|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 3850 days) Posts: 72 From: Los Angeles, California Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
I think the best answer is that the Bible (the only document that we can rely on for information about God/Jesus) is unreliable.
People do all kinds of mental gymnastics to get their take on religion to work in their heads. Some even think that Jesus is in fact Gabriel. Imagine that?The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
Welcome to EvC, it's a great place to learn if you check your assumptions in at the door (you can get them on the way out, though).
I disagree that the Bible is unreliable. In fact, from my study of the Bible, I have found it to be quite the opposite. But since you are making the claim, perhaps you could present a few examples by identifying various scriptures and explaining why they are evidence that the Bible is "unreliable." Be sure and provide Bible book, chapter, and verse along with your explanation. Genesis 7:23 Thus He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky, and they were blotted out from the land; and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark. If every living thing was dead (apart from 14 of the clean and 2 of the unclean animals) there would be a genetic bottle neck for every species around 4600 years ago. As there is not we can conclude the description of the Noachian Flood is unreliable. Your go. Edited by Larni, : Clean and un clean animals. Edited by Larni, : No reason given. Edited by Larni, : You're to yourThe above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
Just one more time, exactly WHAT do you think would show that there had been a bottleneck 4500 years ago that we don't see? Such an extreme loss of genetic variation in animals we know to have under gone such bottle necking can have transplants (skin grafts, for example) that do not provoke immune responses due to being so close genetically. This does not occur in every single species, does it? Score one for not the Bible.The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
As I hope you are now aware I was referring to the amount of unclean animals.
Do you now concede my point about the genetic bottle neck? I appreciate that you don't want to address this (thanks for the tip, Purpledawn) and I will bow out when you respnd. All the best.The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
What point was that? The one you failed to make? You presented speculations and failed to prove there were not sufficient "kinds" of animals on Noah's Ark to have resulted in every existing creature that has ever walked this earth. You asked what evidence one would expect to see. I indicated what that evidence would look like (it's present in modern Cheetahs). How is this failing to make a point?
With all due respect, since everybody on this planet has an opinion, where did you get the idea your opinions are all that special. It's not an opinion. You asked a question, I gave you an answer that you could check for accuracy in less than a minute.
When context (the surrounding words, verses, and chapters) is paid attention to, it soon becomes clear that the verses are not with reference to trinity. This is of course, an opinion Edited by Larni, : No reason given. Edited by Larni, : No reason given.The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
I'll take your silence regarding my replies to you as to concede my points about the evidence for bottle necking that we would expect to see.
Good exchange. The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024