Why I don't believe the Bible

Originally posted by Agerg
I haven't really studied the Mandlebrot set so I can't really say too much.

In what way has it been "proven"? in detail please. You *thinking* it's fantasy is no substitute for a rigorous logical proof that it *is* fantasy.

not one of the places mentioned can be traced to a physical location upon the earth,
not one. Why is that? because they are the product of imagination, an imaginary
world! a fantasy realm!


You have not studied mandlebrot, man i am soooo dimm, i cannot make head nor tail
of them 😞

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
So you have proffered nothing, well well, how intwesting, I say to you avalanche the
putty cat, that if you put a pretty girl on TV with letters after her name, you could be
made to believe almost anything. What is known about the garden of Eden is written
in scripture, not in the speculative claims of some rationalising secularist BBC
documentary. No matter how pretty the lady is.

Why would you even imagine that a person could be so gullible as to allow one's reason to be subverted in such a way? Is this how your mind works? I'd present her arguments if I could see any point, but you're not really interested because your mind is already firmly set.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
not one of the places mentioned can be traced to a physical location upon the earth,
not one. Why is that? because they are the product of imagination, an imaginary
world! a fantasy realm!

That's because Gandalf transformed the world into what it is now, none of such places that existed prior are accessible to us now...my faith still stands strong - you've proven nothing! ;]

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Why would you even imagine that a person could be so gullible as to allow one's reason to be subverted in such a way? Is this how your mind works? I'd present her arguments if I could see any point, but you're not really interested because your mind is already firmly set.

lets stick to the facts and leave the emotive adjectives at bay, shall we.

1. Garden of Eden is almost exclusively a Biblical concept (the Koran mentions it, but
states that it was heavenly), thus what is known about the Garden of Eden, in
literature from antiquity is found where, in scripture. Any further attempts to
corroborate it from a non scriptural source are pure and utter conjecture. That my
dear putty cat is not gullible, nor unreasonable, nor subversive, its a simple statement
of fact! These type of presentations work much in the same way as Dan Browns,
Illuminati, in that they appeal to the mind on the basis of evidence which cannot be
corroborated one way or the other and you have the audacity to talk of being gullible?

Originally posted by Agerg
That's because Gandalf transformed the world into what it is now, none of such places that existed prior are accessible to us now...my faith still stands strong - you've proven nothing! ;]

no vestiges, no archaeological evidence for their existence, its just not very strong, is it
dear Agers? in fact its more weak than Wendy the weak thing, who goes the weekly
shopping, on a week day, to buy tea bags to make weak tea, near Weakingham!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no vestiges, no archaeological evidence for their existence, its just not very strong, is it
dear Agers? in fact its more weak than Wendy the weak thing, who goes the weekly
shopping, on a week day, to buy tea bags to make weak tea, near Weakingham!

The evidence is all there in the books of the Lord of The Ring. As I said it even has a map of middle earth! a map that fits the events which happened in the text, and actual cartographic evidence for my position!!! - read it with an objective and open minded approach, and it will be clear that what I say is fact.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
lets stick to the facts and leave the emotive adjectives at bay, shall we.

1. Garden of Eden is almost exclusively a Biblical concept (the Koran mentions it, but
states that it was heavenly), thus what is known about the Garden of Eden, in
literature from antiquity is found where, in scripture. Any further attempts to
corroborate it from a ...[text shortened]... nnot be
corroborated one way or the other and you have the audacity to talk of being gullible?

The story of the Garden of Eden is so painfully clearly allegorical that the idea of taking it literally is really quite indefensible. And as I already said, appraising you of her arguments would be a waste of my time and yours since your faith precludes you from agreeing with her.

edit: Read my previous post again. I wasn't suggesting you were gullible, I was asking you why you would imagine that I was. Your appeal against emotive adjectives is unwarranted and rejected.

Originally posted by Agerg
The evidence is all there in the books of the Lord of The Ring, as I said it even has a map! a map that fits the events which happened in the text!!! - read it with an objective and open minded approach, and it will be clear that what I say is fact.

its just not very convincing, like the book of Mormon which claims other civilisations
lived in America. Are these places and civilisations corroborated by secular historians?
no, well you dont have a case dear Agers, your a fantasy merchant!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its just not very convincing, like the book of Mormon which claims other civilisations
lived in America. Are these places and civilisations corroborated by secular historians?
no, well you dont have a case dear Agers, your a fantasy merchant!

I have a very convincing case Robbie. Indeed a few posts ago you said that my position had been proven false and when challenged on the matter you had nought but a flimsy argument based on a lack of physical evidence when it is already patently obvious that, logically, no such evidence could be presented in that manner anyway.

You have to read the book to see the boundless substantiation for my belief - and have faith. I'll make a convert out of you yet ;]

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
The story of the Garden of Eden is so painfully clearly allegorical that the idea of taking it literally is really quite indefensible. And as I already said, appraising you of her arguments would be a waste of my time and yours since your faith precludes you from agreeing with her.

edit: Read my previous post again. I wasn't suggesting you were gu ...[text shortened]... u would imagine that I was. Your appeal against emotive adjectives is unwarranted and rejected.

It is allegorical to you dear Avalanche because you have not made room for the divine,
but to those who have, its wonderful. The issue of universal sovereignty is raised, the
idea that God is a dictator who held something good back from Adam and Eve, that
independence from God is beneficial, all of these issues are raised, if its purely
allegorical, none thing in connection with Jesus Christ makes sense, his sacrifice to buy
back what was lost, to give a perfect life for a perfect life, nothing. As for entertaining
fantastic claims of the BBC, i would do just as well to follow Agers to middle earth.

Originally posted by Agerg
I have a very convincing case Robbie. Indeed a few posts ago you said that my position had been proven false and when challenged on the matter you had nought but a flimsy argument based on a lack of physical evidence when it is already patently obvious that, logically, no such evidence could be presented in that manner anyway.

You have to read the book to s ...[text shortened]... boundless substantiation for my belief - and have faith. I'll make a convert out of you yet ;]

that's not a case dear Agers, its an excuse, no secular historians, no case!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
that's not a case dear Agers, its an excuse, no secular historians, no case!

It's not an excuse Robbie, it's a fact. How could I possibly demonstrate physical evidence of places that are no longer around (courtesy of Gandalf). With diligent application of the fundamentalist principle of circular logic and specious arguments, my case is watertight! - many thanks again for teaching me this unbreakable system of faith in magic ;]

Originally posted by Agerg
It's not an excuse Robbie, it's a fact. How could I possibly demonstrate physical evidence of places that are no longer around (courtesy of Gandalf). With diligent application of the fundamentalist principle of circular logic and specious arguments, my case is watertight Robbie - many thanks again for teaching me this unbreakable system of faith in magic ;]

not so fast there dear Agers, there must at least be one secular historian that will lend
his credentials to your case? no historian, no case. no archaeology, no case? no real
people, no case, no real events, no case, no visible places, no case. fantasy dear Agers,


dweam dweam dweam!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
not so fast there dear Agers, there must at least be one secular historian that will lend
his credentials to your case?

Well Tolkein has passed on unfortunately - we are left only with his writings; writings which are clearly factual. I don't know why you keep raising the issue of people and places - like I said, Gandalf did some magic and middle earth was transformed into modern earth - no phyiscal evidence is or can ever, logically, be available.

Originally posted by Agerg
Well Tolkein has passed on unfortunately - we are left only with his writings; writings which are clearly factual.

I am sorry, he will not do, it needs to be externally verified, you fail!