Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,386 Year: 3,643/9,624 Month: 514/974 Week: 127/276 Day: 1/23 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Who to believe , Ham or Ross?
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 9 of 223 (194821)
03-27-2005 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Faith
03-27-2005 1:28 AM


Re: How much agreement?
What is the creationist consensus on the literal Biblical report of the Flood?
  1. It happened.
  2. Any evidence that indicates it didn't happen is to be ignored. It's all just speculation.
  3. Any wild speculation, even that contrary to all known laws, that appears to justify a global flood is evidence for that flood. Pay no attention to the justification for ignoring evidence that no such flood happened.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Faith, posted 03-27-2005 1:28 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by MangyTiger, posted 03-27-2005 8:47 PM JonF has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 24 of 223 (195019)
03-28-2005 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Faith
03-28-2005 5:52 PM


Re: How much agreement?
Just curious. What lessons might we be expected to learn from a false tale about a gigantic Flood?
Quite a bit about the relationship of God and Man.
What can we learn from this? That baldfaced lies are useful for instruction, even though the God they're about said "You shall not bear false witness"?
Yup. Example: Jesus's parables. "Mythical" does not mean "baldfaced lie". Not everything in the Bible is intended literally.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Faith, posted 03-28-2005 5:52 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 03-28-2005 8:52 PM JonF has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 69 of 223 (195248)
03-29-2005 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Faith
03-29-2005 4:25 PM


I guess 3000 year track record of its having been taken as true history isn't evidence in these parts, huh?
No. It's hearsay. And, as Charles pointed out, your claim that it has been taken as true history for 3,000 years is an unsupported asserion. The fundamentalist and evangelical movements, and their interpretatioins of the Bible, are pretty recent phenomena. All histories thet I've seen (and I'm not an expert) agree that the "literal" interpretation of the Bible is a recent phenomenon also.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Faith, posted 03-29-2005 4:25 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Faith, posted 03-29-2005 5:55 PM JonF has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 77 of 223 (195287)
03-29-2005 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Faith
03-29-2005 5:55 PM


I guess it's too much to ask that anyone be literate enough around here to KNOW that it's been taken as true history by great Bible teachers all the way back
The problem is that we are too literate to believe that the Bible has been taken as true history by great Bible researchers all the way back; although I'm no expert, I've read enough to know that your claim is untrue.
so I'd have to find one in each century at least get quotes from voluminous writings to prove it
Well, you might not need that much, but some evidence other than your bare assertion is required.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Faith, posted 03-29-2005 5:55 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Faith, posted 03-30-2005 1:37 PM JonF has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 102 of 223 (195489)
03-30-2005 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Faith
03-30-2005 1:37 PM


OK, some scholars did believe that the Bible is compeletely literal. And some didn't. Notably Augustine; your attempt to avoid the plain mening of his text, regardless of the meaning of the word "tupos", is very amusing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Faith, posted 03-30-2005 1:37 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by Faith, posted 03-30-2005 8:43 PM JonF has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 127 of 223 (195675)
03-31-2005 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by Faith
03-31-2005 1:47 AM


The latest posts are the usual nagging niggling nitpicking nuisance questions about things I've mostly already answered, not serious, so I don't see the point in pursuing this thread further. See you all elsewhere maybe. Cheers.
Yeah, and the U.S. won a famous victory in Vietnam.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Faith, posted 03-31-2005 1:47 AM Faith has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 214 of 223 (197434)
04-07-2005 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 213 by Admin
04-07-2005 9:48 AM


OT: Buried riverbeds & canyons
I know, I know ... but I've got to post this somewhere
In Message 101 Admin posted Faith's image. I guess she (is that settled?) is asking why we don't see that sort of thing. The answer is that we do see that sort of thing, in radar images and seismic images and satellite images and borehole chains and what-not ... and these observations are obviously incompatible with a global flood. Faith's just tremendously overestimating the likelyhood of such features breaking through to view in a place like the Grand Canyon.
From River Channels Buried deep in the Geologic Column, a picture of channels in Pleistocene rock:
From We've Done Rivers, Let's Do Canyons, an Eocene canyon buried a mile under the ocean floor:
(Lots more pictures and discussion at the above URLs).
From Space radar image of Wadi Kufra, Libya, another buried river:
From South Africa, Namibia Diamond Deposits a look at the ancient course of the Orange River, where diamonds might be found:
From SUBSURFACE MORPHOLOGY AND GEOARCHAEOLOGY REVEALED BY SPACEBORNE AND AIRBORNE RADAR one of the first SIR-A pictures of channels just beneath the Sahara desert:
From Salt water timebombs buried terrain in eastern Australia:
Finally, from Komex Geophysics: Seismic Refraction and Reflection, another seismic of a buried channel:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by Admin, posted 04-07-2005 9:48 AM Admin 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