Freethought & Rationalism Archive

funinspace · 04-07-2009, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

God can speak to us in language we can understand or visualize.

So you think these writers (in a time you think they would have heard it some 3500 years ago), would have understood that the earth is less than a single grain of sand on an ocean beach that is known as a universe, with countless stars that are immersibly beyond just the ones the human eye can see; that billions* of stars rotate in groups around a central area (galaxy); and that there are innumerable galaxies doing the same thing ? You think they would have fathomed that the years gone past for the beginning would be like taking one human lifespan and having it exist for only one second, and then realize that the universe began before their grandfather was born some 100 years ago; that the tales and ruins of old from Babylonia are but just droplets on an ocean of time? Do you think they would have visualized a billion year process of evolution with genetic mutations of DNA, when they had no clue about what even bacteria was?

It seams you should take your own words, and apply them to this 7 day creation story and langauges of understanding...

*The Milky Way galaxy is estimated to have 200-400 billion stars in it.

PS A thought on language and the development of word for such large numbers. It seams that even getting to the construct of a "million" didn't really get started until old Latin, which is still millennia after you think your tale was written...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_large_numbers
Million was certainly not invented by Adam or Chuquet. Milion is an Old French word thought to derive from Old Italian milione, an intensification of mille, a thousand.

Wooster · 04-07-2009, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wooster

We have further evidence!

The only problem is that you and your fellow literalists refuse to accept it and without giving any sound reasoning or by the use of accepted science.

Every branch of science dealing with a topic touched by your claims, disagree with you, EVERY ONE OF THEM. But you refuse to accept this, you continue to tell us that we are all wrong and you are right no matter what we can demonstrate and what evidence we have. That is not very christian of you, is it?

If you told me that Jesus did not raise from the dead should I be a good Christian and believe you?

Unless you have evidence besides the bible for the event, then yes, you are believing in something we know from the filed of medicine, is not possible.

The question that remains, is how honest are you in reality?
Are you willing to follow the truth rather than the fables? Until you reach the point were you let the evidence take you wherever it leads you rather than to try to shoehorn what obviously will not fit, no matter what you try, I guess it's equal to having a conversation with a wall. You are basically telling me that every scientist who has ever lived and contributed to their fields of science, were wrong, were liars and deceitful? Are you telling me that every field of science is invalid? Aren't you typing these posts on a computer? Do you even have an idea which fields of science has been involved and which has to be true for you to have a computer? Does any of these go against your bible? (Hint. Geology is heavily involved in computers, do you even know how?)

dimbulb · 04-07-2009, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Evidence the Egyptian Pyramids were built after the Tower of Babel.

Where is the evidence that the Tower of Babel was ever built / started / existed?

And no Bible quotes, I said evidence.

ApostateAbe · 04-07-2009, 03:28 PM

Free Indeed, the earliest known pyramid is the Step Pyramid of Djoser, built before 2648 BC. The well-known pyramids of Giza are dated around 2550 BC. When do you place the construction of the tower of Babel? It can be dated by finding the foundations of the tower itself. You can also date it by finding the remains of the large diaspora that followed after YHWH (along with the other gods that YHWH was acting with) confounded the language of the people .

funinspace · 04-07-2009, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Free Indeed, the earliest known pyramid is the Step Pyramid of Djoser, built before 2648 BC. The well-known pyramids of Giza are dated around 2550 BC. When do you place the construction of the tower of Babel? It can be dated by finding the foundations of the tower itself. You can also date it by finding the remains of the large diaspora that followed after YHWH (along with the other gods that YHWH was acting with) confounded the language of the people .

It's not really an answer, but it appears all that will be provided out of the Simpleton Nurserybook of Biblical History...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by funinspace

It could explain it if you lived in the land of Oz. Otherwise its BS. Your YEC fantasy simply breaks down because there is not enough time for all the history we know, after your 2100-2400BCE flood (the date depends on when one dates the Exodus). Now in Ge 11, it doesn't really tell us when this "confusion of languages" purportedly happened. However, I think it would be safe to say that since only the Cush's (1 of Noah's grandsons) descendents went to the land of Shinar, that it would be at least 200 years after the Deluge. And I think that is really still being too generous. So this would put it between 1900-2200BCE. Now you have to build up 2 civilizations that have eons of history, and somehow squeeze 1,000 years of written history into time where there are already a dozen other kingdoms with their own written history that is now cross referenced against other empires. Now that would take a real miracle to make history LIE.

You see, by the time of you Babel event, the Akkadians were over running the Sumerian civilization, and putting it under their heal. Ironically, Babel actually means "Gate of the gods" in the native language of the place. These ziggurats were part of the temple (religious center) of every major town. There were a quite a few of them, not one. We have many records from them, and know some of the religious functions. And within 200 more years of history Babylonia was emerging. This time period is not in some sort of vacuum, written in a single set of holy writings with no physical evidence, or external written information to support them (you know kind of like the opposite of your fantasy Deluge, Joshua's solar object demands, or Tower of Babel). You again demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge on ancient history and archeology.

According to Ussher, the global flood happened in year 2348 BC, tower of Babel 2242 BC, and Egypt began 2242 BC. I don't see a conflict at this time.

If he is willing to throw aside a millennia of human history, what is time shifting a couple dozen pyramids...

ApostateAbe · 04-07-2009, 04:12 PM

Yes, OK, I think a good opportunity for evidence will be to find evidence for the date of the pyramids calculated by Ussher. You can't just place dates wherever you like willy-nilly.

Mech Bliss · 04-07-2009, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Then the answer I gave previously was valid. "My information is 300 to 360 laminae formed in 160 years in Lake Walensee, Switzerland. We can't always assume that the rate of deposition that we see today has been the same for the past."

Varves are types of sedimentary laminations, which is to say that all varves are sedimentary laminations but not all sedimentary laminations are varves.

Varves have specific indicators of seasonal changes from the appearances of freshwater carbonates to pollen grains and the banding is cyclical. Counting varve layers also correspond with radiometric dates we get from measuring igneous indicators, e.g., a volcanic ash horizon in the varves. This agreement between these two completely independent dating methods should not occur if they didn't work.

Using the simplistic analysis of "oh, see, there are unrelated sedimentary laminations here and there, so they must have formed the same way!" is ignorant. It lacks any detailed analysis of the specific laminations in question. Simply seeing layers of sediment in two places does not demonstrate that their formation was also identical, particularly when you don't examine any details of the laminations.

Tom Sawyer · 04-07-2009, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mech Bliss

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Then the answer I gave previously was valid. "My information is 300 to 360 laminae formed in 160 years in Lake Walensee, Switzerland. We can't always assume that the rate of deposition that we see today has been the same for the past."

Varves are types of sedimentary laminations, which is to say that all varves are sedimentary laminations but not all sedimentary laminations are varves.

Varves have specific indicators of seasonal changes from the appearances of freshwater carbonates to pollen grains and the banding is cyclical. Counting varve layers also correspond with radiometric dates we get from measuring igneous indicators, e.g., a volcanic ash horizon in the varves. This agreement between these two completely independent dating methods should not occur if they didn't work.

Using the simplistic analysis of "oh, see, there are unrelated sedimentary laminations here and there, so they must have formed the same way!" is ignorant. It lacks any detailed analysis of the specific laminations in question. Simply seeing layers of sediment in two places does not demonstrate that their formation was also identical, particularly when you don't examine any details of the laminations.

Hey! Overly broad and inaccurate claims to obscure facts in favour of promoting a narrow, politicized agenda don't work when people respond with specific knowledge about those claims in order to debunk them. You're making things difficult for Free Indeed here.

Kharakov · 04-07-2009, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

No, I don't see a problem. I start with the assumption that the Bible is true and authoritative in all matters then go from there. That is how I interpret evidences and observations. We all have to start somewhere.

That's your problem. Every baby starts with natural experiences. You get this first. Know why? Because it's not a lie.

Then you learn language, and man lies. Some man gives you a book with some great truths, and some stupid lies. The great truths contained within make you feel that the whole book is true, and you stop believing the true truth (the book of nature which is truly written by God, instead of a man written book called the bible) and instead believe the fanciful written stories of men.

However, you don't acknowledge the part of the book that tells you not to pay attention to Jewish myths:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titus 1:13-15

13This testimony is true. Therefore, rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith 14and will pay no attention to Jewish myths or to the commands of those who reject the truth. 15To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted.

Nature is pure. It is the first experience God gives you. Placing a book of man before first hand experience given by God is foolishness.

Free Indeed · 04-08-2009, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wooster

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

If you told me that Jesus did not raise from the dead should I be a good Christian and believe you?

Unless you have evidence besides the bible for the event, then yes, you are believing in something we know from the filed of medicine, is not possible.

The question that remains, is how honest are you in reality?
Are you willing to follow the truth rather than the fables? Until you reach the point were you let the evidence take you wherever it leads you rather than to try to shoehorn what obviously will not fit, no matter what you try, I guess it's equal to having a conversation with a wall. You are basically telling me that every scientist who has ever lived and contributed to their fields of science, were wrong, were liars and deceitful? Are you telling me that every field of science is invalid? Aren't you typing these posts on a computer? Do you even have an idea which fields of science has been involved and which has to be true for you to have a computer? Does any of these go against your bible? (Hint. Geology is heavily involved in computers, do you even know how?)

All science has nothing to do with evolution from common ancestry. That is a model to help explain all that we see, no science experiment or anything we observe takes us there.

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

04-07-2009, 03:28 PM	#134
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	Free Indeed, the earliest known pyramid is the Step Pyramid of Djoser, built before 2648 BC. The well-known pyramids of Giza are dated around 2550 BC. When do you place the construction of the tower of Babel? It can be dated by finding the foundations of the tower itself. You can also date it by finding the remains of the large diaspora that followed after YHWH (along with the other gods that YHWH was acting with) confounded the language of the people .

04-07-2009, 04:12 PM	#136
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	Yes, OK, I think a good opportunity for evidence will be to find evidence for the date of the pyramids calculated by Ussher. You can't just place dates wherever you like willy-nilly.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.