The Return of My Apple Challenge

[Nazzul]

It would be impossible and useless to try to prove to my friend that you created that apple out of thin air. If you refuse to repeat the process then theres really no point in trying to prove anything. In the end it really dosn't matter if you created the apple or not.

 

[AV1611VET]

Consided, if you have definitly no way to evidence an ex-nilhilo creation... how would you know that you have a note from the one who did it?

It's called "faith".

 

[AV1611VET]

If you refuse to repeat the process then theres really no point in trying to prove anything.

As I said, Nazzul, I could repeat the process 1000[sup]1000[/sup] times, and it wouldn't prove that I created the first apple ex nihilo.

 

[Danyc]

The answer to the challenge is-- nothing.

 

[AV1611VET]

Anybody who has played the game "telephone" realizes how much something can change as it is passed orally.

God's Word did not come to us via the Telephone Game.

That is a poor analogy.

In the Telephone Game:

1. The goal is to distort the message.
2. The more distorted the message, the more fun the game was.
3. There is no message verification routine.
4. The message is only conveyed one time, it is not repeated.
5. The message is oral, and subject to distortion from outside interference.

God would not trust His Word to be conveyed to us in such a manner.

 

[Nazzul]

As I said, Nazzul, I could repeat the process 1000[sup]1000[/sup] times, and it wouldn't prove that I created the first apple ex nihilo.

So your willing to repeat the process to show to all my friends? You really cannot "prove" anything but you can support your ability by repeating the process.

 

[Nathan Poe]

God's Word did not come to us via the Telephone Game.

Actually, AV this only goes to show how little you really know about the history behind "God's Word."

That is a poor analogy.




In the Telephone Game:

1. The goal is to distort the message.
2. The more distorted the message, the more fun the game was.
3. There is no message verification routine.
4. The message is only conveyed one time, it is not repeated.
5. The message is oral, and subject to distortion from outside interference.

Besides the fact you've clearly never actually played the telephone game, you're right, AV -- although as usual, by accident, and not in the way you mean.

The telephone game is not a "good" analogy, it's a perfect analogy.

(In your language, you could say "very good," and have it mean the same thing)

God would not trust His Word to be conveyed to us in such a manner.

And why should we take your word for it as to what God would or would not do? You only know God through a book.

 

[Freodin]

It's called "faith".

Call it "faith", or "wild guesses"... it comes down to the same thing: you say it is so, because you need it to be so for your position to work.

 

[BananaSlug]

God's Word did not come to us via the Telephone Game.

That is a poor analogy.


In the Telephone Game:

1. The goal is to distort the message.
2. The more distorted the message, the more fun the game was.
3. There is no message verification routine.
4. The message is only conveyed one time, it is not repeated.
5. The message is oral, and subject to distortion from outside interference.

God would not trust His Word to be conveyed to us in such a manner.

But if you've ever heard anyone tell a story, it changes slightly each time they tell it. Spread the story over several generations and you may get something that is entirely different from the original. A guy telling a tale about catching a ten pound bass could become a story about a hero who battle a shark (told over several generations of course).

 

[Hespera]

Anyone who was there when an event happened, and then read the news report will know how the story always seems to get written down wrong.

The whole theme of inerrency depends on magic. If you believe in magic, no prob.

 

[AV1611VET]

But if you've ever heard anyone tell a story, it changes slightly each time they tell it. Spread the story over several generations and you may get something that is entirely different from the original.

Again --- they weren't just telling a story --- they were documenting it --- putting it down in written form for corroboration, independent verification, and preservation by: 1) the previous generation, 2) the current generation, 3) the future generation.

A guy telling a tale about catching a ten pound bass could become a story about a hero who battle a shark (told over several generations of course).

In my college days, many moons ago, that was known as Retroactive Falsification, a process that I'm sure God is well-aware.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Again --- they weren't just telling a story --- they were documenting it --- putting it down in written form for corroboration, independent verification, and preservation by: 1) the previous generation, 2) the current generation, 3) the future generation.

Every story is "documented," AV -- is this supposed to make the Bible look unique?

In my college days, many moons ago, that was known as Retroactive Falsification, a process that I'm sure God is well-aware.

More aware than you -- given your use of the term here, it's a safe bet you weren't what I would call an "A" student.

 

[BananaSlug]

Again --- they weren't just telling a story --- they were documenting it --- putting it down in written form for corroboration, independent verification, and preservation by: 1) the previous generation, 2) the current generation, 3) the future generation.

Sorry AV, but Genesis was told orally for many generations before it was written down. Written language was not made until 4th millennium BC, and only trained scholars/priests could write and understand the scribbles.

 

[AV1611VET]

Written language was not made until 4th millennium BC...

Bingo ---

Adam --- 4004 BC.

 

[BananaSlug]

Bingo ---

Adam --- 4004 BC.

Oh wait, I forgot China- 6000 BC.

The oldest know Hebrew writing is 3000 years old. 1004 years after Adam.

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh wait, I forgot China- 6000 BC.

The oldest know Hebrew writing is 3000 years old. 1004 years after Adam.

Uh-huh --- funny that the Chinese don't come about until Genesis 10 --- well after the Flood.

 

[Danyc]

Uh-huh --- funny that the Chinese don't come about until Genesis 10 --- well after the Flood.

It is funny, now that you mention it.

 

[BananaSlug]

Uh-huh --- funny that the Chinese don't come about until Genesis 10 --- well after the Flood.

Ah I see... Any evidence that is younger than 6,000 years you accept with open arms. Anything older you reject. Funny that the Bible never mentions anything Chinese, or Native American, or Australian.

Have anything to say about the oldest known Hebrew writing? I find it funny that it is 1004 years after Adam...

 

[AV1611VET]

Funny that the Bible never mentions anything Chinese, or Native American, or Australian.

I disagree, and for reasons I don't particularly care to get into.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Uh-huh --- funny that the Chinese don't come about until Genesis 10 --- well after the Flood.

Another in a series of the Bible's errors.