|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 8, 2020 2:36:24 GMT
By boat? No. On foot? Yes, unless there's some kind of tectonic/volcanic event. Of course, the location is in some doubt. Maybe it was a trickly little tributary during the dry season? Who knows. What if it's documented historically? |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 8, 2020 2:37:08 GMT
MFA, was it you who had that picture of a guy not taking part in Nazi salutes? If so, can you give me a link to the image/story? I don't think so. I've seen that one. Let me look it up... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Landmesser |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Jul 8, 2020 2:48:36 GMT
MFA, was it you who had that picture of a guy not taking part in Nazi salutes? If so, can you give me a link to the image/story? I don't think so. I've seen that one. Let me look it up... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_LandmesserThat's the feller! Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Jul 8, 2020 2:51:09 GMT
By boat? No. On foot? Yes, unless there's some kind of tectonic/volcanic event. Of course, the location is in some doubt. Maybe it was a trickly little tributary during the dry season? Who knows. What if it's documented historically? All sorts of things are documented. I'm a Magistrate.... also formery a fatal accident investigator. And a military intelligence operator. Just 'cos someone says something don't make it true. youtu.be/rV6ZWVlhU8k |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2020 15:22:54 GMT
Science is what the farmer does...but systematized. Isolate influences. Replicate experiments. No, science is not what the farmer DOES, but HOW she does it.
lol
Queshank
|
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 8, 2020 17:03:37 GMT
All sorts of things are documented. I'm a Magistrate.... also formery a fatal accident investigator. And a military intelligence operator. Just 'cos someone says something don't make it true. youtu.be/rV6ZWVlhU8kSo... "On the morning of the 28th we crossed the Red Sea dry shod...Near the port the Red Sea is not above 1,500 meters wide, and is always fordable at low water...at high tide the water rises five or six feet at Suez, and when the wind blows fresh it often rises nine or ten feet." De Bourrienne, part of Napoleon's entourage, documented this in 1798. Still impossible? |
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Jul 8, 2020 17:25:20 GMT
All sorts of things are documented. I'm a Magistrate.... also formery a fatal accident investigator. And a military intelligence operator. Just 'cos someone says something don't make it true. youtu.be/rV6ZWVlhU8kSo... "On the morning of the 28th we crossed the Red Sea dry shod...Near the port the Red Sea is not above 1,500 meters wide, and is always fordable at low water...at high tide the water rises five or six feet at Suez, and when the wind blows fresh it often rises nine or ten feet." De Bourrienne, part of Napoleon's entourage, documented this in 1798. Still impossible? The complete paragraph ..
On the morning of the 28th we crossed the Red Sea dry-shod, to go to the Wells of Moses, which are nearly a myriametre from the eastern coast, and a little southeast of Suez. The Gulf of Arabia terminates at about 5,000 metres north of that city. Near the port the Red Sea is not above 1,500 metres wide, and is always fordable at low water. The caravans from Tor and Mount Sinai always pass at that part, either in going to or returning from Egypt. This shortens their journey nearly a myriametre. At high tide the water rises five or six feet at Suez, and when the wind blows fresh it often rises to nine or ten feet.
You gonna stick with the 'miracle' angle?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 8, 2020 18:08:22 GMT
The complete paragraph ..
On the morning of the 28th we crossed the Red Sea dry-shod, to go to the Wells of Moses, which are nearly a myriametre from the eastern coast, and a little southeast of Suez. The Gulf of Arabia terminates at about 5,000 metres north of that city. Near the port the Red Sea is not above 1,500 metres wide, and is always fordable at low water. The caravans from Tor and Mount Sinai always pass at that part, either in going to or returning from Egypt. This shortens their journey nearly a myriametre. At high tide the water rises five or six feet at Suez, and when the wind blows fresh it often rises to nine or ten feet.
You gonna stick with the 'miracle' angle?
Wow. I never used the word "miracle." I asked if it was possible to cross the Red Sea. Answer: unless you're on a boat, impossible. |
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Jul 8, 2020 18:24:40 GMT
The complete paragraph ..
On the morning of the 28th we crossed the Red Sea dry-shod, to go to the Wells of Moses, which are nearly a myriametre from the eastern coast, and a little southeast of Suez. The Gulf of Arabia terminates at about 5,000 metres north of that city. Near the port the Red Sea is not above 1,500 metres wide, and is always fordable at low water. The caravans from Tor and Mount Sinai always pass at that part, either in going to or returning from Egypt. This shortens their journey nearly a myriametre. At high tide the water rises five or six feet at Suez, and when the wind blows fresh it often rises to nine or ten feet.
You gonna stick with the 'miracle' angle?
Wow. I never used the word "miracle." I asked if it was possible to cross the Red Sea. Answer: unless you're on a boat, impossible.
No you didn't .. but it certainly follows that the Red Sea crossing initially discussed is the biblical account involving a miracle .. Either the parting was a miracle or it was a known phenomena. Which means it was a known phenomena..
|
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Jul 8, 2020 18:44:55 GMT
All sorts of things are documented. I'm a Magistrate.... also formery a fatal accident investigator. And a military intelligence operator. Just 'cos someone says something don't make it true. youtu.be/rV6ZWVlhU8kSo... "On the morning of the 28th we crossed the Red Sea dry shod...Near the port the Red Sea is not above 1,500 meters wide, and is always fordable at low water...at high tide the water rises five or six feet at Suez, and when the wind blows fresh it often rises nine or ten feet." De Bourrienne, part of Napoleon's entourage, documented this in 1798. Still impossible? Fascinating. So, it wasn't a miracle, and the whole point of the Bible story is hugely diminished. Got it. God didn't help Moses. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 8, 2020 18:57:33 GMT
No you didn't .. but it certainly follows that the Red Sea crossing initially discussed is the biblical account involving a miracle .. Either the parting was a miracle or it was a known phenomena. Which means it was a known phenomena..
So...not impossible. Here's my point. Our "scientific perspective" can deem something impossible... until it happens. Then we seek an explanation for it, preferably a scientific explanation (but there are limits to what science can explain). Another example is the orbit of Mercury, the path of which was "impossible" according to Newtonian physics. It demanded explanation. It is explained by Relativity. So how do we approach a historically documented event that seems "impossible"? We just say it didn't happen? Or do we pursue other explanations? |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 8, 2020 18:58:15 GMT
Fascinating. So, it wasn't a miracle, and the whole point of the Bible story is hugely diminished. Got it. God didn't help Moses. That's your conclusion? Evolution explains the diversity of life. Got it. God didn't do it. That doesn't logically follow. |
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Jul 8, 2020 19:41:09 GMT
No you didn't .. but it certainly follows that the Red Sea crossing initially discussed is the biblical account involving a miracle .. Either the parting was a miracle or it was a known phenomena. Which means it was a known phenomena.. So...not impossible. Here's my point. Our "scientific perspective" can deem something impossible... until it happens. Then we seek an explanation for it, preferably a scientific explanation (but there are limits to what science can explain). Sure.. but you've moved the goal posts. The biblical account requires a miracle .. there are no miracles.. |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Jul 8, 2020 19:48:52 GMT
Fascinating. So, it wasn't a miracle, and the whole point of the Bible story is hugely diminished. Got it. God didn't help Moses. That's your conclusion? Evolution explains the diversity of life. Got it. God didn't do it. That doesn't logically follow. Now, now. Let's stick with Moses for a while. Lemme see.... Exodus wasn't it.... hang on, got theKJV on my Kindle... Yep, just checked. God did it via Moses's Rod, at command the waters parted. So, was it a miracle or just a luckily-timed natural phenomenon? If the latter, why the big deal? We can discuss the evolution of flying donkeys later if you like. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 8, 2020 21:51:14 GMT
No you didn't .. but it certainly follows that the Red Sea crossing initially discussed is the biblical account involving a miracle .. Either the parting was a miracle or it was a known phenomena. Which means it was a known phenomena..
So...not impossible. Here's my point. Our "scientific perspective" can deem something impossible... until it happens. Then we seek an explanation for it, preferably a scientific explanation (but there are limits to what science can explain). Another example is the orbit of Mercury, the path of which was "impossible" according to Newtonian physics. It demanded explanation. It is explained by Relativity. So how do we approach a historically documented event that seems "impossible"? We just say it didn't happen? Or do we pursue other explanations? There is no evidence that the Bible is anything more than exaggerated stories that might be based on some actual historical events. To talk about 'historically documented' events, as if that statement makes them credible, is presumptuous at best, and some would consider it farcical. What other ancient texts do you consider factual, or is the Bible the only one?
Why do Bible believers expect everyone else to view their anecdotal story book as historically accurate? We don't.
If you believe in it, that's groovy, but it's just your opinion to see it that way.
Freon
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 8, 2020 21:55:21 GMT
No you didn't .. but it certainly follows that the Red Sea crossing initially discussed is the biblical account involving a miracle .. Either the parting was a miracle or it was a known phenomena. Which means it was a known phenomena..
So...not impossible. Here's my point. Our "scientific perspective" can deem something impossible... until it happens. Then we seek an explanation for it, preferably a scientific explanation (but there are limits to what science can explain). Another example is the orbit of Mercury, the path of which was "impossible" according to Newtonian physics. It demanded explanation. It is explained by Relativity. So how do we approach a historically documented event that seems "impossible"? We just say it didn't happen? Or do we pursue other explanations? What is a 'scientific perspective'? I'm a trained scientist, and I have never heard that one.
Also, I have yet to see science claim anything, except a perpetual motion machine, which defies the first law of thermodynamics, is impossible. So can you give us an example of where you think science has made any other claims of impossibility?
Taking the Bible miracles as an example, I can think of several technologies that would enable their replication. Raising the dead, water to wine, parting of water, all are within known possible technologies that will exist in the next few hundred years.
Freon
|
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 25,958
|
Post by petep on Jul 8, 2020 21:59:55 GMT
So...not impossible. Here's my point. Our "scientific perspective" can deem something impossible... until it happens. Then we seek an explanation for it, preferably a scientific explanation (but there are limits to what science can explain). Another example is the orbit of Mercury, the path of which was "impossible" according to Newtonian physics. It demanded explanation. It is explained by Relativity. So how do we approach a historically documented event that seems "impossible"? We just say it didn't happen? Or do we pursue other explanations? What is a 'scientific perspective'? I'm a trained scientist, and I have never heard that one.
Also, I have yet to see science claim anything, except a perpetual motion machine, which defies the first law of thermodynamics, is impossible. So can you give us an example of where you think science has made any other claims of impossibility?
Taking the Bible miracles as an example, I can think of several technologies that would enable their replication. Raising the dead, water to wine, parting of water, all are within known possible technologies that will exist in the next few hundred years.
Freon
Science has made countless claims of certainty that turned out to be wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 8, 2020 22:06:50 GMT
There is no evidence that the Bible is anything more than exaggerated stories that might be based on some actual historical events. To talk about 'historically documented' events, as if that statement makes them credible, is presumptuous at best, and some would consider it farcical. What other ancient texts do you consider factual, or is the Bible the only one?
Why do Bible believers expect everyone else to view their anecdotal story book as historically accurate? We don't.
If you believe in it, that's groovy, but it's just your opinion to see it that way.
Freon
Um...are you even following the thread? Or just cherry-picking certain posts to misinterpret? Go back up and read the post that referenced the documented crossing of the Red Sea by Napoleon. Honestly...  |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 8, 2020 22:07:39 GMT
What is a 'scientific perspective'? I'm a trained scientist, and I have never heard that one.
Also, I have yet to see science claim anything, except a perpetual motion machine, which defies the first law of thermodynamics, is impossible. So can you give us an example of where you think science has made any other claims of impossibility?
Taking the Bible miracles as an example, I can think of several technologies that would enable their replication. Raising the dead, water to wine, parting of water, all are within known possible technologies that will exist in the next few hundred years.
Freon
Freon, Read through the thread before taking potshots at individual posts. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 8, 2020 22:12:55 GMT
Now, now. Let's stick with Moses for a while. Lemme see.... Exodus wasn't it.... hang on, got theKJV on my Kindle... Yep, just checked. God did it via Moses's Rod, at command the waters parted. So, was it a miracle or just a luckily-timed natural phenomenon? If the latter, why the big deal? "Luckily-timed..." Yeah, quite fortunate that. Not miraculous, just "luckily timed." Part of the problem is that most people have been fooled by the Hollywood-ized version of the story that isn't even accurate. "Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and all that night the Lord drove the sea back with a strong east wind and turned it into dry land. The waters were divided, and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left." (Exodus 14:21-22, NIV) The Hebrew word for "wall" here is used both literally and figuratively in the Old Testament. It reads to me like hyperbole. I've heard people express disappointment that the "miracle doesn't look like Charlton Heston's version" and then complain that it's "not miraculous at all" because it's explainable by natural circumstances, all the while complaining the "miracles are impossible." Real "damned if you do, damned if you don't," wouldn't you say? But sure..."luckily timed." |
|
