I thought a good place to start is to state some categorical misconception of ideas engrained in human thought against fact. Please fell free to add your own. Please when you disagree state clearly your perceived fact.


FICTION: God Loves everybody

FACT: Only a remnant of all humanity past present and future are the Object of his Love.

FICTION: Anyone gets a shot at going to heaven

FACT: Only the remnant of humanity who are objects of his Love are given the gift of eternal life in heaven. This is not a shot but a definite given gift non reversible non negotiable and non immutable.

FICTION: Future can be changed by humans using spells or anything else

FACT: The future is definite including all acts done by all creatures seen and unseen.

Welly, ninjani zalolezulu? Phila nje mntakababa, thina sisaphila ngapha kwelikaShamase.
Mfowethu, as you have stated that you are providing "facts" to correct "fiction" I feel you should lead the way in providing the supporting facts.
For instance, we lesser believers are under the impression that while we are still on this earth we have a chance to go to heaven. Preachers say that if we are reborn we will enter the kingdom of God. Where are they getting that. You say that is not true. What are you basing that on?

its intresting how faith(s) continue(s) to thrive despite the blatant truth being unleashed by science.
FICTION:there is heaven
FICTION:the future can be changed using spells
FACT:the future can be changed using "anything else".although the technology is still primitive it is a fact through bio-engeneering and bio-tech future humans will be able to live "double" our life by "postponing organ degenation"

Welly, ukuthatha ngaphi ukuthi "Only the remnant of humanity who are objects of his Love are given the gift of eternal life in heaven. This is not a shot but a definite given gift non reversible non negotiable and non immutable." yi Fact?
lokuthi "Anyone gets a shot at going to heaven" yiFiction? thats your understanding of izinto lezi but hardly fact or fiction. ungowayiphi inkolo?
Mpumelelo are you into Biotech? I love what you put as a fact, although i dont see it as a fact, i see it as a posibility. kodwa iFiction yakho, cha, asivumelani!

FICTION: Theory of Evolution
FACT: creationism
FACT: Theistic evolution

i am not into biotech i am into enlightment.current scientific possibilities are future scientific facts,to abantu who lived in shakas time it was a possibility/a wish that you could do organ transplants kithi its a fact!! .given that the earth is over 5 billion years old(FACT;as revealed using indisputable dating techniques) you will be naive to rule "evolution" as fiction.ucabangani about genetic engeneering!!what about the unfortunate fact that we are genetically related with animals as exposed by DNA(or its GOD's dna since he created everything)?about creationism the world/universe is not a perfect place as seen from outer space its a "hell", i assume a superior being will create a (near)perfect place!

ungani angikutholi kahle uma ungibuza ukuthi ngicabangani nge genetic engineering. Well that's a fact, phela a fact is something which is known to exist, kule proof yakhona, and there is proof of genetic engineering and we live with it. How can one dispute that? Something that has a possibility of existing in the future cannot be a fact today. For instance, there is a possibility of coming up with a vaccine against the H.I Virus. The vaccine is not a fact today, it might be in future but what is fact today is the possibility. A possibility has a probability of failure and so we cannot say today's possibilities are tomorrow’s facts. They might be or might not.

Why would you think that the FACT that we are genetically related to animals is unfortunate? The structure of the genetic material is universal, with subtle differences here and there, but the gene expression and regulation is different. You probably have studied genetics and I assume you understand the complexity of gene regulation and control. But how does that prove your point? Even the endosymbiotic theory doesn’t present enough evidence for me to discard creationism.

You see, your greatest problem is that creationism cannot be disproved as easily as Friedrich claimed to have disproved vitalism by synthesising urea from inorganic components. Are you an atheist?

Mina ngikholwa iTheistic Evolution mfowethu.

isingisi is not my first (or second) language so i might have unwittingly shifted focus from my main point which is:ama new technologies especially in bio-science are enabling us to play "GOD" by genetically engineering anything(from plants to pets,humans are pending, its a matter of time!!).saying that heaven exists/GOD created the earth is not a fact but a mere proposal which is bound to be discredited just like the ancient european proposal that the world was flat.

Cha mfo, I don’t think ulimi lubeludubo. I think yimi-nje ebengingakutholi kahle. Uyabona, we can only play God if we synthesize an organism from nothing. I view genetic engineering in the same way I do procreation. Do we play God when we procreate? I know these are different coz in engineering, genetic material can be moved from one species to another which may even belong to a different kingdom. Uyabona I believe God gave human being a superior brain and we are using that to manipulate other organisms (including and especially microbe) and the environment for our good. We just manipulate, we don’t make from scratch. Even if we can “synthesize” DNA in vitro, we still need cells somewhere along the process.

Banewethu
Now this is beautiful. It is inspiring so much even lami engingazi luthi kulezi ngizwa kuthi ngivuke ngisiya elibrary kusasa. Manje what books should I look into? Qhubekani njalonje, Well done!

(if) GOD gave us a superior brain i wonder why (most)religions especially jadaism,chritianity and islam cry foul and through their influence,thrwat us when we suggest using discarded human embryoes or stem cells to further medical science as they say GOD and only HIM has the power to create life hence we shouldn't play HIM.our superior intelligence is being thrwated by religious dogmar the same way it delayed ancient astronomers into revealing that the world is round and that the earth isn't the centre of the universe!!of cause when we procreate we don't play GOD maar when we artificially stop dangerous and deadly "inheritable" medical conditions(which natural/GODly procreation can't!!) from passing to the next generation through genetic engeneering i believe we are playing GOD!!

Well I suppose the whole thread has got me off guard. I need to rethink how to put my thoughts across. My intention was not to go into all the thinking outside Theology that is the study of God. I prefer we examine the things about God that we can deduce both from creation and Logic. Then we verify those things by Logic on the basis of fact or fiction.

The dating of creation by scientific study is not fact its an assumption with assumed variables hence not fact. The bible dates creation to approximately 5700 years and still counting. The bible states also that God has fixed a date he will destroy creation and create it anew.

Will think again and respond to view points.

Ngiyaboga banewethu keep the facts and fiction states coming.

Salobonani bakithi.
I must say that this topic has been one of the most interesting so far. I think genetic engineering is ok as it helps us understand and even reverse some of the conditions that some people are born with, like the Downs' syndrome and other degenaretive diseases including Alzheimer and Parkinson's disease. These conditions come as a result of things not going well genetically during growth and development. Scientific advances (genetics in this case)have resulted in us reversing some of "nature's" mistakes.
However things do not go down well with me when people start to talk about human cloning. Is there a need for scientists to create another Mgabe or even Mandela for that matter. Whose soul will this 'new' person have? If its the same soul then does it mean we are now on the verge of being immortal beings? Death will be meaningless! Amadlozi or God angathini kodwa?
If genetic engineering is done for the benefit of the human being, the better. I mean we can produce more food that is not only delicious but nutricious and even contains antibiotics and who knows maybe vaccines against HIV.
Believe me, some of these will be possible in the near future.

my man if you are a religious person be very afraid ngoba a bio-tech tsunami is on the verge of being unleashed. not only will we be able to design babies and "create" new living organisms by manipulating genes men will get pregnant and give birth!! the era of "nature" is about to evaporate into thin air!!

FICTION; Size does not matter!
TRUTH; Size does matter!

Hi guys, I hope you all are doing well. Mina ngiphilile noma-nje ngidiniwe. Ngiyakuzwa Mpumelelo, while what you are saying is possible and likely, there is the issue of bioethics. I believe while there is a whole lot of possibilities, there is a limit to what we can do and remain with a clear conscious (collectively). The era of ‘nature’ cannot evaporate into thin air; it will remain our starting point.

I have been following this thread with both keen and kin interest. Let me hasten to say, it's one of the best upon which we have descended, simply because it engages both the faith based and the fate based i.e religion vs science or evolution vs creation, and bettermost this thread sidelines the politician for a while. lami ngizalinga ukuphosa okuluvana kwami, as usual, with respect and without fear.

Brother Welly has unwaveringly distinguished what is fact from what is fiction, and the question is, what is the truth? I sincerely believe that you intentionally and purposefully separated truth and fact on this topic.

BIBLICAL TEACHINGS Vs GENETIC MORDIFICATION]

1. "Playing God"

First and foremost, the person(s) who first used this particular phrase on this thread, take no offence, i'm handling the phrase from it's general usage. When i come across this phrase in science modules, i can't help it, but burst out loughing. on previous pages they claim we are a product of fate and chance, there is no God, we evolved, and when they start dealing with genetic mordification they claim to be playing god, how then does one role play the non-existant?

2. Scientific creation vs God's Creation

I think the word creating or creation has been used, misused and abused wishfully by the science world. when God created He had no matter to manipulate or mordify, He began with nothing and ended with the universy. however scientists are claiming to be playing god by creating new species, when in essence is by manipulating or mordifying God's creation, to me there is a big gap, we can only seek to understand and unlock God truth hidden in the universy with infinite possibilities, we can't play God. when it comes to life , independent from existing life as we know it, if science brings it's own living organism, i'll come and worship science because only God can give life, and for that matter i worship Him.

Clonning

this is the most feared might be scientific achievement, in Christendom. the biggest question is whose soul will the look-alike being possess? will they go to heaven upon their death? will they be within God's budget? and so on. i know my biblical understanding on the so-called souls will sound not only eccentric but very derogatory to assumed human suprimacy above other organisms.

to calm the fears of most Christians, clonning is still in it's primary stages when it comes to humans, stem-cell research got a knock on the head in South Korea, one leading researcher falsified his team's findings, removing some years of hope.

Biblically speaking, humans do not own any souls, humans are living souls, that is if, and only if the God's natural equation is still balanced i.e DUST + BREATH OF LIFE =LIVING SOUL. the breath of life belongs to God and it is uniform across creation the one in a dog is exactly the same as the one in humans, upon death it goes back to the source not as anybody' but breath of life and the dust belongs to the earth. hence upon the second coming Jesus will have to revitalise the same dust from the grave with the ruahi or the fire, the breath of life. When he raised Lazarus from the dead He does not gaze into the heavens where the good like Lazarus are suppossedly go upon their death, but rather he goes to the tomb and ask him to come forth, and he did.

scientifically speaking, every cell, organelle, organ and finally organism, respect the creation equation, therefore any stage in life, save for organism level, is not you , meaning your arm can be given to someone, your kidney, your sterm-cell. even if the new being look's like you, your clone or the clone, he is not you and he must respect the above equation, my hommie w'd 've said, "tha nigga ain't m'". if they want to reproduce me they'll have to replicate not only my genes, which they hope they'll be able one day, but my entire environment for the past 92 years, which is and has evidently shaped my being, and may be use a super machine to upload my memory on the new dude.

therefore, personally i don't see any religious concerns as far as clonning is concerned, if it will ever happen to humans God w'd have allowed it, if not it will remain what it is, wishful thinking, i don't see any wrong doing in trying, the Al-chemists tried whatever they were called, even if their quest failed they left us some useful knowledge.

i strongly and sincerely believe that science and God are in complete harmony, only that some scientists have used the discipline as tool for their rebeliousness and demonic ends. science is nothing other than the quest to understand the operation of God's natural laws. if any branch of science is more than that, i'd love to study it.

lak'sasa.

on playing "GOD"you should have realised that the GOD is normally in quotes, scientifically it is used hypocritically, to reinforce the FACT that actually it is scientifically possible to create something more like what "GOD" is believed to have done but science goes a step further by creating proper beings ie by understanding genes we can isolate harmful ones and stop degenerative diseases from passing to the next generation which "GOD",through "natural"creation has failed to do in over a billion years of life in the universe!!

As usual emz you have spoken well. To be true I was without words quite unusual and did not have a clue as to what to respond to and how. I totally agree being a scientist does not in anyway challenge God or make one God either for they only deal with what has already been created. Surely are our mothers gods when they cook and come up with new recipies, or btanists when they repoduce new varieities of roses. Yes even humans have attempted to reproduce new species with very little success like cross between a donkey and zebra produces a sterile mule which can never be further crossed. Some genetic modifications even produce lethal combinations and it is science on a razor edge so to speak. Non of this as you have pointed out Emz has anything to do with torpedoeing faith in Christ as the substitution for our sin problem.

For Christ himself is the truth and life for he is the creator and holder of all knowledge.

Bafowethu.

Imnandi li ndaba.

Ngicindezele>>>> Mina ngikholwa iTheistic Evolution mfowethu.<<<<ngime ukucindezela.

MANYATHELA, kuyini i "Theistic Evolution?" hk hk hk hk.

Li Zwangendaba.

Zwangendaba,ususenza iMischief!

ngum'bono nje othi inkolo le Evolution akuphikisani. Thina abantu yithi esingafisa ukuthi sikwehlukanise. Phela ukuthi things evolve akutsho ukuthi azidalwanga nguMdali, kutsho ukuthi wazidala with the intrinsic (ku DNA) ability to evolve. ngalokho-ke njengekholwa, ngiyazi ukuthi izidalwa ziya evolva kodwa hatshi ngendlela abayibeka ngayo ama atheist. Organisms have no ability to evolve from one species or genus in a certain kingdom to another in a different one. Cha, ngiyala. If that’s how we evolved, why don’t the geneticist, cell biologists, physiologists etc team up and try to prove that by accelerating evolution of, say, a bacteria into an elephant for instance? Or if an elephant seems to be too complicated, lets say from bacteria to impolompolo? Or into a novel organism that wouldn’t be classified under any known class of organisms?
Yikho mfowethu ngisithi mina umbono iTheistic evolution yiwo engilawo.

Manyathela
I have never understood how and why scientists should have to "prove" evolutionary theory by the creation of an organism ex exordium. Asuming that they could, what would they then do with this newly created organism- what purpose would it serve? The science that we see today is primarilly concerned with improving the lot of man. I doubt if the creation of an organsim ex exordium would achieve this!
If God did indeed created the world and everything in it then it follows that all the organisms that God created had defined characteristics and abilities. That is when God created an organism such as a bacteria he did not give it the ability to make for example insulin. However throught genetic engineering a bacterial cell can be made to produce insulin in gram quantities. Maize and soya plants as God created them did not have the genes for pesticide resistance yet today it is possible to impart such characteristics to these and other plants through what is loosely referred to as "cloning"(There are different types of cloning!) Today you could if you wanted choose the gender of your baby when previously you could not. To that end what these preceeding examples show is that at some level man is playing God
Your challenge to scientists to create an elephant from a bacteria is a somewhat empyt one. This is because you have ignored one of the basic tenets of Darwinian evolutionary theory- chance or perhaps more scientifically random mutations in the DNA of the organisms that then result in that member/s of the species having a competitive advantage over others. Because the mutations are random i.e cannot be predicted and purely left to chance it means that scientists would find it nigh impossible to achieve the task that you have set them.
Secondly you state that you are believe in theistic evolution but you then go on to dispute the origin of the species from one common ancestor.Indeed in one of your earlier posts you assert that evoulutionary theory is a fiction!! Rather than a theistic evolutionist you sound more like a creationist with leanings towards intelligent design! Indeed you assert in that same post that creationism is fact. Phumela egcekeni mfethu - uyi creationist oro uyi theistic evolutinist?
I concur that theistic evolution offers an "escape" route that alllows compatibility between science and religion (specifically Christianity). It has been suggested that the level of order, organisation and beauty of life at the molecular level is simply stunning to have been a happy accident. The theory of evolution and the bible can thus be viewed as answering two different questions; HOW and WHY respectively

well said!but i don't see how theisic evolution is an escape root when the bible claims the world is around 5000 years old whereas scientifically the earth is 6.5 billion years old!!oro does it refer to the jewish world as being 5000 years and the rest of the unchosen people's world as 6.5 billion?

This goes back to the two questions of WHY and HOW. Why because God saw that it was good and how -through the process of evolution. Thus the claim of how old the world is ceases to be an issue since it becomes accepted that the bible is not a literal or historical account of how old the world is but rather it explains why the world was created but not how. The how part is then accounted for by the Darwninian theory of evolution.

Jazi, sawubona mfowethu. Ngithemba uphilile labanye bonke la enkundleni.
Jazi bengingathanda ukuthi break down your post besengiphendula one issue after the other. Unfortunately angisoze ngenelise ngenxa yesikhathi.
Firstly, I must point out that I agree with some of the things you wrote ngoba phela they are basic facts.
I actually took into consideration the chance you are talking about. Random mutations can be induced and different artificial conditions can be set or created. This is why I said why can’t they come up with a novel organism? The fact—as you rightly pointed out—that scientist would find the task impossible to achieve could be an indication that evolution, as explained by atheist, is highly unlikely. Angazi kumbe uyangithola.
Uthe ngiphumele egcekeni whether I am a creationist or theistic evolutionist. Umbono wami yilo: nxa umuntu ekhula, zinengi izinto asifundayo. Ezinye ngama facts kanti njalo ezinye yimibono lamaTheories abanye abantu. Facts are facts and you can’t just reject them. To reject them, you would have to prove them wrong, but since they are facts, they can’t be proved wrong. On the other hand, a theory or an opinion is just that and its up to an individual to either accept it as it is, (if it makes sense to them) reject it (if it doesn’t), modify it (if part of it makes sense), etc etc. am I a creationist or theistic evolutionist? I believe both with minor modifications. Like I said in other posts, I believe organisms where created with intrinsic ability to evolve. I believe we were made superior to all other organisms and hence our ability to manipulate them and the environment for our good. I don’t believe all organisms have a common ancestor. You might ague then and say I should probably come up with the term to describe what I believe.
Ngiyabonga.