This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Shtal on 04 January 2013 - 04:01
Felloffher,
This video has been posted while back in another thread by some other member, perhaps you haven't seen this....I encourage you sincerely watch it.
Also, if you set a time bar with the mouse click at exactly 31:00 minutes, it talks about theory of multiple universes.
Shtal.
This video has been posted while back in another thread by some other member, perhaps you haven't seen this....I encourage you sincerely watch it.
Also, if you set a time bar with the mouse click at exactly 31:00 minutes, it talks about theory of multiple universes.
Shtal.
by Felloffher on 04 January 2013 - 05:01
Shtal,
The above video has nothing to do with Noah's flood. Since you haven't bothered to respond, I can only assume you have no rebuttal. The bible has far to many creditability issues to be taken seriously or as the word of a all knowing deity. This doesn't automatically rule out the theory of a creator, however it has ruled out your version of the events and your God. The evidence is far too overwhelming to ignore.
Again, the only conclusion we can draw from what we know, is that we don't know.
The above video has nothing to do with Noah's flood. Since you haven't bothered to respond, I can only assume you have no rebuttal. The bible has far to many creditability issues to be taken seriously or as the word of a all knowing deity. This doesn't automatically rule out the theory of a creator, however it has ruled out your version of the events and your God. The evidence is far too overwhelming to ignore.
Again, the only conclusion we can draw from what we know, is that we don't know.
by Shtal on 04 January 2013 - 05:01
Felloffher wrote: I can only assume you have no rebuttal.
No, I simply ignored because your article is nonsense, and I feel no need to go over with you on my thoughts...
btw, please watch that video.
Shtal.
No, I simply ignored because your article is nonsense, and I feel no need to go over with you on my thoughts...
btw, please watch that video.
Shtal.
by Shtal on 04 January 2013 - 05:01
Felloffher wrote: The bible has far to many creditability issues to be taken seriously
I disagree with you.
Shtal.
I disagree with you.
Shtal.
by Felloffher on 04 January 2013 - 06:01
Shtal,
What part of the article is non-sense? Is it this segment?
Records of flourishing civilizations in China, Egypt, Babylon, and Mesopotamia exist straight through the flood era of 2500-2000 BCE. This contingency creates a stack of obvious problems without planned solutions because the flood supposedly vanquished the inhabitants of these regions. If this was the case, why do we now possess their journals made before, during, and after this global deluge? The flood would have certainly destroyed these societal accounts if God were truly guilty of genocide. If people from each region somehow managed to survive and continue these records, why isn’t the cataclysmic flood mentioned in their accounts? In fact, no sort of catastrophe on this level exists anywhere in the written histories of any society during any era.
Your avoidance behavior is so predictable, just change the subject and hope it goes away. How does the grass smell where you're at?
I'm questioning the credibility of the bible at it's foundation, so quoting passages from it are completely irrelevant in my mind, you understand this right?
What part of the article is non-sense? Is it this segment?
Records of flourishing civilizations in China, Egypt, Babylon, and Mesopotamia exist straight through the flood era of 2500-2000 BCE. This contingency creates a stack of obvious problems without planned solutions because the flood supposedly vanquished the inhabitants of these regions. If this was the case, why do we now possess their journals made before, during, and after this global deluge? The flood would have certainly destroyed these societal accounts if God were truly guilty of genocide. If people from each region somehow managed to survive and continue these records, why isn’t the cataclysmic flood mentioned in their accounts? In fact, no sort of catastrophe on this level exists anywhere in the written histories of any society during any era.
Your avoidance behavior is so predictable, just change the subject and hope it goes away. How does the grass smell where you're at?
I'm questioning the credibility of the bible at it's foundation, so quoting passages from it are completely irrelevant in my mind, you understand this right?
by Felloffher on 04 January 2013 - 06:01
How is the content of that video a prophecy? Good one.
by Shtal on 04 January 2013 - 17:01
Felloffher wrote: I'm questioning the credibility of the bible at it's foundation
Contrary to what this article suggests, the dating of those civilizations is disputed, even among secularists. The Bible has more than a thousand times the number of contemporary manuscripts of all other ancient books PUT TOGETHER. Therefore, the authenticity of the Bible should not be in doubt, and is only in doubt because you have an a priori reason for rejecting it.
Contrary to what this article suggests, the dating of those civilizations is disputed, even among secularists. The Bible has more than a thousand times the number of contemporary manuscripts of all other ancient books PUT TOGETHER. Therefore, the authenticity of the Bible should not be in doubt, and is only in doubt because you have an a priori reason for rejecting it.
by Felloffher on 05 January 2013 - 03:01
Shtal,
The article I posted doesn't represent any ground breaking theories, there is an endless amount of data that supports the author's article and ideas. Despite what you claim, there is very little dispute outside of creationist circles as to the accuracy of dating past civilizations or any of the other questions raised in the article. The mountain of evidence against the idea of Noah's flood myth occurring is to overwhelming to be ignored. The basis for disputing the bible doesn't hang on Noah's flood myth alone, there many other inconsistencies which I've pointed out and many others not discussed here. The sad part is biblical creationist's still attempt to validate their claims with dishonest tactics. You can't argue claims based on merit, so your only option is to falsely attack credibility, ignore facts and/or insert falsehood.
The shear multitude of bible manuscripts alone only confirms that Christianity is and was a popular belief, however this alone doesn't guarantee it's authenticity. The bible along with many other religious and mythical stories where written in a time when man had very little understanding of the physical world around them. Today we have a much greater understanding of our physical world and we are able to critically analyze the evidence that is uncovered and piece it together. Holding on to myth in spite of fact, is detrimental to our ability as a society to move forward productively and is an insult to our collective intelligence.
The article I posted doesn't represent any ground breaking theories, there is an endless amount of data that supports the author's article and ideas. Despite what you claim, there is very little dispute outside of creationist circles as to the accuracy of dating past civilizations or any of the other questions raised in the article. The mountain of evidence against the idea of Noah's flood myth occurring is to overwhelming to be ignored. The basis for disputing the bible doesn't hang on Noah's flood myth alone, there many other inconsistencies which I've pointed out and many others not discussed here. The sad part is biblical creationist's still attempt to validate their claims with dishonest tactics. You can't argue claims based on merit, so your only option is to falsely attack credibility, ignore facts and/or insert falsehood.
The shear multitude of bible manuscripts alone only confirms that Christianity is and was a popular belief, however this alone doesn't guarantee it's authenticity. The bible along with many other religious and mythical stories where written in a time when man had very little understanding of the physical world around them. Today we have a much greater understanding of our physical world and we are able to critically analyze the evidence that is uncovered and piece it together. Holding on to myth in spite of fact, is detrimental to our ability as a society to move forward productively and is an insult to our collective intelligence.
by Shtal on 05 January 2013 - 05:01
by Felloffher on 05 January 2013 - 06:01
Shtal,
Really, the Hydroplate theory? I'm embarrassed for you, all the information contained in that video has be debunked numerous times. Try again.
Really, the Hydroplate theory? I'm embarrassed for you, all the information contained in that video has be debunked numerous times. Try again.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top