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.
Campbell, why do you only listen to website claims by people who have a preconceived point to prove? Why do you only take the word of "investigators" who already have a belief that the Bible is literally true? Why do you only listen to those who simply reinforce your belief?
It's because you believe first, and (don't) ask questions later.
That's not archeologically, anthropologically, historically or geologically scientific in any way shape or form.
The reason I believe the Bible is literally true, is because the God that authored the Book, has actually in the past, and on more then one occasion spoke to me. I don't have to question if the Bible is true anymore. I know it is true. And I might also point out, that the only ones that are searching for the Ark are the ones who have a preconceived belief that the Ark is there. And the science of our day is not searching for the Ark becuse of a preconceived belief that the Ark does not exist. So your statement is a sword that swings both ways.
And science does not believe in the Ark at all, so they never ask questions.
Last edited by Campbell34; 01-21-2009 at 12:20 AM..
Did I dispute the existence of Edom?...No, I dispute events mentioned in the bible, such as the great flood or the Red sea crossing, and I see no archeological evidence of either.
Your post that I responded to mentions that there was a lack of archeological evidence to support the Bible. I just gave you one more reason to believe that the Bible is accurate. Your post did not say anything about the Red Sea crossing. And there is a great deal of evidence for that. There is a site marked off with Red Granit columns placed their by King Solomons workmen. Chisled in the Red Granit stone are found the names, Egypt, Death, Pharaoh, Moses, Yahweh. You would have to be a blind man not to see that. How could you possibly say there is no evidence?
Your post that I responded to mentions that there was a lack of archeological evidence to support the Bible. I just gave you one more reason to believe that the Bible is accurate. Your post did not say anything about the Red Sea crossing. And there is a great deal of evidence for that. There is a site marked off with Red Granit columns placed their by King Solomons workmen. Chisled in the Red Granit stone are found the names, Egypt, Death, Pharaoh, Moses, Yahweh. You would have to be a blind man not to see that. How could you possibly say there is no evidence?
Link? To a non-Christian website?
I think it has already be mentioned in the discussion but can't find it again. Googling only brings up Ron Wyatt's "discoveries".
Your post that I responded to mentions that there was a lack of archeological evidence to support the Bible. I just gave you one more reason to believe that the Bible is accurate. Your post did not say anything about the Red Sea crossing. And there is a great deal of evidence for that. There is a site marked off with Red Granit columns placed their by King Solomons workmen. Chisled in the Red Granit stone are found the names, Egypt, Death, Pharaoh, Moses, Yahweh. You would have to be a blind man not to see that. How could you possibly say there is no evidence?
No Campbell, if you review my post you will see that I specifically asked about evidence of the exodus or Red sea crossing. For this there is a lack of real evidence. The only things I find are on sites like Ron Wyatt's.
Ronald Eldon Wyatt (1933 - August 4, 1999) was a self-described archaeologist (he had no qualifications or training and held no professional position in the field) and author who claimed to have discovered many significant biblical sites and artifacts. His claims are dismissed by scientists, historians, biblical scholars, and even by leaders in his own Seventh-day Adventist Church, but he continues to have a strongly motivated, if narrowly-based, following among some fundamentalists and evangelicals.
His claims are dismissed by scientists, historians, biblical scholars, and even by leaders in his own Seventh-day Adventist Church, but he continues to have a strongly motivated, if narrowly-based, following among some fundamentalists and evangelicals.
If even the SDAs rejected it, he has to be pretty out there. The SDAs have some freaky weird ideas.
Your post that I responded to mentions that there was a lack of archeological evidence to support the Bible. I just gave you one more reason to believe that the Bible is accurate. Your post did not say anything about the Red Sea crossing. And there is a great deal of evidence for that. There is a site marked off with Red Granit columns placed their by King Solomons workmen. Chisled in the Red Granit stone are found the names, Egypt, Death, Pharaoh, Moses, Yahweh. You would have to be a blind man not to see that. How could you possibly say there is no evidence?
Where is this supposed site? Any respectable scientist sees the Noah story as just what it is. A fable. If you think about it with any amount of critical reasoning you would see that it is simply impossible or exaggerated to a point where it is no longer recognizable as reality. Do you have any links to pictures of these columns?
Your post that I responded to mentions that there was a lack of archeological evidence to support the Bible. I just gave you one more reason to believe that the Bible is accurate. Your post did not say anything about the Red Sea crossing. And there is a great deal of evidence for that. There is a site marked off with Red Granit columns placed their by King Solomons workmen. Chisled in the Red Granit stone are found the names, Egypt, Death, Pharaoh, Moses, Yahweh. You would have to be a blind man not to see that. How could you possibly say there is no evidence?
I don't know why your having such a hard time making your point. All you have to do is provide scientific evidence of your claims. Theres just a few stipulations.
-All scientists have to agree. Any dissenting opinions invalidate your claim.
-All scientists must be atheist. A religious bias invalidates all claims.
-All evidence must be indisputable. If a 450ft wood boat is found on the mountains of Ararat it must be emblazoned with the nomenclature S.S. Noahs Ark. Otherwise its just a 450ft wooden boat.
-All people referenced must have a degree in Arkology or their opinions and discoveries are invalid.
-Everything must be peer reviewed to have validity. Sorry Galileo, Newton, Einstien,Copernicus, Pasteur etc. No peer review, no validity. (All christians BTW)
-If you claim the sky is blue and others disagree you must first prove the sky is blue before continuing on.
-Everything that would normally be considered a "given" must be proven.
-Scientific publications are only valid when they contradict the bible.
-these rules only pertain to you.
-these rules may change at anytime to negate any valid points you may offer.
I don't know why your having such a hard time making your point. All you have to do is provide scientific evidence of your claims. Theres just a few stipulations.
-All scientists have to agree. Any dissenting opinions invalidate your claim.
-All scientists must be atheist. A religious bias invalidates all claims.
-All evidence must be indisputable. If a 450ft wood boat is found on the mountains of Ararat it must be emblazoned with the nomenclature S.S. Noahs Ark. Otherwise its just a 450ft wooden boat.
-All people referenced must have a degree in Arkology or their opinions and discoveries are invalid.
-Everything must be peer reviewed to have validity. Sorry Galileo, Newton, Einstien,Copernicus, Pasteur etc. No peer review, no validity. (All christians BTW)
-If you claim the sky is blue and others disagree you must first prove the sky is blue before continuing on.
-Everything that would normally be considered a "given" must be proven.
-Scientific publications are only valid when they contradict the bible.
-these rules only pertain to you.
-these rules may change at anytime to negate any valid points you may offer.
Keep the faith.
Yes keep the faith, because that is all you have. Your list is dishonest by the way, but the dishonesty is pretty much expected.
Yes keep the faith, because that is all you have. Your list is dishonest by the way, but the dishonesty is pretty much expected.
Talking to yourself again?
Its funny that you never respond with anything of substance.
Name one thing on the list thats dishonest. Lets go point by point. I can substantiate everything on the list with words that came out of your mouth.
You expect Campbell34 to prove his beliefs but then refuse to accept anything he uses as evidence.
How about we hold you up to the same scrutiny.
Its easy to be negative. All you have to do is say "prove it" over and over and over and then when proof is shown say "prove the proof" over and over and over.
Name one thing on the list thats dishonest. Lets go point by point. I can substantiate everything on the list with words that came out of your mouth.
Well, I don't have time to go through the whole list but I'll chime in on a couple here...
Quote:
Originally Posted by offthefence
-All scientists have to agree. Any dissenting opinions invalidate your claim.
Nobody (logical and sane) would ever say ALL scientists have to agree on everything.
Quote:
-All scientists must be atheist. A religious bias invalidates all claims.
No, religious scientists aren't automatically assumed to have warped facts to fit their beliefs. However, if the ONLY "scientists" to claim something is true are specifically religious and looking to substantiate biblical claims, it is only logical that unbiased sources should confirm their findings before it's taken as "gospel".
The rest of your points are just ill-tempered poking at others so I'll pass on those for now.
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.
