- Jan 17, 2005
- 44,905
- 1,259
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
So obvious, you forgot to mention the alluded to so called contradictions!!! What a scream. Lurkers, have a laugh on me.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
So obvious, you forgot to mention the alluded to so called contradictions!!! What a scream. Lurkers, have a laugh on me.That's hardly a "trick." They are obvious. The trick is continuing to try and make sense of dad's fantasitic ramblings while having the patience to argue with someone with the mentality of a brick.
Not spiritual also bricks.Bricks can be broken.
Older than most tomatoes.How old are you, dad?
It does not matter if it is the years of reign or the years of their life. It is still useful in making a chronology. Didn't James Ussher do the same with the chronologies in the Bible to get the 4004 B.C. creation date? What is the difference between the two?Dates are there? Who wrote them, the spook kings? Guess they didn't use BC. Worthless. They don't even know if a year was a year of reign (assuming the guy or spook existed to begin with) or of a life...etc. No good for dating.
So if the Palermo stone and Turin list are not reliable for dates, how can they be reliable for any other information? Don't creationists typically argument that if one part of the Bible is false, the whole thing is suspect?I don't, thanks, that would be insane. They are not reliable. Why do you think any date that so called science thinks is worth it's salt, is a decay date?
Nope, conjecture.
OK, ...so? That doesn't wave away spirits in the bible or Egypt, or anywhere else.
So you don't know. OK.
So now you agree that the geneaology of Christ is wrong? Cleopatra's reign ended in 31 B.C. with Roman occupation. All you have to do is start with Cleopatra and work your way backward with the years of reign for each king. Cleopatra to Ahmose is 1500 years (31 B.C.-1550 B.C.). In any case, why are the dates not reliable?Nope. No records that are reliable, with dates. Forget working back, just look at the guy supposedly last on the list, and the date, and basis. End of story. It is shot out of the water.
I am claiming Horus is a deified human or made up."Horus is one of the oldest and most significant of the deities in the Ancient Egyptian religion who was worshipped ..."
Horus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So your 'reliable record has a deity handing down the throne to some guy named Menes. You really wanna run with that?????
It lists spirits, so it is a valuable record for that. Not for dates.
So what causes rock to be molten? According to "present state" science, molten rock is caused by the intense pressure caused in the mantle and core. Another line of evidence for our molten core is the fact that we have a magnetosphere.Nope! WQrong. That is a fable. No science exists to back that up, it is assumed. Not known. No one ever got down more than several miles. Of course there is molten rock and heat under parts of the earth. But how deep, is the issue??
Plate tectonics (the continents are still moving), volcanoes, and magnetosphere.If we rapidly moved continents apart, we would expect heat. Simple. The hot core is a lie, far as I am concerned. I don't believe it. Why should I???
Plate tectonics, volcanoes, and magnetosphere.Look at the lying basis for the claim. Imaginary old ages, and some lying dream formation of the earth. Get over it, it was created by God. Why would He make it hot? Any scripture for that?
One of the features of the "present state" pillow lava is that it cools quickly. How would it not be exclusive to water cooling? Could you provide a scientific explanation rather than making stuff up?One of the features of former state matter is that it cooled quickly, and possibly had a different melt point. So what you describe woulld not necessarily be exclusive to water cooling?
All I want is an explanation as to how "past state" pillow lava would form. It's not too hard for you is it?Well, first we must have a need for it to do so. That means having evidence it was pre split. You haven't established that the Aussie formation was immune from being pushed up in the continental separation. Also, that there either was or was not water covering the formation in the desert. If there was, and it was after the split, why not let sleeping pillow lava dogs lay??
Why mention what is painfully obvious, dad? Just for you, however, I could mention the fact you continue to claim that we can learn nothing about the past by looking at the physical evidence and then turn around and claim all the physical evidence supports your merged past nonsense.So obvious, you forgot to mention the alluded to so called contradictions!!!
F.Y.I. The lurkers are laughing at you, not with you.What a scream. Lurkers, have a laugh on me.
It does matter. Either they mean something, or they do not. Also, a chronology has to have a starting point. Your source lists spirits as that point. If the only way you get to date your time of spirits is through some unknown scribe, or other unreliable source, then you really have no case at all.It does not matter if it is the years of reign or the years of their life. It is still useful in making a chronology.
The difference is in the records. The records of the Jews were astounding, and accurate, and sacredly preserved. Without a Spirit, his chronology is no good. The only reason the poor lad had any fame or dates, was because he based it on good stuff. Not based it on unknown scribblers, and shakey lists, that were far less than clear. In the bible, we can come close, because the margin for interpretation is small. The dad then the son, then his son, and on down the line, were the basis for the record. Also, rather than present itself as science, that does not include spirits, it is based on God's word. You want to pretend it is science, and also toss in some spooks dishonestly, since science doesn't believe in them!Didn't James Ussher do the same with the chronologies in the Bible to get the 4004 B.C. creation date? What is the difference between the two?
So if the Palermo stone and Turin list are not reliable for dates, how can they be reliable for any other information? Don't creationists typically argument that if one part of the Bible is false, the whole thing is suspect?
Really? Which part is conjecture, the deitification of early kings or the fact that later pharaohs were considered to be living gods?
But it does provide evidence of our capability to glorify prominent historical figures.
Neither do you. Okay.
So now you agree that the geneaology of Christ is wrong? Cleopatra's reign ended in 31 B.C. with Roman occupation. All you have to do is start with Cleopatra and work your way backward with the years of reign for each king. Cleopatra to Ahmose is 1500 years (31 B.C.-1550 B.C.). In any case, why are the dates not reliable?
I am claiming Horus is a deified human or made up.
So by your argument the Bible is not a valuable record for dates either.
In any case, why is it not a valuable record for dates? Because you disagree with it?
Shuar
Machiguenga
Hmong
Yagua
Here's four. Do you want more?
So what causes rock to be molten? According to "present state" science, molten rock is caused by the intense pressure caused in the mantle and core. Another line of evidence for our molten core is the fact that we have a magnetosphere.
No, they are merely residual movements, many creos feel. Of course there is minor movement in the present. Volcanoes? Well, if we slapped the continents around like legos several thousand years ago, would not heat still exist? Add some residual movements to the mix, and..voila! Magnetosphere? That is grist for my mill. I mean, hasn't the magnetic field got weaker since science came to exist some hundreds of years ago? Almost like we lost our former state alternator, and the present state car is running on battery power...Plate tectonics (the continents are still moving), volcanoes, and magnetosphere.
All I want is an explanation as to how "past state" pillow lava would form. It's not too hard for you is it?
It does matter. Either they mean something, or they do not. Also, a chronology has to have a starting point. Your source lists spirits as that point. If the only way you get to date your time of spirits is through some unknown scribe, or other unreliable source, then you really have no case at all.
It's nice to see how quickly you backtrack. The Egyptians kept equally astounding records, especially since we have more original Egyptian records than original Hebrew manuscripts. If anything, we have more evidence for Egyptian kings than evidence for Hebrew genealogies.The difference is in the records. The records of the Jews were astounding, and accurate, and sacredly preserved. Without a Spirit, his chronology is no good. The only reason the poor lad had any fame or dates, was because he based it on good stuff. Not based it on unknown scribblers, and shakey lists, that were far less than clear. In the bible, we can come close, because the margin for interpretation is small. The dad then the son, then his son, and on down the line, were the basis for the record. Also, rather than present itself as science, that does not include spirits, it is based on God's word. You want to pretend it is science, and also toss in some spooks dishonestly, since science doesn't believe in them!
I am not sure what creationists argue. Do you really think the spook lists are reliable, and used much by academia, or science?
The part that dates anything. The bible seems to indicate that spirits were among men back in the day. So I can't rule it out, that some spirits lived in early Egypt, as the record indicates. Finding out when is the only issue here.
Doesn't matter. JFK didn't walk on water.
For who, Cleopatra? Or the spook kings? You need to work your way back on actual info.
You know this...how? Or do you claim stuff not having a clue?
All we need is the one furthest back. Then you need a way to date it. You can't follow the silly lists for actual dates, and I am surprised you seem to think you can.
Well, if we swish over North America, and Africa, would we not generate some heat deep down?
I mean the silly plate theory has some basis, however dumb it is. How far down can you prove the hot stuff actually is? 100 miles? Or..? That is nothing, like the outer layer of skin on your body.
No, they are merely residual movements, many creos feel. Of course there is minor movement in the present.
Volcanoes? Well, if we slapped the continents around like legos several thousand years ago, would not heat still exist?
Add some residual movements to the mix, and..voila! Magnetosphere? That is grist for my mill. I mean, hasn't the magnetic field got weaker since science came to exist some hundreds of years ago?
Almost like we lost our former state alternator, and the present state car is running on battery power...
Well, first I would like to know it did form pre split. If the Aussie formation was pushed up a bit in the continental move, or some such, maybe all we would have is heated precambrian rock, or whatever. You need details. Why would I concentrate, or anyone else, for that matter, on how the eternal state matter would make stuff, unless we knew, stuff was made then?
The clues from the evidence support a different state. Such as the Dodwell data. But nothing tells us directly what state the universe fabric was in. Science just assumes it is like it was. That is empty speculation.Why mention what is painfully obvious, dad? Just for you, however, I could mention the fact you continue to claim that we can learn nothing about the past by looking at the physical evidence and then turn around and claim all the physical evidence supports your merged past nonsense.
Except the context for the quote was in someone claiming to have a list of contradictions from me. I don't see it, do you? That is funny.F.Y.I. The lurkers are laughing at you, not with you.
Really? Looks like the list is less than complete....Why do you use such arguments against me when they apply to you? Both the Palermo Stone and Turin lists give the same dates of reign.
Really? So tell us about the spook that ruled seven thousand plus years..It's nice to see how quickly you backtrack. The Egyptians kept equally astounding records, especially since we have more original Egyptian records than original Hebrew manuscripts. If anything, we have more evidence for Egyptian kings than evidence for Hebrew genealogies.
It contains spirits! Boo.Yes. Why are you suddenly refering to the Turin list as the "spook list"?
The unknown scribbler is hardly a reliable source for actual dates. Especially not near the beginning of Egypt, which likely would be right after the flood time.So you think that the Egyptian records give false dates for their kings? Just going by the dates of rule from Cleopatra in 31 B.C. to Menes in ~3000 B.C. we get slightly under 3,000 years of Egyptian dynasties. Why would the Egyptians lie?
How would you know what was ascribed to Mohammad or Buddha never happened? Why do you claim such things??Buddha did. It does matter. We have a capability to glorify prominent historical figures and ascribe to them certain abilities and works that never really happened. George Washington and the cherry tree. Robert Johnson.
Getting from cleopatra to the first rulers is a stretch. You have no reliable dating to do that.Going by the dates of reign from Cleopatra to Ahmose is 1550 years. From Ahmose to Menes is another 1550 years. Why would the dates of reign in Egyptian records be wrong?
So now you claim that your source makes things up! OK. I have no reason to assume that, despite their weak records on years, and even kings, that they lied outright. I give them the benefit of the doubt, and assume they are merely stupido.Do you believe a child when they say there is a monster in their closet? People make things up all of the time. People believe in scientology, Kabala, and horoscopes. People make stuff up and others believe it. How do you know Horus was actually a spirit?
Because they are fragmentary, and ridiculous records, maybe made by some insane scribbler for all we know. He was unknown. Some kings are unknown, or erased, some have silly years marked, and etc etc.Why? Why can't the list be used for dates? We can start with Cleopatra and work our way back to Menes.
In reference to this:
Shuar
Machiguenga
Hmong
Yagua
In what way do they belive that? Do they think their mayor is a ghost? Or, like bible believers, do they merely realize that spirits inhabit people?You had asked me to name some cultures that believe spirits still live among men. I have provided four. Would you like for me to list some more?
It means if we rapidly slide a continent hundreds of miles, we will get heat...hence molten rock.What does that mean?
Right, however, how do seismic waves react when they encounter something that is also spiritual? For all I know, they behave as they would for liquid up here.That means if it is spiritual material down thar, all seismic readings are no better than tea leaves! They do not know...really. They have godless religious assumptions, based on nothing, repeat nothing at all!Seismic measurements show that the core is divided into two parts, a solid inner core with a radius of ~1,220 km and a liquid outer core extending beyond it to a radius of ~3,400 km. The solid inner core was discovered in 1936 by Inge Lehmann.
The Cocos plate is moving at a speed of 8.6cm/year. I'm sure both Haiti and Chile would agree that what they felt was "minor movement".
No. I said that the heat was not enough to kill life, and that it was not retained that long. However, remember that the continental separation was likely a result of the split! That means at least by the time it was complete, or near complete, we were right here in this state! So, we would get some heat, depending on how long stuff moved, and how far, in this state!I thought you said there was no heat in the past state?
No doubt. But no evidence that said reversals happened in this present state! Moot.We have evidence that the magnetic field has changed several times in the past.
Past field reversals can be and have been recorded in the "frozen" ferromagnetic (or more accurately, ferrimagnetic) minerals of solidified sedimentary deposits or cooled volcanic flows on land. Originally, however, the past record of geomagnetic reversals was first noticed by observing the magnetic stripe "anomalies" on the ocean floor.
We don't know that. Not any longer than we observed it. How fast the sea floor spread when continents were racing apart in the split is another matter, than how fast man saw them move for a few hundred years.Given that the sea floor spreads at a relatively constant rate, this results in broadly evident substrate "stripes" from which the past magnetic field polarity can be inferred by looking at the data gathered from towing a magnetometer along the sea floor. However, because no existing unsubducted sea floor (or sea floor thrust onto continental plates, such as in the case of ophiolites) is much older than about 180 million years (Ma) in age, other methods are necessary for detecting older reversals.
All I want is an explanation as to how pillow lava would form in the "different state" past. You seem to have given up on giving me an explanation for "past state" geologic folding. I'll take that as defeat #1 for you.
There you go again. Make up your mind. Or are you claiming that only you (God's Infallible Little Echo) can decern evidence that tells us about the past? Considering your overwelming hubris, I am guessing yes.The clues from the evidence support a different state. Such as the Dodwell data.
All the assumptions and empty speculation are on your end.But nothing tells us directly what state the universe fabric was in. Science just assumes it is like it was. That is empty speculation.
When did I mention a list? Putting words in my mouth, now?Except the context for the quote was in someone claiming to have a list of contradictions from me. I don't see it, do you? That is funny.
There you go again. Make up your mind. Or are you claiming that only you (God's Infallible Little Echo) can decern evidence that tells us about the past? Considering your overwelming hubris, I am guessing yes.
Not negotiable. Christians believe that. For good reasons.All the assumptions and empty speculation are on your end.
1. God wrote the Bible
2. The "Split" divided the physical from the spiritual
Seems likely, if we believe the bible, and since science has no clue, it is a safe bet.3. The earth's core is made of spiritual matter, whatever that is
At least it is a believers take.4. Dad's interpretation of scripture is inerrant
5. Anything that contradict's dad's inerrant interpretation of scripture is wrong.
You quaoted me, when I was responding to some poster that made a claim that I had a list of contradictions. They failed to put up, so you can...well, you know.When did I mention a list? Putting words in my mouth, now?
I assume you saying that the future will be similar to the distant past. If this is sooooooo obvious, then why are you still Dad's Lonely Church of One?No. AAnyone that can read can see that a different future is certain, and a distant past was similar.
The Bible was written by MEN. "The Gospel According to Mark," was supposed to have been written by... ready?... Mark... not God. Most Christians believe it was inspired by God. Only Evangelicals and Fundamentalist Christians pretend it was written by God.Not negotiable. Christians believe that. For good reasons.
Basically: empty speculationBasically, they are separate in this temporal state.
Not "likely" at all: empty speculationSeems likely, if we believe the bible, and since science has no clue, it is a safe bet.
And it is: empty speculationAt least it is a believers take.
But its true, isn't it?Trashy patronization.
I am not responsible for what anyone else claims, nor does quoting you imply I am supporting what someone else claims (not sure where you get that twisted logic from??). So unless you can show me where I Claimed to have a list, you can...well you know.You quaoted me, when I was responding to some poster that made a claim that I had a list of contradictions. They failed to put up, so you can...well, you know.
Yes, that is what the bible indicates. There are a lot of real similarities.I assume you saying that the future will be similar to the distant past. ..
The Bible was written by MEN. "The Gospel According to Mark," was supposed to have been written by... ready?... Mark... not God. Most Christians believe it was inspired by God. Only Evangelicals and Fundamentalist Christians pretend it was written by God.
No, it is immutable fact. There are no spirits that are kings on earth, and no spirits marry women. History as well as the bible clearly indicate a past mingling of actual spirits. If we look at after the flood, we will still see spirits, such as the ones that came as men, to destroy Sodom, but they just visited. In the future, we also will not just visit spirits, we will live with God and angels.Basically: empty speculation
No, if it were a weak stance, you could present a bible case against it. Or something...Not "likely" at all: empty speculation
Rock solid bible 101, and science together. Science really does only deal in this present state, and the bible really does tell of more in the past and future.And it is: empty speculation
Then deal with the context, if you don't want to misrepresent the truth of what you snip. There was a claim of contradictions, yet it wasn't backed up, just echoed.I am not responsible for what anyone else claims, nor does quoting you imply I am supporting what someone else claims (not sure where you get that twisted logic from??). So unless you can show me where I Claimed to have a list, you can...well you know.
Yes, that is what the bible indicates. There are a lot of real similarities.
No, it is not the same. Repeating the creationist mantra isn't going to change that. Men wrote the Bible. Men interpret the Bible. Men are fallible.Same thing. If God inspired it, then He is responsible for it. Jesus said it was impossible for the scripture to fail. Men can't do that.
It is not "immutable" fact because you say so. I keep asking, but you dodge, weave and ignore me. Why are you a Lonley Church of One, if this is all so obvious and "immutable?"No, it is immutable fact. There are no spirits that are kings on earth, and no spirits marry women. History as well as the bible clearly indicate a past mingling of actual spirits. If we look at after the flood, we will still see spirits, such as the ones that came as men, to destroy Sodom, but they just visited. In the future, we also will not just visit spirits, we will live with God and angels.
I have presented a bible case against your flawed interpretation of "the Split" over and over again. You may like to repeat yourself (since that is all you can do) but I do not.No, if it were a weak stance, you could present a bible case against it. Or something...
So you claim. You cannot back it up.Rock solid bible 101, and science together. Science really does only deal in this present state, and the bible really does tell of more in the past and future.
You want me to repeat myself some more, don't you? One last time.Then deal with the context, if you don't want to misrepresent the truth of what you snip. There was a claim of contradictions, yet it wasn't backed up, just echoed.
Real similarities? Involving what hasn't even happened yet? Get a grip.
God wrote the words through men. You just can't see beyond the flesh.No, it is not the same. Repeating the creationist mantra isn't going to change that. Men wrote the Bible. Men interpret the Bible. Men are fallible.
No, it is a fact because the descriptions of the future and past simply are different than this present. No way round it, the evidence is with me.It is not "immutable" fact because you say so....
Nothing worthy of recollection. What, questioning what one verse meant when it says the earth was divided in that day?? You can't do that, because it is not known, and, when the rest of the book is considered, I win hands down.I have presented a bible case against your flawed interpretation of "the Split" over and over again. You may like to repeat yourself (since that is all you can do) but I do not.
You want me to repeat myself some more, don't you? One last time.
Everytime you claim:
A. No one can use physical evidence to determine anything about what happened in the past.
No, the bible and history, and observations of man are evidence. They support a different past. All evidence from science agrees, or at least is unable to say a thing against it. That's a win.B. All the evidence supports your Non-PO Past state nonsense..
You Are Contradicting Yourself!
Got it now, Einstein?
Originally Posted by driewerfOriginally Posted by dadFossils? We have a record of all sorts of hyper evolved from the kinds creaturesDo we? Then show me that record
I don't know what you mean by "hyper evolvde, but i 'd liked you to show me the record of this hyperevolution. Because the fossil record is a proof of evolution. I 'll never deny that. The point is you claim we have record (apparantly the fossil record) of hyper evolution. So show me the record.Easy. It is called the fossil record!!! You kidding????
Archeological evidence, geological strata, astronomical data? It all supports a different state past! Don't throw out such vague quasi claims.
I don't deny the existence neither of Jerusalem nor that of Ur or Herod. But how are these supports of a different past?Jerusalem is real, Ur was found to have existed, Herod was real, etc etc. Geology? The continents separated.
Really! Strata? It was laid down as we see!
Same thing for your other allegations. How do they support your alleged different past?Astronomical? The moon never came from an imaginary smash up derby of some mysterious planet x, where the dust up coalesced into the moon, as science dreams! The universe was not in a speck! The majority, some 90 plus percent of our universe that is unseen, is NOT dark matter! Etc etc etc.
The sacred nature of the Koran is not negtiable for muslims.No. AAnyone that can read can see that a different future is certain, and a distant past was similar.
Not negotiable. Christians believe that. For good reasons.
But since I don't believe the bible (and for good reasons) it's no safe bet at all.3. The earth's core is made of spiritual matter, whatever that is
Seems likely, if we believe the bible, and since science has no clue, it is a safe bet.
I don't know what you mean by "hyper evolvde, but i 'd liked you to show me the record of this hyperevolution.
Because the fossil record is a proof of evolution. I 'll never deny that. The point is you claim we have record (apparantly the fossil record) of hyper evolution. So show me the record.
They are examples of the veracity of the record that is the bible. Part of that record is the future and far past.I don't deny the existence neither of Jerusalem nor that of Ur or Herod. But how are these supports of a different past?
The different tree growth and human life spans, and light, and matter, and etc etc, all point to real differences in the record.Same thing for your other allegations. How do they support your alleged different past?
Because, the one who comes up with vague claims is you.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?