Any comment W_Fortenberry?

Nor apparently do you pretend to play games by the rules and standards of the Bible or of polite society.First you present a false argument, such as that radiometric dating is unreliable. When you are given evidence that it is reliable, you argue that scientists are dishonest cheats, purposely pulling the wool over the eyes of the ignorant public. This, I believe, the Bible calls bearing false witness.When you can't back up your accusation, instead of apologizing for your grave offense of falsely accusing men more honest than yourself (scientists), you simply move on to the next casual argument, continually adding "(in my opinion)" in hopes that your opponents will not continue to point out that your opinion is wrong.Finally, you simply say, "I'm really too spiritual to care about logic and sound argument."I think you're really too spiritual to care about the rules of society or the Bible, which is sort of frightening, don't you think? Did you believe that when you jumped into this debate, or did you find it the only response left to you when all your others were demolished?If you believed it when you jumped into this debate, then why did you waste so many posts attempting to obey the rules of sound logic and to naturally explain the events in the Bible by disagreeing with trained scientists? Why didn't you begin with what you really believed?

I did expect criticism of Cooper's claim on those grounds.... and I received it.With regard to your regard, it must be clear by now that what I see when I look "into the matter" is not what you see. I make no bones about that. If you are satisfied with your scholarship and convinced in your own heart that you are closer to the truth now, I am at peace. Your knowledge is sound, your observations are clear and well noted. You seem to have a handle on the finer points of debate.Concerning the scriptures I used.... well here we go. As a matter of fact I was well aware that some of what I put forward as prophecy is from the Psalms because some of the psalms are prophetic. You can either believe that or not. Here are just a few....Psalms 2
7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.
10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.Psalm 69
19 Thou hast known my reproach, and my shame, and my dishonour: mine adversaries are all before thee.
20 Reproach hath broken my heart; and I am full of heaviness: and I looked for some to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but I found none.
21 They gave me also gall for my meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.Psalms 22
6 But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.
7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,
8 He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.
9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother’s breasts.
10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother’s belly.
11 Be not far from me; for trouble is near; for there is none to help.
12 Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.
13 They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion.
14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.
16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
17 I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.
18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. Alright, for the anguish I have caused you I am sorry. I sure do not want to be seen as mean-spirited. Especially since it may surprise you that I actually have your immortal soul weighing heavily on my heart!!!! I doubt if you could care less about who I am.
There is a plus side to finding salvation though. Eternal life and joy and peace and happiness and strength for the day!!!! These are all promises made categorically by Christ and thoroughly testifiable by me!!!! I have been to places in my life and depths of despair and darkness that many haven't. I found Christ, and took him at his word. He has never failed me yet.
However, I do not want you to accept anything. Christ wants you to give your life to him, not me. Without his love in me, I wouldn't give a scrap about you. Sounds pathetic I know, I am well aware of that."Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid." - John 14:27
"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." - Matthew 11:28
"Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." - John 14:23 So I would be hypocritical and also a lier as well as a coward that runs from the truth?I am sorry you feel that way. Maybe one day you won't. I almost wish I could say that I hope I am wrong about all this, but I can't.------------------
Heb 12:29 For our God is a consuming fire.

The funny thing was, I was a Christian, and saved, and all that - I totally had salvation.But I never felt anything like what you're talking about. I still had all the same fear and doubt and anger and stuff. When I asked and prayed for strength, I received weakness and self-recrimination.Christ may have promised strength, and you may be testament to that fulfilled promise - but I'm testament to his broken promise. How to resolve this discrepancy? I came to the conclusion that no amount of prayer could give me that which I already didn't have inside me. If you have strength it's because it's in you already, not from Jesus. I don't think anybody loves me but the human people who do, and the funny thing is, I don't need God's love to care enough about you to tell you you might be wasting your life with this Chrisitan stuff. At the very least you're cheapening the very good things inside you - because all that strength you think comes from Jesus, really comes from you. Ouch, looks like you're giving up on us pretty quickly. Truthlover is a Christian, did you know that? Sounds like you've written him off for Hell, though.

Yes, we do see things differently. For me the truth is about an honest search - for you it is agreeing with what you already believe.Cooper is not honestly seeking the truth - he is seeking to support his beliefs, regardless of the truth. That is why he does not deal with significant evidence against his claims.If you were prepared to accept that then that would be enough. You have your beliefs and if they are not genuinely true you don't want to know. Your mind is closed. If you were a Muslim you would make similar claims about the Quran.So how do you know that the Psalms are prophecies ? Psalm 2 is clearly about a human ruler. And a rather violent one at that. Verse 6 states that there is already a King in Jerusalem - before the day when the "you" of verse 7 is "begotten" (the NIV translation of verse 7 looks more likely - 'I will proclaim the decree of the LORD : He said to me, "You are my Son ; today I have become your Father."')Psalm 69 ? What about verse 5 ? or verse 6 ? Where does it say that it is a prophecy ? Why could it not be about David, who is the reputed author ?Likewise Psalm 22 - and what do the animals have to do with Jesus ?The most amazing thing is that you claim that Jesus has inspired you to "love" me so much that you insult me and boast that the truth is to be found in worshipping you - yes that is what it amounts to. The Jesus I was taught about in church would inspire humility and honesty - and real love. Not the disdain and arrogance you are projecting.

The Living Bible is even clearer: "This is your Coronation Day."db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

quote:

---

Alright, for the anguish I have caused you I am sorry. I sure do not want to be seen as mean-spirited. Especially since it may surprise you that I actually have your immortal soul weighing heavily on my heart!!!! I doubt if you could care less about who I am.
There is a plus side to finding salvation though. Eternal life and joy and peace and happiness and strength for the day!!!! These are all promises made categorically by Christ and thoroughly testifiable by me!!!! I have been to places in my life and depths of despair and darkness that many haven't. I found Christ, and took him at his word. He has never failed me yet.
However, I do not want you to accept anything. Christ wants you to give your life to him, not me. Without his love in me, I wouldn't give a scrap about you. Sounds pathetic I know, I am well aware of that.

---

This is probably way off topic, but I find it interesting that every emphatic evangelical Christian I know, or read in these forums, was in the "depths of despair" before he was "saved" - usually via an emotional epiphany. This leads me to believe that certain brands of Christianity are really only suited to people who've led a certain kind of life.I'm lucky in some respects because my life has always been just fine. I've never known despair and I was never a bad person in need of moral guidance from above. I can figure out my own morals through common sense. I don't need the love of Jesus to care about other people, or the threat of hell to make me behave. No one ever abused me, I never did drugs, I had a wonderful childhood and continue to have loving support from my parents and friends when I need it. So testimonials like the above from Culverin are totally irrelevant for me in terms of making Christianity an appealing proposition.I use my (god-given?) faculties to seek the truth using evidence and logic - primarily as a way to describe the universe. That's what humans do (the ones who bother to try and better humanity, anyway): they attempt to describe the universe, and they do it through science or art. I choose science because my (god-given?) faculties tell me that's a better way to the truth that appeals to me. Art is fantasy - which doesn't make it less valuable, but it doesn't truthfully describe the universe. I place religion in the category of art, and my (god-given?) brain is hardwired to reject that concept of life, the universe and everything.------------------
o--greyline--o

If the ages,such as adams 930 years, in the old testament were monthly revolutions instead of years,which makes a lot of sense,then the date of creation and noahs flood would be changed

Hi, Chinger, Welcome aboard! This implication hadn't occurred to me before. Do you have an estimate for how much it would change the traditional YEC estimates of the dates for creation and the great flood? It would make the dates more recent, but the question is by how much. If the date of the great flood becomes sufficiently recent to have occurred during periods for which we have ancient writings, then the lack of any mention of the flood would be yet more evidence against it. As if more were needed.--Percy{Note from Adminnemooseus - I refer all, also to the topic "Biblical Ages". A Percy message in that topic also references message 12 of the "For TC" topic}[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 08-16-2003]

Greetings Chinger, and welcome aboard. Correctamundo! Glad someone noticed.My calculation holds the 'birth' of Adam to be year zero then adds his age at the birth of Seth {according to the formula (n/12.38 + 13)}, repeating the process with each ancestor up to the birth of Abram. The cumulative ages are then added. The traditional number of years given from Adam to the birth of Abram is 1,946 (assuming I have added correctly), while the adjusted years total 404.2. Estimates of Abram’s period of activity range from about 2050 to about 1850 BC. If we go with the earlier date, think of it as Abrams birthdate and count backward, utilizing our adjusted years, then creation occurs around 2450 BC. If we choose the later date, then creation occurs about 2250 BC; Just subtract 267 years from these figures and you get a date for the flood. But there are problems with that. See below. For reasons which will become immediately apparent, let's choose an intermediate date for the birth of Abram at circa 1950 BC. Thus, Adam appears in Mesopotamia circa 2350, well after the invention of writing and about the same time a man calling himself "Sargon" (son o'god) conquers a region which the Bible calls *Eden.* The flood comes approximately 250 years later (give or take a decade) about the same time Ur re-takes the territory Sargon had seized from them. Could a devastating flood have given them such an opportunity?There are Mesopotamian writings which refer to what was doubtless the same flood as Noah’s. But, by both Sumerian and Hebrew accounts, it would seem that flood occurred much earlier. Woolley's dig at Ur discovered evidence of a great flood which he dated to 3500 BC. One of his colleagues later dated it to around 3700 BC. I have discovered no claim to the contrary. It seems that neither my calculation nor that of Bishop Usher fits this particular evidence.If we assume creation at 4000 BC and work forward, using the adjusted years, then the flood occurs in 3736 BC. A nice fit for the evidence, but it puts the story of Abram way too early and it throws off the entire timeline of the Bible.Don't ask me how I justify all this. I don't. And don't blame me if there are more questions now than there were before. The myth was already a mess before I took it apart.db {edited for arithmetic}[This message has been edited by doctrbill, 08-18-2003]

Doctrbill already has the answer on that one ,i have been forced to accept that the hebrews were not very good with numbers,and it wasn't just the old testament,the new testament starts off with the same problems in matthew.
Fourteen generations from abraham to david,about 1000 years.
Fourteen generations from david to carrying away into babylon,about
280 years more or less.
Fourteen generations from carrying away into babylon to christ,about
720 years more or less.
I have done this from memory,but i think its pretty close,the math just does not work,this is not a good way to start off the new testament.

Hi Percy,In case you haven't noticed, I replied to chinger's post and may have answered your questions. See my post #54.db

Hi DB!Oh, I noticed alright! Thanks for going through the math. Going with the 2450 BC date of Creation creates insurmountable problems since it places the flood in the middle of historical periods of civilizations for which we have numerous records and which didn't seem to notice that they'd been wiped out.I didn't follow the closing portion where you presented a different scenario with a creation date around 4000 BC because I didn't know where that date came from.--Percy

Hi Percy,The 4000 BCE date comes from Bishop Ussher who added up all the genealogies in the Bible to get a creation date of 4004 BCE. This date was the generally accepted date of creation by many churches up until the Enlightenment, after this most realised that this date has to be symbolic/schematic.Brian.

Hello again Percy,Brian's right. My intent was to assume that Bishop Ussher's date is correct and then, using the adjusted genealogy, to calculate the date of Noah's Flood. When one does this the timing fits Woolley's evidence of a Great Mesopotamian Flood circa 3700 BC. The purpose of the exercise was to demonstrate that adjusting for the lunar calendar does not, in itself, resolve the problematic mysteries of the myth.db

Doctrbill,Let me mention a brief inconsistency found in your article suggesting that we assume the biblical writers meant to say months instead of years when presenting the ages of ancient men. Namely that while your primary supporting text comes from the book of Job, you neglected to demonstrate how your proposal fits in with the age of Job as given in Job 42:16 as well as with the comment made that Job "saw his sons, and his sons' sons, even four generations."If we apply your formula of (n/12.38 + 13), we arrive at an age for Job of 11.3 years older than his age at the time of his testing. Surely he could not have seen four generations in just eleven years. Your formula then is flawed because it does not fit the very context from which you seek to derive it.