Tribulation physics

[dad]

Sorry dad, you said you could do it -- now stop blathering and do it.

I can. If you date Egypt then you need evidence. You won't find any that is not 100% same state past religion, period.

 

[dad]

You're the one who challenged Ussher's dating methodology -- you support something for a change.

No idea what you are talking about. Ussher thought creation was around 6000 years ago, I agree.

Even allowing for the predilection of homosexuality in the priesthood,* there's a 10% chance he wasn't.

If he was bang on with dates I doubt he was twisted.

 

[Tiberius]

Not at all. Try and support a date for early Egypt and see how you fare.

Once again you fall into an old mistake.

You think that since there is no evidence for your opponent's position, then your position must be right. It doesn't work like that.

By that logic, I can show that there are magical moon fairies. Want proof that they exist? Then let's see you show that they don't exist. Since you can't, that must mean I am correct!

 

[TLK Valentine]

I can. If you date Egypt then you need evidence. You won't find any that is not 100% same state past religion, period.

Except your different sate past religion only works as far back as your "Split" -- when was that again?

I understand your difficulties, dad (well, some of them, anyway) -- history is not like science, where you can simply rewrite the rules to suit your convenience. Here you actually have to know your stuff.

You keep saying you can do it, but we've already seen you fail time and time again.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No idea what you are talking about.

Color me shocked.

If he was bang on with dates I doubt he was twisted.

Are you saying that you can prove that he was, in fact, bang on with the dates, or is that your unsupported assumption?

Furthermore, are you suggesting that homosexuals are somehow bad at math?

 

[dad]

Once again you fall into an old mistake.

You think that since there is no evidence for your opponent's position, then your position must be right. It doesn't work like that.

Long as we see there is no support for old Egypt dates who cares what else you say?

By that logic, I can show that there are magical moon fairies. Want proof that they exist? Then let's see you show that they don't exist. Since you can't, that must mean I am correct!

No. You can no more prove old Egypt dates than the fairies. Nothing you say matters anymore.

The bible matters. Ask around.

 

[dad]

Except your different sate past religion only works as far back as your "Split" -- when was that again?

Science only works that far you mean. My beliefs span all time.

I understand your difficulties, dad (well, some of them, anyway) -- history is not like science, where you can simply rewrite the rules to suit your convenience. Here you actually have to know your stuff.

Gibberish. If you knew squat you could say something that was highly evidenced, rather than highly absurd.

You keep saying you can do it, but we've already seen you fail time and time again.

I can deal with any dates you offer. Yet you dare offer none. Maybe you have a lick of sense after all? Stay down then.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Long as we see there is no support for old Egypt dates who cares what else you say?

The only person who has a problem with the old Egypt dates is yourself -- and given your abject failure to support any assertion you've ever made, your objection is of no consequence.

No. You can no more prove old Egypt dates than the fairies. Nothing you say matters anymore.

So prove the "new" Egypt dates instead.

 

[dad]

Color me shocked.

Let me grab a pink crayon.

Are you saying that you can prove that he was, in fact, bang on with the dates, or is that your unsupported assumption?

I am saying you have no clue either way and cannot support anything related to dates.

Furthermore, are you suggesting that homosexuals are somehow bad at math?

That depends if we are talking about math that has some relation to reality.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Science only works that far you mean. My beliefs span all time.

How far was that again, dad?

Gibberish. If you knew squat you could say something that was highly evidenced, rather than highly absurd.

Now, now, dad... I've already schooled you several times in the past on history and the Bible -- two things you should probably know at least half as well as you claim -- so there's no cause for you to get bitter.

I can deal with any dates you offer. Yet you dare offer none. Maybe you have a lick of sense after all? Stay down then.

So, nothing but bluff and bluster then? Nothing to offer but the assumption that you must be right because... well, you're you?

Color me shocked.

 

[The Engineer]

"1Corinthians 15:5-8, Paul said that Jesus was seen by Cephas, then the twelve, then by more than 500, most of whom were still alive, then by James and all the apostles, and finally by Paul himself."

Maybe I should have said that there are only four testimonies of Jesus, that would be more correct.

So there were 500 ostensible observers? Doesn't matter, because we only have the word of four people to prove that Jesus existed in the first place.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_persons_saw_Jesus_after_his_resurrection

It told the future for one thing. Dead were raised, sick healed etc etc.

Why should we take such prophecies serious if there is not a single independent source for them? Or can you give me an independent account of someone witnessing Jesus heal the sick?

No. We can take God's word for it since science has no clue. If you had a clue you would need to support that.

The bible isn't Gods word.

Overruled. Get over it...the bible is the primo source of sources.

And how do you know that?

 

[dad]

The only person who has a problem with the old Egypt dates is yourself -- and given your abject failure to support any assertion you've ever made, your objection is of no consequence.

I have zero problem with Egypt dates. You can't even offer any!

So prove the "new" Egypt dates instead.

New? Support the old first, and we will see if anything new is required.

 

[TLK Valentine]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bDcEn79DWE"1Corinthians 15:5-8, Paul said that Jesus was seen by Cephas, then the twelve, then by more than 500, most of whom were still alive, then by James and all the apostles, and finally by Paul himself."

Valentine 3:16 "Ten thousand people all gathered together and laughed at dad, knowing that he had nothing but bluff and bluster to offer."

It was written down, so it must be true!

 

[TLK Valentine]

Maybe I should have said that there are only four testimonies of Jesus, that would be more correct.

So there were 500 ostensible observers? Doesn't matter, because we only have the word of four people to prove that Jesus existed in the first place.

In all fairness, there probably was such a historical person who actually existed -- we only have five (don't forget Paul) sources regarding the things he may have actually said or did -- and they're not historically reliable because even the most cursory reading shows they were never meant to be.

 

[dad]

Maybe I should have said that there are only four testimonies of Jesus, that would be more correct.

Billions actually. That is more correct. You see He is alive and well. The 500 that saw Him risen and all the others don't add up to four though either. You evos are terrible at math.

So there were 500 ostensible observers? Doesn't matter, because we only have the word of four people to prove that Jesus existed in the first place.

Who is "we" speak for yourself.

Why should we take such prophecies serious if there is not a single independent source for them? Or can you give me an independent account of someone witnessing Jesus heal the sick?

Independent of what? Reality? History? Carefully preserved sacred records? Have you a source that proves He did not?

The bible isn't Gods word.

Says who?

And how do you know that?

How do you know it is 2012? How do you know you were not breast fed?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I have zero problem with Egypt dates. You can't even offer any!

New? Support the old first, and we will see if anything new is required.

Conventional Egyptian chronology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now, feel free to do whatever you have to with this, for starters, to give yourself the illusion of superior knowledge -- or the illusion of making an effort.

Remember, I want facts, not just your usual "time and space functioned differently back then!" blather.

 

[dad]

In all fairness, there probably was such a historical person who actually existed --

And He fulfilled many many prophesies.

we only have five (don't forget Paul) sources regarding the things he may have actually said or did --

One actually. God. The tens of thousands that were fed and multitudes that were healed and had demons cast out and etc did not write history. God promised that He would bring it all back clearly to the ones He charged with making the record.

That record told of many things that already happened. That record revealed the world we live in today long before we got here. You may not wipe out Mary and all the disciples and events and characters recorded in the sacred record just because you want them to be in your living room saying boo or you will chose not to believe they lived.

and they're not historically reliable because even the most cursory reading shows they were never meant to be.

False. They are. They were meant to be.

 

[dad]

Conventional Egyptian chronology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now, feel free to do whatever you have to with this, for starters, to give yourself the illusion of superior knowledge -- or the illusion of making an effort.

Remember, I want facts, not just your usual "time and space functioned differently back then!" blather.

Your source mentions zero support for the silly dates they toss out. None. Show us the basis.

 

[dad]

Valentine 3:16 "Ten thousand people all gathered together and laughed at dad, knowing that he had nothing but bluff and bluster to offer."

It was written down, so it must be true!

So Paul and all the people that saw Jesus and knew Him were liars according to you. As if you had any possible clue.

 

[Elendur]

Yes, do you want a quick lesson on covenant theology. God comes to us with a covenant. If we do our part of the deal then you can be sure that God will do His part.

You forgot a question mark, and no, I don't want a quick lesson.

Because God watches over His word to perform and to do what He says He will do.

How do you know that?

Personal experience. He said He will never leave us or forsake us, even to the end of the age.

[FONT=arial, sans-serif]"Anyone who trusts in him will [/FONT]​

never be put to shame

[FONT=arial, sans-serif]."[/FONT]​

Wait, did you just quote the bible at the end?

Yes, {snip}

So... You know that you can trust the bible because he watches over it, you know he watches over it because of a personal experience, you know you can trust that personal experience because of the bible.

The circle is complete!