Dear Christians,

[LadyFeline]

How Do You Know The Bible Is True?

 

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/b_proof.shtml

Historical Proofs of the Bible:

 

"Textual evidence", hmm? That's nothing, Pug. Any writing could be considered "textual evidence" of anything.

 

Let's see... I have, in my hands, the recent Transformers novel, "Fusion". This book makes refences to real places - Las Vegas being one of them. Hell, I'm pretty sure at least one casino is named, too. But, just because it references real places, it does not automatically follow that the Autobots and Decepticons are real, too.

 

Or, how about the book "The Golden Compass"? I can prove that Oxford is a real place, and Svalbard, too. But does that mean that there are talking polar bears, a compass that foretells the future, and daemons, too? No.

 

And both of these books are less fantastical than the Bible when it comes to storytelling. Does that make either of them any more reliable as "textual evidence" of anything? No.

 

Please come back when you have a real argument, Pug.

[Heimdall]

Jewish tradition claims that God made the world -- an oral tradition that goes back to when they left Egypt, and before. It also says there was a flood, and that the human race was reduced to 8 souls. I would try to look at archeology to see if you can trace all human people-groups and language roots to the same region of mesopotamia in that era, about 2500 to 3000 bc.

You evidentially have no concept of what the current atmosphere in Syrio-Palestinian (what you would mistakenly call Biblical) archaeology is. Very few archaeologists will step forward and state that the Hebrew/Israelites were ever slaves in Egypt, that the social groups and language roots can be traced to the same region of Mesopotamia. In fact, Hebrew can be traced to Arabia (it is a member of the Afro-Arabian language family), The various members of the Indo-European languages can be traced to an ancestor that originated on the Russian steppes as early as 5000 BCE, The Sino-Tibetan languages can be traced to the area of China, Indo-China, Tibet, et al at least as far back as 4000 BCE. There is no archaeological evidence of a flood (several literate peoples lived at the time of the flood, yet none seem to have realized that they were writing and living under 6 miles of water for most of a year), no evidence of Hebrew slaves in Egypt, no evidence – Not one campsite – of an Exodus, no evidence of a Conquest of the “promised land”, no evidence of a “United Kingdom” or it’s two famous kings David and Solomon (not one contemporary written word about either) or no contemporary evidence for a Jesus of Nazareth in the 1st century CE. There is a lot of evidence for a collapse of the Canaanite economy around the 13th century BCE due to the “Mycenaean Drought” (a meteorological incident that lasted from the 13th to the 11th century BCE) and the “retribalization” of the remains of the Canaanite peoples (one such group was the ancestral Jews and the another the proto-Israelites) and the beginning of the “early biblical” period. They evidentially were related and seemed to worship a very similar set of gods, YHWH being the titular head of the pantheon with Asherah as his wife. Later, as YWHW supplanted all the other gods and goddesses, the two peoples divided into the "Aaronoids" and the “Mushites” (one group’s priesthood claimed descent from Aaron and one group’s priests claimed descent from Moses. You can trace the amalgamation of these peoples and their two related concepts of YHWH by studying the different sources of holy scripture that were joined together to make part of your OT.

This tradition also says that there was a single male progenitor at the time of the flood -- Noah, and a single female progenitor roughly 2000 years before that -- Eve. I would examine the field of paleo-genetics to see what it says about the human race having a single female progenitor, and a single, more recent, male progenitor. If the Bible has any validity there will be some evidence to support it in that field of study.

You are evidentially referring to the Mitochondrial Eve, she was not 2000 years ago (why do Christians always attempt to warp their info, don’t they think we can read and research) but rather 150,000 (a bit before the supposed flood) the single common male ancestor was relatively recent 45,000 years ago. If you are wanting to refer to the MRCA (most recent common ancestor) then you are referring only to a mathematical construct, the same science that proved Bumble bees can’t fly.

This tradition also claims the Jewish people received a law. You might want to look for archeological or historical evidence of Jewish migration through Sinai, to a mountain that appears to fit the historical claims. If you can find evidence that the law was written down in antiquity, then I would think you would have to examine those writings to see if they have any evidence of local, human invention or some kind of design or intelligence that they could not have invented at the time.

As I pointed out above, there is no archaeological evidence of a migration of 1,000,000 plus people through the Sinai or the wanderings of such a group for 40 years. Not one piece of evidence, none, nada, zip. The earliest law received from a god was by Hammurabi in the 25th century BCE…Just a bit before Moses don’t you see?

The Great Pyramid appears to be the first, and best, pyramid of its series, (except for the step pyramids at Saqqara) and has some surprising features and proportions that do not require the use of writing. I would investigate it to see if you can explain how it came about that the best one came first, and seems to have scientific insight that was thousands of years ahead of its time.

I have no idea what the Great Pyramid has to do with the validity of Christianity, so I will pass on that.

Finally, there is the fact of human death, and that most religions of the world claim there is some sort of eternal life -- whether reincarnation, hell, heaven, etc. I would think about the fact that such claims exist, and ask yourself whether you think those claims are true. My personal belief is that they are not, and this is what the Bible says. (It claims that people return to dust, awaiting a future resurrection, and that only Jesus has been resurrected thus far).

Since humans were born and died for at least 125,000 years efore the Jews came along, I wouldn’t take the word of a document that was formulated around 560 BCE, by YHWHist priests to support the Temple state that the Persians had given Ezra permission to found. Since the Persians did not like to rule the local people through a Persian governor, they normally installed a local ruler. Local Princes often rebelled, so a religious government that was thankful to the Empire for their existence was the perfect thing to govern the people of Judah. You might want to study the teachings of the Zoroastrian religion and see what all ideas that the priests of YHWH borrowed from the Persians. You can also study Mithrian beliefs and see what Christianity borrowed from Mithra (also a Persian deity – the Son of Ahura Mazda and a savior).

In summary I would focus on trying to figure out if the universe had a beginning or not, if there is any evidence that the Jewish people came from Egypt, if there is any evidence that a person named Jesus actually existed, if any eyewitnesses gave credible testimony that he was raised from the dead.

Well, there is no evidence that the Jews were ever slaves in Egypt and there is no contemporary evidence of a person named Jesus of Nazareth ever existing and there is no credible verifiable testimony that he resurrected (only 4 books written several generations after the supposed fact by non-witnesses writing to late to have access to eye-witnesses even mention his resurrection); what this has to do with the beginning of the universe, I have no idea, but it does not prove any point about the validity of your religion.

Finally, I would think about human civilization, life and death, and ask yourself whether you think the evidence supports totally random origins for the human race, and whether you are at peace with the idea of totally random, meaningless existence going forward, as Sartre posited... or whether there is really no morality and no purpose and no reason why anyone should care when a child dies or a hurricane hinders a cultural tradition like music or art.

Actually, I am more a Francis Hutchison type. I believe that mankind has this built in love of his fellow man, that we need no directions from an invisible guy-in-the-sky, that sin is an invention of the YHWHist priests as a tool to control the populace and Christianity is nothing more than just another antique and tired mythology.

If any of these endeavors strike your fancy, I can point you in the direction of some non-biblical evidence.

Please direct us, that might be amusing. - Heimdall

[Ouroboros]

Diggin,

 

If you read the Iliad, and start looking for the cities that are referenced in it, you'll might come up with quite a few of them actually existed for read. Even some of the people and kings too. Would this prove that Homer wrote the Iliad, and that Odysseus travelled and met giants and sea-nymphs? Does it mean that Zeus and Posseidon actually are true gods that exists?

 

A mythology that have some or minor foundation in true events and places, doesn't make the made up stuff real.

 

(I can't write more, my kids are fighting... again...)

[SkepticOfBible]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ine_none.htm

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I hope you read it. It works both ways.

 

 

Jesus' bodily resurrection could have happened. We have no eye witness account of the event,

Agreed

 

 

but no evidence of an event is not proof that the event never happened.

 

It is not for the skeptic to prove a negative. This is akin to saying "since there is no evidence of Allah's existience is not proof that the Allah does not exist".

 

Similarly, we have no proof that he was resurrected. The eye witness reports could have been based on mass hallucination.

 

Most likely scenarios, since these events occur even in our time.

[Amethyst]

The Great Pyramid appears to be the first, and best, pyramid of its series, (except for the step pyramids at Saqqara) and has some surprising features and proportions that do not require the use of writing. I would investigate it to see if you can explain how it came about that the best one came first, and seems to have scientific insight that was thousands of years ahead of its time.

 

FYI, the Egyptians were not Christian at the time the pyramids were built. IIRC from what I've read on them and various TV specials, etc., the pyramids were alligned with certain star constellations like Orion's belt so that the souls of the entombed could go up to the stars. The Egyptians worshiped Ra, among other ancient deities like Osiris, Isis, etc. The pyramids have nothing to do with Christianity.

 

Just because the Egyptians were mathematicians and engineers, that does not prove anything. Nor does it prove aliens built the pyramids or anything else like that. Human beings can be pretty darn intelligent on their own. Give people some credit where credit is due.

[diggin]

You evidentially have no concept of what the current atmosphere in Syrio-Palestinian (what you would mistakenly call Biblical) archaeology is.  Very few archaeologists will step forward and state that the Hebrew/Israelites were ever slaves in Egypt, that the social groups and language roots can be traced to the same region of Mesopotamia.  In fact, Hebrew can be traced to Arabia (it is a member of the Afro-Arabian language family), The various members of the Indo-European languages can be traced to an ancestor that originated on the Russian steppes as early as 5000 BCE, The Sino-Tibetan languages can be traced to the area of China, Indo-China, Tibet, et al at least as far back as 4000 BCE.  There is no archaeological evidence of a flood (several literate peoples lived at the time of the flood, yet none seem to have realized that they were writing and living under 6 miles of water for most of a year), no evidence of Hebrew slaves in Egypt, no evidence – Not one campsite – of an Exodus, no evidence of a Conquest of the “promised land”, no evidence of a “United Kingdom” or it’s two famous kings David and Solomon (not one contemporary written word about either) or no contemporary evidence for a Jesus of Nazareth in the  1st century CE.  There is a lot of evidence for a collapse of the Canaanite economy around the 13th century BCE due to the “Mycenaean Drought” (a meteorological incident that lasted from the 13th to the 11th century BCE) and the “retribalization” of the remains of the Canaanite peoples (one such group was the ancestral Jews and the another the proto-Israelites) and the beginning of the “early biblical” period.  They evidentially were related and seemed to worship a very similar set of gods, YHWH being the titular head of the pantheon with Asherah as his wife.  Later, as YWHW supplanted all the other gods and goddesses, the two peoples divided into the "Aaronoids" and the “Mushites” (one group’s priesthood claimed descent from Aaron and one group’s priests claimed descent from Moses.  You can trace the amalgamation of these peoples and their two related concepts of YHWH by studying the different sources of holy scripture that were joined together to make part of your OT. 

 

You are evidentially referring to the Mitochondrial Eve, she was not 2000 years ago (why do Christians always attempt to warp their info, don’t they think we can read and research) but rather 150,000 (a bit before the supposed flood)  the single common male ancestor was relatively recent 45,000 years ago.  If you are wanting to refer to the MRCA (most recent common ancestor) then you are referring only to a mathematical construct, the same science that proved Bumble bees can’t fly.

 

As I pointed out above, there is no archaeological evidence of a migration of 1,000,000 plus people through the Sinai or the wanderings of such a group for 40 years.  Not one piece of evidence, none, nada, zip.  The earliest law received from a god was by Hammurabi in the 25th century BCE…Just a bit before Moses don’t you see? 

 

I have no idea what the Great Pyramid has to do with the validity of Christianity, so I will pass on that.

 

Since humans were born and died for at least 125,000 years efore the Jews came along, I wouldn’t take the word of a document that was formulated around 560 BCE, by YHWHist priests to support the Temple state that the Persians had given Ezra permission to found.  Since the Persians did not like to rule the local people through a Persian governor, they normally installed a local ruler.  Local Princes often rebelled, so a religious government that was thankful to the Empire for their existence was the perfect thing to govern the people of Judah.  You might want to study the teachings of the Zoroastrian religion and see what all ideas that the priests of YHWH borrowed from the Persians.  You can also study Mithrian beliefs and see what Christianity borrowed from Mithra (also a Persian deity – the Son of Ahura Mazda and a savior). 

 

Well, there is no evidence that the Jews were ever slaves in Egypt and there is no contemporary evidence of a person named Jesus of Nazareth ever existing and there is no credible verifiable testimony that he resurrected (only 4 books written several generations after the supposed fact by non-witnesses writing to late to have access to eye-witnesses even mention his resurrection);  what this has to do with the beginning of the universe, I have no idea, but it does not prove any point about the validity of your religion.

 

Actually, I am more a Francis Hutchison type.  I believe that mankind has this built in love of his fellow man, that we need no directions from an invisible guy-in-the-sky, that sin is an invention of the YHWHist priests as a tool to control the populace and Christianity is nothing more than just another antique and tired mythology.

 

Please direct us, that might be amusing. - Heimdall 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I know very little about the areas mentioned -- so I'll do some research on each of your points -- give me a few weeks to get back to you.

 

I was simply suggesting areas that a person might want to investigate if he doesn't think the Bible is a credible source.

 

I don't think you answered my question about the universe. Do you think it has a beginning?

 

You say you believe man has built-in love of his fellow man. What evidence do you have for this?

I would think the Biblical concept of a fall, leading to the potential for total self-destruction if not averted at the last minute by an intervention by God, would be a better explanation than your instinctual love concept.

 

Richard

[pug]

Pug...

 

Why don't you check out this site and compare the creation story as compared to Genesis which was written by the Sumerians WAAAAAY before the Jews...

 

http://halexandria.org/dward181.htm

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thanks, SerenityNow. So, in conclusion:

 

>> At the most fundamental level, all religions are pretty much the same. They are, after all, talking about the same Universal Creator, the same history of Earth (however much we argue about the sequence and dating of events), and the same humanoids, extraterrestrials, and interdimensional beings running amuck on the planet’s surface and surrounding space.

 

Everything is connected, everything is one. But everything is also disguised in order to make it interesting in finding out how everything is one and connected.

 

2003© Copyright Dan Sewell Ward, All Rights Reserved

[pug]

Pug, have you thoroughly studied and analyzed these claims? Have you compared historical writings about earlier interpretations of the revelations? Have you studied the history of Christianity, in depth? Have you honestly sat down and made a rational thought about the claims by Josephus, and by other writers? Take a good look at those things, because we have debated and argued these things many times over on this site now.

 

I truly think that you want to be an honest and well regarded person, and you become one by doing your homework. I'm just preparing you for the flood of counter arguments that will come.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Han, Too much homework. So many claims and counterclaims. Which are the genuine articles? Urghhh. Sorry, I'm sure you have argued these tiresome things many times before. But it's still relatively new to me.

 

So, like I'm doing my homework here and now. Sorry for all your trouble.

 

Looks like Josephus is a hoax then?

 

Having said that, new things are being revealed as we debate (re: last link). Any hoo, dear all, thanks for humouring me nevertheless.

[pug]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You base your beliefs on the reliability of the Bible because of these links? 

These are just some of the sites defending the reliability of the Bible. But, as you know, the debate is still on-going.

 

Sloppy Pug.  Very sloppy.  I look forward to you defending what they say in your dialog with HanSolo.

Yes, agreed, sloppy. But with the time I have and my poor knowledge, that's about all I can do (for now). I do not wish to defend! Just share knowledge.

 

Because ultimately, I believe we will never know. For a bad analogy, if we were living in the time when electricity had not yet been discovered ~ how will we know what it is until it was discovered? It's invisible! Like god. But you can feel electricity's power. As for god, well, different people believe differently.

 

I believe there are more exciting discoveries in the future (we won't be dead by then i hope). Even proof of god!

 

Otherwise, I assume you really haven't studied what they said and just forwarded the first thing you found because it was someone who agreed with what you want to believe - just like how you see things as direct answers to your prayers. 

 

No, not the first thing I found. And not what i want to believe. I have an open mind. I read all the evidence.

 

No matter what, nothing is conclusive even as i type this. Tomorrow somebody may just dig up another Dead Sea document which proves God's 1 day = 10,000 human years. Or Jews actually migrated out of Egypt. Or another Turin shroud. But until then, yes, proof of the compilation of the 66 books known as the Bible, is still....errr... as this link shows:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/575168.stm

 

Pur-leeze. Very seldom will i get direct answers to my prayers. How i wish! However, let's not belittle that since I'm the only person directly reaping the rewards.

 

Be careful in what evidence you choose to present.

I present the evidence IMHO is the most convincing. But you all have even more convincing evidence. So, I profit. No risk, no gain. Amen?

[pug]

I hope you read it. It works both ways.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yep, I did. It sure does.

[pug]

AND here are 300++ proofs of God's existence:

 

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

 

[Please don't take it too seriously.]

 

I love #13 tho'

[Heimdall]

I don't think you answered my question about the universe. Do you think it has a beginning?

As the first Deist posting on this board and now one of the many resident Deists, yes, I believe the universe had a beginning. My concept of the beginning is nothing like that held by Christ Cultists and concerns a Creator that caused the start (possibly the Big Bang) and then for reasons of his own, left his "life-friendly" creation to chart its course. Evolution is an accepted theory in the Deist concept of the universe. - heimdall

[Antlerman]

You evidentially have no concept of what the current atmosphere in Syrio-Palestinian (what you would mistakenly call Biblical) archaeology is.  Very few archaeologists will step forward and state that the Hebrew/Israelites were ever slaves in Egypt, that the social groups and language roots can be traced to the same region of Mesopotamia.  In fact, Hebrew can be traced to Arabia (it is a member of the Afro-Arabian language family), The various members of the Indo-European languages can be traced to an ancestor that originated on the Russian steppes as early as 5000 BCE, The Sino-Tibetan languages can be traced to the area of China, Indo-China, Tibet, et al at least as far back as 4000 BCE.  There is no archaeological evidence of a flood (several literate peoples lived at the time of the flood, yet none seem to have realized that they were writing and living under 6 miles of water for most of a year), no evidence of Hebrew slaves in Egypt, no evidence – Not one campsite – of an Exodus, no evidence of a Conquest of the “promised land”, no evidence of a “United Kingdom” or it’s two famous kings David and Solomon (not one contemporary written word about either) or no contemporary evidence for a Jesus of Nazareth in the  1st century CE.  There is a lot of evidence for a collapse of the Canaanite economy around the 13th century BCE due to the “Mycenaean Drought” (a meteorological incident that lasted from the 13th to the 11th century BCE) and the “retribalization” of the remains of the Canaanite peoples (one such group was the ancestral Jews and the another the proto-Israelites) and the beginning of the “early biblical” period.  They evidentially were related and seemed to worship a very similar set of gods, YHWH being the titular head of the pantheon with Asherah as his wife.  Later, as YWHW supplanted all the other gods and goddesses, the two peoples divided into the "Aaronoids" and the “Mushites” (one group’s priesthood claimed descent from Aaron and one group’s priests claimed descent from Moses.  You can trace the amalgamation of these peoples and their two related concepts of YHWH by studying the different sources of holy scripture that were joined together to make part of your OT. 

 

<snip>

 

[etc.]

 

Excellent information. I've been looking for more references to this study of history I'm loosly familiar with like which I'd referenced above in my response to him. Can you point to some links to these? It would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks

[BlueGiant]

Not so sure that the universe had to have a beginning. IIRC Hawking was working on a zero-boundary condition universe, one that did not need a starting big bang. Not sure whatever became of that line of work, though.

 

As far as the Isrealites and Egypt, how come there is no famous writing about the slaves leaving or the sudden death of a Pharoh and his Army (and like any good beuacracy, they wrote down a lot)? I mean, there should probably be some kind of monument to it at least or some writing on a toomb somewhere, had it happened.

 

As far as Troy and the Illiad (and the Odessy and the Aeneid), there is a ruin that corresponds to Troy at about the time that it should have been sacked as it was in those epics. Turns out that there were about nine versions of Troy, each building on the ruins of the last and I believe the one that corresponds to that story is VIIb. Been a while, but this is what I recall from my studies in Latin in HS (it came up as we did some serious work with the Aeneid).

[Amethyst]

Not so sure that the universe had to have a beginning. IIRC Hawking was working on a zero-boundary condition universe, one that did not need a starting big bang. Not sure whatever became of that line of work, though.

 

Right. Why couldn't it have always existed? For all we know, it has.

[MQTA]

for all intents and purposes, it always has existed and it's not like we can trace it back.. we can't even trace back our planet's history, much less this solar system or galaxy.

 

Does Christianity not exist if you can't make the leap from puny humans on this planet up to the ENTIRE universe, having the same creator?

 

I think it's a smoke screen to mask OUR creator and make us think it's the same as who created the planet and universe. How much harder, than an unknown invisible God to create all, and us, is it to accept beings from elsewhere in the galaxy or universe genetically engineering homo sapiens or any of our living beings on this planet?

 

It's one thing to deny everything except your big book fantasy, but to deny anyone else is just as entitled to their fantasyland answer, is the ultimate in ostrichness.

[Ouroboros]

Han, Too much homework. So many claims and counterclaims. Which are the genuine articles? Urghhh. Sorry, I'm sure you have argued these tiresome things many times before. But it's still relatively new to me.

 

So, like I'm doing my homework here and now. Sorry for all your trouble.

Very true. There's a lot of information out there, and it's hard to go through all of it. At least you're keeping a good attitude about it.

 

Looks like Josephus is a hoax then?

Not Josephus himself. But the particular passage that references Jesus have been heavily disputed to be authentic or not. You can see it two ways, either Josephus didn't want to write about Jesus at all, or he would have written a lot about Jesus. He was after all living in the same century as Jesus, and would have been more affected by the movement of Christianity, if it was so powerful as it pretends to be.

 

But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought it before the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.[17]

You have to realize that Josephus was a Jew, and not a Christian. To call someone Christ, is in fact to admit that person being annoited and sent by God. Josephus basically deconverts in this statement from Judaism to Christianity. But nowhere else, in his writings, or his actions, does it proves that he would be a Christian. Everything points to that he still was a Jew. How can he write something like this?

 

The alternative explanation is that his reference is not about admitting Jesus to be Christ, but to differentiate this particular Jesus from other "Jesus"s that he writes about. But he could have used a reference like "the one who was crucified by Pilate." Or he could have called him for what he was, "the cult leader that claimed to be from God."

 

I wouldn't make a reference to Saddam Hussein as "Saddam the so-called Hero", because even if it admits that I don't think he is, it still would be to insinuate that everyone else consider him to be a hero. Wouldn't that be very rude on my part? To claim that everyone else believe Saddam is a Hero, but I'm so smart that I know he isn't? Did Josephus intent to say that everyone else believed in Jesus as Christ, but not him? Was the Roman empire already overtaken and won for Christianity in the first century?

 

 

Having said that, new things are being revealed as we debate (re: last link). Any hoo, dear all, thanks for humouring me nevertheless.

No problem.

[Ouroboros]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/575168.stm

Thanks for the link. Very interesting read.

 

I found this quote most amusing!

He argues,"lack of evidence does not mean evidence of lack."

That's a Jewish rabbi saying that about the archeologists theories. Where have I heard that kind of statement before?

[MQTA]

well, it sure made an impact.. 1970 years and we're STILL talking about it. but maybe that's it.. if not for the Bible and all that stems from it, what other point of reference and topic fodder would any of us have, to talk about?

 

Whether you're a believer, or not, or religious or spiritual or humanist... whatever you are, it's still all centered and point-of-referenced around God/our creator/the belief side of our existance.

 

I think a lot of people speak with a language of colorful words, how else could they speak? Some people can't speak for themselves, so they need to use bigger weapons than themselves to get people to pay attention to them.

 

 

Who becomes priests and monks? Not the football players and cheer leaders. There seems to be a whole psychological profile to life-long believers who have the need to tell others how they should be living their lives.

[All Gods Fail]

As far as the Isrealites and Egypt, how come there is no famous writing about the slaves leaving or the sudden death of a Pharoh and his Army (and like any good beuacracy, they wrote down a lot)?  I mean, there should probably be some kind of monument to it at least or some writing on a toomb somewhere, had it happened.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Also, am I right in thinking that many archeologists now question if slave labor was really used in building the pyramids? That it was probably paid work, and attracted large numbers of foreign workers?

 

Can't remember where I heard that.

[Antlerman]

Also, am I right in thinking that many archeologists now question if slave labor was really used in building the pyramids? That it was probably paid work, and attracted large numbers of foreign workers?

 

Can't remember where I heard that.

It was a special on PBS. Don't recall the name of it off hand. I think they base that in part from the burial sites and living conditions of the workers not being what would be expected with enslaved people.

[MQTA]

It was a special on PBS.  Don't recall the name of it off hand.  I think they base that in part from the burial sites and living conditions of the workers not being  what would be expected with enslaved people.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

plus the paycheck stubs they found at the base? LOL

[Razor]

I think you would have to dis proove your own conciencness or awareness if you like, to proove that God does not exist.

 

Where does that awareness come from?

 

Then there is that full range of emotions that we all have that is also not physical.

 

Lots to explain away eh!

 

Peace

[Razor]

Hello dear friends. As I've noticed throughout the Christian belief structure, there seems to be a lot of turning to the Bible to prove God. I'd like to explain my thoughts on this, and offer a small challenge.

 

I believe that to accept the Bible as true - and therefore for the proof within it to be accurate, and the 'fulfilled' prophecies within it to be considered anything more than chance and coincidence, we first have to establish its authenticity.

 

This requires 2 things: Proving God exists - and proving that God is the author/inspiration of the Bible. However, 2 authenticate a document - you need an outside source - rather than the document itself.

 

I challenge you therefore, to provide me with non-biblical evidences, recordings and proof that 1) God exists (if this is proving to dificult for you, you may ignore this point, and for the sake of the argument we will hypothetically accept God's existing a priori.) 2) He is the Christian God, and the Bible is his inspired word.

 

The conditions of this are as such: The Bible is not to be used, or referenced as a source. No scriptures, no prophecies, nothing from the Bible.

 

I eagerly look forward to any information you can provide me with.

 

Thank you, TSO

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

One Question I do have is , what independant authentication do you have that God does not exist?

Outside of a bunch of people saying he does not exist, because that can be matched by as many people saying he does Exist.

 

Peace

[crazy-tiger]

One Question I do have is , what independant authentication do you have that God does not exist?

Outside of a bunch of people saying he does not exist, because that can be matched by as many people saying he does Exist.

 

Peace

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you really trying to make the argument that it exists until proven not to exist? Are you really going to try an argument that shows that Allah, Odin, Loki, Osiris, Baal, Ra, Zeus, Posiden and every single other "godlike" being also exist?

 

 

You don't understand how it works... If I said that I have been in contact with an entirely new form of life that comes from a seperate universe, you wouldn't believe me until I could prove it.

 

Why? Because the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.

 

So, if I make the claim that Ra exists, would you believe me? You can't prove that he doesn't, so it means he must... if you want to follow the argument.

 

 

 

Think carefully... do you want to make that argument?