- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,790
- 52,545
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
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.
The timing -- for starters."By looking at the civilisations that were conspicuisly unperterbed by a global flood - Damascus, the Nile, the whole of Asia, all show continuous habitation despite an alleged global flood. That counts as rather strong evidence against any Global Flood."
Why do those sentences demonstrate a misunderstand of the Flood?
Just to be clear, you seem to be writer, director, producer, actor, stunt double, and gaffer of your one man show, in your own little theater.Just to be clear, you don't constitute "you guys".
You're not a one-man show.
Damascus has been continually inhabited for 10,000 years, yet you believe the Earth has only came into existence around 6,000 years ago. So, you must also believe the Flood occurred some time in the past 6,000 years, probably 4,000 years ago - so Damascus was founded before the Flood, and hasn't been uninhabited.The timing -- for starters.
Yep, you've got the timing all wrong, and don't even understand why.The timing -- for starters.
Your mixing your beliefs in with mine.Damascus has been continually inhabited for 10,000 years, yet you believe the Earth has only came into existence around 6,000 years ago. So, you must also believe the Flood occurred some time in the past 6,000 years, probably 4,000 years ago - so Damascus was founded before the Flood, and hasn't been uninhabited.
What part of the timing did I get wrong there?
I [obviously] don't believe Damascus has existed for 10,000 years -- you do.
For two obvious reasons:Why is that? Do you have evidence indicating otherwise or are you simply not allowed to?
For two obvious reasons:
- The earth has only gone around the sun some 6100 times.
- Damascus would have been founded by Noah's progeny, not ancestors.
Doubtless, but the evidence nonetheless confirms that it was. So, the evidence for Damacus' continuous inhabitation for 10,000 years constitutes evidence against a recent global flood - thus answering your original question.Your mixing your beliefs in with mine.
I [obviously] don't believe Damascus has existed for 10,000 years -- you do.
That is correct -- I'm not allowed to.So, you're not allowed to, then.
Because you looked and found a planet -- then, 76 years later, you looked again and found more planets -- so you plutoed the planet you found.Doubtless, but the evidence nonetheless confirms that it was. So, the evidence for Damacus' continuous inhabitation for 10,000 years constitutes evidence against a recent global flood - thus answering your original question.
We've looked, and we've found the evidence against the flood. Why should we look again?
What does the IAC's revised nomenclature have to do with anything? Quibble over whether Pluto is a planet or not, it's still there. Quibble over whether Damascus is a town or a city, it's still there - and it's been there for 10,000 years uninterrupted.Because you looked and found a planet -- then, 76 years later, you looked again and found more planets -- so you plutoed the planet you found.
Look at Damascus again in 76 years, then tell me what you think.
In the meantime... what? You've presented nothing to support your case, presented nothing to diminish mine, you haven't done anything. So what, AV, are you going to do in the meantime?In the meantime...
Because you looked and found a planet -- then, 76 years later, you looked again and found more planets -- so you plutoed the planet you found.
Look at Damascus again in 76 years, then tell me what you think.
In the meantime...
Hovindians: Classify-----> selective observation. Static process.Aw bless, you still haven't learned the difference between classification and observation.
If we weren't so close to the Rapture, it would be just a matter of time before someone 'discovers' that Damascus isn't really that old -- in my opinion.What does the IAC's revised nomenclature have to do with anything? Quibble over whether Pluto is a planet or not, it's still there. Quibble over whether Damascus is a town or a city, it's still there - and it's been there for 10,000 years uninterrupted.
4.5by isn't enough time? Sheeesh. :oIf we weren't so close to the Rapture, it would be just a matter of time before someone 'discovers' that Damascus isn't really that old -- in my opinion.
regardless your still wrong. evidence trumps opinion.If we weren't so close to the Rapture, it would be just a matter of time before someone 'discovers' that Damascus isn't really that old -- in my opinion.
So the age of Damascus will never change?regardless your still wrong. evidence trumps opinion.
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?