It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evidence for and against the Bible

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

Sorry, but when your source comes with a page that has a tittle like this

(And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands. Heb 1:10 )

It's just more religious propaganda to prove the bible as the only truth.

Jericho may have been a city but the story in the bible was a myth.


Marg, my source for the Jericho information was never posted. Mainly because it came from many sources; I provided enough information to allow you to do your own google search. The source I quoted in my next post was in reference to the geological evidence, and yes, it was the creation institute that ed cited as well. I also pointed out that that was just one of my sources. The one I actually used when discussing geology was Berkeley's website. Not exactly a creationist mentality there. Their evidence supports the 3.9 to 4.6 billion year old Earth model and I was pointing out holes in it.

Pending something really outrageous, I'll not be replying to your points anymore unless you back them up with some sort of evidence. I don't understand why your opinions should be held as Gospel truths and I have to defend agains them when you have nothing supporting it except your prejudice against Christianity.

I'll probably also reply to your postings if you take some things completely out of context such as your attempted lie to people just joining the thread mixing a geological source with information about the excavation of Jericho.




posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   
“So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. (Josh.6:20)

Jericho was destroyed over three hundred years before Joshua arrived.



In the first half of the second millennium BC, Jericho encompassed ten or twelve acres, though much consisted of ramparts. According to Kathleen Kenyon, this city was destroyed (along with many others in the country) when the Egyptians established control in Canaan after driving out the Hyksos -- an event usually dated to 1550 BC, long before the time of Joshua.


Then after she died a creationist named Bryant Wood came around and wanted to prove that she was wrong and that her findings were wrong and that indeed the Jericho city matched the bible story.

This is the way that has been played all alone with findings of ancient cities.
But his findings posted a problem and that is perhaps what he wanted to do all alone, his arguments actually does not place Jericho on the bible times but way later after Joshua’s time.
So the debate on Jericho was planted by creationist.

www.netours.com...

Sorry jungle your sources are not reliable either.


[edit on 23-2-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Keep one thing in mind here, when you say that I think the universe is 6000 years old, you are mistaken.......The speed of light rules that out.


What you must understand is that a day in the Lords eyes is more accurately described as a "age" 'eon" 'period of time' . It does not mean exactly 24 hours.....


Do any of you read Hebrew? Could you look at that ONE word and tell what its meaning is?



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger


Do any of you read Hebrew? Could you look at that ONE word and tell what its meaning is?


Edsinger you can not read anymore hebrew that you can spanish, and I can not read anymore hebrew than chinese.


but at least I can read and write English.



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   
I read through your source, and it was pretty interesting. There was nothing, however, damning Wood's arguement, there's just more questions than answers. The source you quoted stated Wood's arguements, and then the potential problems with them. I did like how it showed the failability of Carbon dating



Wood: Archaeologists divide the Middle Bronze Age into three sub-periods. The last (III) is normally dated from 1650 to 1550 BC, when Kenyon says the city was destroyed. At Jericho she found 20 architectural phases within this hundred-year stretch, including three major and twelve minor destructions. That seems rather much for a century. It does not seem too much if the city lasted 250 years -- till 1400.



Problems: None. This argument remains standing, but it may not suffice to support Wood's thesis.


So the end all be all: Wood's thesis needs more support, but so does Kenyon's. Due to the fact that the Bible has yet to be contradicted in other historical records or ways, I'd say the evidence presented by the historical document first detailing this destruction adds a bit of credibility to his claims.

Oh, nd Wood didn't wait until Kenyon died to make his statement. He did so after two Italian archaeologists conducted a limited excavation at Jericho under the sponsorship of the Palestinian Department of Archaeology, excavating for a month on the fringes of Kenyon’s dig site. He used these findings to base his thesis.

To immediately dismiss someone's ideas because they're Christian is about as sound of mind as discounting George Washington Carver's ideas about agriculture because he was black.



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 01:47 PM
link   
ed, yom is the Hebrew word you're talking about (amazing that marg knows us all so well
). It is, as I stated earlier, used interchangably in the original Hebrew of Genesis. In Psalm 90:10, yom is used to mean an endless eternity. It must be taken in context, just as if I were to say the stone age and the age of reason. One would be a heck of a lot longer than the other. If you just took the word age out of context, which would I mean? That's the problem with those first verses in Genesis, it could go either way, as age or as day.



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Jungle you know that whenever a site is discovered the Catholic church has its own crew of researchers and PhD to disputed times frames, when the carbon copy became available they were not very happy with it.


And when the death sea scrolls were unveiled they went over the roof to keep them away from public view.

Funny the most ancient time telling was by saroi,



The ancient Sumerian system of numeration was sexagesimal (based on 60), which gave rise to our division of the hour into 60 minutes and of the circle into 360 degrees. The key names of the numbers were 1, GES or GESH; 60, also GES or GESH (the base unit); 3600, SAR or SHAR ... The disappearance of Sumerian numeration can be dated to the 15th century B.C. (cf. Georges Ifrah, Histoire universelle des chiffres, Paris, 1981; Paris, Laffont, 1994).
1. All the numbers are divisible by 3600, with the exception of the last two, which are divisible globally. Hence the last two antediluvian kings are said to have reigned for eleven periods. In total, five cities were governed by eight kings during 67 saroi, or periods of reign.


The time telling was not first by Hebrew but Sumerians and then Arkkadians.

Example,

1 - Eridu A-lulim 28.800 years = 8 saroi

cura.free.fr...

The Babylonians used enormous time periods in the King lists, actually time was tell by king reigns, and this lists span tens of thousands of years for each of many early kings. They also divided these time frames into smaller units, one of which was known as the saroi and lasted 3,600 years.

A period of 432,000, years equals 120 saroi, this brings to mind the biblical story, when God says to Noah, “My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years” (Gen.6:3)

The bible interpretation of time may have been forgotten by the time that the last writers of the bible were compiling the texts and some times may have been mis quote in the translations.

The biblical chronology could not allow for huge time periods and the redactors of the bible simply assumed that “years” should be substituted for “saroi” in order to accommodate the pre-existing chronology in Genesis.

This only tells that the bible final product took many centuries alone the line to complete.

Perhaps some of the problems with bible times is because the pursue of accuracy by the Church, the bible had to be perfect, God does not make mistakes


[edit on 23-2-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

Edsinger you can not read anymore hebrew that you can spanish, and I can not read anymore hebrew than chinese.


but at least I can read and write English.


But Marg, I can! With the help of software I can read it, it takes a while but it can be done......Strongs Numbers is a good example.........but you will only acknowledge that which derides the Bible....sad really, you are missing so much...



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
But Marg, I can! With the help of software I can read it, it takes a while but it can be done......Strongs Numbers is a good example.........but you will only acknowledge that which derides the Bible....sad really, you are missing so much...


That is nice that you are learning to read Hebrew, And by the way I am not missing anything for the contrary is very delightful to see how the bible has been tampered misquoted and misused to pursue personal and religious agendas.



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 07:47 PM
link   
I believe that their was a Jesus but he had different intentions to let on other then World Peace and all that crap that he preached. But I think that Jesus Christ is no son of God but just some regular Et that was/is superior to us and hence we called them "God". But The bible is so much credible if you fill in Angels and Chariots with UFOS and Aliens. Really anything in the bible can be done right now. Like the splitting of a sea *English Chanel Rail Road* Destroying entire cities in the blink of an eye *Nuclear Bombs* so and so on.

Their was a Jesus but he was no Savior. And he failed to complete his duties by not completing his mission. The world did not change at all before or after Jesus it still remained the same. The only thing reason Jesus did was give us a damn reason to fight for*The foolish people who are slaves to Religion propaganda , like YOU*



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grey Fox
I believe that their was a Jesus but he had different intentions to let on other then World Peace and all that crap that he preached. But I think that Jesus Christ is no son of God but just some regular Et that was/is superior to us and hence we called them "God".


Thats great now where is your evidence to back up these claims, which is after all, the topic of the thread.....LOL



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grey Fox
Really anything in the bible can be done right now. Like the splitting of a sea *English Chanel Rail Road*


That is funny, you really think we can part a sea in hours?






Originally posted by Grey Fox
Their was a Jesus but he was no Savior. And he failed to complete his duties by not completing his mission. The world did not change at all before or after Jesus it still remained the same.



Oh but He DID complete the mission, "It is finished!"

But I guess you dont understand that do you?



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Jungle you know that whenever a site is discovered the Catholic church has its own crew of researchers and PhD to disputed times frames, when the carbon copy became available they were not very happy with it.

[edit on 23-2-2005 by marg6043]


True that, yo, God does not make mistakes. Now, if you were the Catholic church, and knew that there were people like seapeople and marg6043 who loath the religion and will do anything they can do desecrate it though they know nothing or very little about it, wouldn't you send your own researchers out to check it out instead of assuming these people who hate you just proved your religion wrong?

The issue of time is fairly irrelevant here. yom can refer to a day, that is, a passing of day and night. I don't need to be able to count minutes to know when a day has passed. The other term is age. One is a set period of time, the other refers to an indeterminate amount of time, a changing of "seasons", if you will, just like the bronze age changed to the iron age. You don't need to be able to tell time to notice when the night passes to day, and counting minutes doesn't help you at all in judging when an age passes. That's determined after the fact, when you can look back and see there was a shift in whatever you're measuring. The Hadean Age was quite a bit shorter than the Archaean Age, yet both are used to measure the same type of thing, the geologic/evolutionary state of the planet. You don't need to count minutes to figure out when these came to be and pass.

Or, was the point of your post that scientists with PhDs who start with the conclusion the Bible is right are idiots and the scientists with PhDs who start with the conclusion that the earth is 4.5 billion years are brilliant? Personally, I'd say they both sacrificed their scientific integrety, because they started with a conclusion instead of a hypothesis. You can always find evidence supporting your answer, and are likely to ignore evidence refuting it if you start with a conclusion.



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   


Now, if you were the Catholic church, and knew that there were people like seapeople and marg6043 who loath the religion and will do anything they can do desecrate it though they know nothing or very little about it, wouldn't you send your own researchers out to check it out instead of assuming these people who hate you just proved your religion wrong?



I beg your pardon, now you don't have anything else to said that you have to insult me, can you prove that I am desecrating the world of "God" and by the way how do you know that the world of God is in the bible.

Can you prove it? I am very upset with your post and I think you are insulting me.

Tonight you will have nightmares, I promised.


Do you think I should trust places like this,

Institute for Creation Research
A Christ-Focused Creation Ministry

Yes perhaps you do but in my case I am less gullible than you.

[edit on 23-2-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
Amuk, as to your question of an impartial researcher saying the earth is 6000 years old, I doubt one exists. The problem with both these scientific viewpoints is the geologist starts with a conclusion, then backs it up with supporting evidence


Not really, Astronomy, Biology, etc have come to the same answer pretty much independently



Interestingly enough, there is no evidence for this age as the earliest dated rocks and fossils are from 3.8 billion years ago. Source


Still a lot closer than 6000 years though no serious researcher believes the Earth is 6000 years old.



A lot must have happened in 100 million years to have created life on this planet!


So it is MORE reasonable to believe it happened in 6 days?



It is interesting that it's assumed that life first appeared at this time, yet no explanation as to the sudden existence of something so complex as a cell is given.


Your explanation asks us to believe something FAR more complex than a one-celled creatures existed BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE



If anything, you would have expected life to be silicone based, as it has a more crystalline structure, reproduces its self, and is simpler in nature than a single amino acid.


The discovery channel did a show on just why this is not right. The gist if I am correct is that Silicone CAN evolve into life but Carbon reacts quicker, so silicone life would be pretty much regulated to places carbon CANNOT react in. That is highly simplified but I am sure there are those that can fill in the blanks, I will try yo look up some more on the subject.



We are told to simply accept spontaneous life with no evidence or reasoning behind it.


And you are asking us to believe that a VASTLY more complex organism (God) existed FROM THE START. Without any evidence or reasoning behind it.



It took, according to the current model, 1.4 billion years for "simple" multicellular life to develop, and another 2 billion before algae became small crustaceans, but only 100 million years for life to pop up in a hostile, Venus-like environment.


So how long should it have took for an All powerful, all knowing, creature that was capibile of doing ANYTHING and incapible of making a mistake but looks just like a human being to appear from NOTHING?



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 08:37 PM
link   
funny how creationist has tried to discredit carbon 14 dating methods and has done anything in their path to do so.

like creating their own "Creationist research centers"

www.icr.org...



creationists have attempted to discredit all scientific tools for age-determination by demonstrating how unreliable carbon 14 can be. In their book, Reasons Skeptics Should Consider Christianity (Here's Life Publishers, 1981), Josh McDowell and Don Stewart poke fun at a Yale University study yielding three different ages for an antler -- 5,340 years, 9,310 years, and 10,320 years. Their derision is unwarranted, however, for the researchers explained what caused variations in result: limestone contamination of the sample. The 5,340 years is the carbon 14 date for the limestone contaminant; the 10,320 years is the antler's date; and the 9,310 years is the date for the antler and limestone combined.



www.reasons.org...

[edit on 23-2-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
True that, yo, God does not make mistakes. Now, if you were the Catholic church, and knew that there were people like seapeople and marg6043 who loath the religion and will do anything they can do desecrate it though they know nothing or very little about it,



I think this was unfair.

Just because Marge doesnt believe the same as you do doesnt mean she loathes religion. She has said she believes in God as I have too, its just the Bible that we question



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 08:41 PM
link   
To keep all the eggs in the same basket so to sopeak here is my reply to Eds question about the Odds



Originally posted by Amuk
What are the odds of drawing a royal flush?

I have seen it done several times.

What were the odds on the uncountable trillions of sperm creating EXACTLY the 6 billion people they have and no others?

The numbers mean nothing



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Ah but a royal flush 50000 times in a row? Come on, you know the numbers are staggering, even if you don't believe in God you have to at least acknowledge the universe is beyond chance don't you?



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
SomewhereinBetween, you're ignoring the rest of the Jericho post and the other scientific points.
I like to deal with facts Jake, or as that curmudgeon of pious defence states; "known knowns."

I ignored it because I found it superfluous and without basis in fact to prove the walls came down by the sounding of trumpets, especially considering that it is now being framed as having sunk into the ground. That hardly corroborates the miracle. Further, if I wanted to spin a tale about the American and Canadian conflicts and say that as the Americans crossed the river in their boats, Pegasus flew overhead and rested a foot on the water creating the horseshoe falls and causing the American boats to fall over, does it make it so?

What is the truth exactly when we have archaeologists being called liars by Biblical backers such as with the case of Lorenzo Nigro and Nicolo Marchetti who in 1997 claimed the cause of the wall falling was an earthquake, and was promptly accused by a member of a Biblical research team that they were paid to lie by the Palestinians for whom the excavation was being done?

And I do not see in your proof, mention of a 10,000 year old town buried by the wall, as found by Ms. Kenyan, or that the wall had been repaired numerous times, or that it lay in ruins for centuries before Joshua hauled out his shofar.

If you read Josephus’ account of the city walls, you will find he speaks of repairs to same because of failure.

I see no other scientific points and certainly not with Job. You base your premise on the belief that Job in fact wrote this at a time when this could not be known, a timeframe estimated to be near the Era of Solomon. You have made an unconscious deduction that Job was an Hebrew scribe, yet his works do not attest to this, whereas, the writings are remarkably akin to the laments of the Egyptian "The man who was tired of Life" mixed in with other Egyptian laments found both in stone and on papyri.

To agree that the God of Israel caused this destruction requires that you also believe:

Israel is wasted, bare of seed,.. By the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Banere-meramun, Son of Re, Merneptah, Content with Maat, Given life like Re every day.
What comes before that on the Victory Stele of Merneptah, is even more intriguing.

It is more obvious to me every day that those wholeheartedly swallowing the Biblical stories have invested little to no time at all to either investigate the historical findings of other countries in the area, or to perform due diligence on what they proffer as truth. It is too bad for they would be flummoxed as to how much of it there is versus how little there is for Israel, and how much the former resembles the Israel in the Bible.

To think that understanding rain was some achievement pales in comparison to conception:

Provide for men, the cattle of God, for he made heaven and earth at their desire. He suppressed the greed of the waters, he gave the breath of life to their noses, for they are likenesses of Him which issued from His flesh. he shines in the sky for the benefit of their hearts; he has made herbs, cattle, and fish to nourish them. he has killed His enemies and destroyed His own children, because they had planned to make rebellion; He makes daylight for the benefit of their hearts, and he sails around in order to see them. he has raised up / a shrine behind them, and when they weep, He hears. he has made them rulers even from the egg,
From the Teaching of Merikare c2200BCE. If you think the laws and wisdom of the Jews was exclusive to them only, then this is recommended reading for you.

It must be shocking for you to read such profundity from Egyptian sages living way before Hebrew scribes. You will recover, not within honesty, but you will recover.

Even an understanding of clouds 10,000ft above us pales in comparison to an understanding of the stars:

It is clear that the Egyptians were using their knowledge of the stars to assist them in their architectural projects from the beginning of the pharaonic period (c.3100-332 BC), since the ceremony of pedj shes ('stretching the cord'), reliant on astronomical knowledge, is first attested on a granite block of the reign of the Second-Dynasty king Khasekhemwy (c.2650 BC). This pedj shes ceremony relied on sightings of the Great Bear and Orion constellations, aligning the foundations of the pyramids and sun temples very precisely with the north, south, east and west. They usually achieved this with an error of less than half a degree.


Re singer:You mean your Bible is wrong? If it is wrong at the very beginning then it stands to reason there is just more falsehoods to follow. No wonder I outrightly dismiss it as propaganda.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join