sadly today we have many who believe far worse as my threads will continue to show. But any time the bible is rejected, people will believe some crazy stuff.
Er, not to put too much of a point on it, that link is a creationist "science critique". Specifically their argument is that isochronic dating is totally junk science because its predicated on an uranium/lead isotopic correlation between known meteors, the moon and the segments of the earth's crust . More sophistic tomfoolery, but it sure does sound high falutin' precisely because 90% of the link is solid accepted nuclear science.
Wrong, as i answered your question. You avoided mine. Please pay attention. So...what is your answer to my question?
Exactly my point. And the Dogon most assuredly had no idea what a planet or a star was, much less that there were other planets or stars.
?? Do you even try to follow the responses, or just parse out a snippet and spout whatever you want, even if it has no bearing? I've let it slide a few times, hoping it was just misunderstanding. But the continued practice makes me think it is a tactic of avoidance, and repetition of talking points. ..probably just me. I have trouble adapting to the New! Improved! reasoning style of the new millennium..
No, it's to clarify exactly which statement to which I am referring. And it wasn't a counterpoint to what you said. It was me,making my point. Gee, if that's okay with you, that is....
Not to put too fine a point on it, but you can also deduce, infer, correlate and extrapolate from people's statements and behaviors. Doing that does provide some insight into what other people might know or believe, no?
just an observation on a definitive statement you made in rebuttal, that seemed germane to it. Nothing more.
Because you inferred that I could not possibly know what the Dogon knew (or didnt know) about the universe. You were wrong, and he was trying to explain why you were wrong.
Again, there's the option that he naturally woke up that morning or he couldn't sleep. Either way, this is off subject of an already off topic discussion. The question was whether there was a time discrepancy between the two passages, not whether it was plausible for Pilate to wake up at the suggested time.
Maybe they were at war and in fear of of dying, he made his son co-regent. Or maybe he was in danger of assassination. Either way, we weren't there.
This article gives a decent explanation. Basically it's not just the word itself, but rather the context in which it is used. https://www.gotquestions.org/red-reed-sea.html But either way, this isn't really a contradiction in the Bible but rather a question in translation
Theists will continue to rationalize EVERYTHING! Please elucidate on how "rising from the dead" has a "reasonable explanation or at least a plausible one"?
So you offer no other explanation than to make up some excuse? We are talking about the same stories inspired by an infallible being. No excuses are needed if the inspiration is infallible.
Got questions is a pretty lowbrow site. Yam was the name of a Canaanite god.. and nobody knows what Suf means.
I'm speaking strictly about contradictions in the Bible. You have yet to show a acclaimed contradiction that doesn't have a reasonable explanation or at least a plausible one. Rising from the dead isn't a contradiction in the Bible. It defines common understanding of physics (and there are cases where people rose from the dead long after reviving attempts ceased) but it's not a contradiction.