Update on "Ida" - not ancestor-link at all

[ConScience]

The question is, what evidence exists to demonstrate that their eyewitness testimony to the resurrected Christ false/inaccurate?

None as far as I am concerned.

But do you care to weigh in on whether the Flood was local or global?

We have more than one eye witness writing about the resurrection - and the martyrdom of said eye witnesses speaks volumes of their belief in the resurrection. It really doesn't make sense why the disciples would make up this lie only to be martyred and hated by their own families and people.

We are not in disagreement (finally, nobody on the board is disagreeing ... either everyone's too tired, or we've actually made a little progress).

On another thread, I just discovered that SpiritMan believes that the waters above the firmaments prevented c-14 production. That's a breakthrough - something specific that I didn't know people believed. now THAt is progress.

[MorningGlory]

The question is, what evidence exists to demonstrate that their eyewitness testimony to the resurrected Christ false/inaccurate?

None as far as I am concerned.

But do you care to weigh in on whether the Flood was local or global?

We have more than one eye witness writing about the resurrection - and the martyrdom of said eye witnesses speaks volumes of their belief in the resurrection. It really doesn't make sense why the disciples would make up this lie only to be martyred and hated by their own families and people.

We are not in disagreement (finally, nobody on the board is disagreeing ... either everyone's too tired, or we've actually made a little progress).

On another thread, I just discovered that SpiritMan believes that the waters above the firmaments prevented c-14 production. That's a breakthrough - something specific that I didn't know people believed. now THAt is progress.

[ConScience]

The question is, what evidence exists to demonstrate that their eyewitness testimony to the resurrected Christ false/inaccurate?

None as far as I am concerned.

But do you care to weigh in on whether the Flood was local or global?

We have more than one eye witness writing about the resurrection - and the martyrdom of said eye witnesses speaks volumes of their belief in the resurrection. It really doesn't make sense why the disciples would make up this lie only to be martyred and hated by their own families and people.

We are not in disagreement (finally, nobody on the board is disagreeing ... either everyone's too tired, or we've actually made a little progress).

On another thread, I just discovered that SpiritMan believes that the waters above the firmaments prevented c-14 production. That's a breakthrough - something specific that I didn't know people believed. now THAt is progress.

Well guys and gals, I'm off to bed and dream about Noah's ark, apes and carbon dating. Sleep well, all, and dream in color!

[spiritman]

I said species- if you believe that there are much more species now that were not on the ark ; where did they come from? Certainly not from like species that would be evolution, wouldn't it?

I know for a fact that there are much more Kinds, then there were before the flood, because the simple fact is, more time has passed, and these critters have been reproducing.

And when I say kinds I mean cats, dogs, bears, lions, etc etc.

[Guest shiloh357]

The question is, what evidence exists to demonstrate that their eyewitness testimony to the resurrected Christ false/inaccurate?

None as far as I am concerned.

But do you care to weigh in on whether the Flood was local or global?

So you don't have a reason to disbelieve their testimony?

[ConScience]

The question is, what evidence exists to demonstrate that their eyewitness testimony to the resurrected Christ false/inaccurate?

None as far as I am concerned.

But do you care to weigh in on whether the Flood was local or global?

So you don't have a reason to disbelieve their testimony?

No evidence ... I didn't say no reason.

[ConScience]

Because you have to assume that the laws of the universe were suspended in their favor. That's delusional.

I sympathize with you opinion, but being too outspoken is likely to get you in trouble with some of the members here.

Perhaps not delusional ... let's say "deeply optimistic" or "unnatural" or "suspicious".

Basically, for something so outrageous as miracles to be claimed as 'real', there would have to be a VAST amount of evidence.

(If I said I had a bagel for breakfast, you might accept scant evidence, whereas if I said I consumed a loch Ness monster egg, you might require a little more convincing).

Many people (no all, I hasten to add) rely solely on the evidence of one book. Meaning one person's interpretation of events. Which, as a scientist is quite troubling.

But this is a digression from the topic, so my apologies.

[MorningGlory]

Many people (no all, I hasten to add) rely solely on the evidence of one book. Meaning one person's interpretation of events. Which, as a scientist is quite troubling.

The Bible is a collection of books; it was NOT written by one person.

[Believer1997]

Many people (no all, I hasten to add) rely solely on the evidence of one book. Meaning one person's interpretation of events. Which, as a scientist is quite troubling.

The Bible is a collection of books; it was NOT written by one person.

And not ALL people rely solely on the evidence of one book written by many and inspired by God.

[ConScience]

Many people (no all, I hasten to add) rely solely on the evidence of one book. Meaning one person's interpretation of events. Which, as a scientist is quite troubling.

The Bible is a collection of books; it was NOT written by one person.

Of course, this is a point I've made many times, as you know.

My point is that any one book only usually applies to one time period. The exception being (supposedly) some books in the NT. But even the gospels, while claiming to COVER the same time period, were not written at the time that they relate to. Nor were they written by eyewitnesses (re-read Luke, if you have any doubts about that).

But this is nothing to do with Ida.