Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Mosque shooting in Christchurch livestreamed

I added the history of Shem, Ham and Japheth to take it back to the sons of Noah . . . that is where it all started. https://www.freemaninstitute.com/RTGham.htm

You might want to do a little research before you start throwing out your red herrings. When the Afghanistan war started, there were many reports of captured Isis and Taliban documentation on the sons of Noah, where the different muzzy cultures took great pride in which of the son's lineage they belonged. There is plenty of documentation on this for the curious.

The statement for which I was criticized was intended to be critical of the poster's apparent attitude of welcoming towards a Muslim invasion into his (and your) tiny nation. My statement had nothing to do with cheering on the killer.

According to the genealogies in The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail by Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln, I am a direct descendant of Jesus Christ himself.

I don't believe that either, just like I don't believe any other alleged linage including a mythical being.

Muslims are followers of Muhammed. He lived in the 7th Century AD.

Did he?

For me, those claiming he existed have not met their burden of proof.

Most modern day muzzys are descendants of Shem and Japheth, two of the three sons of Noah. They are mostly Persians or Arabs. The Indonesian muzzys are probably proselytes of either the Persians or the Arabs or Egyptians. All of the Tribes which inhabited "The Promised Land" to Abraham (descendants of Ham) were descendants of Shem and Japheth, including the descendants of Esau. The Muslim faith is just another false and idolatrous religion, like in Biblical times) that rejects Jehovah God and his Son Jesus Christ (Messiah.)

Murdochs News Corp. is invested in Fairfax?

2003, NewsCorp released/ sold its whole 45% stake in NZs 'Independents Newspapers Limited' to Fairfax Holdings.

in what media business do rivals NewsCorp and Fairfax have shared interest...?

You understand none of your above claims are supported by the DNA evidence?

+1 - the voice of reason!

Frankly I have never seen nor heard of DNA evidence for or against Biblical genealogies.

OO,

On many subject you are a pretty smart guy, however, on some, your critical reasoning is seriously hampered.

There is no good evidence in the DNA record supporting your claim that just 2500 years ago the totality of humanity was reduced to a 8 persons who repopulated the entire earth. Nada. Nil. Zip. "The Flood", as described in The Bible, is not a historical event. It did not happen. Consequently, you whole religious narrative for hating Muslim, is not valid.

Your claim qualifies as total conjecture and innuendo. There is plenty of historical evidence for the flood. If one is curious, it is quite compelling. The flood and my faith in the Biblical revelation of history has long been settled, and I can see that you have no faith in Biblical revelation, which is fine. Neither did the Athenians in Acts chapter 17 when Paul addressed them on Mars Hill, and convinced many to follow him without quoting a single verse of Scripture. He appealed to their scientific and practical observation experience since birth, of the unfathomable creation.

Is there really evidence of the flood?


Like actual evidence??

There was a flood of bullets in a NZ mosque , and they say they started praying or exercising their 'faith'
that he would run out of bullets.

Clearly muslims have the same God as Christians...A God that will shun prayers and let people die.

Jim and anyone else who may be curios, here is a link to a wonderful collection of articles on the subject of the flood, as well as many other topics, written by scientists. Dr. Bert Thompson is one author, in particular, who I heard speak in person, several decades ago. He really piqued my interest in the Biblical account of the creation, the flood, and other Biblical revelations. Check out his article here on the flood, and judge for yourself:

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&topic=303

quote from OOs link....

DID SOME DINOSAURS SURVIVE THE FLOOD?

Since much historical and physical evidence indicates that humans interacted with dinosaurs as recently as hundreds or thousands of years ago (e.g., stories and rock art of dinosaurs), then it must follow that some of the dinosaurs survived the Flood. What’s more, since the only dry area on the globe during the Flood was on Noah’s ark (Genesis 7:23), dinosaurs must have accompanied Noah and his family on the ark. Questions arise, however, as to how pairs of huge dinosaurs, some growing to lengths of over 120 feet, weighing more than 110 tons, could have been housed on the ark. First, it is important to remember that the ark was a huge vessel—300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high (Genesis 6:15). The word “cubit” comes from a Hebrew word meaning “forearm,” because the Hebrews used their forearm in determining the length of a cubit. Generally, a cubit was the distance from the elbow to the tip of the middle finger (cf. Free and Vos, 1992, p. 182). According to our own measurements, a cubit would be about 18-20 inches. Thus, the ark was approximately 450 feet long (one-and-a-half football fields!), 75 feet wide, and 45 feet tall. For a long time, it was the largest sea-going vessel ever recorded.

The ark would have had a total floor area of about 100,000 square feet—the equivalent of slightly more than 20 standard basketball courts! And its total volume would have been roughly 1.5 million cubic feet. To help readers get a better idea of just how large the ark really was, John Whitcomb urged people to “imagine waiting at a railroad crossing while 10 freight trains, each pulling 52 boxcars, move slowly by, one after another” (1973, p. 23). Now imagine putting all of those boxcars into the ark. Whitcomb noted that the space available inside the ark would have held 520 modern railroad boxcars! (p. 23).

To some, the idea of dinosaurs on the ark seems absurd. However, it is not so hard to accept the idea of dinosaurs on the ark after considering the subject carefully. First, remember that God was the Creator of all animals, and He knew exactly how big the ark needed to be in order to house all different kinds of land-living animals. Second, contrary to popular belief, not all dinosaurs were massive. According to the famous evolutionary dinosaur fossil-hunter John Horner, the average dinosaur was only about the size of a large cow (see Horner and Lessem, 1993, p. 124). Many dinosaurs were only a few feet tall—even as full-grown adults. Some were as small as chickens. Third, God may have allowed Noah to take baby dinosaurs into the ark, instead of those that were full grown. That allowance certainly would have saved space and reduced the amount of necessary food. The largest fossil dinosaur eggs indicate that a 40-foot-long dinosaur laid eggs that were less than a foot in diameter (see “Dinosaur Reproduction,” 2007). As hatchlings, even the largest dinosaurs were no bigger than an average house pet. Young dinosaurs on the ark would have needed no more space than the average dog.

Folks actually believe You could fit two of each dinosaur onto an Ark together with all the other creatures..?

...?....and the enormous amount of food storage requirements for all such,.. for the period of time locked in an Ark?

If we all came from Adam and Eve, shouldn't we all have the same mitochondrial DNA?

What is the current population of Moslem in NZ. I would suspect very small at present. If history is to repeat, it won't a problem until their % reaches about 5-7% and then problems will began to appear. I would suggest you mark and remember my words. Those who don't pay attention to history are doomed to repeat it!! Just saying Cheers NC