🚀 go-pugleaf

rbwinn wrote:
> On Jul 15, 11:57 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>> rbwinn wrote:
>>> On Jul 14, 11:23 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>> On Jul 14, 5:12�pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...@thanks.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:44f19f98-4d96-4419-a87a-d6bdbd73f31b@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>>>> Their idea is that if Hezekiah's tunnel exists, then Harry Potter has
>>>>>>>>> to be true because the train station in London is mentioned in Harry
>>>>>>>>> Potter.
>>>>>>>> Exactly. Since we know therefore that harry potter isn't true, the fact
>>>>>>>> of hezekiahs tunnel means the bible is obviously false. Since we have
>>>>>>>> true facts referred to in works of complete fiction.
>>>>>>>> By your reasoning at least.
>>>>>>> Well, you have it exactly as atheists have been telling me it is.
>>>>>>> Don't ask me what it is supposed to mean.
>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
>>>>>> Here is an example of rbwinn's logic.
>>>>>> Sheep are mentioned in the bible
>>>>>> Sheep exist today
>>>>>> The bible is accurate and there is a God
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Steve O
>>>>> Well, no, Steve O.  Here is an example.  Atheists were claiming that
>>>>> nothing existed on earth today that could prove anything in the
>>>>> Bible.
>>>> And yet you've been unable to produce these mythical posts. Well, you do
>>>> seem to like myths...
>>>>>  So I said, What about Hezekiah's tunnel?  These atheists had
>>>>> never heard of Hezekiah's tunnel.  So after they looked it up, they
>>>>> said, The fact that a tunnel exists no more proves the Bible to be
>>>>> true than Harry Potter leaving from the train station in London to go
>>>>> to wizard's school.
>>>> In a slightly mangled sense, yes that was me. I'd never heard of
>>>> Hezekiah's tunnel. Now I have. I still can't see how it supports the
>>>> existence of any gods. Assuming it's the same tunnel (which hasn't been
>>>> established AFAIK), so what? People sometimes write things about stuff.
>>>> Does that automatically render it true?
>>>>>    I really believe that it certainly does prove certain verses in the
>>>>> Old Testament to be true which describe the digging of Hezekiah's
>>>>> tunnel.  Otherwise, atheists need to explain why there is a tunnel
>>>>> exactly where the Bible in three books of the Old Testament says a
>>>>> tunnel was dug as a conduit for water.
>>>> I might point out that the physical evidence doesn't accord well with
>>>> the account of the tunnel's construction. Even if you're right, it's
>>>> simply shows that a tunnel was built, not that gods exist.
>>>> If you want to infer more than is logical from this, go for it! But to
>>>> maintain a degree of intellectual honesty, I cannot follow.- Hide quoted text -
>>> Well, obviously, you have not studied the history of that time.
>>> Robert B. Winn
>> I haven't much, and yet I still know that. Additionally, the Bible
>> contains some history, but doesn't qualify as a whole. It's far too
>> unreliable.- Hide quoted text -
>>
> 
> Well, I understan why atheists would want to believe Sennacherib's
> account of the Assyrian invasion of Judea over the Biblical account,
> but, obviously, Sennacherib was lying.  Chaldean historians agree with
> the Biblical account.  Sennacherib lost his entire army at Jerusalem.

Obviously. Ummmm..... why again? Why would either of them have to be the 
"gospel truth"?