betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) deleted. Edited January 1, 2013 by betsy Quote
Canuckistani Posted January 1, 2013 Report Posted January 1, 2013 You can choose to believe the Bible is nothing more than just a myth I guess, even if Ballard finds a plank that has the words, "The Ark" emblazoned on it...or a tattered coat that says, "granpa Noah"....I guess some folks would still insist to want to see it as nothing more than a myth. What else can I say? He found those things? But even if he did, as Kimmy points out, that doesnt mean that the flood covered the whole earth, that all animal species around today were on that ark, that God had anything to do with this, etc etc. At best, there was a guy named Noah who survived a flood with his family and domestic animals, and for some reason chose to name his boat Ark. Quote
Mighty AC Posted January 1, 2013 Report Posted January 1, 2013 For those that missed it the first time: the fact that London exists doesn't qualify as evidence that the events in Harry Potter actually happened, or as evidence that wizards are real. -k I hear that in London people can walk through walls in the train stations. Quote "Our lives begin to end the day we stay silent about the things that matter." - Martin Luther King Jr"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) kimmy, on 01 January 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:For those that missed it the first time: the fact that London exists doesn't qualify as evidence that the events in Harry Potter actually happened, or as evidence that wizards are real. Is that supposed to be profound? Who's saying that the existence of London qualifies as the evidence for the existence of Harry Potter??? Do you think Ireland exists to prove little leprechauns exist? There's more historical documentaion and ancient manuscripts that support the historicity of the Bible than there are that supports the historicity of Alexander the Great. Nobody doubts the existence of Alexander the Great. Why do you doubt the history written in the Bible? I know why you do. God. These archeological discoveries are evidence(s) that further supports the historicity of the Bible, no more no less. Edited January 1, 2013 by betsy Quote
dre Posted January 1, 2013 Report Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) Oh well, the same old rebuttals are being given again.....yet still disregarding the main thrust of the argument, which was repeated for the unpteenth times, as a reply to Dre. You can choose to believe the Bible is nothing more than just a myth I guess, even if Ballard finds a plank that has the words, "The Ark" emblazoned on it...or a tattered coat that says, "granpa Noah"....I guess some folks would still insist to want to see it as nothing more than a myth. What else can I say? Of course! Even if scientists proved there was a man named Noah with a big ship called the Ark that rescued a bunch of animals and people that would do absolutely nothing to prove the story of Noah as written in the bible. It would simply mean that hundreds of years later when the authors of the bible wrote the story of Noah that they based it on a legend that included real events. It would prove there was a flood and a man and a boat, but it would prove nothing with regards to the core claim made in the bible which is that god committed an act of genocide against all living things on earth except the people on Noahs boat to punish them for sins they commit because of an evil spirit present in their souls as a result of a women made of ribs getting talked into eating fruit from a forbidden tree by a talking snake. Is that supposed to be profound? Who saying that the existence of London qualifies as the evidence for the existence of Harry Potter??? Thats the exact same logic put forth by you in all your silly "scientific facts" posts. Edited January 1, 2013 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) Thats the exact same logic put forth by you in all your silly "scientific facts" posts. What???? What does that mean?? Aren't you the one who summed up the history of western civilization in two short paragraphs? Please be more specific. Give me a few examples of what you're on about. Edited January 1, 2013 by betsy Quote
kimmy Posted January 1, 2013 Report Posted January 1, 2013 Is that supposed to be profound? Who's saying that the existence of London qualifies as the evidence for the existence of Harry Potter??? Do you think Ireland exists to prove little leprechauns exist? And yet you list the historical existence of Sodom and Gomorrah among your list of "facts" that prove the Bible is true. There's more historical documentaion and ancient manuscripts that support the historicity of the Bible than there are that supports the historicity of Alexander the Great. Nobody doubts the existence of Alexander the Great. There's lots of historical proof that some ancient desert mooks believed in some weird crap and wrote lots of it down. Astoundingly little proof of cataclysmic floods, 900 year old dudes building magic boats, dudes rising from graves, or any of that other stuff. Why do you doubt the history written in the Bible? I know why you do. God. Oh, right. You're telling me I know the Bible really true but I'm denying it because I hate God? haha. Trust me, if I believed the Bible was true, I'd act like it. If I believed I was in for an eternity of torment if I didn't change my ways, I would change my ways. If I thought there was a God who was going to make me suffer if I didn't kiss his ass, I'd kiss his ass. Rest assured, my denial of the "Biblical Truth" isn't an act of rebellion against a God I know is real. It's just rejection of a book full of stupid stories that are too silly to believe. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) And yet you list the historical existence of Sodom and Gomorrah among your list of "facts" that prove the Bible is true. Where did I say that? Go ahead, check it out. FACT: ARCHEOLOGY DISCOVERED SODOM AND GOMORRAH The ruins of Sodom and Gomorrah have been discovered southeast of the Dead Sea. The modern names are Bab edh-Dhra, thought to be Sodom, and Numeira, thought to be Gomorrah. Both places were destroyed at the same time by an enormous conflagration. The destruction debris was about three feet thick.There is ample evidence of subterranean deposits of a petroleum-based substance called bitumen, similar to asphalt, in the region south of the Dead Sea. Such material normally contains a high percentage of sulfur. It has been postulated by geologist Frederick Clapp that pressure from an earthquake could have caused the bitumen deposits to be forced out of the earth through a fault line. As it gushed out of the earth it could have been ignited by a spark or surface fire. It would then fall to earth as a burning, fiery mass. It was only after Clapp formulated this theory that Sodom and Gomorrah were found. It turns out that the sites are located exactly on a fault line along the eastern side of a plain south of the Dead Sea, so Clapp's theory is entirely plausible. There is some evidence for this scenario from the Bible itself. Abraham viewed the destruction from a vantage point west of the Dead Sea. The Bible records what Abraham saw: "He looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah, toward all the land of the plain, and he saw dense smoke rising from the land, like smoke from a furnace" (Genesis 19:28). Dense smoke suggests smoke from a petroleum-based fire. Smoke rising like smoke from a furnace indicates a forced draft, such as would be expected from subterranean deposits being forced out of the ground under pressure. http://www.biblearch...estruction.aspx http://www.mapleleaf...ic=18914&st=870 Edited January 1, 2013 by betsy Quote
kimmy Posted January 1, 2013 Report Posted January 1, 2013 Where did I say that? Go ahead, check it out. Your point? -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 KimmyThere's lots of historical proof that some ancient desert mooks believed in some weird crap and wrote lots of it down. Astoundingly little proof of cataclysmic floods, 900 year old dudes building magic boats, dudes rising from graves, or any of that other stuff. Oh, right. You're telling me I know the Bible really true but I'm denying it because I hate God? haha. Trust me, if I believed the Bible was true, I'd act like it. If I believed I was in for an eternity of torment if I didn't change my ways, I would change my ways. If I thought there was a God who was going to make me suffer if I didn't kiss his ass, I'd kiss his ass. Rest assured, my denial of the "Biblical Truth" isn't an act of rebellion against a God I know is real. It's just rejection of a book full of stupid stories that are too silly to believe. Your response proves my point. You didn't even mention the comparison with Alexander the Great. You make nebulous analogies....but it's a strawman. You're avoiding the point. The archeological doscoveries, (this one and many, many others) invariably support the historicity of the Bible. That's all. What more do you want, the Hobbit? Quote
dre Posted January 1, 2013 Report Posted January 1, 2013 The archeological doscoveries, (this one and many, many others) invariably support the historicity of the Bible. That's all. What more do you want, the Hobbit? I explained to you 5 times why this is sometimes the case, and why its meaningless. You just keep ignoring it. Of course the bible is going to contain some references to real events that happened before it was written. So what? Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 Your point? -k Eh? My point is that they proved Sodom and Gommorrah existed. NOT THAT THE BIBLE IS TRUE! (Of course it is, but this doesn't prove it) A little hair of the dog, maybe? Quote
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 I explained to you 5 times why this is sometimes the case, and why its meaningless. You just keep ignoring it. Of course the bible is going to contain some references to real events that happened before it was written. So what? Exactly. So what? Quote
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) Betsy: The evidences support the historicity of the Bible! Dre: The Bible is not true! Betsy: The evidences support the historicity of the Bible! Kimmy: The Bible is not true! Betsy: The evidences support the historicity of the Bible! Dre: I told you, the Bible is not true! Edited January 1, 2013 by betsy Quote
kimmy Posted January 1, 2013 Report Posted January 1, 2013 Eh? My point is that they proved Sodom and Gommorrah existed. NOT THAT THE BIBLE IS TRUE! (Of course it is, but this doesn't prove it) The premise of you "The Bible" thread was to list facts that supported the historicity of the Bible. But now you concede that the fact that Sodom and Gomorrah existed does *not* support the historicity of the Bible. By the way, I took a look at your article, and while it might be a big hit with the folks at "biblearcheology.org", it's not a widely accepted premise in the archeological community. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) The premise of you "The Bible" thread was to list facts that supported the historicity of the Bible. But now you concede that the fact that Sodom and Gomorrah existed does *not* support the historicity of the Bible. I did not concede to such a thing! Maybe you don't know what historicity means. Here's webster's def: Historicity - the condition of having actually occurred in history; authencity. By the way, I took a look at your article, and while it might be a big hit with the folks at "biblearcheology.org", it's not a widely accepted premise in the archeological community.*k Maybe you understood it wrong. Edited January 1, 2013 by betsy Quote
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) Anyway, what's this sudden hang up on Sodom and Gomorrah? It's not the only archeological thingy (that's already done!).....we've got quite a few new ones coming up soon, you know. Edited January 1, 2013 by betsy Quote
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) With only Sodom and Gomorrah....you guys seem to be hyperventilating already. Wait til they float the Ark back into the Meditarrenean.....complete with guest book of the greatest cruise of all time! Now, that's an analogy. Edited January 1, 2013 by betsy Quote
kimmy Posted January 1, 2013 Report Posted January 1, 2013 And they found a couple of sites that might have been (but probably aren't) Sodom and Gomorrah, but nothing to support any of the stuff that's supposed to have occurred. No gay rape gangs; no "righteous man" offering his daughters to rape gangs; no angels, no rains of fire, no chicks turning into salt, no smiting. So big deal. Once again, you found London but no wizards. Yippee. And your latest discovery. Somebody found evidence of a flood? Big deal. No evidence of a cataclysmic flood that wiped out all life on earth except a 900 year old dude and a magic boat full of animals. Get back to me when they find your magic boat, betsy. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
betsy Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Posted January 1, 2013 And they found a couple of sites that might have been (but probably aren't) Sodom and Gomorrah, but nothing to support any of the stuff that's supposed to have occurred. No gay rape gangs; no "righteous man" offering his daughters to rape gangs; no angels, no rains of fire, no chicks turning into salt, no smiting. So big deal. Once again, you found London but no wizards. Yippee. And your latest discovery. Somebody found evidence of a flood? Big deal. No evidence of a cataclysmic flood that wiped out all life on earth except a 900 year old dude and a magic boat full of animals. Get back to me when they find your magic boat, betsy. Do you know what archeology means? Do you know what historicity means? So, I repeat....by way of illustration: Betsy: The evidences support the historicity of the Bible! Dre: The Bible is not true! Betsy: The evidences support the historicity of the Bible! Kimmy: The Bible is not true! Betsy: The evidences support the historicity of the Bible! Dre: I told you, the Bible is not true! Quote
Sleipnir Posted January 1, 2013 Report Posted January 1, 2013 One of the most exciting discovery of science may well be about Noah's flood. How is that exciting? Are you behind on the times? We've known about the flooding in the black sea regions for quite some time now. Quote "All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." - Mark Twain
dre Posted January 2, 2013 Report Posted January 2, 2013 Betsy: The evidences support the historicity of the Bible! Dre: The Bible is not true! Betsy: The evidences support the historicity of the Bible! Kimmy: The Bible is not true! Betsy: The evidences support the historicity of the Bible! Dre: I told you, the Bible is not true! No... more like... BETSY: Yet another confirmation! EVERYONE ELSE: Of what? Floods? Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
GostHacked Posted January 2, 2013 Report Posted January 2, 2013 How big of a boat do you need to sustain two of EVERYTHING for two months at sea? Not only that, how the hell did he manage to get two of everything in time? Quote
dre Posted January 2, 2013 Report Posted January 2, 2013 How big of a boat do you need to sustain two of EVERYTHING for two months at sea? Not only that, how the hell did he manage to get two of everything in time? Obviously he didnt. Chances are Noah rescued a drowning goat in an 8 foot rowboat... word got around and as the story was passed down after a few generations the boat because larger as did the number of animals. Then once religious "leaders" got involved, they added the part of the genocide as punishment for sin, and all that garbage. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Sleipnir Posted January 2, 2013 Report Posted January 2, 2013 How big of a boat do you need to sustain two of EVERYTHING for two months at sea? Not only that, how the hell did he manage to get two of everything in time? Good question plus getting two of every creature to permit them to procreate later on is a bad idea. Quote "All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." - Mark Twain
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.