It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: quintessentone
originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: quintessentone
Truth is, that truth is never apt to materialise short of humanity devising a time machine.
There was no great flood that encompassed the world at the time period suggested in the Bible.
And there is plenty of evidence that shows that to be the case ranging from that of the geological sorts to paleontological evidence, and even that of the genetic sorts which show patterns of divergence and evolution that are inconsistent with a recent global flood.
The missing gospels and the included gospels in the Bible could be considered as evidence because some of the writings were done somewhere in the time range of between 60 AD to 200 AD and some are alleged to have been written down by witnesses.
Damn now I feel like having a Guinness.
originally posted by: Topcraft
originally posted by: quintessentone
originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: quintessentone
Truth is, that truth is never apt to materialise short of humanity devising a time machine.
There was no great flood that encompassed the world at the time period suggested in the Bible.
And there is plenty of evidence that shows that to be the case ranging from that of the geological sorts to paleontological evidence, and even that of the genetic sorts which show patterns of divergence and evolution that are inconsistent with a recent global flood.
The missing gospels and the included gospels in the Bible could be considered as evidence because some of the writings were done somewhere in the time range of between 60 AD to 200 AD and some are alleged to have been written down by witnesses.
Damn now I feel like having a Guinness.
Sorry, I have to respond to this, even if the thread is older, somehow I missed it.
The books you are talking about WERE examined as possible evidence when they were consolidating the Bible. And they were rejected. And with good reason. I for one am a bit informed about those reasons, and I have a different viewpoint than you.
I read the Gnostic texts, you missed an interesting one. The Gospel of Judas. In which it’s told that he was the greatest apostle of all. It talks about how he was the closest to Jesus, he was supposed to have received all kinds of “secret” knowledge, told he was supposed to kill him and said it was ok. What garbage. Along with the Roman centurion that supposedly got Mary pregnant.
Do you not believe that there were many texts even pornography that floated around that were meant for entertainment? People in the past wrote fiction also. For entertainment. So 300 years ago someone throws a scrap of that in the mix.
The whole idea was to find the truth. Just because the scrap existed and it’s old, doesn’t mean it’s true. They had a process, and access to far more documents then you do. I believe they still exist in the Vatican.