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.

 

Tiny tablet provides proof for Old Testament

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2007 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Nice to see you around Ed, thanks for the article I do find fascinating when discoveries that match historical events are found.

Even if they are religious base due to the fact that everything that has to do with ancient middle east will be use to justified the Bible veracity.

Too bad that the rest of the world at the time was not part of the history of the bible.

The writers of the bible old testament should not be blame for their faults because they were just trying to keep with the history of their humble beginnings as the Israeli people.

After all the old testament is their story.




posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by jaydelay
seems to me it just means that a person mentioned in the bible actually existed. Still along way from proving the Old Testament 100%.



I completely agree with you on this one.

This does NOT provide proof the entire old testament, or indeed the whole bible, is 100% accurate



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 04:17 AM
link   
lets put this find in perspective people :

it is a foreign language traslation of a part of the old testement , held ` off site `

all that this ` proves ` is that the text used as the modern OT is a fiathful trascription of the origional scriptures used in the 2nd century BCE

nothing else

as an analogy - if in 4000 years time - an argument has sprung up over wether the ` harry potter ` series of novels was infact the chronicles of a reall wizard how actually atrtended a real college of magic

unlikley , but humour me

would you attempt to use on of the other 60 odd foreign language translations as ` proof ` that hogworts was infact a physical place ? and potter a real wizard who existed ???????

think about that



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 04:56 AM
link   
Just to throw my voice in with the chorus here:

Some stories within the Old Testament are, most liklely and in my opinion, based loosley of real occurances. A ny significant event could be retold to shine a light in favor of those telling.

A religious spin and a bit of fabrication can go a long way when attempting to 'rewrite', or at least edit, history.

[edit on 7/12/0707 by spines]



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Cool, King Kong is real man, we have video evidence of him climbing the empire state building. It's a real building, right? And there WERE emma-effing snakes on that emma-effing plane because Airbus really do have that plane! All good fiction is written so it relates to the people and places of the time. (Not saying snakes on the plane was good.

Ohh, Ohh. We have trucks these days. Wouldn't it have been cool if we actually saw Optimus Prime transform?



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 07:43 AM
link   
It makes me laugh when people get upset when something is found that seems to support the Biblical record. Some then say its a good historical document but still a fantasy or something. It should really makes you wonder if what it says continues to be proven by secular means, and deep down you know that their is a greater power out there, maybe just maybe consider the chance that "it" is trying to reveal to you, His Word. Maybe some other things are also true, and if they are should you at least listen?


Half those here or probably more have probably never actually read more than a few snippets of the Bible, and yet when it comes to slamming it, they are experts.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 11:10 AM
link   


I completely agree with you on this one.

This does NOT provide proof the entire old testament, or indeed the whole bible, is 100% accurate



It is 100% human understanding of events brought down for generations.

Interesting: is 9/11 understood, some still bicker about it.

The Apostles did not know Jesus was God right off but had to believe and
receive the Holy Ghost in order to relate to the world.

That is the New Testament, but wait:

What about all the Prophets no one understood or heeded in time
to ward off enemies. Its generation and generation of not knowing if
the story fit.

Well I saw something that seemed to fit overall, although many stories
may be baseless. But Johan could have been in a whale until
he accepted God plan.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
It makes me laugh when people get upset when something is found that seems to support the Biblical record. Some then say its a good historical document but still a fantasy or something. It should really makes you wonder if what it says continues to be proven by secular means, and deep down you know that their is a greater power out there, maybe just maybe consider the chance that "it" is trying to reveal to you, His Word. Maybe some other things are also true, and if they are should you at least listen?


Half those here or probably more have probably never actually read more than a few snippets of the Bible, and yet when it comes to slamming it, they are experts.


There are religions far older than Christianity. To say yours is the right religion and everyone else is wrong is ludicrous. We have yet to find anything at all that suggest Jesus could walk on water, rise from the dead, and fly around like Neo (zomg he rose to the heavens!). We have yet to find anything even remotely suggesting moses was able to split seas in half with his magic staff of dividing. We have yet to find any proof that some dude named Samson was able to knock down buildings with his super human strength in much the same way Hercules would. We have yet to find any evidence suggesting Noah actually got 2 of every animal in the world and managed to stuff them into a boat. Yeah, yeah, the flood actually happened, but I don't see Gilgamesh saying anything about traveling around the world saving animals.

All we've found are a few locations, a person here and there, and maybe an event or two that actually occurred. So why, praytell, should we make the leap from "A book that is supposed to chronicle our past names a few locations that have existed" to "Oh lordie! Jesus is going to ride on his fiery steed and smote all them evil mofos who don't believe he was made of magic!"? It just doesn't make sense to do so, unless you're already very religious.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xerimethius

.................All we've found are a few locations, a person here and there, and maybe an event or two that actually occurred. So why, praytell, should we make the leap from "A book that is supposed to chronicle our past names a few locations that have existed" to "Oh lordie! Jesus is going to ride on his fiery steed and smote all them evil mofos who don't believe he was made of magic!"? It just doesn't make sense to do so, unless you're already very religious.


exactly,

it is a leap, a big leap.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Now all we have to do is find a source that verifies the truth of the little tablet, and it will all be solved! As long as we can find proof for that other source.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
When it comes to Nothing turning into ROCKS and then into HUMANS and the amount of supernatural force that would be needed they have no problems believing.


uh huh... you're taking a jab at science... very original straw man there too. nobody believes that ROCKS turn into HUMANS. we believe that chemical pre-life became life which became more advanced life and that it becamse more advanced as the generations wore on... until humans


Yeah he was taking a nice jab at science hehe BUT the bottom line still remains: According to science, something was created out of nothing. At first there was nothing, now billions of eons later we are here. okay



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Nacum


...... BUT the bottom line still remains: According to science, something was created out of nothing. At first there was nothing, now billions of eons later we are here. okay



Not all theories say there was NOTHING, now there is something

As i understand,

in string THEORY its suggested that a POSSIBLE explanation for the big bang is that there are multiple dimensions and that contact between two of the caused a huge amount of energy in a little amount of space and BOOM.

Now, i only bring this up because you mentioned science says NOTHING became then something. That is a very broad statement thats not totally correct. Some science suggest that, others dont. Its just like saying "religous poeple believe......."

Now honestly, whether you believe in the bible or not, making broad claims and taking facts to make big leaps is ignorant no matter what side of the arguement



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 04:42 PM
link   
I was alway under the impression that having proof was bad for faith? You don't need faith to believe something if there is proof, or so I have heard religious people say, ad nauseum, when faced with scientific proofs that directly contradict the Bible.

The Human Race has been capable of thought and speech for at least 150,000 years, so why does the old testament take no account of this? Doesn't the age of the Earth, when calculated based on OT events, end up being 4.5 thousand years or something ridiculous? Surely a better way of proving the Bible would be to disprove carbon dating?

Personally, I think anybody who thinks they know what's what for certain are wrong, whether they are scientists, bishops or newsreaders.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Nacum
Yeah he was taking a nice jab at science hehe BUT the bottom line still remains: According to science, something was created out of nothing. At first there was nothing, now billions of eons later we are here. okay


no, according to science something has ALWAYS BEEN HERE. but this is fairly... incredibly off topic.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul


no, according to science something has ALWAYS BEEN HERE. but this is fairly... incredibly off topic.


I think we agree, be it the singularity or what, something caused it to bow up!



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
When it comes to Nothing turning into ROCKS and then into HUMANS and the amount of supernatural force that would be needed they have no problems believing.


Have any of you creationists actually read science articles about the origins of the world/minerals/humanity? Or do you just post random words to divert scrutiny from your point of view and also to 'degrade' the oppositions argument?
I would go in length and describe the scientific view (or at least one of them) on the creation of the aformentioned world/minerals/humanity, but there really is no point.
I could also go into the whole 'Science is based on the application of logic and observation' blah blah blah, but at the end of the day I highly doubt it would have made a difference.


Originally posted by theindependentjournal
I guess it all rests on FAITH in your supernatural force, for me and mine WE CHOOSE GOD.


Once again the fallacious belief that 'Science is a religion' pops up again.
Maybe I should make a new law (just ripping from Godwin here
):
Chaoticar's Law of Religious Science
As an online religious discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving science and religion/faith-based belief systems approaches one.

Anyway the artifact in question only 'supports' one section of the Bible. We're still waiting for Sodom and Gomorrah ruins, the Flood etc


[edit on 12-7-2007 by Chaoticar]



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Sure I understand that minerals are the results of generations of star births and star deaths.

I believe it was all created, that the laws of nature are so finely tuned to even allow life to exist let alone 'appear after many amino acids lock into the correct order after billions and billions of years'.

I believe that I know whom the Creator is, I believe he has communicated with his creation. I believe that is through his Word.

Could I be wrong? Of course I could, but I highly doubt it.....I could go into the odds and the definition of 10^120th power etc etc etc but why bother, those that do not believe, do so of the own will. It is rebellion.


An old friend once told me, "If you can't put it in my hands, If I can not touch, nor feel, nor smell, nor see, nor taste it, then it doesn't exist.



[edit on 12-7-2007 by edsinger]



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
It makes me laugh when people get upset when something is found that seems to support the Biblical record. Some then say its a good historical document but still a fantasy or something. It should really makes you wonder if what it says continues to be proven by secular means, and deep down you know that their is a greater power out there, maybe just maybe consider the chance that "it" is trying to reveal to you, His Word. Maybe some other things are also true, and if they are should you at least listen?


Well, it always makes me laugh when supporters of the notion of a "greater power" grasp for tiny scraps of clay or moldy parchment in their attempts to prove the validity of their beliefs, particularly when something so huge should realistically be obvious and beyond debate. And it's not.

So I guess we're all laughing.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger



An old friend once told me, "If you can't put it in my hands, If I can not touch, nor feel, nor smell, nor see, nor taste it, then it doesn't exist.



[edit on 12-7-2007 by edsinger]


I wonder what he would say now that quantum physics even questions whether any of that stuff is actually real in the sense we think it is.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Old testament, new testament... All of those stories were adopted from stories that were told a long time ago so whats the big deal? Everyone can offer proof of this and that but I dont think you can change anyones mind on either side of the fence. So why even try?



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join