Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Cheerful Charlie · 02-08-2008, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malintent

"And can you point to any evidence that indicates where this garden was?"

"Genesis 2:8 It was in Eden"

Can you please provide geographical coordinates (latitude and longitude)? Where is this "Eden" place you speak of? We should be able to find some evidence of an ancient garden, no?

Darwin's "Origin of Species" is NOT evidence of evolution. It is a bunch of words put together that describe this one person's take on the matter. After over 100 years of examination, actual, physical evidence (the kind that anyone can look at and draw their own conclusions from) has been found in great abundance to support those man-made words.

A bible is the same thing... just a bunch of man's words that express an idea. After 2000 years NO physical evidence has been found to support any of the statements therein regarding 'creation'.

Words and paper are not evidence in themselves.

Do note Genesis mentions the Euphrates as one of four rivers near Eden.
After Noah's flood, we still had the Euphrates. So,why wasn't it buried in mud? We have tall moutains with fossil sea shells creationists tell us were deposited by the flood.

CC

Tigers! · 02-08-2008, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheerful Charlie

Do note Genesis mentions the Euphrates as one of four rivers near Eden.
After Noah's flood, we still had the Euphrates. So,why wasn't it buried in mud? We have tall moutains with fossil sea shells creationists tell us were deposited by the flood.

CC

And the significance of the river being called Euphrates is precisely what?

Baalazel · 02-08-2008, 09:15 PM

You don't need to find the Garden. All you need to do is find the angels with the flaming swords. They should still be there.

Baal

Tigers! · 02-09-2008, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baalazel

You don't need to find the Garden. All you need to do is find the angels with the flaming swords. They should still be there.

Baal

It singular
Genesis 3:24
After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

skunker · 02-09-2008, 07:19 PM

Nice response, Ibelieve. good points. Btw, my first post here! I hope to chime in, as well.

Tigers! · 02-09-2008, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skunker

Nice response, Ibelieve. good points. Btw, my first post here! I hope to chime in, as well.

Welcome skunker. Hope you like your new neighbours. :wave:

deadman_932 · 02-10-2008, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibelieve

I'm also having trouble seeing your's and deadman's logic here. If we have a historical record that some place existed in the past, but we can't find it. That doesn't mean that it didn't exist. This has been demonstrated over and over again in archeology. It was also demonstrated with the Komodo dragon.

1. Calling Genesis "a historical record" as a whole...will not make it so, nor will it make "The Garden of Eden" a historical, geographical place. Troy was and is a real place, too. It's named in the Illiad, but that won't make Achilles invulnerable or the river Styx real, or Athena, for that matter.
2. I haven't argued a whit about the Garden of Eden. I merely pointed out that your claim about plant material not being preserved over millenia or millions of years...was wrong.
3. Claiming that the Komodo dragon was a "dinosaur" that lived coincident with man is also just more of your redefinition game. Certainly you have not shown that monitor lizards are dinosaurs, and pretending that you have is simply intellectual dishonesty.

You have particularly unsavory habitual modes of response when you apparently feel threatened by people pointing out your errors. I'd expect more emotional maturity out of a person claiming to be old enough to be a grandfather.

I posted this up in the other thread about your "demonstration" concerning monitors being "dinosaurs" :

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadman_932

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibelieve

Question for you deadman. The komoda dragon can be up to 10 feet long. What if we found a fossilized creature that was three times the size in length (30 ft long) as the Komodo, but had roughly the same skeletal structure. Naturally there would be some differences, because of the weight and adaptation. Would this creature be a dinosaur or a monitor lizard?

Why not add wings to it and call your imaginary creature a dragon?

If such a giant fossilized lizard were found, as in Australia -- which had varanids about that big..see Megalania prisca ...guess what it would be called? That's right...a giant lizard and not a dinosaur. The skeletal differences are not minor and are obvious.

The original classification was due to Richard Owen, who was no friend of Darwin and a bit of a religious nut himself:
Owen, Richard (1860) Description of the remains of a gigantic land lizard (Megalania prisca) from Australia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 149: 43-48

WVIncagold · 02-11-2008, 09:44 AM

I thought this post was about Eden it seams to be straying from the OP.

JayW · 02-11-2008, 05:09 PM

Quote:

WVIncagold
I thought this post was about Eden it seams to be straying from the OP.

I think we can pretty much give up expecting to find Eden. It's covered with at least eight feet of silt from a major flood. Even if it was uncovered, there probably wouldn't be a sign saying "welcome to Eden". All you probably gong to get in the way of evidence is ancient Sumerian texts.

Robert Byers · 02-11-2008, 06:32 PM

Some facts here.
The river flowed out of Eden into four heads.
In describing these heads the Author is clearly saying it was a very different pre-flood world. Th
There is no river with these heads now or when the bible was written. in fact a critic should use theses verses to say the bible got its geography wrong.
However the bible didn't but shows a different pre-flood geography.
Robert Byers

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-08-2008, 09:15 PM	#23
Baalazel Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: South Alabama Posts: 649	You don't need to find the Garden. All you need to do is find the angels with the flaming swords. They should still be there. Baal

02-09-2008, 07:19 PM	#25
skunker Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 33	Nice response, Ibelieve. good points. Btw, my first post here! I hope to chime in, as well.

02-11-2008, 09:44 AM	#28
WVIncagold Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: West Virginina Posts: 4,349	I thought this post was about Eden it seams to be straying from the OP.

02-11-2008, 06:32 PM	#30
Robert Byers Banned Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto. Ontario, Canada Posts: 921	Some facts here. The river flowed out of Eden into four heads. In describing these heads the Author is clearly saying it was a very different pre-flood world. Th There is no river with these heads now or when the bible was written. in fact a critic should use theses verses to say the bible got its geography wrong. However the bible didn't but shows a different pre-flood geography. Robert Byers

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.