12 Jun 14
Originally posted by RJHindsSo you admit that not all the bible should be taken literally, do you want to name which parts shouldn't be? Don't bother listing Ecclesiastes and Psalms, where it's obvious.
Some parts of the Holy Bible are to be taken literally and some are not. It takes wisdom to determine which.
ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME.
There is no way for us to observe past miracles as they happened, but we can observe evidence of their occurrence and some people have as I point out in my thread about the supernatural.
I believe there i ...[text shortened]... way to be saved from the punishment of death and wrath of God for sins that occurred in Genesis.
ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME.That is a very very stupid expression. I stated the assumptions I was making in my post. I have justified them elsewhere. I can do it again if you insist.
There is no way for us to observe past miracles as they happened, but we can observe evidence of their occurrence and some people have as I point out in my thread about the supernatural.Miracles such as those described in the New Testament can't be tested because they wouldn't be expected to leave a trace after 2,000 years. A Young Earth and a World Wide Flood would have left traces. There is no evidence for this.
...to be saved from the punishment of death and wrath of God for sins that occurred in Genesis.Given that in the Genesis account Adam and Eve did not eat from the tree of life, indicating they were already mortal, death cannot be a punishment. You believe in a God that would punish us for the sins of others? Despite the fact that we have no means to stop the frankly quite minor transgressions of Adam and Eve, it's a very strange God you believe in.
12 Jun 14
1 edit
Originally posted by DeepThoughtWell, there are traces of the miracle of the resurrection of Christ left behind in the empty tomb at Jerusalem and the miracle image on the Shroud of Turin. And there are many traces of the miracles of God written in the Old Testament all around us. The creation of the heavens and the earth and biological life serve as traces of God's miracle of creation to me. There are traces of God's miracle of parting of the Sea at the Red Sea crossing site and other miracles that I pointed out in my thread "Proof of the Supernatural" such as the ruins of Sodom and Gomorrah.
So you admit that not all the bible should be taken literally, do you want to name which parts shouldn't be? Don't bother listing Ecclesiastes and Psalms, where it's obvious.ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME.That is a very very stupid expression. I stated the assumptions I was making in my post. I have justified them elsewhere. I can ...[text shortened]... the frankly quite minor transgressions of Adam and Eve, it's a very strange God you believe in.
Noah's big boat has been found in Turkey and the Turkish goverment has confirmed the discovery by establishing a visitor site by the location. So I believe that is one trace of the worldwide flood and the Grand Canyon could be another trace along with all the deposited fossils of sea creatures in high mountains all over the world.
God taking away the tree of life is why Adam eventually died after 900 years. So that fulfilled God's threat of death for Adam sinning against Him and resulted in death to all that followed. It is God Himself that came up with a way that He would accept so that we, who repent and believe, could eat of the new trees of life and obtain everlasting life.
as our repentance from sin.
He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will grant to eat of the tree of life which is in the Paradise of God.
(Revelation 2:7 NASB)
Then he showed me a river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb, in the middle of its street. On either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
(Revelation 22:1-2 NASB)
12 Jun 14
Originally posted by RJHindsAs long as you leave science out of it, nobody will object to your dogma.
Well, there are traces of the miracle of the resurrection of Christ left behind in the empty tomb at Jerusalem and the miracle image on the Shroud of Turin. And there are many traces of the miracles of God written in the Old Testament all around us. The creation of the heavens and the earth and biological life serve as traces of God's miracle of creation t ...[text shortened]... and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
(Revelation 22:1-2 NASB)[/b]
12 Jun 14
Originally posted by RJHindsThe Turin Shroud was carbon dated and turned out to be from the middle ages.
Well, there are traces of the miracle of the resurrection of Christ left behind in the empty tomb at Jerusalem and the miracle image on the Shroud of Turin. And there are many traces of the miracles of God written in the Old Testament all around us. The creation of the heavens and the earth and biological life serve as traces of God's miracle of creation t ...[text shortened]... and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
(Revelation 22:1-2 NASB)[/b]
That a tomb is empty is evidence of little other than maybe grave robbers.
The existence of the universe is not evidence for the young earth theory.
The Turkish government are hoping for tourists, no more no less.
They'd already been chucked out of the Garden of Eden, so Adam had no access to the tree of life.
12 Jun 14
3 edits
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThe carbon dating turned out to be of a repaired corner portion of the Shroud of Turin, so that invalided the carbon dating, even if carbon dating works. The linen cloth was rewoven with cotton thread and dyed to make the repair look invisible to the necked eye where the sample was taken and cut in three parts for the carbon dating instead of being taken from three separate locations as was earlier agreed upon. There is no cotton in or paint on the main body of the shroud that has the image.
The Turin Shroud was carbon dated and turned out to be from the middle ages.
That a tomb is empty is evidence of little other than maybe grave robbers.
The existence of the universe is not evidence for the young earth theory.
The Turkish government are hoping for tourists, no more no less.
They'd already been chucked out of the Garden of Eden, so Adam had no access to the tree of life.
What is written in the Holy Bible testifies of a youg earth for there is not but a few thousand years of history mention from its creation.
Well, the remains of Noah's big boat with the same lenth dimensions as that mentioned in the Holy Bible is there in Turkey for everyone to see anyway.
I don't recall any mention in the Holy Bible of Adam repenting of his sin against God either.
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2006/04/19/Latest-Developments-on-the-Shroud-of-Turin-Part-II.aspx
12 Jun 14
Originally posted by RJHindsThe Shroud of Turin samples were representative. The clincher is that the date that the three separate laboratories gave is consistent with the shroud's appearance in history. There is no indication of any repair. This is wishful thinking.
The carbon dating turned out to be of a repaired corner portion of the Shroud of Turin, so that invalided the carbon dating, even if carbon dating works. The linen cloth was rewoven with cotton thread and dyed to make the repair look invisible to the necked eye where the sample was taken and cut in three parts for the carbon dating instead of being taken fr ...[text shortened]... www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2006/04/19/Latest-Developments-on-the-Shroud-of-Turin-Part-II.aspx
The earth is over 4 billion years old. The Bible does not constitute scientific evidence. Events in the New Testament are contested, never mind what is in the Old Testament.
There have been several claims that the Ark has been found. They are invariably hoaxes. Assuming you are referring to the NAMI expedition the wood was placed there by some Kurdish workers as a hoax. The alleged remnants were in any case moved to China. If you are talking about a different find then please give me a reference, and I'd like an objective one so not a Creationist site but an archaeological website.
You still haven't answered why anyone other than Adam should be punished for his sins.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtIt is wishful thinking if you think there was never any repairs done on the Shroud of Turin.
The Shroud of Turin samples were representative. The clincher is that the date that the three separate laboratories gave is consistent with the shroud's appearance in history. There is no indication of any repair. This is wishful thinking.
The earth is over 4 billion years old. The Bible does not constitute scientific evidence. Events in the New ...[text shortened]... bsite.
You still haven't answered why anyone other than Adam should be punished for his sins.
http://shroud2000.com/FastFacts.html
Anyone that says the earth is over 4 billion is spoutung speculative nonsense. Anyone can make up any age they want for the age of the earth, but that don't make it so.
Irrefutable Proof The Earth is Only 6000 Years Old
This is the Noah's Ark I am referrring to:
http://www.arkdiscovery.com/noah's_ark.htm
Eve and practically all mankind have also sinned. Even the the great angel, Satan, and the demon angels that followed him have also sinned against God. Don't try to tell me that you have not sinned by violating on of God's ten commmandments, for I will not believe it.
14 Jun 14
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsNone of that crap has anything to do with your ancient 6 day Egyptian creation tale.
It is wishful thinking if you think there was never any repairs done on the Shroud of Turin.
http://shroud2000.com/FastFacts.html
Anyone that says the earth is over 4 billion is spoutung speculative nonsense. Anyone can make up any age they want for the age of the earth, but that don't make it so.
Irrefutable Proof The Earth is Only 6000 Years Old ...[text shortened]... that you have not sinned by violating on of God's ten commmandments, for I will not believe it.
The fact is all you have is religious faith to 'prove' the Earth is 6000 years old. That story just gets weaker and weaker as time goes by and new science comes online refuting that ancient tale.
14 Jun 14
Originally posted by sonhouseDon't you know that you can't prove the earth is billions of years old? That is something you believe because someone told you. That is what you have faith in, not the science, because there is no science on the age of the earth.
None of that crap has anything to do with your ancient 6 day Egyptian creation tale.
The fact is all you have is religious faith to 'prove' the Earth is 6000 years old. That story just gets weaker and weaker as time goes by and new science comes online refuting that ancient tale.
No scientific method can prove the age of the universe or the earth. Although age indicators are called "clocks" they aren't, because all ages result from calculations that necessarily involve making assumptions about the past.
15 Jun 14
Originally posted by RJHindsDon't you know that I don't give a crap about what you think anymore, troll?
Don't you know that you can't prove the earth is billions of years old? That is something you believe because someone told you. That is what you have faith in, not the science, because there is no science on the age of the earth.
No scientific method can prove the age of the universe or the earth. Although age indicators are called "clocks" they aren't, ...[text shortened]... se all ages result from calculations that necessarily involve making assumptions about the past.