Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 4:18 pm
The "scriptures" are horseshit written by very fallible men with an agenda. We know that AND that is why we have dimissed them.
When are you going to wise up to the holy con game that has suckered you in?
Posts: 1965
Threads: 83
Joined: June 15, 2010
Reputation:
37
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 4:24 pm
(July 7, 2010 at 4:15 pm)Godschild Wrote: Again I say you know nothing about the scriptures if once you truely knew the scriptures then you would not have put God out of your life.
You put god out of your life, because you don't know the scriptures, because you've put god out of your life.
Circular argument! Yay!
"How is it that a lame man does not annoy us while a lame mind does? Because a lame man recognizes that we are walking straight, while a lame mind says that it is we who are limping." - Pascal
Posts: 8781
Threads: 26
Joined: March 15, 2010
Reputation:
29
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 5:56 pm
(July 7, 2010 at 12:37 am)tavarish Wrote: (July 6, 2010 at 2:50 pm)Godschild Wrote: Nope structural engineers have stated that we (modern man) do not have the ability,even with all our technology, to lay out the base of the pyrimids as accurately as the Egyptians did.
travish Wrote:1. Please provde citation for claims dealing with assertions of structural engineers.
2. You're absolutely fucking insane if you think that modern man doesn't have the ability to effectively put a bunch of big rocks in a pile in such a way that is consistent. The reason we don't rebuild pyramids is because there's no need for such structures. We tend to construct buildings that are efficient, both in manpower and materials, not huge stone monuments set aside for the burials of Gods among men.
Check these out for some concise rebuttals to your catasrophe of an argument:
http://www.anomalist.com/afiles/pyramids.html
A columnist is your expert rebuttal that's a laugh where is his building, engineering and architectual degrees.
travish Wrote:http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=74717
The people on that site are no more than a want-a-be group. Again where is their expertise.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Posts: 2080
Threads: 52
Joined: April 11, 2010
Reputation:
47
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 5:58 pm
Posts: 8781
Threads: 26
Joined: March 15, 2010
Reputation:
29
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 6:02 pm
(July 7, 2010 at 4:24 pm)Jaysyn Wrote: (July 7, 2010 at 4:15 pm)Godschild Wrote: Again I say you know nothing about the scriptures if once you truely knew the scriptures then you would not have put God out of your life.
You put god out of your life, because you don't know the scriptures, because you've put god out of your life.
Circular argument! Yay!
You are the one making the argument circular by rearranging my statment I'm going to use a Min statement "grow up sonny."
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Posts: 12806
Threads: 158
Joined: February 13, 2010
Reputation:
111
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 8:24 pm
godschild Wrote:I'm certainly glad that the greatest fault you find in me is that I'm not an adequate writer.
Well, you can cancel that wave of gladness. Being a horrific butcher of the English language is not the greatest fault I find in you.
Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 8:40 pm
The Romans were not so impressed with the pyramids.
Quote:Will anybody compare the idle pyramids, or those useless though renowned works of the Greeks, with these aqueducts?
--Sextus Julius Frontinus (Water Commissioner under Nerva) c 100 AD
"
Posts: 8781
Threads: 26
Joined: March 15, 2010
Reputation:
29
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 10:14 pm
(July 7, 2010 at 8:40 pm)Minimalist Wrote: The Romans were not so impressed with the pyramids.
Quote:Will anybody compare the idle pyramids, or those useless though renowned works of the Greeks, with these aqueducts?
--Sextus Julius Frontinus (Water Commissioner under Nerva) c 100 AD
"
Pride can be a real killer and was.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Posts: 12806
Threads: 158
Joined: February 13, 2010
Reputation:
111
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 10:39 pm
(This post was last modified: July 8, 2010 at 12:00 am by Shell B.)
Obviously you have misunderstood the significance of the Great Pyramids, godschild. They are amazing and magnificent. However, the reason that they are such is not because we can't recreate them because the Egyptians were more advanced than we are. They are amazing because building such a monument was such a massive undertaking at the time and they did so with precision that must have been painstaking for them to have lasted so long. Such precision was not easy to come by with the tools they had at hand.
Engineers of today could build the pyramids without breaking a sweat, literally. They could sit in air-conditioned equipment and build an exact fucking replica of it. (I should say close to an exact replica. They could build an exact replica, but then they'd have to dissect them) Before you ask for a source, I will tell you that I know this because I have read about the pyramids extensively. How could scholars and scientists explain the dimensions and building materials of the pyramids with any kind of authority, if they don't understand how to build them? That's like saying, I can draw you a blueprint of a house and tell you exactly what you would need to build it, but I have no idea how to build it.
Min's reference to the aqueducts is an example of well-placed pride. What function did the pyramids serve, other than to waste a lot of time and effort and give us something to gawk at? In fact, the sort of pride that built the pyramids was foolish. The aqueducts served a purpose. I'll give you a shiny penny if you can tell me why the aqueducts were more important than the pyramids, godschild.
Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: The Bible, what's literal and what's not?
July 7, 2010 at 11:54 pm
(July 7, 2010 at 10:14 pm)Godschild Wrote: (July 7, 2010 at 8:40 pm)Minimalist Wrote: The Romans were not so impressed with the pyramids.
Quote:Will anybody compare the idle pyramids, or those useless though renowned works of the Greeks, with these aqueducts?
--Sextus Julius Frontinus (Water Commissioner under Nerva) c 100 AD
"
Pride can be a real killer and was.
Frontinus' was justly proud of the Roman aqueduct system which made possible the growth of cities such as Rome, Ephesos, and yes...finally....even that little shithole Jerusalem. Water is vital for human life. If the Egyptologists are right the pyramids were a tomb for a single man. Talk about vanity!
|