Page 64 of 102
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:39 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
actually its the view of most sane people in the world
that the bible is a collection of older stories rewritten into a monotheistic pattern
the fact that you don't know that and the fact that you are using the new international version and not the original hebrew text for your research shows to exactly what level your ability at biblical research is at
i.e. none you were raised with it and you don't care that its erroneous because you have been indoctrinated into a false belief system which worships an ancient pagan flood god
or in other words
you have nothing to add to your ridiculously tenuous connection of Biblical Genesis to Eden in Texas
thats what I thought
maybe next time you should think these sorts of thinsg through before you post them eh
Man, I really got your goat, didn't I.
All I did was mention the parallels in the Bible, and your off the wall, defending your religion. Many ancient texts are used to aid and guide archeological expeditions. BTW, I never said anything about Texas being the Garden of Eden...geez. Stop and think, before you start defending your belief system, pagan boy.

That's right, I said boy.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:41 pm
by marduk
Smithsonian Statement regarding the Book of Mormon
South Park statement regarding the book of Mormon

Joseph Smith had a hat
dum dum dum dum dum
and your off the wall, defending your religion
religion doesnt come into it
had you claimed there was a parallel with a harry potter text i would have said the same
fact of the matter is that you are allowing your personal belief to colour your theory
thats bad Charlie
and you know it
its not the way to do science
btw Pagan is a catholic designation and isn't applicable to my current faith
and if I'm a boy then you're an old man
oh and this seems to be a normal tactic of yours that I've heard three times now
1. bring religion into a scientific discussion
2. back out
3. claim the other person in the discussion is a religious nut
pretty transparent y'know

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:42 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
Ram in a thicket from Ur, southern Iraq, about 2600-2400 BC
Ram, in limestone, prior to 14,000 B.P.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:45 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
Joseph Smith had a hat
dum dum dum dum dum

Yeah, he was a nut. Didn't stop the Smithsonian from using bits and pieces to aid their archeological endeavors.
You're the one that dragged religion into this.
All I did was mention the parallels. Are Summerian texts not used to aid archeological research?
Any mention of the Hebrew bible, and your blood pressure is off the wall. I guess that's to be expected from a reincarnated Babylonian?
Let the religion go, boy, this is science.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:49 pm
by marduk
Are Summerian texts not used to aid archological research
not as far as I know as they are regarded wholly as mythology
they are the result of archaeological excavation
not as a factual history book like the bible which is derived from them
You're the one that dragged religion into this
oh so it was me posting bible quotes
I am sorry charlie I had thought that was you
see my earlier post
oh and this seems to be a normal tactic of yours that I've heard three times now
1. bring religion into a scientific discussion
2. back out
3. claim the other person in the discussion is a religious nut
Ram, in limestone, prior to 14,000 B.P.
says furnace 2 on the picture
????
Let the religion go, boy, this is science
hippocrite

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:50 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
religion doesnt come into it
had you claimed there was a parallel with a harry potter text i would have said the same
fact of the matter is that you are allowing your personal belief to colour your theory
thats bad Charlie
and you know it
its not the way to do science
My original statement:
Hey guys. I've been down today with some kind of stomack bug...ugh.
A quick post here, and back to bed I go. Check into the story of Tubal-Cain, his brothers, and the flood that followed. One of Tubal-Cain's brothers, Jubal, is said to have been the father of all who play the harp and flute.
Quote:
19 Lamech married two women, one named Adah and the other Zillah. 20 Adah gave birth to Jabal; he was the father of those who live in tents and raise livestock. 21 His brother's name was Jubal; he was the father of all who play the harp and flute. 22 Zillah also had a son, Tubal-Cain, who forged all kinds of tools out of [g] bronze and iron. Tubal-Cain's sister was Naamah.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... version=31;
Some intriguing parallels to the situation here:
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:51 pm
by marduk
Any mention of the Hebrew bible
you've never read it have you ?

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:53 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
you've never read it have you ?
Nope, I don't read or speak Hebrew. I've read the English translation, though.
You didn't answer one question, though: Are Summerian texts used to aid archeology?
If so, how is this any different from using other religious texts?

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:55 pm
by marduk
Isengard was a stronghold guarding the Gap of Rohan at the southern end of the Misty Mountains. The impregnable Tower of Orthanc stood within the walls of Isengard. Isengard was originally an outpost of Gondor, but in the later part of the Third Age it was home to the Wizard Saruman. During the War of the Ring, Saruman was defeated and the walls of Isengard were torn down by the Ents, and the Tower of Orthanc was reclaimed by Gondor.
you could use this ?
Isengard in the language of Gondor means Iron fortress
You didn't answer one question, though: Are Summerian texts used to aid archeology?
yes I did
not as far as I know as they are regarded wholly as mythology
they are the result of archaeological excavation
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:57 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
Quote:
Isengard was a stronghold guarding the Gap of Rohan at the southern end of the Misty Mountains. The impregnable Tower of Orthanc stood within the walls of Isengard. Isengard was originally an outpost of Gondor, but in the later part of the Third Age it was home to the Wizard Saruman. During the War of the Ring, Saruman was defeated and the walls of Isengard were torn down by the Ents, and the Tower of Orthanc was reclaimed by Gondor.
you could use this ?
Isengard in the language of Gondor means Iron fortress
yes I did
Quote:
not as far as I know as they are regarded wholly as mythology
they are the result of archaeological excavation
Is that a Summerian text.

You can't do that...it makes you a religious nut!!

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:59 pm
by marduk
Is that a Summerian text.
Its Tolkiens lord of the rings Charlie
fyi its not a religious text
ahahahahahaha

btw there's only one "m" in Sumerian
You can't do that...it makes you a religious nut!!
so you agree then that people making tenuous claims based on the bible are religious nuts
thats what I thought

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:04 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
Its Tolkiens lord of the rings Charlie
fyi its not a religious text
ahahahahahaha
That's hilarious!

Never read it before.
But what about this?
not as far as I know as they are regarded wholly as mythology
they are the result of archaeological excavation
btw there's only one "m" in Sumerian
Ha! O.K., I'll make sure to correct your many typos in the future.
Your so smart.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:06 pm
by marduk
But what about this?
what about it ?
you think Gilgamesh is regarded today as a religious text ?
its a story
that consensus is agreed upon by everyone
even biblical scholars who would love to ignore it

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:08 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
so you agree then that people making tenuous claims based on the bible are religious nuts
thats what I thought
Oh, you got me.
The point is, many ancient manuscripts are used to aid archeology...be them wholly true, wholly myth, or a little of both.
Look back to the many Native American legends we were discussing previously.
You have a double standard.
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:10 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
what about it ?
you think Gilgamesh is regarded today as a religious text ?
its a story
that consensus is agreed upon by everyone
even biblical scholars who would love to ignore it
And what was my original statement?
I never brought my personal beliefs to the table.
