Archaeologica.org

archaeologist17 wrote:

Personally, I enjoy the repeated opportunities to keep insulting him.

that is why your arguments have no validity. you focus on the messenger and not the message. you can't even provide proper responses and i wonder how you get to remain on this site because of your lack of arch. and scientific posts.

Like you're doing now?

I notice you avoiding the "Current Biblical Archaeology" thread like the plague. Reality too hard to face?

I notice you avoiding the "Current Biblical Archaeology" thread like the plague. Reality too hard to face?

no and i am just too busy at the moment to be able to give it proper attention.
i haven't even read it for some time now so i have no idea where the discussion is heading. but i imagine that it is all one sided and not a real discussion anyways. probably a group p'pat on the back' which seems to be the norm around here.

archaeologist wrote:[...] probably a group p'pat on the back' which seems to be the norm around here.

Yeah, the choice between "a pat on the back" and fire & brimstone is easy, matey.

No, no...I understand his point of view. That's what the whole bible is about. Providing facile and silly answers to complex problems that people don't want to think about.

Why study biology when you can insist that man was made out of dirt?

Why study biology when you can insist that man was made out of dirt?

even as a believer one should study biology to find out how the body works and to find out how to heal it.

i have never advocated the ignorance of science.

i have never advocated the ignorance of science.

No. Merely ignoring it when it doesn't fit your mythology.

not really as i would point out that alternatives to God's design are ignoring what God has done and not the reverse.

Magic again, arch....when you can't explain something you retreat into magic.

someone once said if i proved one thing of the Bible they would listen or believe or something like that. well i would like to put up as one piece of evidence for that proof and it is found inthe book of ecclesiastes 1:9---

"...there is nothing new under the sun..."

through archaeology we can see the validity of that verse as we know that in the modern age, men wrote, built buildings, went to war, thought of flying and so on.

yet all these same things appear throughout the historical record. greek mythology had the idea of flying long before Da Vinci drew his helicopter. the ancient minoans built two and three story buildings with hot and cold running water. war we know so no need to put an example here. astronomy was practiced long before telescopes were invented, then the pythagaryn (sp) theory was used by the babylonians long before pythagarous (sp)

vehiles were thought of, though not in the form they are made today but wheeled travel was an concept put ito practice over and over. writing, publishing, libraries were done in some form throughout the ages .

so we see a consistancy in the thinking of mankind where the writer of eeclesiastes laments that there is nothing original left, even in his time.

the only lacking factor is the abilityto discover and use the ingrediants that modern man has been fortunate to discover and manipulate its structure to make them pliable for use.

i evenremember reading about an ancient computer invented thousands of years ago thus that invention is no longer original either. so we can see by ancient history, by archaeology the truthfulness of even that one verse of the Bible.

archaeologist wrote:[...] i evenremember reading about an ancient computer invented thousands of years ago thus that invention is no longer original either. [...]

ROTFLMAO!!!
Yeah, like I 'even remember' watching a movie called "Jurassic Park". That – obviously – was/is true as well...

Yeah, like I 'even remember' watching a movie called "Jurassic Park". That – obviously – was/is true as well...

laugh if you want but the book "LOst Discoveries" by Dick Teresi adds weight to my argument. i don't remeber which book the computer was mentioned in but when i find it i will post the title.

Teresi's book is quite informative, though at time he gets very tedious and spends too much time on the injustice done to the ancients and not enough on the discoveries of their technological prowess.

Have you read Erich von Däniken, Arch?
Right up your alley.

Have you read Erich von Däniken, Arch?
Right up your alley.

you mean the author of the Chariots of God book? isn't he a little out there like hancock?

it is a foolish game to dismiss one person's reference material and then expect them to accept your own. at least i read books outside of my religion and look for information that i haven't learned before. what can you say about yourself?

Minimalist stays within his own belief structure when he reads (at least as evidenced by the books he has quoted). so you guys really have no place to mock or criticize.

archaeologist wrote:

Have you read Erich von Däniken, Arch?
Right up your alley.

you mean the author of the Chariots of God book? isn't he a little out there like hancock?

it is a foolish game to dismiss one person's reference material and then expect them to accept your own.

Who said that Erich von Däniken is my reference material, Archhole?
Reading, and actually understanding what it is you are reading, is clearly a bridge too far for you.