[HOLY S**T!] Who was the Pharoah of Moses?

[~AK49~]

Originally Posted by Cuauhtémoc1520

What I find very ironic, is how believers accuse non believers of the very thing non believers complain about. That somehow Atheism is some sort of dogma, or theology.

Very strange.....

Something like evolution which has been studied, verified, critiqued, and scrutinized like no religious theology is somehow faulty because we don't have ALL of the transitional fossils, yet the Bible of the Quran which have clear scientific errors, historical inaccuracies and fantastical stories of magic, is believed by the same people who are skeptical of science.

Blows my mind.

Funny, what i find ironic is how non believers accuse believers of ignoring/denying evidence, then turn around and....ignore/deny evidence.

'The only thing worse than a blind believer is a seeing denier'


^^^and yes, that quote goes both ways

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Originally Posted by akScoundrel

Funny, what i find ironic is how non believers accuse believers of ignoring/denying evidence, then turn around and....ignore/deny evidence.

'The only thing worse than a blind believer is a seeing denier'


^^^and yes, that quote goes both ways

What evidence? There is no evidence of god, if there is, I will be the first to line up and worship him/her/it/them.

[~AK49~]

Originally Posted by Cuauhtémoc1520

What evidence? There is no evidence of god, if there is, I will be the first to line up and worship him/her/it/them.

Wasnt aware this thread was about providing evidence for/of God.

With that said, whatever the case may be in whatever subject, all evidence is subject to interpretation…

One could look at things such as golden ratios, sacred geometry, fractals, etc in life, nature, the universe and conclude this is evidence of a creator. If there was/is a creator, such things would be evidence.

On the other hand, you can deem such things to simply have come about through random choas. Ultimately, neither of us are in a postiiton to make definitive statements either way. The evidence is potentially there, and maybe not.

Not what this thread was about tho

[Javen]

ramses

source: the bible

[Enayze]

Originally Posted by squealpiggy

It has more inaccuracies in it than inaccuracies. Things happening that are mutually incompatible for example, or major events occurring for which there is zero independent evidence.

That's without even mentioning talking donkeys, men living inside fish, God's fiery buttocks, the sun being stopped in the sky or all that other magical garbage.

Yeah thats not true, I'd like for you give me an example or two please, because I am more than positive whatever you do post will be easily refuted.

[Ta Khent]

Originally Posted by squealpiggy

The bible counts as evidence for the truth of the bible in the same way that Lord of the Rings provides evidence for the truth of Middle Earth.

I believe that's called circular reasoning.

[squealpiggy]

Originally Posted by Chups

Is that also considered a double negative?

fuck. OK it has more inaccuracies in it than accuracies!

Originally Posted by Cuauhtémoc1520

What I find very ironic, is how believers accuse non believers of the very thing non believers complain about. That somehow Atheism is some sort of dogma, or theology.

Very strange.....

Something like evolution which has been studied, verified, critiqued, and scrutinized like no religious theology is somehow faulty because we don't have ALL of the transitional fossils, yet the Bible of the Quran which have clear scientific errors, historical inaccuracies and fantastical stories of magic, is believed by the same people who are skeptical of science.

Blows my mind.

Religious people don't just hold their religion to different standards than science, they hold them to opposite standards. If science gets something wrong then this is used to declare that science cannot be trusted. Conversely if religion gets something right then we are instructed to assume that everything about that religion is therefore right. An example used by creationists is something like Piltdown Man, a hoax perpetrated against scientists (and uncovered by scientists). But then you'll have Enayze saying "Well the existence of David has been confirmed by professor XYZ therefore Noah collected two of every animal and put them on a huge wooden boat".

Originally Posted by akScoundrel

Funny, what i find ironic is how non believers accuse believers of ignoring/denying evidence, then turn around and....ignore/deny evidence.

'The only thing worse than a blind believer is a seeing denier'


^^^and yes, that quote goes both ways

The topic is about the historicity of the Exodus from Egypt as depicted in the bible. You did not provide evidence of that. You provided evidence that the Israelites had historical and prehistoric antecedents. That's not the same thing. In fact if the Israelites had just popped into existence from nowhere that would be at least as astonishing as the more mental stories in the bible.

Originally Posted by Enayze

Yeah thats not true, I'd like for you give me an example or two please, because I am more than positive whatever you do post will be easily refuted.

Two examples of historical inaccuracy in the bible:

1. A global flood
2. God stopping the sun from moving around the earth so that Joshua could knock down the walls with trumpets

Why did these not happen? Because they can't! They are absurd!

[Mannie Phresh]

Originally Posted by squealpiggy

People with nutty views started the thread.

Alright, massive tribe of people wandering the desert for 40 years and conducting numerous wars of extermination and conquest. They must have left some archaeological evidence.

So.... where is it?

in the north eastern arabian desert? really? deserts recording the exploits of a nomadic tribe? a wind blown desert, sandblasting any possible remnants for 5000 years. And your serious? your grasping hard squeal. hate on liberty and faith all you want but stick to the scientific method which i thought you believed in.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Originally Posted by akScoundrel

Wasnt aware this thread was about providing evidence for/of God.

With that said, whatever the case may be in whatever subject, all evidence is subject to interpretation…

One could look at things such as golden ratios, sacred geometry, fractals, etc in life, nature, the universe and conclude this is evidence of a creator. If there was/is a creator, such things would be evidence.

On the other hand, you can deem such things to simply have come about through random choas. Ultimately, neither of us are in a postiiton to make definitive statements either way. The evidence is potentially there, and maybe not.

Not what this thread was about tho

Evidence is subject to interpretation, if it's done with the scientific method. There is only one truth though, and since you are the one claiming there is a magical being floating in between time and space, the burden of proof is on you, not I.

I don't claim to know all the answers of life, you do, or at least your holy books and god does.

[squealpiggy]

Originally Posted by Mannie Phresh

in the north eastern arabian desert? really? deserts recording the exploits of a nomadic tribe? a wind blown desert, sandblasting any possible remnants for 5000 years. And your serious? your grasping hard squeal. hate on liberty and faith all you want but stick to the scientific method which i thought you believed in.

Have you read the many exploits of the Israelites in the Old Testament? We're not talking about a small amount of people in disparate tribes, we're talking about a coherent nation of 600,000 men. Women and children are on top of that. We're talking about a coherent group of well over a million people spending 40 years not in the Arabian desert but in the wilderness of the Sinai peninsular, an area of land about 38 times smaller and considerably less arid.