# ***Jan/AL:Inspired Prophecy!

[ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Al; [Aldurant] on October 27, 1999 at 20:41:13 {dPkPwxsNJEmlvf6PLwvct74NX2uzuA}:

In Reply to: **Jan/AL:Inspired Prophecy! posted by Bibleman#2 on October 27, 1999 at 18:04:10:

:Because it might have been common for waterproof baskets for children to be made.

Might have been? Might not have been. Your faith is based on this sort of reasoning? Maybe it was common to make up legends. The point is that we have no reason to ascribe extraordinary atributes to the Jewish versions. If there is a reason, what is it?

:It wouldn't necessarily mean the story of Moses was an adaptation.

Maybe not, but maybe it did.

:You talk about many things including the "fruitage" of the Bible, etc. All that's "subjective."

No, it's history.

:1. As far as the "days of Creation" are concerned. Of course, anybody can have their own interpretation. But, Biblically, Hebrews requires us to time the Creative Days as 7,000 years each since the millennium is called a "sabbath" rest, basically occupying near the last 1000 years of the 7th Creative Day. Of note, written history and biblical history fall within that 6000-year parameter. And further, there is a Jubilee after the millennium. That is, the last 1000 years of the 7th Creative day means it is the 49th 1000 years, which is a "sabbath" year. But also the 50th, the jubilee, is also a special sabbath. So that Biblical typology forces me to limit specifically the timing of those Creative days to 7000 years each.

Why are you telling me this? (again)

:As far as your billion-years theory,

You know that it is not my theory, right?

:And you can't prove otherwise, so another INCONCLUSIVE.

In view of the fact that your theory contradicts the laws of physics and mine doesn't, the burden of proof is on you. Where is it?

:But I haven't seen anything to persuade me yet. Certainly not radiocarbon dating and certainly not thermoluminescence, and certainly not archaeology which agrees with the Bible's chronology.

What archaeology agrees with the Flood? Or with anything prior to 2500 BC ? Zip.

:Get it?

Yes, I get it. You start with your conclusion and refuse to do serious study. I ask you for reference for your theories and you ignore my question.

:that there is nothing you can do about my dismissal.

I am not the slightest bit concerned about your dismissal or your beliefs. I don't have to ever concern myself about peoples religious "beliefs" again. This started because you commented to me on an archaeology thread and raised some questions. I thought you were interested in answers. I find them very interesting myself.

:And that's because, your observations are based upon THEORY and TECHNIQUE.

And your "observation" of Christs' return is based on aritmetic and ?

:But since we know the correct dating for mankind, that's more than just opinion,

Yes, it's YOUR opinion

:It is as simple as that.

Or as this: arithmetic + claim that one has seen the second coming = new sect

:They can't PROVE the dating.

They have proven it, Gary. Do the reading. If you will ever give me a reference, I will read that.

:And it's no big deal since scientists don't really have a great grasp on things of nature anyway.

What was your response to my comment on medicine, airplanes, and automobiles? I can't recall.

:It's a lot of speculation.

Like mediceine, airplanes, and cars, right.

:So one day, when they get it right, if it is a reliable method of dating, the Bible's chronology and dating will be confirmed and that's that.

Are you ever going to respond to my question of your view of tree rings? Or are we going to pretend that is also that?

:But please, be convinced about it as much as you want. It's not scientific and it is very dismissible. If it wasn't, I wouldn't be able to dismiss it.

Yes, I get it. Because you are right, that's how we know that you are not wrong. OK.

:So let me explain this to you again one more time.

You have explained nothing, ever, on these threads.

:I'm not concerned in the least bit of nonsense and chatter about mankind being one day older than circa 6000 years.

"Chatter" = several thousand scientists, over seventeen different methods, over fourty years of comparative, double-blind, critical tests, with peer review.

:We don't know enough about the ancient past, it's atmosphere, weather conditions, anything!

Excuse me, you can talk about who doesn't know enough after you've done some reasdonable study other than obsessive arithmetic.

:We can only presume they are similar to ours. With those amount of variables involved there is lots of room for error.

Yes, up to 15% in some cases.

:And since they are coming up with such wild dates, I can confirm for you the dating is INCOMPETENT, so I don't even need to pay attention to it.

I take it that now that I have decided to read your references (if you give me any) that you have decided not to read mine.

:See how easy that was.

Yes, just as easy as "God said it. I believe it. That settles it."

:And I didn't just dismiss this without at least looking at what the methods were and the theories behind the methods.

You either didn't read it or you have no short term memory.

:Anyway, I see you're focussed more on dismissing the Bible than how it's prophecies work out.

Like I said before. I haven't "dismissed" it. I just disagree with your, uh, conclusion.

:So the "evidence" of the flood is likely abundant, but that's because it likely destroyed things rather tan built things.

So, things are missing, and that's evidence of the flood, but since they are missing, we can see them. Oh, except for the ice packs, cave art, sedimentary layers, and no debrie scattered all over th earth like every other flood. I think I understand now.

:Thanks for considering the Biblical prophecies.

Your welcome. I've been doing it since 1971.

:I understand that from an outsider, a non-prophet, let's say, the Biblical experience will be different and I empathize with the skepticism.

No problem. all i heard was arithmetic and I am familiar with that also.

:Those who are wanting to see God "face to face" will get that chance....

I will see God in whatever manner he wants. I think that is why he gave us a brain, for those who have the honesty and the courage to use it.

Sincerely, Al

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject: ****Jan/AL:Inspired Prophecy!

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ FAQ ]