|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 5937 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Meaning Of The Trinity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: I doubt that you do. I certainly doubt that you know about all the work that has been done to verify and check our dating methods,
quote: Aside from the fact that you don’t understand the word “data” perhaps you would like to explain which assumptions are wrong.
quote: We know that they are more than reliable enough to prove that the Earth is billions of years old.
quote: I know for a fact that we don’t.
quote: Not if we understand the error and can avoid it. And, of course, if the error underestimates the age, or the error depends on the presence of older material then it can’t cast any doubt on the fact that the Earth is much older than your masters would claim.
quote: Good job that we know better than you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Indeed, but the interpretation you offer fits poorly with the text of Daniel.
quote: As is clear from the text of Daniel these verses refer not to the Roman Empire but to the Greek kingdoms formed from the division of Alexander’s Empire. See for instance Daniel 8 - explicitly an End Times prophecy (8:17) and clearly set at the time of those Kingdoms (8:21-23). I would also point out that confusing the Roman Empire with the (thoroughly misnamed) Holy Roman Empire does you no favours at all. There is no real connection between the two
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: That’s not exactly true any more. There have been plenty of measurements of samples where the age has been determined by other methods. So we can use those rather than guessing the starting amount.
quote: Wrong again. We know that it hasn’t.
quote: Good job we have all that observational knowledge then. You make the mistake of assuming that creationists tell the truth. Maybe you should examine your own assumptions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Highly unlikely, the Gulf of Aqaba is too deep.
quote: It’s been discussed here, and that is really unlikely.
quote: The traditional location fits better.
quote: The evidence is really, really underwhelming.
quote: Only if you want to laugh at them.
quote: Obviously you haven’t been looking very hard.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: There is no real description of the site, beyond “before Pi Hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, opposite Baal Zephon”. These locations are all uncertain, except perhaps Migdol. Even the idea that the text should be translated as meaning the Red Sea is in question. Beyond that, all we can say is that the location is implied to have been flat and level enough for chariots to be a major threat. Nuweiba does not fit that description, and certainly not the actual crossing.
quote: If it - or anything like it - ever happened (it probably did not) the most likely site is at or near the former Ballah Lakes (now occupied by the Suez Canal). That is where Migdol was.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Much of what the Bible says about the route is unclear to modern readers since it relies on place names which are no longer known. Some sites have been identified but the identification is never certain.
quote: Quite frankly this makes no sense. Infra red cameras would not show a route that people followed more than 3000 years ago. No matter how many they were. It looks like the sort of thing that the Weekly World News might make up. Someone just drew a red line on a map and claimed it was what infra red cameras saw. I don’t think that even Ron Wyatt - liar and fraud that he was - would have made that up. So far your “overwhelming” evidence includes a supposed “description” which does not fit with the Biblical text and this obvious fiction. After “decades” of investigation you should be able to manage something better.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: It would have to be reasonably level for the chariots to charge into the parted sea, so it can’t be too deep. I’ll take your 6 inches as mere hyperbole, since obviously things have changed in that region.
quote: Which is a rather larger army than is plausible. The Egyptians only fielded a maximum of 53,000 troops at the battle of Kadesh, or perhaps as few as 20,000. Josephus, of course was writing more than a thousand years after the event, and without any known sources,
quote: And why should we believe Isaiah on this? Is it not possible that if it was an actual event the story has been greatly magnified? Let us note, also, that this is the only site that matches the actual description we have from the Bible- since Migdol (as far as we know) is there, and not near Nuweiba.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: This is misleading at best. The traditional site for crossing the Red Sea is on the Gulf of Suez, with a maximum depth of only 70m. At Nuweiba the maximum depth - which would have to be crossed - is more than 850m. The rest of the Red Sea hardly matters - nobody suggests a crossing anywhere but one of the two Gulfs. And I very much doubt that you have surveyed the Gulf of Suez to see if the sea floor is clear.
quote: You overestimate the depth - but even the actual depth is sufficient to disqualify it from being a “land bridge”.
quote: When they have highly defensible terrain where the Egyptian chariots will be useless…. Let us note that Exodus only mentions the 600 chariots - and based on figures for Kadesh we’d expect the rest of the force to be far smaller than Josephus claims (there were likely 2000 Egyptian chariots at Kadesh). Not 250,000 - likely well under 20,000. Which would still be an impressively large army for the time.
quote: Well I keep seeing the same photos and not once have I seen any real evidence that they contain chariot wheels. Indeed, there are claims - from supporters of the idea - that they contain iron which would be quite impossible for Egyptian chariot wheels for the supposed date. I’m also less than convinced that there is more than 3000 years of coral growth there, either.[ABE]Apparently coral doesn’t grow on wood, which would rule out Egyptian chariot wheels, too. If the contents are man made objects they could be far more recent. If they contain iron they must be more recent.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: The point is not to say that tradition is automatically right - the point is to say that the traditional site fits the Bible better than yours. Not that that’s saying much,
quote: Wadi Watir flows through rugged hills to get to Nuweiba beach. Chariots are not going to get over those hills.
quote: I have read it, and probably more carefully than you.
quote: Exactly why the story makes no sense if you give the Israelites the advantage of a defensible position. Now, with the devastation supposedly caused by the plagues it’s rather unlikely that the Egyptians could muster 200,000 soldiers for their army. If they even had that many to start with, they’d still have to be recalled from their postings. And if they had, they should have had rather more than 600 chariots.
quote: Certainly not all of the 600 - a few at most. And remember we have yet to see any evidence that these supposed wheels came from chariots.
quote: You say that, but Exodus 3 only says that Horeb was “beyond the wilderness” from Jethro’s current location.
quote: That is not exactly what Exodus says. The pillar of cloud held the Egyptians back in the night, before they happened to cross. If this strip of “fused sand and gravel” were formed by that it would have to leave room for the Israelites. And of course how would we know that it was formed by the angel? Exodus doesn’t mention it,
quote: Exodus doesn’t say that the Israelites felt hemmed in. So all you are doing is admitting that the site is unsuitable for the Egyptian attack. And very suitable for an Israelite defence, which hardly fits the story. The Israelites weren’t dismayed by feeling hemmed in, they were dismayed by the threat of the Egyptian attack.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Not exactly. The point is that the Israelites turned around from crossing the wilderness and were trapped in Egypt.
quote: And Exodus 14 never uses that phrase.
quote: Or so you assume. Nevertheless the only location we have for Migdol is there.
quote: Which is narrow, and therefore easily obstructed. Not ideal for a chariot attack.
quote: There isn’t exactly a lot of evidence that they drowned at all. And the allegedl chariot wheels are Nuweiba are not much better than nothing (the more so since what evidence the Wyatt camp have let out suggests that they are much later in date)
quote: I suspect that is untrue. And I have yet to see any that reliably places it in Saudi Arabia.
quote: And how many of them are from the Wyatt camp?
quote: Isaiah was written centuries after the supposed events. Why think that the author had any special knowledge. So when do we get to see this “overwhelming” evidence you claimed to have?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: That’s not going to be a very reliable source, is it?
quote: I wouldn’t describe the alleged “crossing” at Nuweiba as a “path” or “road”. It’s pretty steep terrain. Which is an issue you haven’t dealt with.
quote: None of the photos I’ve been shown qualify.
quote: I have seen that photo and I’m pretty sure it’s a brass fitting off a steamship, And almost certainly planted at the site by Ron Wyatt.
quote:Because they turned back to Egypt rather than crossing the wilderness. You really should read it in context. quote: Obviously not.
quote: Obviously if he was writing hundreds of years after the event there is no reason to think he had special knowledge.
quote: I treat the Bible as a collection of historical documents.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: And yet - after the departure from Egypt - we are only told that Jethro met Moses in the wilderness and afterwards returned to his own land. We aren’t told that the Israelites wandered through Midian, or met Jethro there. Sounds like a bit of a clue that the. Israelites weren’t passing through the territory now called Saudi Arabia.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Sounds like Oyun Musa - but that is in Egypt. Want to say why your site is the correct one, given that names are uncertain evidence - as you admit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: The dark colour of the rocks at Jabal Maqla- which is the mountain you refer to - is due to a layer of darker rock (hornfels, rather than the paler granite beneath). It’s not the result of any event in the last few thousand years. Odd that your “decades” of research hadn’t found that out. If you have “overwhelming evidence” why are you wasting time with stuff like this?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
You’re seriously arguing that the presence of a cave is significant evidence? And yes, the traditional location has caves.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024