₦airaland Forum

OLAADEGBU: The Hebrew scriptures is the same with the OT Scriptures, not more and not less. It's better you stay with your evolution myth than getting involved in what you don't know.

So Isaiah 7:14 is the same in the Torah as it is your bible? Does the Torah contain any prophecy about virgin giving birth to people?

OLAADEGBU: Watch how this man exposed your myth below:

The Genesis Flood -- Dr Henry Morris (Part 4).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0OZujIZaSc?version=3&hl=en_GB


The Genesis Flood -- Dr Henry Morris (Part 5).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SzTJIE5HNY?version=3&hl=en_GB

Dr Henry Morris has been exposing the circular reasoning of evolutionists when they say the date the age of the rocks and fossils.  He quotes The World Book Encyclopedia vol. 15 in part 4 of the videoclip as saying:

"the age of rocks may be determined by the fossils that are found in them" 

Vol. 7 of the same book says:

"Scientists determine when fossils were formed by finding out the age of the rocks in which they lie" 

So we can see how your textbooks have been contradicting each other and going round in vicious cycles by saying that the age of the rocks may be determined by the fossils that they are found in and in another place they say that fossils are dated by the age of the rocks in which they lie.  See confusion and contradiction rolled up in one and our resident evolutionists have swallowed this lie hook, line and sinker.

Watch how the Genesis Flood answers the question about the age of the rocks and fossils and why the Bible is true.

There's a difference between relative dating and absolute dating. This man must be talking about relative dating, which doesn't give an absolute age for anything. So why are you bringing him here to waste my time?

The bible claims that the earth is less than 10k years old. The claim is presented without evidence, not from God himself, who chose to remain inconspicuous, but from random Jewish males speaking on his behalf.

On the other hand, scientists present an age of billions of years after observing a pattern in the way rocks are formed and dating those rock layers through radiometry. They're not using their mouths to make superstitious declarations like your side is.

It's possible to determine the order in which things appear even without knowing the age of those things. Faunal succession, the idea he directly criticises, is only one of the ways that scientists determine the relative age of rock strata. The principle of superposition is another. Older rocks are buried beneath younger ones. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence for this. Only stubbornness is preventing you from realizing how weak your entire argument is.

Why would a God tell someone to write a book, does that make sense to you? Where is the God going?

OLAADEGBU: The Hebrew Scriptures are the same as the OT Scriptures in the Bible. Who compiled the Hebrew Scriptures, the Roman Catholics?

There are critical differences between the two. For example, the Hebrew Torah doesn't contain a prophecy about a virgin giving birth, and your old testament does.

OLAADEGBU: And how is the rock strata dated?

In many different ways actually.
http://paleobiology.si.edu/geotime/main/foundation_dating2.html

OLAADEGBU: What "multiple testing methods" did you use in dating millions of years for dinosaur fossils?

Stratigraphy, and radiometric dating of rock strata between which the fossils were found.

Sarassin: It would be fair to state that Christians believe Jesus arose from the dead, and that is the basis of Christianity. Historically speaking though, there is not a shred of incontrovertible evidence that Jesus died and rose from the dead beyond the tittle-tattle of old-wives tales and the spurious embellishings of the Gospel writers.

The character Jesus has two things going against him. First, history, especially Jewish history, says absolutely nothing about him, not even bothering to mention him as an apostate. And then there's reality itself, in which dead people stay DEAD.

loveroftruth:

Ok, you said you will not circumcised youloor son.

Ok, good for you.

May you remember this circumcision discuss when the time comes.

But then, HYPOCRITES dont stick to their own standards.

How easy it is for you though circumcised to come out here so fast to state that you "will not circumcised your son" when you do carry one.

Even though you, haven been circumcised have no own untoward experience on circumcision to warrant your objection so fast for your unborn child.

How old are you sef ?

Am begining to wander if I am talking to a kid.

WTF?

mazaje: You expect logicboy to take this shapeless doll that is just whistling any how seriously?. . .


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIPimX-ZiCY

This dull is what you call artificial intelligence and you expect anybody to take you seriously?. . . whistling sounds come from the dull and the man keeps saying he is interpreting what the dull is saying. . .

TheBigUrban2 see what our man is calling artificial intelligence. . .

LOL.

loveroftruth: @weah96

This was for you.



Do you think you have answered this questions ?

Pls, go back and answer this questions also.

Thank you.

Who was the first female to sell her v)agina for cash? This is the same kind of question you're asking. You're not going to a definite answer. The best someone can do is describe the characteristics of that initial person.

loveroftruth: Firstly, hypocricy is a disease, and discussing with hypocrite is an excersis in futility.

Hence, befor I address your post above, I wish to ask you some petinent questions. Just to make sure.

1. Are you circumcised ?
2. If you have kids, or, when you do have kids, will you have them circumcised ?

Pls, your andswers to the questions above befor I attend to your post.

Thank you.

Yes I am. I don't have children now, and I won't mutilate them when I do.

loveroftruth: Am trying to get the import of this post.

Are aquating male circumcision to female circumcision ?

Are you saying that there is no benefit of male circumcision over female ?

Are you saying that it is the person that authorised male circumcision that authorised female circumcision ?

Do you have evidence for that insinuation ?

The reason given for male circumcision, is it the same reason given for female own, is it from same source ?

If the directive is not from same source, how did the source of the male circumcision come to know and avoided demanding for female circumcision ?

Your answer please.

I can't think of any medical benefit of circumcision. Human beings are not laptops or vehicles that can be customized by removing factory apps or wheels. We are alive.

I suggested that the original source of the practice was a mad person. Only a mad person would dare take a blade a start sawing away at the Instruments of a newborn baby. The character Abraham in the bible is an example of a madman. He tried to decapitate his son after hearing a voice in his head.

I think female and male circumcisions have the same purpose. In both cases, the pleasure derived from having sex is reduced by removing valuable and sensitive tissue from the Instruments. In males it's the foreskin, in females it's the c)litoris.

Mad people are all around us. You know some of them as prophets and pastors. These practices must have evolved independently, probably on separate sides of the globe. The point I tried to emphasize was that it only takes one unchallenged mad person to begin a trend this widespread.

loveroftruth: Ok, its very obviouse that the atheist have nothing to offer here.
Though most of them if not all carry a circumcise manhood, it does not tickle their fancy to enquire how come some one cut their manhood and how it came about.

Well, I do, and I wish to find out why it is no other person cared to ask.

How did circumcision come abou ?

Your answer pls.

How did genital mutilation come about? Females are mutilated down there too, in some cultures.

IMO, it is the work of madmen. Sometimes, if people do not speak up quickly, a madman is able consolidate an incredible amount of power over otherwise sane human beings. Mad people should always be checked, or put in their place, as soon as the madness rears its head. If not, then we could end up like this, grown men walking around with sawed off p)enises.

debosky: If God, by definition, is the creator of everything, then the answer is obvious - unless of course light/energy is excluded from 'everything'.

I don't see how that serves the presumed purpose of this thread though.

The proposition that God created everything is a knotty one for believers to handle. It implies that he also designed Ebola and HIV, just to name a few. Those viruses didn't exist before everything was created.

solotutu: if we cant see that, maybe God did plan it so perfectly that the earth divided and thus we have different colour.(a good explanation)

we have blacks since 'africa moves from d centre of the map towards the equator and so...... Same for the indians and persians. That division was divine and we cant but see it as a better explanation for now. All from the same father, yet races discriminate. Devil must be smiling.

Are you saying that Homo sapiens sapiens with pale skin existed before the dark skinned ones like us?

PastorOluT: Smile, atheist will definitely run from this thread 'cos circumcision gives credence to the bible n God.

What are you talking about?

Some people say that sex feels better with the foreskin. If that is true, then I can see why a meeting was called and why the decision to remove the thing was ratified.

Men everywhere will suddenly stop showing up for work.

loveroftruth: Assumption! Some people may say.

Is it just the bible that contains the first instance pf circumcision ?

Well, you have said yours, let others also have their say.

It is not all that subscribes to the bible as you do, what do they/those set of persons think about it ? I want to know.

Meanwhile, thanks for your imput.

LOL.

Keep multiplying. The resources on earth are finite. If God doesn't come, we'll eventually run out of food.

Image123: It means that you lack the ability for basic comprehension. He asked when God will heal ALL, that essentially means no more sickness. God heals today.

The creator is the same as the healer. After creating Ebola, and allowing its integration among people, are you telling me that he then sets out to heal the same people he inflicted with the disease?

mployer: What Is wrong with the answer and who Is the boss in this case?

God did it is not an answer. You have an employer, don't you?

Image123: You asked when God would heal ALL the children in the world and i told you when.

So basically a little girl with stage four leukemia right now is left with only the healing power of science developed by her fellow human beings, right?

It also means that the faith healers around today are ALL a bunch of FRAUDS.

mployer: Answer: God alone was present at said time and He doesn't need eyes to see.

Is this how you answer your boss when he asks you a difficult question? Hahaha.
I'll make sure to keep that in mind.

RayMcBlue: In the same way, it is obvious that human beings are big, walking chemical reactions. When the chemical reactions cease, you die. That is the end of it. No afterlife.

How can you be so sure? At least preface this comment by saying, IMO. To say that consciousness is poorly understood by science would be an UNDERstatement.

http://mobile.dudamobile.com/site/iep_utm?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iep.utm.edu%2Fconsciou%2F&dm_redirected=true#2791

enigmaotr: Animals are also sentient beings.
Why is it that only humans seek to have a purpose in life?

Have you not seen that video of the honey badger on YouTube? You can't tell me that a honey badger isn't seeking a purpose in life. They always mean business.

RayMcBlue: You forgot "Religion", the age-long enemy of progress/science.

Right. They are not helping.

Dux01: watch benny hinn... you will hear in his church.

And that's where it remains. Nobody watches the religious channels, not even the pastors themselves. They are often immersed in the latest episode of some reality show.

RayMcBlue: The beauty of science is that it never assumes. It doesn't invent notions out of thing air. It examines, calculates, separates and then proposes. It's borne of "cold hard logic."

I agree, but in reality, true science faces obstruction from political forces and the lure of financial interests.

There's no reason why I should put more than a gallon of gas in my car every week. Something is preventing the manufacture of 500mpg vehicles.

benodic: the mystery of death lies in proper understanding of what happens when the physical body is asleep and the person is dreaming.
in dreams you still retain your consciousness. sleep is afterall a temporal death and death is a permanent sleep.

Excellent.

He must keep all his cash in that big round chin.

Dux01: even in the western world?how come no one catches them.how come people never stop giving testimonies of being healed.pls take a honest look at this.

Because of the stigma associated with challenging the authority of God in public. Few do it openly, and they're mostly comedians or Rhodes scholars. Note that I've yet to hear of a reported miracle in the US.