03-17-2008, 06:00 AM
Since no one has bothered to quote Plato's recount of the Atlantis story, here goes :
"Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent . . . But, there occurred violent earthquakes and floods, and in a single day and night of misfortune. . . the island of Atlantis . . .disappeared in the depths of the sea."
At face value, needless to say, this account sounds like strong support for the eruption theory.
Would you object to :
If not, then why hold biblical archeology to a different standard ?
Heinrich Schliemann believed in Troy's existence when most men still thought it to be a mere myth.
Believers have the advantage of making allowances for allegorical literature. Non-believers would not tend to be so open-minded or have the same spirit of adventure (as evidenced by Schliemann), IMO. So, it that sense, believers make better risk-takers.
Therefore, the motives, theories and conclusions of non-believers are understandably, IMO, subject to greater suspicion and scrutiny. Of course, they can and do make great contributions in discovering new evidence.
That's my take, anyway.
~Theo
"Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent . . . But, there occurred violent earthquakes and floods, and in a single day and night of misfortune. . . the island of Atlantis . . .disappeared in the depths of the sea."
At face value, needless to say, this account sounds like strong support for the eruption theory.
Quote:Thanks for the lecture, but I know.. I probably see the same documentaries as you doSpeaking of documentaries, have any of you seen "The Exodus Decoded" ? The program was aired in 2006 on the UK Discovery Channel. It was produced by James Cameron and written by Simcha Jacobovici (from the History Channel). It compares the hypothetical eruption that caused the sea / marsh to recede in Moses' time to the modern eruption in Cameroon. Many parallels between the two events are made evident and help give scientific explanations for the ten plagues that ravaged Egypt. This was a high budget documentary which used a lot of CGI.
Quote:What I find unacceptable is believers who, because a scholar is not a believer, do not listen to his theories.Why ?
Would you object to :
- a science teacher who did not believe in science ?
- a marxist teaching capitalism ?
- an anarchist teaching about representative democracy ?
- a medical professor who didn't believe in medicine ?
If not, then why hold biblical archeology to a different standard ?
Heinrich Schliemann believed in Troy's existence when most men still thought it to be a mere myth.
Believers have the advantage of making allowances for allegorical literature. Non-believers would not tend to be so open-minded or have the same spirit of adventure (as evidenced by Schliemann), IMO. So, it that sense, believers make better risk-takers.
Therefore, the motives, theories and conclusions of non-believers are understandably, IMO, subject to greater suspicion and scrutiny. Of course, they can and do make great contributions in discovering new evidence.
That's my take, anyway.
~Theo
Jaime
