U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 03-12-2008, 11:57 AM
 
9,604 posts, read 3,314,019 times
Reputation: 2258
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCSTroop View Post
I am literally confused at this point... Part of me thinks that we're being trolled by someone who ACTUALLY thinks there were fire-breathing dinosaurs.... I mean... Is this even worth the discussion????

You know what??? I'd love to walk into a church next Sunday, stand up in front of the crowd and say:

"Ladies and gentleman... I came a very long way in finding my place through these doors. I had no divine intervention. I had no miracles. No... Ladies and gentleman, the thing that brought me closer to you, closer to God, and established my faith was fire breathing dragons as mentioned in the Bible that I read about on an internet forum. Thank you and I look forward to worshipping with you."
You make a good point!! I'm surprised, at the people that actually believe this and more about the Bible. First you have to read it to understand. Now I'm even more surprised, at the people who go to the Internet for there religious answers.

It amazes me people could probably tell us more about "HARRY POTTER" and it would be accurate, but ask some about the Bible and it's dragons and unicorns and sex and violence, OH, if they only knew or wanted to know the truth!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-12-2008, 01:29 PM
 
7,768 posts, read 9,476,362 times
Reputation: 3389
Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
Which is the same as god likes to play favourites but in a more positive language. Not very loving if u ask me
Believers believe that this is where all mankind originated from. We believe in the account of Adam and Eve. As such, ALL people are 'favorites' having descended from the same two people originally created.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
As i said already, i don't doubt that parts of the bible are true and some are not. Fantastic claims require fantastic evidence and the discoveries so far have been nothing special. To properly explain this lets take the example of gibeah whose ruins were found by archaeologists sometime in the past

Now for those who haven't read all of the bible. In Judges 20, the Israelites are [surprise surprise] fighting yet another army. This time its neither the philistines nor the canaanites but the Benjaminites who angered them when they murdered the wife of a levite.

God, in her infinite wisdom, decided the best way to resolve this was with violence of biblical proportions. So when she was asked if 10% of the four hundred thousand(totally not an exaggeration) Israelite soldiers should attack Gibeah first and its 26000 Benjaminite soldiers, she was totally on board with the idea.

you'd think that an army which was 1 1/2 times the size of the other and also backed up by an omnipotent god would win but turns out that they lost the first time round when The Benjaminites slew 22000 of their soldiers.

So the Israelites actually ran back crying and asked god if they should fight again. Presumably god just wanted to see more people die or the writers suddenly forgot that she was omniscient because she said yes and once again went running back after losing another 18000 men(40k-22k-18k=...?).
The remaining Israelites were getting ready to throw in the towel but god was having none of it and pinky promised them that this time they would win. This time around they hatched a plan that involved luring them out of the city by making it look like they were wining again. Why all 26000 soldiers all left the city is beyond me but this allowed some Israelites to sneak inside and make it look like the city was on fire. Upon seeing the smoke, the feared battle hardened veteran soldiers of Benjamin who had managed to take out 40k soldiers without any considerable loses, all began to panic like little girls. While trying to escape, the 'lites killed 18000 followed by 5 other thousand and 2 thousand more a bit later. The remaining six hundred fled while the 'lites went on to burn to the ground every Benjaminite town they found while also killing every man, woman, child and even goat(all livestock fyi) that may live in it. All of course approved by god
That was much to do about nothing

By the way, 400,000 is represented as 400K not 40K, that might help alleviate your confusion in your math equation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
I sort of went of course there so let me sum my argument up.
Finding the ruins of gibeah tells us that gibeah existed, not that this god spoke directly to the 'lites. Finding lots of bones encased in armor tells us that there probably was a big battle, not that this god spoke directly to the 'lites.

In other words, me finding out that the moon is real doesn't mean that the events depicted in Le Voyage dans la lune actually happened. Me finding the bones of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle doesn't even come close to suggesting that the cottingley fairies were real. Im not sure how i can make it more clear that painting the bible with a giant brush that says 100% true or 100% false is a stupid way to approach it. Instead we should approach it like any other historical text, bound to have inaccuracies and exaggerations as well as truths, but nonetheless be useful in studying the culture of the people at the time.
Yes, you did go off course, glad you saw that. That being said, you are correct in your assessment of the evidence. Thing is, just because you reject evidence doesn't mean it's not sufficient. John Hancock signed the Declaration of Independence but do we know for a fact he read it? Nope. But the evidence sure points that way, doesn't it?

So when the text of the Bible is confirmed by physical evidence, of course believers' faith is strengthened and rightfully so. Not good enough for you, fine. But that doesn't mean it is not good enough....just not good enough for you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
yes we've all heard, anything supernatural that doesn't come directly from god has to come from the devil. It allows evangelists to be intolerant of wiccans
You seem to imply that you do believe in the supernatural, is that true?


Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
How do miracles differ from magic? It might not have been written that Jesus said "curaga" when healing the sick but the only difference between those 2 terms, as you unwittingly pointed out above, is that one is used more often within a -holy- context
Miracles and magic are both in the supernatural realm, true. I'm missing your point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
I'm sure you have but can't show this because of excuse X. Sadly thats not convincing enough to make people believe that magic is real
Now it appears you don't believe in the supernatural. Please clarify.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
Show me one, a simple link will do. I'm actually looking forward to see this magnificent discovery that shows miracles to have happened because most(all tbh) of the stuff i read is about having found a tablet/city/jar showing that [society mentioned in bible here] were real

Heck strictly speaking for anyone to claim that the bible is 100% true, would require that person to check each individual statement and make sure that it is in fact true. Can you honestly say that you have done that? or did you just assume that its all true because you like the book so much? Am i wrong in feeling that the deeply religious are more interested in whats appealing that what is true?
What's appealing? You just gave a great example of things in the bible that are not appealing. The fact that I needed a Savior was not appealing when I heard it. The fact that I there needed to be a payment for my sin was not appealing when I heard it. The message of the cross was offensive to me. Certainly not appealing.....

Anyway, I do believe the Bible is true and there are any number of apologetics websites out there that have huge amounts of arguments for the Christian faith. That being said, there will NEVER EVER be a time that faith will not be necessary. So trying to prove something to you without you be willing to take elements of this belief system on faith would be futile and waste of everyone's time. In short, if someone COULD prove the faith to you they would, in effect, disprove it at the same time. For they would prove that faith was not necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
While it is true that ~it~ wouldn't be of any sex, reffering to ~it~ as ~it~ all the time is rather cumbersome and it will cause unnecessary whining from people who think that ~it~ must have a penis. On the other hand, strictly speaking gender doesn't necessarily relate to sexual organs of which ~it~ would most likely be devoid of in which case I can refer to ~it~ as a she if i damned well feel like doing it. I'm sure that ~it~ and whoever follows ~it~ has better things to do that care about something so trivial.
Not commenting on this mature exchange......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2008, 02:47 PM
 
2,633 posts, read 3,193,523 times
Reputation: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Believers believe that this is where all mankind originated from. We believe in the account of Adam and Eve. As such, ALL people are 'favorites' having descended from the same two people originally created.
understood

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
That was much to do about nothing
Just an example. The reason it dragged on for so long was because i had fun compiling it

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
By the way, 400,000 is represented as 400K not 40K, that might help alleviate your confusion in your math equation.
You skimmed past it didn't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judges 20:10
taking from all the tribes of Israel ten men for every hundred, a hundred for every thousand, a thousand for every ten thousand, and procuring supplies for the soldiers who will go to deal fully and suitably with Gibeah of Benjamin for the crime it committed in Israel.
This means that they had 10% of the original army
400000x0.1=40000


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Yes, you did go off course, glad you saw that. That being said, you are correct in your assessment of the evidence. Thing is, just because you reject evidence doesn't mean it's not sufficient.
I'm not rejecting it, I'm just trying to explain that the conclusions made are tenuously connected

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
John Hancock signed the Declaration of Independence but do we know for a fact he read it? Nope. But the evidence sure points that way, doesn't it?
Of course, its not impossible that John Hancock actually didn't read it but we look for whats likely in history, anything else and you are talking philosophy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
So when the text of the Bible is confirmed by physical evidence, of course believers' faith is strengthened and rightfully so. Not good enough for you, fine. But that doesn't mean it is not good enough....just not good enough for you.
But thats the thing, im not suggesting to reject the bible or accept it as inerrant. Just to treat it like any other piece of historical text

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
You seem to imply that you do believe in the supernatural, is that true?
no, whatever gave you that idea? Im sure the person fully believes what was said, doesn't mean i do

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Miracles and magic are both in the supernatural realm, true. I'm missing your point.
what is the difference between them?


Quote:
Originally Posted by dictionary:magic
1 a: the use of means (as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces b: magic rites or incantations2 a: an extraordinary power or influence seemingly from a supernatural source b: something that seems to cast a spell
Quote:
Originally Posted by dictionary:miracle
1. An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God: "Miracles are spontaneous, they cannot be summoned, but come of themselves" Katherine Anne Porter.2. One that excites admiring awe. See Synonyms at wonder.
3. A miracle play.

Seeing 1 on both makes me feel that i can use the term interchangeably.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Now it appears you don't believe in the supernatural. Please clarify.
I don't, whatever gave you the idea that i did?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
What's appealing? You just gave a great example of things in the bible that are not appealing. The fact that I needed a Savior was not appealing when I heard it.
I disagree, the idea of being humble and full of flaws is appealing. If i were to say "we are perfect and we can be like gods" would it be appealing to the religious?
Sure it sounds appealing to say that we can be like gods but people simply prefer the idea that there is something more powerful watching over them. It depends on what we perceive of as good, excessive wealth for example is closely related to greed so consider the scenario of 2 people, an elderly woman and a rich politician doing the exact same thing to help the poor. Now tell me which one you prefer and carefully ask yourself why this is

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
The fact that I there needed to be a payment for my sin was not appealing when I heard it. The message of the cross was offensive to me. Certainly not appealing.....
....followed by the promise of eternal bliss exclusive to good people. The highschool bully? gone. The obnoxious condescending jerk? not a problem. I'm not saying that this applies to you but i can only conclude that when i see people whose line of reasoning is "conclusion" followed by "rationalization"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Anyway, I do believe the Bible is true and there are any number of apologetics websites out there that have huge amounts of arguments for the Christian faith.
Every detail true? or open to interpretation true?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
That being said, there will NEVER EVER be a time that faith will not be necessary.
Speak for yourself, the only faith I have is that the evidence tells the truth and the arguments for that would send this far off-topic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
So trying to prove something to you without you be willing to take elements of this belief system on faith would be futile and waste of everyone's time. In short, if someone COULD prove the faith to you they would, in effect, disprove it at the same time. For they would prove that faith was not necessary.
Why is it necessary anyways? why is it seen as one of the best things to have while unbelief is associated with evil?
I'm sure you know what my answer to this is and why
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2008, 03:16 PM
 
7,768 posts, read 9,476,362 times
Reputation: 3389
Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
Just an example. The reason it dragged on for so long was because i had fun compiling it
It showed!

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
You skimmed past it didn't you?
Not as quickly as you apparently did.

Quote:
Then all the Israelites from Dan to Beersheba and from the land of Gilead came out as one man and assembled before the LORD in Mizpah. The leaders of all the people of the tribes of Israel took their places in the assembly of the people of God, four hundred thousand soldiers armed with swords. (The Benjamites heard that the Israelites had gone up to Mizpah.) Then the Israelites said, "Tell us how this awful thing happened."

So the Levite, the husband of the murdered woman, said, "I and my concubine came to Gibeah in Benjamin to spend the night. During the night the men of Gibeah came after me and surrounded the house, intending to kill me. They raped my concubine, and she died. I took my concubine, cut her into pieces and sent one piece to each region of Israel's inheritance, because they committed this lewd and disgraceful act in Israel. Now, all you Israelites, speak up and give your verdict."

All the people rose as one man, saying, "None of us will go home. No, not one of us will return to his house. But now this is what we'll do to Gibeah: We'll go up against it as the lot directs. We'll take ten men out of every hundred from all the tribes of Israel, and a hundred from a thousand, and a thousand from ten thousand, to get provisions for the army. Then, when the army arrives at Gibeah in Benjamin, it can give them what they deserve for all this vileness done in Israel." So all the men of Israel got together and united as one man against the city. Judges 20:1-11
Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
This means that they had 10% of the original army
400000x0.1=40000
Please see bolded text above. The early verse (3 I think) is talking about the number of soldiers. The numbers of the fighting men were drawn from ALL the tribes men, not just the soldiers. We don't know how many there were, not from this text anyway. Do you disagree? (Further, it appears that the 1/10 was used to get provisions for the army, so how large do you think the army was? Seriously, you're casting the bible aside as erroneous and these are your reading skills?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
Of course, its not impossible that John Hancock actually didn't read it but we look for whats likely in history, anything else and you are talking philosophy
Exactly how is that different than using biblical confirmations to shore up confidence in scripture. Looking for what's likely in history is exactly what you seemed to be finding fault with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
no, whatever gave you that idea? Im sure the person fully believes what was said, doesn't mean i do
It was just the way it was written. Might have just been me......

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
what is the difference between them?
Very little, I was actually agreeing with you and asking you for your point. The only difference, in my opinion, is magic requires calling on some force to perform supernatural acts while miracles are simply performed by a supernatural being. Miracles are generally not associated by spells or charms, ya know?

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
I disagree, the idea of being humble and full of flaws is appealing. If i were to say "we are perfect and we can be like gods" would it be appealing to the religious?
Sure it sounds appealing to say that we can be like gods but people simply prefer the idea that there is something more powerful watching over them. It depends on what we perceive of as good, excessive wealth for example is closely related to greed so consider the scenario of 2 people, an elderly woman and a rich politician doing the exact same thing to help the poor. Now tell me which one you prefer and carefully ask yourself why this is


....followed by the promise of eternal bliss exclusive to good people. The highschool bully? gone. The obnoxious condescending jerk? not a problem. I'm not saying that this applies to you but i can only conclude that when i see people whose line of reasoning is "conclusion" followed by "rationalization"
There are belief systems that believe we can be like gods, but that would be getting off topic. And a Christian does not believe any good person gets to heaven. Again, as you have shown perfectly here, you are free to disagree but since the same rules that apply to me also apply to you, disagreeing with me doesn't make you right....it just means you disagree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
Every detail true? or open to interpretation true?
I believe that when every word of the bible was inspired by God, He only had one meaning in mind. Do we have multiple meanings applied to the same scripture? Sure.

If I say "Dude, you are so cool!"

Could I mean:

1-You have a temperature of less than 98.6.
2-You have an attitude that makes you less than pleasant to be around.
3-You are an awesome person to know.

Could any of these be true? Yep.

How many would be true though? Just one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
Speak for yourself, the only faith I have is that the evidence tells the truth and the arguments for that would send this far off-topic.
I wasn't implying you had faith. I was stating the fact that faith in Christ will never be taken out of the equation. I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. (That's quite telling, isn't it?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
Why is it necessary anyways? why is it seen as one of the best things to have while unbelief is associated with evil?
I'm sure you know what my answer to this is and why
Why is it necessary? For the believer it's because God said it was. It's a trust thing. As far as unbelief goes, I didn't associate that with anything or anyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2008, 04:43 PM
 
2,633 posts, read 3,193,523 times
Reputation: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
It showed!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Not as quickly as you apparently did.

Please see bolded text above. The early verse (3 I think) is talking about the number of soldiers. The numbers of the fighting men were drawn from ALL the tribes men, not just the soldiers. We don't know how many there were, not from this text anyway. Do you disagree? (Further, it appears that the 1/10 was used to get provisions for the army, so how large do you think the army was? Seriously, you're casting the bible aside as erroneous and these are your reading skills?)
You are right and on this I concede. My error was probably to do with not being able to understand how such an army would lose back 10 years or so when i first read it

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Exactly how is that different than using biblical confirmations to shore up confidence in scripture.
No, the fault is making connections that do not follow.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Looking for what's likely in history is exactly what you seemed to be finding fault with.
As in most likely to occur. Reading the declaration is the most likely thing that happened based on him knowing how to read, knowing it is an important document....ect..ect

Unless miracles suddenly become commonplace, it fails the criteria for history and remains a philosophy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Very little, I was actually agreeing with you and asking you for your point. The only difference, in my opinion, is magic requires calling on some force to perform supernatural acts while miracles are simply performed by a supernatural being. Miracles are generally not associated by spells or charms, ya know?
Well i guess it depends on the author since its not like the rules of each have been established

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
There are belief systems that believe we can be like gods, but that would be getting off topic. And a Christian does not believe any good person gets to heaven.
Depends on which Christian sect. Im thinking of the Jack Chick kind here

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Again, as you have shown perfectly here, you are free to disagree but since the same rules that apply to me also apply to you, disagreeing with me doesn't make you right....it just means you disagree.
Sure, nothing wrong with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
I believe that when every word of the bible was inspired by God, He only had one meaning in mind. Do we have multiple meanings applied to the same scripture? Sure.

If I say "Dude, you are so cool!"

Could I mean:

1-You have a temperature of less than 98.6.
2-You have an attitude that makes you less than pleasant to be around.
3-You are an awesome person to know.

Could any of these be true? Yep.

How many would be true though? Just one.
This raises some questions though. For one why is it just one? it could be that all interpretations lead somewhere(a la pantheism) or that there might be none(ie no personal god) which do.

Would god actually punish us for being mistaken and not choosing the right one?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
I wasn't implying you had faith. I was stating the fact that faith in Christ will never be taken out of the equation. I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. (That's quite telling, isn't it?)
Ah, makes sense as long as its exclusive to Christianity. Having faith in Christ is pretty much the definition of a christian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
Why is it necessary? For the believer it's because God said it was. It's a trust thing.
Well I don't really find this as an answer. I trust people because they have done well in the past or because i have a reason to believe its also in their best interest to make do. Pardon my daring attitude but i think that god should not scape scrutiny

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207 View Post
As far as unbelief goes, I didn't associate that with anything or anyone.
I kinda figured because you are many times more eloquent that other deeply religious ive met in the past who thought that lack of faith lead to evil and lack of morals
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2008, 02:17 PM
 
7,654 posts, read 6,421,254 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
Its because they already arrived at the conclusion that the bible can't ever be wrong about anything so everything that comes afterwards will be rationalized away and any minor albeit "in your face" type of details will be ignored. To be frank i preferred it when they used to shout -its magic-
Yes that is correct we have arrived at the conclusion, just as we did when the Bible told us there really was a King David, and the non believers said there was not. In the end, the Bible was proven to be correct.
The Bible was also proven to be correct again just in recent times. The Bible stated that dinosaurs had scales, science did not know what a dinosaurs skin was made up of. Yet a recent discovery of a mummy dinosaur revealed that yes the dinosaur skin was made up of scales. Again, the Bible was confirmed. Which brings to question how could a Book that was wrinten some thousands of years ago, describe a dinosaur that science tells us died out 70 million years ago?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2008, 03:05 PM
 
2,633 posts, read 3,193,523 times
Reputation: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
Yes that is correct we have arrived at the conclusion, just as we did when the Bible told us there really was a King David, and the non believers said there was not. In the end, the Bible was proven to be correct.
Why thank you for filling my prediction. I don't have a problem with accepting such things but miracles and the like are on severe need of confirming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
The Bible was also proven to be correct again just in recent times. The Bible stated that dinosaurs had scales, science did not know what a dinosaurs skin was made up of. Yet a recent discovery of a mummy dinosaur revealed that yes the dinosaur skin was made up of scales. Again, the Bible was confirmed. Which brings to question how could a Book that was wrinten some thousands of years ago, describe a dinosaur that science tells us died out 70 million years ago?
Because it didn't but that didn't stop people from tenuously connecting them both, if at any point it turns out that they are wrong then they will just go "this isn't really what the bible meant, it was actually this" and continue to try to make reality conform with their world view.

Again, no pursuit of truth. Just the assumption that whatever we say or believe in is right
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2008, 09:22 AM
 
7,654 posts, read 6,421,254 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by coosjoaquin View Post
Why thank you for filling my prediction. I don't have a problem with accepting such things but miracles and the like are on severe need of confirming.


Because it didn't but that didn't stop people from tenuously connecting them both, if at any point it turns out that they are wrong then they will just go "this isn't really what the bible meant, it was actually this" and continue to try to make reality conform with their world view.

Again, no pursuit of truth. Just the assumption that whatever we say or believe in is right
Proof of recent dinosaurs existance can be found outside of the Bible, yet because the theory of Evolution is the fad of the day, that proof is rejected reguardless of how strong it is. The Bible does not stand alone here. I would say science is often more guilty of the "whatever we say or believe is right" thing.
Science for years told us soft tissue can only last 10,000 years. Yet believers in the Bible told us that dinosaurs were here on earth just 3,000 years ago or less.
When scientist discovered soft tissue in dinosaurs bones, they reversed their gears once again and now are telling everyone soft tissue with cells attached ect. can last 70 million years. Rather than consider the fact that the bones may not be as old as believed, they tossed in an extra 70 million years to protect their theory of Evolution. Of course no real study was done to come to this conclusion, just a proclamation. I don't consider this a pursuit of truth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2008, 11:08 AM
 
Location: Nashville, Tn
7,917 posts, read 11,387,548 times
Reputation: 5294
Campbell34 wrote:
Quote:
Proof of recent dinosaurs existance can be found outside of the Bible, yet because the theory of Evolution is the fad of the day, that proof is rejected reguardless of how strong it is.
The Origin of Species was written before the Civil War and has withstood a century and a half of scrutiny so it can hardly be described as the fad of the day. I'm aware of hoaxes such as the dinosaur footprints alongside of human footprints in Texas in which a creationist carves or casts replicas of human footprints but I'm not aware of any credible evidence that has been uncovered that would suggest that dinosaurs died out in the past few thousand years. Do you know of any?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2008, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Huntsville, AL
2,221 posts, read 1,909,125 times
Reputation: 470
Now I am speaking to anyone who really puts their faith in science.

I have not heard about the soft tissue thing. Is it true that scientists said that soft tissue cannot be found in anything older than 10,000 years, but since they did find some in a dinosaur bone that they changed it to 70 million?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, 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 - Top