₦airaland Forum

Workch:
It’s no surprise that I am an atheist, but one thing people don’t know about me is that I was a Christian for 28years. Yes 28years.

I was not just a Christian, I had full membership in my church and was a member of the choir. I was born into a Christian home, we had morning and evening devotions everyday as a child. My dad personally tried indoctrinating us a lot, we read the Bible every single day and then he explains but seriously even as a child a lot of the stories didn’t add up but I was scared that I was being blasphemous.
I remember a day my dad was teaching us about Noah’s flood and then we got to that point where god said he’s using the rainbow as a sign to remind humanity that he would never destroy earth with flood. Even as a 9years old, that part didn’t make sense to me, because I see it in the news frequently of flood destroying farms, properties and even killing people. I asked my dad and he didn’t give me a reasonable explanation.
As a teenager, I started teaching Sunday school to kids in church, I taught them that god never change but in my mind, I wasn’t convinced because while reading the Bible, there many instances of god changing his mind and even regretting his decisions. I always think about it that the god of Old Testament seems different from what is portrayed in the New Testament, something changed. I kept a lot of things to myself because people around were so religious and would quickly rebuke me for such reasoning.
As time goes on, I joined the choir, I learn drums and keyboard, I sang choir ministrations and even wrote songs for my church choir. All these while, it wasn’t clear, I was just scared to come out fully.

I got admitted into the university to study biochemistry. Being someone that is very inquisitive, I started asking so many questions in respect to the relationship between living organisms. After having background knowledge in genetics, molecular biology and biological metabolism, it was clear that every living thing are the same basically. At this point, I didn’t even understand the theory of evolution properly but I had seen the a fairly clear picture. I had to go back and then study the theory of evolution properly (took weeks), because the impression I had from secondary school was that an ape turned into human. Our biology teachers, just like every other biology teachers in Nigerian schools, were so bad at teaching the theory of evolution. Seems like a lot of them didn’t even understand it.

Fast forward, I graduated, I still believed god existed. since after I properly studied the theory of evolution, I started holding the notion that God presided over evolution and the Bible is somehow consistent with the theory of evolution. This idea was born out of the sheer fear of not wanting to sound blasphemous to my beloved ones. After I graduated, I started reading wide, I didn’t like physics in school but I started reading physics (specifically quantum and astrophysics), I discovered about Big Bang theory, theory of relativity, string theory etc, it took a lot of time before I could grasp them but when I did, it became clearer that the Bible is not consistent with anything in reality.

It was difficult for me to accept this truth because I didn’t want to be seen as a blasphemer, not until I had the opportunity to run my masters degree abroad in clinical biochemistry. I met with lot of renown and brilliant people in the field of biochemistry. They were realistic in their beliefs and will not believe anything unless you can back it with evidence. I became bolder with time, we shared ideas as I studied. Th society gives everyone liberty and I was very free to come out clean with my realistic traits. A lot of my lecturers didn’t believe in god. I became a full fledged atheist in Europe by the time I finished my program.


Today, I have done several works and I still keep reading to find the truth, so far I haven’t seen anything consistent with the Christian God. I am back in Nigeria and trust me, I don’t have lot of friends for this reason. I have just two friends and they are both agnostic ( I made them agnostic because they are open minded and also brilliant Phd holders in biochemistry).

Workch:
You think I haven’t read the Quran?

I have gone as far as reading the Hindu Dharma-shastra, Book of Mormon, Midrash and even the gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

None is consistent with reality. Of all, the Hindu Dharma-shastra and Buddhist Sutras is closest to reality but still full of fictions

keppler:
Again we are beginning to see the trend that the reasons are mostly borne out of incomplete knowledge or invalid premises

ThothHermes:
Your faculties of spiritual perception are deadened. So you won't be able to perceive the evidence even if it landed on your head.

Enceladus:
So they converted you into atheism religion abi? Sorry to tell you that you are still not free from religion. Science is a religion and the scientific method with a little bit of arrogance is the god.

Workch:
Define religion?

Iyasaburi:
It has to do with the individual and your purpose in life. Everything has its purpose and destiny.
Mind you, our collective spirituality is what is sustaining this nation till now.

Workch:
I don’t know, we don’t have evidence for it yet, we only have hypothesis called abiogenesis and panspermia.
What we have evidence for is that evolution occurred and every living thing on earth share common ancestry.

It’s better to have questions that has not been answered than have answers that cannot be questioned. Religion provide answers that cannot be questioned, that’s not a good way to learn.

Workch:
It’s better to have questions that has not been answered than have answers that cannot be questioned. Religion provide answers that cannot be questioned, that’s not a good way to learn.

Workch:
Is this another way of saying you don’t have evidence?

Enceladus:
Is the current C the speed of light on a one-way trip or on a two way's trip divide by 2 ?

Also my initial statement is why did Einstein believe that the true value of C is the value of C he was using.

ThothHermes:
I don't have the kind of evidence you want. Nobody does. You will never get it.
It's like trying to get an FM station on an AM frequency.

1Sharon:
Flying spaghetti monster is sarcasm designed to mock believers

Pelecius:
If asked the evidence that evolution occurred, we may get evidence for adaptation or speciation which no informed one disputes, yet the "enlightened" ones want to tell us that it is evolution - the type that brought about all life forms from the first single ancestor.

But do we need to talk about the evolution when we can't even get how the first cell came to be? Worse, materialists have definitely reduce science to physics and chemistry, claiming that whatever can't be observed, tested and experimented is unscientific. But of course, same should go for evolution (it has never been observed and it'll never be, because no one can live for millions of years that's believed for it), abiogenesis (more researches are making the little hope fleet away, but that's the only atheistic myth for origin of life; so they have faith that it'll be cracked one day), panspermia (only pushing the problem of origin of life to outside of the earth. Again, no evidence of aliens, but the faith believe that given the vastness of the universe and the faith that abiogenesis occured even without evidence, then life must have arose in other places).

It's not lack of evidence for God' that makes people abandon Christianity, it's mostly the rebellious nature of man that kicks in. Then one use materialism to justify oneself in an intellectual manner.

MaxInDHouse:
Please do you believe in air and gravity?
If you do have you seen any of the two?

keppler:
I remember a day my dad was teaching us about Noah’s flood and then we got to that point where god said he’s using the rainbow as a sign to remind humanity that he would never destroy earth with flood. Even as a 9years old, that part didn’t make sense to me, because I see it in the news frequently of flood destroying farms, properties and even killing people
I'm surprised that you tried to equate FLOODING THE EARTH to LOCAL FLOODS. I want to believe that you didn't read it well, else, you must have seen the difference.
Your skepticism would be valid if you have witnessed flood destroying the earth again. But of course, it didn't happen (Whether the Bible is correct or not). I believe this should not be part of your reason as it was invalid in the first place.

I taught them that god never change but in my mind, I wasn’t convinced because while reading the Bible, there many instances of god[b] changing his mind[/b] and even regretting his decisions
Again, this is false equivocation. I don't know anyone who understands language (English in this case) who would agree that CHANGING ONE'S MIND is the same thing as CHANGING ONESELF. I don't need to say much on this again but this is another reason you gave but is invalid to begin with.

I always think about it that the god of Old Testament seems different from what is portrayed in the New Testament, something changed
Nothing really changed. He is still the consuming fire (Heb 12:29), it is still a terrible thing to fall in to his hands (Heb 10: 31), we still need to behold his ...severity (Rom 11:22). Just as he yearn for us as a Father to his son (Jer 31: 20), He gathers his children with GREAT COMPASSION after chastising them (Isa 54:7) He is compassionate and gracious... and abounding in love (Psa 103: 2) and so many others.
Again we are beginning to see the trend that the reasons are mostly borne out of incomplete knowledge or invalid premises

After having background knowledge in genetics, molecular biology and biological metabolism, it was clear that every living thing are the same basically
Of course, that is the data on ground. Now, interpreting it depends on the lens with which one wants to use. The theist argue that that same raw materials can be used by a designer to produce different products - God is sovereign to use same material to produce spectrum of living things. The atheists arguing with the background knowledge that there is no God, sees same data as one thing leading to all (I just simplified it anyway).
So, this has not proved anything as both can not experimentally prove their case. It is almost unfalsifiable. So, here we go again...

I discovered about Big Bang theory, theory of relativity, string theory etc, it took a lot of time before I could grasp them but when I did, it became clearer that the Bible is not consistent with anything in reality
Though the big bang ( through which the string theory too somehow depends on) was of theistic origin and one of the Nobel laureates who confirmed the CMB did his work with a theistic motivation that the universe has a beginning, but the entire theory and its offshoot have been hijacked so that it has no theistic influence. The way data are being interpreted as I said earlier is usually based on which lens you are using.
Finally on this, your last statement is also false. It's in fact a statement of faith as all I need is to show just ONE thing in reality that the Bible is consistent with. The Bible talks about the heavens and earth having a BEGINNING and we know at least (even with so much materialist interpretation) that the universe has a beginning. I don't need to give other life lessons that the Bible teaches which is consistent with reality again.
Once again, we are yet to see any valid argument

It was difficult for me to accept this truth
Here we go again. We are to accept your "truth" which is full of invalid proofs anyway

I met with lot of renown and brilliant people in the field of biochemistry. They were realistic in their beliefs and will not believe anything unless you can back it with evidence
I expect that these brilliant people would accept abiogenesis with zero evidence. Maybe I should not jump into conclusion yet sha

I was very free to come out clean with my realistic traits. A lot of my lecturers didn’t believe in god. I became a full fledged atheist in Europe by the time I finished my program
I think we should have seen by now that those REALISTIC TRAITS were not as a result of conflict with what the Bible teaches, but could be your inner desire (The Bible said that folks in the last days will gather teachers to teach them what they want to hear 2 Tim 4:3... This could be another consistency with reality I think.)

so far I haven’t seen anything consistent with the Christian God
Well, if you ask, I believe you should see. But I have a feeling that 2 Tim 4:3 is talking about you. Even if you see, you could still fulfil Rom 1:18 and maybe to verses 21.

Workch:
your first comment is funny.

Evolution is actually speciation and adaptation. Do you even understand what you are saying at all?

Pelecius:
Of course, that's the usual tactics. But how does speciation and adaptation produce the evolutionary tree of life?
What evidence is there which support the idea that ALL LIFE FORMS as we have it now branched off from the first universal common ancestor (supposedly a "simple" cell)

Not forgetting the ignored part of my response since there are no evidence to support those atheistic statement of faith. Yet they make us look like they don't accept anything without evidence

Workch:
Just provide evidence for your god and I will immediately change my mind.

Pelecius:
That's the burden of proof game most atheists play.
Now you want to tell us that your points have being refuted but you are an atheist because there's no proof for God?

The simple proof for God is Jesus. I told you this before but you attempted to deny his existence on earth. I responded that it is your atheistic bias (denial) that prompted that idea, because you'll have to discard all ancient history to be able to deny the existence of Jesus.
But you'll not want it that Jesus existed since you may not have reason to hold on to your atheistic believe.
Once again, the proof of God's existence is the fact that Jesus walked this Earth

Workch:
I don’t even accept the evolutionary tree, I have not seen evidence for it’s accuracy, it will only give a basic description of how it happened. I don’t advice you to believe it either. A lot of scientists don’t take the proposed evolutionary tree seriously but the idea behind it is what we have evidence for.

But we have evidence that organisms adapt and change over time, which is evolution. You really don’t know what you want.

Pelecius:
Lemme leave the first paragraph


You are just using the usual bait-and-switch tactic. Mere equivocation.
That organisms adapt and there's speciation are mechanisms which even predate Darwin. In fact, it is part of the Creationist model. The difference between the two groups is that evolutionists believe that All Life Forms arose from the UNIVERSAL COMMON ANCESTOR while Creationist believe that organisms are created in distinct kinds with enough genetic information to allow for speciation from such distinct kinds.

So how do we get plants and animals from the FIRST CELL? Since That's what evolution assumes.

Workch:
Jesus never existed. That’s another problem.

No archeological evidence he did

Workch:
There is not word like evolutionists, it’s a word used by scientifically illiterate people to describe those who accept the evidence in evolution.

I don’t think you deserve any further answer unless you grasp the basics of adaptation and speciation. It’s funny to think that you even know whatever you are saying.

How is speciation and adaptation part of creation model? Please educate me

Workch:
When did I tell you that I don’t believe in god because I cannot see him?

MaxInDHouse:
Haaaaaaaaaaaaa, have i offended you?

Please i tender an apology if i did!

I just want to know your views about a person you can't see yet He lives!

Pelecius:
Do you notice you have been avoiding my question, which evolutionists want us to believe?

I'll repeat it again.
How do we get all life forms from the first simple cell?

Pelecius:
Like I said, the first statement is a statement of faith. It's an atheist creed.
You are not an historian, so it's easy to just say WHAT YOU WISH and hence, believe it.
To believe you, one will have to discard all ancient history, which is nonsensical at least.

What type of archaeological evidence do you want for a man? How many ancient figures have archaeological evidence for them? Do you doubt existence of Aristotle, Plato etc? If no, what archaeological evidence do you have for them?

Workch:
theres no kinds of evidence.

Evidence is always evidence; repeatable and measurable. You will create different kinds when you want to hide something

Workch:
why do you think that I am offended?

MaxInDHouse:
Most people here are offended anytime you say something that contradicts their line of thought!