choose which part of evolution you believe in simply because it is one theory. one which no single or multiple parts can stand scientific test unless all the remaining parts are true. As soon as you discard a part of it, the whole theory falls.

I wasn't with darwin but his theories has been put to scientific test and they passed those tests. Today, you can "observe" evolution in bacteria. Even in larger animals like the african elephant it has been reported that they are genetically mutating and developping smaller tusks due to danger from posessing larger tusks.

I do not see why I should start reviewing the literal meaning of genesis when the bible itself described and accepted it literally. See Exodus 20:11, Romans 5: 12-19 etc.
If it wasn't literal, then the whole christian faith was based on a misinterpretation of the word of god by the Apostle Paul himself!
If adam and eve story was not literal, what else is not literal in this great book?
Was all animals living in one big boat for weeks literal?
Was the talking donkey literal?
Was Lot's wife turning into salt literal?
Was Jonah living in the fish belly literal?
Was the virgin birth literal?
Was turning water into wine literal?
Was resurrection literal?

You are wrong to say that I think that evolution disproves the Bible's creation story and you don't think it does. It is not me thinking. It is an analysis of facts presented by both sides. Here is a quote from a christian in another thread concerning evolution.

• The Bible has absolutely no hint of ages of evolutionary development. Forcing the "days" of Genesis 1 to mean "ages" can be done, but there is no support for that idea in the rest of Scripture (Psalm 33:6-9, 148:5-6; John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:3; Revelation 4:11; etc.).

• God's character absolutely forbids evolutionary methods. God's holiness demands truth, and His omniscience demands perfection. He cannot know what is best and then "create" something inferior. He wrote that He took six days to create the universe (Exodus 20:11). And He cannot lie!

• God's stated purpose for creating excludes evolution. The creation reveals the Creator (Romans 1:20, Psalm 19:1-4), gives authority to the message of Jesus Christ (John 1:1-14, Colossians 1:16-18.), and is the foundation for the gospel and for worship (Revelation 14:6-7). Creating is what God does at the moment of the new birth (Ephesians 2:8-10).

You cannot call god holy, omniscience etc and call the bible his unquestionable word if you believe in (or as you put it, in any part of) evolution.

jmoore: for example there are two cellphones in the market and one is in perfect condition while the other can explode in your ear while making a phone call. The seller of this product makes you to know the disadvantages of one and the advantages of the other. It is now left for you to make a choice. It will be foolishness for anyone to buy the one that can explode in the ear. There is freewill in choice making and those choices have their effects. A freewill to choose between touching a live n@ked wire and not touching it. There is no fallacy here if you put your reasoning together.

It is not freewill if I already know billions of years ago that you were going to touch the live wire and still create you to go and touch the live wire. your god already knows what we all are going to do no matter what. why is he still expecting something different?

i.chuka:
Great post!!!

deluded fool

D sage: Yes,and that's what i believe.

bliss is great

Unitedsatanist: I am certain that this post will upset some people but with all the hype and speculation about Jesus coming between 2012-2019 the truth has to be said by someone. Jesus is dead and would never come back again---- the dead have nothing doing with the living only when they've been contact through channelling but that doesn't make them to belong here . as dead person always belon to the land of the dead! . I will say dogmatically that Jesus is not coming to rule the earth . believing that Jesus is still alive is like the case of micheal jackson and Tupac Shakur....LOL

well, i am upset that you said that the dead have a land.

Unitedsatanist: It was not unusual for wandering sages of his time to take on some kind of common labor (such as carpentry or tent making) in order to supplement their income while traveling around and teaching.

Now in the Bible it does say he was a carpenter, so we can assume that is what he did.

where in the bible does it say he was a carpenter?

Callotti: Why don't you ask your MOTHER, since she does not wear any.
Especially as flies naturally populate her pubic/ANAL areas 24/7.
No need for 'pant' in her own 'special' case abi?

why the insult?
can't you answer the question or do you not buy your pants yourself?
are they from charity?

italo: It seems to contradict the Bible's account of creation but it doesn't necessarily do so... And it definitely doesn't contradict Catholic teaching.

The Church teaches that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, as regards their whole substance, have been produced by God from nothing.

It doesn't have an official position on whether the stars, nebulae, planets we see today and the various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.

It does, however, allow for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are taught that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are. 

So the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions. 

Have you considered that what you deduce from the Bible's creation story might not be exactly what the author tried to convey?.. That the writing style of the ancient author might not exactly be in tune with the rules of grammar of today?

Evolution theory is not conclusive, and most likely, not totally correct. And even if it were, there's nothing in it that is contrary to Catholic teaching.

Catholicism has no shaky foundation, though your understanding of it might be very "shaky".

This was the sort of answer I was accustomed to hearing and it confirms my fear that you are playing more to your belief system than accepting things as they actually are.

I was expecting this response which was why I went to the extent of quoting Paul in the new testament. You see, my consideration of the Bible's creation story is insignificant in the face of the interpretation by Apostle Paul. Paul corroborated the creation story. Not me.

If your doctrine allows for the evolutionally possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, it then begs the question: At which point in this evolutionary process did god decide we were mature enough to have souls? Seeing that evolution is a continuous process, and in years to come humans will look different from today's humans, at which point in this developpment will the soul be removed from humans, if ever?

This allowance in the doctrine also makes a mockery of Genesis chapter 1. Because it means that god did not create animals and told birds to fly etc.

It seems like you pick and choose the parts of the bible that suit your doctrine and disregard the rest. And when that is not enough, invoke Catholic teachings.

It shows that your arguments are weak. It shows frustration and to save face you have once again resorted to that which you promised not to resort to when we started this discussion: pandering to your belief system and giving answers to satisfy your doctrine instead of accepting facts.

and who has been summoned for power failures elsewhere? nigeria is not limited to airports.

brainpulse: You are thinking like a suckling child?

No. I'm thinking freely.
try it for a change. it's marvelous.

OLAADEGBU: And this brings us to the final question: What is the ultimate cause of the bigger explosion that caused it to go b-ang?

a really bigger mighty bang.

Let me put it to you this way:
everything is inside something else and are not unique.
my organs are inside me. i'm inside my cave, my cave is inside the earth, the earth is inside the milky way, the milky way is inside our expanding universe, logic tells me that our universe must be inside something else which in itself is inside something else and so on. So i believe there was not one big explosion but innumerable, and billions more are still happenning every second as we speak.

if you see such a person, you either have him checked by a psychiatrist or have yourself checked by a psychiatrist.

i neither want nor need his forgiveness.
but if he truly repents and bows to me, i might forgive him.

brainpulse: I told you, you will never understand

please recheck the pulse of your brain.

yes, gullible child.
low iq symptoms

TheShopKeeper: A thousand years is like a day to the Lord and for sure the Lord is never slack concerning His promises.
All of God's divine promises had come to pass, coming to pass and will surely come to pass.
Jesus is coming soon, watch this space.

how soon is soon?

brainpulse: I laugh, if you truly care and have pains for these people and wants to save lives, you will do more than just typing on the keyboard. How will you save a man or people that are being subjected into slavery, how will you save lives that are dying and being maltreated by our brothers cause of greed, corruption and lust of this world, how will you show love to the man that needs a token to eat, and the woman dying of cancer when with your HEART YOU HAD BELIEVED THAT THEY WERE NOT CREATED BUT THEY FELL AND CAME FROM NOWHERE? Indirectly you inflict pains on them by your confessions and the hardness of your heart.

christianity does not have the monopoly of goodness. infact atheists are generally more good and humane than the so called christians.

tbaba1234: A woman praying in front of men? when she bows, she would cause distractions for the men behind her in prayer. It is not about superiority, it is a law based on our natures.

What if it were lesbians behind her in prayer?

italo: I think there is at least some truth to it. Because of the evidence behind it: both the ones put forward by scientists and the ones I have observed on my own.

Well, then if you believe in some truth of the evolution, I am wondering how you are able to reconcile this with your biblical belief as it directly contradicts the creation story of the old testament, thus making a mockery of the new testament.
Evolution according to evolutionary theory, all life on earth came from a single common ancestor. That means trees, ants, cockroaches, kangaroos, sharks, algae, bacteria, lions etc have the same single ancestor from whom we all evolved into our present form by a process Darwin called the natural selection.
If all different types of life on earth came about through natural selection, how can God be called the creator of life?
If humans are a product of natural selection, how can you assert that we are created in the “image” and “likeness” of God (Gen. 1:26)?
If humans evolved as one species among others, then the doctrines and beliefs about the soul, original sin, salvation etc, are either lies or must apply to all animals and plants.

Modern Christians are always fast to discard the old testament and affirm that the teachings of the new testament are what matter the most.
Let us examine two passages by apostle Paul in this new testament.

Romans 5: 12-19
12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

13 To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.

15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16 Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!

18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.


1 Corinthians 15:21
21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

These two passages clearly show the relevance and importance of the old testament and the creation story to christianity. Paul was unambiguous: Jesus' coming and ministry and death were all a direct consequence of the fall of Adam, the supposedly first man.

Reconciling evolutionary evidence with christian doctrine has led many to do great mental gymnastics but the problem for christians remains that this is simply impossible: we cannot have been created from dust in the image of god some few thousand years ago and at the same time been evolving since millions of years.

If you agree with evolution, then apostle Paul was wrong. And if Paul was wrong on the fundamental tenet of christianity, one wonders how many other things he is wrong on.

Which begs my next question. Why continue following a belief/religion with such shaky foundations?

italo: The truth!

and greater Lies!

OLAADEGBU: Where did the matter that caused the big explosion originate from?

from a bigger explosion

Callotti: . . . And what EXACTLY is YOUR problem?

the size of your pants.
are they tailor made or did you get luck in the shops or do you go to a specialised store?

OLAADEGBU: If life originated from mars where did mars originate from?

from the big explosion

oh dear!

Callotti: When did he ever 'c-u-m'?
Did you see him with your eyes?

do you want to go blind or what?
you must close your eyes and let him do his thing.

Callotti: Mu he he he he he he he

where do you get your pants size?!