An PLEASE why do you keep blaming BOOSH? He hasn't been president for years. It's OBOMA who keeps us in the ME.
There is no Statute of Limitations on War Crimes and Mass Murder. Bush, as Klinton, as Bush I, as Reagan, as Nixon, as LBJ, are all WAR CRIMINALS who have used the U.S. Military as a private army to enforce the edicts of the Bilderberg cabal and specifically the House of Rotchild.
I think, if anything, the current little suppurating pustule in the Whore House is no different that his predecessor - he is in fact worse, but that does excuse the action of the Killer Chimperor.
As for the Bible I do not degrade, disparage, or attack other religions. I will entertain factual criticisms e.g., the multiple times the text of the Bible has been edited and rearranged to support political agendas - such as the Scofield Bowlderization, the monkeyshines with the King James translation, the council of Nicea etc., .... However, that is an academic dispute and should not be confused with gratuitous and mean spirited attacks on others' beliefs.
However, that is an academic dispute should not be confused with gratuitous and mean spirited attacks on others' beliefs.
point well taken, however, i would like to see a disputation of what P&T presented in this video. are the stories in the OT of Adam and Eve, Noah's ark, and Moses parting the Red Sea factual (or possible?) or are they allegories?
point well taken, however, i would like to see a disputation of what P&T presented in this video. are the stories in the OT of Adam and Eve, Noah's ark, and Moses parting the Red Sea factual (or possible?) or are they allegories?
I believe it is postulated by academia that the creation story was based on the earlier epic of Gilgamesh. They do parallel one another. While I believe much of the Bible is based on actual historical events, I think the archeological evidence is sparse though some does exist. O_I is better at that end of things than I am.
However, that is an academic dispute should not be confused with gratuitous and mean spirited attacks on others' beliefs.
point well taken, however, i would like to see a disputation of what P&T presented in this video. are the stories in the OT of Adam and Eve, Noah's ark, and Moses parting the Red Sea factual (or possible?) or are they allegories?
My personal opinion is that legends and myths (including some religious works) have generally had, at some point, a basis in fact i.e., they are representations of actual events. What makes it tricky is that we have no other good contemporaneous works to truly support or refute those events. The other problem of course is that they occurred so long ago that it is possible (I think likely) that they have become distorted and garbled being passed down through time.
As for the specific events mentioned I think it could be a mixture of allegory and and factual and that the two have become conflated through time.
It is interesting, and seldom commented on, that other people are mentioned in the tale of Adam and Eve.
Noah's Ark - I suspect some factual basis. There are flood legends on both sides of the Atlantic. I suspect that there may have been a boat, or boats, that were prepared to weather the storm. Beyond that, on a factual not theological basis, there is not really enough to say more. Charles Berlitz, the heir to the Berlitz language school fortune, was able in his linguistic research find the syllabic group "atl" in words meaning water in 20 languages on both sides of the Atlantic.
The parting of the Red Sea is an interesting one. I have not read a lot on it but did skim a recent article that put forth the idea that there was a scientific basis upon which to explain it. Personally I leave it in the "I don't know" box.
The problem with such as Penn and Teller, and their fellow "skeptics", is that they are just as dogmatic in their rejection as the supporters are in their affirmation.
i would like to see a disputation (refutation?) of what P&T presented in this video. are the stories in the OT of Adam and Eve, Noah's ark, and Moses parting the Red Sea factual (or possible?) or are they allegories?
Good points all.
When it comes to refuting the Bible P&T lean heavily on science. But when it comes to their belief in the official, ever changing 9/11 story it becomes a matter of faith and science "don't mean jack doodly"....