• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Interesting Facts about the So-Called Book of Mythology...

pinqy said:
The problem is that anyone who actually uses and understands carbon-14 dating would expect the results on a freshly dead seal or any sea creature to be wrong. That misusing a tool gives a bad result does not mean the tool is flawed when used properly.
Click to expand...

“I used a yardstick to measure a nanometer and it gave me a reading of 1/8th of an inch. Clearly yardsticks aren’t accurate!”
 
pinqy said:
The problem is that anyone who actually uses and understands carbon-14 dating would expect the results on a freshly dead seal or any sea creature to be wrong. That misusing a tool gives a bad result does not mean the tool is flawed when used properly.
Click to expand...
lol...kinda like the misuse/misunderstanding of God's Word...got it...
 
Elora said:
lol...kinda like the misuse/misunderstanding of God's Word...got it...
Click to expand...

No, it’s not like that at all because science can be objectively verified and independently confirmed.
 
Elora said:
lol...
Click to expand...
Simply trying to laugh your way out of your own ignorance of the bible will not do it.
The bible if read properly tells us the earth is around 6000 years old.
Do you need a link to prove tis?
 
Elora said:
Even though the Bible is not considered a history book, the history it does touch on is accurate...makes one wonder how much more of these divine writings is accurate, yet people are still insisting it's a myth, huh...

“ … the historical books of the Old Testament are as accurate historical documents as any that we have from antiquity and are in fact more accurate than many of the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, or Greek histories. These Biblical records can be and are used as are other ancient documents in archaeological work.”

In other words, not only does archaeology confirm that the Bible is historically accurate, but professional archaeologists actually use the Bible as a guide in their work.

The great Jewish archaeologist Nelson Glueck, who is known to be one of the top three archaeologists in history, has stated the following: "No archaeological discovery has ever contradicted a single, properly understood Biblical statement."
https://www.thedestinlog.com/story/...red-is-bible-historically-accurate/985681007/
Click to expand...

Well, he hedged his bet a bit by saying "properly understood", but generally ancient texts seem to have been written around core facts, even if misinterpreted and subjected to propaganda, so I guess that's ok.
 
soylentgreen said:
Simply trying to laugh your way out of your own ignorance of the bible will not do it.
The bible if read properly tells us the earth is around 6000 years old.
Do you need a link to prove tis?
Click to expand...
Wrong on both counts...I was loling at yours...I don't need a link to what ignorant men think, I know what the Bible says and doesn't say...nowhere in its writings does it address the earth's age...NOWHERE...keep believing the lies, if you must...typical of those looking for excuses not to believe...
 
Elora said:
Wrong on both counts...I was loling at yours...I don't need a link to what ignorant men think, I know what the Bible says and doesn't say...nowhere in its writings does it address the earth's age...NOWHERE...keep believing the lies, if you must...typical of those looking for excuses not to believe...
Click to expand...

Yet other Christians here disagree that you know what the bible says. Ain't that peculiar.
 
Jacksprat said:
They found a human being who died and came back to life? Where did they present the evidence?
Click to expand...
If you're talking about the resurrection of Jesus there are multiple, independent reports and/or confirmations in the Gospels and epistles of the New Testament.
 
soylentgreen said:
Again, the claim that the earth is 6000 years old is made by reading the contents of the bible. It is not me personally making that claim.
Click to expand...
That's a specious understanding of the dating of the earth in Genesis.

One could simply respond by asking how much time elapsed between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.
 
Elora said:
Even though the Bible is not considered a history book, the history it does touch on is accurate...makes one wonder how much more of these divine writings is accurate, yet people are still insisting it's a myth, huh...

“ … the historical books of the Old Testament are as accurate historical documents as any that we have from antiquity and are in fact more accurate than many of the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, or Greek histories. These Biblical records can be and are used as are other ancient documents in archaeological work.”

In other words, not only does archaeology confirm that the Bible is historically accurate, but professional archaeologists actually use the Bible as a guide in their work.

The great Jewish archaeologist Nelson Glueck, who is known to be one of the top three archaeologists in history, has stated the following: "No archaeological discovery has ever contradicted a single, properly understood Biblical statement."
https://www.thedestinlog.com/story/...red-is-bible-historically-accurate/985681007/
Click to expand...
There is no archaeological evidence of Jesus, Moses, the Exodus, the Great Flood, etc. Sometimes archaeology can prove some of the places might have existed, but nothing whatsoever to show any of the mythical characters existed. At best, the bible is historical fiction.
 
Logicman said:
If you're talking about the resurrection of Jesus there are multiple, independent reports and/or confirmations in the Gospels and epistles of the New Testament.
Click to expand...

They aren’t independent. There’s loads of evidence (and the current theological scholar consensus) that the Gospel writers were aware of the works of each other and even copied sections from other Gospels (word for word at points).
 
Logicman said:
If you're talking about the resurrection of Jesus there are multiple, independent reports and/or confirmations in the Gospels and epistles of the New Testament.
Click to expand...
Which are all subjective and anecdotal. It's no different about reports of Elvis or UFO sightings.
Logicman said:
That's a specious understanding of the dating of the earth in Genesis.

One could simply respond by asking how much time elapsed between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.
Click to expand...
The time passed is probably the amount of time it took biblical authors to write those parts.
 
Elora said:
Wrong on both counts...I was loling at yours...I don't need a link to what ignorant men think, I know what the Bible says and doesn't say...nowhere in its writings does it address the earth's age...NOWHERE...keep believing the lies, if you must...typical of those looking for excuses not to believe...
Click to expand...
If you believe the bible an accurate account then you cannot deny the accuracy of the genealogical records from adam onwards. You are correct that the bible does not have the words written in it that state the earth is 6000 years old. Because that would make the earth now 8000 years old if we consider the book to be about 2000 years old. Try to use some common sense in your thinking.
What the bible does do is give an account of the lives since adam which can by actually reading the bible and understanding what it says gives us a world that is 6000 years old.

https://creation.com/6000-years

Logicman said:
That's a specious understanding of the dating of the earth in Genesis.

One could simply respond by asking how much time elapsed between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.
Click to expand...
In this argument I need merely prove to elora that the bible if read " properly" will give us an accurate genealogical method of finding the earths age at 6000 years. Which makes her OP claim look silly.
 
soylentgreen said:
If you believe the bible an accurate account then you cannot deny the accuracy of the genealogical records from adam onwards. You are correct that the bible does not have the words written in it that state the earth is 6000 years old. Because that would make the earth now 8000 years old if we consider the book to be about 2000 years old. Try to use some common sense in your thinking.
What the bible does do is give an account of the lives since adam which can by actually reading the bible and understanding what it says gives us a world that is 6000 years old.

https://creation.com/6000-years


In this argument I need merely prove to elora that the bible if read " properly" will give us an accurate genealogical method of finding the earths age at 6000 years. Which makes her OP claim look silly.
Click to expand...
Which has absolutely nothing to do with determining the age of the earth but the age of mankind...try to use some common sense in your thinking...
 
Logicman said:
You should dig deeper.

Archaeological Evidence for the Exodus

Click to expand...
Or maybe find less biased sites (or at least ones that weren't put together using 20th century technology)

NOVA | The Bible's Buried Secrets | Moses and the Exodus | PBS

In this article, archaeologist and biblical scholar Carol Meyers offers a new and surprising view of the iconic exodus from Egypt.
www.pbs.org

 
Airyaman said:
Or maybe find less biased sites (or at least ones that weren't put together using 20th century technology)

NOVA | The Bible's Buried Secrets | Moses and the Exodus | PBS

In this article, archaeologist and biblical scholar Carol Meyers offers a new and surprising view of the iconic exodus from Egypt.
www.pbs.org

Click to expand...
The bias is yours. Carol Meyers is a left-wing anti-supernaturalist. If the hussy had ever done any real research she would have known that science has never demonstrated that God and the supernatural do not and cannot occur. So she's got no real basis for her anti-supernaturalism. Neither do you.

She's also a big fan of diversity, so just ask her how many conservatives there are in liberal sociology departments across America?
 
Logicman said:
The bias is yours. Carol Meyers is a left-wing anti-supernaturalist. If the hussy had ever done any real research she would have known that science has never demonstrated that God and the supernatural do not and cannot occur. So she's got no real basis for her anti-supernaturalism. Neither do you.

She's also a big fan of diversity, so just ask her how many conservatives there are in liberal sociology departments across America?
Click to expand...
I think the bolded sums this up rather nicely!

Science isn't used to disprove the negative.
 
Logicman said:
The bias is yours. Carol Meyers is a left-wing anti-supernaturalist. If the hussy had ever done any real research she would have known that science has never demonstrated that God and the supernatural do not and cannot occur. So she's got no real basis for her anti-supernaturalism. Neither do you.

She's also a big fan of diversity, so just ask her how many conservatives there are in liberal sociology departments across America?
Click to expand...

You seriously have no ****ing clue how proving a negative isn’t a thing in logic or science.
 
Logicman said:
View attachment 67407766
Click to expand...
Was this supposed to be a rational response?

How does science disprove an element that does not exist?

It can't because there is nothing to test, nothing to examine. Science only works with something that can actually be examined.

It is the same with the supernatural. The supernatural is something that is beyond the laws of nature or scientific understanding. That is putting it kindly.
 
Elora said:
Which has absolutely nothing to do with determining the age of the earth but the age of mankind...try to use some common sense in your thinking...
Click to expand...
Concerning the age of the Earth, the Bible's genealogical records combined with the Genesis 1 account of creation are used to estimate an age for the Earth and universe of about 6000 years, with a bit of uncertainty on the completeness of the genealogical records, allowing for a few thousand years more.

How amusing that you deny the bibles words because it does not fit your" proper" understanding of it. Your OP has been proven wrong.
 
soylentgreen said:
Concerning the age of the Earth, the Bible's genealogical records combined with the Genesis 1 account of creation are used to estimate an age for the Earth and universe of about 6000 years, with a bit of uncertainty on the completeness of the genealogical records, allowing for a few thousand years more.

How amusing that you deny the bibles words because it does not fit your" proper" understanding of it. Your OP has been proven wrong.
Click to expand...
How amusing that you deny the Bible's lack of words because it does not fit your "proper" understanding of it...you have been proven wrong...nowhere does the Bible address the age of the earth, what it does address is the age of mankind...

When Did God Begin to Create the Universe?​

The Bible’s answer​

The Bible does not say when God began to create the universe or how long this took. It simply states: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) The Bible does not specify when “the beginning” occurred. However, the sequence of events recorded in Genesis places it before the six periods, or “days,” of creation.

When were the sun, moon, and stars created?​

The sun, moon, and stars already existed as part of “the heavens” created in “the beginning.” (Genesis 1:1) However, their light evidently did not reach the earth’s surface because of a dense atmosphere. (Genesis 1:2) So although diffused light became visible on the first day, the light’s source was not yet recognizable. On the fourth day, the atmosphere apparently cleared up. The Bible says that the sun, moon, and stars now began to “shine upon the earth,” evidently describing how they would have been seen from the perspective of an observer on earth.—Genesis 1:17.

How old is the earth according to the Bible?​

The Bible does not comment on the age of the earth. Genesis 1:1 simply states that the physical universe, including our earth, had a beginning. This statement conflicts neither with sound scientific principles nor with scientists’ estimates of the age of the earth.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/500100105?q=age+of+the+earth&p=sen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom