[_ Old Earth _] Evolution is not based on empirical evidence

[Sophistress]

The drawings were estimated at 400-500 years after Jesus' death. Enough said.

:roll: You may stop with those lies at anytime now heathen,that is not
what was said about the cave,just the drawings that depict John the
Baptist by those who told of him and what he did there.
The actual cave could have been the cave of John the Baptist because
of when it was used and the shards of pottery that was found.
Why did I know that you wouldn't believe any thing that christians
told you no matter what it was?
This proves the bible right all the time. If they wouldn't believe Moses
and the prophets,they won't believe anyone else!

Mr Gibson, 45 said evidence of specific links to John at the site came from drawings made 400 to 500 years later.

There you go.

Also, I liked it when in defence of the claim that the cave could have been used for some other religion or reason, he said "I don't believe in that kind of coincidence". Compelling. :wink:

http://ebooks.palmone.com/product/detail/16700 <--- Coincidence? Or planned timing? I think the latter.

 

[Sophistress]

The drawings were estimated at 400-500 years after Jesus' death. Enough said.

:B-fly: look at the other news sites and read what they say also,K?

Oh, I've done that blueeyeliner.

 

[ThinkerMan]

Blue.

What the article, and common sense, says about this is that the paintings are consistant with some of the believed practices of John of the Baptist.

However, the cave is also consistent with the practices of various sects running a few hundreds years around the time of John the Baptist.

It is not an unequivical statement that John used the cave, and it is unfair that you present it that way.

I am more than willing to concede that it is POSSIBLE that the depictions are of John. I tend to disagree with Quath, in that their is a bit more historical and contemporary evidence for John existing than even Jesus.

However, even granted that John did use the cave (which is entirely possible if he existed), that does not substantiate the miraculousness of John, nor any other part of the bible.

The actual cave could have been the cave of John the Baptist because
of when it was used and the shards of pottery that was found.

That is not the reason why they thought it was John. Again, you are misrepresenting the article. The nature of the drawings is the primary reason some came to that conclusion.

This proves the bible right all the time.

Even if the cave was proven without a doubt to have been used by John, that does nothing to support the miraculous parts of the bible.

The fact that Herod and Pilate existed is not proof of the rest of the bible.

Neither is a cave where John may have baptized followers.

 

[BenjaminTC]

The drawings were estimated at 400-500 years after Jesus' death. Enough said.

:B-fly: look at the other news sites and read what they say also,K?

Oh, I've done that blueeyeliner.

Does anyone else see the irony in Blueeyeliner encouraging other people to read the links she provides?

 

[Guest]

Blue.

What the article, and common sense, says about this is that the paintings are consistant with some of the believed practices of John of the Baptist.

However, the cave is also consistent with the practices of various sects running a few hundreds years around the time of John the Baptist.

It is not an unequivical statement that John used the cave, and it is unfair that you present it that way.

:B-fly: Thats wrong Thinkerman,I said it could have been the cave used
by John. I am not the one trying to mis-represent anyone or anything at
all. It is something to feel good about . Archaeology has discovered other
things as well concerning the bible and I am glad.
It could be a cave John used as I said,but I feel it's wrong to be so
critical of it . This just barely hit the news and already the critics are
trying to put it down.
The Bible is always right,and I believe what it says about the lost.

 

[Sophistress]

I feel it's wrong to be so critical of it

Some insight into the mind of a religious fundamentalist.

 

[Guest]

The drawings were estimated at 400-500 years after Jesus' death. Enough said.

:B-fly: look at the other news sites and read what they say also,K?

Oh, I've done that blueeyeliner.

:B-fly: Then do one more thing for us,please look up all the archaeology
sites that have found other places and things mentioned in the bible,and
add them all together and see what you get.
Only Jesus Christ is absolute proof,and he has made himself real to me,but just learn what all Archaeologists have found.
I know this might be hard for you,but just try it.

 

[Guest]

I feel it's wrong to be so critical of it

Some insight into the mind of a religious fundamentalist.

:roll: Does your mocking spirit ever get tired?

 

[Guest]

I feel it's wrong to be so critical of it

Some insight into the mind of a religious fundamentalist.

8-) The folly of the secular mind is: "I HAVE RIGHTS"

 

[Guest]

Does anyone else see the irony in Blueeyeliner encouraging other people to read the links she provides?

:B-fly: Do you ever notice the shameless way you try to insist you
have something to add when you have nothing at all?
This news about this cave is everywhere,so what is your point?
It was one of you who asked me for links!!!

 

[Sophistress]

Don't take the defensive, blueeyeliner. I think to say that we shouldn't be critical is ridiculous. It is clear you refuse to criticize anything unless it in some way challenges your beliefs, and when you do challenge opposing theories you do so without any evidence. On the other hand, you clearly accept anything put in front of you that reinforces your belief. Do you know what it means to be objective?

 

[Sophistress]

I feel it's wrong to be so critical of it

Some insight into the mind of a religious fundamentalist.

8-) The folly of the secular mind is: "I HAVE RIGHTS"

It is folly for a secularist to want rights? I believe denying somebody their rights in accordance to their belief is classified as racism and prohibits one's human and civil rights. Since when was America a theocracy? Or did I miss something?

 

[ThinkerMan]

This just barely hit the news and already the critics are
trying to put it down.

Blue, I did not put down the idea. Rather, I was quite open to the possible. It is doubtful it could ever be characterized as more than a possibility, but I conceded that it could be consistent with having been used by John the Baptist.

Thats wrong Thinkerman,I said it could have been the cave used
by John.

You implied that when you said..."This proves the bible right all the time. "

Proof means positive. That was what I was addressing.

Archaeology has discovered other
things as well concerning the bible and I am glad.

Yes, it has confirmed some things in the Bible. I completely concede that point. Please don't take me as a blanket objectionists. The bible is an important historical document, regardless of the spiritual aspects of it.

Blue, I really think it would help your effectiveness if you responded in one post, as opposed to numerous posts.

You are certainly one of, if not the, most engaging people on this forum, and to a large extent carry the torch of YEC here. I enjoy the reparte.

However, it might serve you well to make your posts more clear and concise to facilitate better discussion.....just my two cents.

 

[Guest]

Don't take the defensive, blueeyeliner. I think to say that we shouldn't be critical is ridiculous. It is clear you refuse to criticize anything unless it in some way challenges your beliefs, and when you do challenge opposing theories you do so without any evidence. On the other hand, you clearly accept anything put in front of you that reinforces your belief. Do you know what it means to be objective?

:roll: :roll:
That is such a big lie heathen,and you know it.
You know this news about John The Baptist is big news
and it's in all the news. Thats not exactly believing every thing
put in front of me,and I don't see how you feel that you have
any logical reason to debate about such things knowing that
you have no evidence to support yourself.
How is it logical to claim what you claim?

 

[Sophistress]

Again, what am I claiming?

 

[Guest]

This just barely hit the news and already the critics are
trying to put it down.

Blue, I did not put down the idea. Rather, I was quite open to the possible. It is doubtful it could ever be characterized as more than a possibility, but I conceded that it could be consistent with having been used by John the Baptist.

[quote:58dd3]Thats wrong Thinkerman,I said it could have been the cave used
by John.

[/quote:58dd3]

You implied that when you said..."This proves the bible right all the time. "

Proof means positive.

:B-fly: Thinkerman,I meant all the critics,not you.
What I meant about proving he bible right all the time is when
you try to teach the lost who refuse to listen to you,don't be
surprized if they don't believe you. I suppose I should have given
more detail to what I meant. I didn't mean that the news about the
cave in and of itself,although I can see how it could have been taken
that way.
I try to answer all the questions when I get a chance to.Sometimes I
cannot answer all the questions at one time.
Thinkerman,I think you have a great sense of humor here,and you
keep thing from getting too serious.
I found myself laughing about the post you wrote about the pagan
worship thats been associated with evolution where you added that
you were guilty of the one about the female body parts.
I really had a good laugh from that one,though I do not condone it,or
think men should do it,I just know many men have fallen prey to it,and
I thought it was just histerical along with your avatar.
By the way,I hope you don't really do it.

 

[Guest]

Again, what am I claiming?

:B-fly: Are you not claiming that there are many things wrong with
The Holy God of the Bible?

 

[Sophistress]

Again, what am I claiming?

:B-fly: Are you not claiming that there are many things wrong with
The Holy God of the Bible?

So far I have merely pointed out some sexist quotes. I was giving you the chance to prove to me I was incorrect in my view that the Bible is sexist. However, I have seen no compelling return from you.

Once again I state: I have a disbelief in God. I am open to the possibility I am wrong. I want you to prove to me that the Bible is the word of God. As I said, I am very willing to challenge my own beliefs if you have something to prove your claims that the Bible is the word of God. I make no claims. I have a disbelief. Maybe the difference is subtle, but I assure you it's there.

 

[Guest]

Once again I state: I have a disbelief in God. I am open to the possibility I am wrong. I want you to prove to me that the Bible is the word of God. As I said, I am very willing to challenge my own beliefs if you have something to prove your claims that the Bible is the word of God. I make no claims. I have a disbelief. Maybe the difference is subtle, but I assure you it's there.

:B-fly: It's great that you are willing to challenge yourself.
Unlike you I know that I am not wrong,because I know God is
right. So it's not that I'm right,it's that God is right. His word is
the truth about him. He may appear one way to you,but in another
way to me. If you feel that I have no evidence,then how can I be
of any help to you?
I believe if you mean what you said,you will seek God.
When you really seek him,you will find him.

 

[Hawkman]

It's great that you are willing to challenge yourself.
Unlike you I know that I am not wrong,because I know God is
right.

Like Heathen, I am entirely willing to change my beliefs if you can give supporting arguments for your case and evidence. But this isn't it. This isn't even close--it's nothing more than empty assertions.

If you feel that I have no evidence,then how can I be
of any help to you?

While you have done nothing to help your case, you have provided some excellent insight into the validity of your beliefs. If you had evidence, you would have referrenced it by now. If you had a compelling argument, it would have been presented.

Suppose a man told you that psychic powers were real, but was unable to present evidence to support this claim. Would you find it reasonable to believe his claim, or to disbelieve it?