₦airaland Forum

jahstech:
You won't appreciate what you read from the Bible unless you are;

1: Hungry for truth
2: Humble
3: Honest

Even statistics alone tells you you can't compare the Bible to Koran if your are truly Honest with yourself. Why would a book gain such ground if it were not divinely inspired, even if it was just a fluke it would die off after some time.

After all said and done, I would love to hear your opinion on the most important question in life the Bible gave answers to, question like:questions about our past, our present, and our future, Where did we come from? What is the purpose of life? How can we find happiness in life? Will there always be life on earth? What does the future hold for us?

Over to You.

Cc Weah96

There are as many Muslims as there are Christians. Why has the quran not died out yet despite years of Christian dominance? Is the quran a fluke even though it's experiencing an increase in popularity?

When I ask for proof that the creator gave someone a message, I mean just that. Inscriptions on a wall are not proof of that claim.

Think of it this way: Olumba Olumba gives you a book and states that he created the universe before you were born.

What must you read in that book for you to believe that he created the universe? The location of old villages or kings who ruled his tribes and their corresponding locations today?

flamingREED:
But I don't see anything enviable in atheists: I don't smoke, take alcohol, masturbate, steal, lie, watch porn, curse or do to any man any evil: So, why shouldn't I be proud of the evidential power of Christ in me?

You're telling lies now.

4everGod1:
The whole basis of Atheism is the lack of proof thereof which was why I placed proof alongside my testimonies so it would be easier for you to investigate and arrive at your own conclussion. I demanded for same from you but you couldnt offer any. For someone who is always so hungry for proof I am surprised you are unwilling to offer any proof to back up your assertion.

Does your wife know that you don't visit doctors for anything? She might have used that information to her advantage.

4everGod1:
You are only shooting yourself in the foot. Do you know what HCG test is or what hormonal checks even mean?

I never went for any test as I am as radical a believer as they come. By personal conviction on Goda word I do not even take medication not even paracetamol as I believe sickness cannot dwell in my body and this is 19 yrs of a drug free life.

What goes on in my home is a mystery to you hence why you will always keep shooting yourself in the foot.

Do a DNA test on the baby. 5 yrs is a long time to be shooting blanks. You might be supporting someone else child.

Btw, this hospital where they automatically do DNA test on all the newborns, where is it? Did you give blood?

@Jahstech: Job 26:7

What, then, can we make of Job 26:7? While its sense is hardly plain, one notion it certainly does not convey, I would tell my students, is that of a spherical earth held by the force of gravity in space (Morris). The earth that hangs on nothing is also the earth that rests on "pillars," which tremble when God shakes the earth (Job 9:6), or upon a "foundation" with bases and a cornerstone (Job 38:6). It is also the dry land that God separated from the waters of the encircling deep (Gen. 1:9-10; Job 26:10; Prov. 8:27), that the psalmists describe as "founded ... upon the ocean, set ... upon the nether-streams" (24:1-2, JPSV; cf. Exod. 20:4), the earth which God "stretched out ... above the waters" (136:6 KJV). I see no value in trying to reconcile these many and varied metaphorical images with our own image of a spherical, rotating planet--aside from the fact that these ancients did not think of the earth as a planet.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2001/PSCF9-01Schneider.html

@Jahstech: Translation of Chugh

Isaiah 40:22a--When is a Circle a Sphere?

Here is how Isa. 40:22 is rendered in the NRSV:

It is he who sits above the circle of the earth,

and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers:

who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,

and spreads them like a tent to live in ...

The critical line in Hebrew reads (transliterated and omitting vowels): hyshb 'l hwg h'rtz, which my colleague Dr. Robert Suder translates: "the one dwelling on the circle/horizon of the land."14 A survey of Hebrew lexica and theological wordbooks15 yields much information about the key word hwg (chûgh).16 According to K. Seybold, its root appears six times in biblical Hebrew, and it is clear from its usage in context that it has a specifically geometrical meaning, that is, "a circle, as drawn with compasses." In Job 26:10 and Prov. 8:27, chûgh is used with choq, meaning "to inscribe a circle."17 This nominal infinitive form also appears in Job 22:14, where it denotes "the circle of the heavens" (shamayim), and in Isa. 40:22a, where it denotes "the circle of the earth" (haarets). Sir. 43:1218 uses chûgh in describing the rainbow. Finally, in Isa. 44:13, mechûghah, a hapax legomena (a form used only once), means "a compass," i.e., that simple instrument people my age used to draw circles in high school geometry class.19

All but one of these contexts are cosmological, and in fact four of the five uses of chûgh occur in creation hymns. Isa. 40:22a describes God as sitting/ dwelling above "the circle of the earth" which God laid out--with a compass, as Job 26:10 and Prov. 8:27 suggest, for the latter verses describe the act of inscribing the circle that fixes the boundary between the earth and the deep, the circle that also marks the boundary between light and darkness.20 The context also suggests that in Isa. 40:22a, the earth ('erets) which is encircled refers not to the earth as that part of the creation distinct from the heavens (Gen. 1:1)--as the creationists cited above seem to interpret it--but to other meanings of earth: as "the dry land" (Gen. 1:9-10), and at the same time, it appears, as "the ground on which people and things stand," for "its inhabitants are like grasshoppers."21

A circle is no more a sphere in Scripture than it is in geometry.

Looking at these usages together, I am hard put to see how anyone could justify rendering chûgh in Isa. 40:22a as "sphericity."22 The earliest translations of these Scriptures bear this out. In the Septuagint (LXX), the translators render the nominal and verbal forms of chûgh in every case with the Greek gýros (noun), "circle" or "ring," which they use in Isa. 40:22a, or gyróo (verb), "to make or inscribe a circle."23 Gýros does not mean "sphere,"24 and in fact nowhere in any Greek recension of the Hebrew Scriptures will one find the proper word sphaíra used in this context at all.25 The history of the formation of the LXX is largely lost, and we do not know if the Prophets were translated in Alexandria as the Torah was in the third century BC.26 But if they were and if the translators were familiar with the concept of a spherical earth taught at the Museon of Alexandria, then the center of Greek science, they give no hint of it in their translation of chûgh.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2001/PSCF9-01Schneider.html

jahstech:
Why the Bible Merits Your Consideration

In this little write up, am going to discuss not only prophesies but all other prove that makes the Bible worthy of a second look.
Most of the citation can be cross checked historically, so you may have to do your own digging with reference to what am going to show you.


1: The World's Most Widely Distributed Book
"The Bible is the most widely read book in history. . . . More copies have been distributed of the Bible than of any other book. The Bible has also been translated more times, and into more languages, than any other book."—"The World Book Encyclopedia."1
IN SOME respects, most books are like people. They appear on the scene, may grow in popularity, and—except for a handful of classics—become old and die. Libraries often serve as cemeteries for countless books that are obsolete, unread and, in effect, dead.
The Bible, however, is exceptional even among classical works. Although its written origins go back 3,500 years, it is still very much alive. It is by far the most widely circulated book on earth. Each year, some 60 million copies of the entire Bible or portions of it are distributed. The first edition printed from movable type came off the printing press of the German inventor Johannes Gutenberg about 1455. Since then an estimated four billion Bibles (the whole or in part) have been printed. No other book, religious or otherwise, even comes close.
The Bible is also the most widely translated book in history. The complete Bible or portions of it have been translated into more than 2,100 languages and dialects. Over 90 percent of the human family have access to at least part of the Bible in their own language.2 This book has thus crossed national boundaries and transcended racial and ethnic barriers.
Statistics alone may not provide a compelling reason for you to examine the Bible. Nevertheless, the circulation and translation figures are impressive, testifying to the Bible's universal appeal. Surely the best-selling and most widely translated book in all human history is worthy of your consideration.

2: A Book That "Speaks" Living Languages
If the language in which a book is written dies, for all practical purposes the book dies too. Few people today can read the ancient languages in which the Bible was written. Yet it is alive. It has survived because it has "learned to speak" the living languages of mankind. The translators who "taught" it to speak other languages faced seemingly insurmountable obstacles at times.
TRANSLATING the Bible—with its more than 1,100 chapters and 31,000 verses—is an imposing task. However, over the centuries, devoted translators gladly took on the challenge. Many of them were willing to suffer hardships and even to die for their work. The history of how the Bible came to be translated into the languages of mankind is a remarkable account of perseverance and ingenuity. Consider just a small part of that compelling record.

The Challenges Facing the Translators
How do you translate a book into a language that has no written script? Numerous Bible translators faced just such a challenge. For example, Ulfilas, of the fourth century C.E., set out to translate the Bible into what was then a modern but not a written language—Gothic. Ulfilas overcame the challenge by inventing the Gothic alphabet of 27 characters, which he based primarily on the Greek and the Latin alphabets. His translation of nearly the entire Bible into Gothic was completed before 381 C.E.
In the ninth century, two Greek-speaking brothers, Cyril (originally named Constantine) and Methodius, both outstanding scholars and linguists, wanted to translate the Bible for Slavic-speaking people. But Slavonic—the forerunner of today's Slavic languages—had no written script. So the two brothers invented an alphabet in order to produce a translation of the Bible. Thus the Bible could now "speak" to many more people, those in the Slavic world.
In the 16th century, William Tyndale set out to translate the Bible from the original languages into English, but he encountered stiff opposition from both Church and State. Tyndale, who was educated at Oxford, wanted to produce a translation that even "a boy that driveth the plough" could understand.1 But to accomplish this, he had to flee to Germany, where his English "New Testament" was printed in 1526. When copies were smuggled into England, the authorities were so enraged that they began burning them publicly. Tyndale was later betrayed. Just before he was strangled and his body burned, he uttered these words with a loud voice: "Lord, open the King of England's eyes!"
Bible translation continued; the translators would not be stopped. By 1800, at least portions of the Bible had "learned to speak" 68 languages. Then, with the formation of Bible Societies—in particular the British and Foreign Bible Society, founded in 1804—the Bible quickly "learned" even more new languages. Young men by the hundreds volunteered to go to foreign lands as missionaries, many with the prime purpose of translating the Bible.

Learning the Languages of Africa
In 1800, there were only about a dozen written languages in Africa. Hundreds of other spoken languages had to wait until someone invented a writing system. Missionaries came and learned the languages, without the aid of primers or dictionaries. Then they labored to develop a written form, and after that they taught the people how to read the script. This they did so that someday people could read the Bible in their own tongue.
One such missionary was a Scotsman named Robert Moffat. In 1821, at the age of 25, Moffat set up a mission among the Tswana-speaking people of southern Africa. To learn their unwritten language, he mixed with the people, at times journeying into the interior to live among them. "The people were kind," he later wrote, "and my blundering in the language gave rise to many bursts of laughter. Never, in one instance, would an individual correct a word or sentence, till he or she had mimicked the original so effectually, as to give great merriment to others." Moffat persevered and eventually mastered the language, developing a written form for it.
In 1829, after working among the Tswana for eight years, Moffat finished translating the Gospel of Luke. To get it printed, he traveled about 600 miles by ox wagon to the coast and then took a ship to Cape Town. There the governor gave him permission to use a government press, but Moffat had to set the type and do the printing himself, finally publishing the Gospel in 1830. For the first time, the Tswana could read a portion of the Bible in their own language. In 1857, Moffat completed a translation of the entire Bible into Tswana.
Moffat later described the reaction of the Tswana when the Gospel of Luke was first made available to them. He noted: "I have known individuals to come hundreds of miles to obtain copies of St. Luke. . . . I have seen them receive portions of St. Luke, and weep over them, and grasp them to their bosoms, and shed tears of thankfulness, till I have said to more than one, 'You will spoil your books with your tears.'"
Devoted translators like Moffat thus gave many Africans—some of whom initially saw no need for a written language—the first opportunity to communicate in writing. The translators, though, believed that they were giving the people of Africa an even more valuable gift—the Bible in their own tongue. Today the Bible, in whole or in part, "speaks" in over 600 African languages.

Learning the Languages of Asia
While translators in Africa struggled to develop written forms for spoken languages, on the other side of the world, other translators encountered a much different obstacle—translating into languages that already had complex written scripts. Such was the challenge facing those who translated the Bible into the languages of Asia.
At the beginning of the 19th century, William Carey and Joshua Marshman went to India and mastered many of its written languages. With the help of William Ward, a printer, they produced translations of at least portions of the Bible in nearly 40 languages. Regarding William Carey, author J. Herbert Kane explains: "He invented a beautiful, free-flowing colloquial style [of the Bengali language] that replaced the old classical form, thereby making it more intelligible and attractive to modern readers."
Adoniram Judson, born and raised in the United States, traveled to Burma, and in 1817 he began to translate the Bible into Burmese. Describing the difficulty of mastering an Oriental language to the degree necessary to translate the Bible, he wrote: 'When we take up a language spoken by a people on the other side of the earth, whose thoughts run in channels diverse from ours, and whose codes of expression are consequently all new, and the letters and words all totally destitute of the least resemblance to any language we have ever met with; when we have no dictionary or interpreter and must get something of the language before we can avail ourselves of the assistance of a native teacher—that means work!'
In Judson's case, it meant some 18 years of painstaking work. The final portion of the Burmese Bible was printed in 1835. His stay in Burma, however, cost him dearly. While he was working on the translation, he was accused of spying and hence spent nearly two years in a mosquito-infested jail. Not long after his release, his wife and young daughter died of fever.
When 25-year-old Robert Morrison arrived in China in 1807, he undertook the extremely difficult task of translating the Bible into Chinese, one of the most complex written languages. He had only a limited knowledge of Chinese, which he had started studying just two years earlier. Morrison also had to contend with Chinese law, which sought to maintain China's isolation. The Chinese people were prohibited, under penalty of death, to teach the language to foreigners. For a foreigner to translate the Bible into Chinese was a capital offense.
Undaunted but cautious, Morrison continued studying the language, learning it rapidly. Within two years he obtained a job as a translator for the East India Company. During the day, he worked for the company, but in secret and under constant threat of detection, he worked on translating the Bible. In 1814, seven years after he arrived in China, he had the Christian Greek Scriptures ready for printing. Five years later, with the help of William Milne, he completed the Hebrew Scriptures.
It was an enormous achievement—the Bible could now "speak" in the language used by more people than any other in the world. Thanks to capable translators, translations into other Asian languages followed. Today, portions of the Bible are available in over 500 of the languages of Asia.
Why did men such as Tyndale, Moffat, Judson, and Morrison labor for years—some even risking their lives—to translate a book for people they did not know and, in some cases, for people who did not have a written language? Certainly not for glory or financial gain. They believed that the Bible is God's Word and that it should "speak" to people—all people—in their own language.
Whether you feel that the Bible is the Word of God or not, perhaps you would agree that the kind of self-sacrificing spirit displayed by those devoted translators is all too rare in today's world. Is not a book that inspires such unselfishness worth investigating?

Investigating yes. I have investigated it which brings us here. I didn't see any non human revelation.

Muslims labored to arrange their quran. Have you read the it? Laboring to translate the book does not imply divine authorship of it.

jahstech:
Sorry about that.
Have you ever read the bible before? Or you just shy from it cos of "popular opinion" of your class?
Am more than willing to show you what you need, was just trying to buy time and give you ample evidence of my claims, my job isn't giving me all the time I need.
I would get back at you first thing tomorrow morning.
Cheers.

I have read the bible. I did not notice any bombshell revelation made therein to suggest that the writers spoke to an omniscient non human. Maybe you care to point them out. What did you read in it that made you realize that it was commissioned by the creator of the universe?
Was there anything mentioned in it that no human being could have revealed?

jahstech:
Yeah boss, a lot of them, kind of too much I don't know where to start from. Wanted to send you a book I on the subject that's why I sent a pm, so i can send it to your physical address and you can read for yourself.
If you don't like the idea let me know.

Bad idea. I asked for proof that the authors of the bible made contact with an invisible person, who turned out to be the creator of the whole universe.

Are you saying that there's nothing in the bible itself? I don't think that you appreciate the nature of the evidence.

There must be some revealing information in the bible which attests to its non human source.
So far, there's no revelation in the bible that could have only come from a non human. You're supposed to show me bible passages that prove it came from an omnipotent non human.

Does the bible mention the future Jew called Mark Zuckerberg by his name? Strangely enough, that would be considered proof by my standards.

Does it mention the exact mass of the earth and planets? Exact composition of air? Does it come with solutions to future mathematics problems? These are things that humans did not know 2000yrs ago.

I dont want to read another book. The proof should be inside the bible.

jahstech:
Please I would try to contact you via pm

Cmon man. Do you have proof or not?

jahstech:
Thanks boss, if you permit, would you want us to discuss the evidence I have by comparing the bible along with history?
Am requesting this because the bible writers all claim inspiration from God, a book inspired by the creator as they say it should have some noteworthy expression/remarks that cut across all facet of life. Can I show you these with facts?

Please do. I would love to see particular revelations which serve as evidence of divine inspiration.

JhyMedex:
U raised some cogent points Bro...
Bt I believe FREEWILL is D wrong choice of word...
As a lecturer I tell u, u can come 2 my class or not...
Den u choose nt 2 come den I fail u... Does dis seem fair...?
Dis is D scenario u painting with ur extrapolations..

U c although I didn't verbally coerce u 2 come 4 my lectures.. I did it tacitly...
It logically can't b said I gave u freewill...
Freewill shld mean I shld Do wat I want without D fear of a punishment or comeuppance...

LOL, I see that it's not easy to fool you.

Worship me and get mansions.

Don't worship me and roast forever.
Na you get the freewill. Hahaha.

jahstech:
Now while Paul was waiting for them in Athens, his spirit within him became irritated on seeing that the city was full of idols. So he began to reason in the synagogue with the Jews and the other people who worshipped God and every day in the marketplace with those who happened to be on hand. But some of both the Ep·i·cu·reʹan and the Stoʹic philosophers began disputing with him, and some were saying: “What is it this chatterer would like to tell?” Others: “He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign deities.” This was because he was declaring the good news of Jesus and the resurrection.

How does that passage lend any credibility to the argument that the writer spoke with spirit who told him that it was the creator of the universe? My position is I don't believe that the universe has the type of creator that speaks to selected people.

The whole bible is based on that. Im supposed to accept that someone I dont know communicated with something who told them that it was a creator. That's fine if the evidence supports their claim, but it doesn't.

Good kill. Looks like juicy meat to me. I buy whole deer here in the US myself, $40 for that size.

paxonel:
what i see as a true modern day miracle(what God want modern day people to see ) in not the type of miracles recorded in the Bible. those recorded in the Bible are second class miracles meant to convince people who want to see sudden spontaneous physical evidence of God existence(even christians are running to churches to observe pastors carrying out healing and commanding fire ) , and i tell you, God is not interested in doing all that child's play anymore.
what i see as modern day miracle is fulfilment of prophecy over time, like evolution(more than 2000 years ago Jesus was crucified)which is the greatest thing that has ever happened in the history of mankind. And we have seen the fulfilment of that prophecy right in our eyes, forget Bible days.
if you have ever read Bible, look at this.
Mark 4:30 And he said, Whereunto shall we liken the kingdom of God? or with what comparison shall we compare it?
mark 4:31 It is like a grain of mustard seed, which, when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the seeds that be in the earth:.
mark 4:32 But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it.
the interpretation of this Scripture(exactly what was in the mind of Jesus when he was saying it) somehow has a way of affecting every human being living on earth today. That makes it the greatest miracle.
i googled it, and Google confirmed it.
How did Jesus knew this will happen after more than 2000 years?
Now, many christians don't care to understand this parable or prophesy. That's why they are constantly defeated by atheists.
But i call these scriptures mark 4(a type of gun ) that is used to shoot and silence every form of atheism.
may be i should just interprete it for you to understand

Kai!!! Begin go.

Acidosis:
but seriously, this animal is rare nah.. chai, I wish I could keep it somewhere

I hope you're joking.

They are having relationship troubles. Unless she's using her commercial account for publicity, she doesn't need to invade her privacy.

Omooba77:
Thanks alot sir,but Socrates and those philosophers you believed and read are not waste of time abi. Life is a choice. Choose Life and live. God bless.

I didn't read philosophy but I get the point.

Muslims fear for their lives, so they either suppress their feelings or learn to live a lie. It's easy to feign the performance of meaningless rituals for a reward. Pastors do it for cash. Atheists Muslims do it to keep their heads attached to their bodies.

Omooba77:
When my younger brother died in his sleep; I felt betrayed by God.

God as you know it serves only as a limiting factor. It was designed to waste your time. Stuff happens, bad stuff, to decent human beings. You are trying to seek consolation in an ideology that promotes a you vs. us mentality. I know the love you had for your brother, but he has to live through you now. Don't fold up and accept unguided superstition out of desperation. We all die someday, no one leaves this place alive.

jahstech:
@Seun, don't get me wrong, am not trying to tell you that there is a God, all am trying to tell you and with all the evidence I have been providing is that everything has a designer, a very very intelligent one at that, and I have been given you examples of such that defy even conventional wisdom. You are bent on your evolving theory but as I try to prove otherwise and make you see reasons with some intelligent questions and examples, I also expect you to give me answers to your theory with good examples as well.

My point here is not to justify who is wrong or correct, but let the facts we present be reasonable enough to help us reach a conclusion.

Thanks.

As I mentioned in the other thread, we are faced with an unprecedented phenomenon, one that cannot simply be ascribed to design. Why? Because designers always use prexisting materials to design. Even the biblical god used prexisting mud or dirt to design human beings. So if you choose to believe that it was designed, you must be willing to concede that the materials used already existed somewhere somehow.

iamDiabolic:
I realise that when u kneel down nd pray u realise that u talking to urself

I remember the first moment that I acknowledged this particular implication.

jahstech:
Thanks a million @Weah96, I really appreciate your response.

I must say am lost at some point in your above explanation.

But I would highlight some parts and try to throw more light on them..

FIRST AND FOREMOST, I DON'T WANT TO INVOLVE THE BIBLE IN OUR CONVERSATION AS OF NOW, IT WOULD HINDER OUR PROGRESS.
SECONDLY, I WAS OF THE OPINION THAT ATHEISM IS BORN OUT OF THE FRUSTRATION RELIGION HAS CAUSED AND HENCE THEY CONCLUDE THAT THERE IS NO GOD..

Bringing that booklet up was to buttress the point that there has to be an INTELLIGENT BEING somewhere, somehow for all the various SCIENCE BREAKING DESIGNS on EARTH/IN THE UNIVERSE to EXIST.

ATHEISM vies toward EVOLUTION to help explain the existence of intelligent beings, so I wanted we all to reason if the level of intelligence around us can occur by mere CHANCE??


If you want us to discuss the above am also happy to, Who said it isn't relevant in our day? We can delve into that if you want us to.


Surely the message applies to future generation and if you care I can show you why I came to such conclusion. The term you used "CON MEN" comes in handy due to the assertion of the current so called men of god who have become lovers of money rather than lovers of God..


For now don't bother yourself about the BIBLE please, it would make things more complicated for us.

Please kindly point areas, I might have reasoned wrongly..

I didn't bring up the bible. The booket created the false dichotomy by presenting the bible as the necessary alternative to evolution and abiogenesis. So technically you brought up the bible not me.

Pertaining to the existence of an intelligent being, we must first appreciate how loaded the phrase is. It can be interpreted anyhow, and I'll tell you why, using the well worn watchmaker analogy. When you see a watch, you assume that someone intelligent designed it. However, implicit in your thought process lies the dormant acknowledgement that the anonymous human watchmaker used materials that already existed. But the corresponding watchmaker of the universe must have used zero prexisting materials, a fact which makes this an unprecedented design process. Intelligent designers always use prexisting materials. What do you then mean by the phrase intelligent being? We only measure intelligence in material terms. What we seem to be dealing with are subatomic particles, the only materials that violate common sense, but I will leave it at that for now. In short, saying that an intelligent being did it doesn't add anything meaningful to the mystery. The whole thing is unprecedented. More specificity is required, and that is where the various holy books come into play.

I graduated from georgia state with a degree in cell biology, so I know a thing or two about evolution. However, my neighbor, an Ethiopian immigrant, not only didn't study biology but also doesn't have a clue about the evolutionary process. He was an atheist when I met him, with an extremely beautiful Ethiopian wife in tow. His wife is also an atheist. So no, I don't think atheists necessarily espouse the theory of evolution. Educated ones, maybe. As for me, I find the theory to be entirely irrelevant to the discussion of the existence of a particular god. The idea of a more general God would perhaps require a reconciliation of the theory of evolution, but the so called religious gods (who were really humans on psychedelic drugs ) make independent claims that are rejected by reality. It doesn't matter whether an amoeba could have assembled itself by chance gradually, religion has gone waaay beyond that. There are other claims involved now, like pot of stew speaking and resurrections. The biggest of all the claim is the original one, that the progenitor of the universe, is actually something that speaks to human beings. Just not to me or other atheists. That claim is independent of evolution. For example, let's assume i agree with your position, that the universe is not the product of chance. Where do we go from there? We either go back to the holy book or we go to sleep and admit that our knowledge is incomplete.

I don't personally believe that the universe is the product of chance, there are possibilities in the quantum realm that address every paradoxical aspect of its generation. What we know as magic or counter intuitive proposition exists for real when atoms are smashed into tiny pieces. Those tiny particles, which make up 100% of everything, behave in ways that defy common sense.

What does the evidence reveal? If evo-
lution is true, then it should seem at
least reasonably possible that DNA could
have come about by means of a series of
chance events. If the Bible is true, then
DNA should provide strong evidence
that it is the product of an orderly, intelli-
gent mind

@Jahstech: the author of the booklet is facing the same roadblock as the majority of Nairaland theists in that he or she doesn't understand the argument.

The whole booklet is occupied with the desire to prove science wrong, with the assumption being that if the science is wrong, then the bible is right.
Nothing could be further than the truth.

If the bible is true, then all of its biggest claims would also be true. What do I mean? Well, assume that you are speaking to an assembly of the original original bible authors from the middle east. They have just gathered outside your house to bring you the good news, that they all spoke to the intelligent mind who created life and DNA, and have brought you a book from the mind to read lest you die in ignorance. They also want money to pay ministerial bills, but that's besides the point. You first instinct goes "scam artists, con men" but you still allow them to speak.

This is where the argument is. The authors must earn the right to continue the conversation otherwise it's going to take blind faith to believe that they aren't pis.sing in your face and calling it rain water.
The book either validates itself or the claimants need to start moving mountains. The book should have a chapter called "Ways to validate the message for all future generations" and proceed to give recipe for everyone to receive proof that these are not con men.

Or the authors should move about 2 or 3 mountains and teach you the method. Then you can bring the book to your neighbors house and pass the message along.

It has nothing to do with evolution or science. Science is trying to understand the process of the universe's emergence and how life began. It was always an uphill battle because we're already in the universe. But I don't see why the bible is the necessary alternative.

haibe:
What are the good reasons to assume that you are purchsing an effective medicine? Consider the old woman's perspective which I gave earlier

You know that reliable pharmaceutical companies exist, you can confirm this with a Muslim. You know that people take medicine for illnesses around the world, again you can confirm this with Muslim or Buddhist.

You understand how the best medical systems work because you have used money before and know the value that we humans attach to it. So it makes sense that a hospital in Switzerland wont charge you 50k USD to repair an injure knee, and then give you pills made out of sugar for the postoperative pain. You might be wrong, but your decision was based on material evidence.

There is no precedent in life or nature to believe that a dead Jew ressurrected 2000 years ago, and is on his way to save you. What did you see in life that made you want to buy that claim from a vendor

Omooba77:
if you believe Ogun,Sango,Oya,I wonder why you still doubt existence of Almighty God. It is a choice.

I prefer to use common sense. Your almighty god came to earth disguised as a Jew person because he had to sacrifice himself to himself. Doesn't make sense.

There is a source of the universe, but that bible didn't come from it. Everything in nature is replete with the source, there are no special people or chosen tribes.

There are two different kinds of faith. The one to which you refer is the one based on common sense. When you walk into an upscale pharmacy to pick up your medicine, you have ostensibly placed your faith in the value the establishment.

However, there are good reasons to assume that you are purchasing an effective medicine.

The other type of faith is blind faith, the one where you believe a Jewish man from 2000 years ago is coming back to save you after resurrecting himself.

Omooba77:
Ok sir,but check Hebrew 11:6

There's no evidence that your god exists except by blind faith.

Is that not the verse says?

raphealolami:
hmmmmm

Revelation 22:11-12King James Version (KJV)

11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

LOL, these Jewish writers, you realize that the whole passage is saying nothing right?

He dat is bad let him be bad. He dat is good let him be good. He dat wan chop food, let him chop. Bla bla bla.

Now I understand while prophet Mohammed felt like he could also successfully brainwash human beings. He read this verse and couldn't stop laughing at its emptiness.

Gimme a thick black girl and keep the pale twig. She's not even gifted in the rear.

No drainage system. Even Ancient Rome was able to build elaborate drainage systems over 2000 years ago.