U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 01-18-2011, 03:40 PM
 
6,039 posts, read 9,219,724 times
Reputation: 3933

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
"Answers in Genesis"!!! Are you kidding?
Exactly. The National Inquirer of biblical "proof".

 
Old 01-18-2011, 03:45 PM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,442,202 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane View Post
So if I say that "the cow did not jump over the moon" you expect me to prove that it didn't? If I say that the "moon is not made out of cheese" you expect me to go up there and prove that it is not made out of cheese? If I say that dead people did not rise out of their graves and "were seen by many" in Jerusalem you expect me to prove this did not happen?
Everyone knows the cow did not really jump over the moon unless one is insane. So I would not ask you to prove it didn't.
Same goes for the cheese moon.

However, the people coming out of the tombs was never meant to be make believe. So, yes, you'd have to prove they did not come out of their tombs since it was taken to be fact to begin with.

Quote:
You CAN'T prove none of these things happen (either) but you can BELIEVE them by faith DESPITE the unlikeliness of such things.

Anyway, Raifus asks you to do some homework.
I can't take by faith the moon is made of cheese or a cow jumping over the moon because they are meant to be fictitious. I can take people coming out of their tombs by faith because it was written as factual by an eyewitness. What you would have to do is PROVE that what I take by faith is false.
 
Old 01-18-2011, 03:51 PM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,442,202 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercury Cougar View Post
Exactly. The National Inquirer of biblical "proof".
In other words, Mercury Cougar cannot disprove what my link says so he has to make fun of it. Yea, that's mature.
 
Old 01-18-2011, 03:58 PM
 
16,301 posts, read 24,254,280 times
Reputation: 8261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
Both the Egyptians and the Chinese have written records stretching back to and beyond the alleged date of this mythical flood.
The fable says the flood killed everyone save for the very few on the ark, so whom do your propose as the authors of these records?
 
Old 01-18-2011, 04:00 PM
 
4,480 posts, read 4,222,930 times
Reputation: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
No, I could care less if you don't believe the bible that the sun stood still. What I hate is you coming here making puerile statements that the sun could not possibly have stood still based solely on your word it could not have.

It is incumbant upon the detractor to PROVE the sun could not have stood still if he says it could not.

You ask for other posters to prove that certain events didn't happen (the flood or the sun standing still.) But when we give reasonably logical and scientific reasons why these things could not and did not occur. You either dismiss them as not creditable out of hand without a logical retort as to why or you fall back on mysticism and miracles.

Oh, and if you want to try having a intelligent debate try spell check before you hit submit reply. Misspellings detract somewhat from your intellectual creditability. (which you can ill afford)
 
Old 01-18-2011, 04:02 PM
 
16,301 posts, read 24,254,280 times
Reputation: 8261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
In other words, Mercury Cougar cannot disprove what my link says so he has to make fun of it. Yea, that's mature.
I believe that MC is dismissing the bible as a book of fantasy, and it is so outrageous in claims that it is dismissed out of hand just like reasonable people dismiss the National Enquirer. And yet I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find those that see the NE as a factual and accurate publication.

The source holds no credibility in either case.
 
Old 01-18-2011, 04:15 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
13,900 posts, read 9,668,418 times
Reputation: 2402
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-Ducky View Post
-Please, where's the records?
In Egyptian and Chinese history. Or easier if you like just research Egypt's "Old Kingdom". Look up the list of Pharaohs for the date of the alleged flood (I assume you know when your flood was supposed to have happened as per your Bible) and see if there is a gap in the succession of Pharaohs for that period...there isn't.

Quote:
-I'm sure Noah probably had some money to pay for a crew.
Nope, you're simply speculating. No others are mentioned in your Bible other than Noah and his gang.

Quote:
-Well, lets see, if He spoke and there was light.... that's an easy one.
Ah! Magic again.

Quote:
-A year? Hunh. Let me see.

-Accually my New Living Translation say five months.
Genesis 8.

"The water receded steadily from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone down, and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. 5 The waters continued to recede until the tenth month, and on the first day of the tenth month the tops of the mountains became visible."

So we see above that Noah was still inside the ark and therefore, still caring for his animals after 10 months. Then....

"He waited seven more days and again sent out the dove from the ark.

He waited seven more days and sent the dove out again, but this time it did not return to him."
When the dove returned to him in the evening, there in its beak was a freshly plucked olive leaf! Then Noah knew that the water had receded from the earth. He waited seven more days and sent the dove out again, but this time it did not return to him.
"

So we see that Noah was aboard his boat with his animals for a total of 10 months and two weeks. We have confirmation that neither he nor his animals emerged before that period, ....again in Genesis 8 (after the waters had receded)

Then God said to Noah, “Come out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and their wives. Bring out every kind of living creature that is with you—the birds, the animals, and all the creatures that move along the ground—so they can multiply on the earth and be fruitful and increase in number on it."

So sorry but according to the word of your god, it wasn't 5 months it was 10 months and 2 weeks which, I think you'll agree, is nearer to a year.

Quote:
It's sad, I know, but this is the best one you had.
Perhaps, but it's clear that you have no answer to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
No, if someone comes up to me and tells me the world-wide flood in Noah's day could not have happened they have to back up their statement with scientific proof.
Would you even read it if I give it to you?


Quote:
I backed up my statement there was a flood with scientific proof.
No you didn't. You backed up your statement with "Answers in Genesis"...a Bible literalist, fundie website that is well known for 'Lying for Jesus' which contains, I think, only two people who have any acredited scientific qualification.

Quote:
It would help if you could prove Jesus did not walk on water.
It would help if you could prove Jesus even existed.

Last edited by Rafius; 01-18-2011 at 04:56 PM..
 
Old 01-18-2011, 04:55 PM
 
Location: New York City
5,556 posts, read 6,717,352 times
Reputation: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Everyone knows the cow did not really jump over the moon unless one is insane.
There are kids with "faith" that believe it did. They are applying the same process you apply to parts of the bible (an incredulous story or miracle). They read or have a story read to them, they believe it despite NEVER seeing such a thing and that's all that matters. Guess they're insane then.

Quote:
However, the people coming out of the tombs was never meant to be make believe.
Do you have scientific proof of this? That is, that it was NOT meant to be.

Quote:
So, yes, you'd have to prove they did not come out of their tombs since it was taken to be fact to begin with.
There are quite a few Christians who would tell you that it was NOT meant to be factual and they are no less Christian than you. It's YOUR opinion against theirs so I wonder who is right?



Quote:
I can't take by faith the moon is made of cheese or a cow jumping over the moon because they are meant to be fictitious. I can take people coming out of their tombs by faith because it was written as factual by an eyewitness. What you would have to do is PROVE that what I take by faith is false.
So you can determine, 2,000 years later what was meant to be fictitious (as if you knew the authors like that) and what isn't?
 
Old 01-18-2011, 05:00 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
13,900 posts, read 9,668,418 times
Reputation: 2402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
I can take people coming out of their tombs by faith because it was written as factual by an eyewitness.
...and that eyewitness would be who?
 
Old 01-18-2011, 05:02 PM
 
Location: East Coast
30,239 posts, read 20,001,723 times
Reputation: 2108
Wyatt Archaeological Research Fraud Documentation (WAR, W.A.R.)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top