Shoe is on the other foot: Prove there is not God.

[Demonic Kitten]

....

Yeah i thought about that but i also thought about some of the "superhuman" stuff some of the eastern nations do. Just recently watch fight science and they showed a man focusing his "chi" to keep a spear from going in his neck at i think 2000 psi. Anythings possible if that was really true what they did

...

I am a Ki (or Chi) user and I have a hard time believing that one.

 

[AK4]

A fine example of how the impossibly rapid repopulation of the earth is contrary to even the most devout of minds.

For yet seven days and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth
kol-hay·kum a·sher a·si·ti me·'al pe·nei ha·'a·da·mah u·ma·chi·ti
(Every living thing I have made wiped from the face of the earth)

What have you proved? I didnt say the whole earth was flooded and killed. Even the word for earth in this verse suggests land and not earth

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Strong's Number: 127[/FONT]encodedOriginalWord[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Word Origin[/FONT] אדמה [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]from (0119)[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]'adamah[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]ad-aw-maw'[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Parts of Speech[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]TWOT[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Noun Feminine[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]25b[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]ground, land

1. ground (as general, tilled, yielding sustenance)
2. piece of ground, a specific plot of land
3. earth substance (for building or constructing)
4. ground as earth's visible surface
5. land, territory, country
6. whole inhabited earth
7. city in Naphtali

[/FONT]

I prefer a direct translation from Hebrew. It seems to be a more accurate reading of the writers intent.

Doesnt even the context suggest land and not earth. Going back and forth from land and earth is confusion and the translators have done a fine job with that

 

[AK4]

Yes it is your claim.
You have made said claim more than once in this very thread.

Seems that your safety net is "you don’t know the true scriptures".

I have not made the claim that because someone dont know the true scriptures then they are wrong. Youre twisting my words. I have never just left it at just that.

 

[McBell]

Like ive argued earlier in this post that science shows the creation having a beginning. That substantiates creation

Huh?
What exactly is it that you claim substantiates it?

I dont personally need him, but if it works it works.

that's just it.
It does not work.
At least not outside your choir.

Just something i heard or read about but didnt pay much attention to. I dont swear by this one

Fair enough

Maybe, but there are plenty of animals that we have taught to be able to mimic human things

Yet none of them can talk....

Yeah i thought about that but i also thought about some of the "superhuman" stuff some of the eastern nations do. Just recently watch fight science and they showed a man focusing his "chi" to keep a spear from going in his neck at i think 2000 psi. Anythings possible if that was really true what they did

If you say so.

I could have sworn i posted something already for this. maybe i will look for it again.

What, Josephus again?

 

[McBell]

I have not made the claim that because someone dont know the true scriptures then they are wrong. Youre twisting my words. I have never just left it at just that.

Please see post #1496

 

[tumbleweed41]

What have you proved? I didnt say the whole earth was flooded and killed. Even the word for earth in this verse suggests land and not earth

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Strong's Number: 127[/FONT]encodedOriginalWord[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Word Origin[/FONT] אדמה [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]from (0119)[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]'adamah[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]ad-aw-maw'[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Parts of Speech[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]TWOT[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Noun Feminine[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]25b[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]ground, land

1. ground (as general, tilled, yielding sustenance)
2. piece of ground, a specific plot of land
3. earth substance (for building or constructing)
4. ground as earth's visible surface
5. land, territory, country
6. whole inhabited earth
7. city in Naphtali

[/FONT]




Doesnt even the context suggest land and not earth. Going back and forth from land and earth is confusion and the translators have done a fine job with that

For yet seven days and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth
kol-hay·kum a·sher a·si·ti me·'al pe·nei ha·'a·da·mah u·ma·chi·ti
(Every living thing I have made wiped from the face of the earth)

 

[AK4]

Poor link, let me help you...
"Now all the writers of barbarian histories make mention of this flood, and of this ark; among whom is Berosus the Chaldean. For when he is describing the circumstances of the flood, he goes on thus: ‘It is said there is still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the mountain of the Cordyaeans; and that some people carry off pieces of the bitumen, which they take away, and use chiefly as amulets for the averting of mischiefs.’ Hieronymus the Egyptian also, who wrote the Phoenician Antiquities, and Mnaseas, and a great many more books, makes mention of the same. Also, Nicolaus of Damascus, in his ninety-sixth book, has a particular interest; where he speaks thus: ‘There is a great mountain in Armenia, over Minyas, called Baris, upon which it is reported that many who fled at the time of the Deluge were saved; and that one who was carried in an ark came on shore upon the top of it; and that the remains of the timber were a great while preserved. This might be the man about whom Moses the legislator of the Jews wrote.’ "
Josephus, 35ce-100ce

Unfortunately for Josephus' claim, and yours, there is no evidence of a history of the writings he mentions. Nor would any writings of regional floods be evidence of the destruction of all life on earth as written in the Torah.

If there is no history of those writings why do we have so many things written on them?

And again, the supposed event occurred thousands of years before Josephus was born.
So your claim is...
Unsubstantiated

Come on now. Only this double standard is applied to the bible. In nothing else does this apply. Killing me

 

[tumbleweed41]

Like ive argued earlier in this post that science shows the creation having a beginning. That substantiates creation

You were also shown not only more valid alternatives to your cause/effect argument that you ignored and invalidated through a poor understanding of physics, you were also shown that the circular reasoning of failing to aply the cause/effect to the creator is a logical fallacy.
Not to mention a complete failure to logically substantiate your claim that the so called creator must be the God spoken of in the Torah.

I understand that this is your BELIEF, however it is an UNSUBSTANTIATED BELIEF.

 

[AK4]

Ah... so you just meant that Josephus believed the flood story of mainstream Judaism, not that he was privy to any special information as a historian, right?

Who knows. Could have been both.

Can you give an example?

www.telegraph.co.uk/.../Soldier-who-was-clinically-dead-for-40-minutes-wins-compensation.html

abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98447&page=1

 

[AK4]

Oh, don't get me wrong. I actually agree with you here. Why?....Because it actually strengthens my case against those that try and use Isaiah 40:22 as evidence that it was known that the "earth" was spherical instead of flat. If we are to believe that earth simply means "land" then I must be right in my assessment.

I think i agree because i seriously doubt that it could have been common knowledge back then that the earth was spherical and then at some point in history everyone changed their mind to that it was flat.

 

[AK4]

I am a Ki (or Chi) user and I have a hard time believing that one.

So you think it was fake? Im skeptical too, but i dont know much about what chi can really do or even if its real. it was on the NatGeo channel

 

[Demonic Kitten]

So you think it was fake? Im skeptical too, but i dont know much about what chi can really do or even if its real. it was on the NatGeo channel

When it comes to something like this I am very skeptical of it, in fact I was skeptical of the whole Ki (or Chi...Prana....Qui) thing until I experienced it for myself. I can't say whether it is real or fake because I have never been able to find an episode where it was performed and I can't talk my sensei into trying it.

 

[AK4]

Huh?
What exactly is it that you claim substantiates it?

There was a beginning to creation. What that implies is that something outside of our universe started our universe, hence a creation.

that's just it.
It does not work.
At least not outside your choir.

We could use that argument on almost anything then right?

Quote:
Yet none of them can talk....

You got parrots. There was one I believe that knew over 100 words.

And here are some more if you want to believe it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talking_animal

 

[tumbleweed41]

Come on now. Only this double standard is applied to the bible. In nothing else does this apply. Killing me

It is also applied to any historical/scientific claims that can not be backed up through independent verification and multiple reliable sources.

Such as...
The Angels of Mons
Marie Antoinette "let them eat cake"
The Aryan Invasion
Ancient Aliens
Newtons "apple"
Robin Hood in Sherwood Forest
King Arthur
The burning of witches in Salem
Nero's fiddle
Cleopatra was Egyptian
Edison inventing the light bulb
Vikings with horned helmets

 

[AK4]

Please see post #1496

And? Does that say "ONLY because you dont know the true scriptures you are wrong"? Sorry theres no "only" there and that is the claim you are trying to say i said

 

[AK4]

For yet seven days and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth
kol-hay·kum a·sher a·si·ti me·'al pe·nei ha·'a·da·mah u·ma·chi·ti
(Every living thing I have made wiped from the face of the earth)

Okay if God was originally talking about the land, the local land, and said "every living substance that I have made will I destroy" from the face of the earth [land] what does your argument prove?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Okay if God was originally talking about the land, the local land, and said "every living substance that I have made will I destroy" from the face of the earth [land] what does your argument prove?

It would mean that God was a limited God, since "every living substance that I have made" would only have been over a limited area and would not have been all living things on Earth.

 

[AK4]

You were also shown not only more valid alternatives to your cause/effect argument that you ignored and invalidated through a poor understanding of physics, you were also shown that the circular reasoning of failing to aply the cause/effect to the creator is a logical fallacy.
Not to mention a complete failure to logically substantiate your claim that the so called creator must be the God spoken of in the Torah.

I understand that this is your BELIEF, however it is an UNSUBSTANTIATED BELIEF.

Please. You guys have yet to show anything contrary to the my argument except for opinions and doubt. You have nothing to show to argue your points because there is nothing in creation that is eternal. Nothing. I told you guys flat out to show proof of anything eternal in creation and you guys easily when this debate and yet not one single thing from you guys.

The belief of the "i dont know religion" is an UNSUBSTANTIATED BELIEF

The belief that QM is free from cause and effect or that it somehow brought itself into is existence is an UNSUBSTANTIATED BELIEF

 

[tumbleweed41]

The passage clearly states that God will destroy every living thing he made. Indicating that the flood would be the source of this destruction. In order to do this the flood could not have been regional, but worldwide. (Unless you believe all living things were contained withing the area of the deluge)
Now I am not arguing that the writer is not mistaken in his belief in a worldwide flood. Just what the clear intent of the story relates.

Thus the Torah clearly indicates a global, rather than local, flood.
Unsubstantiated.

 

[AK4]

When it comes to something like this I am very skeptical of it, in fact I was skeptical of the whole Ki (or Chi...Prana....Qui) thing until I experienced it for myself. I can't say whether it is real or fake because I have never been able to find an episode where it was performed and I can't talk my sensei into trying it.

On that episode he had the tip of a spear to that indented spot at the bottom of the neck. The other end of it was on the ground or something that could measure the psi. He pushed and pushed and then someone whacked on that back with something and it borke. Im skeptical and intrigued really. Maybe im to intrigued because of my love for the video game Street Fighter and their "chi" abilities. lol