Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Page 7 of 7
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
theatheistjew





Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 398
Reputation: 11.2
votes: 10
Location: Niagara Region, Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrsocko wrote:
Quote:
You should watch the video I linked. Then we can talk on an equal playing field.


I have a 26.4k connection so that's out of the question. Egyptian and Sumerian/Akkadian history has always been a passion of mine so i am very familiar with the workings of the deny the Exodus crew. You should reasearch the anti-semitism related to that. Within 50 years Rohl's chronology or one some other chronology will be accepted as better than the Old chronolgy. The old Chronology throws out the written histories of more than just the Jewish peoples. It's a travesty that it has gone on this long.


Here is a good link about the historical evidence regarding the Exodus:
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/04-04-05.html#SPH
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Here is a good link about the historical evidence regarding the Exodus:


I have already looked at both sides. I along with thousands of archaelogists favour the new chronology because whole dark ages of history come to life when it is used. Which chronology is better is a debate that is going on now in middle eastern archaeology. I don't need to look at both sides. I already have!

You need to look at both sides. Read A Test of Time.This book could open up a new avenue to your Jewish heritage. Rohl has found letters from the King of Jerusalem asking the Pharoah of Egypt to help save him from David's attempt to take the city. It's really amazing that it was all here all along. They just had it dated wrong or were looking at the wrong strata as in the case of Jericho. Read A Test of Time. You won't be disappointed.
theatheistjew





Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 398
Reputation: 11.2
votes: 10
Location: Niagara Region, Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrsocko wrote:
Quote:
Here is a good link about the historical evidence regarding the Exodus:


I have already looked at both sides. I along with thousands of archaelogists favour the new chronology because whole dark ages of history come to life when it is used. Which chronology is better is a debate that is going on now in middle eastern archaeology. I don't need to look at both sides. I already have!

You need to look at both sides. Read A Test of Time.This book could open up a new avenue to your Jewish heritage. Rohl has found letters from the King of Jerusalem asking the Pharoah of Egypt to help save him from David's attempt to take the city. It's really amazing that it was all here all along. They just had it dated wrong or were looking at the wrong strata as in the case of Jericho. Read A Test of Time. You won't be disappointed.

I will look it up, but I want you to read this and give your opinion of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_Unearthed
theatheistjew





Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 398
Reputation: 11.2
votes: 10
Location: Niagara Region, Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh one more thing. Didn't you say you looked at both sides of evolution too and you are painfully obviously on the wrong side of that. So I question your opinion to begin with.
But I will look at what I can come up with wrt to Rohls letter discovery.
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I will look it up, but I want you to read this and give your opinion of it.


I love books like that(strange I know). I am going to look it up and see if I can get it at a library or bookstore. The bad part about the new chronology and the reason that so many oldtime archaeologist's hat eit is that it makes alot of their work irrelevant. It will be interesting to see who's chronology they are using. Sometimes in the back of the more scholarly books they have timelines along more than one chronology. There are many new ones other than the 2 I have mentioned being proposed.

7th century seems pretty late to me(and Rohl's chronology moves the date up 200-300 years). I will check my books and compare the dates with the outline in The Bible Unearthed, Rohl's Chronology and the old Chronology. I may send you a private message on it. If I can find my copy of A Test of Time I could send it to you.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

theatheistjew wrote:
I already said that I didn't see any major anti-semitism against me in my life to date first hand, except for that basketball tourney which was probably good old religious intolerance instead.

Why am I reminded of the CBC "town hall" during the 2006 election? Remember when Peter Mansbridge corners Paul Martin with a smile, "Prime Minister, that's not the question I'm asking." and Paul Martin returns the smile, "Well, that's the question I'm answering."

-Mac :wink:
theatheistjew





Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 398
Reputation: 11.2
votes: 10
Location: Niagara Region, Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrsocko wrote:
Quote:
I will look it up, but I want you to read this and give your opinion of it.


I love books like that(strange I know). I am going to look it up and see if I can get it at a library or bookstore. The bad part about the new chronology and the reason that so many oldtime archaeologist's hat eit is that it makes alot of their work irrelevant. It will be interesting to see who's chronology they are using. Sometimes in the back of the more scholarly books they have timelines along more than one chronology. There are many new ones other than the 2 I have mentioned being proposed.

7th century seems pretty late to me(and Rohl's chronology moves the date up 200-300 years). I will check my books and compare the dates with the outline in The Bible Unearthed, Rohl's Chronology and the old Chronology. I may send you a private message on it. If I can find my copy of A Test of Time I could send it to you.


From Wikipedia:
Some scholars have identified Labaya with the biblical figure of Abimelech ben Gideon-(the identical name of Abi-Milku of the Amarna letters), (Judges 9)[citation needed]. Still others, such as David Rohl, have advocated a totally revised chronology of ancient Israelite and Egyptian history, and instead identify Labaya with Saul and Mutbaal with Saul's son Ishbaal or Ish-bosheth. These scholars further identify Dadua, Ayab and Yishaya, three figures mentioned by Mutbaal in a later Amarna Letter, as King David, his general Joab and his father, Jesse/Yishai-(EA 256, title: "Oaths and denials").[9] The Rohl chronology, which is recently proposed, is not, however, widely accepted. There are wide discrepancies between the Labaya of the Amarna texts and King Saul as he is described in the Books of Samuel, leading Rohl's suggestion to be dismissed by other Egyptologists, such as Kenneth Kitchen.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

theatheistjew wrote:

Are you a book burner too?


Locking topics is for when they go off-topic.. or if they get out of hand.

You seem to like to try to drive the topics out of hand.

My job here is to ensure that topics stay on topic, and that there is respect among the posters.

So far you are demonstrating a complete lack of respect for the members, the board and myself...

We've been giving you chances... don't push buttons.

If you want to stay and have an intelligent discussion, then please do so.
if you insist on insulting members then you won't be welcome any longer.

I really don't think the rules are that hard to understand.

We won't get into the fact that some of the most noted atheists of all time have been book-burners...

I have yet to see an agnostic burning books. 8)
theatheistjew





Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 398
Reputation: 11.2
votes: 10
Location: Niagara Region, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

biggie wrote:
theatheistjew wrote:

Are you a book burner too?


Locking topics is for when they go off-topic.. or if they get out of hand.

You seem to like to try to drive the topics out of hand.

My job here is to ensure that topics stay on topic, and that there is respect among the posters.

So far you are demonstrating a complete lack of respect for the members, the board and myself...

We've been giving you chances... don't push buttons.

If you want to stay and have an intelligent discussion, then please do so.
if you insist on insulting members then you won't be welcome any longer.

I really don't think the rules are that hard to understand.

We won't get into the fact that some of the most noted atheists of all time have been book-burners...

I have yet to see an agnostic burning books. 8)

Sometimes topics evolve to go off the original topic. Still, if people are participating and having civil discussion like what is going on here right now, I really don't think you should cut the thread off. That is my opinion, but it is logical. The reason for message boards is to discuss things, and most people don't agree with everybody about everything.
Please note, that I too have been insulted here, but the monitors seem to fail to recognize it.

Outside of the Bolsheviks (many were agnostic/atheist) name an atheist who was a book burner. Hitler was a theist btw. He believed in God and that his mission was divinely inspired by God. Though he was a bad Catholic.


Here is a link of historical book burnings:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_burning

In my view, there is nothing wrong with going off topic. I usually learn a lot, as I just did by looking book burning. Hopefully others feel the same way.
urbanmonk





Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 307
Reputation: 16.8Reputation: 16.8
votes: 5

PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrsocko wrote:

Investigate the writings of David Rohl and the new chronology for proof of the exodus and the sojurn in Egypt. The book would be called "ATest of Time". he is not Jewish or Christian by the way.

I read that book a few years ago, it fascinating. I'd recommend it to anyone who's interested in the topic, or the history of the 'fertile crescent' in general.
Thanks for mentioning it mrsocko, I think I'll borrow it again from the library.
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Oh one more thing. Didn't you say you looked at both sides of evolution too and you are painfully obviously on the wrong side of that. So I question your opinion to begin with.


Do you always have to try to piss people off. I am trying my best to be friendly and courteous to you but as always you have to misrepresent what I have said in my posts.

Please look again. Here is what I have said about the Evolution Creation debate.

Posted Sept. 10/07
Quote:
I don't believe that the simpleton creationists have it right when they say that the world is 6000 years old. I also don't believe that evolutionists have it correct either.


The only opinion of yours that I am vehemently opposed to is that that anyone who believes in God is an idiot or writes gibberish in their postings here.

You may question my opinion. I question your ability to get along with your fellow bloggers on this site and would ask you to exercise better decorum.
theatheistjew





Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 398
Reputation: 11.2
votes: 10
Location: Niagara Region, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrsocko wrote:
Quote:
Oh one more thing. Didn't you say you looked at both sides of evolution too and you are painfully obviously on the wrong side of that. So I question your opinion to begin with.


Do you always have to try to piss people off. I am trying my best to be friendly and courteous to you but as always you have to misrepresent what I have said in my posts.

Please look again. Here is what I have said about the Evolution Creation debate.

Posted Sept. 10/07
Quote:
I don't believe that the simpleton creationists have it right when they say that the world is 6000 years old. I also don't believe that evolutionists have it correct either.


The only opinion of yours that I am vehemently opposed to is that that anyone who believes in God is an idiot or writes gibberish in their postings here.

You may question my opinion. I question your ability to get along with your fellow bloggers on this site and would ask you to exercise better decorum.

************************
Evolutionists have it right. So much for looking at both sides of the issue.
I'm not trying to piss anyone off. But you try to slough things off by saying you researched it for 20 years. You discredited yourself.

I already said, I can respect someone who believes in God if they don't deny evolution. Of course, I can respect those who believe in God on many other issues too. I just wrote a post where I commended a Pastor on my blog.

I have a tendency to be honest about my opinion and the reasons behind them. Some consider me to be a militant atheist because of it. I think it is a fair summation.
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I read that book a few years ago, it fascinating. I'd recommend it to anyone who's interested in the topic, or the history of the 'fertile crescent' in general.
Thanks for mentioning it mrsocko, I think I'll borrow it again from the library.


His other books are great too especially "Legend". The Lost Tesatament is a bit of a rehash.


Last edited by mrsocko on Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Evolutionists have it right. So much for looking at both sides of the issue.
I'm not trying to piss anyone off. But you try to slough things off by saying you researched it for 20 years. You discredited yourself.


I really have no idea what you are talking about. So much for trying to get along with you. Bye Bye.
theatheistjew





Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 398
Reputation: 11.2
votes: 10
Location: Niagara Region, Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I made a motivational election poster:

http://diy.despair.com/output/poster37658385.jpg
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Page 7 of 7

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Ontario PCs 2 points behind. Majority support Tory on Schoo

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB