Split from "energy cannot be created" thread split & retitled by admin

[PeteWaldo]

I already explained that the specific historical event of God ending the suffering of the Canaanites was acceptable because God commanded it. Period. It's been almost 3,000 years since any Old Testament saints are recording as having used the sword in God's service. As you may have noticed at the beginning of that web page:

...again, isn't this still moral relatavism?

1,500 years had passed since any Hebrew prophet was described in the Old Testament as using a sword in the service of God. Neither Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Micah, Amos, Malachi nor any other later Hebrew prophet is described as using the sword or prescribing its use.

This is kind of irrelevant isn't it?  Your god still prescribed infanticide and genocide.  Presumably such a being would not change right?

I praise the Lord for lifting those Canaanite children up unto Himself

Let's not mince words here, and call it what it is:  murdering babies.

Not a surprise to see Satan - the father of lies - increasingly speaking for you. I already explained that God rescued the innocents, who are with Him now and will be forever, while the rest received just recompense for their actions.

that would have resulted from their being indoctrinated by their community into incest, pedophilia, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality and ritualistic prostitution. Let alone saving them before they reached an age of accountability for those actions, which would have separated them from God forever

These are horrible things, but why could the Israelites (or indeed their God) rescued them instead of butchering them?  Also I haven't asked before, but what is your source that the Canaanites did these things?  I woudn't mind having a look at it if you know where it comes from.

See what I mean? Now Satan's got you trying to assign innocence to the Canaanites in your continuing quest to assign guilt to God. As I indicated earlier, your railing against YHWH and support of the Canaanites makes you an accessory to their sins, including the sacrifice of children to idols.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sacrifice#Phoenicia_and_Carthage

Try a search like - sins of the Canaanites.
You wish the Canaanites were innocent of those sins, so you can continue to accuse God of murder, even though all of those same sins are even committed in the world today including, I would suggest, what is tantamount to sacrifice of children to the Quraish pagan's black stone idol in Mecca.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/#black_stone_idol

Were you raised by atheists or agnostics?
Roman Catholic church or other?

Remember Pete, those things are not mutually exclusive.  I have said a few times I am both atheist and agnostic.  To answer your question though, one parent was a deist, the other atheist.

So what's your position on the over 50 million abortions that have been performed since Roe vs Wade?

A tragedy for sure.

Unsurprisingly vague.

What is your position?

That those mothers had their children killed.
That much of the world is guilty of the most widespread practice of infanticide in the history of mankind.
That politicians who codify as a right, the killing of those children, are accessories to that killing to the same extent as a person that hires a trigger-man to kill someone.
So what does that suggest about those who vote to put those politicians into office?

Do you believe a woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?
Do you believe a child should be legally recognized as a person at conception?

[Beatrice]

Pete, you are not answering my questions.

Is it not moral relatavism to sugges that to murder an innocent baby under some circumstances is permissable, and not under others?
What is your source that the Caananites did these kind of things?

See what I mean? Now Satan's got you trying to assign innocence to the Canaanites in your continuing quest to assign guilt to God.

No I am not, I have looked for historical sources regarding what the Canaanites would like and have only found Bible verses and not anything else that remotely indicates the things you describe.

[Beatrice]

Hi again, I remember you posted this awhile ago

Putting effort into DISbelief rather than simply considering the evidence, is what I have found to be typical of those with pure blind faith in the religion of atheism, and may be part of the reason that only about 4% of U.S. citizens believe there is no God.

I mentioned at the time that the data was old, and in the last few days it appears a new survey has been done regarding religious demographics in America and thought you may be interested.

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

[PeteWaldo]

Pete, you are not answering my questions.

You are lying. I have answered it repeatedly. Specific historical events that happened thousands of years ago were exceptions because God specifically commanded it. Since I trust in God I know he had good reason to end the suffering of the Canaanites and bring any innocents unto himself.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4643.msg17880#msg17880

Let alone you are wishing you were ruled over by moral reprobates like of Adolf Hitler, since defense against such barbarians often results in collateral damage in the deaths of innocents of all ages.

It is you going on and on like a chatty Kathy doll that has the ability to pull its own string, carping on about this exception, while ignoring point after point in post after post throughout our conversation. At the same time saying "gee I never saw any evidence of God" when the fact in you ignore the evidence and just keep on proclaiming it. Whether the origin of matter and energy, or DNA or such compelling biblical evidence as the restoration of Jews to their land and Daniel having prophesied the years, 2500 years in advance.
Perhaps you won't get the significance of it all until you are compelled to prostrate yourself toward the Quraish pagan's black stone idol in Mecca and pray in the "vain repetitions of the heathen" five times a day, to the Arabian pagan's deity "Allah" and his "messenger" Muhammad.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/muhammad_islam_in_bible_prophecy.htm#the_conflict

Is it not moral relatavism to sugges that to murder an innocent baby under some circumstances is permissable, and not under others?
What is your source that the Caananites did these kind of things?

The scriptures, which demonstrate their veracity as a reliable record of ancient history, through fulfilled prophecy, archaeology and mathematics.
Additionally, the writings of folks that are far more studied on the subject, to which I left links.

See what I mean? Now Satan's got you trying to assign innocence to the Canaanites in your continuing quest to assign guilt to God.

No I am not, I have looked for historical sources regarding what the Canaanites would like and have only found Bible verses and not anything else that remotely indicates the things you describe.

I left links to many more studied on that subject than I. You need to answer to this, this time.

Which of the sins of the Canaanites, that you are wishing were innocent, are not practiced in the world today?

And of course accusing me of ignoring as you do so, once again.
If your opinion on the following has changed, please answer honestly, and according to whatever opinion you would have stated prior to coming to this forum.

Do you believe the woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?
Do you believe a child should be legally recognized as a person at conception?

[Beatrice]

You are lying. I have answered it repeatedly.

You answered some other question, but you haven't addressed the issue that you are describing moral relatavism.

Whether the origin of matter and energy

This isn't evidence for a deity.  I told you honestly that I did not know where the original energy and matter for the universe came from.  Just because you say it was your God doesn't make it a fact Pete.  If you have evidence to suggest it then please show it.

or DNA

DNA suggests common descent, not the Biblical account.  I haven't asked yet, but do you interpret Genesis literally and reject evolution?

Why would DNA suggest a deity?

Daniel having prophesied the years, 2500 years in advance.

 I raised legitimate questions you could not satisfactorily answer in this regard regarding the dates.  You have no reason other than faith that you could name to pick your date over the other much more accepted historical dates.

Also, one more question regarding the your prophecy:  what is this describing to you from Daniel 12:2?

And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
Some to everlasting life,
Some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Perhaps you won't get the significance of it all until you are compelled to prostrate yourself toward the Quraish pagan's black stone idol in Mecca and pray in the "vain repetitions of the heathen" five times a day, to the Arabian pagan's deity "Allah" and his "messenger" Muhammad.

I have literally no idea where this came from.  Why would I have such compulsions to do such a thing?

The scriptures, which demonstrate their veracity as a reliable record of ancient history, through fulfilled prophecy, archaeology and mathematics.

I am trying to be objective here Pete.... but are you seriously suggesting that the best source for accurate historical information on a people group is a book written by the people who committed genocide against them, murdered their babies and took over their land?

Do you believe a woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?

No

Do you believe a child should be legally recognized as a person at conception?

No.  I do not know, or have been presented with any information regarding when a fetus becomes a human being.  When that is answered, I will have an answer.

[PeteWaldo]

Hi again, I remember you posted this awhile ago

Putting effort into DISbelief rather than simply considering the evidence, is what I have found to be typical of those with pure blind faith in the religion of atheism, and may be part of the reason that only about 4% of U.S. citizens believe there is no God.

I mentioned at the time that the data was old, and in the last few days it appears a new survey has been done regarding religious demographics in America and thought you may be interested.

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

Like me for example. I was affiliated with Calvary Chapel in 2003. I am unaffiliated with any Christian denomination today, primarily because it became too difficult to be exposed to unsound eschatology. Because of pop-approaches to eschatology of futurism and preterism, that began to come into vogue in the 19th century, the "church" has precluded itself from even considering, that Muhammad could be THE false prophet of the book of Revelation.
http://www.christianeschatology.com/#limitations_futurism_preterism

I know for a fact that disillusionment with unsound eschatology is a big reason that the unaffiliated group is growing. Another reason is that much of the body of Christ is returning to the 1st century model of meeting in homes in an every-member-functioning ecclesia. A book you might enjoy on the subject of what happened to the "church" is "Pagan Christianity" by Frank Viola.
http://www.amazon.com/Pagan-Christianity-Exploring-Church-Practices/product-reviews/141431485X/ref=cm_cr_dp_qt_see_all_top?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=byRankDescending

It's also heartening to see that so many are escaping the bondage and false doctrines of Roman Catholicism.

[Beatrice]

I am unaffiliated with any Christian denomination today, primarily because it got too difficult to be exposed to unsound eschatology.

You have to look into the data, but there was a response as Christian-Other, which I assume that would cover.  They grew from 0.3 to 0.4.

I know for a fact that disillusionment with unsound eschatology is a big reason that the unaffiliated group is growing. Another reason is that much of the body of Christ is returning to the 1st century model of meeting in homes in an every-member-functioning ecclesia. A book you might enjoy on the subject of what happened to the "church" is "Pagan Christianity" by Frank Viola.

I'll check it out, thanks for the link. 

Again, you have to check out the data on the link more, but "Unaffiliated" had only three sub responses, Atheist, Agnostic and Nothing in Particular.

[PeteWaldo]

I am unaffiliated with any Christian denomination today, primarily because it got too difficult to be exposed to unsound eschatology.

You have to look into the data, but there was a response as Christian-Other, which I assume that would cover.  They grew from 0.3 to 0.4.

And far worse elsewhere, which I already covered in detail in the post at this link:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4643.msg17844#msg17844

I know for a fact that disillusionment with unsound eschatology is a big reason that the unaffiliated group is growing. Another reason is that much of the body of Christ is returning to the 1st century model of meeting in homes in an every-member-functioning ecclesia. A book you might enjoy on the subject of what happened to the "church" is "Pagan Christianity" by Frank Viola.

I'll check it out, thanks for the link.

I noticed you can pick up a used copy for under $5. That book has spoken to a lot of people who had left the "church".
http://www.amazon.com/Pagan-Christianity-Exploring-Church-Practices/dp/141431485X/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8

Again, you have to check out the data on the link more, but "Unaffiliated" had only three sub responses, Atheist, Agnostic and Nothing in Particular.

As I pointed out in that prior post apostasy in the church is another fulfillment of prophecy, that further demonstrates the veracity of scripture.
http://www.christianeschatology.com/falling_away_apostasy.htm

[PeteWaldo]

Which of the sins of the Canaanites, that you are wishing were innocent, are not practiced in the world today?

Do you believe the woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?
Do you believe a child should be legally recognized as a person at conception?

[Beatrice]

My apologies, I did answer that up but stuffed up my formatting, I will edit it after this post.

Which of the sins of the Canaanites, that you are wishing were innocent, are not practiced in the world today?

I'm not wishing they are innocent, please decease bearing false witness against me.  Just because I am not willing to take a book written by their slaughterers at face value does not mean I think they were innocent, it means I have yet to ascertain whether they were guilty.

You know, like how courts work, innocent until proven otherwise?  If you have evidence not written by the people who committed their genocide I would be very interested to read it.

[PeteWaldo]

Do you believe the woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?
Do you believe a child should be legally recognized as a person at conception?

If you prefer:

Do you believe women should have the right to hire an abortionist to kill their children?
Do you believe a child should be legally recognized as a person at conception?

[Beatrice]

Do you believe a woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?

No

Quote
Do you believe a child should be legally recognized as a person at conception?

No.  I do not know, or have been presented with any information regarding when a fetus becomes a human being.  When that is answered, I will have an answer.

Copied from previous post.

I noticed you can pick up a used copy for under $5. That book has spoken to a lot of people who had left the "church".
http://www.amazon.com/Pagan-Christianity-Exploring-Church-Practices/dp/141431485X/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8

So I've read the first few chapters.  Is it basically saying that the root of many practices of the modern church come from pagan belief?  Because I thought everyone knew that.

[PeteWaldo]

Do you believe a woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?

No

Quote
Do you believe a child should be legally recognized as a person at conception?

No.  I do not know, or have been presented with any information regarding when a fetus becomes a human being.  When that is answered, I will have an answer.

And if their answer is that a mother has a right to kill her child up until the day before it is born (as no shortage of feminists believe), then you would be satisfied to agree that would be morally and ethically just and OK.
So if some men arbitrarily proclaim (and it would always necessarily have to be arbitrary) that a child becomes a child at 213 days of age, then killing it before that time would be OK, even though the exact day of conception is at least relatively indeterminable. You pass your moral responsibility on to others, deluding yourself into believing that that lets you off the hook, for deciding what is right and wrong. What is good and evil. When a mother is legally licensed to slay her child, and when that child is given the right to life,f usurping the mother's "right" to kill it. That way you can pretend to yourself that you don't need to decide for yourself. The epitome of moral relativism. Even beyond, since you believe you can pass your responsibility for moral judgment on to others, to determine for you.

Copied from previous post.

I did miss that in that post.
So you criticize God for desiring an end to the sacrifice of children to idols, suffering and disease of a few Canaanites, while you turn a blind eye to the state-legal slaughter of 50 million children in our times. Regarding the spurious nature of the lawyer invented law I would encourage you to research Sandra Cano and Norma McCorvey.

You know as well as I that at the moment of conception the blueprint is complete, the die is cast, and all that is left to be done is cell division. Simply put, to grow. Sometimes even diseases, that the person will suffer late in life, are already programmed in.
You also know as well as I that no human being would ever be able to answer your question, so it is nothing more than a convenient dodge of your support for the state-sponsored slaughter of those 50 million children. In other words far worse than moral relativism, and into immoral hypocrisy, while running and hiding from truth. From where I stand not much different than Germans that remained silent during Hitler's holocaust. I would encourage you to research the procedure used in "partial-birth abortion".



Even from a purely secular viewpoint, Blacks is the basis of our Common Law, which defines a child as a person at conception. So according to the U.S. Constitution, that child from the moment of conception is endowed with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That is of course, why it is considered a double-homicide, when a pregnant woman is murdered.

When a person hires another to murder someone, the person who did the hiring is more responsible than the trigger man, since the murder would have never taken happened in the first place if it hadn't been hired done.
So where does that leave the politicians that license the abortionist to slaughter children?
Where does that put the people who vote those politicians into office?

And of course from a spiritual point of view, a person is given a soul at least by conception, as far as the physical world is concerned.

I noticed you can pick up a used copy for under $5. That book has spoken to a lot of people who had left the "church".
http://www.amazon.com/Pagan-Christianity-Exploring-Church-Practices/dp/141431485X/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8

So I've read the first few chapters.  Is it basically saying that the root of many practices of the modern church come from pagan belief?  Because I thought everyone knew that.

As you read on you will find that the point of the book, is that the problems within the institutional "church" have always been men usurping the authority that belongs to Jesus Christ, who has always been the head of the church. What you point out is just one manifestation of that usurpation.

[Beatrice]

Pete, I know this is an emotional issue for us, but seriously, how do you go from me saying this:

Do you believe a woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?

No

to this response

You pass your moral responsibility on to others, deluding yourself into believing that that lets you off the hook, for deciding what is right and wrong

That way you can pretend to yourself that you don't need to decide for yourself.

while you turn a blind eye to the state-legal slaughter of 50 million children in our times.

I suggest you familiarise yourself with the ninth commandment.

When you get a chance, could you please address the following questions I asked previously:

DNA suggests common descent, not the Biblical account.  I haven't asked yet, but do you interpret Genesis literally and reject evolution?

Why would DNA suggest a deity?

what is this describing to you from Daniel 12:2?

And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
Some to everlasting life,
Some to shame and everlasting contempt.

are you seriously suggesting that the best source for accurate historical information on a people group is a book written by the people who committed genocide against them, murdered their babies and took over their land?

in regards to the biblical genocide of the Canaanites

And also whether you have any extra biblical sources for the things you claim the Canaanites did.

Thanks!  Hope you are well and had a good few days since we last communicated.

Bea

[PeteWaldo]

Please review the post as I was still editing before your response. Will return when I get a chance.

[PeteWaldo]

Pete, I know this is an emotional issue for us, ........

Moral absolutes as opposed to moral relativity take the emotion out of it for me. It is the difference between right and wrong, good and evil.

........ but seriously, how do you go from me saying this:

Do you believe a woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?

No

to this response

You pass your moral responsibility on to others, deluding yourself into believing that that lets you off the hook, for deciding what is right and wrong

That way you can pretend to yourself that you don't need to decide for yourself.

while you turn a blind eye to the state-legal slaughter of 50 million children in our times.

Leaving it up to others to decide what is right and wrong for you constitutes a tacit nod of approval for whatever they decide. And yes, turning a blind eye. I'm sure there was no shortage of Germans during WW2 that passed their responsibility for judgment off onto the State as well. As far as what you have written thus far, I didn't notice any rejection of approval of abortion even up to the day before birth, if that's what others should happen to decide for you.

I suggest you familiarise yourself with the ninth commandment.

When you get a chance, could you please address the following questions I asked previously:

DNA suggests common descent, not the Biblical account. I haven't asked yet, but do you interpret Genesis literally and reject evolution?

I don't have a firm opinion as I haven't been called to that area of study. There is no shortage of opinion within the Christian community. But when I see charts of human population I do have to wonder, how we are supposed to have been around for millions years, yet populated from virtually zero to seven billion over the last 6,000 years. Let alone the absence of a transitional form fossil record that even Darwin noticed.

Why would DNA suggest a deity?

We don’t need to spend our time with this. Your argument is with scientists who have gained that opinion. Try a search like - scientists dna god

what is this describing to you from Daniel 12:2?

And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
Some to everlasting life,
Some to shame and everlasting contempt.

You post like a Muslim. Rather than continuing on with points like fulfilled Bible prophecy, and the subject of Daniel's math, how energy was created without a Creator, you simply leave them behind and obfuscate by starting yet another subject.

Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

are you seriously suggesting that the best source for accurate historical information on a people group is a book written by the people who committed genocide against them, murdered their babies and took over their land?

in regards to the biblical genocide of the Canaanites

Satan is a champion of the Canaanites and sacrifice of children to idols as well. While you may not believe in him, what you wrote indicates that he certainly hasn't stopped believing in you!

And also whether you have any extra biblical sources for the things you claim the Canaanites did.

I left links for you. The scholars who are called to that area of study are sufficient on the specifics for me. Fulfilled Bible prophecy, and even simply looking around at the state of the world as it is today, are sufficient to prove the existence of my God that passed judgment and justice on the Canaanites - that commanded an end to the suffering of the Canaanites.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/bible_prophecy.htm

Thanks!  Hope you are well and had a good few days since we last communicated.

Bea

You too.

[Beatrice]

It is the difference between right and wrong, good and evil.

But you yourself condoned the murder of babies, quite explicitly under certain circumstances?

As far as what you have written thus far, I didn't notice any rejection of approval of abortion even up to the day before birth

Perhaps you missed what I said, and you later quoted:

Do you believe a woman has, or should have, a right to kill her child?

No

We don’t need to spend our time with this. Your argument is with scientists who have gained that opinion.

My apologies, you brought it up and I was curious as to what you meant by it.  I would be quite surprised if this was the majority interpretation, mostly due to the large amounts of junk DNA, and the horrible, horrible things that can be caused as a result of DNA mutations.

But when I see charts of human population I do have to wonder, how we are supposed to have been around for millions years, yet populated from virtually zero to seven billion over the last 6,000 years

You are assuming I believe that we have always multiplied as fast.  This is really not true however, due to advances in society (ceasing from being nomads to farming etc.) and more discoveries in medicine.

Let alone the absence of a transitional form fossil record that even Darwin noticed.

There have been literally hundreds of transitional fossils found.  For a few famous examples have a quick search for Archaeopteryx and Tiktaalik.  The reason Darwin noted there weren't any because at the time he wrote the Origin of Species, there had been none discovered.  The future discovery of them proved his prediction correct.  If you look at the quote, he even accurately guessed WHY there were none found at the time.

You post like a Muslim. Rather than continuing on with points like fulfilled Bible prophecy, and the subject of Daniel's math, how energy was created from nothing, you simply leave them behind and obfuscate by starting yet another subject.

Like a Muslim?  I'm not sure I follow.  My apologies.  I was just curious, as it appeared to be part of the prophecy and I was unaware to what it was pointing to.

I left links for you.

I did look.   It is frankly very hard to find ANY information on what you are describing regarding the Canaanites.  There were a few stories regarding some of them that you were describing, but almost nothing specifically regarding Canaanites.  But surely a mere story isn't proof yes?  One could easily point to Biblical narratives that describe child sacrifice and incest among the Israelites too, but that hardly makes it a fact yes?

[PeteWaldo]

It is the difference between right and wrong, good and evil.

But you yourself condoned the murder of babies, quite explicitly under certain circumstances?

We have a historical record of a specific event of a few thousand years ago in which God ordered it. It is what it is. Those babies, and any other innocents killed, are with God.

While your inability to discern the difference between right and wrong and good and evil is so relative, indistinct and confused, you assign the task to others, while your standing by in silence expresses tacit approval for the continuing silent holocaust and genocide of 50 million babies in our times.

Do you believe a child should be legally recognized as a person at conception?

No.  I do not know, or have been presented with any information regarding when a fetus becomes a human being.  When that is answered, I will have an answer.

See what I mean? Excusing away your inability to discern the difference between right and wrong because you are waiting for what you know is unanswerable, to be answered by others, before you can decide what is morally right and wrong.

We don’t need to spend our time with this. Your argument is with scientists who have gained that opinion.

My apologies, you brought it up and I was curious as to what you meant by it.  I would be quite surprised if this was the majority interpretation, mostly due to the large amounts of junk DNA, and the horrible, horrible things that can be caused as a result of DNA mutations.

But when I see charts of human population I do have to wonder, how we are supposed to have been around for millions years, yet populated from virtually zero to seven billion over the last 6,000 years

You are assuming I believe that we have always multiplied as fast.

My observation had nothing to do with what I assume you believe. I was stating an offhand opinion regarding charts of human population.

This is really not true however, due to advances in society (ceasing from being nomads to farming etc.) and more discoveries in medicine.

Let alone the absence of a transitional form fossil record that even Darwin noticed.

There have been literally hundreds of transitional fossils found.  For a few famous examples have a quick search for Archaeopteryx and Tiktaalik.

It's all about what you choose to put your faith in. Like having faith in an opinion that a species is instead a transitional form, while remaining in self-admitted self-imposed ignorance to the things of the kingdom of God like the related history, archaeology and mathematics of fulfilled Bible prophecy, and the odds against fulfillment thereof. Essentially, pure blind faith in what to disbelieve. And some claim that atheism isn't a religion!

The reason Darwin noted there weren't any because at the time he wrote the Origin of Species, there had been none discovered.  The future discovery of them proved his prediction correct.  If you look at the quote, he even accurately guessed WHY there were none found at the time.

You post like a Muslim. Rather than continuing on with points like fulfilled Bible prophecy, and the subject of Daniel's math, how energy was created from nothing, you simply leave them behind and obfuscate by starting yet another subject.

Like a Muslim?  I'm not sure I follow.  My apologies.  I was just curious, as it appeared to be part of the prophecy and I was unaware to what it was pointing to.

And even in this post you continue on with your tangent while failing to return to the math. Your tangent isn't the part of Daniel's prophecy that I brought up. What do you suppose the odds are of Daniel having pinned the years of 1948 and 1967, to the year, 2500 years in advance?

I chose to present the math, because discussion of the Bible as in the passage you pulled from thin air is pointless, with someone who stands outside the Spirit of God that insists on willful disobedience and puts their effort into misunderstanding and faith in disbelief.

This certainly isn't the only fulfilled prophecy. Some suggest about 1/4 of the Bible is prophecy, and most of it fulfilled.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/bible_prophecy.htm

I left links for you.

I did look.   It is frankly very hard to find ANY information on what you are describing regarding the Canaanites.

What is so hard for you to believe? Which of the sins attributed to the Canaanites that you wish to doubt they committed, are not practiced in the world today?

There were a few stories regarding some of them that you were describing, but almost nothing specifically regarding Canaanites.  But surely a mere story isn't proof yes?  One could easily point to Biblical narratives that describe child sacrifice and incest among the Israelites too, but that hardly makes it a fact yes?

While a secular humanist might say that sacrifice of children to idols is the only sin of the Canaanites not practiced today, from my Christian perspective, I see 1/4 of mankind unwittingly sacrificing their children to the Quraish pagan's black stone idol in Mecca that they prostrate toward 5 times a day, since Muhammadanism turns its adherents into antichrists ............. like you.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/islam_is_antichrist.htm

[PeteWaldo]

It will make things less confusing, and give us links to posts of the quoted content, if you learn how to multiquote:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=39.0

[Beatrice]

It will make things less confusing, and give us links to posts of the quoted content, if you learn how to multiquote:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=39.0

Sorry, I will look into this and make things clear.

I have already explained quite clearly that your dates are either incorrect in the prophecy date, or the author of the book has got their facts wrong.

Either way the maths is incorrect.

Excusing away your inability to discern the difference between right and wrong because you are waiting for what you know is unanswerable, to be answered by others, before you can decide what is morally right and wrong

Just because I do not know does not mean I think it is OK, nor should be allowed.  I have stated this multiple times, so please stop attributing positions to me that I do not actually hold.

And some claim that atheism isn't a religion!

It isn't.  It simply describes a lack of a belief in deities.  If you think that constitutes a religion, then that is OK, but then you could apply it to pretty much any statement that describes a person (occupation, political view, cultural etc.)

I have to head out now, so sorry about that, but again, if you get a chance.

1.  Extra biblical accounts of what the Canaanites did
2.  Clarification of those verses in the Daniel prophecy

Thanks!  Have a good day

PS.  Also, I suggest you have a good look into the characteristics of Archaeopteryx, as well as the myriad of other transitional forms.  It really is quite a fascinating animal.  It  does not fit into any neat category we have today.  Check out its teeth, lack of a beak and super long tail! 

[PeteWaldo]

It will make things less confusing, and give us links to posts of the quoted content, if you learn how to multiquote:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=39.0

Sorry, I will look into this and make things clear.

If you do it per the instruction at that link you quoted, as you can see in the following, it gives every quote a header with a clickable link back to the post that is being quoted. When I wanted to include part of the April 30th quote I went back, quoted it, then removed what I didn't need, then copied and pasted the whole thing - tags and all - into this post.

I have already explained quite clearly that your dates are either incorrect in the prophecy date, or the author of the book has got their facts wrong.

See how much effort you have to put into your disbelief? Now you are pretending it is the author of one book, that dates the first year of Cyrus in Babylon to 537-536, even after I quoted just a few of many that date it the same way. Setting up a straw man messenger, you wish you could then shoot, in efforts to run and hide from the truth.

"The archeology record indicates that Cyrus enters Babylon the year following his victory, entering the city BC 537, and that after the following year (which would be 536 BC), in 535 BC, Cyrus is crowned king of Babylon in a large display."
http://www.angelfire.com/bc2/Bereans/Myfiles/Chronology/cyrus.html
".....first year of King Cyrus the Persian may not have begun till late in the year 538 B.C. to extend over into the following year of 537 B.C."
http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/babylon/babylon18.html
"The Bible shows that the Jews returned to their homeland in the first year of King Cyrus, which would have been 537-B.C.E."
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
"He died 536 b.c., and Cyrus succeeded him; and as the order to rebuild the temple was in the first year of Cyrus, the time referred to in this chapter....."
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/daniel/9-1.htm
"The Persian Empire was founded by Cyrus in 536 BC., after they succeeded the Babylonian Empire. The first king of the Persian Empire was Cyrus, who issued the famous decree for the Jews to return to their homeland to rebuild their Temple."
http://www.bible-history.com/maps/04-persian-empire.html
"Therefore, the ascension year of Cyrus over the province of Babylon was 537/6 B.C., and his first calendar year was 536/5 B.C."
https://www.wake-up.org/Daniel/DanChap5.htm

Did your comment "...every source apart from yours seems to indicate it was 539 BC..." suggest you were putting effort into being honest enough with yourself to consider the evidence, or instead putting all of your effort into DISbelief, even at the expense of truth?
Would you at this point agree that 537-536 is supportable dating - at least in the opinion of many - for the first year of Cyrus (as likely hundreds or perhaps even thousands of sites attest)?

Can't even you see your demonstration of how automatically and naturally you lie to yourself?

Either way the maths is incorrect.

But you formed that opinion, through your continuing effort to further indoctrinate yourself into DISbelief, by way of conspicuous self-deception.
Whereas a person with reasonable critical thinking skills and normal cognitive function unbroken by indoctrination into the faith of atheism, might otherwise observe that while there may be a little variation in dating from website to website, one of the oft-repeated perfectly acceptable years that is advanced, happens to be confirmed mathematically and textually through two parallel problems in prophecy that span 2500 years. To a reasonable person not running and hiding from truth, these two problems would demonstrate which dating is correct, while even cross confirming each other, since the odds against those two math problems spanning 2500 years and pinning the years of 1948 and 1967 being an accident, are astronomical.
http://www.zionismchristian.com/daniel_prophesied_modern_zionism.htm

Just as astronomical as the odds against the restoration of Jews to their land that 1200 years of Islam had rendered utterly desolate, that Daniel dated through those math problems, as well as so much other old covenant Bible prophecy of that restoration.
http://www.zionismchristian.com/history_of_modern_zionism.htm#desolation_of_israel
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/abomination_of_desolation.htm
http://www.zionismchristian.com/zionism_in_prophecy.htm
http://www.zionismchristian.com/zionism_in_christianity.htm

Excusing away your inability to discern the difference between right and wrong because you are waiting for what you know is unanswerable, to be answered by others, before you can decide what is morally right and wrong

Just because I do not know does not mean I think it is OK, nor should be allowed.  I have stated this multiple times, so please stop attributing positions to me that I do not actually hold.

Spoken as I'm sure no shortage of buck-passing Germans did in Nazi Germany.

And some claim that atheism isn't a religion!

It isn't.

It is. Your accusing the God of the Bible and His people for obeying him, through your antichrist spirit led understanding of a historical event that happened thousands of years ago, is a classic doctrine within the religion of atheism. Continuing to carp away on it even after I explained that all innocents that were killed are with the Lord - saved before growing up to be indoctrinated into the sins and resulting suffering therefrom, of their community. In that doctrine you join antichrist Muslims, however their spin on that event is that it demonstrates the scriptures are "corrupt". You lie to yourself, just as Muhammadans must lie to themselves, because you and they follow the father of lies.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4479.0

It simply describes a lack of a belief in deities.  If you think that constitutes a religion, then that is OK, but then you could apply it to pretty much any statement that describes a person (occupation, political view, cultural etc.)

I have to head out now, so sorry about that, but again, if you get a chance.

1.  Extra biblical accounts of what the Canaanites did

You deem the record that YHWH gave us because you desire to disbelieve it, even though archaeological evidence increasingly confirms the Bible to be a reliable record of ancient history. Just recently it appears that the palace of king David was discovered, while liberal "Christian" "scholars" and atheists had previously wished to believe the Biblical accounts of king David's palace were fables.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2964.0

What impresses me is that you are so eager to wish that the Canaanites were innocent and Jews guilty, that you desire to disbelieve the sins of the Canaanites, even though the same sins are practiced in the world today. The reason for this unreasonableness and resulting accusation being your indoctrination into the faith of atheism.

2.  Clarification of those verses in the Daniel prophecy

I already explained the pointlessness of going off on a tangent, which you further confirmed through this additional demonstration of your willingness to lie to yourself, to advance your blind faith in disbelief.

You deny that atheism is a religion, and would likely suggest it does not require faith, even as you believe that energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Thanks!  Have a good day

PS.  Also, I suggest you have a good look into the characteristics of Archaeopteryx, as well as the myriad of other transitional forms.  It really is quite a fascinating animal.  It  does not fit into any neat category we have today. Check out its teeth, lack of a beak and super long tail!

As above you will believe what furthers your self-indoctrination. I left a link to a Bing search of those with opinions that disagree that it is a transitional form.