yalla

Well I could get pictures but I have no idea how to transfer them to here. I'm a mug at that sort of thing.
Just around the river bend from me is Ngaut Ngaut Conservation Park about 3 kms as a sober crow would fly, which was the ceremonial centre for the people in my area.
Try these links. Some have images. Most of the info is old and tourist oriented. I didn't realize how sloppy the media/tourist stuff is presented. One of the interesting facets of Ngaut Ngaut is that people walked down a very narrow 'path' along rocks to get to the main cave from the cliff above and in so doing wore a smooth visible trail of footmarks in the rock. The tourists retrace a footpath used for thousands of years.

http://www.pleasetakemeto.com/austra...ngaut/location

http://www.atnf.csiro.au/research/Ab...NgautNgaut.htm

Does that help?
cheers
yalla

Robert Byers

A summery of what I've said and been dealing with here comes doen to whether a account of something can be used as a witness to events described.
I say clearly in life and law that someone can be used as a witness and must be heard as one (so in good standing) and only later can be cross-examined to verify thier accuracy/integrity.
The bible is claiming to be a witness to events desribed and so must be accepted as a witness for its assertions.
A witness but not a true one nessesarily.
therefore a witness in good standing for one side until shown false.
I don't see how this can be denied but we've been around this block.
Robert Byers
Toronto, Ontario

spin

Yes, it's a repetition with no new perspectives and no response to the different analyses you've received. You didn't need to post this.


spin

Doug Shaver

Not entirely. You still have not told me what it would take to rebut a book's claim to be a witness.

Johnny Skeptic

Why is that?

Are you not aware that God broke his promise to give Egypt to Nebuchadnezzar as a compensation for Nebuchadnezzar's failure to conquer Tyre?

That is false. Any deist could claim that desim is a legitimate witness until proven otherwise to what it accounts.

In courts trials, he who asserts first must reasonably prove his assertions. Since the Bible is the original claimant, it is not enbumbent upon skeptics to reasonably prove that it is false. Rather, it is encumbent upon Christians to reasonably prove that it is true.

On the contrary. If the Ten Plagues occured, that would have been the end of Egypt as a major power in the Middle East. As history shows, that did not happen.

As Dr. Jonathan Roth of San Jose State university once told me in an e-mail, "history was considered literature and meant for entertainment. Tacitus is always thinking about making his stories more interesting and readable.” Dr. Roth's specialties are military history, Judea in the first century CE, ancient race and ethnicity.

If the story of the Ten Plagues was written for entertainment, obviously, the Egyptians disregarded it as fiction.

If the Ten Plagues occured, surely lots of travellers and traders would have gone home and told lots of people about them. The plagues would easily have been the most important news story in the world by far. All kinds of historical records would have been recorded. The odds that only Biblical records would have survived would be very small. The fact that the story only survived in the Bible is much too convenient to be considered credible evidence.

Some of the firstborn males in Egypt must have been babies. No decent person would ever accept a God who killed babies.

It is interesting to note that there were not any noticeable changes in Egyptian attitudes towards Jews as a result of the supposed plagues. This indicates that the plagues probably did not occur. In addition, no ruler of Egypt would have lasted through the ten plagues within giving in. I do not buy the story that God forced pharoah to refuse to let the Jews go free.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to Robert Byers: Please be advised that a claimed eyewitness is not necessarily an actual eyewitness.

If Jesus made some personal appearances after he rose from the dead, why did he do it?

Robert Byers

I know you've been pushing around here some claims that God didn't fulfill this or that hitorical point.
This seems off thread.
I don't see any of your criticisms of the ten plagues as good ones.
The bible only lasted thru the ages because God preserved it. When the Hebrews went to canaan they were famous because of what happened in egypt.
Its such a big suject however I faint.
Rob Byers

Johnny Skeptic

I said that in response to your false claim that the Bible is a legitimate witness until proven otherwise to what is account. You did not reply to that argument. Please do so.

You did not reply to that argument. Please do so.

You did not reply to those arguments. Please do so.

It is difficult for me to have discussions with you because when I refute your arguments, you cherry pick which ones you reply to based up how easy you believe they are to refute. I do not run away from your arguments, but you run away from some of my arguments. I have have made almost 9,000 posts at the IIDB. It has been my experience that fundamentalist Christians usually become evasive sooner or later if their competition is well-prepared.

That is true, but I recently started a new thread about the Nebuchadnezzar issue, and you conveniently have not made any posts in that thread.

Well of course that it the case, but why did you state the obvious? Stating the obvious does help the discussions progress. I could say the same thing about your claims, but I won't because it is already obvious that I do not think that your claims are good ones. It is not helpful for you to state that my criticisms are not good ones. You need to specifically state WHY my criticisms are not good ones.

But you said "I know you've been pushing around here some claims that God didn't fulfill this or that hitorical point. This seems off thread," and here you are getting off thread. The preservation of the Bible is related to the topic of inerrancy. There is currently a thread on inerrancy at this forum that you and I are participating in. I suggest that we discuss the preservation fo the Bible in that thread.

Please post your historical sources for this claim. What evidence do you have that the Ten Plagues occured?

Robert Byers

I'm never evasive but pick only the most worthy points to discuss.

Perhaps the confusion here is that you misunderstand how we use the bible as a good witness.
We are making our case and offer to the jury the bible as a witness to events described.
You say it must prove itself before it can be used by us as a witness.
We respond that we can use it as a witness and you must prove why we can't.
This means it is a witness in good standing for the trial. We do not insist that you accept it as a good witness to the judgement of the trial.
Therefore you must accept it as a witness in good standing even while then attacking it as a false witness.
Your trying to dismiss our witness from entering the trial in the first place.
You are very wrong and confusedhere.

I don't know how to address all these other ideas as they are legion.
Rob Byers

Amaleq13

You have obtained repeated explanations why this is nonsense but you have chosen to ignore them.

It is simply a fact that no attorney brings a witness to a trial until after they have established, if only for themselves, that the individual actually witnessed something relevant to the trial. It is simply a fact that no cop treats a witness as you suggest but in the exact opposite fashion. All alleged witnesses are treated with suspicion and doubt until they establish their legitimacy and credibility.

Your entire approach to witnesses is irrational and contrary to actual practice. No further reply is necessary. Your position with regard to witnesses has been shown to be irrational and contrary to actual practices whether you are willing to accept it or not.