Posted on 06/23/2008 3:05:46 PM PDT by betty boop
Paul was converted ~ the time Josephus was born. The books/letters of the New Testament were all completed prior to 97 AD and many of the people who were in the 'more than 500' whom Paul spoke of as eyewitnesses still alive when he was writing his letters were still alive when Jerusalem was razed in 70 AD.
Read my Bible? Sparky, you might want to read A Bible! Wouldn't hurt you to read a few histories of the New Testament times, too.
You pretend pretty well, but you are in the final analysis merely a poser, pretending to have depth of study and understanding that you haven't put the work into to actual possess.
A simply stunning insight, dearest sister in Christ!
Thank you ever so much for this magnificent essay/post!
How can it be said they don't? The "'evidence" in play does not seem to be dispositive either way....
AMEN! THANKS THANKS.
Some folks are disinclined to have their biases dinged or pinged.
Well put.
The fool has said in his heart, there is no God.
That's very nice.
But you still must realize that there is no scientific evidence for a global flood about 4,350 years ago.
The argument that comets may have had some effect about the same time as a purported worldwide flood is typical of what we see from creation "science." It totally ignores the mountains of evidence that the flood did not occur in favor of an idea, comets, for which there is scant evidence. It takes what is, only to creation "science," an anomaly and uses that to equal and in fact refute the mountains of evidence on the other side.
Sorry, real science doesn't work that way.
If you posit a global flood, you better start finding some evidence for flooding in some parts of the world at the specified time. In reality, a global flood would mean that there would be evidence in your back yard. An archaeologist or a sedimentologist could find it easily, if it was there.
Archaeologists and sedimentologists have been poking their noses into the earth everywhere, and there is no evidence for a global flood at the appointed time. Not surprising, as the idea of a global flood is a tribal myth.
There may have been some effects on advanced civilizations from comets or other celestial phenomena, but that does not equal a flood -- except to creation "scientists."
As for pings, please feel free to ping me to posts that have some science content (as this one has a specific claim). What I don't have time for is the lengthy metaphysical posts that are totally devoid of science content.
Beware the oysters, indeed!!!!
LOL, you know what a hot button "second realities" are for me, dearest sister in Christ! How could I resist?
Thank you for raising the issue!
A flood would not have to be global in the sense of global unundation.. All it would have to do is effect all the food chains negativly to blot out most life.. Which is "the spirit" of the biblical verses(creationists hold to).. the intent.. the end result..
Looking for flood lines in strata at every level would be quite silly.. overlooking the intent of the scripture and missing "the point".... only to make a reverse point.. in error..
So we have a flood that was not a flood, which destroyed civilizations but not populations, and took place over about a century or more instead of a year. How does this even vaguely resemble the biblical account?
A flood would not have to be global in the sense of global unundation.. All it would have to do is effect all the food chains negativly to blot out most life.. Which is "the spirit" of the biblical verses(creationists hold to).. the intent.. the end result..
You know the Bible better than I. So you (collectively) are backing off the claim of a global flood?
Where, then, did this formerly-global flood occur? And what evidence is there to support that claim.
Looking for flood lines in strata at every level would be quite silly.. overlooking the intent of the scripture and missing "the point".... only to make a reverse point.. in error..
Really?
Then the flood came upon the earth for forty days, and the water increased and lifted up the ark, so that it rose above the earth. The water prevailed and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. The water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered. The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered.All flesh that moved on the earth perished, birds and cattle and beasts and every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind; of all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died.
Thus He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky, and they were blotted out from the earth; and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark.
Genesis 7:17-23
Looks pretty explicit to me. All the earth was covered, everything died, the only things left alive were the creatures on the Ark.
There is a human tendency to attribute to God’s action/fault natural disasters which God uses to further His designs. Just because a natural disaster is at the heart of the world-wide flood(s), does not mean God caused the natural disaster. And what occurred world-wide may have been focused upon as it effected the Middle East specifically, thus such flooding world-wide over a period of time would not necessarily have to be the focus of the specific cultures the Bible describes as 'wiped out'. To the writer of the Bible, the scribe not the author dictating, the focus would be 'the whole world' if the scribe had no knowledge of the rest of the globe.
One needs to choose paths carefully, where one states God uses catastrophe and other path which asserts that God causes catastrophes. Anti-religion agenda driven posters will twist our words to read 'God causes the catastrohes' when our post actually only assert that God uses these natural disasters because He knows they are coming. These same posters will accuse that God sends people to Hell, when in reality He has made a way to avoid Hell and it is the rejection of His gift that sends someone away form His presence.
I appreciate your point.
However, there’s ample Biblical example of God actually deliberately causing great disasters . . . Moses and Pharoah . . . for example.
And, at some point . . . it’s a bit moot if God allows reaping what’s been sown . . . the effect is essentially the same as if God arranged it independently on His own, imho.
Thx.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.