Is There Any Reason to Believe the Biblical Story of Creation?

@neologist,

"Differ" to your heart's content. Babylon did not have those plagues. It continued to be inhabited for another 1500 years. "The wrath of the Lord" had nothing to do with the final decline of Babylon, the policy of "Islamification" by the Caliphate had everything to do with it--and remember, that was 1500 years later. Once again, you want to distort in order to make your "prophecy" come true.

Your boy was addressing a Jewish population. He wasn't writing in Farsi, he wasn't addressing anyone but the Jews. Furthermore, her foundations did not fall, and her walls were not thrown down.

Diverting the river did not cause a drought, and it did not cause the waters to be dried up. The water was still there, it was just flowing in a different channel.

This is a typical example of the tortured distortions you practice. You take three examples out of all that i provided, and think that's an answer? Your boy had a very detailed prophecy. His prophecy failed to materialize. Even if it had--and remember, it didn't--it would not constitute evidence that your book is inerrant, and that therefore the creation account must be true.

Because the biggest distortion here is this stupid bait and switch which fails to answer the question of the thread.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

"Differ" to your heart's content. Babylon did not have those plagues. It continued to be inhabited for another 1500 years. "The wrath of the Lord" had nothing to do with the final decline of Babylon, the policy of "Islamification" by the Caliphate had everything to do with it--and remember, that was 1500 years later. Once again, you want to distort in order to make your "prophecy" come true.

Or, distort in order to refute. Had the prophecy been fulfilled within 100 or so years, as in the case of Isaiah's prophecy regarding Cyrus, you would assert it to have been written after the event. But 1500 years requires a different denial. Carry on, sir.

Setanta wrote:

Your boy was addressing a Jewish population. He wasn't writing in Farsi, he wasn't addressing anyone but the Jews. Furthermore, her foundations did not fall, and her walls were not thrown down.

Diverting the river did not cause a drought, and it did not cause the waters to be dried up. The water was still there, it was just flowing in a different channel.

The point of 'drying up the waters' was to expose Babylon's walls to invaders who now could walk into the city virtually unopposed. The Jews had the prophecy in mind, no doubt, all the time they were in Babylon. But, of course, there are parts of the prophecy still having meaning for us. We just have to understand who is being spoken to.

Setanta wrote:

This is a typical example of the tortured distortions you practice.

Back atcha, sir.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

...I have been on the receiving end enough times to know that your claim that you never talk about the debater is not accurate...

No rancor, but please show me the post in which I criticized a debater for anything other than his argument, not including stating a very few times that someone is a troll when they really, truly are. If I say that an argument is stupid, or an argument method is invalid, that is about the argument, not the arguer.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

I'm OK with you, Brandon, in spite of the fact that you seem to me a bit obtuse.

At times, that is.

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

I'm OK with you, Brandon, in spite of the fact that you seem to me a bit obtuse.

At times, that is.

Please note that you are now commenting about the poster, not the argument. Can you give an example of me being obtuse?

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Whenever you disagree with me, of course.

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

Whenever you disagree with me, of course.

Noted.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

0 Replies

@neologist,

In essence, you're just saying that if even some of it appears to have been accurate, it should get a pass. That is part and parcel of your overall "argument" here, which is that if even some of the bible appears to have been accurate, the rest of it should be taken as a reliable account.

Your claim of prophecy is BS, and you ignore the many, many objections to it to focus upon a few dubious passages which you think you can twist into prophetic accuracy. The same thing applies to the overall question of the thread. You think that if you can claim that some of the bible is correct, the rest should be taken as literal truth.

None of what i pointed out to you did not take place, despite you claims about this alleged prophecy were distortions.

You have completely failed to address the question of this thread.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

None of what i pointed out to you did not take place . . .

Finally, we agree.
Sorry if I came across as pushy.

1 Reply

@neologist,

Play a f*cking word game--what i wrote were not distortions, because the events "predicted" did not take place. You are a liar and a lowlife. I don't know why i bother with you. I have no doubt, though, that you'll try to keep this up.

I truly despise you, and i will point out your lies and distortions every time i see them.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Have a good day, sir.

0 Replies

Spread more lies, sir.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Spreading butter on toast, shortly.

0 Replies

You can't let i go, can you?

Liar

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

I truly despise you . . .

I assure you and all who may chance to read this, the feeling is not mutual. I suspect you may find me irritating, since I appear to be the only believer willing to stand your scorn. There have been many in the past, still active a2k members, who now no longer chance your presence.

Setanta wrote:

You can't let i go, can you?

No, I can't let you go. I read as many of your posts as time permits and am often rewarded. But I can't pass up opportunities to defend the Bible. And, it appears you will not let me go, either.

Setanta wrote:

. . . i will point out your lies and distortions every time i see them.

" . . . By iron, iron itself is sharpened. So one man sharpens the face of another." (Proverbs 27:17)

1 Reply

@neologist,

Coming up with more goofy "scripture" doesn't change that you consistently lie in the attempt to glorify your silly book of fairy tales. That is why i despise you. I don't care if you delude yourself. I do care that you try to peddle this sewage as though it ought to be taken seriously.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

this thread is like an eel trap.

Them is some slippery fish fer sher.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

I do not agree with Neo's views. It seems that my views are closer to yours with regards to the bible. I do however think he is light years ahead of you in class...How ANYONE can "Despise" another in a internet site for disagreeing with a certain position is beyond my level of comprehension.
I would encourage you to re-think and retract that statement.

1 Reply

@giujohn,

I would encourage you not to spout off on subjects of which you are ignorant. Neo has been a member here for nine years. He has peddled the same BS for thode nine years. I have become tired of it. I have come to despise him for peddling that BS. You will find a post earlier in this thread in which i took this putative prophecy point by point. It was not actually hard to do, because i just copied and pasted it from another thread. You can point out to him that he's wrong, and why he's wrong, and he'll come right back and attempt to peddle that BS again, as though it had never been responded to. For that, i despise him. Your opinion on the subject is a matter of indifference to me.

1 Reply

Is There Any Reason to Believe the Biblical Story of Creation?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know