• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Evidence for the Bible / God [W536; 634]

Logicman said:
I never mentioned whales. You've got me confused with someone else.
Click to expand...
Oh my, are you now going to deny that you posted this:

Logicman said:
PHOTOS: What Archaeologists Just Put on Display Has Bible Believers Saying "I Told You So" to Atheists

Excerpts:

"In what the U.K. Daily Mail called “one of the driest regions of the world, receiving just a few inches of rain a year,” the fossilized remains of two now-extinct whale species have recently been put on display."

"Whale bones are probably not what one would first expect to see during a tour of the Egyptian Sahara Desert, but there they are."

Why are the fossilized remains of now-extinct whale species in the Sahara Desert? A major flood, perhaps?
Click to expand...

....and have been failing to defend the supposition that homo sapiens coexisted with them? This is getting more and more absurd, illogical and incoherent.
 
Logicman said:
I wasn't there. But God was and he confirmed Noah's flood.
Click to expand...

Please show that 'God' was there, and that he 'confirmed Noah's flood'. Can you show independent confirmation (I.e. other than the bible). that this is so?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Oh my, are you now going to deny that you posted this:

....and have been failing to defend the supposition that homo sapiens coexisted with them? This is getting more and more absurd, illogical and incoherent.
Click to expand...

Listen, I don't give a rat's a*s what you think about Noah and his flood. One day you'll stand before the Great God Jesus Christ who confirmed it and then you'll be the one eating crow. You can count on it.
 
RAMOSS said:
Please show that 'God' was there, and that he 'confirmed Noah's flood'. Can you show independent confirmation (I.e. other than the bible). that this is so?
Click to expand...

Whistle for it.
 
Logicman said:
Listen, I don't give a rat's a*s what you think about Noah and his flood. One day you'll stand before the Great God Jesus Christ who confirmed it and then you'll be the one eating crow. You can count on it.
Click to expand...

Attempts to derail threads by continually and/or singularly attacking the idea of skepticism within theological discussions may result in thread bans and/or infractions. Expressions of ones personal faith as it relates to a topic is allowed; however, continual attempts to derail a thread by demanding others accept such views, and refusing to engage in substantive back and forth debate on the actual topic, may also result in thread bans and/or infractions.
 
Logicman said:
Whistle for it.
Click to expand...

In other words, you make all sorts of claims you can not show to be true. It seems you like talking for God. I don't see any reason that God agrees with you.
 
RAMOSS said:
In other words, you make all sorts of claims you can not show to be true. It seems you like talking for God. I don't see any reason that God agrees with you.
Click to expand...

How many times have you been asked whether or not you believe in God, and all you can do is skulk away? So save your folly for someone else. I'll answer you when you answer myself and others.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Attempts to derail threads by continually and/or singularly attacking the idea of skepticism within theological discussions may result in thread bans and/or infractions. Expressions of ones personal faith as it relates to a topic is allowed; however, continual attempts to derail a thread by demanding others accept such views, and refusing to engage in substantive back and forth debate on the actual topic, may also result in thread bans and/or infractions.
Click to expand...

Tsk tsk...

Like I said, I have it on the respectful authority of the resurrected Jesus Christ that Noah's flood was legit. Feel free to try to impugn that or bust the resurrection, which gives him additional credence.
 
Logicman said:
How many times have you been asked whether or not you believe in God, and all you can do is skulk away? So save your folly for someone else. I'll answer you when you answer myself and others.
Click to expand...

And, considering I have told you why I won't answer you, I don't see why you keep asking.

I , however, don't make any claims about God one way or another. You , however, do, and you can't back up your claims.
 
Logicman said:
Tsk tsk...

Like I said, I have it on the respectful authority of the resurrected Jesus Christ that Noah's flood was legit. Feel free to try to impugn that or bust the resurrection, which gives him additional credence.
Click to expand...

You haven't shown that the 'Resurrection' is anything more than religious dogma and the unsupported claims of the New Testament, whose accounts are not historical, nor are they independent, no matter what you say.
 
Logicman said:
Tsk tsk...

Like I said, I have it on the respectful authority of the resurrected Jesus Christ that Noah's flood was legit. Feel free to try to impugn that or bust the resurrection, which gives him additional credence.
Click to expand...
The debate you continue to avoid is your referencing 34 million year old whales coexisting with homo sapiens. Hiding behind religion is not a defense. Either back your claim or accept your shame.
 
Logicman said:
Tsk tsk...

Like I said, I have it on the respectful authority of the resurrected Jesus Christ that Noah's flood was legit. Feel free to try to impugn that or bust the resurrection, which gives him additional credence.
Click to expand...

You need to prove the resurection no one needs to "bust" it.
Just like all your claims, the burden of proof remains upon the one who makes it. Not the other way around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom