Ezkerraldean

it's called geology. the neptunist versus plutonist debate was 250 years ago, you're a little late i'm afraid.
geology is your enemy.

budgie

Except that the plat or legal description (bible, if you will) of your property states "and in the center of the neighbor's yard is an tree of gopher wood".



-jim

Johnny Skeptic

If a God exists, there are not any doubts whatsoever that he could easily have inspired a book that made many indisupatable claims. For instance, he could easily have predicted when and where a lot of natural disasters would occur, month, day, and year. If that had happened, there would not have been any need for anyone to debate whether or not at least one being exists who is able to predict the future.

Logically, if a God exists, he has not tried to convince anyone to believe that he can predict the future.

Sheshonq

Which isn't what I posted. Read it again.

On the contrary. Go back and read what I posted:

Today, archaeologists and language specialists alike doubt that the Ur, Kish, or even Fara floods could be the source of the Mesopotamian flood narratives, and prefer to take them merely as evidence for the endemic hazard posed by floods in the flat alluvial plain of southern Mesopotamia.

That's more than one archaeologist. And since you said EVERY archaeologist agrees with you, I think we can all conclude that you're blowing smoke on that.

By the way: when do you plan to actually read Glenn Morton's critique?

Wrong. I entered this discussion with about 20 years of background study on the topic. In case it hasn't dawned on you yet, we have heard all these claims before from many other people. You'll need to do better than they have, if you hope to convince anyone here at all.

deadman_932

My view is that the real issue here is the shifts in claims and goalposts.

This is a claim of : "If an event X is found to occur at the same time as Biblical event B that is contradictory to Biblical claim B...then the Bible is wrong. This has never happened"

This is significantly different than Jayw's subsequent claim that "if an event X happens BEFORE Biblical claim B...then it's evidence that an event in the Bible has a true basis "

But JayW said (returning to a "contemporaneous X and B" mode) :

But this is not true. The localized Mesopotamian floods JayW cited as evidence do not coincide with the Biblical Flood time frame of 2300-2500 BC.

JayW's flipped through a number of subtle changes, some geographic, but mostly temporal.

Yes, the Astra-hasis myth is the story that is told to Gilgamesh by Unapishtim. Yes, the Bible-writers took that story, as modified by Babylonians and Assyrians and made it into Noah. Yes, this story may have roots in an ancient local and MINOR (relatively speaking) flood at about 2900 BC. Or it might be another flood at another time, in another area like around Nineveh (far, far to the north of Ur) -- But it's sure as hell not at Jericho.

But this still doesn't fit the time period given by the Bible, nor the scope of the Biblical flood.

Sheshonq

[QUOTE=JayW;5152186]It's a tongue-in-cheek example of how useless your argument is. Because you won't tell us which details are critical to this flood story vs. the ones that can be ignored, your argument is meaningless.

Flood in Ur? No I meant Shuruppak. Oops; I meant Nineveh. 4000 years ago; no, more like 2800. Unless you want to look at this other flood in 1600 BCE


Because you refuse to commit to any set of details, your argument floats around without any real meaning. You can stretch it and bend it however you want.

Humor as an educational tool is clearly wasted on some people.

Cool. Which details are "must have" for your hypothesis?
Which are not?
Be specific.

Except this is a little different. Let me draw you a more accurate picture of what you're doing: it's as if you claimed an entire forest sprouted in your yard overnight.

Only it's not a forest; it's a weed.
And only it's not exactly in *your* yard; it's in your neighbor's back lawn.
And it didn't actually sprout overnight, it took two weeks to grow.

That is what you're doing.

Johnny Skeptic

If you mean "what items can be shown to directly contradict the Bible's claims that King Nebuchadnezzar and Pontius Pilate were real people?," the correct answer is that there are not any such items. It is not unusual for people to record ordinary secular history that happens where they live. Would you expect that ancient people would have recorded ordinary secular history that happened where they did not live?

What items can you show that contradict the claims in the Koran that Muhammed was a real person?

What items can you show that contradict hundreds of widely accepted secular historical claims that are found in many other religous books, and many non-religious books.

Skeptics historians rejects all claim of miracles in all religious books, not just the Bible.

If a God exists, and wanted to convince people that at least one being exists who is able to create new planets, he could easily do that.

Ezkerraldean

perfectly sums up creationism in general.

Dargo

There is a good possibility at least one person at the Luxor casino was suffering from some form of illness when you were there. That proves the Egyptian plaques are true. It's only a slight exageration with some details not quite right.

makerowner

Right, and when they put a 'Do Not Disturb' sign on their door, the cleaning service "passed over" their room, proving the bible true yet again. :Cheeky: