Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Hell is real, and you're not going to like it..

From what I've read, people have been peeking in on the other side for thousands of years. Some do it on purpose, some do it accidently.

I don't see any good reason to debate whether or not there's something that our receiver isn't wired to pick up. But I tend to think that human beings are limited in their ability to perceive everything that exists.

It's fairly conceited to believe that if we can't detect it, that it's not there.

Except the part where one of us has studied math, and science, at the University level, and the other hasn't.....

We know there are things that to date, we've only been able to detect indirectly. Dark energy and Dark matter are just two well know examples. We can detect their affects, but have yet to directly detect either.

I can say with a fair amount of confidence that there's both a math and a science that is beyond man's ability to understand.

Word.

String theorist whine about that all the time, claiming they don't have sufficient mathematical tools to prove their ideas....or maybe they need to go down a different path...

toad,



The original Congress set up Bible societies and the Congress paid to get Bibles printed and distributed. More than 200 of the first colleges were set up by Christians and staffed by Christians. Many of them pastors. These would include Harvard, William & Mary and the likes.

Check out this. The first written "government" document in America.

The Mayflower Compact

In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereigne Lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britaine, France and Ireland king, defender of the faith, etc. having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honour of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northerne parts of Virginia, doe by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civill body politick, for our better ordering and preservation, and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enacte, constitute, and frame such just and equall laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meete and convenient for the generall good of the Colonie unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cape-Codd the 11. of November, in the year of the raigne of our sovereigne lord, King James, of England, France and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fiftie-fourth. Anno Dom. 1620.

John Carver Edward Tilley Degory Priest
William Bradford John Tilley Thomas Williams
Edward Winslow Francis Cooke Gilbert Winslow
William Brewster Thomas Rogers Edmund Margeson
Issac Allerton Thomas Tinker Peter Browne
Myles Standish John Rigdale Richard Britteridge
John Alden Edward Fuller George Soule
Samuel Fuller John Turner Richard Clarke
Christopher Martin Francis Eaton Richard Gardiner
William Mullins James Chilton John Allerton
William White John Crackston Thomas English
Richard Warren John Billington Edward Dotey
John Howland Moses Fletcher Edward Leister
Stephen Hopkins John Goodman

Galaxies. Each one contains billions of solar systems.

Big place. Lots of mysteries.

antelope_sniper,



Technically that is not the definition I heard. In order to qualify for a religion its proponents need to believe in some kind of beginning and have some kind of belief in an ending. There was no menition of a deity.



That is your assessment and the assessment of the brainwashed liberal educated. There are millions around the world who don't agree with your opinion.

Don't dispary. Your side is winning. Just today I heard on the radio about a Canadian who was arrested for preaching hate speech from the Bible. All he had to do was deny his religion and he would be set free. He spend $100,000 and went to their highest court where it was overturned in his favor.

Another pastor, one in the U.K. was arrested for hate speech for saying Islam is a Satanic religion. It's fine for the Muslims to say Israel and United States are the Great Satan with impunity in those same countries.

Did they teach you the parts about child sacrifice?

Genocide?
Self mutilation?
Genital mutitlation?
Corpse mutilation?
Nailing dudes head to the floor?
Stabbing a Lardass so schit came out?
Incest with father?
Incest with father-in-law?
Polygamy?
Giant demon/human hybrid offspring?
Whores?
Drunkeness?
Cutting up mistresses into 12 parts and Fedex-ing them hither and yon?
Death by rape?
Bear maulings?
Hewing kings to pieces?
Impaling on stakes?
Insanity manifested as wild animal behavior?
Coitus interruptus?
Adultery?
Illegitimate children?
Abandoned children?
Wholesale,slaughter of animals?
Plagues?
Fiery furnaces?
Animal torture?
Astronomical terrors?
Zombies?

And don't forget a book dedicate to boobs and entering your lover's 'garden'! (The original BTE!)

And many, many more....or did you just learn about the talking donkey???

I'll tell you this, the collection of translations known as the Bible may not be any good for metaphysical truth but it's a goldmine of psychological insight into early, male, Semitic thought!

I'm telling ya, that schit would SELL!! Imagine making a 'true to the book' adaptation mini-series from the pages of the Bible. It would make Game of Thrones look like Mr. Rogers!

Hmm, maybe I should start working on a screenplay for HBO.....

We spent most of our time on the bear maulings.

MojoHand,



Your information is dated. Earlier this month I saw a documentary where the original daters had some prejudice against the accuracy of the Scripture that influenced their dating. Subsequent research by both believes in the Scripture and secularist discover that the town of Jericho would have been a thriving metropolis at the time of Joshua.

I would suggest to the archaeologists it pays to be more objective when doing research. Like the three I mentioned earlier, they all made no bones about the accuracy of the Jewish History we call the Bible.

I made sure never to make fun of bald guys as a kid (besides my dad)!

and of course, that was written under British rule...

Sigh, I know better, but ............

Ed, my Brother, I'm quoting, but please don't take offense as I'm not directing the response towards you, just a point within. Understand that I'm speaking from the position of a Christian (though "only" a Catholic so I don't qualify as such with some of the "Christian Experts") who is DONE with organized religion due, in great part, to folks baring a striking philosophical resemblance to some posters.

I enjoy reading these " discussions" right up to the point of condescension. Unfortunately, each "side" wants to point that finger. Does AS reach that point.......absolutely. Generally, though, it's after the "ignorant unbeliever" schit gets dropped.

I know what I believe but, conversely, I am a facts/logic type. I've reconciled my beliefs with the fact that the Bible is mans' translation. What do I KNOW about the afterlife? Jackshit, and I'm fine with that. I'll live my life according to my moral compass regardless of whether my beliefs are right or wrong. "Super-Christians" preaching known "facts" to the ignorant......that's where I get off the theological bus.

George

No offense, Rich but your arguments always start with 'I saw/heard/read something by so and so that says this' with no sources. Here's a source (from Bublical Archaeology, no less) that I was able to find in seconds. Please list your specific sources in the future so I can study them and see their data and viewpoints...




Is Bryant Wood's chronology of Jericho valid?

The following article is abstracted from The Biblical Chronologist Volume 2, Number 3. Full details and references can be found there.

The Problem to be Solved

In Joshua chapter 6, the Bible records the defeat of the city of Jericho by the children of Israel, led by Joshua. Traditional biblical chronology places this event ca. 1407 B.C.

The archaeological remains at Tell-es-Sultan correspond to the biblical Jericho. This is undisputed by mainstream scholarship, whether conservative or liberal.

John Garstang conducted excavations at Jericho from 1930 to 1936. He found a destruction layer corresponding to the termination of City IV, and dated it to ca. 1400 B.C. This worked out well for traditional biblical chronology.

However, in the 1950's, Kathleen Kenyon conducted further excavations at Jericho and concluded that the destruction of Garstang's City IV should be dated ca. 1550 B.C., not ca. 1400 B.C. In fact, Kenyon found no evidence at all of occupation of Jericho ca. 1407 B.C.

The following figure shows the chronology of Jericho held by nearly all modern archaeologists. The dashed line represents a period when Jericho was merely a campsite, the solid lines indicate an unwalled town, and the rectangles indicate a walled city. The letter 'A' points to 1407 B.C., the traditional biblical date for the destruction of Jericho by Joshua.


Clearly traditional biblical chronology is in conflict with the chronology of Jericho held by the consensus of modern archaeologists. The termination of the walled city (City IV) ca. 1550 B.C. is the chronologically closest candidate to the traditional biblical date for the destruction of Jericho by Joshua, but it is still about 150 years from the traditional biblical dates according to the scholarly consensus. Clearly the destruction of City IV Jericho and the destruction of Jericho by Joshua cannot be the same event if they are separated by 150 years.

Wood's Proposed Solution

In the March/April 1990 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review conservative biblical archaeologist Dr. Bryant G. Wood proposed that Garstang was right all along. He proposed that the termination of City IV Jericho be redated from ca. 1550 B.C. to ca. 1400 B.C. He argued that a reanalyis of pottery shards excavated from City IV, stratigraphic considerations, scarab evidence, and a single radiocarbon date all converged "to demonstrate that City IV was destroyed in about 1400 B.C.E., not 1550 B.C.E. as Kenyon maintained."

Wood's proposal received press coverage and positive reaction from conservative sectors, but his fellow archaeologists did not react so favorably. In a subsequent issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, Piotr Bienkowski attacked Wood's arguments and then summarized his assessment of Wood's claims as follows:

Wood has attempted to redate the destruction of Jericho City IV from the end of the Middle Bronze Age (c. 1550 B.C.) to the end of the Late Bronze I (c. 1400 B.C.). He has put forward four lines of argument to support his conclusion. Not a single one of these arguments can stand up to scrutiny. On the contrary, there is strong evidence to confirm Kathleen Kenyon's dating of City IV to the Middle Bronze Age. Wood's attempt to equate the destruction of City IV with the Israelite conquest of Jericho must therefore be rejected.
Wood responded to Bienkowski in the same issue with a more detailed discussion of pottery shards. He charged:
Bienkowski's attempt to explain away the evidence for lowering the date of the destruction of Jericho is misguided and void of substance. Assertions made without data to back them up are unconvincing. His discussion is superficial, at best, lacking both depth and precision.
And so the battle raged.
Settling the Dispute

It is clear that the question is one of chronology. When was City IV Jericho destroyed? The scholarly consensus says ca. 1550 B.C., Wood says ca. 1400 B.C. What source can we turn to to settle this dispute?

In fact, radiocarbon is such a source. In the early 1990's, when Wood first published his claims, there was only one radiocarbon measurement available for City IV. It was from a piece of charcoal dated by the British Museum to 1410 plus or minus 40 years B.C. Unfortunately, this date was later retracted by the British Museum, along with dates of several hundred other samples. The British Museum found that their radiocarbon measurement apparatus had gone out of calibration for a period of time, and thus had yielded incorrect dates during that period. The corrected date for the charcoal sample from City IV turned out to be consistent with Kenyon's ca. 1550 B.C. date for the City IV destruction.

The corrected date no longer supported Wood's proposal, but it was insufficient to falsify the proposal. Radiocarbon dates on charcoal give the date the wood grew, not the date it was burned. To be consistent with Bryant Wood's proposal, the wood which burned to produce the charcoal sample would need to have been cut from a living tree 150 years prior to the destruction. Of course, this is not impossible.

As mentioned earlier, no other radiocarbon dates from samples from City IV Jericho were available in the early 1990's. In 1995, however, results were published by Hendrik J. Bruins and Johannes van der Plicht from high-precision radiocarbon measurements made on eighteen samples from Jericho. Six of these samples were charred cereal grains from the City IV destruction. Bruins and van der Plicht did not set out to disprove Wood's thesis. Their stated purpose was to contribute "toward the establishment of an independent radiocarbon chronology of Near Eastern archaeology."

The chart below is the same as the chart shown earlier. Heavy black bars have been added showing the range of dates radiocarbon gave from the six charred grain samples from City IV Jericho.


Bruins and van der Plicht recognized the results of their work held a serious implication for Wood's theory. They devoted only one sentence to this implication:

Further, the fortified Bronze Age city at Tell es-Sultan [Jericho] was not destroyed by ca.1400 BC, as Wood (1990) suggested.
As is evident from the chart, the radiocarbon measurements strongly support the chronology advanced by Kenyon long before the radiocarbon measurements were made. This radiocarbon evidence falsifies Wood's theory. City IV was destroyed ca. 1550 B.C., not ca. 1400 B.C. City IV Jericho was not destroyed by Joshua.
Other Considerations

The chronology of Jericho is by no means the only problem associated with the traditional biblical chronology of the Exodus and Conquest. For example, even if Wood's chronology of Jericho were viable, the complete absence of fortified habitation at et-Tell (identified by almost all scholars with the biblical Ai) for 1000 years prior to the traditional biblical chronology date for its destruction by Joshua is still left to be explained. And the archaeological and historical data from Egypt must also be explained. These depict Egypt as a stable, properous nation at the very time the traditional biblical chronology date for the Exodus says Egypt should be a nation devastated by plagues.

Aardsma's Solution

Having settled the dispute over the date of City IV Jericho's destruction and having demonstrated that Wood's chronology is not valid, we are left with the problem we started with. Traditional biblical chronology conflicts with the archaeological/radiocarbon chronology of Jericho. Traditional biblical chronology places the date of the Conquest of Jericho at a time when there was no city at Jericho. In fact, as noted in the preceding paragraph, traditional biblical chronology of the Exodus and the Conquest is plagued by such problems.

Gerald E. Aardsma, Ph.D., has proposed an alternate solution, one that solves these problems and does justice to both biblical and secular scientific evidence. He has shown that the correct biblical chronology date for the Conquest is ca. 2400 B.C., not ca. 1400 B.C. By this solution, it is the ca. 2400 B.C. destruction at Jericho, shown in the charts above, which must be credited to Joshua. For further information on Dr. Aardsma's solution, see What is the missing millennium discovery?

I have never seen people spend so much time and effort trying to get others to believe in absolute nothingness.

Hope they don't try cutting off my Johnson..

Maybe not that many, maybe, but there are an azz load of them for sure. You just KNOW there has to be green people out there someplace.

Why green?

I prefer my intelligent life in the "Predator" model....

MojoHand,

No offence taken. Here's what I have discovered over the years. People start with one of two ideas. The Bible is wrong and I will prove it, or the Bible is true history and I will discover it. I see your last person quoted supports the Bible.