Jump to content
Science Forums

Is Bible history fact or fiction?


eMTee

Recommended Posts

Salmon live both in fresh and salt water. I'm no ichthyologist, but I'd bet there are others which do the same, and there are any number of fish which thrive in brackish (lower salinity) water.

And the other 99%

 

Your attempts are extremely weak. You might want to look up "anecdotal".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the Creationists here certainly have something you don't: civility. Are you under the misguided impression that it is pleasant to read your diatribes?
Wow, it hasn't been this active around here since Freet. last visited. Freet. does know how to stir things up does't he. Freet., your the man.

Of course Bioboy is blocking me so he won't see it.

 

I do find it amusing that the first response to my first post here earlier, first in a long time, was the attack by Bioterrorist.

 

Don't fret, I will soon be gone.

 

"Back to the shadows again. Out where the injun's are your friend, where the grass is green and you can pee right into the stream, Back to the shadows again." (Firesign Theater)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can always say that God can do anything...he is not limited to science.

Ah yes, you can. It is meaningless, just empty platitudes, but you are welcome to say it all you like!

 

Just don't expect it to have any value in a science based discussion.

 

I take that back. It's value would be to show how meangless anyone espousing such a philosophy would be in a science based discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bible sets it up as it's Jesus saying it. (And until somone here actually provides ANY proof to support the existence of the biblical Jesus, instead of continuing to ignore the request, I need to keep using the disclaimers)

Flavius Josephus, 1st century Jewish historian.

 

http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-18.htm

In Chapter 3:3 - "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You post was clear, Inf. It looks like FrT can't read when he is on a rant like this. Probably too much spatter on his monitor.

 

Thank you Bio, I went back to read all the previous posts because I thought maybe I had misled someone. Freet is certainly an intelligent person, I'm surprised that he misunderstood me. In any case, even though we don't have to agree with his view on things, he's still a lot of fun to have around. You have to admit, he knows how to stir the pot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if you will read my last post over again you will see that that is exactly what I said.
Actually Christ's words are "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me". I think this would mean that it was God that was rejecting Christ, not the other way around.

You are implying that it was an action BY/ FROM god, "it was God that was rejecting Christ". Rather than the actual context of it, where it is Jesus rhetorically questioning god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me take the time to say

 

CONGRATS!!!! :eek:

:eek:

HEY IRISH! Glad to hear from you before I disappear again! Thanks for the congrats. I deserve them more than she does. I'm the lucky one. She has to put up with me. :-)

 

Though we both question the validty of marriage in the US if there are efforts to stop people in love from being allowed to use it as such.

 

Say hi to the kids, I am sure they miss reading me and hearing you yell back at my posts! :-)

 

Best wishes.

 

I'm outtta here, back into the Mystic! With my gypsy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flavius Josephus, 1st century Jewish historian.

All the old timers here are groaning. I can hear it now!

Oh I just had to have one more look. Why did I not just go home...

 

OK, read what I actually posted. Or if that just doesn't work for you, have someone read and explain it to you:

provide ONE valid contemporary eyewitness report to confirm the biblical stories of Jesus the Christ,

Josephus was BORN aprox 31CE. According to historical detail provided in the bible, it's mythical Jesus would have been born 3-7 BCE and thus died 26-30CE.

 

Please explain how Josephus could be an eyewitness to something that happened BEFORE he was BORN!

 

If that is not enough, I can rip the text you provided apart. (it can not be found in historical reference till over 200 years later amoung other problems.)

 

Care to try again. This time an ACTUAL "valid contemporary eyewitness report to confirm the biblical stories of Jesus the Christ"

 

But yes, this is as close as Christers can come to pretending there is historical support for the bible's Jesus existence. Pretty pathetic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, well, well. Look who came crawling back :eek:.

 

And it appears is leaving just as quickly, ah well, at least I have some new reading material. Glad to hear from you again :eek:. You need to learn to make your visits slightly more frequent, we all (almost all :eek:) still enjoy reading your posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do words mean nothing to you? The highlighted words below are not accidental, they are put in the text by the "scientists" in order to keep some amount of credibility, because they know that adding more concrete verbiage would nullify their credentials as "scientists."

 

From your "scientific" evidence":

From http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/macroevolution.html

--"Punctuated equilibrium theory proposes..."

--"Phyletic gradualism suggests..."

--"Species selection and species sorting theories claim..."

--"...macroevolution is thought to be..."

--"..synthesists claim...can be extrapolated to between species changes..."

--"...although some (eg, Gould 1989) think that the genomes..."

From http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC200.html

--"However, direct lineages are not required; they could not be verified even if found. What a transitional fossil is, in keeping with what the theory of evolution predicts..."

 

Funny. You say there is no evidence, I provide evidence, but because it is written in the language of science (i.e., nothing is 100% certain) you throw it away out of hand. You certainly are far from the open mind you claim to be.

-Will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Josephus was BORN aprox 31CE. According to historical detail provided in the bible, it's mythical Jesus would have been born 3-7 BCE and thus died 26-30CE.

Please explain how Josephus could be an eyewitness to something that happened BEFORE he was BORN!

Please explain how Jesus could be 33 when He died and have lived only 23 years by your dates?

 

I can play your silly game. How can I, at 41 years of age, write a biography of John F. Kennedy? Would it be valid? Certainly because he has surviving family, surviving co-workers and other contemporaries I could interview. Our libraries are full of such non-fiction books and even you would consider them authoritative.

 

Answer me this... who has written as an eyewitness about a single, solitary identifiable step of evolution? No one has ever been an eyewitness to the process whose altar you bow down to. You may not like them, but Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter and James were all contemporaries of Jesus and we still have their writings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please explain how Jesus could be 33 when he died and have lived only 23 years by your dates?

 

You know, we do also have a Math forum here...although I can't really prove addition.... "born 3-7 BCE and thus died 26-30CE" would mean 29 at the youngest and 37 at the oldest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting objection to Noah's flood, the Egyptian civilization's history stretches back to at least 3100 BC, well before the flood, through the old Kingdom 2700-2200 B.C. (which includes the flood) to the end of the new kingdom in 1087 B.C. Why didn't they notice a global flood? Edit: Why weren't they wiped out by this global flood?

-Will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...