|
Post by rational on Feb 22, 2020 11:36:53 GMT -5
"Doesn't that indicate that they are not really interested in telling the truth but only twisting their findings to support their own beliefs?" Thanks Wally for quoting that, otherwise I would not have seen it. Very good - the former 2x2 atheist poster has nothing to say regarding the evidence contained within the featured article, but posts quotes from a 'buttonized' access to a separate page named, PASTOR RESOURCE SITE pastors.patternsofevidence.com/And my thanks to that former 2x2 atheist for posting quotes - and providing an obviously suggestive 'question.' <SNIP> - to save space removed text that did not concern the accuracy of the films <SNIP> For centuries, a historical and religious controversy has existed around certain events described in the pages of the Bible. In the 1950’s, this controversy accelerated when archaeologists showed mounting evidence that directly contradicted the Bible. One event in particular holds tremendous significance for people of faith all over the world – the Exodus of Israel and their deliverance from slavery in Egypt by the leadership of Moses. However, because no archeological evidence had yet been found to support the event, most archaeologists abandoned the search for Moses and the Exodus as “a fruitless pursuit”. This is much like the search for the N-Rays described by French physicist Prosper-René Blondlot. When it was determined they didn't exist people stopped looking for them. Much like searching for a púca - for those who can accept belief without proof it exists! (Thanks to the 1950 film Harvey - a much better film to watch!)Maybe it is not a mistake made by the worlds of archaeology and Egyptology but the fact that the search is attempting to find data supporting a myth. For some stories but there seems to be little data to support 2 million people walking around a relatively small area for 40 years in a climate whhich would be very good for preserving artifacts. Right. What archeologist would not like to discover proof of the exodus. Not myths from an ancient text that has no data to support it. But no data to support his claims.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 23, 2020 22:19:59 GMT -5
<SNIP> - Response that does not address questions posted - <SNIP> You posted the videos. Point out the data that supports the claims.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 24, 2020 10:03:02 GMT -5
Snip & zap - Response that does not address the post, which contains no questions Aw, what's the matter rational, too much work for you to take a look at the evidence in the video - ask your mommy to watch it for you then. It would seem by this time you would have realized how fruitless it is for you to make personal attacks against me. There was no evidence in the videos - just unsupported beliefs. Perhaps at some point you will actually post information that you can back up with something more than unsupported beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 24, 2020 17:39:43 GMT -5
This introductory video unavoidably SHOWS that the TMB babble on is based upon willful ignorance, which is quite common to 2x2s and former 2x2s. The Middle Kingdom period of the new date for the Exodus was not Tim Mahoney's idea. That dating is the work of a highly honored Historian and Egyptologist, Agnostic, David Rohl, as this video details by David Rohl himself. Is this the same David Rohl whose book, A Test of Time, is banned from the British Museum store because if its inaccuracies? The same David Rohl whose proposed revisions were not supported by recent radiocarbon dating? Did you present any of the research that supports Rohl's claims? Believing and providing supporting data are two very different things. <SNIP> - Response providing no supporting data - <SNIP> You keep talking about evidence but can never be counted on to present any. Repeating over and over that the video contains evidence does not make it so. Did you ever consider that I am not responding to your posts for your benefit but to introduce some factual references into the discussions so readers can verify what have been pointed out as errors? Consider the posts as candles in the dark against your demon-haunted world. Well, maybe not always demon haunted but dangerously imaginary. (Thanks to Carl Sagan)
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 24, 2020 22:58:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 25, 2020 11:52:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 25, 2020 11:55:25 GMT -5
Thanks for the link – The linked page has no site id, and glancing at its introductory, I don't blame it for hiding itself on the net such that no one can research that site. Excerpts – the introduction paragraphs – very different from rational's made out to be quote (blue text, which shows up nowhere on the linked site that I could find), or from somewhere the source of which must be FURTHER hunted for to see any context: quote (from rational's link) Little conclusive evidence for an historical Old Testament has come to light in two centuries of archaeological endeavour. Ever since excavations in the Lands of the Bible began at the beginning of the last century, biblical scholars have been systematically stripping out elements of the narratives - the stories of Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Saul, David and Solomon - and consigning them to the realms of myth and folklore. Egyptologist and ancient historian David Rohl has made a discovery which challenges the modern sceptical view of Old Testament history. His revolutionary theory demonstrates that archaeologists have been looking in the right places for evidence of the Israelites - but in completely the wrong time. The New Chronology developed in A TEST OF TIME reveals the true historical setting of the biblical epics, providing astonishing archaeological evidence for the existence of the Old Testament's most charismatic personalities. For the first time the lives of Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Saul, David and Solomon are examined from an historical perspective, as David Rohl explores their cities, palaces and tombs. A TEST OF TIME unveils such archaeological wonders as the desecrated statue of Joseph in his 'coat of many colours', the Israelite city of bondage in Egypt (including graphic evidence of the plagues), and letters from King Saul. unquote Now to add the point by point by point: Rational - “No, his claims are in the video. There is no indication of the data (if any) to support the conclusions he presented .“ Ah huh – and David Rohl speaks to that issue in the video – AND the linked site does say that David Rohl's research and evidence is still rejected by most (but not all) archaeologists in favor of the wrong time period that they hang onto regardless of any contrary evidence. AND David Rohl's research is backed by a number of other Egyptologists and archaologists IN David Rohl's video. Just who might rational accept as “indication of the data“??? No one, I suspect because no one knows as much about the topic as rational does – ho hum. rational - “I was leaving that up to you and your search skills.” Thanks for the rational-test of my 'intellectually inferior' searching skills – but I did not waste my time trying to pass rational's 'skill tester.' theory - It i rational - “You were presenting Rohl's expertise in support of the video. I was pointing out that the word 'expert' might need to be redefined.” Yup – rational was “pointing out” that “expert” might need to be redefined to meet rational's level of Egyptian Archaeological expertise – ho hum. rational - “Readers should know as much as possible about sources presented.” Again, on that ONE point in rational's whole post, I fully agree with - i.e., Readers should know as much as possible about rational. Just point to the place where the data supporti Rohl's claims can be found. Or the research describing the data. Or anything other than unsupported beliefs. I don't know much abou the history of Egypt. But I do know a poorly supported claim. Did you wonder why most professional individuals and organizations reject Rohl's conclusion? For the same reason they rejected Lisle's theory - It is not supported by verifiable data.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 25, 2020 15:27:29 GMT -5
“Did you wonder why most professional individuals and organizations reject Rohl's conclusion?” Nope – The Bible explained why to me while I was still very young. Popularity does not imply truth. Millions saw Starwars as well but there is no truth implied. It takes a special mind to equate popularity with truth. Yep, I can feel it crumbling. But given your proclivity to post videos containing outright lies and piles of inaccurate data what can be done? Sites that are the source of most of your posts have already tried to lower the level of education. To allow it to continue without presenting some verifiable information to counter the BS would be wrong. Ah yes, the end of times. How many people have claimed it was 'just around the corner" and it never comes. Another case of blind belief.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Feb 25, 2020 19:36:10 GMT -5
rational- “It takes a special mind to equate popularity with truth.” Awwww I nowwww – Tell me somethin I dowwwwn nowww - I've been watchin the popularity of your religion's dogma for most of my life, and it still hasn't become true. . rational “Yep, I can feel it crumbling. But given your proclivity to post videos containing outright lies and piles of inaccurate data what can be done? Sites that are the source of most of your posts have already tried to lower the level of education. To allow it to continue without presenting some verifiable information to counter the BS would be wrong. “ Awwww I nowwww – Tell me somethin I dowwwwn nowww - I've been watchin the popularity of your religion's dogma for most of my life, and it still hasn't become true. rational - “Ah yes, the end of times. How many people have claimed it was 'just around the corner" and it never comes. Another case of blind belief.” It looks like God knew rational very well ages before rational existed: Psalm 14:1 Fools say to themselves,2 “There is no God.”3 They sin and commit evil deeds;4 none of them does what is right.5 2 Peter 3:3 Above all, understand this:8 In the last days blatant scoffers9 will come, being propelled by their own evil urges10 3:4 and saying,11 “Where is his promised return?12 For ever since13 our ancestors14 died,15 all things have continued as they were16 from the beginning of creation.” 3:5 For they deliberately suppress this fact,17 that by the word of God18 heavens existed long ago and an earth19 was formed out of water and by means of water. (Final comp "2 minutes ago") You are so predictable
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 25, 2020 22:11:31 GMT -5
rational- “It takes a special mind to equate popularity with truth.” Awwww I nowwww – Tell me somethin I dowwwwn nowww - I've been watchin the popularity of your religion's dogma for most of my life, and it still hasn't become true. . rational “Yep, I can feel it crumbling. But given your proclivity to post videos containing outright lies and piles of inaccurate data what can be done? Sites that are the source of most of your posts have already tried to lower the level of education. To allow it to continue without presenting some verifiable information to counter the BS would be wrong. “ Awwww I nowwww – Tell me somethin I dowwwwn nowww - I've been watchin the popularity of your religion's dogma for most of my life, and it still hasn't become true. rational - “Ah yes, the end of times. How many people have claimed it was 'just around the corner" and it never comes. Another case of blind belief.” It looks like God knew rational very well ages before rational existed: Psalm 14:1 Fools say to themselves,2 “There is no God.”3 They sin and commit evil deeds;4 none of them does what is right.5 2 Peter 3:3 Above all, understand this:8 In the last days blatant scoffers9 will come, being propelled by their own evil urges10 3:4 and saying,11 “Where is his promised return?12 For ever since13 our ancestors14 died,15 all things have continued as they were16 from the beginning of creation.” 3:5 For they deliberately suppress this fact,17 that by the word of God18 heavens existed long ago and an earth19 was formed out of water and by means of water. (Final comp "2 minutes ago") You are so predictable Tough not to be when you have nothing to support your beliefs but more unsupported beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 26, 2020 13:54:33 GMT -5
rational - "You are so predictable" Again, displaying your prowess as a computer user, you have misattributed the quote. As in your misquote, I believe you are mistaken. Wise move to delete your posts. It might afford you plausible deniability, something I am sure you find useful. Keeping your posts visible to people is a public service to make sure there is some bit of truth available. Of course, deleting your own posts leave more of the truth available. And the exceptionally absurd posts get piled on the trash heap for comic relief.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Feb 26, 2020 13:56:24 GMT -5
rational - "You are so predictable" With rational the pot is always calling the kettle black, and probably necessarily so - he knows how it is done and therefore is able to project it upon anyone he chooses - at least in his own mind. And he obviously liked my last, now deleted post, so much that he posted the same quote twice in a row. And in the process rational has seen to it that this thread is still high on page one - so predictably he makes himself my helper - lately with the quoted bit of hog wash in place of his former endless crowing of his 'intellectual superiority' over everyone else. But, predictably, he WILL have last word, usefully bumping this thread top side for me any time I want him to do so - get it done rational this thread is seven down from top side. That was me not Rational.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 28, 2020 20:47:51 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2020 21:45:47 GMT -5
ummm Christ was born in bethlehem not nazareth. nazareth was likely the place that the wise men caught up to him when he was about 1 or 2
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 28, 2020 22:52:55 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 29, 2020 0:11:24 GMT -5
not sure where that came from... but it does bring up an interesting question... what gets more dirty and used up 1 house used by 10 men or 1 man using 10 houses?
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Feb 29, 2020 0:21:49 GMT -5
The yow-yow on this thread reminds me of that which I underwent by the TZmB cops many years ago! It was so bad, I left for a period of 2-3 years, never intended to come back but fool that I am and watching it all over again.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 29, 2020 4:13:03 GMT -5
not sure where that came from... but it does bring up an interesting question... what gets more dirty and used up 1 house used by 10 men or 1 man using 10 houses? Only dirty people wash.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 29, 2020 9:13:41 GMT -5
Quoted from the transcript of that video, right at the beginning: "I'm James Randi or did you guess there are well accepted accounts from the Bible that Christians and others never question events and locations that are part of the story told of Christ and his history one such is the account in John 1 of the birth of Christ in the lower Galilee town of Nazareth...." Google search “In what town was Jesus born?” Answer - Jesus was born in a town called Bethlehem which is 5 or 6 miles south of Jerusalem. www.answers.com/Q/In_what_town_was_Jesus_born So much for your video xna. The main point of the video is to discredit the claims of the bible and those of the Nazareth Village Resort. The main point was Nazareth the town, did not exist at the time of Jesus as described in John 1 or the claims of the Nazareth Village Resort, so the bible is not supported in fact. Only Matthew and Luke talk about Jesus' birth but each have varying discrepancies in describing Jesus' birth. There is no historical evidence of Jesus birth outside of the bible. Most people accept the story that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but there are those who say he was born in Nazareth. Marcus Borg who founded the Jesus Seminar, John Dominic and others claim he was born in Nazareth. The problem here is there are two Bethlehems there, Bethlehem in Galilee was only seven miles northwest of Nazareth but the Bethlehem of Judea is more than 100 miles. So to make the story fit better you could switch Bethlehem Judah to Bethlehem Galilee, a 7 mile walk. The problem is, now we know there is no evidence that Nazareth exited around the time of Jesus birth, as described in the video. So much for bible version of Patterns of Evidence..... Micah 5:2 King James Version (KJV) 2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
Was Jesus born in a different Bethlehem?
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Feb 29, 2020 11:06:21 GMT -5
Quoted from the transcript of that video, right at the beginning: "I'm James Randi or did you guess there are well accepted accounts from the Bible that Christians and others never question events and locations that are part of the story told of Christ and his history one such is the account in John 1 of the birth of Christ in the lower Galilee town of Nazareth...." Google search “In what town was Jesus born?” Answer - Jesus was born in a town called Bethlehem which is 5 or 6 miles south of Jerusalem. www.answers.com/Q/In_what_town_was_Jesus_born So much for your video xna. The main point of the video is to discredit the claims of the bible and those of the Nazareth Village Resort. The main point was Nazareth the town, did not exist at the time of Jesus as described in John 1 or the claims of the Nazareth Village Resort, so the bible is not supported in fact. Only Matthew and Luke talk about Jesus' birth but each have varying discrepancies in describing Jesus' birth. There is no historical evidence of Jesus birth outside of the bible. Most people accept the story that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but there are those who say he was born in Nazareth. Marcus Borg who founded the Jesus Seminar, John Dominic and others claim he was born in Nazareth. The problem here is there are two Bethlehems there, Bethlehem in Galilee was only seven miles northwest of Nazareth but the Bethlehem of Judea is more than 100 miles. So to make the story fit better you could switch Bethlehem Judah to Bethlehem Galilee, a 7 mile walk. The problem is, now we know there is no evidence that Nazareth exited around the time of Jesus birth, as described in the video. So much for bible version of Patterns of Evidence..... Micah 5:2 King James Version (KJV) 2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
Was Jesus born in a different Bethlehem?Wikipedia/Nazareth-2200AD Hebrew Netzer One view holds that "Nazareth" is derived from one of the Hebrew words for 'branch', namely ne·ṣer, נֵ֫צֶר,[8] and alludes to the prophetic, messianic words in Book of Isaiah 11:1, 'from (Jesse's) roots a Branch (netzer) will bear fruit'. One view suggests this toponym might be an example of a tribal name used by resettling groups on their return from exile.[9] Alternatively, the name may derive from the verb na·ṣar, נָצַר, "watch, guard, keep,"[10] and understood either in the sense of "watchtower" or "guard place", implying the early town was perched on or near the brow of the hill, or, in the passive sense as 'preserved, protected' in reference to its secluded position.[11] The negative references to Nazareth in the Gospel of John suggest that ancient Jews did not connect the town's name to prophecy.[12] Bronze and Iron Age In 1620 the Catholic Church purchased an area in the Nazareth basin measuring approximately 100 m × 150 m (328.08 ft × 492.13 ft) on the side of the hill known as the Nebi Sa'in.[citation needed] The Franciscan priest Bellarmino Bagatti, "Director of Christian Archaeology", carried out extensive excavation of this "Venerated Area" from 1955 to 1965. Fr. Bagatti uncovered pottery dating from the Middle Bronze Age (2200 to 1500 BC) and ceramics, silos and grinding mills from the Iron Age (1500 to 586 BC) which indicated substantial settlement in the Nazareth basin at that time. However, lack of archaeological evidence for Nazareth from Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Hellenistic or Early Roman times, at least in the major excavations between 1955 and 1990, shows that the settlement apparently came to an abrupt end about 720 BC, when the Assyrians destroyed many towns in the area.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 29, 2020 11:57:05 GMT -5
Wikipedia/Nazareth-2200AD Hebrew Netzer One view holds that "Nazareth" is derived from one of the Hebrew words for 'branch', namely ne·ṣer, נֵ֫צֶר,[8] and alludes to the prophetic, messianic words in Book of Isaiah 11:1, 'from (Jesse's) roots a Branch (netzer) will bear fruit'. One view suggests this toponym might be an example of a tribal name used by resettling groups on their return from exile.[9] Alternatively, the name may derive from the verb na·ṣar, נָצַר, "watch, guard, keep,"[10] and understood either in the sense of "watchtower" or "guard place", implying the early town was perched on or near the brow of the hill, or, in the passive sense as 'preserved, protected' in reference to its secluded position.[11] The negative references to Nazareth in the Gospel of John suggest that ancient Jews did not connect the town's name to prophecy.[12] Bronze and Iron Age In 1620 the Catholic Church purchased an area in the Nazareth basin measuring approximately 100 m × 150 m (328.08 ft × 492.13 ft) on the side of the hill known as the Nebi Sa'in.[citation needed] The Franciscan priest Bellarmino Bagatti, "Director of Christian Archaeology", carried out extensive excavation of this "Venerated Area" from 1955 to 1965. Fr. Bagatti uncovered pottery dating from the Middle Bronze Age (2200 to 1500 BC) and ceramics, silos and grinding mills from the Iron Age (1500 to 586 BC) which indicated substantial settlement in the Nazareth basin at that time. However, lack of archaeological evidence for Nazareth from Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Hellenistic or Early Roman times, at least in the major excavations between 1955 and 1990, shows that the settlement apparently came to an abrupt end about 720 BC, when the Assyrians destroyed many towns in the area. I'm not sure we will ever know for certain where Jesus was born. The controversy is highlighted in the book The Myth of Nazareth. Since there are at least two Nazareth's, and two Bethlehems in that part of the world, a 9 month pregnant woman could more likely make the shorter trip vs. the much longer trip. It's also strange that, two gospels don't talk about the birth at all and only Matthew says Joseph and Mary went to Egypt with the infant. Both the birth and trip to Egypt I would have thought would have made it into all four synoptic gospels. I would expect if you dig enough you would find evidence of human inhabitance going back hundreds of thousands of years in this part of the world.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Feb 29, 2020 12:23:01 GMT -5
Wikipedia/Nazareth-2200AD Hebrew Netzer One view holds that "Nazareth" is derived from one of the Hebrew words for 'branch', namely ne·ṣer, נֵ֫צֶר,[8] and alludes to the prophetic, messianic words in Book of Isaiah 11:1, 'from (Jesse's) roots a Branch (netzer) will bear fruit'. One view suggests this toponym might be an example of a tribal name used by resettling groups on their return from exile.[9] Alternatively, the name may derive from the verb na·ṣar, נָצַר, "watch, guard, keep,"[10] and understood either in the sense of "watchtower" or "guard place", implying the early town was perched on or near the brow of the hill, or, in the passive sense as 'preserved, protected' in reference to its secluded position.[11] The negative references to Nazareth in the Gospel of John suggest that ancient Jews did not connect the town's name to prophecy.[12] Bronze and Iron Age In 1620 the Catholic Church purchased an area in the Nazareth basin measuring approximately 100 m × 150 m (328.08 ft × 492.13 ft) on the side of the hill known as the Nebi Sa'in.[citation needed] The Franciscan priest Bellarmino Bagatti, "Director of Christian Archaeology", carried out extensive excavation of this "Venerated Area" from 1955 to 1965. Fr. Bagatti uncovered pottery dating from the Middle Bronze Age (2200 to 1500 BC) and ceramics, silos and grinding mills from the Iron Age (1500 to 586 BC) which indicated substantial settlement in the Nazareth basin at that time. However, lack of archaeological evidence for Nazareth from Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Hellenistic or Early Roman times, at least in the major excavations between 1955 and 1990, shows that the settlement apparently came to an abrupt end about 720 BC, when the Assyrians destroyed many towns in the area. I'm not sure we will ever know for certain where Jesus was born. The controversy is highlighted in the book The Myth of Nazareth. Since there are at least two Nazareth's, and two Bethlehems in that part of the world, a 9 month pregnant woman could more likely make the shorter trip vs. the much longer trip. It's also strange that, two gospels don't talk about the birth at all and only Matthew says Joseph and Mary went to Egypt with the infant. Both the birth and trip to Egypt I would have thought would have made it into all four synoptic gospels. I would expect if you dig enough you would find evidence of human inhabitance going back hundreds of thousands of years in this part of the world. I don’t get from the Bible that Bethlehem was a city of any size if at all. More of a community. David was a shepherds boy so he’d been caring for the sheep that produced lambs used for offerings in the tabernacle whenever it was available. Bethlehem was known as the center for sheep raising in Jesus’ day for the lamb offerings in the temple. I know it says “inn” but it was a common thing for house holders in that day to have “upper room(s)” to let to travelers. And this would be a likely reason that there was no room in the inn because the house so likely used had all its guest chambers filled but not necessarily so many rooms at that. I don’t think it imperative that the same stories be found in all four gospels. It seems to me that as it was individuals that wrote or dictated these gospels, that the things they wrote about were the things that they remembered as being of importance. Just as on TMB, we all don’t present the same thing that we think important or memorable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 29, 2020 12:31:32 GMT -5
Wikipedia/Nazareth-2200AD Hebrew Netzer One view holds that "Nazareth" is derived from one of the Hebrew words for 'branch', namely ne·ṣer, נֵ֫צֶר,[8] and alludes to the prophetic, messianic words in Book of Isaiah 11:1, 'from (Jesse's) roots a Branch (netzer) will bear fruit'. One view suggests this toponym might be an example of a tribal name used by resettling groups on their return from exile.[9] Alternatively, the name may derive from the verb na·ṣar, נָצַר, "watch, guard, keep,"[10] and understood either in the sense of "watchtower" or "guard place", implying the early town was perched on or near the brow of the hill, or, in the passive sense as 'preserved, protected' in reference to its secluded position.[11] The negative references to Nazareth in the Gospel of John suggest that ancient Jews did not connect the town's name to prophecy.[12] Bronze and Iron Age In 1620 the Catholic Church purchased an area in the Nazareth basin measuring approximately 100 m × 150 m (328.08 ft × 492.13 ft) on the side of the hill known as the Nebi Sa'in.[citation needed] The Franciscan priest Bellarmino Bagatti, "Director of Christian Archaeology", carried out extensive excavation of this "Venerated Area" from 1955 to 1965. Fr. Bagatti uncovered pottery dating from the Middle Bronze Age (2200 to 1500 BC) and ceramics, silos and grinding mills from the Iron Age (1500 to 586 BC) which indicated substantial settlement in the Nazareth basin at that time. However, lack of archaeological evidence for Nazareth from Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Hellenistic or Early Roman times, at least in the major excavations between 1955 and 1990, shows that the settlement apparently came to an abrupt end about 720 BC, when the Assyrians destroyed many towns in the area. I'm not sure we will ever know for certain where Jesus was born. The controversy is highlighted in the book The Myth of Nazareth. Since there are at least two Nazareth's, and two Bethlehems in that part of the world, a 9 month pregnant woman could more likely make the shorter trip vs. the much longer trip. It's also strange that, two gospels don't talk about the birth at all and only Matthew says Joseph and Mary went to Egypt with the infant. Both the birth and trip to Egypt I would have thought would have made it into all four synoptic gospels. I would expect if you dig enough you would find evidence of human inhabitance going back hundreds of thousands of years in this part of the world. if the gospels all had the exact same information in them it would be called collusion by non-believers...so we can't win for losing....
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 29, 2020 12:53:40 GMT -5
Yup, at any cost, come hell or high water – the Bible predicted this ages ago, so the enactment before all human eyes these days these days, for believers (2x2/visitors perhaps) could be a booster of reason to trust in the Bible. So I suppose that believers might offer a thank-you to such as James Randi for the cost and effort he spends to spread his own reason's to “discredit the claims of the bible.” Ho hum Well @gratu the more I looked into this matter, the more I think both James Randi and René Salm from his book The Myth of Nazareth got this wrong. I came to this conclusion after reading Bart Ehrman's blog on the subject Did Nazareth Exist? That's called, changing your mind based on new evidence, which is the opposite of your biblical dogma. I will also point out that if James Randi and René Salm got this wrong, it does not follow that the bible got it right. The only support for the bible claim of where Jesus was born is the bible, and in that, only in one of the four synoptic gospels says that. But what we can prove is; James Randi was able to show no one could demonstrate any supernatural claim, (you know like in the bible) during the many years of the One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 29, 2020 13:12:07 GMT -5
Yup, at any cost, come hell or high water – the Bible predicted this ages ago, so the enactment before all human eyes these days of all days, for believers (2x2/visitors perhaps) could be a booster of reason to trust in the Bible. So I suppose that believers might offer a thank-you to such as James Randi for the cost and effort he spends to spread his own reason's to “discredit the claims of the bible.” Ho hum @gratu I forgot to ask; Why does your post title end with "- for 2x2/visitors"?
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Feb 29, 2020 13:35:46 GMT -5
I wanted to find an ICE Cream Cone but my faith she was "weak." I found none!
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 29, 2020 13:45:57 GMT -5
For believers THAT is solid 'granite' on which to stand, as given by the Creator Himself. And I already gave you the evidence of the supernatural fact that the current widespread dumping of the Bible as the word of the Creator is predicted in the Bible written AGES ago, but then the Bible also predicts that as it was in the days of Noah it will be again in the last days (which we have lived in for 2000 years already) - i.e., the masses will 'eat, drink, and be marry' right up to the actual last opportunity to change their minds and heed the signs of our times, which were foretold AGES ago in the Bible. @gratu Christianity is not being turned away from, like in the days of Noah. Today there are 2.1 Billion Saved Christians. If I recall correctly, the bible says in Noah day, 8 were saved. 8 vs. 2,000,000,000 are not even close to being comparable numbers ..... You don't even need to take your shoes off to tell the difference..... You must be joking
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 29, 2020 14:16:03 GMT -5
"You must be joking" - translation - "eat, drink and be merry." I just completed my post and you might take a new reading of it to see that I AM NOT JOKING IN THE LEAST. Let's examine "eat, drink and be merry."Eat - Everyone must eat, or die. Drink - Everyone must drink, or die. Be Merry - If you are merry or not, it' won't kill you. It's generally accepted the story is; Earth 1.0 had failed, as there were only 8 good people left, so he decided to give it another try, and so he kill all the rest.
|
|