Greg Jennings
New member
Ive made my position pretty clear to both you and jester. I'm not going to legitimize any more of your ridiculous questions by replying to them.
Doser, otoh, seems interested in actual dialogue, not drive by comments.
More leftist hypocrisy, nicely illustrated
- Thread starter musterion
- Start date
Ive made my position pretty clear to both you and jester. I'm not going to legitimize any more of your ridiculous questions by replying to them.
Doser, otoh, seems interested in actual dialogue, not drive by comments.
Even slower...The LORD God is the author of the bible.
You: He could not use his creation, to pen His word.
And you are on this site?
Yes, and He created the universe, warms the heart of a mother, from the smile of her little one, raises the dead......
Let TOL know when you have a point....
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
The point is, fella, that she's "nice....real nice".
I asked:
His "response," punt:
No, sonny, if you don't have an infallible source authority, for correcting any alleged errors in the greatest book, that has ever, will ever, be written, you cannot correct it.
"4000 year old manuscript"
The devious punk will not, after being asked, over, and over, what relevance age has, on veracity. And thus, he asserts, on record, that the US Constitution should be thrown out, and The Declaration of Independence, and the history books written on Caesar, ......................
You deceiving punk-even you know it.
His "response," punt:
No, sonny, if you don't have an infallible source authority, for correcting any alleged errors in the greatest book, that has ever, will ever, be written, you cannot correct it.
"4000 year old manuscript"
The devious punk will not, after being asked, over, and over, what relevance age has, on veracity. And thus, he asserts, on record, that the US Constitution should be thrown out, and The Declaration of Independence, and the history books written on Caesar, ......................
You deceiving punk-even you know it.
I think a lot of you misinterpret that a bit. The Bible didn't fall out of the sky, it was written by men with the assistance of God- and every time a preacher speaks truth from the pulpit, it's by the assistance of God.
What those as yourself end up doing is turning 'sola' into 'solo'- from 'final authority' to 'only authority'. And the Bible itself doesn't teach that, the Bible states that it is useful, not the grail of all things we can know.
No, sonny, droids smarter than you, have been making the same type of claim, that you are, re. alleged errors in the book, in the same lines as you did, "There is no record...................," and later, the bible is found out to be true.
For eg., for years, "science" said "not possible" to have fountains in the ocean...
Genesis 7:11 KJV In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
And yet, later, science "discovered" that there are. The bible was vindicated, once more. One of many examples.
You bore us.
Greg Jennings
New member
What "fountains of the deep" are you referring to? Black smokers? Link please.
While you're at it, tell me how a woman transforms into salt
Greg Jennings
New member
I did answer that. But you obviously never saw or have forgotten. Veracity is independent of age. We can check the veracity of something by examining the claims made within it. The Bible contains many many things that if instead contained within the Quran you would label as "impossible." To the objective reader, it has easily refutable claims, such as the woman to salt example.
What in the constitution is demonstrably incorrect? Or in the histories of Rome?
You keep espousing the perfection of your book, yet ignore all challenges to that perfection. Get your head out of the sand and answer my questions
Greg Jennings
New member
That's not physically possible (woman to salt, which you claimed wasn't in the bible two posts ago). My point is that you take what a 4000 year old book says about a woman turning into salt as fact (a proven impossibility), while completely denying other religious absurdities (Mohammed and his flying carpet, for instance). You don't see the contradiction there?
The bigger point beyond THAT is that you believe in impossible things simply because an old book tells you so. Your authority on everything contains obviously false information, yet you want to use it due to its "inerrancy." That's ridiculous
And we know, don't think, that you are wrong...Slower...
Even slower...The LORD God is the author of the bible.That is the book's testimony
You: He could not use his creation, to pen His word. And yet He created the universe...
Prove that you are the author of your last post. Prove you "wrote" it, and not your keypad on your computer.
Fun!
Sophistry.
Yes it does.
See how that works?
You:It is impossible, if this God did create the universe, raises the dead,............................ for Him to change a woman to salt.
And you are on TOL? You cannot be this stupid.
I never claimed it was not in the bible, you devious false accuser. Knock it off, punk.
Cannot read, eh, Spanky? Genesis 7:11 KJV.
Science, relatively recently, concedes Genesis 7:11 is true, after, for centuries, laughing at it.
Tell us how the universe was created.
You:It is impossible, if this God did create the universe, raises the dead,............................ for Him to change a woman to salt.
And you are on TOL? You cannot be this stupid.
Vs.
Add habitual liar, to your "resume."
Greg Jennings
New member
No it hasn't, but feel free to actually prove what you are saying by providing a source
We'll never know the details. But we know that at least 13 bya, there was a massive expansive event that we can still see occurring today. We don't know what was before it, if anything. We can never know, because the laws of physics as we know them break down before that point
Then explain how it's possible. "Because it says so" doesn't convince anyone of anything
Says the guy claiming that Earth is 6000 years old, and women turn into salt
Observe the deception, side step....He argues that the bible is false, because....
"4000 year old manuscript"
vs.
"Veracity is independent of age."
Habitual liar, or drunk.
Which is it?
Deceiver.
"To the objective reader, it has easily refutable claims, such as the woman to salt example. "-you
No, you are wrong. The bible is correct. See how that works?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
after cremation, what's left is:
Phosphate 47.5% Calcium 25.3% Sulfate (Sulphate) 11.00% Potassium 3.69% Sodium 1.12% Chloride 1.00% Silica 0.9% Aluminum Oxide 0.72% Magnesium 0.418% Iron Oxide 0.118% Zinc 0.0342% Titanium Oxide 0.0260% Barium 0.0066% Antimony 0.0035% Chromium 0.0018% Copper 0.0017% Manganese 0.0013% Lead 0.0008% Tin 0.0005% Vanadium 0.0002% Beryllium <0.0001% Mercury <0.00001% |
Tricalcium phosphate (sometimes abbreviated TCP) is a calcium salt of phosphoric acid with the chemical formula Ca3(PO4)2.
Greg Jennings
New member
I said:
"The Bible has well noted inaccuracies.
Can s woman turn to a pillar of salt?
How old is Earth?
See?"
Then you said:
So I think you DID deny that the Bible says a woman turns into salt. But perhaps I misunderstood you
Greg Jennings
New member
Yes there is a lot of different salts in the body. That doesn't explain how you turn into salt. Your body is 80% water. It would be kind of a big deal of you just magically turned into a puddle
You do the work. Science concedes the bible is correct re. Genesis 7:11 KJV, punk. You are just a lazy slug, not here to learn the truth, but to "prove" your "argument"-a dishonest seeker. You did not even research it, you devil child....
One of many...
"But the discovery at Northwestern University is an example of how strictly scientific inquiry might be informed by Scripture, and how believers might also learn from free inquiry. That a huge amount of water may be stored deep in the earth in deposits of minerals under the immense weight of the earth’s crust is a theory that goes back to at least 1997. In the journal New Scientist, L. Bergeron wrote in 1997, “You have oceans and oceans of water stored in the transition zone. It's sopping wet.”
Researchers from Northwestern University and the University of New Mexico have now reported their evidence that oceans worth of water is found deep beneath the United States. It may be the largest reservoir of water in the world. While it is not in a liquid form, according to a news release, the scientists found ingredients for water bound up in rock deep in the earth’s mantle. They now seek to know if this deposit of water may extend around the world.
Geophysicist Steve Jacobsen of Northwestern University and seismologist Brandon Schmandt of the University of New Mexico have found deep pockets of magma located about 400 miles beneath North America, possibly indicating water at great depths. The discovery suggests water from the surface can be driven to great depths beneath the earth by plate tectonics and eventually cause the partial melting of the rocks found deep in the mantle. They published their findings in the journal Science.
“Geological processes on the Earth’s surface, such as earthquakes or erupting volcanoes, are an expression of what is going on inside the Earth, out of our sight,” said co-author Jacobsen. “I think we are finally seeing evidence for a whole-Earth water cycle, which may help explain the vast amount of liquid water on the surface of our habitable planet. Scientists have been looking for this missing deep water for decades.”
Scientists have long speculated that water is trapped in a rocky layer of the Earth’s mantle located between the lower mantle and upper mantle, at depths between 250 miles and 410 miles. Jacobsen and Schmandt are the first to provide direct evidence that there may be water in the rocky layer of the earth’s mantle located between its upper and lower layers: the “transition zone.” If just one percent of the weight of mantle rock located in the transition zone is water, theorized the researchers, that would be nearly three times the amount of water in all of the oceans.
The study combined Jacobsen’s lab experiments in which he studies mantle rock under the simulated high pressures of 400 miles below the earth’s surface with Schmandt’s observations using vast amounts of seismic data from a dense network of more than 2,000 seismometers across the United States, known as USarray. Jacobsen and Schmandt produced evidence that melting of rock may occur some 400 miles under the earth’s surface. The researchers said that water stored in mantle rocks, such as those containing the mineral called ringwoodite are key to the process. “Melting of rock at this depth is remarkable because most melting in the mantle occurs much shallower, in the upper 50 miles,” said Schmandt. “If there is a substantial amount of H2O in the transition zone, then some melting should take place in areas where there is flow into the lower mantle, and that is consistent with what we found.......................................................................”