God’s Power is the Missing Link


My busy schedules allowed much time for evolutionists and agnostics to answer a question I raised in the last blog posted on this website.

How can inorganic matters like soil and water evolve into an amoeba or protozoa?

One attempted to answer by citing the hypothesis of abiogenesis. However, my question was a legal one. It is not wise to answer a legal question with a hypothesis!

A hypothesis is a hypothesis and a theory is a theory unless repeated experimentation and investigation prove them to be “facts.” The problem with agnostics and atheists is that they recklessly combine hypothesis and theory with facts to prove their claim about the evolution of life.

If life can come into being from non-living materials, why cannot scientists today, equipped with state of the art scientific instruments and an accumulated knowledge of thousands of years, produce even a single living cell since they know precisely the components of a living cell?

I am not a scientist but I am not as reckless as these insecure pretended scientists! When God, according to the Bible, created the entire universe, He saw that it was very good.

GENESIS 1:31

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. 

The expression “very good” denotes completeness and perfection.

PSALMS 145:16

Thou openest thine hand, and satisfiest the desire of every living thing. 

It cannot be called “very good” or “good” when something is lacking! Salt complements the flavor of egg white.

JOB 6:6 

Can that which is unsavory be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the white of an egg?

Even our wastes or refuses complement and satisfy other living organisms. The carbon dioxide we give off is life to plants and the oxygen they throw off is life for us.

A specific creature is created to live in a given environment with the necessary resources to live and reproduce. Lack of food, resources and favorable ecological conditions will not cause the evolution of a specific creature into another. Cattles with a four-chambered stomach and with enzymes to digest the cellulose in plants and grasses are found in places where there is abundant supply of the food intended for them. They will not evolve to be a bear if they are in the polar regions of the earth where there are no grasses. Certainly they will die!

“Ruminants (cud Chewers)

Cellulose is the principal organic compound in the diets of herbivores. Most herbivores, however, cannot produce cellulases, the enzymes that hydrolyze cellulose. Exceptions include silverfish, earthworms, and shipworms. Other herbivores, from termites to cattle, depend on microorganisms living in their digestive tracts to digest cellulose for them. The digestive tracts of ruminants (cud chewers) such as cattle, goats, and sheep are specialized to maximize the benefits of their endosymbiotic microorganisms. In place of the usual mammalian stomach, ruminants have a large, four chambered organ. The first two chambers, the rumen and the reticulum, are packed with anaerobic microorganisms that break down cellulose by fermentation. The ruminant periodically regurgitates the contents of the rumen (the cud) into the mouth for re-chewing. When the more thoroughly ground-up vegetable fibers are swallowed again, they present more surface area to the microorganisms for their digestive actions. The microorganisms in the rumen and reticulum metabolize cellulose and other nutrients to simple fatty acids, which become nutrients for their host. In addition, the microorganisms themselves provide an important source of protein for the host. A cow can derive more than 100 grams of protein per day from digestion of its endosymbiotic microorganisms. The food leaving the rumen carries with it enormous numbers of cellulose-fermenting microorganisms. This mixture passes through the omasum, where it is concentrated by water absorption. It then enters the true stomach, the abomasum, which secretes hydrochloric acid and proteases. The microorganisms are killed by the acid, digested by the proteases, and passed on to the small intestine for further digestion and absorption. The rate of multiplication of microorganisms in the rumen is great enough to offset their loss, so a well-balanced, mutually beneficial relationship is maintained.”

(Source: http://www.tutorvista.com/biology/ruminant)

A sea lion was created in the sea and shall remain there in its entire lifetime. Lions in land will not evolve to be sea lions nor will sea lions evolve to be lions in land!

GENESIS 1:20-22, 24-25

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 

Considering the Biblical truth that the Creator created different species with different ecological resources and environment, the idea of “ecological niche” and “speciation” will not apply!

A hungry cow will not eat flesh because its teeth and its digestive system and enzymes were not designed like those of carnivores.

The differences in the digestive systems of different species, including that of the human stomach, discredit then the concept of evolution.

“If you look at the various species in the animal kingdom, each is equipped with teeth that are ideally suited to masticate a particular type of food. Herbivores (like the cow) have 24 molars, eight jagged incisors in the lower jaw and a horny palate in the upper jaw. Their jaws move vertically, laterally, forward, and backward, enabling the herbivore to tear and grind coarse grasses. 

Omnivores (like the hog) can have tusk-like canines allowing them to dig up roots. Frugivores (like the chimpanzee) have 32 teeth: sixteen in each jaw including four incisors, two cuspids, four bicuspids, and six molars. The cuspids are adapted for cracking nuts, and the uniform articulation of the teeth enables the frugivore to mash and grind fruits. 

On the contrary, carnivores (like the cat family) have markedly developed canines that are long, sharp, cylindrical, pointed, and set apart from the other teeth. Fangs and sharp pointed teeth that penetrate and kill, that rip and tear flesh, are a feature of all true carnivores (except certain birds). The powerful jaws of the carnivore move only vertically, and are ideal for ripping and tearing flesh that is swallowed virtually whole and then acted upon by extremely potent gastric juices. 

Comparative Digestive Physiology 

Among the various species throughout nature, the length of their particular alimentary canals also differs greatly in relation to their natural food. The gut of the carnivore is 3-6 times the length of their body. They require a short, smooth, fast-acting gut since their natural flesh diet becomes quite toxic and cannot be retained within the intestine for long without poisonous putrefaction taking place. The gut of the herbivore is sacculated for greater surface area, and is 30 times the length of their body. Its herb and grass diet is coarse and fibrous, requiring longer digestion to break down cellulose. The length of the omnivore’s alimentary canal is generally 6 times its body trunk size. The gut of the frugivore (like humans) is also sacculated and is 12 times the length of its body. The length of the adult human alimentary canal is about 30 feet. The human digestive tract is about four times as long as the carnivores. The intestine of the carnivore is short and smooth in order to dissolve food rapidly and pass it quickly out of the system prior to the flesh putrefying. The human digestive tract is corrugated for the specific purpose of retaining food as long as possible until all nutriment has been extracted, which is the worst possible condition for the digestion and processing of flesh foods. Meat moves quickly through the carnivore’s digestive tract and is quickly expelled. The human lengthy intestine cannot handle low-fiber foods including meat and dairy very quickly at all. As a consequence, animal foods decrease the motility of the human intestine and putrefaction almost invariably occurs (as evidenced by foul smelling stools and flatulence), resulting in the release of many poisonous by-products as the low-fiber food passes through, ever so slowly. In humans, eventual constipation may develop on a meat-centered diet. Colon cancer is also common, both of which are rare or non-existent on a high-fiber diet centered around raw fruits and vegetables. 

Stomach form and size among various species also vary markedly. In the carnivore the stomach is a small, round sack designed to dissolve flesh quickly and then pass it on for removal.  In plant eaters (particularly ruminants) stomachs are complicated adjoining sacks with ring-like convolutions. The frugivore stomach (including in humans) is oblong and is characterized by folds called rugae which serve to retain food for relatively long periods. 

Organ sizes of various species also markedly vary. The liver and kidneys in the carnivore are much larger than in vegetarian animals. A lion’s kidney is twice the size of a bull’s, and not much smaller than the elephants. This allows the lion to handle large amounts of protein and nitrogenous waste products contained in its natural flesh diet. The carnivore’s huge liver secretes larger amounts of bile into the small intestine than does the herbivores liver. There is a direct relation between the quantity of meat eaten and the amount of bile secreted. Meat-eating therefore, places a strain on the small liver of humans which impairs the organ’s function over a long period of time. 

When you place humans on a diet for which they are NOT naturally adapted, this places unnatural stress on the organs of elimination. Humans have never adapted to the carnivorous diet that is high in animal products. The human liver is smaller than the carnivores and as a result, we cannot detoxify the poisonous products inherent within animal foods such as uric acid (discussed below). Our kidneys are also smaller and become diseased from overwork caused by a diet high in animal protein. 

Comparative Digestive Enzymes 

The hydrochloric acid concentrations of various species are an additional determinant of their natural diet. A carnivore’s gastric juice is highly acidic, serving to prevent putrefaction while flesh undergoes digestion. Plant-eaters however, secrete a much less concentrated and less abundant quantity of hydrochloric acid that does not curtail the bacterial decomposition of flesh: a process that begins at the animal’s moment of death. Flesh is digested in an acid medium within the stomach. Humans secrete a very weak concentration of hydrochloric acid relative to the carnivore, and little of the protein-splitting enzyme pepsinogen. Carnivorous animals have concentrations of these flesh-digesting secretions 1100% greater than do humans. Lions can rip off and swallow your hand whole and quite readily digest it. 

Uric Acid: Toxic Component of Meat to Humans 

About 5% of the flesh volume of all animals consists of waste material called uric acid that is normally eliminated by the kidneys. Uric acid is a poison to humans because it is toxic and non-metabolizable. Nearly 100% of Americans suffer some form of osteoporosis which is due in large part, to the acidic end-products of meat (and grain) eating. All carnivorous animals however, secrete the enzyme uricase that breaks down uric acid so it can be readily eliminated. Humans do not generate this enzyme. Instead, we ABSORB uric acid when meat is eaten. As a result, calcium-urate crystals form and concentrate in joints, feet, and in the lower back. These deposits lead to arthritis, gout, rheumatism, bursitis, and lower back pain. Humans are physiologically unsuited to utilizing meat as food. Natural carnivores swallow hunks of carrion almost unchewed, and the flesh is digested in the stomach with ease and facility. If humans were to do the same, we would digest very little of it before putrefaction set in and illness ensued. For humans, meat is a pathogenic and nutritionally deficient food. 

Saliva pH Varies Widely Among Species 

The saliva pH of various species is another determinant of their natural diet.  In carnivores, their saliva glands are small and secrete an acid saliva having little or no effect on starch, which makes sense since flesh is virtually starch-free. Omnivores (like pigs) have tremendous salivary glands that secrete copious quantities of starch-splitting enzymes. Humans only have one starch-splitting enzyme, versus a multitude of them in omnivores and other natural starch-eating animals. Our ptyalin is very limited. This rules us out as being true granivores (starch-eaters) which includes grains and cereals. Frugivores have salivary glands that secrete alkaline saliva, containing only moderate amounts of ptyalin, which initiates starch digestion. This tells us that humans and other frugivores can easily digest the small amount of starch contained in fresh fruits, nuts, and leafy greens, and that humans are not intended to subsist on a diet of highly starchy grain foods as many currently do.  (Diabetes mellitus is largely the result of consuming large amounts of refined sugars and starches. Even eating predominantly of whole grains and natural legumes as dietary staples can be injurious because of the need for excessive starch digestion). 

The biological equipment of humans is such that the body is most capable of obtaining complete and optimal nutrition from plant foods. Actually however, we are NOT true vegetarians either. Many natural herbivores (horses, cows, sheep, etc.) that subsist on green leaves and grasses (ruminants) have four stomachs containing special enzymes including cellulase that can digest the carbohydrate cellulose, which is totally undigestible by humans. Leafy greens that make-up your salad are actually high calorie foods. Yet salad is a diet food that aids in weight loss. Most of the calories of vegetables are bound within cellulose, whose fuel value is largely unobtainable to our system (except for extremely valuable mineral matter from which our body does derive great benefit). True herbivores however, are fully capable of attaining energy from herbs and grasses since they secrete the enzyme cellulase, which breaks down and liberates the energy within the sugar molecule cellulose. Unlike purely natural vegetarians in nature then, the human stomach can not process large amounts of cellulose. Man cannot regurgitate and re-chew his food as does the cow. Nor can the human stomach efficiently digest a mixture of all different types of foods as do true omnivores. Though nearly anything can be put into the human stomach and virtually has, our physiology is such that only foods that we are biologically adapted to can effectively be digested when eaten in compatible combinations according to the natural limitations of digestive chemistry”

(Source: http://www.iol.ie/~creature/BiologicalAdaptations.htm) 

Every living thing exists for a definite purpose. The DNA in all living organism protects and perpetuate such purpose of existence!

What about living things simply evolving? Does it imply a purpose?

75 thoughts on “God’s Power is the Missing Link

  1. dear brother in christ , praise the lord. i am watching ur program every day at 0600 hrs to 0630 hrs.i am blessed by this greatly.(SAB TV). i wish that every one should see this and blessed.

  2. I wonder why God would even suppose to change our diet from fruit and nuts, Genesis 1:29And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.; to a seemingly endless array of foods to include all animal meat. Genesis 4:2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. What would be a purpose of having sheep, if not to skin them for clothing, milk them for their milk and to sacrifice the meat to God. Or eat it… depending on the regularity of sacrifices. Anyway, If it is so harmful to us, why tell us to eat them? Understanding, the fat, we should not eat. We all know the reasons why. So again. If you read through all the biblical text regarding the sacrifices given to God during those days, there were a lot. A whole lot! Which meant there was a lot of meat to eat. And it had to be eaten quickly and not left over. God surely had some forethought that man needed to eat meat, and would. As a matter of fact, man consumes more meat than any other consumable product.

    And by the way, while I’m here I mean.. The verse Genesis 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

    “let the WATERS bring forth… not only moving creatures but also the fowl of the air. I have always stopped to ponder this verse. Mostly because it invokes a comparison between the evolutionists and we Christians. Evolutionists believe we all originated in the sea. At some point in time, fish began to leave the sea. Evolving into walking creatures and even flying creatures. This verse suggests such an occurrence. That is, unless you believe in God. And have the faith that comes with hearing.

    It’s the same thought I have with the Big Bang theory… Nothing decides to come together to produce everything in our universe. Sounds down right stupid. Something being created out of nothing. Who came up with that? I know…. God. God can make something out of nothing… He said in Genesis 1. Let there be light. and there was…. Something out of nothing. There’s even a verse that describes it. John 1:3
    All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. Something out of nothing.

  3. I never thought that the missing link is “God’s Power”. I’ve just said on my last comment that there is no missing link on evolution. But I don’t still believe in evolution, all that I believe is, God planned and created all that we can see in this world.

  4. Beware of atheists

    Col 2:8
    Take care that no one takes you away by force, through man’s wisdom and deceit, going after the beliefs of men and the theories of the world, and not after Christ:

  5. Recent developments in medical science enabled scientists to create artificial human organs to replace deceased organs. At first glance especially with the headline presenting such developments and discoveries (e.g. Scientist created skin, kidney, pancreatic cells, etc.) we might be misled into believing that really scientists are able to create on their own new cells and organs. BUT if you read closely and scrutinize the news you will discover that what the scientists did was take an existing living cell and reproduce/replicate cells.

    I find it very hard to comprehend why so many people now do not believe in a CREATOR or a HIGHER BEING. Imagine a scientist saying there is no God and then using a burrete, test tube, petri dish, centrifuge, cold storage equipment, even just the latex gloves and then saying this all came from nothing! No, not one man can make a single grain of silica to make glass for a lab device, nor a man can make a single drop of rubber on his own.

    We owe everything in this universe from someone, somewhere out there, a CREATOR and a HIGHER BEING. We have everything to prove that HE EXIST, and nothing to disprove his existence.

  6. To all atheists and agnostics, why not surrender your foolish pride and just accept you have nothing truthful to say. In fact, by being what you are, you are in effect made to be imaginable beings, refusing to have God on your lives. What a shame. You only have to read the Bible and if you feel you are intelligent enough, just relate the Biblical truths with the present scientific discoveries. may God have mercy on your souls.

  7. Atheist surely missed it… They deny God’s power not knowing that it is the missing link that they are looking for. I am afraid some atheist won’t find the “missing link” because they deny God’s existence. Thank God for sending Bro Eli and Bro Daniel in our midst.

    To God be the Glory!

  8. No doubts Bro. Eli’s website has been chosen as Most Educational to Follow by Mashable.com, and Peoples Choice Award Winner for blog category by Philippine Web Awards this year. Really worth to read, two thumbs up!!!!

    Thanks be to GOD for having “The Truthcaster”.

  9. By GOD’s power every problem was resolved, every questions was answered.therefore it is indeed true that God’s power is the missing link.

  10. Atheism as your First Attempt In Learning? FAIL!

    Change happens to all that physically exist. But before anything can even physically exist and change there must be creation to begin with.

    Some invariant and preexisting cause have initially created everything out of nothing, then from something to another thing, and that is GOD.

    The origin, diversity and complexity of life is all there in the Bible, well supported by these observable and irrefutable realities! But despite every possible change allowed, restricting laws remain the same according to God’s purpose.

    Bro. Eli Soriano’s biblical ideas are all logically & scientifically reasonable, valid, and true. But the atheists quickly deny them entirely just because their materialistic standpoint is very limited to their physical senses.

    Still can’t find the missing link? Good luck and God bless.

    • youre right bro. They are searching for the missing link hoax after hoax after hoax but they cant even find the answer on whats behind the bigbang theory if bigbang is true. Atheist and evolutionists will never know and feel what success means because of their materialistic kind of thinking.

  11. Power of Information, that’s Bro Eli’s blog, Sometimes it took a country to engage in war before peace could be attained. This group of people has long been engage in word war with Bro Eli ignoring the existence of God. Hopefully, sooner or later this atheist and agnostics were awakening that they run out of excuses to believe that there is God.

  12. Thanks be to God Bro.Eli for another wonderful blog!
    a lot of people would benefit from reading this blog, i hope this circulates fast so more and more people will be aware that none of the baseless scientific theories of where man came from was ever true.

  13. Nice analogy, evidence presentation, logic and sound reasoning by Bro. Eli Soriano. This is beyond contestations. Atheists and agnostics deny the existence of God despite the fact that they feel it deep within themselves, because their works are evil. Long live Bro Eli! To God be the Glory!!!

  14. Good analogy, evidence presentation, logic and sound reasoning by Bro. Eli Soriano. This is beyond contestations. Atheists and agnostics deny the existence of God despite the fact that they feel it deep within themselves, because their works are evil. Long live Bro Eli! To God be the Glory!!!

  15. If life can come into being from non-living materials, why cannot scientists today, equipped with state of the art scientific instruments and an accumulated knowledge of thousands of years, produce even a single living cell since they know precisely the components of a living cell? – Bro. Eli

    Does this mean knowing the components of a living cell constitute enough knowledge to enable scientist to know how it came to be? Does knowing the components of a system like the living cell the same as knowing its dynamics and change?

    There are many theories about the beginning of life because the building blocks of proteins, the amino acids, were not only found in the harshest conditions on earth but also in bodies in outer space. How the building blocks of our genetic materials formed is currently being explored. Still other newly discovered organism were found to survive even in high amounts of arsenic and so on so that possibly life possibly may exist as an inherent property of the universe. Science is making progress, so far the first synthetic genome capable of supporting life has been made but it isn’t the end of course, time will tell.

    However, I still believe in God though I consider evolution and all those scientific theories.

  16. i was enlightened with your show Bro. Eli. I always watch “Ang Dating Daan” on tv. You are a very good preacher. I can understand your teachings clearly.

  17. You quote “GENESIS 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

    Then you say: ‘The expression “very good” denotes completeness and perfection.”, “It cannot be called ‘very good’ or ‘good’ when something is lacking!”

    If it’s not only complete but also “PERFECT” then why, in Genesis 6:7, does it say “And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. ”

    Obviously, it wasn’t perfect.

    You also say:: “A hypothesis is a hypothesis and a theory is a theory unless repeated experimentation and investigation prove them to be “facts.” ”

    That’s exactly the issue with religion. “Repeated experimentation can’t provide prove that God exists. Therefore, it’s just a hypothesis.

    Lastly, you say: “A sea lion was created in the sea and shall remain there in its entire lifetime. Lions in land will not evolve to be sea lions nor will sea lions evolve to be lions in land!”

    It has been known since Darwin’s time that whales occasionally show evidence of vestigial limbs and pelvic structures. This is most obvious in whale embryos, but adult whales have actually been found with protruding limb rudiments. (See the discussion in P. Gingerich et al, “Hind Limbs of Eocene Basilosaurus: Evidence of Feet in Whales,” Science 249, July 13, 1990, p. 154). Why would an animal be born with traces of legs when it currently has no use for them? That the vestigial stumps have no functional purpose in modern whales is obvious. How, then, are we to explain the case of the whale’s vestigial structures in a logical and scientific manner?

    The evolutionist position is at once simple and perfectly logical: modern whales have vestigial legs and pelvic girdles precisely because they evolved from land animals with legs (most likely artiodactyls, an ungulate mammal of which hippos are perhaps the best modern example).

    It would thus stand to reason that the earliest whales had fully functional legs and that only later did their legs begin to diminish in utility to the point at which they appear in modern whales as vestigial stubs concealed beneath the blubber. It is to be expected, moreover, that various intermediate forms will be found between early whales with fully functional hind limbs and modern whales with vestigial limbs only.

    What, then, does the fossil record reveal? Early whales, as exemplified by Ambulocetus natans, show well-formed fully functional hind legs. Two other whales–Indocetus ramani and Rodhocetus kasrani–appear later in the fossil record and show diminished although still perfectly functional hind limbs. Basilosaurus isis, finally, had very tiny hind limbs the utility of which is unknown. (See the bibliography appended at the end of this note for the relevant scientific literature on these respective animals). In the case of Rodhocetus, at least, where the pelvis is well-preserved, there can be no doubt but that the legs were attached to the pelvic girdle and that they were functional. As P. Gingerich et al note in their analysis of the whale in question, “The pelvis of Rodhocetus articulates with the vertebral column by normal mammalian sacral synarthroses, meaning that Rhodocetus could support its body weight on land.” (“New whale from the Eocene of Pakistan and the origin of cetacean swimming,” Nature 368, 1994, p. 847).

    Bibliography:

    J. Thewissen, S. Hussain, M. Arif, “Fossil Evidence for the Origin of Aquatic Locomotion in Archaeocete Whales,” Science 263, Jan. 14, 1994, pp. 210-212.

    P. Gingerich et al, “New whale from the Eocene of Pakistan and the origin of cetacean swimming,” Nature 368, April 28, 1994, pp. 844-847.

    P. Gingerich et al, “Hind Limbs of Eocene Basilosaurus: Evidence of Feet in Whales,” Science 249, July 13, 1990, pp. 154-157.

    Evolution is accepted among many religions Why? Because there is overwhelming evidence.

    • @ steven:

      your argument is simply coming from an ignorant mind that never stops thinking on non-sensical things. i hope one day our GOD will open ur heart to understand things that is factual… athiest are always relying on theories… stop dreaming and accept the reality that God really EXIST!

      • How many different species of monkeys are there? The inference that we came from monkeys predisposes that there should be no monkeys today. But.. If only one species, a version not so different fro ourselves were just a single branch of the evolutionary tree, it would seem more possible that we continued to develop into an upright homosapien.

    • Steven
      If it’s not only complete but also “PERFECT” then why, in Genesis 6:7, does it say “And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. ”

      Obviously, it wasn’t perfect.

      God created man to be perfect, but man turn to their wicked ways. They disobeyed God. God didn’t created man to be robots to do only the things that are told them to do. God gave us our minds our freewill. You have it that is why your free to choose what you believe.

    • do you mean we don’t have evidence in our claim? your claim as supported by your evidence cannot imply a perfect basis to disprove our claim. you just rely with those available stories which even you cannot say if it is really true or fabricated. our claim about the existence of God is supported by scientific facts which are available for your scrutiny.

  18. Hope one day all the athiest and agnostics will choose someone in them to stand and have guts to debate with the ONLY sensible preacher of our time in order to settle their “world of dreams”!

    Since bro eli has a live broadcast every week in http://www.livestream.com/elisoriano wherein anyone is welcome to call and ask. Why not they will call and discuss the mechanics of the debate and its topic?? Is there any athiest/agnostics out there have the guts to do this challenge???

  19. Steve says:

    That’s exactly the issue with religion. “Repeated experimentation can’t provide prove that God exists. Therefore, it’s just a hypothesis.

    Bambi Says:
    That depends on what your trying to prove, is it God existence? Or proof that you are right and everyone of us is wrong.

    Isaiah 29:11-12;16
    11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:
    12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.
    16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

    Steven Say:
    Evolution is accepted among many religions Why? Because there is overwhelming evidence.

    Bambi Says:
    Then those religions are wrong. I believe in the teaching of the Bible.

  20. If I am right evolution also means deleting the former state to a perfect state. If man came or evolve from apes then why does apes still exist? Does this mean that it (evolution) have an exception for apes as your ancestors?

    • Bambi said:
      May 19, 2011 at 5:02 am

      “If I am right evolution also means deleting the former state to a perfect state. If man came or evolve from apes then why does apes still exist? Does this mean that it (evolution) have an exception for apes as your ancestors?”

      No, you are not right and you are displaying an almost comical ignorance of the subject. You should take some time and actually study the subject prior to passing judgement on it. It’s kind of like saying you don’t like fruit even though you’ve never seen it, eaten it or even read about it.

      Bambi also said:
      May 18, 2011 at 4:59 am
      “Then those religions are wrong. I believe in the teaching of the Bible.”

      If that is true then you also believe in dragons. (Deuteronomy 32:33, Job 30:29, Psalm 74:13, Isaiah 27:1, Jeremiah 9:11, Micah 1:8)

      You believe in the Satyr, a creature of Greek mythology. It is a man with a goat’s legs, ears and horns. (Isaiah 13:21, Isaiah 34:34)

      You believe in the gigantic sea monster known as a Leviathan. (Job 3:8, Job 41, Psalm 74:14, Psalm 104:24-26, Isaiah 27:1)

      You believe in unicorns, referenced no less than 8 times in the bible. (Numbers 23:22, Numbers 24:8, Deuteronomy 33:17, Job 39:9-10, Psalm 22:21, Psalm 29:6, Psalm 92:10, Isaiah 34:7)

      You believe in the Cockatrice, a serpent hatched from a rooster’s egg that can kill with a glance. (Jeremiah 8:17, Isaiah 11:8, Isaiah 59:5, Isaiah 14: 29)

      You believe the earth is flat. The authors of scripture constantly reference the “four corners of the earth,” as if the world is a level plane. In fact, Daniel 4:11 speaks of a vision of a tree growing so tall, it
      touched the sky, making visible the “ends of the earth. Job 38:13 talks of the world being shaken “by the edges.” (Isaiah 11:12, Jeremiah 16:19, Revelation 7:1)

      You also believe that the entire (flat) earth can be seen from “an exceeding high mountain,” as when Satan tempted Jesus in Matthew 4 by showing him “all the kingdoms of the world.”

      You believe that the earth doesn’t rotate around the sun. It is “fixed” and “immovable.” (1 Chronicles 16:30, Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, Psalm 104:5, Isaiah 45:18)

      You believe that insects like the grasshopper, locust and cricket have FOUR legs, not six. (Leviticus 11:20-23)

      You believe that donkeys can talk and carry on a conversation (Numbers 22: 21-30)

      The most ironic thing? You probably didn’t even know you believed in these things until this moment.

      Akiva said:
      May 12, 2011 at 5:07 pm

      “steven,perhaps better if you face Bro.Eli in the debate”

      I’ve attempted to engage him but, he has chosen to not respond to me.

      • @ steven:

        he sys: “I’ve attempted to engage him but, he has chosen to not respond to me.”

        are you sure about this??? really??? i doubt it!

        ABOUT YOUR BIBLE INTERPRETATIONS:

        Your throw many doubts about the bible, in fact you disgraced the bible with your own interpretations about the verses you have read but ONE THING is for SURE! NONE OF THE WICKED WILL UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE!!! AND I BELIEVE YOUR ONE OF THEM!!!

        Daniel 1210. ” Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.”

      • Don’t tell me what I believe Steve. You have your interpretation of the four corners of the world and that is funny. Really no kidding. 🙂 If the bible says there are things like that then I believe. That is the essence of faith.

        Hebrews 11:1 (King James Version)
        Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

        Now if you don’t believe then don’t make it a big deal. No one is forcing you to do so. You are making it hard for yourself. 🙂

        Debate Bro Eli??? You are totally out of your mind. I never seen this man loose! Look at his statistic and make your own thoery and probability that the chance of you winning is 0%. Sorry but is is true. 🙂

  21. …only fool deny the existence of GOD … where he likes it or not , a scientist who is looking for facts and evidences , will witness that there is a God, because He’s existence is a fact… and as what i have learned as what was taught by my professor that is science is a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general law … therefore… if he is a scientist and don’t believe in God he is not a scientist but a … a big fool …. and a blind one … all the evidences and facts are around us and us …
    …we should hope and pray that one day they will woke up from a deep sleep of fantasies and illusions and will see what is happening in the real world…

  22. Wow. Your misunderstanding of evolution takes stupid to a new level. This article fails on many, many MANY points. You instantly lost me when you implies that a scientific theory could become “fact” through more testing. You clearly don’t even understand what a Scientific theory IS, and how something becomes a Theory.

    This is just a little sad.

    • Then how would you explain a scientific theory and how does something become a theory? You speak so proudly but you don’t even explain why, or maybe you cannot. Bro. Eli’s explanation about theories are logical, theories are theories unless proven through testing.

      You know what? I find your way of thinking very sad, not just a little.

      • Bo, let me explain the difference between common day usage of the word ‘theory’ and the scientific usage and description of the word.

        The word ‘Theory’ in common everyday language simply means an idea.
        In scientific terms, the word for something that is simply an idea is called a ‘hypothesis’.

        For a hypothesis to advance and become a theory in the scientific definition, it must survive repetitive tested and testable evidence. If even ONE test or evidence ever shows it to be incorrect then it is no longer qualified to be accepted as a theory.

        Perhaps that will help you to understand the terminology better.

  23. May God bless all of us in this blog, especially Bro Eli who devote his time in the study of God’s truth in spite of the enemy’s persecution, threats and the never ending maligning of his name. There is no use engaging these non-believers because there is no spirit of truth in their heart, and no matter what the bible, science and proof we present, they will always find fault. Many of us in the Church had also that chance to study in colleges and universities, and finished our bachelor, and masters decree; yet we are not yet learned until we heard Bro Eli who filled up the ‘vacuum’ in us, thru the study of the bible.

    Yes, Bro Eli is right, the missing link that non-believers continue to search, and will never find is the POWER OF GOD. The key then is listen to Bro Eli and Bro Daniel, and by the grace of the Almighty, your eyes might be opened, they way the multitude’s eyes were opened from the satanic blindness that has befallen many.

    We love you and will always support you Bro Eli, Bro Daniel, please go on with your evangelical mission.

  24. God’s Word + Science + Bro. Eli’s “analysis” = work of the Almighty God.To God be the glory.

  25. The problem with Bro Eli is that he claims he knows science but, in reality, thinks unscientifically. For example, he keeps asking the silly question “If evolution happens, why are there still monkeys?” People who ask questions like this betrays the fact that they DON’T ACTUALLY KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT EVOLUTION. If he really understood what the theory of evolution is really about, he would be ashamed to ask such a foolish question. He applies common sense against the theory of evolution but using common sense to explain everything about the world is misleading. Evolution is counterintuitive to common sense: that every creature needs a creator. (But saying the Earth is round also defies common sense.) But the EVIDENCE, however, disputes common sense. Evidence points to and squares perfectly with the evolutionary theory. And for that reason alone, that’s why scientists unilaterally accept it. And that is the only valid reason to accept it as real, not that you don’t like it or its implications.

    The only reason you people even dispute the theory of evolution is that you don’t like the implication that every living thing, including monkeys and slime mold, are actually related to us.(I don’t see any believers disputing the theory of relativity although it is just as counterintuitive as the evolutionary theory.) US! We’re HUMANS! We’re better than monkeys or slime mold! We’re the royalty of all living things! Heaven forbid our royal bloodline be contaminated by the dirty heritage of monkeys and slime mold! Hahahaha! So elitist! So proud and snobbish! Mga dugong bughaw! Hahahaha!

  26. BAMBI said:
    “Don’t tell me what I believe Steve. You have your interpretation of the four corners of the world and that is funny. Really no kidding. 🙂 If the bible says there are things like that then I believe.”

    It’s not interpretation, it’s a factual quote from the bible.
    The Bible actually says the earth if fixed and immovable. It’s not open to interpretation. It’s a statement of fact. Do you actually believe that the earth is fixed and immovable? Do you also actually believe that insects like the grasshopper, locust and cricket have FOUR legs?

    Akiva said
    “Steven , When and where did you challenge bro.Eli in the debate?

    I’ve challenged him multiple times on his Blog. He responds by deleting posts that show him that he was wrong. I was even forced to edit one entry because it contained too much truth.

    • Please cite the exact verses you are referring to.

      Don’t challenge a person in his blog. Firstly, Bro. Eli is so busy, he is not regularly updating his blog. Second, you aren’t sure if Bro. Eli himself is “deleting” posts.

      You can challenge him in his live Bible expositions perhaps, or a formal letter, through snail mail or email. Blog sites are not good bridges for debate.

  27. Great review! You actually covered some nice news here. I came across it by using Google and I’ve got to admit that I already subscribed to the RSS, it’s very great 🙂

  28. I’ve read evolution 101 of Berkeley Univ and it’s just so stupid. There is no “evidence of evolution”, not a single atheist has shown me that. They wrongly link natural selection and mutation to evolution, which cannot be accepted even in the court of law.

    I’ve met so many atheists and I’ve concluded that the “real” mainstream atheists suggests that big bang and evolution doesn’t refer to origins. Those “sidewalk” or “tambay” atheists believe the opposite. The “real” atheists believe evolution and big bang just because it is the ones generally accepted “predictions of natural tendencies”. They are left with no other explanation, so they accept it (that’s why they are called theories, which can be negated anytime, if new discoveries disprove them).

    What Bro. Eli is saying about the existence of monkeys, or chimps as the “closest” for evolutionists, is asking for the rationality of evolutionistic reasoning. What are the exact sets of conditions wherein a monkey, or whatever evolutionists call those ancestral forms, will evolve into an intelligent and less hairy form? No atheist has explained that to me, I’m not sure with others. To say evolution is true, it must perfectly describe the sets of conditions wherein a reptile will evolve into a bird or a frog into a croc. Then that’s how you will be able to answer the question why there are still gorillas and gibbons.

    • What’s the alternative? That God suddenly poofs animals into existence every 100,000 years or so and poofs other extinct animals out of existence? Funny. Even if you do not know EXACTLY what conditions made man out of ape-like beings, it’s funny that God made it SEEM that man came out of ape-like beings.

      The way that creatures that existed and became extinct throughout the Earth’s existence, their distribution and progression throughout history is consistent with the evolutionary theory. It fits and scientists agree with the results. And you actually have an idea how ape-like beings eventually became humans eventually: MICROEVOLUTION. Lots and lots of microevolution. You’re just being excessively difficult because you can’t accept you’re actually related to everything else living in this Earth. (Monkeys? Ewww.)

  29. @Bambi

    Never heard back from you. What’s your answer to my questions?

    You said: “If the bible says there are things like that then I believe.””

    My questions are:
    1. Do you believe that the earth is fixed and immovable?
    The bible says it is fixed and immovable so, I want to know if you believe that is actually is fixed and immovable?
    2. Do you believe that insects like the grasshopper, locust and cricket have FOUR legs?
    Again, the bible says they do so, I want to know if you also believe that too?

    • It’s funny that you think every word or phrase in the Bible is literal, no wonder you would never understand the knowledge of truth that is written in it, maybe your mind is shut or you’re just afraid to admit that this is it, that there is nothing else beyond death.

      Daniel 1210. ” Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.”

      Christ also said to eat his flesh and drink his blood, by your logic maybe we should become Cannibals =)

  30. @ superlucky20: So you admitted it, that you belong to the ones I consider “sidewalk” atheists. I was successful in that aspect. Thank GOD.

    You had admitted that just don’t have alternative. Those I consider scientific atheists say, and I agree based on the real concept, that evolution and big bang doesn’t explain, in any way, origins. But still they believe those theories, just like a fad, because “pseudo-scientists” believe it, too.

    “… it’s funny that God made it SEEM that man came out of ape-like beings”. This argument is foolish. Evolution is only on evolutionists mind, not on reality. You can show your so-called “evidences of evolution” or at least the best one of those evidences and I will show you, without a shadow of a doubt, that the generally accepted theory is stupid.

    Microevolution, as you call it, or horizontal variation, is a fact, i.e. breeds of dogs. But humans are not breed of monkeys. So you’re wrong.

    If it really happened that chimps are a kin to humans, then why will I not accept it, if that is really reality? But that is actually not. The argument is irrational, and until now, no one can give the exact set of conditions why ape-like species will “need” to “evolve” into higher intelligence, nor can anyone explain why a croc will need to fly or have mammary glands, though it’s babe doesn’t need it. The foundations of the darwinian theory is so weak.

    Until evolution explains everything accurately, the whole mechanism being so clear, it’s a trash.

    Anyway guys, it may be a waste of time arguing only on a theory, something that can be disproven anytime. Any better topics you can suggest? A law can be worthwhile.

    • Don’t thank God yet – I’m not done. I believe you mean sidewalk atheists as part-time theists, correct? I’m not sure why you’d say that about me. I think it’s because I’m honest in saying that I don’t know the origins. But that’s the difference between atheists and theists: atheists aren’t afraid to admit that they don’t know; theists make stuff up because they aren’t honest enough to admit that they don’t actually know.

      Why do I need an alternative? You say that as if beliefs are interchangeable like SIM cards in a cellphone. You either believe or you don’t. I believe in evolution; I don’t believe in the Genesis account. Should your Genesis account be an “alternative”? I can’t do that; you can’t either. You believe in one and reject the other. There are no alternatives in this case. Anyway, evolution does not involve itself in the origin of life; it is only possible when life already existed. You talk as if abiogenesis and evolution are the same thing and abiogenesis somehow discredits evolution. Sadly, it does not. God could’ve originally created life and still that would not disprove evolution. In fact, that’s what the hierarchy of the Catholic church believes. So you see, you can believe in both God and evolution; they’re not mutually exclusive.

      You said something funny: “If it really happened that chimps are a kin to humans, then why will I not accept it, if that is really reality?” My answer is: I don’t know. Maybe you’re mentally uncreative. Or maybe you’re overly biased. Or maybe you’re disgusted at the thought that you’re related to lower species. (Or all of the above.) I’m not really sure. Fun fact: do you know that there are people today that still believe in a FLAT EARTH? (http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/) And that there are also people today that still believe that the Earth is the CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE? (http://www.fixedearth.com/) Weird, huh? And the strange part is they’re both BIBLE-BELIEVING CHRISTIAN groups. I have to guess that maybe that’s the reason they reject good and established SCIENCE. So if you ask why you don’t believe in evolution even if it is considered factual by the entire scientific community, I’m not entirely sure. But I think your belief in the Bible has something to do with it. But understand this, it’s not because of the supposed weakness of the evolutionary theory that you don’t believe. A scientific assertion could have the strongest support of the scientific community and all the evidence like the shape of the Earth or the arrangement of the solar system (or evolution) but people will still not believe. It’s your fault and your fault alone that you don’t believe.

      Let me analyze you for a moment. You find evolution irrational not because it is actually irrational (it actually makes a lot of sense), but because ANOTHER belief counters it within your mind. And that is Genesis. You don’t believe in evolution because you value Genesis more highly than science. And those two things don’t and won’t mix. And rightfully so, you’re a madman if you believe BOTH are real at the same time. You either believe that one is real and the other is not. Other Christians have found a way around this discrepancy, however. Some have conceded that the Genesis account (Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Noah, etc) are just allegories. In effect, these people just gave up and said the Genesis account is a fable. Something had to give. But I think a great many Christians who believe in evolution just don’t think about the topic at all. (I was that way once but that’s a story for another time.) And then there are people like you and the geocentrists and the flat earthers who chose the Genesis account over science. The science gave way to unproven fantasy. That’s hardcore.

      In conclusion, let me mull over what you said: “Until evolution explains everything accurately, the whole mechanism being so clear, it’s a trash.” Evolution does explain the diversity of living creatures past and present quite elegantly and accurately. But you still won’t believe. Is that the failing of the evolutionary theory? That its evidences for its claims are as you say “a trash”? Of course not. While you pretend to be a scientist by trying to prove the Genesis account over actual science, the ACTUAL scientists are happy where they are, equally unmoved by Bro Eli’s retorts as you are to evolution’s. There’s no doubt within the community and there’s no reason to. The science is OK. The kids are all right. The Genesis account still lingers in your head with all its inconsistencies, anachronisms and flat-out weirdness. And while it’s still there, evolution can’t stay around. They don’t and won’t mix. The good news is you’re not crazy. (Yey!) But now I can’t think of flat earthers and geocentrists without thinking about you.

      Have a nice day.

      • @ superlucky20: I will thank GOD whatever happens, even if the world breaks into half or superlucky20 becomes a king. HE deserves all the praises and glory.

        1st paragraph: don’t think that all theists think that way. We members of the Church of GOD admit that we do not know a lot. Personally, I don’t know where Tartaro (abyss) is, where GOD originated, what will happen tomorrow, many things. Some things are useless to know that research is unnecessary.

        2nd paragraph: I’m confused with your reasoning. I did not say that belief in GOD and belief in evolution will always be different things. As you have explained, that’s correct and I agree. What I meant in my post is that you don’t have an alternative to evo that’s why you believe it. And I don’t believe it, and I don’t just say that I do not believe, I can prove it. I also didn’t mean that “interchangeable” issue. i apologize but maybe my English language is poor, but thank GOD i understand yours.

        3rd paragraph: Your trying to establish a connection between belief in the Bible and the belief of the ignorant people on a flat earth and an earth as center of the cosmos. Then you’re illogical. To prove your whole point, please cite the verses that say that the PLANET EARTH is flat.
        Actually man, you are judging me very wrong. Don’t jump into conclusions because you are not being scientific as you dream to be. To correct your many illogical reasoning, I will not use the Bible to disprove your evolution. I will use factual science. And another thing, please show evidence that evolution is considered FACTUAL by the ENTIRE scientific community. What I know is, evo is generally-accepted theory, not fact. It’s different, if you understand science.
        To quote Mr. Dawkins, “evolution is only a theory, which implies that, it is in doubt.” I’m pretty sure that I understand a bit of science because I have the same understanding as Mr. Dawkins on evo. You supelucky20 is exaggerating things.

        4th: same with 3rd. I won’t use to counter your evo. I’m very much aware that atheists will not accept the Bible verses as evidences, so I use science and logic.

        5th: same with 4th and 5th. Btw, I will explain the word “everything” that I mentioned by asking you 1 question, if you won’t mind: Can evolution explain the exact set of conditions, ELEGANTLY AND ACCURATELY, why a reptile will need either to have wings and feathers or to have mammary glands? I’ll be very glad if you can explain it without a shadow of a doubt left in me. Don’t worry, as you have explained and I believe so for a long time already, that you cannot compare creationism and evo because there is no common point: one explaining origins and another explaining process of development. I want to see the scientific logic. Thanks in advance if you can answer me. Or to make it easy, just explain the “wings and feathers” topic.

        Conclusion and summary: jezZ is not using Genesis or Bible to counter evo. i can use but I didn’t. superlucky was not lucky in analyzing my posts.

  31. @Bambi.

    Why won’t you respond?

    Why, when presented with facts, do you and others like you choose to simply ignore them and pretend they don’t exist?

    What is your answer to my questions?

    • Would you like to cite your sources?

      Please let us not mislead the readers. You numbered them, then you call them facts?

      Colossians 2:8
      King James Version (KJV)
      Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

      2 Timothy 3:16
      King James Version (KJV)
      All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

      May…
      Numbers 6:25
      New King James Version (NKJV)
      The LORD make His face shine upon you,
      And be gracious to you;

  32. Bo says:
    July 9, 2011 at 1:00 am

    “It’s funny that you think every word or phrase in the Bible is literal, no wonder you would never understand the knowledge of truth that is written in it, maybe your mind is shut or you’re just afraid to admit that this is it, that there is nothing else beyond death.”

    It wasn’t ME who said it is literal, it was Bambi (May 25, 2011 at 12:27 am) who said:

    “Don’t tell me what I believe Steve. You have your interpretation of the four corners of the world and that is funny. Really no kidding. 🙂 If the bible says there are things like that then I believe. That is the essence of faith.”

    I’ll quote it again: “if the bible says there are things like that then I believe.”

    I’m simply showing her that her statement is wrong and that you can’t believe that everything the bible says is true.

    You obviously agree when you state that the bible isn’t literal!

    Tell me, if those parts of the bible are wrong how many other parts can be believed too?
    Do you simply conveniently choose what you want to take literally and what you don’t want to take literally? Must be nice.

  33. @jv37id11101374t1259d4feb2011
    Who Said:

    “Would you like to cite your sources? Please let us not mislead the readers. You numbered them, then you call them facts?”

    Obviously, you don’t know your bible too well do you?

    >>Here’s where the bible says that locusts and grasshoppers have 4 feet:

    Lev. 11:20-23 (KJV)
    20 All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you.
    21 Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth;
    22 Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind.
    23 But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you.

    >>1 Chronicles 16:30 is one of three places where the bible says the earth is fixed and immovable:
    (New King James Version) Tremble before Him, all the earth. The world also is firmly established, It shall not be moved.
    (American Standard Version) Tremble before him, all the earth: The world also is established that it cannot be moved.
    (21st Century King James Version) Fear before Him, all the earth! The world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
    (English Standard Version) tremble before him, all the earth; yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved.
    (King James Version) Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
    (New American Standard Bible) Tremble before Him, all the earth; Indeed, the world is firmly established, it will not be moved.
    (New International Version) Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved.

    • @ steve: the translation is more clear in our (Tagalog) language than the english translation, because the terminology used is “legs above their feet”. In our language, it is clear that the said insects have “two longer legs than the other four”. I suggest that you check on the original language used, which is Hebrew, to be sure. The English translation is not clear.

      About the verse from Chronicles, it’s so simple. You know well the difference of world from Earth. Earth can be land (in this case) or planet, while world refers to inhabitants and their ways. Sorry, missed shot.

  34. Bro. Eli,

    We are praying for you that God will continue to bless & keep you under his divine care.

    Can i have your mail address as i need to personally ask you some concerns. Thanks/dang

  35. @Jezreel B. Magbanua who said:

    “About the verse from Chronicles, [the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.] it’s so simple. You know well the difference of world from Earth. Earth can be land (in this case) or planet, while world refers to inhabitants and their ways. Sorry, missed shot.”

    Let’s use your official brand new definition of the word ‘world’, the Hebrew word tevel (תבל), found in 1 Chronicles 16:30 and see how the verse now reads.

    “………..the inhabitants and their ways also shall be stable, that it be not moved.”

    Obviously, your conveniently made up new definition makes no sense. Saying that ‘tevel’ means “inhabitants and their ways” would require a complete rewriting of the Hebrew lexicon.

    The KJV verse reads just as it should when it says “…..the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.” because that was the common belief at the time of its writing. There is no need for you to try to redefine the Hebrew lexicon for your own selfish convenience.

    As you say………………….Sorry, missed shot.

  36. @Jezreel B. Magbanua who said:

    “About the verse from Chronicles, [the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.] it’s so simple. You know well the difference of world from Earth. Earth can be land (in this case) or planet, while world refers to inhabitants and their ways. Sorry, missed shot.”

    Let’s use your official brand new definition of the Hebrew word tevel (תבל), found in 1 Chronicles 16:30 and see how the verse now reads.

    “………..the inhabitants and their ways also shall be stable, that it be not moved.”

    Obviously, your conveniently made up new definition makes no sense. Saying that ‘tevel’ means “inhabitants and their ways” would require a complete rewriting of the Hebrew lexicon.

    The KJV verse reads just as it should when it says “…..the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.” because that was the common belief at the time of its writing. There is no need for you to try to redefine the Hebrew lexicon for your own selfish convenience.

    As you say………………….Sorry, missed shot.

  37. @ steve: pardon me, I’m not sure if my english language is correct. As I see, i did not make myself clear. Don’t accuse me of anything. I’m using dictionary definition, not establishing my own definition. From the dictionary, definition of “Earth” is also included in the word “world” as a planet, plus the things therein.

    If you can show us the literal meaning of the word “tevel” please show here. I don’t have Hebrew translator here.

    It’s funny that you still don’t realize up to now. Look here:

    “Tremble before him, all the earth: The world also is established that it cannot be moved.” Does the word “tremble” implies immobility? It’s clear with the word “Earth”. Disregard first the word “world” for argument’s sake. What I explained before is the difference in the terms.

    See, I didn’t missed a shot. It’s more of a dunk.

    About the insects, maybe you realized already your mistake, and carelessness in interpretation.

  38. So, you also believed in “lihi” Gen. 30:37-39. What is your scientific proof? I knew that you are crediting the science also as a standard of truth bec. you have a journal entitled “from dust to man A SCIENTIFIC PROOF”

  39. to Thor,

    to Christians, Bible is the standard of truth. It is just happen that even science agreed to Bible, Science follows the Bible and not vice versa. Scientific truth is differ with spiritual truth, and spiritual truth is the ultimate truth that science sometimes cannot comprehend.

    What we believe is that, God is powerful and almighty and for HIM, all things are possible. (Mark 10:27)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s