Does A Biblical Historical Record Exist?

Surely you are aware of how a terrarium works, needing no watering or rain etc. The Genesis record clearly depicts a terrarium type planet with enough of a canopy in the atmosphere to collect the evaporated moisture which would in turn fall as a mist back to the earth. According to clear Genesis implications, there being no rainbow, a mist type rain watered the earth. The length of life claimed and the evidence of large animals etc also imply a super climate before the flood.This thread is not about this perse so I don't want to get into a discussion on this. You keep on keeping on charging that I never lend reason for these things. I'm calling you on it here and that is the only reason I went into it to the extent that I did. Go figure. You should be science apprised enough to know that a radically different atmosphere would effect dating methodology designed for present day conditions if such an atmosphere existed.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

The problem Buz is you mention things that are simply so silly that most folks BullShit detectors go off the scale.You say stuff like "According to clear Genesis implications, there being no rainbow, a mist type rain watered the earth. " which is so totally absurd that it is beyond being laughable.Instead of a "mist type rain' being indicative of no rainbow, a mist assures a rainbow even when it is NOT raining. Take a ride on Queen of the Mists sometime. Please post the relevant verses from Genesis that support your assertion. Please present the scientific model that supports that assertion. Please provide the model that supports that assertion.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

That's the only problem I see, given you agree with most of my points. The problem with the above is that no matter what any of us Biblical fundamentalists produce in debate for substantiating our case we are accused of not substantiating. Of course the majority view has the bully pulpit here. Case in point is the last exchange with PaulK. He will likely go on and on and on making he same demeaning unsubstantiated charges as is his MO, and of course his friends all listen to them and agree, including some other admins.Evolutionists, imo, need to begin understanding that if they want anyone to debate they should expect the minority viewpoints to be aired and tolerate them expressing their viewpoints as they see them. But no, until we agree with mainline science, we will likely never be tolerated to the point that good ID creationist debaters will feel comfortable at this site.Having said the above, Quetzel, I respect you a great deal in that you are willing to agree about valid points presented. It would be great if more were as objective and understanding as you are in this regard.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

As jar pointed out this is just absolute ignorant garbage. Rainbows are created by light interacting with water droplets in the air. Do you know what mist is made out of? Do you even think about this crap before you spew it forth?Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.

---

Live every week like it's Shark Week!
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

Jar, you're another great example of what I just described. The Maid Of the Mist rainbow was due to bright sunshine above which would not have been the case before the flood, the sun being very dim due to a very large atmosphere due to the heat expanding the canopy higher up than what we have today. I've covered this elsewhere in the past.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

buzsaw Except for the little matter of those pesky rivers being incapable of being formed from misting rainfall.

I'm sorry Buz but that is nothing but nonsense piled on top of nonsense. Please show me both the scientific model that supports your assertions as well as the evidence.You just keep making absurd assertion on top of absurd assertion. If you expand the fictional canopy (which you have never provided support for even existing) it becomes LESS dense.And regardless, all it takes is one ray of sunshine and you get a rainbow.So now maybe you will for once step up and present models that support or in your words, corroborate, ANYTHING at all.But as pointed out in Message 32 we still need the relevant verses that support ... ...the scientific model and evidence that supports ... ... the scientific model that supports ... ... as well as the evidence that

• there was a flood
• that the atmosphere was different before the flood
• that lives were longer
• that there were larger animals up until the flood
• that the size and longevity of the animals was due to the specific composition of that atmosphere
• that the specifics of that atmosphere will affect dating methods and effect ALL of the unrelated dating methods is such a way that they will still show the clear correlations we see today

I will be waiting for your information. Maybe for the first time, we will actually see a Type 2b Biblical Creationist.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I see I need to remind some participants what the topic is. the above is directly from the OP.The only reason I posted what I did about preflood is to counter the claims that I/we fundamentalists do not attemp to substantiate claims. It is not expected of the majority science view to agree with my statements. If you wish to debate/discuss the canopy, etc in debth, please take it where it belongs. Thanks.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

Sidelined, elsewhere I addressed the river problem sometime during summer. I'm not sure where but I did soundly substantiate the possibility of preflood rivers in a pre-flood earth.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

But you didn't substaniate the claim. You provided nothing but alleged biblical support for the vapor canopy crap. You have no outside support and the situation you propose is impossible, its a perfect example of how the bible contains stuff that is not history but bullshit.

---

Live every week like it's Shark Week!
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

We are discussing the topic Buz. You continue to make unsupported assertions but NEVER support them. But you did mention the preflood and you did not attempt to "substantiate claims."This is a pattern Buz, a consistent pattern.Yes the Bible contains history, however if you expect anyone to take that history as anything more than myth, you will HAVE to provide the outside, independent corroborating data.So far in this thread you have not even been able to provide the passages from the Bible that support your assertions.Have you ever read the Bible Buz?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Surely you are aware of how a terrarium works, needing no watering or rain etc. The Genesis record clearly depicts a terrarium type planet with enough of a canopy in the atmosphere to collect the evaporated moisture which would in turn fall as a mist back to the earth. According to clear Genesis implications, there being no rainbow, a mist type rain watered the earth. The length of life claimed and the evidence of large animals etc also imply a super climate before the flood.

---

A terrarium is not maintained by a vapour canopy. You might appeal to the solid firmament as a roof instead but this would be conceding my point. The reference to a "mist" appears in Genesis 2:6 - long before the Flood and there is no indication that it represented a continuing state of affairs right up to the Flood. The long life spans are NOT a likely result of a "super climate", and the "large animals" are not found in the Bible. So all in all it is as I said,the bible neither explicitly states nor clearly implies a vapour canopy and the references you use are from sections that are better labelled myth than history.

quote:

---

This thread is not about this perse so I don't want to get into a discussion on this. You keep on keeping on charging that I never lend reason for these things. I'm calling you on it here and that is the only reason I went into it to the extent that I did.

---

But you did so only to prove me right. You would have done better to concede the point

quote:

---

Go figure. You should be science apprised enough to know that a radically different atmosphere would effect dating methodology designed for present day conditions if such an atmosphere existed.

---

I am science apprised enough to know that a radically different atmosphere would be more likely to kill all life on Earth than to affect the decay rate of atoms sealed in deeply buried rocks !No, Buz the reason I challenge your statement is BECAUSE of my knowledge of science - which tells me that your idea is completely crazy.

quote:

---

That's the only problem I see, given you agree with most of my points. The problem with the above is that no matter what any of us Biblical fundamentalists produce in debate for substantiating our case we are accused of not substantiating. Of course the majority view has the bully pulpit here. Case in point is the last exchange with PaulK. He will likely go on and on and on making he same demeaning unsubstantiated charges as is his MO, and of course his friends all listen to them and agree, including some other admins.

---

Well that's intesetsting since you did a great job of substantiateing the charges. And you were the one attempting to occupy the "Bully pulpit" instead of supporting your claim about the pre-Flood atmosphere affecting dating methods. And it is the case that you have repeatedly refused to provide any substantiation for this claim.

quote:

---

Evolutionists, imo, need to begin understanding that if they want anyone to debate they should expect the minority viewpoints to be aired and tolerate them expressing their viewpoints as they see them. But no, until we agree with mainline science, we will likely never be tolerated to the point that good ID creationist debaters will feel comfortable at this site.

---

The problem here is the difference between airing your opinions and expecting others to believe them or to take them seriously as arguments. When I suggested that you wanted your references to "historical record" of the Bible to be only expressions of opinion you violently objected, calling it "demeaning". But that appears to be exactly what you are asking for above. SO which is it ? Do you just want to express your opiniosn as opinions ? Or is it as it seems - that you want to suppress valid criticism ?

quote:

---

Well the "sandbar" can't be physical evidence because it doesn't exist. And the Nuweiba site fails to fit the Biblical evidence because it is in the wrong place. And there is other evidence that indicates that the Exodus account is unreliable, late, and almost certainly ahistorical. It is not even true that the Bible claims that Mt. Sinai is in Saudi Arabia - that is an inference drawn more from the alleged evidence, than from the Biblical account itself

---

Aside from you totally missing Buzsaw's point in referring to the Biblical historical record, you are severely tempting me to divert this conversation into another Exodus debate.All I will say is that a sandbar DOES exist (yes, we have recent geological surveys that have just come out and now prove it), and the Nuweiba beach is the only place the crossing could have been, because, it IS in the right place according to the Biblical record. And yes The reason why you disagree that there is no sandbar is because your definition of "sandbar", and our definition of "sandbar" are two different things. There is no "definable" sandbar across the Nuweiba Beach. Only the Saudi Geological Surveys show the gradual gradients...and believe me, it is super deep (900+ meters) on the north side of Nuweiba Beach, and reaching up to 1300+ meters deep on the SOUTH side of Nuweiba Beach. These are actual, physical geological maps. Across Nuweiba itself the depth of the sea ranges from 100 to 300 meters deep. There is a GRADUAL slope, allowing for a peaceful crossing. And yes, Galations 4:25 tells us that Mount Sinai is in Arabia.Much of this has been documented by a Korean Doctor:
http://www.lifebookus.com/final/bookjumun.asp?gs_product=...This Korean doctor was the personal physician to the 4th in line to the Saudi throne and documents the doctor’s incredible story of living in Arabia for 20 yrs and his work around Mt. Sinai. His evidence is what postponed Lennart Moller's Exodus film. In his book he tells us what happens to the pillar Solomon put up on the Saudi side of the Red Sea crossing.I'm still waiting for your proof against all these things PaulK. Ever since I've known you, you deny evidence, yet you never have evidence to prove our evidence wrong. I'm still waiting, and I believe that I shall forever be waiting.Edited by Lysimachus, : No reason given.Edited by Lysimachus, : No reason given.

Perhaps you could actually start a thread and present evidence that can be examined and discussed.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion