Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 74 (8962 total)
117 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, xongsmith (3 members, 114 visitors)
Newest Member: Samuel567
Post Volume: Total: 870,726 Year: 2,474/23,288 Month: 665/1,809 Week: 97/225 Day: 28/69 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   My HUGE problem with creationist thinking (re: Which version of creationism)
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 281 days)
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(2)
Message 263 of 336 (637786)
10-17-2011 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by IamJoseph
10-17-2011 11:22 PM


IamJoseph responds to bluescat48:

quote:
quote:
These stories were not written down until centuries later. There was no alphabets in the 5th millinium BCE.

How do such statements pass w/o any response! Hebrew alphabets have been found dated 1000 BCE


You act like there's a contradiction. You do know what "millennium" means, yes? You do understand that the 5th millennium was before 1000 BCE, yes? Thus, if there were no alphabets in the 5th millennium, how is that a problem when Hebrew alphabets show up four thousand years later?

quote:
king David has been proven

No, not really.

quote:
You should post your evidence when making such statements.

Indeed. You should. You're the one saying he existed. It's your burden of proof.

quote:
it still marks an advanced view placing winged creatures before water borne creatures.

Which is completely backwards from what actually happened. Ergo, the Bible got it wrong.

quote:
How did those ancient people determine such stuff - wiki!?

You know of no ways in which stories are created? The only two ways are to witness it directly and to reference what someone else said?

quote:
this event 'proves' the Hebrew bible predates 586 BCE by centuries.

Except it doesn't. Too many references to events that happened after then (such as cities that didn't exist until the first or second century BCE) as well as linguistic constructs that wouldn't come into play until hundreds of years after what you claim.

There is history to be found in the Bible. However, it is not the history you want to learn.


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by IamJoseph, posted 10-17-2011 11:22 PM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by IamJoseph, posted 10-18-2011 12:24 AM Rrhain has responded

Rrhain
Member (Idle past 281 days)
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 269 of 336 (637795)
10-18-2011 1:09 AM
Reply to: Message 266 by IamJoseph
10-18-2011 12:24 AM


IamJoseph responds to me:

quote:
I believe the pyramids are older than 5000 years and these contain earlier writing modes.

Well, no, they're not, but that's beside the point (and if they are, there goes the global flood...there's no flood damage to the pyramids.) Hebrew is alphabetic.

quote:
He is mentioned in a relic 100 years after his death.

No, he's not.

Hint: This is where you mention the item you are referring to. I'm pretty sure I know which one you mean, but you have to go first. You're the one making the claim.

quote:
Are you saying David is a myth?

I'm saying we have no real evidence for his existence. That doesn't mean he didn't exist, but he certainly didn't the way you think he did.

quote:
Life started in water; next up is air borne life.

But the Bible has it the other way around: Airborne life is described as coming first when it was the other way around. It also describes terrestrial plants coming first and that's even more ass backwards.

quote:
You have no proof of your claim

Nice try, but you're the one with the burden of proof. I don't have to prove that 2 + 2 = 4 in order to show that they don't equal 5. It would certainly be nice, but it isn't a requirement.

Since the Bible's description of the order of creation is not in agreement with the way life actually progressed, it is your burden to describe how they can be reconciled since you are the one claiming they can.

quote:
Does this apply also to a temple which was destroyed, listed in numerous books made before this date!?

Except there aren't any such references. This would be where you lay your cards on the table. You're the one making the claim. You're the one who needs to prove it.

quote:
We do need to learn it - it is indispensible: a host of primodial factors depend on it, and these are not found anywhere else.

The identical case exists for the Iliad and the Odyssey. Why do you accept the divine claims of one set of books and not another?

quote:
The origins of three religions depend on Abraham and Moses being credible entities else they fall in a heap

Why does that matter? Are you saying that if a lot of people believe in a dumb thing, that makes it not a dumb thing?

quote:
Genesis stands in the face of all notions of human history as a yard stick

Indeed.

And it fails to measure up. This would be where you provide your evidence that it does as you're the one making the claim.

quote:
significantly, we have no 'name' older than Adam

The Hindu would have something to say about that, seeing as how it's older than Judaism and its writings predate the Bible.

And by the way: "Adam" isn't a name.

quote:
the first 'king' is listed here as well as the first human cencus.

Except they're not.

quote:
Ancient names listed in the geneologies in Genesis are today used by archeology to verifiy dates.

No, not really. A couple, but only because we were able to validate their existence outside of the Bible.

quote:
There is no other writings more important or offers more to learn from: name one?

I've named two and hinted at a third source. Have you read them?


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by IamJoseph, posted 10-18-2011 12:24 AM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by IamJoseph, posted 10-18-2011 3:17 AM Rrhain has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020