Was Primordial man conscious?

[Mickiel]

@tomndebb

:rolleyes:
Recent Afro-Centrist nonsense.
.

Listen, since you are a Mod, this is my last response to you, because its no telling what you will do, as I continue to disagree with you.

Listen, there were more blacks in those biblical lands and times than you care to know. And blacks were mixed into nearly every biblical land and nation; you cannot extract them from hardly any nation in those times.

But I understand the effort to minimize black presence in the bible times; and I consider it racist.

Peace on your journey.

[Mickiel]

@Twoflower

I think the correct word is “inconceivable.” This entire thread could be summarized as “I don’t think that word means what you think it means.”

I don’t think religion means what many here seem to think it means.

[Mickiel]

@RaftPeople

“Part of him is 7 revealed " Great Spirits”; unknown what they exactly are and do"

If we don’t know what they are or what they do, how can they be called “great”? Seems kind of presumptuous.
To be safe, let’s call them “might be pretty good, but we’re not quite sure” spirits (based on some hearsay we are aware of, we are kind of giving them the benefit of the doubt).

I disagree; I consider God as Great, and ANYTHING he allows to reside on his throne is great. Rev. 4:5, those 7 Spirits are on his Great throne!

[Mickiel]

Now, humans before Adam were obviously wiped out during the ice age, there had to be a creation after that, or a recreation.

[dropzone]

@Mickiel

But I understand the effort to minimize black presence in the bible times; and I consider it racist.

I see, but I think the central question is: Were the royal families of Europe black? Because we had a guy claiming that a couple years back.

[XT]

@Mickiel

Prior to Adam humans were humans, but in my theory they were not conscious of being human.

So, how would we test this, um, ‘theory’? What would prove or disprove it, in your own mind? HOW would you prove or disprove it…again, in your own mind?

[XT]

[QUOTE=Mickiel]
But I understand the effort to minimize black presence in the bible times; and I consider it racist.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t actually give a flying fuck what you consider it or don’t consider it. I don’t care what color you are either. What I DO care about is scientific proof. So, you are making a claim here that should be provable. Do you have any cites showing DNA evidence that backs up your claim? Or, short of that, any archeological evidence from scientifically valid sources (as opposed to the sort you linked too earlier, of which the less said the better)? Something, you know, peer reviewed? If so, trot that shit out and let’s take a look at it and see if indeed there was a large black presence ‘in the bible times’ (presumably in the ME where the Bible is talking about).

[Mickiel]

@dropzone

I see, but I think the central question is: Were the royal families of Europe black? Because we had a guy claiming that a couple years back.

I think some were; certainly possible;

Illuminati News: The Black Nobility

[Mickiel]

@XT

I don’t actually give a flying fuck what you consider it or don’t consider it. I don’t care what color you are either. What I DO care about is scientific proof. So, you are making a claim here that should be provable. Do you have any cites showing DNA evidence that backs up your claim? Or, short of that, any archeological evidence from scientifically valid sources (as opposed to the sort you linked too earlier, of which the less said the better)? Something, you know, peer reviewed? If so, trot that shit out and let’s take a look at it and see if indeed there was a large black presence ‘in the bible times’ (presumably in the ME where the Bible is talking about).

Well I think this is a fairly presented article, to begin with;

http://www.gci.org/bible/africans

[Captain_Amazing]

First off, that website is using “black” in an evil sense, not a racial one. Secondly, that’s a conspiracy theory site, and the page you’re metioning goes on and on about the illuminati, the Khazars, the Bilderbergs, and the Rothschilds.

[Mickiel]

@Captain_Amazing

First off, that website is using “black” in an evil sense, not a racial one. Secondly, that’s a conspiracy theory site, and the page you’re metioning goes on and on about the illuminati, the Khazars, the Bilderbergs, and the Rothschilds.

Well try reading this book;

The Black Presence in the Bible

[Mickiel]

@Captain_Amazing

First off, that website is using “black” in an evil sense, not a racial one. Secondly, that’s a conspiracy theory site, and the page you’re metioning goes on and on about the illuminati, the Khazars, the Bilderbergs, and the Rothschilds.

Secondly, here’s a list of over 75 books on the subject, I am sure you may find one that passes your critic;

http://www.nathanielturner.com/blackpresenceinbiblebibliography.htm

Of course if you don’t like reading, here are some DVD’s;

http://blacksinthescriptures.com/blacks-in-the-bible/

[Mickiel]

@XT

I don’t actually give a flying fuck what you consider it or don’t consider it. I don’t care what color you are either. What I DO care about is scientific proof. So, you are making a claim here that should be provable. Do you have any cites showing DNA evidence that backs up your claim? Or, short of that, any archeological evidence from scientifically valid sources (as opposed to the sort you linked too earlier, of which the less said the better)? Something, you know, peer reviewed? If so, trot that shit out and let’s take a look at it and see if indeed there was a large black presence ‘in the bible times’ (presumably in the ME where the Bible is talking about).

Dr. John L. Johnson wrote an interesting book on the subject;

Here you can download a free preview;

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52036366/Dr-John-L-Johnson-500-Questions-Answers-on-Black-Presence-in-The-Bible

[kaylasdad99]

Mickiel, can you share with us the steps that led you to conclude that the Bible is authoritative?

While you’re at it, could you share with us precisely which texts/translations/versions you deem the Bible to comprise

[Mickiel]

@kaylasdad99

Mickiel, can you share with us the steps that led you to conclude that the Bible is authoritative?

While you’re at it, could you share with us precisely which texts/translations/versions you deem the Bible to comprise

Certainly.

For one, the unusual manner in which it was written. It has over 40 different authors who wrote it during a span of 1500 years, and they did not compare notes; simply stunning! And it was written in three different languages, Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew, which is astounding! It was the first modern book printed on a press. It has been a worlds best seller for over 400 years running; which is again stunning! Its the most shoplifted book in the world, so people will steal it to get it. Its been translated in over 2,000 languages. Too many to comprise a list.

I believe in it also because of its archaeology, also too long to list, but you can refer to these;

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/general-religious-discussions/45587-archaeology-bible-print.html

http://www.religionforums.org/Thread-A-Closer-look-at-Biblical-Archaeology

Biblical Archaeology. - Spiritual Forums

I apologise for not repeating this research ver batum, its just too extensive.

[Uniqueorn]

@Mickiel

Certainly.

For one, the unusual manner in which it was written. It has over 40 different authors who wrote it during a span of 1500 years, and they did not compare notes; simply stunning! And it was written in three different languages, Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew, which is astounding!

Am I misunderstanding you or are you saying that people in different time periods and different regions wrote stuff independently of each other and then someone noticed “Wow, all these writings are part of the same book!” ?

[Latro]

@Mickiel

Now, humans before Adam were obviously wiped out during the ice age, there had to be a creation after that, or a recreation.

The depth of your ignorance is truly amazing.
Together with the “black” thing, this thread has gone from horseshit to diarrhea.

[kaylasdad99]

@Mickiel

Certainly.

For one, the unusual manner in which it was written. It has over 40 different authors who wrote it during a span of 1500 years, and they did not compare notes; simply stunning! And it was written in three different languages, Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew, which is astounding! It was the first modern book printed on a press. It has been a worlds best seller for over 400 years running; which is again stunning! Its the most shoplifted book in the world, so people will steal it to get it. Its been translated in over 2,000 languages. Too many to comprise a list.

I believe in it also because of its archaeology, also too long to list, but you can refer to these;

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/general-religious-discussions/45587-archaeology-bible-print.html

http://www.religionforums.org/Thread-A-Closer-look-at-Biblical-Archaeology

Biblical Archaeology. - Spiritual Forums

I apologise for not repeating this research ver batum, its just too extensive.

Thank you for your response; what it lacked in rigor, it more than made up for in promptness.

Now please (at your convenience), address the remainder of my request, that is, a list of which texts you consider to actually be part of the Bible.

TIA.

[zoid]

@Mickiel

Now, humans before Adam were obviously wiped out during the ice age, there had to be a creation after that, or a recreation.

This is literally nonsense.
The amount of wrong you post is amazing. That a singer person can be so completely wrong about basic facts and so completely smug in their certainty is just shocking.
I know this gets thrown out a lot around here but it’s truly relevant - Dunning–Kruger effect - Wikipedia

[Smeghead]

@Twoflower

I think the correct word is “inconceivable.”

I was using “incredible” in its original meaning of “literally impossible to believe”.

@Mickiel

I don’t think religion means what many here seem to think it means.

All right then. Adding “religion” to the list of words, and…yes, yes. That’s the entire English language you’ve redefined now. Well done you.

@Mickiel

Now, humans before Adam were obviously wiped out during the ice age, there had to be a creation after that, or a recreation.

:dubious: That’s a HELL of a claim to make. Please explain your evidence for this, taking into account a few pertinent facts, such as:
-The Ice Age did not cover the entire planet. Large swathes of land near the equator remained perfectly comfortable and habitable. What killed off the people there?
-Why did the Ice Age only kill off the humans? Or are you suggesting that EVERY species around today had to be specially recreated?

@Mickiel

Certainly.

For one, the unusual manner in which it was written. It has over 40 different authors who wrote it during a span of 1500 years, and they did not compare notes; simply stunning! And it was written in three different languages, Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew, which is astounding! It was the first modern book printed on a press. It has been a worlds best seller for over 400 years running; which is again stunning! Its the most shoplifted book in the world, so people will steal it to get it. Its been translated in over 2,000 languages. Too many to comprise a list.

Not a single one of these points, even if we just accept without argument their truth, counts as evidence of the Bible’s authenticity or accuracy.