  |
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:00 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Freddie wrote: |
The fact of the matter is the bible has been tested and has been proven accurate. There are many books within the bible that are historical and each one has stood the test of time. |
Really? So, could you point out the scientific proof that demonstrates that jesus really did walk on water?
| Quote: |
In fact many modern day scientist have been looking to the bible to find evidence of lost civilizations and land marks. |
Those people are called historians. And it's not uncommon for people to use the myths and legends of a culture to try to find the location of that culture.
| Quote: |
But we don't just take the first evidence in any case do we but we by two or three witnesses prove things. The bible give us something and we can see it proven out by the events that follow and by the witness in each of us as we listen to the voice of God. |
Bible...proven...how?
| Quote: |
There are other historical books that also back up the bible written by secular historians around the time of Christ. One such person was Flavorous Josephus, he wasn't a believer but he did speak of Christ and what was done to him. This is not even encluded in the cannon of scripture. |
And guess what?
Josephus was born after jesus died. His views on the matter are irrelevent - he was never in a position to witness the truthood or the falsehood of the events described in the bible.
| Quote: |
The evidence of things unseen are everywhere if you have an open heart to it. If you've hardened your heart then you won't recognize it when it's there. |
If you really, trully believe that something is true, then you'll "feel" it to be true everywhere. You'll see "evidence" for it all the time, even if your belief is completely false.
| Quote: |
I don't just believe with my mind(soul realm) or my emotions and desires (fleshly realm) but I know in my spirit. These three bare witness. |
Three people eh? There's only one person in my skull...
| Quote: |
I don't just have the word of God through the bible I also have the application of his word in my life and of the physical evidence of it's truth. These three bare witness. |
Physical evidence? What evidence would that be?
| Quote: |
Jesus Came came as descriped in the prophecy of the scriptures, He performed the perfect work He was given to do and He rose the third day leaving an empty grave. These three bare witness. |
That's incoherent nonsense. Stories written on paper do not "bare witness" in any meaningful sense.
| Quote: |
You know the biggest reason for it? People hate being held accountable for how they live. A person can reason that if they aren't ultimately accountable to anyone than who can say what they do is right or wrong. |
No kidding. That's exactly what makes me think that the bible isn't true. It's all because i don't like playing by the rules!
Hell, the only reason that i don't kill like five people every day is that doing so involves a lot of manual labor. I'm way too lazy.
| Quote: |
Liberals seem to care about every little thing in the world but when it comes to Christians they have no tollerence. |
Wow, really? I had no idea...
When did they ban christianity anyway? And how many churches have they burned down in their intolerant rage?
| Quote: |
There is no real evidence to the big bang theory and that is why it is a theory and not a law. |
Yeah, no kidding. It's just a damned theory. Like gravity. And electricity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Being angry at me for my view and my knowledge of the truth won't gain you one ounce. If you do not wish to hear what I have to say don't read it.
You look at me as though I spout poisen when it's only poisen you want to ingest from the world.
Forgive my intrusion into your life. I can answer every single question you asked and will be happy to debate you through email if you wish.
I will not get into a war of words that will only cause more problems than solve. I respect your right to be wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
So you have no response, then?
Forums are for discussion, not posturing. If you can defend your position, then let's hear it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike
Not a Newbie
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 143
Location: Roanoke, Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| The Bible never says how old the earth is, remember, Genesis 1:1-1:2 says "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth/ And the earth became barren and empty" Many translated versions say "was", but the Hebrew translation is "became", so, in the time between God created the earth and the time God created man, 2 days, 2 years, 2 billion years, could have passed. I don't believe in evolution in the sense that I believe we cannot accurately measure the time on earth or that animals evolve, but who knows what kind of creatures existed before man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
As long as you keep to the subject no problem. I don't posture in fact I walk slightly bent over LOL.
The personal attacks are unnecessary. If you feel I'm in error like wise provide back up data as will I. So tit for tat my friend and maybe we'll all learn something ok.
Let me begin with the carbon 14 question. Here is a good web site that answers the question much better than I can and will give you time to review the data at you convienence
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/di.....ating.html
Now onto biblical events proven through history.
lets look at the prophecy given to Daniel in the book of Daniel.
Daniel 8:3-8
3Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
4I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great.
5And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
6And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power.
7And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.
8Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
This prophecy is actually explained to Daniel in the next few verses by the angel Gabriel.
Basically what is said is that the ram represent the Mede and Persian Empire. (For those who are interested the Medes and Persians joined together and over threw Babylon and became the biggest world power on earth at that time.) One horn was Mede and the other Persia. Persia being stronger being represented by the larger horn.
The goat is Greece and represents the reign of Alexander the Great. At the apex of Alexander's career he dies having been very ill from excessive drinking. It was expected that his kingdom would fall to his lineage or at least one strong general what happened shocked the world. 4 strong commanders took control of Greece and the country split in to quarters.
Daniel was written in most likely between 605-562 bc Alexander the great wasn't born for another 200 years. Alexander while matching his way across the known world rode to Jerusalem and was met with the high priest of the temple who presented to him the scripture written by Daniel concernin this prophecy. Alexander believed the scripture and spared Jerusalem.
Ok this is enough to start with. If you want to disscuss this a little while then we can move on.
Please understand that this is presented in humility not in malice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Freddie wrote: |
The personal attacks are unnecessary. |
I've been sarcastic and snide; no personal attacks have occured.
| Quote: |
Let me begin with the carbon 14 question. Here is a good web site that answers the question much better than I can and will give you time to review the data at you convienence
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/di.....ating.html |
Did you read what i said about that?
Carbon 14 dating is not used to determine the age of the earth, and it is not used to determine the age of ancient fossils.
| Quote: |
Basically what is said is that the ram represent the Mede and Persian Empire. (For those who are interested the Medes and Persians joined together and over threw Babylon and became the biggest world power on earth at that time.) One horn was Mede and the other Persia. Persia being stronger being represented by the larger horn.
The goat is Greece and represents the reign of Alexander the Great. At the apex of Alexander's career he dies having been very ill from excessive drinking. |
No one knows how he died. Some speculate that excessive drinking weakened his health, but no one claims that drink itself killed him.
| Quote: |
It was expected that his kingdom would fall to his lineage or at least one strong general what happened shocked the world. 4 strong commanders took control of Greece and the country split in to quarters. |
As far as i can tell, that's not at all what happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamian_War
| Quote: |
Daniel was written in most likely between 605-562 bc Alexander the great wasn't born for another 200 years. Alexander while matching his way across the known world rode to Jerusalem and was met with the high priest of the temple who presented to him the scripture written by Daniel concernin this prophecy. Alexander believed the scripture and spared Jerusalem. |
As far as i can tell, there's no basis in fact for this legend. It seems to be a fantastic story cooked up by josephus.
And that's assuming, of course, that one can even be as liberal with their interpretations of a prophesy as you have been. A prophecy as ambiguous as the one you describe can't really be considered a prediction of the future at all - it's too vague and metaphorical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Mike wrote: | | I don't believe in evolution in the sense that I believe we cannot accurately measure the time on earth or that animals evolve. |
Explain why you believe this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lester
Forum Elder
Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 4650
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| That prophecy from daniel could be interpreted to mean september 11, thats certainly what I was thinking, the two horns being the towers, the ram being the U.S., which is certainly a great power, and the one horned he goat being Al-queda. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
No one has ever used the word liberal when discribing something I've written,hmm feels kind of icky LOL.
First of all carbon 14 is used for dating age of fossils such as living matter like plants so you please present me with something that backs up your statements.
Second It is not liberal at all. In fact Gabriel in the next few verses clears it all up and explains exactly what I've written in interperatation of this prophecy check it out read Daniel chapter 8 I promise it won't curve your spine or anything like that LOL. The prophecy is far from ambiguous as the intereperatation is given right after the vision, again take a moment to read it you'll understand what I mean.
Thirdly the manner of Alexander's death is irrelevent the fact he died at the apex of his power and that his kingdom was split into fours is what is important as it fulfills prophecy, the prophecy didn't say the manner of death (i.e. drunkeness or suicide).
Lastly. wikapeidia is not the most accurate way of getting information. Do a little more digging and you'll find better information but again the manner of Alexander's death is irrelevent to my statements.
I feel like we got off on a bad foot but actually I don't feel near the hostility as I did before and actually I need to thank you for challenging me to clearify my statements.
Thank you and God bless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike
Not a Newbie
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 143
Location: Roanoke, Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: | | Mike wrote: | | I don't believe in evolution in the sense that I believe we cannot accurately measure the time on earth or that animals evolve. |
Explain why you believe this. |
I believe that God created all creatures. Not a basic blueprint that evolved into a superior being. However, mutations and abnormalities could have certainly led to a "new" species. Take the tiger. I believe that in the time of Noah, there were no Bengal Tigers, no Siberian Tigers, no White Tigers, etc. Rather, there were just tigers. Through the thousands of years since then, mutations have created new "species", not through gradual Darwinian evolution, but through rapid mutations. Now, this is just my belief, there is no documented science to back it up, but, frankly, evolutionary theories are not documented either, hence the term "theory". Also, look at the common dog. Greyhounds and Chihuauas are the same "species" despite very different appearances. As for carbon dating, this is yet another theoretical science. I'm not saying that the earth is absolutely not billions of years old, as it very well could be, but it could be millions or thousands of years old too. Nobody knows how much time is between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, I just am skeptical of science that claims to know exactly how old the earth is. I don't believe in the accuracy of any theoretical science.
I also like my personal theory on mutation because it helps to explain how Noah could fit every animal onto a boat, without every modern variation of tiger, or elephant, or zebra, or canine, it leaves room for more animals. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Freddie wrote: |
First of all carbon 14 is used for dating age of fossils such as living matter like plants so you please present me with something that backs up your statements. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating
It's only accurate to 60,000 years. Anything older than that is dated using other techniques.
And the science parts of wikipedia are as reliable as the encyclopedia britannica.
http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html
| Quote: |
Second It is not liberal at all. In fact Gabriel in the next few verses clears it all up and explains exactly what I've written in interperatation of this prophecy check it out read Daniel chapter 8 I promise it won't curve your spine or anything like that LOL. The prophecy is far from ambiguous as the intereperatation is given right after the vision, again take a moment to read it you'll understand what I mean. |
Ohh okay, i looked it up and i see what you're saying.
| Quote: |
Thirdly the manner of Alexander's death is irrelevent the fact he died at the apex of his power and that his kingdom was split into fours is what is important as it fulfills prophecy, the prophecy didn't say the manner of death (i.e. drunkeness or suicide). |
Isn't it a given that he died at the apex of his power?
That is, had he died a year or two earlier, THAT would also have been the apex of his power. He would have died at the apex of his power even if he had died before conquering persia, because his power was on a continuous rise until his death.
| Quote: |
Lastly. wikapeidia is not the most accurate way of getting information. Do a little more digging and you'll find better information but again the manner of Alexander's death is irrelevent to my statements.
|
Nowhere can i find a source that states that greece was divided into four parts, ruled by four of alexander's generals.
What's more, i've read that most schollars believe that daniel was actually written around 160 B.C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Ok kat daddy I'm not sure how you looked it up but I got a hit with one try on Alexanders kingdom split.
On his death bed, his marshals asked him to whom he bequeathed his kingdom. Since Alexander had no obvious and legitimate heir (his son Alexander IV would be born after his death, and his other son was by a concubine, not a wife), it was a question of vital importance. There is some debate to what Alexander replied. Some believe that Alexander said, "Kratisto" (that is, "To the strongest!") or "Krat'eroi" (to the stronger).
Alexander may have said, "Krater'oi" (To Craterus). This is possible because the Greek pronunciation of "the stronger" and "Craterus" differ only by the position of the accented syllable. Most scholars believe that if Alexander did intend to choose one of his generals, his obvious choice would have been Craterus because he was the commander of the largest part of the army (infantry), because he had proven himself to be an excellent strategist, and because he displayed traits of the "ideal" Macedonian. Regardless of his reply, Craterus was eventually assassinated before he could organize a coup with the infantry and Alexander's empire was split into four kingdoms.
here's the link http://www.answers.com/topic/alexander-the-great
It is not most scholars that say that either only those who are attempting to "de bunk" the bible. I find just as many that put the time at 562 than I do at 160. The sole reason for their argument, they don't believe that prophecy exists so the only way to "reason it" is to say it was written later.
Now about the apex of power. Is it not conceivable that had Alexander not died as he did that he through his love of drink (this is not contended and I know everyone loves the history channel and you can verify it by watching their documentary on Alexander if you like LOL) that he could have gone on a downward slide off the apex of his power. This aurgument seems a little bit thin concerning the apex thing.
Many blessings |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Freddie wrote: | | Ok kat daddy I'm not sure how you looked it up but I got a hit with one try on Alexanders kingdom split. |
And yet, that excerpt is from wikipedia...the source you rejected.
(about.com just combines information from various sites - it tells you the site it comes from with a heading before the content)
| Quote: |
It is not most scholars that say that either only those who are attempting to "de bunk" the bible. I find just as many that put the time at 562 than I do at 160. The sole reason for their argument, they don't believe that prophecy exists so the only way to "reason it" is to say it was written later. |
If it's evenly split, then on what basis do you claim a date of 562?
| Quote: |
Now about the apex of power. Is it not conceivable that had Alexander not died as he did that he through his love of drink that he could have gone on a downward slide off the apex of his power. This aurgument seems a little bit thin concerning the apex thing. |
You're absolutely right; it could have declined afterwards. There's no way to know.
But we DO know that it was on the climb right up until his death. Thus, the claim "alexander will die at the height of his power" covers the entire time frame between when he became king and when he died. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
But Alexander's death was surprising. Remember he was young when he died. He conquered the known world by the age 30 and died at 32 almost 33. He was like no other leader at that time or really since. He fits the prophecy to a "T".
There is internal and external evidence for the date of Daniel. I have to get home to my reference books to give you the full run down so give me till later tonight to get that up for you.
Anyway thanks again for spurring the conversations I've enjoyed it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 1:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
The internal evidence describing the rulers of the time point to the 605-562 time frame. This is also backed up by Daniel being mentioned in the book of Ezekiel who also live in the same time during the Babylonian captivity.
The language that Daniel was written is contray to some critics attack actually supportes the 500's time frame. The Aramaic used along with Persian and Chaldean do not point away from the earlier time but rather secure it. By the time of 160 Greek would have been the dominant language. The only Greek words used in Daniel refer to musical instruments and since the persians and babylonians.
Had it been written during the time of Macabees as some suggest it would have had much more Greek and much less Aramaic as the language.
I'll let you crunch this for now tell me when you ready for some more....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
|
|
