Evidence for the Biblical Record

But the legend of Moses appears in the Quran. It is recounted at length in Sura 20, and again in Sura 26.I'm sure any Muslim would love to have a scrap of a shred of evidence for the myth of Moses, because it's their myth as much as it is yours.

Yeah. For example, here's an excerpt from the Book of Dr Adequate, which, as you can see from the text, was written in 1990. Now, one of those silly skeptics would say that there's no evidence that the Book of Dr Adequate was composed in 1990, and that this fact suggests that what we have here is a case of vaticinia ex eventu. You, on the other hand, know that that's no refutation of my self-proclaimed magical powers, and are therefore compelled to believe that I am a bona fide prophet.

You seem to be claiming the Book of Revelation as a successful prophecy on the grounds that you are capable of daydreaming that one day something will happen which will vaguely resemble whatever it is the Book of Revelation is about.Well, it's not an actual successful prophecy unless it comes true, OK? The fact that you can imagine something vaguely metaphorically kinda-like-but-not-really-like the events in Revelation happening at some point in the future is only a tribute to how vivid your imagination is and how much of the Book of Revelation you can manage to ignore, distort, misread, "interpret", or otherwise be wrong about.

That wouldn't even be very interesting if it was true.As it is false, that removes any significance it might have had.

Actually it's representative of mouths.The word "duh" springs to mind.

Or "eight vessels in a mouth", or "a mouth in eight vessels", or "a vessel in eight mouths" or "eight mouths outside a vessel" ... the word order and the preposition are entirely invented by the apologists and have nothing to do with the actual Chinese character.But their error is deeper even than that, because it is simply nonsense to try to read a single Chinese character as though it was a sentence.The breadth and variety of subjects that fundamentalists can be wrong about is astonishing.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

I've just been looking at a list of Chinese radicals. The element of the character that you say means "mouth" actually means "erect, proud, upright", and the element that you say means "eight" actually means "small table".

Well, "small table" is what they've written here: However, I'll agree that they might have intended to write "eight". According to talkorigins, by the way, it actually means "divide".As to the supposed "mouth" element, the "erect" element also is formed from three strokes, as you can see from the webpage I linked to. The only difference seems to be that "erect" is squarer and "mouth" is more oblong.

I'm going to mention Noah's Flood again, and then I'm going to giggle.Like my ass is it in harmony with historical fact. It is known, for certain, to be wrong.