Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christmas Star Explained
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 278 (427515)
10-11-2007 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by macaroniandcheese
10-11-2007 7:40 PM


No, the HMS Starship Sceptre. (First Class) Otherwise known as Ezekiel's wheels, God's wheels, the mobile throne, or the Christmas star, or the star of Bethlehem.
Edited by simple, : No reason given.
Edited by simple, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-11-2007 7:40 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-11-2007 7:50 PM simple has replied
 Message 34 by Damouse, posted 10-11-2007 8:58 PM simple has replied
 Message 40 by bluegenes, posted 10-12-2007 2:36 AM simple has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 32 of 278 (427518)
10-11-2007 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by simple
10-11-2007 7:45 PM


Re: Christmas star
wht exactly are you agreeing with, here?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by simple, posted 10-11-2007 7:45 PM simple has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 33 of 278 (427519)
10-11-2007 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by simple
10-11-2007 7:47 PM


her majesty's ship?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by simple, posted 10-11-2007 7:47 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by simple, posted 10-12-2007 4:21 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
Damouse
Member (Idle past 4905 days)
Posts: 215
From: Brookfield, Wisconsin
Joined: 12-18-2005


Message 34 of 278 (427527)
10-11-2007 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by simple
10-11-2007 7:47 PM


Why Simple's answer is NOT the answer.
Simple you have to be the most astounding person i have ever seen(read?) I seriously doubt that you actually believe the utter trash that appears on the screen in front of me under you name, it is simply appalling. Im more inclined to believe youre just having a grand old time messing with all of us.
Fist of all that titanic post at post 13 was from this page, so at least give the credit to where its so sadly due when you post your illustrious comments. Its not even worth my time to respond to that whole block, but on a first time skim there were a few scientifically objectionable points.
Therefore, since the starship was a very local event there, it is reasonable to assume that the local records would be sure NOT to reflect that, except for the record of records, the bible!
What? what makes the bible the record of records? Humans wrote the bible, buddy, as more or less generally accepted by the ENTIRE WORLD. That you believe otherwise matters not because theres absolutly NO BACKING behind it. Along with that, the general consensus on the dating of the bible is that Mark, being the earliest written book, was written around 70 BC, nowhere NEAR the birth of Christ. PEOPLE WROTE THE BIBLE. THE SAME PEOPLE WERE NOT THERE TO SEE THE STAR.
The entire book of Matt revolves around the life of Christ, not the Romans.This is news? One of the most important events was the birth of Christ. That was marked by a star in the sky, seen by shepherds, and wise men. Not Ceasar in the sky with diamonds.
So important was this star, the starship of the Father, that your computer is set to it, and most calendars in the world!You are running on Sceptre Time, whether you knew it or not!!! That was where they tried to set the calendar to, as best they could.
What ramos was saying, if you took the time out of your day to look up COMMENTARY, is that although the book of Matthew was written(at first glance) on the topic of the Nativity story, it was really meant to comment on the political situation of Rome. Just because something is named specifically in the book doesnt mean it cannot have a deeper meaning that is not apparant at first glance. Much like your star/flying saucer. The differance is his theory makes some sort of logical sense and yours makes none.
On the same quote, the calendar we are based around is not based on jesus' birth. The year is, true, but the calendar is not. In fact, the Gregorian calendar which we currently use is from around the mid 1500's, and one of its main points was to move the calendar so it corresponded with Easter.
No need to prove the bible here, it is assumed true. You can assume what you like. What we are looking at is the bible Christmas star, and what it really was, not whether it really was.
Plenty more i could say from the rest of the contents of this particular post, but ill just examine this line.
What on earth are you talking about? First of all you are INTERPERTING the bible, so it does not matter what the truth is when you create your own truth from it. As weve seen, even if Ramoss takes the bible to be true, you and he still came up with different conclusions to its contents when you interperted it. As for its actual Truth, its is NOT ASSUMED TRUE. If the bible was assumed true then there would be no purpose for EVC or debate(except on the interpertation), the bible would be our roadmap to absolutly everything. Do yo think that eveyone on EVC believes the bible to be true? Ive seen you on different threads, you cant even claim ignorance on this topic. Do you think everyone in the world beleives the bible to be true?
Ill save you from making a dumb comment and just answer for you. NOT EVERYONE BELIEVES IN THE BIBLE.
I agree. The size wasn't, if I recall given in Ezekiel. Imagine one of these about 6 times the size of a football field!
Heres a thought, brennakimi was being sarcastic/laughing at you/ridiculing you, not agreeing with you. Im inclined to think that she/he thinks your story as as much cock-and-bull as everyone else who reads your empty space. Why on earth does god need a ship!? he is, by definition, limitless and omnipotent! what use does a being that is (as defined by your accepted bible) everywhere and EVERYTHING need transportation? and why such conventional transportation? There is absolutly no rationale for this or anything youve written so far.
No, the HMS Starship Sceptre. (First Class) Otherwise known as Ezekiel's wheels, God's wheels, the mobile throne, or the Christmas star, or the star of Bethlehem.
Hilarious. My favorite post so far. Do you even know what HMS stands for? How is it logical, possible, or make ANY sense that the vehicle of the creator of the universe has a title given to it by Her Majesty (i dont recall who presided circa 0 BC...), the Queen of ENGLAND( does not EXIST on 0 BC...). And of course, the ever popular "first class," which, in conjunction with the HMS tag, means a vessel of a high military rank. Too much Star Trek for you?
All in all, my ribs hurt from laughing. Don think i dont take your ideas seriously(sarcasm), its just that i dont understand how on earth you arrived at them, nor do they make any logical sense, nor are they supported. Im sure books could be written about what i left out (why is god an alien, why noone thought it odd that a starship was on a barn, why you know sparingly to not all that much about the bible, ect) but im sure youll invoke the wrath of some logical, sensible member that will be ... amazed... by your theories.
I hope to god that your proposed topic on "why there were no natural physical laws in the beggining" goes through. I cant wait.
Edited by Damouse, : Making it more user friendly. Removed some flaming.

This statement is false.
Yeah so i lurk more than i post, thats why my posts are so low for two year's worth of membership. So sue me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by simple, posted 10-11-2007 7:47 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Vacate, posted 10-11-2007 10:12 PM Damouse has not replied
 Message 43 by simple, posted 10-12-2007 4:58 AM Damouse has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 278 (427532)
10-11-2007 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by simple
10-11-2007 5:04 PM


S'pose we can pretend that the word 'Genesis' is just a phony, too, eh? Since, it wasn't around when the Scriptures were written.
Spidy will come along and clear it all up; I hope
Jon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by simple, posted 10-11-2007 5:04 PM simple has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 3:29 AM Jon has not replied

  
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4600 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 36 of 278 (427540)
10-11-2007 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Damouse
10-11-2007 8:58 PM


Don't worry, its Simple
Damouse writes:
I seriously doubt that you actually believe the utter trash that appears on the screen in front of me under you name, it is simply appalling.
You should also note that he cannot keep his wild speculations consistent between threads.
Heaven, according to Simple, used to be above the Earth, presumably within reach of tower enthusiasts that once lived in Babel. God had to step in and stop the construction to prevent these citizens from reaching Heaven. Jesus, after his death, moved Heaven to a safe location to prevent space shuttles from marring the scenery.
Its difficult to piece it all together, but its clear (in Simple Speak) that Heaven was a real place above Babel.
Simple in Language and the Tower of Babel writes:
Message 16
but not applicable to the time of Babel, when there was a spiritual level nearby.
Simple in Language and the Tower of Babel writes:
Message 50
Heaven is still there, but not the part of it that was a level over earth.
Simple in Language and the Tower of Babel writes:
Message 50
Heaven, or where the spirits live is now, as I understand it, is New Jerusalem. Since Jesus built that, I would think that there was another abode before that was complete, that He ascended to.
What does this have to do with the Christmas star (aka the HMS Starship Sceptre?)
This spacecraft "6 times the size of a football field!" looked like a star. That must put that sucker pretty high up to begin to compare it to the pin pricks in the sky.
How low was Heaven for the tower of Babel to attract Gods concern? How high was the spacecraft for it to look like a star? Why would God be riding in a spacecraft if Heaven itself was closer?
Damouse writes:
Im more inclined to believe youre just having a grand old time messing with all of us.
Or hes delusional.
Edited by Vacate, : Credit to Damouse on last quote
Edited by Vacate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Damouse, posted 10-11-2007 8:58 PM Damouse has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Taz, posted 10-11-2007 10:44 PM Vacate has not replied
 Message 45 by simple, posted 10-12-2007 5:36 AM Vacate has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 37 of 278 (427547)
10-11-2007 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Vacate
10-11-2007 10:12 PM


Re: Don't worry, its Simple
Vacate writes:
Or hes delusional.
I'm just surprised other saner christians haven't stepped in to question his beliefs yet.

Disclaimer:
Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.
He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Vacate, posted 10-11-2007 10:12 PM Vacate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-11-2007 10:45 PM Taz has not replied
 Message 42 by simple, posted 10-12-2007 4:23 AM Taz has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 38 of 278 (427548)
10-11-2007 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Taz
10-11-2007 10:44 PM


Re: Don't worry, its Simple
i tried, i gave up.
*rocks out*
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Taz, posted 10-11-2007 10:44 PM Taz has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 39 of 278 (427573)
10-12-2007 1:56 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by simple
10-11-2007 7:38 PM


quote:
Our records were eventually compiled into the bible. This is news?
Not really. I knew that you didn't have the records you claimed.
quote:
Of course they would, the scribes and pharisees knew all about these things.
How would they ? And if the story had been around for more than 30 years how could they suppress it ?
quote:
What other nations were there in Egypt, while they were getting clobbered??? Who do you think they wanted to hide it FROM??!
Probably traders and ambassadors and messengers from most of the nations in the region. And how do you hide a disaster of that magnitude without anybody noticing that something's up ?
quote:
No need to prove the bible here, it is assumed true. You can assume what you like. What we are looking at is the bible Christmas star, and what it really was, not whether it really was.
Like I said you've got no evidence that there was a star. You just have to assume it. Oh and pretend to have records that don't exist. End of thread. There's nothing worth discussing.
quote:
The only real evidence I can think of outside the bible, is the lack of evidence for the star, which IS evidence it was not a modern sense star!
Of course it wasn't a star because it wasn't anything. THere is no record because there was no star. That's why none of the other Biblical authors know about it.
quote:
What in Luke do you think means that the star was not a starship??
It's evidence that Matthew's story - including the star - is a fiction. If there wasn't a star then it wasn't a spaceship.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by simple, posted 10-11-2007 7:38 PM simple has not replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 40 of 278 (427575)
10-12-2007 2:36 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by simple
10-11-2007 7:47 PM


simple writes:
No, the HMS Starship Sceptre.
I don't know what those other folks are complaining about, simple. I like your theory. It confirms what we've always known in our hearts here. God was British.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by simple, posted 10-11-2007 7:47 PM simple has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 278 (427584)
10-12-2007 4:21 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by macaroniandcheese
10-11-2007 7:50 PM


That's another story.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-11-2007 7:50 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 278 (427585)
10-12-2007 4:23 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Taz
10-11-2007 10:44 PM


Re: Don't worry, its Simple
They may know enough of the bible to realize they better not dare. Besides, maybe a few would enjoy seeing you nice folks on the defensive for a change.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Taz, posted 10-11-2007 10:44 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Taz, posted 10-12-2007 3:34 PM simple has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 278 (427586)
10-12-2007 4:58 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Damouse
10-11-2007 8:58 PM


Re: Why Simple's answer is NOT the answer.
quote:
Simple you have to be the most astounding person i have ever seen(read?) I seriously doubt that you actually believe the utter trash that appears on the screen in front of me under you name, it is simply appalling. Im more inclined to believe youre just having a grand old time messing with all of us.
Fist of all that titanic post at post 13 was from this page, so at least give the credit to where its so sadly due when you post your illustrious comments. Its not even worth my time to respond to that whole block, but on a first time skim there were a few scientifically objectionable points.
I thought I gave the link. Must have forgot, why do you think sites like that are some secret??? Get a grip, man. This is basic stuff here.
quote:
What? what makes the bible the record of records? Humans wrote the bible, buddy, as more or less generally accepted by the ENTIRE WORLD. That you believe otherwise matters not because theres absolutly NO BACKING behind it. Along with that, the general consensus on the dating of the bible is that Mark, being the earliest written book, was written around 70 BC, nowhere NEAR the birth of Christ. PEOPLE WROTE THE BIBLE. THE SAME PEOPLE WERE NOT THERE TO SEE THE STAR.
Nonsense. What do you think Mark or others did, dream this stuff up?? No. The records were here, and the holy spirit quickened them to mind, as needed. No dreaming up stuff, like evos do involved.
quote:
What ramos was saying, if you took the time out of your day to look up COMMENTARY, is that although the book of Matthew was written(at first glance) on the topic of the Nativity story, it was really meant to comment on the political situation of Rome.
Right, which is not worth responding to, it is so delusional, and out of touch.
quote:
Just because something is named specifically in the book doesnt mean it cannot have a deeper meaning that is not apparant at first glance. Much like your star/flying saucer. The differance is his theory makes some sort of logical sense and yours makes none.
There are deeper meanings to the bible, yes, but the story of Christmas is pretty straightforward. Part of that story is the light in the sky the ancients referred to as a star. I thought I gave an interesting prophesy about the king (Sceptre) looking down from afar up on Shiloh. That, plus the wheels of Ezeliel, that show God does have a mobile throne mean that we could place the Dad on the manger scene!
quote:
On the same quote, the calendar we are based around is not based on jesus' birth. The year is, true, but the calendar is not. In fact, the Gregorian calendar which we currently use is from around the mid 1500's, and one of its main points was to move the calendar so it corresponded with Easter.
Now, perhaps you can explain why AD is something else now, as you suggest. If you can, fine, but watch out, cause who was it that you think came to take His son to heaven!!??? Perhaps the star stayed out of sight that day.
"Anno Domini (Latin: (In)The year of (Our) Lord[1]), abbreviated as AD or A.D., defines an epoch based on the traditionally reckoned year of the conception or birth of Jesus of Nazareth."
Anno Domini - Wikipedia
quote:
Plenty more i could say from the rest of the contents of this particular post, but ill just examine this line.
What on earth are you talking about? First of all you are INTERPERTING the bible, so it does not matter what the truth is when you create your own truth from it. As weve seen, even if Ramoss takes the bible to be true, you and he still came up with different conclusions to its contents when you interperted it. As for its actual Truth, its is NOT ASSUMED TRUE. If the bible was assumed true then there would be no purpose for EVC or debate(except on the interpertation), the bible would be our roadmap to absolutly everything. Do yo think that eveyone on EVC believes the bible to be true? Ive seen you on different threads, you cant even claim ignorance on this topic. Do you think everyone in the world beleives the bible to be true?
Ill save you from making a dumb comment and just answer for you. NOT EVERYONE BELIEVES IN THE BIBLE.
Not everyone understands it or believes it either. Not everyone believes in spirits, or God, or some form of spiritual, but most do. So???
quote:
Heres a thought, brennakimi was being sarcastic/laughing at you/ridiculing you, not agreeing with you. Im inclined to think that she/he thinks your story as as much cock-and-bull as everyone else who reads your empty space. Why on earth does god need a ship!? he is, by definition, limitless and omnipotent! what use does a being that is (as defined by your accepted bible) everywhere and EVERYTHING need transportation? and why such conventional transportation? There is absolutly no rationale for this or anything youve written so far.
How would I know why He choses to have wheels??? I notice that His throne was on that starship, maybe that has something to do with it! Why lug around a big throne across the universe! Maybe the angels observed around the Sceptre need it to tag along with the Almighty, and He is a nice Guy? Why doubt for nothing? Remember, this baby is likely much much much much much much much much much much much older than our universe!
quote:
Hilarious. My favorite post so far. Do you even know what HMS stands for? How is it logical, possible, or make ANY sense that the vehicle of the creator of the universe has a title given to it by Her Majesty (i dont recall who presided circa 0 BC...), the Queen of ENGLAND( does not EXIST on 0 BC...). And of course, the ever popular "first class," which, in conjunction with the HMS tag, means a vessel of a high military rank. Too much Star Trek for you?
I used it for His Majesty. Remember, He was here long before a monarch of England. But I feel that the Holy Spirit, is a woman, and She is God as well, so what the hec.
quote:
All in all, my ribs hurt from laughing. Don think i dont take your ideas seriously(sarcasm), its just that i dont understand how on earth you arrived at them, nor do they make any logical sense, nor are they supported. Im sure books could be written about what i left out (why is god an alien, why noone thought it odd that a starship was on a barn, why you know sparingly to not all that much about the bible, ect) but im sure youll invoke the wrath of some logical, sensible member that will be ... amazed... by your theories.
The idea of this thread is the biblical star of Bethlehem, and what it was not, and what it likely was. If it were a star or cosmic event, some record would exist. Since it was not, according to that evidence we are left with it being what I say, or something else biblical, or the whole thing being a fabrication.
I use the evidences, and bible to see what must have been, assuming God is real, and true.
quote:
I hope to god that your proposed topic on "why there were no natural physical laws in the beggining" goes through. I cant wait.
I have been looking at the facts for awhile now, so your euphoric hopes that you or others would have a good showing are very very very unlikely. I learn from my wins. What I mean by that, is if I just barely win a debate, I learn from that, so the next time, I really mop up the floor with em.
For example, with Razd, even though I won by default, and he never showed up after the thing got closed down as I said it would, I learned something. Like reviewing a boxing match, I see where I allowed an approach, that I should have KOed more quickly. But that's another story.
quote:
Yeah so i lurk more than i post, thats why my posts are so low for two year's worth of membership. So sue me.
No problem, if all you got is what you posted here, I can see why you need to lurk most of the time. Relax.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Damouse, posted 10-11-2007 8:58 PM Damouse has not replied

  
AdminPhat
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 278 (427587)
10-12-2007 5:18 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by simple
10-11-2007 7:31 PM


Re: Christmas star
Now that your topic has been promoted, you need to be actively responsible for advancing the ideas set forth in it. Posts such as this one are not conducive. EvC is not just some giant blog where we can say whatever we want. Our topics actually need to advance ideas that are reasonably supported by at least one other source.

What Is A Discussion Board Anyway?

  • New Topics should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Keep them short and don't attempt to explain your entire point in the first post. Allow others to respond so that you can expand your discussion.
  • If you are warned by an administrator or moderator for any reason that is not explained in the Forum Guidelines you can argue your case here.
  • If you are not promoted, feel free to discuss your reasons with the administrator in the Proposed New Topics Forum who responded to your topic proposal. Feel free to edit and modify your topic and inform the administrator that you have done so.
    You may also take your argument here and get feedback from other administrators.
    Usually, we leave topic promotion to the first administrator that responds, unless that administrator invites others to comment.
    ************************************
    "DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU"
    AdminPhat

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 27 by simple, posted 10-11-2007 7:31 PM simple has not replied

      
    simple 
    Inactive Member


    Message 45 of 278 (427588)
    10-12-2007 5:36 AM
    Reply to: Message 36 by Vacate
    10-11-2007 10:12 PM


    Re: Don't worry, its Simple
    quote:
    You should also note that he cannot keep his wild speculations consistent between threads.
    Heaven, according to Simple, used to be above the Earth, presumably within reach of tower enthusiasts that once lived in Babel. God had to step in and stop the construction to prevent these citizens from reaching Heaven. Jesus, after his death, moved Heaven to a safe location to prevent space shuttles from marring the scenery.
    Its difficult to piece it all together, but its clear (in Simple Speak) that Heaven was a real place above Babel.
    PART of heaven. Heaven is a big place. There was a spiritual level nearby before Babel. Angels used to marry women, yes.
    In the big event that changed the universe, the split, the spiritual was divided from the physical. Therefore, of course, there was no longer a spiritual level on earth, in the world of men.
    quote:
    What does this have to do with the Christmas star (aka the HMS Starship Sceptre?)
    This spacecraft "6 times the size of a football field!" looked like a star. That must put that sucker pretty high up to begin to compare it to the pin pricks in the sky.
    How low was Heaven for the tower of Babel to attract Gods concern? How high was the spacecraft for it to look like a star? Why would God be riding in a spacecraft if Heaven itself was closer?
    Good questions. Firstly, remember, as I said, we do not know by the bible how big this is. I grabbed a size I thought would be impressive.
    This has a wingspan of nearly a football field! If we put this, say, 40,000 feet up, how big would it look, at night? The space station is about an acre as we speak. That is 24% or so bigger than a football field.
    Many so called UFO sightings are bigger than this.
    Example
    "The incident began on Sunday, December 12, 2004, when Robert and Anne were enjoying the evening at about 7:10 PM. Soon, they saw a glowing light in the night sky. They first noticed the phenomena through their sliding door which led to the outside deck.
    Robert described the sight as "a huge ball of brilliant white light coming toward the house from the west."
    The size of the object was immense, according to the couple as big as several football fields, covering the landscape with glowing light. The couple was mesmerized with the glow, which did not hurt their eyes, although it was extremely bright."
    Humor & Whimsy
    But in the case of the Christmas star we have indirect evidence. It could not have been seen that far away, or there would be records. I would use 100 square miles as an example, as Moab, if I recall is not much further than that, well, that is a long story, let's just use 100 miles as the example.
    Perhaps we could use 14,500 feet as an elevation for the ship, to see it we could have the shepherds and wise men see it, but not, say, China, and other places. Mount Rainer is about the height, and can be seen for about 100 miles.
    We could tweak this if need be, but we need to start somewhere.
    About your question on Babel. They had to know that they could build a tower up to it,, so it could not have been too high up at all. The CN tower in Canada is 1,815 feet high or so. I would guess that the spiritual level at the time of Babel was no more than 2-3 thousand feet up.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 36 by Vacate, posted 10-11-2007 10:12 PM Vacate has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 46 by Vacate, posted 10-12-2007 11:40 AM simple has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024