Missing link was a lie

[dad]

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.

So obvious, you forgot to mention the alluded to so called contradictions!!! What a scream. Lurkers, have a laugh on me.

 

[dad]

Bricks can be broken.

Not spiritual also bricks.

 

[dad]

How old are you, dad?

Older than most tomatoes.

 

[BananaSlug]

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.
​

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?

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?

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?


​

Nope, conjecture.

Really? Which part is conjecture, the deitification of early kings or the fact that later pharaohs were considered to be living gods?

OK, ...so? That doesn't wave away spirits in the bible or Egypt, or anywhere else.

But it does provide evidence of our capability to glorify prominent historical figures.

So you don't know. OK.

Neither do you. Okay.

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.

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?


​

"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?????

I am claiming Horus is a deified human or made up.


​

It lists spirits, so it is a valuable record for that. Not for dates.

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?

Really? Example?

Shuar
Machiguenga
Hmong
Yagua

Here's four. Do you want more?


​

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??

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.


​

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 (the continents are still moving), 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?

Plate tectonics, volcanoes, and magnetosphere.



​

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?

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?


​

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??

All I want is an explanation as to how "past state" pillow lava would form. It's not too hard for you is it?
​

 

[Split Rock]

So obvious, you forgot to mention the alluded to so called contradictions!!!

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.

What a scream. Lurkers, have a laugh on me.

F.Y.I. The lurkers are laughing at you, not with 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.

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.

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?

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!

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 am not sure what creationists argue. Do you really think the spook lists are reliable, and used much by academia, or science?


​

Really? Which part is conjecture, the deitification of early kings or the fact that later pharaohs were considered to be living gods?

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.

But it does provide evidence of our capability to glorify prominent historical figures.

Doesn't matter. JFK didn't walk on water.

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?​

For who, Cleopatra? Or the spook kings? You need to work your way back on actual info.


​

I am claiming Horus is a deified human or made up.

You know this...how? Or do you claim stuff not having a clue?


​

So by your argument the Bible is not a valuable record for dates either.

No, that sets the very calendar of man.

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?​

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.


​

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.

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.


​

Plate tectonics (the continents are still moving), volcanoes, and 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...




​

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 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?

 

[BananaSlug]

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.

A chronology can go from last to first. If the the only way you get to claim your "time of spirits" is through some unknown scribe or other unreliable source, then you really have no case at all. 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.

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!

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.

I am not sure what creationists argue. Do you really think the spook lists are reliable, and used much by academia, or science?

Yes. Why are you suddenly refering to the Turin list as the "spook list"?

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.

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?

Doesn't matter. JFK didn't walk on water.

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.

For who, Cleopatra? Or the spook kings? You need to work your way back on actual info.

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?

You know this...how? Or do you claim stuff not having a clue?

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?

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.

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

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?

Well, if we swish over North America, and Africa, would we not generate some heat deep down?

What does that mean?

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.

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.

No, they are merely residual movements, many creos feel. Of course there is minor movement in the present.

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".

Volcanoes? Well, if we slapped the continents around like legos several thousand years ago, would not heat still exist?

I thought you said there was no heat in the past state?

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?

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.

Lawrence W. Morley, Frederick John Vine and Drummond Hoyle Matthews made the connection to seafloor spreading in the Morley-Vine-Matthews hypothesis[2][3] which soon led to the development of the theory of plate tectonics.

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.

Almost like we lost our former state alternator, and the present state car is running on battery power...

See above and try to argue against that...

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?

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.

 

[dad]

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.

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.

F.Y.I. The lurkers are laughing at you, not with you.

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.

 

[dad]

..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? Looks like the list is less than complete..

Some disagreement exists as to whether the fragments were even arranged in the right place!

"constantly disagreeing on how much was missing and how to put the pieces together. It was not until 1938 that Guilio Farina succeeded in making a definitive restoration of the document which was then preserved between two pieces of glass, although there was still some disagreement about his reconstruction....

After all, "after Drovetti threw it into a box and took it back toEurope,where he sold it the king od Sardinia, it was nothing but a pile of jumbled fragments."

New fragments of the Turin King Llst: Fresh light on the pharaohs:

Now a quick look at the actual rulers and dates they ruled seems to yield bizarre results?!

" Djehuty (Thoth), 7,726 years"

Turin Kings List

You really think this is good for dating? Seriously?

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.

Really? So tell us about the spook that ruled seven thousand plus years..

Yes. Why are you suddenly refering to the Turin list as the "spook list"?

It contains spirits! Boo.

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?

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.

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.

How would you know what was ascribed to Mohammad or Buddha never happened? Why do you claim such things??

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?

Getting from cleopatra to the first rulers is a stretch. You have no reliable dating to do that.

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?

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.

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

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.

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?

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?

What does that mean?

It means if we rapidly slide a continent hundreds of miles, we will get heat...hence molten rock.

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.

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!

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".

Yes, and there will be an earthquake that will level every tower on the planet one day. No news there. A few centimeters is a small amount.

I thought you said there was no heat in the past state?

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!

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.

No doubt. But no evidence that said reversals happened in this present state! Moot.

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.

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.

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.

I don't know it was done in a past state. You need to have details. I deal in facts.

 

[Split Rock]

The clues from the evidence support a different state. Such as the Dodwell data.

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.

But nothing tells us directly what state the universe fabric was in. Science just assumes it is like it was. That is empty speculation.

All the assumptions and empty speculation are on your end.
1. God wrote the Bible
2. The "Split" divided the physical from the spiritual
3. The earth's core is made of spiritual matter, whatever that is
4. Dad's interpretation of scripture is inerrant
5. Anything that contradict's dad's inerrant interpretation of scripture is wrong.
6. Only dad can use physical evidence to tell us about the past
7. Dad's wild speculation about "the Split" is cutting edge theology and science
8. Lurkers are not laughing at dad
etc., etc.

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.

When did I mention a list? Putting words in my mouth, now?

 

[dad]

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.

No. AAnyone that can read can see that a different future is certain, and a distant past was similar.

All the assumptions and empty speculation are on your end.
1. God wrote the Bible

Not negotiable. Christians believe that. For good reasons.

2. The "Split" divided the physical from the spiritual

Basically, they are separate in this temporal state.

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.

4. Dad's interpretation of scripture is inerrant

At least it is a believers take.

5. Anything that contradict's dad's inerrant interpretation of scripture is wrong.

Trashy patronization.

When did I mention a list? Putting words in my mouth, now?

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.

 

[Split Rock]

No. AAnyone that can read can see that a different future is certain, and a distant past was similar.

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?

Not negotiable. Christians believe that. For good reasons.

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.

Basically, they are separate in this temporal state.

Basically: empty speculation

Seems likely, if we believe the bible, and since science has no clue, it is a safe bet.

Not "likely" at all: empty speculation

At least it is a believers take.

And it is: empty speculation

Trashy patronization.

But its true, isn't it?

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.

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.

 

[dad]

I assume you saying that the future will be similar to the distant past. ..

Yes, that is what the bible indicates. There are a lot of real similarities.

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.

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.

Basically: empty speculation

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.

Not "likely" at all: empty speculation

No, if it were a weak stance, you could present a bible case against it. Or something...

And it is: 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.

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.

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.

 

[Split Rock]

Yes, that is what the bible indicates. There are a lot of real similarities.

Real similarities? Involving what hasn't even happened yet? Get a grip.

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.

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 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.

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, if it were a weak stance, you could present a bible case against it. Or something...

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.

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.

So you claim. You cannot back it up.

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.

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.
B. All the evidence supports your Non-PO Past state nonsense..
You Are Contradicting Yourself!
Got it now, Einstein?

 

[dad]

Real similarities? Involving what hasn't even happened yet? Get a grip.

Yes, for us it hasn't happened. However, New Jerusalem was prepared for us. It is new heavens ready. The similarities in the biblical descriptions of the far past, and the future are stunning. The tree of life is in both, as is different rate plant growth and light. Spirits also are in both. The present is the odd man out. Absolutely.

Isa 46:10 -Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
Joh 8:58 -Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

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.

God wrote the words through men. You just can't see beyond the flesh.

It is not "immutable" fact because you say so....

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.

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.

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.

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.

I never claimed that. We know plenty about the past from physical evidence, tell the truth! What science can't know from things like a fossilized animal, is what state the universe was in at the time. It merely assumes. No repeating can help you there, you are beat.

B. All the evidence supports your Non-PO Past state nonsense..
You Are Contradicting Yourself!
Got it now, Einstein?

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.

 

[Split Rock]

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?"

 

[driewerf]

Originally Posted by dad

Fossils? We have a record of all sorts of hyper evolved from the kinds creatures​

Originally Posted by driewerf

Do we? Then show me that record​

Easy. It is called the fossil record!!! You kidding????

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.

Archeological evidence, geological strata, astronomical data? It all supports a different state past! Don't throw out such vague quasi claims.

Jerusalem is real, Ur was found to have existed, Herod was real, etc etc. Geology? The continents separated.

I don't deny the existence neither of Jerusalem nor that of Ur or Herod. But how are these supports of a different past?

Really! Strata? It was laid down as we see!

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.

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.

 

[driewerf]

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.

The sacred nature of the Koran is not negtiable for muslims.
The sacred nature of the Talmud is not negotiable for Jews.

There are no sacred texts. There are only people who are affraid to get their illusions in their favourit book lost.

 

[driewerf]

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.

But since I don't believe the bible (and for good reasons) it's no safe bet at all.
And, as a matter of fact, science has a clue and has astimated that the core of the earth is made of iron and some nickel.

 

[dad]

I don't know what you mean by "hyper evolvde, but i 'd liked you to show me the record of this hyperevolution.

It's called 'the fossil record'! Hyper evolution means evolving in a very different, and fast way. It started from created kinds, not a pond.

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.

The fossil record is the only record man has, other than the bible. There, we have all kinds on the ark at a certain time, and only so much time for all the evolving to happen. In other words, we see that there were changes, but we have only assumed that they took place slowly, as now.

I don't deny the existence neither of Jerusalem nor that of Ur or Herod. But how are these supports of a different past?

They are examples of the veracity of the record that is the bible. Part of that record is the future and far past.

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.

The different tree growth and human life spans, and light, and matter, and etc etc, all point to real differences in the record.