New series by Aron Ra: Why there was no Noachian Flood

[AV1611VET]

I would like to ask first however, do you believe in a literal, inerrant Bible?

Affirmative.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Affirmative.

Flat Earth and all.

 

[AV1611VET]

Flat Earth and all.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'and all,' but flat earth is a negative.

It gets pwned by my Boolean standards.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not sure what you mean by 'and all,' but flat earth is a negative.

It gets pwned by my Boolean standards.

The question, not aimed at you, was whether the poster addressed believed in a literal inerrant Bible.

The Bible only refers to the Earth as being flat, in both word and deed.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Bible only refers to the Earth as being flat, in both word and deed.

Really?

Genesis 1:2a And the earth was without form,

 

[Subduction Zone]

Really?

Genesis 1:2a And the earth was without form,

Yes, we all know that the Bible has endless self contradictions in it. But that is not a flat Earth verse.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, we all know that the Bible has endless self contradictions in it. But that is not a flat Earth verse.

So which one is the contradiction?

The one in Genesis, or the one scientists use diabolically?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So which one is the contradiction?

The one in Genesis, or the one scientists use diabolically?

AV, if you make false claims about others I will merely point out that sin of yours. Scientists did not do anything "diabolically".

 

[AV1611VET]

AV, if you make false claims about others I will merely point out that sin of yours.

Get to it then.

I'll give you a lot of sins to point out.

But just remember: for every letter on the keyboard that points to me, there are twenty five pointing back.

Scientists did not do anything "diabolically".

Science today has close parallels with witchcraft.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Get to it then.

I'll give you a lot of sins to point out.

But just remember: for every letter on the keyboard that points to me, there are twenty five pointing back.

Science today has close parallels with witchcraft.

More sins and nonsense.

Try again.

You have to at least try to be honest. You can do it.

 

[AV1611VET]

You have to at least try to be honest.

As I asked before, so shall I ask again.

If I was, would you even know it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

As I asked before, so shall I ask again.

If I was, would you even know it?

Yes.

 

[Aman777]

Flat Earth and all.

Amen, since the flood was only 15 cubits (22.5) deep when it covered the highest mountains on Adam's Flat Earth. Genesis 7:20 Can you tell us it's diameter in comparison to Everest's 29,029 foot elevation on the present Earth?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Amen, since the flood was only 15 cubits (22.5) deep when it covered the highest mountains on Adam's Flat Earth. Genesis 7:20 Can you tell us it's diameter in comparison to Everest's 29,029 foot elevation on the present Earth?

Please, your fantasy world never existed.

 

[Aman777]

Please, your fantasy world never existed.

Sure it did UNLESS you can describe the process of changing prehistoric people into Humans (descendants of Adam). There is ONLY one way to introduce higher intelligence into beings who descended from Apes. Hint: Birds and Bees. Failure to understand this process leads to believing the biggest Lie in the history of Humankind, the False ToE.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sure it did UNLESS you can describe the process of changing prehistoric people into Humans (descendants of Adam). There is ONLY one way to introduce higher intelligence into beings who descended from Apes. Hint: Birds and Bees. Failure to understand this process leads to believing the biggest Lie in the history of Humankind, the False ToE.

Been there, done that.

Why can't you face the fact that your claim of sudden civilization has been refuted many times over?

 

[Aman777]

Been there, done that.

Why can't you face the fact that your claim of sudden civilization has been refuted many times over?

Because it hasn't and you cannot produce ANY post where ANY person has refuted (proven me wrong) either Scripturally scientifically or historically. Those who CLAIM to have refuted me are guilty of violating the ninth commandment. Where's the beef? or should I say the confirming post? Amen?

 

[Queller]

Sure it did UNLESS you can describe the process of changing prehistoric people into Humans (descendants of Adam). There is ONLY one way to introduce higher intelligence into beings who descended from Apes.

You're assuming what you wish to prove.

 

[Gene2memE]

Because it hasn't and you cannot produce ANY post where ANY person has refuted (proven me wrong) either Scripturally scientifically or historically.

Ohh, I can, I can!

Would you like links to earlier posts on this forum, popular science and/or history articles, or just the original studies themselves?

The fact that you don't think you've been thoroughly refuted, doesn't mean you haven't been.

 

[_-iconoclast-_]

We have been over this. Your prejudices will not allow you to properly study your Bible. If one can't own up to obvious flaws then one is prejudiced beyond reason. One cannot properly study the book if you can't be honest with yourself.

Ok.


We know my belief system. Wanna hav some fun?


What flaws in your belief system are you aware of sir?

Do you have some form of spirituality?

What is your opinion of the supernatural?

Do you need the verses? They are in the book of Luke. He used the false excuse that a census required Joseph to go to his ancestral home. Of course censuses never require that to start with. The author of Luke failed there. That is counterproductive. In Luke 2 he tells how Quirnius ordered a census. The date of that is well known. It was in the year 6 CE:


Census of Quirinius - Wikipedia


But he also said Jesus was born in the reign of Herod, read Luke 1. Also Matthew has Jesus born during Herod's reign. Herod died in 4 BCE. That is an error that no apologist has been able to answer.

Hey hey.


Have a read


https://www.jashow.org/articles/jesus/christmas/was-luke-wrong-about-the-census-under-quirinius/

Tell me what you think?

By the way, you are not using the Socratic method. You do not understand that. That is used when the questioner knows more than the person being asked. It is the other way around here. You are continually shown to be ignorant not only about science, by about your own Bibl

What happens when both parties believe they know more than the other?

Does this mean there is no socratic method or is it a 'great socratic method'?


The Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is a form of cooperative argumentativedialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions