1
   

Creationism is the claim. What is the evidence?

 
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2004 07:27 am
Well I'm definately not going to argue with that! I was apparently, as were most in the past I suspect, fed a line of bull as far as slavery in Egypt goes. I stand corrected.....well I sit corrected (I'm so tired right now). Thanks for the info.

Lightwizard wrote:
I wrote my thesis in history at UCLA on ancient Egypt just about the time the scholars were refuting that Egypt had slavery per se. The word translated to slave is unsubstatiated and the latest scholarly studies are almost overwhelmingly in concurance that Egypt did not generally practice slavery. There may have been household "slaves" which were actually servents who were given a space to live and sustenance but were also paid a salary.

If you enter "ancient Egypt, slavery" in Google you'll get references but they are not very authoritarian. I would have to pull some of the latest books out of my library to quote what is stated about slavery in ancient Egypt. I'm really not going to spend the time right now as I don't have it to spend. This isn't from just my reference but documentaries on the building of the pyramids and other structures which they are now sure were built mainly by agricultural workers in the outseasons of crops. If there were any slaves, it was the exception and not the norm.
0 Replies
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2004 07:33 am
Moo wrote:
He thinks radiocarbon dating is BS, it's impossible to calculate the distance of distant stars etc., and that anyone who supports evolution has been lied to by the devil.


You've got to be joking. Well, no of course you're not. That is past sad, past pathetic and right on laughable.

Thanks for the links and I'm checking them out now. I just found this site by the way so I'm still 'learning my way around'.
0 Replies
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2004 10:37 am
Not if you're are going up to the space station anytime soon!

Many here seem to suffer from Cecil B. DeMillitis --
he knew there is no history of Jewish slaves building any Egyptian edifices. He covers himself by have the Pharaoh wipe out all the records that Moses existed. He forgot to wipe out any record of Jewish slaves which, of course, there is no historical record. It's plainly mythological.
0 Replies
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2004 10:38 am
Brings to mind the scene in Mel Gibson's "Passion" where he invents Jewish uniformed soldiers. The Romans never let any of its conquered people have their own soldiers or police.
0 Replies
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Jun, 2004 07:02 pm
Moo wrote:
He thinks radiocarbon dating is BS, it's impossible to calculate the distance of distant stars etc., and that anyone who supports evolution has been lied to by the devil.



Come now, Professor Chin may give us a lot of homework, but she is not the devil...
0 Replies
 
Post: # 728,527
View Profile Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 11:32 am
LW writes:

Quote:
Brings to mind the scene in Mel Gibson's "Passion" where he invents Jewish uniformed soldiers. The Romans never let any of its conquered people have their own soldiers or police.


That isn't entirely correct. The Sanhedrin did have its own police force to serve as guards of the temple and keep the discipline among the Jews. The Jews were not allowed to carry out capital punishment and were required to appeal to the Roman governor for that, but the concept of the Sanhedrin temple police arresting Jesus in the garden is quite historically plausible. Whether they were uniformed is still a question--when I can I will check back through years of notes on that.

Gibson did some pretty good research putting that movie together, however, and I think it is reasonable to assume that the temple police did wear some kind of garb or insignia indicating their role and status.
0 Replies
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 12:00 pm
There is no historical research proving that the Sanhedrin had uniformed guards or any kind of police. I don't know where you are getting this from. You do not know what research other than the Gospels and Emmerich that Gibson used. It is no historically plausible.
0 Replies
 
Post: # 920,841
View Profile cranthy
 
  0  
Reply Tue 21 Sep, 2004 12:59 pm
hey guyzz
first try to understand the concepts then try to question . All the way we are trying to find out whose the creator .. There is a creator and we are not present without his will OK ... Only thing is we dont know where he is what his intensions are ... So inorder to know them we created concepts as GOD , FAITH .... all this just act as catalysts .... without these terms we cant go ahead ( like a torch in darkness ..) . First let me know guyz why do you wnat to know of GOD ???


IF YOU THINK LIKE YESTERDAY YOU WILL NEVER SEE TOMORROW ?
0 Replies
 
  0  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 03:11 pm
What ever happened to Satt fs?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Why the banana does not disprove evolution - Discussion by Robert Gentel
WHY CREATIONISM WILL NEVER WIN - Discussion by farmerman
Intelligent design Vs Evolution - Discussion by au1929
Creationism for Wisconsin - Discussion by rosborne979
A question about intelligent design - Discussion by Cyracuz
Roger Ebert answers your questions on creation - Discussion by Robert Gentel
 
Copyright © 2009 Horizontal Verticals :: Page generated in 0.34 seconds on 11/26/2009 at 02:14:02 Top End