Originally posted by tabibito
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by Mikeenders View PostActually I don't - even though I go for around the 15th. IF you say there is no evidence and the debate is over pointing at the 1200s then I show you Kadesh. If you say no evidence and point to 14-15 hundreds I say - ahem then have you read Rohl yet and laugh at your claims.
Either way you lose both in your claims of no evidence and in claiming the debate is over. Good thing for you is you are so uneducated in what the various issues are you don't realize what a fool you are making of yourself in all theses twists and gyrations to get out of your blunder. The bad news is everyone that is educated is pointing at you and laughing. Let me give you a hint and see if the lightbulb can go off. You are now appealing to the date that many evangelical conservatives that you love so much point to - do you really think they are pointing to that because it makes their case weaker or stronger?
ROFL..........You flat out rejected Patterns of Evidence as thoroughly debunked and you have now put yourself right within sight of one of their timelines.
If you ever get to Vegas and need work consider being a stand up comic....lol
Once again, you are espousing the fringe of the fringe. Rohl is considered a crackpot, even by Christian archeologists and scholars:
In his book Pharaohs and Kings: A Biblical Quest (1995a; it was first published in England as A Test of Time: The Bible - From Myth to History [1995b]), David Rohl purports to have produced a better correlation between the findings of archaeology and the Bible by revising Egyptian chronology. One is tempted to dismiss Rohl as simply another crackpot and get on with more important issues. Rohl, however, cannot so easily be brushed aside. As opposed to most who attempt to revise ancient history, Rohl has some scholarly training - he has studied Egyptology and ancient history at University College, London. Moreover, the lay public, largely as the result of a three-part video series based on his book, have become enamored with his supposed Biblical correlations.
...Rohl attempts to lower Egyptian chronology by several hundred years for the period before 664 B.C. The sacking of Thebes by Ashurbanipal in 664 B.C. is accepted as a fixed date by Rohl and becomes the starting point for his revised chronology (119). He accomplished this by shortening the 20th Dynasty and overlapping the 21st and 22nd Dynasties (144, 384). Several scholars have critiqued the Egyptological aspects of his ideas (Bennett 1996; Brissaud 1996; Kitchen 1996: xlii-xlvi; van Haarlem 1997), but no one has evaluated the impact of his theory on Palestinian archaeology and the resulting correlations, or lack thereof, with Biblical history.
...Regarding the date of the Conquest, Rohl vacillates between the early date (ca. 1410 B.C.) and the late date (ca. 1210 B.C.) as it suits his purposes.
Source: http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post...Palestine.aspx
Gary: Sounds a lot like our Mike. Vacillating between dates as it suits his purposes. Make up your mind, Mike. When was this alleged tall tale!Last edited by Gary; 10-12-2015, 11:40 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gary View PostAh, yes, the ol' Christian standby: Don't give the evidence yourself, just tell your critic to go read yet another Christian book or article
On many occasions I don't have to say that because the person I am discussing issues with some who already knows the issues. In your case....what can I say....can't blame me for your lack of education on things you go barreling into without a clue
No, Mike, have the cojones to put up the evidence yourself, you rabid little fundamentalist weasel.
Heres what has you and to a bit lesser degree Stein stumped - Its Obvious - oh let me use stein's phrase - BLATANTLY obvious - that research is still being done, data is still coming in, previous thoughts are being shown to be wrong and we are still learning as is the nature of a history that has faded on us. You and Stein's position However REQUIRES certainty that the debate is over , you NEED the matter settled and the consensus to be unchangeable so you can make your certainty pronouncements.
Problem is the reality of archaeology and history just bites you in the rear every few months and like the BAR article face palms your certainty which angers the living daylights out of you..... and then....like now...it becomes all comedy hour
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mikeenders View PostOn many occasions I don't have to say that because the person I am discussing issues with some who already knows the issues. In your case....what can I say....can't blame me for your lack of education on things you go barreling into without a clue
ROFL.....Moah Gary. More. I had the cojones thats why you are so frustrated. The BAR article torched your the debate is over claim and now your frustration is palpable. Entertaining me with these name calls just makes it funnier
Heres what has you and to a bit lesser degree Stein stumped - Its Obvious - oh let me use stein's phrase - BLATANTLY obvious - that research is still being done, data is still coming in, previous thoughts are being shown to be wrong and we are still learning as is the nature of a history that has faded on us. You and Stein's position However REQUIRES certainty that the debate is over , you NEED the matter settled and the consensus to be unchangeable so you can make your certainty pronouncements.
Problem is the reality of archaeology and history just bites you in the rear every few months and like the BAR article face palms your certainty which angers the living daylights out of you..... and then....like now...it becomes all comedy hour
Comment
-
Which part of "also known as" do you fail to understand Gary?
Perhaps you think I didn't check whether there might be an alternative site known as Kadesh?
Kadesh Barnea.jpg1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
gain, you are espousing the fringe of the fringe. Rohl is considered a crackpot, even by Christian archeologists and scholars:
I wonder at what point Gary will figure out that ABR as his new favorite source is going to bite him in the rear (again)
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostWhich part of "also known as" do you fail to understand Gary?
Perhaps you think I didn't check whether there might be an alternative site known as Kadesh?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]10529[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]10529[/ATTACH]
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mikeenders View PostOh I am not endorsing all that Rohl says oh clueless one - I am saying if you are in his time period then you should at least go read up on what he reports on -I've said it like three times now - People have issues with how he adjusts the egyptian chronology but no one doubts all the things he reports on so its worth a read. This is the difference between you and stein and myself - I like the evidence and facts. I don't have to buy all the theories.
I wonder at what point Gary will figure out that ABR as his new favorite source is going to bite him in the rear (again)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gary View PostYou pathetic milly-mouthed little whiner: Pick a date for this tall tale, defend that date, or shut your trap!
"
They're coming to take me away, ha-haaa.
They're coming to take me away, ho ho, he he, ha ha,
To the funny farm, where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see those nice young
Men in their clean white coats and
They're coming to take me away, ha-haaa!"
This Monday has started out great!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gary View PostMy purpose of quoting ABR is to show you just how far out on a limb your position is; just how far to the fringe of the fringe your position is
Comment
-
Kadesh-Barnea
An important oasis situated on the southern border of Canaan (Num. 34:4; Josh. 15:3; Ezek. 47:19; 48:28) in the wilderness of Zin (Num. 20:1; 27:14; 33:36; Deut. 32:51) – part of the wilderness of Paran (Num. 20:16) – at a distance of an eleven days' journey from Mt. Horeb (Deut. 1:2). Kadesh is alternatively called En-Mishpat ("spring of judgment"; Gen. 14:7) and the "waters of Meribah" ("strife," Num. 20:13, 24; 27:14; Deut. 32:51), names which indicate its special role as a sacred place of judgment and assembly for the desert tribes.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...eo/Kadesh.html
Here's the map again:
Kadesh Barnea.jpg
Wilderness of Zin - just east of Kadesh Barnea and extending north
Wilderness of Paran - east of Kadesh Barnea and extending south
They're both clearly marked.
And south of the Wilderness of Paran is the Sinai Desert - East of the Sinai Peninsula.Last edited by tabibito; 10-12-2015, 12:36 PM.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View PostSo the evidence given to me about the Scythians was burial sites.
You know, what I claimed that we had already found and why it is that that is important.
So Gary's evidence to consider that I hadn't supposedly was the evidence that I already gave.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostKadesh-Barnea
An important oasis situated on the southern border of Canaan (Num. 34:4; Josh. 15:3; Ezek. 47:19; 48:28) in the wilderness of Zin (Num. 20:1; 27:14; 33:36; Deut. 32:51) – part of the wilderness of Paran (Num. 20:16) – at a distance of an eleven days' journey from Mt. Horeb (Deut. 1:2). Kadesh is alternatively called En-Mishpat ("spring of judgment"; Gen. 14:7) and the "waters of Meribah" ("strife," Num. 20:13, 24; 27:14; Deut. 32:51), names which indicate its special role as a sacred place of judgment and assembly for the desert tribes.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...eo/Kadesh.html
Here's the map again:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]10531[/ATTACH]
Wilderness of Zin - just east of Kadesh Barnea and extending north
Wilderness of Paran - east of Kadesh Barnea and extending south
They're both clearly marked.
And south of the Wilderness of Paran is the Sinai Desert - East of the Sinai Peninsula.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View PostSo the evidence given to me about the Scythians was burial sites.
You know, what I claimed that we had already found and why it is that that is important.
So Gary's evidence to consider that I hadn't supposedly was the evidence that I already gave.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment