Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,058 Year: 5,315/9,624 Month: 340/323 Week: 184/160 Day: 1/19 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for the Biblical Record
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 348 (550333)
03-14-2010 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by ICANT
03-14-2010 3:39 PM


Re: For the sake of sanity.
Genesis 1;1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Evidence
The heavens and the earth exist.
You're forgetting one critical element. The causation for what exists -- God. Where is the indisputable evidence of that? Sure, the earth exists. That doesn't prove that God, whatever God is, created it. Therein lies the crux of the situation.

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by ICANT, posted 03-14-2010 3:39 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Buzsaw, posted 03-14-2010 8:45 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 17 by ZenMonkey, posted 03-14-2010 9:28 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 20 by ICANT, posted 03-15-2010 2:13 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 348 (550377)
03-15-2010 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by ICANT
03-15-2010 2:13 AM


Re: For the sake of sanity.
Please do not reply to this message in this thread because it is off-topic, a reply to another message that was off-topic. If someone proposes a thread to discuss the existence of God or why the existence of the universe is evidence of God then I will promote it as quickly as I can. --Admin
Where is the indisputable verifiable evidence it happened any other way?
If you make the assertion, it is customary to back it up with evidence and not answer a question with a question. You gave a tautological response, so I am asking you to back that up. I already know that you cannot, but I am trying to get you to think about your own tautology.
Since God claims to be everything that is when He says "I AM"
He would have the ability and the material to do the job.
You are basing that off of a belief from a book. Just because the book alleges he said it, it not only doesn't mean that God necessarily did it, but it also doesn't even mean that he said it.
You therefore have to find independent evidence to corroborate it, not saying, "God did it because he said he did it." That's a tautology.
Whatever created the heavens and the earth had to have the ability and the material.
Had to have? In accordance with what whimsical and arbitrary rule?
Since our universe is the only isolated system in existence as I have been told several times there is nothing outside of it. Therefore matter and energy cannot be created in it.
1. We don't know if this is the only isolated system. It is a gigantic universe, of which know almost nothing about in the grand scheme of things.
2. Even supposing some form of supernatural being created the universe, who is to say that it was the Judeo-Christian God? The Qu'ran makes similar declarations, the Vedas make similar declarations, Norse religions make similar declarations. It could also be a supernatural being we know nothing about. There are incalculable theories would could pull out of thin air because they can neither be proven nor disproven.
Therefore whatever created the heaven and the earth would be God. Making the statement in Genesis 1:1 a fact.
Do you understand what "fact" means? You are creating an arbitrary rule that anything that does not conform to your beliefs, or anything we don't know with 100% empirical certainty, automatically defaults to your position. That's not how reality works.
It doesn't make any difference what or who created the universe whether it was the God I believe in or the pea sized God that I have been told had the entire universe in it. Either one had to be the existence of everything that exist today.
No, not necessarily. This universe had a beginning, in accordance with all known observation. It is reasonable to say that something must have existed prior to the creation of the universe, because nothing in the known universe comes about without some cause precipitating the event.
We also know that this universe is bound by certain physical laws. However, the possibility exists that the beginning of this universe was created out of the death of another universe, of which could have had an entirely different set of physical laws.
Sure, it points to an infinite series of regressions that merely delay the ultimate First Cause, but we already do that because no one knows for sure. That, in and of itself, is my point though. You don't know, I don't know, no one knows with certainty. We may never know the full scope of the truth. You are welcome to theorize whatever you'd like, but you need to understand that people will challenge you on that belief and probe for inconsistencies.
Edited by Admin, : Add moderator request.

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by ICANT, posted 03-15-2010 2:13 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 273 of 348 (552480)
03-29-2010 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Peg
03-22-2010 4:42 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Peg, posted 03-22-2010 4:42 AM Peg has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 274 of 348 (552494)
03-29-2010 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by Peg
03-19-2010 11:43 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
The story of Babel most certainly is based on fact which is confirmed by history, archaeology and folklore.
That there were large Ziggurats is uncontested, that the Hebrews often took from Sumerian folklore and gave it their own monotheist twist is uncontested, but that there was an actual confusion of tongues is contested. That is not a "fact," that is folklore.
But if you think so, then what was the original Adamic language that everyone spoke before the confusion? Is it still in existence?
Forget the fact that the dates don't line up with the first known languages. You also have to account for why semetic languages, mediteranean languages, Indo-european languages, and Anatolian languages, etc have similar root words that correspond to their region if there was a confusion of tongues. What linguists clearly see is the obvious evolution of language, not a confusion of language.
And the folklore found in various nations provide further evidence that the story was not only a bible story because many of these nations did not have the bible.
Of course they didn't have a bible. The bible was written over 2,000 years after-the-fact. Several biblical stories are merely borrowed from Sumerian lore.
Before 1993, there was no proof outside the Bible to support the historicity of David but in 1993 archaeologists uncovered a basalt stone called the Tel Dan Stele, dating back to the 9th Century B.C. that experts say bears the words House of David and king of Israel.
the thing about this stone is that it wasnt made by the isrealites but is actually a victory monument erected by the Aramaeans.
What is your point? That one day we'll find that Enmerkar & Co. got pissed and confused everyone's language? Because you seem to conveniently be leaving out the details. YHWH or any other cognate is not used in the original story.
All this story serves to prove is that it was stolen from another civilization's folklore, just like Christmas, just like Easter, just like Halloween. By your rationale, we should assume that because there is a Christmas story must mean that Jesus was actually born on Dec 25 because a story exists saying it, when in reality it is just a story borrowed from another story and twisted to conform to a specific belief.

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Peg, posted 03-19-2010 11:43 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by Peg, posted 03-31-2010 8:04 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024