Forums-->Off-game forum-->
1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|>|>>
| Author | May 21, 2011-End Of The World? |
|---|
So I take you *still* can't refute the Genesis contradiction?
Well, since such an obvious problem is being studiously avoided by you I guess you are simply unable to account for it.
There really isn't much point engaging in this discussion if you continually evade answering what should be such a simple issue. You've had responses to most of your questions, although you've gone on to *try* and muddy the waters after each answer (a tactic that you will obviously continue to use Ad Infinitum). Why not answer a question that was actually put to you rather than evading and trying to "answer" other things you weren't asked.
Really is there any point in trying to talk to someone who steadfastly ignores such an obvious flaw in their own position?
"No amount of evidence, no matter how good it is or how much there is of it, is ever going to convince the true believer to the contrary." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True-believer_syndrome
On a more On-Topic issue -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
Very relevant for those who wonder how anyone can believe the guy who predicted the end of the world. In many ways it resembles the Great Disappointment. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Disappointment) | for Grunge:
Er, no Grunge. The reason I haven't bothered with the question is because it has been asked and answered by NUMEROUS authors in the past 200 years. Do you two think you have stumbled upon some new thing?
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=1131
You can find numerous explanations about this on the web if you wanted to look.
This has all been covered in debates. What I find amusing is that neither of you has been impressed with the evidence of a historical Moses or the Exodus,even though it has had a PROFOUND effect on our society. No, that's not a big deal to you is it? Of course not, because you and your mate are disingenuous at best.
Do you realize that your side once proclaimed there was never an Assyria? I mean, really? Why? Because they had not located it at that time so ASSumed it was a myth.
It was in the Bible and they hadn't located it so they loudly proclaimed " the Bible is false." Oops, embarrassed again!
"Indeed the only historical source in those days that verified the existence of the empire was the Bible. The Old Testament histories and prophecies spoke about Assyria. Jesus proclaimed the existence of Nineveh as a historical fact (Matthew:12:41The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.). Yet some scholars disputed the testimony of Jesus and the prophets—that is, until "one spectacular decade in the middle of the nineteenth century...[when] Austen Henry Layard and Paul Emile Botta rediscovered in northern Iraq the ancient remains of three Assyrian cities [including Nineveh] and evidence of the military panoply that had crushed all resistance from the Tigris to the Nile. The Assyrian empire...in all its awesome power had been resurrected through archaeology" (Magnusson, p. 175).
The skeptics were silenced. There was nothing they could say. The excavations at Nineveh and other cities in the area yielded a staggering wealth of historical evidence including "tens of thousands of tablets" containing "an immense amount of data" (The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, 1962, Vol. 1, "Assyria and Babylon," p. 275). The Bible had been right all along." | Ouch, that's^^ a pretty big miss, wouldn't you say? I mean proclaiming a one time mighty empire as a myth?
That pesky Bible was right again.
Do you know it was called the Nabī Yūnus? The mound of Jonas? You know who he is right? Jonas was the man who was sent to Assyria to tell them to repent. I find it ironic the natives correctly had named the mound while the educated elitists said it was a myth. | | I agree with Modi on the existence of Moses and all things related to him.The Holy Q'uran has verses proving this; | I love the way you keep claiming that "skeptics" said this and "skeptics" said that. As usual you are choosing to quote a few individuals while ignoring the greater body of skeptical thought. In fact most skeptics have been more concerned with how to *prove* the existence of the biblical fables. In some cases there have indeed been shown to be places that were populated as recounted in the bible. But inevitably most of the biblical details were way off. Particularly in the numbers of population, the referenced dates, the continuity of inhabitence, etc.
Really so the supposed "discovery" of Mount Sinai proves the existence of Moses? The mountain you reference has had various chapels (including an Islamic Mosque) on it, some dating as far back as the 9th century AD. But according to the YouTube accounts you reference it was only recently "discovered"?
And why does the alleged discovery of Mount Sinai "prove" the existence of Moses?
Does the existence of Buddha's Footsteps prove the existence of Buddha? Surely it meets the same criteria that you are using.
Same goes for Mount Olympus proving the existence of Zeus and the greek pantheon. I'm sure there are plenty of others, but I'm sure these will be enough for Modi to chew on for a while.
And there has been plenty of work looking for evidence of the Exodus as spoken of in the Bible. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus, from Historicity Debate section onwards. If you believe you have such comprehensive evidence, please update the page and I'm sure you can justify keeping the changes in place. Should be a cinch huh? After all, you do have such comprehensive evidence, right? There has been a mountain of attempts to show that Exodus is factual. Perhaps there was an Exodus event in history, but in no way does it match the biblical account of the story. Perhaps it is because of the "Chinese Whispers" nature of passing down such events through oral history. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers which leads to the interesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology which discusses the relationship between beliefs and knowledge).
What a surprise. The site that you reference to allegedly "prove" that genesis isn't a contradiction uses interpretation of *other* biblical references for the "proof" that genesis contradiction, well, isn't (in their opinion). In fact they try to use *interpretation* of the bible to find excuses for the contradiction. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_contradictions, old testament, new testament and beyond).
The most interesting thing is that the story of the creation of Man could only come from divine inspiration, right? After all, even if you suppose the existance of man at that time (just been created right?), Man had not eaten from the "Tree of Knowledge" at that time. So he would be ignorant of anything that was happening. So the account had to dictated to Man by god, right? Surely god wouldn't recount such a tale with even the faintest hint of contradiction, would he? Omnipotent and all, right?
There's also the matter of the monotheism problem you face. You keep demanding for us to prove your religious text flawed. I put it to you, shoudn't you be doing a similar thing? You believe all other religions are wrong because you worship the one and only "true god" right? So please provide your evidence that all the other religions that exist are flawed in a way that yours is not. After all, isn't it in your interest to do so, to bring all those other "wrong" religions back into the fold. Then you can enjoy the unreasonable expectation to prove the non-existence of someone else's fables for a change. You can encounter the joys of True Believer Syndrome yourself. That should keep you busy for a few millenia.
Anybody interested in more information can find info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B | Anybody interested in more information can find info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_criticism) here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_history) and here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Bible).
There's plenty more information on these subjects available. I recommend anyone who wishes to know more to find your own sources of information. By all means, read the sources provided by myself, Modi and others. But please, make sure to try and explore the subject in a way that you find to satisfy your own beliefs or lack thereof. That's the most attractive thing I find about skepticism *in* *general*. I get to make up my own mind from the many and varied sources available. I don't simply use the "this is the way things are and have always been" standpoint that many religions try to force on others.
Back On Topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfulfilled_religious_predictions
Have Fun
Grunge | Really so the supposed "discovery" of Mount Sinai proves the existence of Moses? The mountain you reference has had various chapels (including an Islamic Mosque) on it, some dating as far back as the 9th century AD. But according to the YouTube accounts you reference it was only recently "discovered"?
Er um, wrong Mt Sinai. Try again son. | See this is the nonsense we have had to endure for over 200 years.
Did your side say there was no king David before 1993? Did they? Yes they did. So let me ask you why are these same dupes able to now tell us all about the life of someone who they claimed was a myth? I would love an answer to that.
Why would anyone listen to discredited people? The skeptics are no better than the joke of a "pastor" who predicted the date of the Rapture.
Both are wildly wrong but one side still is held in high esteem. Bwahahahaha
Gee, where is that Assyrian Empire? Must be around here somewhere?
So while the skeptics continue to debate the intricate details of the Bible with the goal of discrediting it, they shamelessly ignore all the times they have been proven to be fools.
Liken it to the NY Times running a page one story about a subject but when found to be false, place a small 2x2 inch retraction on page 3.
We know your game son. | Are you sure? SO what you are saying is that isn't a consensus on where Mount Sinai is, or in fact which mountain it is?
Thanks for that.
No matter which mountain it supposed is, why does it prove Moses? Why is a similar criteria used for Buddha's footsteps? Mount Olympus?
I love the way Modi just ignores the greater swath of information against his stance and focuses on the miniscule portion he can find fault with.
Care to explain?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_contradictions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_criticism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Bible
Back On Topic.
My favourite part of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfulfilled_religious_predictions is that most of the people advocating "The End of the World" is that so many of the instigators manage to find financial benefit from those that choose to believe them. Apparently religion is a favourite method *and* target for scam artists. After all if someone has already shown a history of of belief without proof, well, they're prime targets, right?
Have Fun
Grunge | The skeptics are really good at being wrong. The Hittite Empire is another one that they claimed was a myth, only found in the Bible. Until over 60 Hittite cities were unearthed.
Really guys? Tell me again why anyone should listen to you?
And while we are on a thread about dupes following fables, shall we cover Piltdown man? Nebraska man? You know, the hoaxes swallowed fully by the scientific community as proof of the missing link. Shall we laugh?
Human Ancestral Frauds
Piltdown man: Found in a gravel pit in Sussex England in 1912, this fossil was considered by some sources to be the second most important fossil proving the evolution of man—until it was found to be a complete forgery 41 years later. The skull was found to be of modern age. The fragments had been chemically stained to give the appearance of age, and the teeth had been filed down!
Nebraska Man from the Illustrated London NewsNebraska man: A single tooth, discovered in Nebraska in 1922 grew an entire evolutionary link between man and monkey, until another identical tooth was found which was protruding from the jawbone of a wild pig.
Java man: Initially discovered by Dutchman Eugene Dubois in 1891, all that was found of this claimed originator of humans was a skullcap, three teeth and a femur. The femur was found 50 feet away from the original skullcap a full year later. For almost 30 years Dubois downplayed the Wadjak skulls (two undoubtedly human skulls found very close to his "missing link"). (source: Hank Hanegraaff, The Face That Demonstrates The Farce Of Evolution, [Word Publishing, Nashville, 1998], pp.50-52)
Orce man: Found in the southern Spanish town of Orce in 1982, and hailed as the oldest fossilized human remains ever found in Europe. One year later officials admitted the skull fragment was not human but probably came from a 4 month old donkey. Scientists had said the skull belonged to a 17 year old man who lived 900,000 to 1.6 million years ago, and even had very detail drawings done to represent what he would have looked like. (source: "Skull fragment may not be human", Knoxville News-Sentinel, 1983)
Shall we laugh?
http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionfraud.html | for Grunge:
You prove my earlier point son. Evidence is ignored because it doesn't jive with your account.
Show me the Mt Sinai in Arabia, where the Bible says it is. No, you are pointing to the Sinai Peninsula where Queen Helena proclaimed it was THE Mt Sinai.
You seem to be a bit confused. | Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny?
Haekel’s faked embryonic drawings
Haekel’s EmbryosThe theory of embryonic recapitulation asserts that the human fetus goes through various stages of its evolutionary history as it develops. Ernst Haeckel proposed this theory in the late 1860’s, promoting Darwin’s theory of evolution in Germany. He made detailed drawings of the embryonic development of eight different embryos in three stages of development, to bolster his claim. His work was hailed as a great development in the understanding of human evolution. A few years later his drawings were shown to have been fabricated, and the data manufactured. He blamed the artist for the discrepancies, without admitting that he was the artist. (source: Russell Grigg, "Fraud Rediscovered", Creation, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.49-51)
This is STILL in textbooks. Duped? Why yes, you were. Ouch. | Oh, this is too good.
Piltdown Man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man) and Nebraska Man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebraska_man) are a favourite of Creationists. Is Modi showing his real colours here?
Isn't it interesting that these hoaxes, *masquerading* as scientific discoveries were exposed by scientists, not by the effort of any religious groups.
That is the thing I love about the Scientific Method (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method). Anyone who perpetrates such a hoax will inevitably be found out because of the "must be repeatable/reproducible" requirement.
Pity most religions don't have such a evidential requirement for their "proofs".
Back On Topic
Science has actually gone on "the End of the World" bandwagon. However, unlike most others it doesn't propose such an event in any reasonable person lifetime. The current hypothesis is that the Sun will become a Red Giant in approximately 5 billion years, expanding far enough to consume the Earth in one way or another. Unlike previous religious predictions, however, the scientific community hasn't tried to use this as a scare tactic to induce belief, nor as a method to garner funds for their own personal benefit.
Have Fun
Grunge | for Grunge:
Er um, the hoaxes were said to be wrong by Christians and of course the Christians were proven correct.
Christians also believed correctly that the Biblical text remained the same through the ages. Skeptics said it was not possible. Aw, did the Dead Sea Scroll discovery prove you wrong? Gee, I'm sorry but the Christians were correct again vs the scientific community.
Hey I see a pattern here.
I wonder why fraud is still being used in textbooks when it was exposed as fraud over 100 years ago? Hmmm, that sure is odd.
Yeah, that scientific community is as sharp as a bowling ball. | Still going the route of muddying the waters Modi?
Still ignoring the stuff that doesn't support your position? As I said earlier - There really isn't much point engaging in this discussion if you continually evade answering what should be such a simple issue. You've had responses to most of your questions, although you've gone on to *try* and muddy the waters after each answer (a tactic that you will obviously continue to use Ad Infinitum). Why not answer a question that was actually put to you rather than evading and trying to "answer" other things you weren't asked.
Care to explain?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_contradictions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_criticism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Bible
Let's see what tack Modi will take this time. As usual evasion and smoke-and-mirrors is his stock in trade.
Back On Topic
An explanation of why religion is so focused on "the End of the World"? If a person can be convinced of "the End of the World" it immediately brings up thoughts of one's own mortality. At this point the particular faith that is trying to instill belief in the "End of the World" leaps and employs the true weapon. If you die without having followed our creed you will - end up in hell/experience a dire ressurection/cease to exist (particular method depends on which religion is making the "End of the World" scare-tactic presentation.
Have Fun
Grunge
Grunge | Back to Anthony Flew, who was the point man for your side for over 50 years. Don't run from the truth.
Now that the man has used the complexity of life as a reason why he believes in intelligent design, he has been lambasted by his former followers.
He is no longer brilliant but weak, old, and maybe even senile.
This shows that they are just as much a religion as we are and just as zealous. At least my side admits we are fundamentalists, even zealots if you will. So are they but they don't have the sand to admit it. | Christians also believed correctly that the Biblical text remained the same through the ages. Skeptics said it was not possible.
No off.,but I'm not saying it is completely possible but some evidences do show that Bible or In'jil as it is known was written after Jesus was taken up by God.Note: He didn;t die nor was crucified.
A comparison of verses 16-17 in chapter 19 in Matthew with verses 17-18 of chapter 10 in Mark in the New Testament shows the method of distortion by individual compilers.. | for Grunge:
Wow, you are pretty slow.
Look up Queen Helena and maybe that will help you out.
What I said was that your side refuses to look at the evidence for the Exodus which I provided already.
Now you show me links proving what I already stated? That the community ignores the evidence? Circular what?
Weak, really weak.
Hey, I can do the same thing. Want me to provide Christian links about the Exodus and claim them as valid?
What I provided is VISUAL evidence of the description of the Exodus found in the Bible, the evidence your side ignores and continues to ignore.
No Grunge, you and Fishy are here to oppose me because it is me, just like all the other threads you chased me, like the Tavern 1 and 2, the ethics thread, my personal miniature thread, and others. You want proof of that also? | My turn.
Now the "experts" say there was not an Exodus of the Jews from Egypt. It's all a myth, right?
The Bible says Mt Sinai is in Arabia.
Galatians 4
"For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children."
So what would they expect to find if Mt Sinai was there and Israel with it?
A mountain with a blackened top. check
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyvEVfMqOJY&feature=related at the 8:25 mark.
A split rock where water had gushed forth from. check
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_sYCXJIzBs&feature=related at the 8:51 mark.
12 pillars representing the 12 tribes of Israel. check
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_sYCXJIzBs&feature=related at the 4:18 mark.
An altar to the golden calf. check
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyvEVfMqOJY&feature=related at the 6 minute mark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_o6DZKUCRY&feature=related 7:46 mark.
Footprint impressions here and also where Joshua crossed over the Jordan, making stone walls about the camp in the shape of a footprint.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vmIoBsDrA0&feature=related at the 4:16 mark. Agreeing is this video of the same time period where Joshua took over from Moses after he died.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWawVUZg3Es at the 14:16 mark.
Aarons rod was made of almond wood. check
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_sYCXJIzBs&feature=related at the 7:22 mark.
"But but, Moses was a myth and Israel never came out of Egypt and went to Sinai."
Sorry but the evidence proves otherwise. I'm sure you will dismiss it or maybe even ignore it like the rest of the "scientific" community.
Let me refresh your memory. You see I spent time posting visual evidence of my claim and stated that it was being ignored by the community. Now you show me the community that does not reference this evidence at all, backing up what I originally claimed.
And you prove what?
I ask those reading to watch for yourselves and be the judge. Why should anyone listen to an already discredited scientific community? | Haeckel's aim was a reformed morphology with evolution as the organizing principle of a cosmic synthesis unifying science, religion, and art.
Although the identity of H. haroldcookii did not achieve general acceptance in the scientific community, and although the species was retracted a decade after its discovery, critics of evolution have promoted this episode as an example of the scientific errors that they allege undermine the credibility of how paleontology and hominid evolution theories are crafted, and how information is peer reviewed or accepted as mainstream knowledge. However, considering that the proposal of this species was rejected by the scientific community as being obviously flawed clearly works in favor of the scientific method, which constantly seeks to critique and validate its theories, and to remove those that do not stand up to evidence.
From the outset, there were scientists who expressed skepticism about the Piltdown find. G.S. Miller, for example, observed in 1915 that "deliberate malice could hardly have been more successful than the hazards of deposition in so breaking the fossils as to give free scope to individual judgment in fitting the parts together." In the decades prior to its exposure as a forgery in 1953, scientists increasingly regarded Piltdown as an enigmatic aberration inconsistent with the path of hominid evolution as demonstrated by fossils found elsewhere. Sceptical scientists only increased in number as more fossils were found.
Apparently the scientific community was not so gullible. Although the religious communities have continued to rely on these, even to this day.
I've answered some of yours. Won't you please answer some of mine?
Care to explain?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_contradictions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_criticism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Bible
Let's see what tack Modi will take this time. As usual evasion and smoke-and-mirrors is his stock in trade.
Again and again, evading the points put to you earlier.
Back On Topic
Perhaps in 5 billion years, if the human race still exists, it will have found a solution to the Earth being consumed by the Sun becoming a Red Giant. Perhaps we will have colonised other stellar systems, so Earth simply won;t matter anymore. Perhaps we will have the technology to move the Earth without destroying it. Who knows (maybe Modi does, he seems to have a biblical answer for everything else)? Then there will be the issue of how the Universe ends (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_fate_of_the_universe). Heat Death, Big Crunch or something else? Which do you think it will be? Personally I don't care. I'm not going to be around to worry about it.
Have Fun
Grunge |
1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|>|>>Back to topics list
|
