Noetic2's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Noetic2's Profile › Noetic2's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 (of 126 pages)
Neptunz:before who? Bible God or allah? |
ashewo ![]() |
charming and cool |
muhsin:with due respect. . . .I was addressing shariaman there. |
I find this thread very hilarious. . . . . dont know why ![]() where is abuzola? |
Chrisbenogor: ![]() |
mazaje:thats not what this thread is about. why not open a new thread to educate us on atheism and naturalism? |
1. I started this thread by commending the fact that like every one else u are also entitled to ur opinion. So with regards to ur position on the authority of the bible, I do not find it interesting. I have gone through several theoretical concepts about possible explanations to the bible in the form of books and documentaries. Some of the theories being postulated include. a. Jesus lived and died. . . . but did not resurrect. b. There is no record of Jesus ever existing. . . .he is a fictional character. c. The shroud (garment) of Jesus has been found . . . . .oh! NO! it cannot be His garment d. Jesus was Hindi . . . .He learnt from Buddhist monks e. He married mary madgalene f. The bible was written by barbaric tribes men. . . . or even the amunaki's and white masters to control the world population. g. Jesus is the abdicated son of Julio ceaser and Cleopatra, who attempted to recapture His father's kingdom. This theories have been postulated by several different groups of people. I have taken my time to analyse, study and read each of this theories. They all have one thing in common. . . .they are very inconsistent in their postulations. They make ambiguous and sarcastic claims that cannot stand the test of intellectual or logical scrutiny. The most annoying part is that I spent my hard earned money to actually buy some of these books. My point is . . . . I accept the bible as absolute authority on all matters. There has been no plausible explanation to any of the anti-biblical stories and theories. If and when such does arise. . . .I am intelligent enough to analyse such. 2. By creating the world and its inhabitants God left us undeniable evidence. Note that the following statements are very different. a. credibility of an evidence b. acceptance of an evidence c. belief in an evidence. # There is a huge difference between the credibility, acceptance or belief in an evidence. God definitely made the inhabitants of the world. He also told them to be fruitful and multiply. This decree is today biologically defined as reproduction. A man and a woman reproduce a baby. so also do lions and lionesses, tigers and tigresses. I make this deduction from the knowledge of science available in this century. This is a credible evidence for creationism. you and I are products of a reproductive process explainable only by creationism. The issue is not the acceptance of this evidence or a belief in it?. . . .The issue remains that this evidence is reconcilable with the proclamations of God in Genesis. God is mentioned here because He is the subject of creationism. is this evidence acceptable? Based on the knowledge we have about reproduction. . . .we have no doubt about the process involved. One thing is certain. . .and it is the fact that all those alive today and within the recorded scope of history that we know of as humans were born by virtue of reproduction. from the BC years to the present age. . . . .all were born or rather reproduced. The reproduction process of all living animals and also humans have been extensively analysed. The creationism concept of "be fruitful and multiply" is ontologically reconcilable to reproduction as buttressed by the conception of Cain and Abel as recorded in the bible. I am of the opinion that reproduction as we know it today is an acceptable evidence for creationism. is this evidence believable? There is no intellectual or scientific knowledge that suggests otherwise. This is not a question of faith. It is visible to all that just as the bible proclaims we all are still reproducing today. questions might be raised about the believe-ability of the creationism concept of the formation of pioneer man and animals. The fact remains that since the resultant process of reproduction is reconcilable to the decrees made by God. . . .and since this reproduction concept is not synonymous to any other concept. . . . it is easy to as such believe that God indeed create Adam and other pioneer animals out of almost nothing. # Modern agricultural practices as deducible from knowledge tells us that the soil has to be tilled, an active photosynthetic process, the plants watered or irrigated before plants could grow. The bible establishes this fact, , .via creationism, ages before this knowledge was sacrosanct. verses 5 and 6 of genesis 2 gives explicit explanation as to how this processes took place and how we had our first rainfall. is this evidence acceptable? Science has since acknowledged the essence of photosynthesis and rainfall in the life of plants. This acknowledgement does not dispute the creationist account. This process as advocated by creationism is repeatable, observable and reproducible in millions of farm lands all over the world. This evidence for creationism is scientifically, logically and intellectually acceptable. is this evidence believable? u should only disbelieve if u have any other explanation for the source and process of food we do consume. 3. Evolution is anything but scientific. I asked u to define science: this was ur definition: Krayola:Lets analyse ur definition a. was this genetic changes in population observed in real life scenarios without the need for guesses and assumptions? by who? b. how credible is the means of identification? c. are these genetic changes experimentable? where have they been experimented? are they repeatable? The major flaw of evolution is its inability to explain the pioneer formation and conceptualisation of life as we see it today under the verifiable microscopic knowledge we have now. To be continued. |
shariaman:What EXACTLY are u ranting about? and they were given miracles, soyou have not said anything new. I know allah to be a blood-thirsty demon. so what else? as regards killing non beliversHow many people did Jesus kill before He died? "All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman. (From the NIV Bible, 2 Chronicles 15:13)"This are OT days. . .I believe I have addressed this on several threads. please can u stop embarrassing allah? we all know him already. |
sweetpie23:what? who? |
shariaman:the name allah is a linguistic connotation of the GOD we all know. but here I am asking for the koran allah the blood thirsty idol of arabia, who was worshipped by mohammed's father. the allah with a wife called allat and 3 daughters. |
she is still a sweet naija chinko |
I will respond soon. |
shariaman:The type of illiterates that islam breeds makes u wonder at times, if mohammed was so deceived ![]() which God or god are u talking about? is it the moon idol god called allah? what happened to his wife allat and 3 kids? why should anyone submit to the blood sucking demon called allah, who decreed the killing of all non-muslims? so amongst mankind Adam was the first muslim also notewhere was adams mat? what mosque did he pray in? how did he receive his revelation from allah? why did allah not tell other prophets to kill non-muslims? why was this demonic commandment issued to mohammed alone? why do none of the OT prophets have no book in the koran? The truth is that allah is a plagiarist, fraud and maladroit. He plagiarised christianity and commanded his unfortunate followers to kill, steal and deystroy defenceless people. Allah is a fraud. all were muslims because all submitted to the will of God.God yes, allah NO. muslim NO. where is ur evidence even from the koran? yes jesus was and is a muslim just like mohammedGod we know, allah we dont. Jesus told us that mohammed is a false prophet, we should beware of (mathew 24) Jesus also told us allah is a thief who comes to steal kill and deystroy defenceless people (JOHN 10:10) never in the bible did jesus call us to be christiansstop disgracing allah. u have no understanding of Christianity. |
Abuzola:so how many virgins do u get? ![]() |
[quote author=Tudór link=topic=297632.msg4220456#msg4220456 date=1248123527]Quite the contrary i think most atheists here on NL know exactly what they're talking about. You can't be an atheist coz you wanna tag along its IMPOSSIBLE. Conversion to atheism is not just a one day affair, in most cases it takes years of thought, analysis and self searching. Imagine having to come to terms with the fact that what you've been taught and believed all your life has been one BIG LIE a MYTH concorted by land stealing desert tribesmen. The fear of this realisation and the unwillingness to bravely face up to this fact is what keeps people in the bondage of christianity. I don't think anyone would just disregard the very foundation of his life for just social frolicking or "tag" along like you put it. You'd just be as deceiving yourself like the deluded christian, and as they say THERE'S NOTHING MORE PATHETIC THAN SELF-DECEIT. (noetic take note)[/quote]u never cease to amaze me. u have no evidence to support ur belief/disbelief. . . all u have is faith. and u dare accuse others of self-deceit? |
Abuzola:are u denying ur shag-able virgins? ![]() |
Abuzola:why are u denying the haddith? is it because it records mohammed shagging 9 year old aisha? |
she wants me for my money. . . . .uhmn I am tinkin twice ![]() |
Abuzola:and also nothing like 72 shag-able virgins ![]() |
please shut up. . . .thou deluded and retarded troll of allah |
and moaned |
littleb:who started the killings? did allah not command muslims to kill? is niger-delta a christian war? please stop lying. |
Aremugangan:it definitely would not have a shagging room or 72 shagable virgins ![]() |
Krayola2:The bible is the literal word of God. Also, do u acknowledge that humans are related to the other human-like species whose fossils have been found, or was the man God created Homo-Sapien? I know that Genesis says Adam and Eve had hands and could speak. . .I also know Abel was a shepherd while Cane was a farmer, so I'm assuming they were not primitive beings without language, or any form of culture. Is that the same way u understand Genesis?Humans are homo-sapiens who have no relationship with any other specie. I mean do u think the earth is thousands of years old as opposed to billions. I just want to know what ur understanding is so I don't end up trying to refute something that u do not believe in the 1st place.I believe that there was a gap between Genesis 1verse 1 and verse 2. I have lots of biblical evidences to buttress this fact. As to how old the earth is, I cannot state because I do know that there was a pre-adam era between genesis 1 v1 and v2. . . .how long this era was, I do not know. |
why not? |
cool |
Abuzola:This is true and he also protested mohammed's inaction. but he could not do anything because mohammed would claim to have received another revelation and have him killed. so olabs. . . what exactly is ur point? why are u desperately trying to deny what mohammed did? |
pure water |
Moyola:I wasnt gonna come. . .cos it looks like agbere ![]() |
Genesis 1 offers a direct analyses of how God made the heaven and earth. with special emphasis of the earth. Genesis 2 offers an analyses of how the creation took place from a human perspective which corroborates modern human scientific knowledge including photosynthesis. . . between verse 1 and 2 of Genesis 1 is an unknown period of time. this fact is established by several biblical verses. The bible also gives accounts of what the earth looked like after Gen 1:1 . . . .and also what the earth looked like slightly before verse 2. The number of years between these two verses are not known, . . .I would delve into that unless required. As far as creationism is concerned. . . . creation took 7 days. Day 1. . . .God created light 1. Day 2. . . .God made the firnament et all. Day 3. . . .God made plants Day 4. . . . God made Light 2. . . .that marks seasons and time. Day 5. . , God made fishes and birds Day 6. . , . God made the animals and Man Day 7 . . . God created Rest. God made several assertions. All of this assertions are valid even till today. 1. In verse 3 the light was called Day and the night darkness Its pretty obvious, there is definitely no need for further analyses. but this type of light created here is unique. here is what the dictionary calls it. 18. spiritual illumination or awareness; enlightenment. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/light 2. In verse 9 He called the dry place land and the water sea Thats pretty obvious. 3. in verse 16 He decreed that the sun rules at night and the moon at night Bear in mind that God created a kind of light in verse 14. . . .this type of light, I have no explanation of. but just like was said by God, we know that a. the sun rules truly by day b. the moon rules by night. c. the sun generates its own light d. the moon obtains it light from the sun e. the moon takes much time to travel at night. f. the traveling and the inability of the moon to generate its own light does not dispute the fact that the moon rules by night. 4. in verse 22 God asked that the animals be fruitful and increase. This is the only plausible explanation for the reproduction in animals. There is yet no repeatable, scientific, observable, recordable or reproducible analyses, process, theory or evidence to suggest that animals evolve. Neither is there any alternative to re-production (except for cloning). . . .which in essence is what God decreed here. 5. in verse 28 God asked that man be fruitful and multiply. Reproduction is still the only observable, repeatable, recordable and reproducable evidence for the emergence of humans that we know of. This was exactly what God decreed here, by stating that be fruitful and multiply. By logical and intellectual analyses of each of this pronouncements from God, these pronouncements are undeniably so even till this day. It is impossible to lay emphasis and explicit credence of creationism on genesis 1 without analysing genesis 2. Genesis 2 represents human analyses of creationism with emphasis on modern scientific knowledge. Scientific knowledge including the complexity of the sun, moon, stars, photosyntesis et all. From genesis 2 we understand that, though God had created all things. . . .they did not appear to us as such. # There was no plant on the field or tree because there was no man to till the ground and water the fields (Gen 2:4).This corroborates the fact that the sun and the moon had been made. . . there was light. Modern agricultural process explains that there needs to be some form of photosyntesis and irrigation or watering of plants before plants can grow. Genesis 2 corroborates this. |
Abuzola: will u get to shag aisha there in paradise too? |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 (of 126 pages)



I am tinkin twice 
