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.
That's what the atheists say about the bible God too in the present day. So, evidently from the beginning of time, God has always made His presence felt. Now examine the mesapo something myth that was said to be the source of Noah story. If it has mythical figures like centaur, sphynx in it, then I will agree it is a myth. But if it doesn't, then I think it happened. This vid said it did:
And these geologists(?) agree there really was black sea flooding that happened. But the timeline does not coincide with the bible times of Noah. That's why I argue, what if timeline of the bible is not what was presented.
I think historians has really confused me. I actually realized just now about God's presence during the BC years. Why does history presents God's presence ONLY during bible timeline. What about the BC years? They are God's children too.
My point is forget the names used, they may be different based on timeline(the culture and knowledge during those times). But if you concentrate on the story, and if the story remains the same, well then the SOURCE may be one and the same. Even in the present bible, God has used different names.
Well the evolutionists say there are no archaelogical evidence of the bible. So, there. But, well of course why would I ever think this fact means anything to them, silly me.
They do not mean that there is no archaeological evidence that the texts of the Bible existed.
They'd be referring to archaeological evidence of claims made in the Bible.
That's what the atheists say about the bible God too in the present day. So, evidently from the beginning of time, God has always made His presence felt. Now examine the mesapo something myth that was said to be the source of Noah story. If it has mythical figures like centaur, sphynx in it, then I will agree it is a myth. But if it doesn't, then I think it happened. This vid said it did:
And these geologists(?) agree there really was black sea flooding that happened. But the timeline does not coincide with the bible times of Noah. That's why I argue, what if timeline of the bible is not what was presented.
I think historians has really confused me. I actually realized just now about God's presence during the BC years. Why does history presents God's presence ONLY during bible timeline. What about the BC years? They are God's children too.
My point is forget the names used, they may be different based on timeline(the culture and knowledge during those times). But if you concentrate on the story, and if the story remains the same, well then the SOURCE may be one and the same. Even in the present bible, God has used different names.
BTW, joyk, and NOT wanting, oh please god, to get into yet another Noah's Ark debate, this video of yours is the original Ron Wyatt official hoax site that the Turkish gov'mint has officially approved. Unfortunately, the geologists who have inspected it found rock. A typical upthrust basalt outcropping, and nothing more. Certainly not a boat (what, a "fossilized" boat?).
Turkey however, smelling moolah, set up a gift shop, parking lot and guided tours, hoping to soak the gullible (they take Visa, MC or, of course, Amex [the card carried by millions of well-heeled Yanquee touristaz...]).
This is quite different from the other "absolute" Ark site, up on Mt. Ararat, that the NAMI group (Noah's Ark Ministries International, a Chinese Theme Park development group) claimed 4 years ago to have discovered the real, intact Ark, with, of course, 99.9% surety. Only later did they openly admit that they had no possible way of making such a statement, but if it only converted but one person to Christianity (or paid one of the group's exorbitant salaries or travel expenses to return to Turkey...), hey: it was worth the purposeful deception. Essentially, also known as lies.
Christianity has to be ever-vigilant of their own, I'd say. Don't you agree? and so, ditto with all the various claims made about the Dead Sea Scrolls.
BTW, joyk, and NOT wanting, oh please god, to get into yet another Noah's Ark debate, this video of yours is the original Ron Wyatt official hoax site that the Turkish gov'mint has officially approved. Unfortunately, the geologists who have inspected it found rock. A typical upthrust basalt outcropping, and nothing more. Certainly not a boat (what, a "fossilized" boat?).
Turkey however, smelling moolah, set up a gift shop, parking lot and guided tours, hoping to soak the gullible (they take Visa, MC or, of course, Amex [the card carried by millions of well-heeled Yanquee touristaz...]).
This is quite different from the other "absolute" Ark site, up on Mt. Ararat, that the NAMI group (Noah's Ark Ministries International, a Chinese Theme Park development group) claimed 4 years ago to have discovered the real, intact Ark, with, of course, 99.9% surety. Only later did they openly admit that they had no possible way of making such a statement, but if it only converted but one person to Christianity (or paid one of the group's exorbitant salaries or travel expenses to return to Turkey...), hey: it was worth the purposeful deception. Essentially, also known as lies.
Christianity has to be ever-vigilant of their own, I'd say. Don't you agree? and so, ditto with all the various claims made about the Dead Sea Scrolls.
HEY RIFLEMAN! The Ark is real and you don't know what you're talking about with all your silly sciency stuff! You can't prove anything! I expect you to limit your response to doctoral thesis length and make me laugh a minimum of 40 seperate times.
Well the evolutionists say there are no archaelogical evidence of the bible. So, there. But, well of course why would I ever think this fact means anything to them, silly me.
Point is, that so far, there have been absolutely no credible archeological finds for the various biblical miracle stories. no verification of a parting sea, no Noah's Ark, not even the fabled cities of Sodom or Gomorrah. Meantime, we do have relaible documents from the Chinese, the Egyptians and others that are in direct contradicton of biblical chronologies.
So what do I (we scientists) mean by credible? Well, briefly (but also "obviously"):
1) stories or artifacts confirmed by in-focus, or good quality video, along with views leading up to the site and of surrounding country (i.e. not produced in a shed in south Orange County, California!). Accurate measurements, aerial photos, surveys and other absolute, verifiable numbers. Absolutes, not the fervent hopes of or for....
2) confirming reports by other, independent but credible observers. Preferably from some other organization. but never from the organization with an obvious agenda.
3) confirmation of age, location, historical artifacts, corroborating stories or documentation for surrounding areas or artifacts, etc.
4) etc., etc. In other words, good, solid credible, corroborative, documented evidence, not the wishful statements of those with the biggest gains to be made.
I'm always amazed at how Christian claimants fight these basic and logical requirements, when if they would only agree to them, and go find such unambiguous evidence, their valuable stories or claims would be substantiated.
Oddly, they NEVER do this simple step. What, are they tremblingly afraid of putting their claims under such scrutiny? They always claim science won't accept the "evidence" placed in front of them. They don't realize that good science ALWAYS includes these necessary steps to confirm a new discovery, especially when it's of ground-breaking significance (like for instance the discovery of an actual Noah's Ark. I mean, just think!) But no.. They're happy to accept the word and some really out of focus photos from a Theme Park developer? Whats' with that?
I can only conclude that they know full well that their faker story won't hold up under unbiased careful scrutiny. As as the case with the recent NAMI claims. These stories NEVER Do; they have a history now, and it's NEVER good. It NEVER follows through. So yes, after 60 years of purposeful fakery, hoaxes and biased nonsense, we've become sorta biased. Wouldn't you be?
But please: do show us one good story and related, valid, verifiable corroborating evidence and we'll go take an honest and objective look. And no, we won't EVER just take anyone's first word for it, not even from a credible scientist. We have to protect our reputation for veracity and accuracy, after all. You'd do the same, right? I mean, if it was your professional reputation and career?
Point is, that so far, there has been absolutely no credible archeological finds or biblical miracle stories in the field.
So what do I (we scientists) mean by credible? Well, briefly:
1) confirmed by in-focus, or good quality video, along with views leading up to the site and of surrounding country (i.e. not produced in a shed in south Orange County, California!). Accurate measurements, aerial photos, surveys and other absolute, verifiable numbers. Absolutes, not the fervent hopes of....
2) confirming reports by other, independent but credible observers. Preferably from some other organization. but never from the organization with an obvious agenda.
3) confirmation of age, location, historical artifacts, corroborating stories or documentation for surrounding areas or artifacts, etc.
4) etc., etc. In other words, good, solid credible, corroborative, documented evidence, not the wishful statements of those with the biggest gains to be made.
I'm always amazed at how Christian claimants fight these basic and logical requirements, when if they would only agree to them, and go find such unambiguous evidence, their valuable stories or claims would be substantiated.
Oddly, they NEVER do this simple step. What, are they tremblingly afraid of putting their claims under such scrutiny? They always claim science won't accept the "evidence" placed in front of them. They don't realize that good science ALWAYS includes these necessary steps to confirm a new discovery, especially when it's of ground-breaking significance (like for instance the discovery of an actual Noah's Ark. I mean, just think!) But no.. They're happy to accept the word and some really out of focus photos from a Theme Park developer? Whats' with that?
I can only conclude that they know full well that their faker story won't hold up under unbiased careful scrutiny. As as the case with the recent NAMI claims. These stories NEVER Do; they have a history now, and it's NEVER good. Never follows through. So yes, after 60 years of purposeful fakery, we've become sorta biased. Wouldn't you?
But please: show us one good story and evidence and we'll go tak a look. no, we won't EVER just take anyone's first word for it, not even from a credible scientist. WE have to protect our reputation for veracity and accuracy, after all. You'd do the same, right? if it was your professional rep?
Hmmph. That's all fine and good, but what about:
1. Ica Stones of Peru
2. Stegosaurus relief sculptures at the Cambodian temple of Angkor Wat
3. Human footprints next to dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy River in Texas
4. Chinese expeditions and alpine spiders
5. Late 1970s/early 1980s GPS usage when the constallation wasn't even operational yet.
6. Consider this website...consider that website
HEY RIFLEMAN! The Ark is real and you don't know what you're talking about with all your silly sciency stuff! You can't prove anything! I expect you to limit your response to doctoral thesis length and make me laugh a minimum of 40 seperate times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville Native
1,000 yards, 7 mph crosswind left.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fullback32
Hmmph. That's all fine and good, but what about:
1. Ica Stones of Peru
2. Stegosaurus relief sculptures at the Cambodian temple of Angkor Wat
3. Human footprints next to dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy River in Texas
4. Chinese expeditions and alpine spiders
5. Late 1970s/early 1980s GPS usage when the constallation wasn't even operational yet.
6. Consider this website...consider that website
Ok, what have I left out?
CNN Reports:
"A well-armed but seemingly geriatric man, carrying what seems to be an outlandishly accurate looking firearm that even scared the local PD SWAT Team Leader, was seen schlumping up a local tower that overlooks a large Southern Neo-Baptist Church of the Perennial Ark. Locals said he had a particularly devilish gleam in his eye, mumbling something about a troll named...."
Well, I don't know why the fact that Israel, Jerusalem exists or the places mentioned in the bible exists/existed is NOT enough archaelogical evidence. Also the culture or way of life mentioned like stoning/crucifixion of criminals is not enough historical fact. But I understand the need to find loopholes.
Greece exists. Is that evidence that Zeus and Hercules are real?
Egypt exists. Is that evidence that Anubis is real?
Norway exists. Is that evidence that Thor is real?
...see the pattern here?
And also, they STILL stone criminals in the middle east. i guess that's evidence that Allah is real too
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.
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.
This Just In....
