Anglo-Israelitism , End Times and the misuse of scripture

Blowing smoke. He lost the debate about Israelites so he's blowing smoke to cover that up.Not good, Candle(x). Your lack of intellect is showing, again.

Now it's my turn to use the Candle3 method of interpreting the Bible:Read in Genesis 48 about Joseph's two son, Ephraim (Sub-Saharan Africa) and Manasseh (Australia).There, I've proved it. The Bible says South Africans are descended from Ephraim and Australian Aborigines are descended from Manasseh.Wow, this Bible interpretation thing is easy. You just put in some parentheses and add whatever you want.

AZ, you wrote:"Blowing smoke. He lost the debate about Israelites so he's
blowing smoke to cover that up."
​
"Not good, Candle(x). Your lack of intellect is showing, again."Good try. I lost nothing. Debating Paulk is like debating a
seventh grader. He still reads comic books.You know that I know evolution is a religion. You have
faith that life began by coming from non-life.You big bad evolutionists don't like to be questioned about
your ignorance, because it shows how much you accept
by faith.Punctuated equilibrium is another theory because you all
clearly understand that the fossils do not support evolution.The best support for creation are dinosaurs.They contain blood cells, collagen, soft tissue and C-14.Soft tissue and C-14 are even found in fragments of dino
bone.You people want me to talk to you the way that you talk to
me and creationists. Okay.

Taq, any proof of how life started yet. Or are you burying
your hand in the sand?

You still can't stay on topic?If you want to discuss a different topic start a new thread.

Then you don't know evolution or religion, as you have make clear before. Then you don't know science. We love evidence that shows us wrong. That's how we learn. Unlike you priests, our knowledge base does not end with a 3000 year old fairy tale.When science is questioned the scientist says, "Whoa, that was unexpected." When religion is questioned the priest calls for war.
You are evil. Then you don't know evolution. PE is a well known, documented mechanism of population dynamics firmly explained within the Modern Synthesis. Then you don't know epistemology, evidence, knowledge and reality. You are out here in the intellectual arena unarmed. Actually I don't want you to talk at all, ever.Your commission to spread your delusions to others is evil. You spread poison in the human psyche and you need to be shut down.

Is this the topic you mean? Message 1If so, let's revisit it. I will keep Last Day's discussion there, though you have the advantage in a strict Bible Study Forum as opposed to Faith & Belief. My angle is not based on the * evidence-based * arguments, of which I question some. A nonbeliever cannot make a judgment on a faith-based argument.The link to my summation is here. Message 1749

That’s the one. However I don’t think twisting Scripture is given a pass even in Faith and Belief.

Just watch

You're a non-believer of all religions and sects but one, so you do it all the time.--Percy

Percy, George Washington used to be a courier for General
Braddock during the French and Indian war.Couriers were killed by the Indians pretty quickly. In fact,
all but one was killed.George Washington had several horses shot out from under
him, and one of his coats had four bullet holes in it. He had
fragments of a bullet in his hair.Before Washington became President he came back to the
area. An elderly Indian just had to see this man; so, he had
some braves to take him.The Indian was an expert marksman. He had shot the
courier (Washington) 17 times. He was sure of this. He
told the other braves to stop even shooting at him.The old Indian stated that he just had to see the man who
was protected by the "great presence from above."God had promised that Manasseh's descendants would
become a great nation. There is no power in the universe
that could prevent this from coming to fruition.During the Gulf war Iraq fired missiles at Israel. Witness have
stated that they had seen missiles miraculously change
course and land in the sea.God stood with England when Germany was sending their
might against them. Day and night they rained bombs and
missiles down on them. France folded in no time. God was
protecting them.But that protecting is nearing its end.The God of the Bible is the only God. God will give those who
worship other gods their opportunity to become members of
His family.They will get to know Him. But during this present age they
do not know Him.God is no respecter of persons. All in their pre-appointed
times will get to know Him.There are some however who will never receive eternal life.
These include the incorrigibly wicked; those who deliberately
reject Him; and, those who know that He exists but for some
reason fight against Him.

From God's lips to your ears, huh?--Percy

My emphasis added above. Typical of creationists, he doesn't know what a theory is:

quote:

---

Definition of "theory":

​

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspects of the natural world based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.

​

Theory might win the prize for the most commonly misunderstood word in science. In everyday usage, a theory is a hunch. A guess. Speculation. For example, I have a theory about why my cat yells (sings?) at night — he’s calling on the spirits of his ancestors to free him from the captivity of his luxurious life.

​

But in science speak, a theory is almost the complete opposite — it’s a broad explanation for a wide range of phenomena that’s supported by a vast amount of evidence. As science progresses and evidence accumulates, related ideas are combined into a clear and powerful explanation.

​

Theories form the basis of our scientific knowledge and are used by scientists to make predictions for further testing, and as such are continually subjected to scrutiny.

​

Examples include gravitational theory, plate tectonic theory, evolutionary theory, cell theory, germ theory, foraging theory, the sliding filament theory of muscular contraction, atomic theory…

​

The bottom line is that the ultimate goal of science is to understand and explain the natural world, and theories are about as close to the “truth” as we may ever get.

​

So don’t be fooled when someone doubts science because “it’s just a theory.”

---

Also:

quote:

---

"A scientific theory is a broad and well-supported explanation of a natural phenomenon, established through substantial evidence, repeated experiments and observations. It is not simply an outcome of a single experiment.

​

A scientific theory is defined as a well-supported explanation of why a natural phenomenon occurs. It is not merely a proposed explanation, but heavily reliant on a broad range of confirmed evidence from multiple, repeated observations and experiments.
For instance, the theory of gravity, or Darwin's theory of evolution, are not just ideas or hypotheses. They were developed through substantial evidence, and have been tested and re-tested over time.

​

The outcome of a single experiment, however, does not constitute a scientific theory. Scientific theories are broad and comprehensive explanations, supported by a plethora of evidence."

---

Candle3 was obviously trying to disparage PE by calling it a "theory", but instead he is doing the opposite. Yet again he has demonstrated the depths of his profound ignorance.Also, his assertion that it shows that "the fossils do not support evolution" (problematic since he does not know what evolution is -- go ahead, ask him to tell you what it is and watch him run away) is completely wrong. I came into this issue c.1981 on the coattails of PE being a common topic of discussion.Nobody proposing PE ever said that the fossil record conflicted with evolution, but rather with gradualism, the idea that evolutionary change is at a constant gradual uniform pace -- formally described as phyletic gradualism. PE says that the rate of change varies characterized by periods of very little change interspersed with periods of "rapid" change (rapid in the geological sense) -- that "rapid change" was still gradual change over thousands of generations.So the only conflict is over the rates and patterns of change. Ironically, although Darwin proposed gradualism, he did know that the rate of changes was not uniform. He emphasized gradualism to distance himself from the saltationists (Lat. salto = "jump"; sudden and large change in a single generation, AKA "single-step speciation", which appears to be how creationists think speciation works). Huxley reportedly strongly warned Darwin away from gradualism.If we examine it at the generational scale, we will see that evolutionary processes work like a negative-feedback loop (an analogy would be how a power supply tracks and maintains the output voltage level) with the population mean trying to track an optimal. When the population mean is far from optimal then that mean will move faster towards optimal, when closer then it will move more slowly, and when at optimal it will be held at optimal. That means that stasis is an expected consequence of evolution along with change. So then, yeah, Candle3 has absolutely no clue what PE or evolution or just about anything is, nor how anything works. Least of all his theological nonsense.Two words that describe him:

quote:

---

Fractal wrongness -- You are wrong at every conceivable level -- ie, zoom out for the whole picture and you're wrong, then zoom in to any part down into the finest details and you are wrong there too.

​

intrarectalcranialitis

​

A pseudo-scientific word for the condition of having ones head up their ass. Also known as cranial rectal inversion. IRC for short.
"Wow, Johnson, I think I know why you can't get anything done right, you're suffering from intrarectalcranialitis! You've been walking around with your head up your ass all day!"

---

On that last, years ago I heard of a surgical procedure that would help Candle3. They would replace his sternum (AKA "breast bone") with a transparent material so that he can at least see where he's going.will be driven

What Percy actually said: The nonsense you just blathered has nothing whatsoever to do with what you are "replying to".Yet another attempt to avoid the topic? It's called "going stupid." It's what happens when guided ordnance loses lock on the target that they're tracking and they try to reacquire the target. What would cause a guided missile go stupid? Countermeasures, which are a very important part of a ship's or aircraft's defenses against ... wait for it, wait for it ... guided ordnance.To a clueless JAFO like yourself it would appear to have been a miracle, but to a Countermeasures Officer it would be just another day on the job.You've never served, have you? Wrong yet again! It's called "boots on the ground." Everybody familiar with military matters knows that you cannot conquer territory solely from the air, but rather you need to use ground forces, AKA "boots on the ground."France folded because German ground forces rolled in all over them. That's "boots on the ground"; what part of that do you not understand?All the attacks on British territory (outside of the occupation of the Channel Islands by ground troops) were from the air and so did little more than to cause civilian suffering and to increase the populace's resolve to resist the enemy. We were getting the same results in our air campaign against Germany.And you seem to be crediting God with those bombs and missiles raining down on the Brits day and night. Whose side was God actually on? Just look at the belt buckle of any WWII German soldier: "Gott mit uns" Obviously, God was on Germany's side! As you just acknowledged.Analysis of the air war (in which the Army Air Forces (USAAF) suffered far more casualties, mainly fatal, than the US Navy and Marine Corps combined, so the Air Force has paid its dues in blood) shows the effects of heavy bombardment (termed "terror bombing" by its proponents like Gen Curtis LeMay, later commander of the Strategic Air Command (SAC)) on the enemy's ability and resolve to wage war to have been largely negligible.

I am a monotheist. Truth is not relative. Your point would have merit if (as an example) all 300 million "gods" were invented by humans. I believe that one is not. We were created. Perhaps not on a planetary level but on a cosmological level. One God. Many imitators. I never was impressed by a relativistic argument.Even non believers have to reference my "god" to show me my hypocrisy.