18 Nov 10
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWe've already talked about Tyre. The whole debate can be found here, and consists of me and epiphinehas going at it for a few pages. Read through it. You may learn something.
Ok, why don't we talk about the fall of Tyre then, or the fall of Babylon? or the fall of Jerusalem to Titus?? events which can be corroborated with archaeology? mmm, scared that you might find some vestiges of fulfilled prophecy not corroborated by your materialism? As for Adam and Eve, your argument is straw! you assigned values where none were intended! care for some strawberries to fill your straw basket?
http://www.chessatwork.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=96558&page=&page=10
Verdict: The prophecy about the fall of Tyre was false.
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe period of time where you say "nothing happened" (although I will argue I would say things happened VERY slowly) was a time where the world population was very low and sparsely distributed. If one small community came up with an idea, they would not be able to communicate it with another community many miles away (if they even knew they even existed).
yes i understand all of that, never the less, it does not explain the phenomena, nuthin for eighty thousand years, no not even a sandcastle, next we have the pyramids and sculpture, we have apparently went from stone axes to painting, inscription, calligraphy, written language, huge cities and massive edifices overnight.
Domestication of animals (hence riding horses) helped with this, and then the invention of the wheel.
Nowadays we have very rapid communication. If there is a new invention, the world can find out about it within minutes, and many people will have inspiration for new ideas very quickly.
18 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyou will try to explain the case for Adam and eve rationally and without recourse to the scriptures, hey but all we really have is the scriptures, no you cant use them
haha, we were set an impossible task, hands tied behind our backs, please jump through the fiery hoop again, you will try to explain the case for Adam and eve rationally and without recourse to the scriptures, hey but all we really have is the scriptures, no you cant use them, It was a set up from the start, loaded and a fallacious argument, for scri as the meanest medieval church, so don't tell me my dear friend what to read! i dont tell you!
The reason we said 'without recourse to the scriptures' is because you had originally said that the biblical stories were corroborated by archealogy, history and science. I.e. outside of scripture. This thread is just asking you to point out this evidence with regard to a specific story.
In the last few posts you seem to have held your hands up to the fact that this particular story has no such corroborating evidence and in the post I am replying to, you seem to be admitting that this is more generally true.
So can you be big enough to admit that actually, the bible is no more corroborated by history, archeology and science than any many other ancient religious texts?
--- Penguin.
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_minerals
Silicon accounts for 27% of the Earth's crust yet only 0.000001% of us. Yes i think you've hit the nail on the head, although not in the way you intended! Interesting that the writer of Genesis should specifically state that it was clay and not silicone or some other element, i mean, considering their apparent abundance! What it proves my trusty feer is that the Biblical creation account may be corroborated, scientifically!
lots of silicon in clay as well. why isn't there more silicon in us
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobiethere is a time and place for everything. in a debate forum on a certain subject, when the individuals aren't face to face it is harder to spot "humor".
get a life my friend, just because a no nonsense attitude is part of the Swedish psyche doesn't mean we have to be subject to it, i care not for points scoring nor for winning debates, i just like having fun, you should try it some time, its good for your health. Would you like to assimilate us and make us all clones?
also it denotes lack of respect towards your debate opponent. expecially since your line of thought is harder to follow than most. humor has its place to enforce a point with sarcasm. i don't understand the point you are trying to make.
on one hand you see a lot of oxygen in clay and in our bodies and say the bible can be corraborated scientifically. but then we point out there is also a lot of silicon in clay but not in us. and you still didn't explain that.
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNow I don't think you are joking. You do actually invent your own ideas.
actually for your information these things are a product of my own reasoning, do you understand that, i thought them up myself, from my own mind, you may occasionally have an original thought yourself, all you have to do is think deeply and wait for one to come along, so don't tell me what to read and not what to read, do i tell you? spangle that you ...[text shortened]... orbing the ideas of others, indeed, is there any talent to identify the thief once he is found?
I haven't told you what you read, I just tell you to read the right stuff. Don't read things only that back your ideas up, because then you are stuck in your ideas.
If you really want to know what happened in the early times of human history, then read books about it, visit the museums, go find people who really knows and not those who invent their own ideas. Don't ask the first elder you can find in your church, because he doesn't know much about areas he is not supposed to know much about.
Now, go and do some work, go earn your paycheck.
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobiein this case i am sure you will be fairplay and accept a constructive criticism from us. you are wrong, your reasoning is flawed and there are numerous others who like you had some reasonings. the only difference is their reasonings stem from proof, experience and honest debate. and peer-review.
actually for your information these things are a product of my own reasoning, do you understand that, i thought them up myself, from my own mind, you may occasionally have an original thought yourself, all you have to do is think deeply and wait for one to come along, so don't tell me what to read and not what to read, do i tell you? spangle that you ...[text shortened]... orbing the ideas of others, indeed, is there any talent to identify the thief once he is found?
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou belong to an organisation that prints 70 million magazines a month and distributes them to peoples households worldwide, and you don't like it when i suggest you read some books.
haha, we were set an impossible task, hands tied behind our backs, please jump through the fiery hoop again, you will try to explain the case for Adam and eve rationally and without recourse to the scriptures, hey but all we really have is the scriptures, no you cant use them, It was a set up from the start, loaded and a fallacious argument, for scri ...[text shortened]... as the meanest medieval church, so don't tell me my dear friend what to read! i dont tell you!
Can you see the irony? Or is it hypocrisy?
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobOkay, so what does that have to do with Adam and Eve? That has more to do with
I would like him to see that humans have been on this planet for more than 6,000yrs
dating methods, not if we all came from two people doesn't it? What is it you think
you should see if we were not from two people that you do see?
Kelly
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by KellyJayIts a whole lot more than dating methods.
Okay, so what does that have to do with Adam and Eve? That has more to do with
dating methods, not if we all came from two people doesn't it? What is it you think
you should see if we were not from two people that you do see?
Kelly
I think that if we were from two people, there would be DNA evidence to that effect. The evidence currently points to a common female ancestor a long time before 6,000 years ago, and as far as I am aware does not point to a single pair of ancestors, but rather a fairly small group of humans. I think that if we had a single pair of ancestors it would show in the diversity of our genes.
What I always find hilarious is that young earth creationists simultaneously argue that we managed to get all our diversity of genes from a single pair of humans in a very short space of time and that evolution does not take place.
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by Proper Knobi was incensed not by the suggestion, but by the condescension, the irony is my dear friend, that the bible is the most widely translated book and the most widely distributed bookin the entire history of humanity and remains the least understood and the least read, you people talk of reading books when you have not even read this one, does that not strike you as ironic 🙂
You belong to an organisation that prints 70 million magazines a month and distributes them to peoples households worldwide, and you don't like it when i suggest you read some books.
Can you see the irony? Or is it hypocrisy?
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by Zahlanzisure i don't mind if my variations are unsound, indeed many gambits are unsound yet may yield results 🙂
in this case i am sure you will be fairplay and accept a constructive criticism from us. you are wrong, your reasoning is flawed and there are numerous others who like you had some reasonings. the only difference is their reasonings stem from proof, experience and honest debate. and peer-review.
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by bbarri am not epiphinehas just in case it may have escaped your notice 🙂
We've already talked about Tyre. The whole debate can be found here, and consists of me and epiphinehas going at it for a few pages. Read through it. You may learn something.
http://www.chessatwork.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=96558&page=&page=10
Verdict: The prophecy about the fall of Tyre was false.