OkaiCorne:


Nah...you didn't digress at all. I have also considered the possibility of Eden being a mythical or spiritual place...but for the author of Genesis for example to mention four rivers which was equally corroborated by the documentary I posted earlier...that shows that Eden indeed existed on earth...

Initially, you asked for the purported map of the world...now the basis has shifted to the Universe...no human being or invention can give you a detailed map of the milky way galaxy, not to talk of the Universe....

I thought we were discussing map of the world (earth) here...

Again taking us aback, do we think Google Map covers every part of these earth? I am not shifting, I am saying this technology is also Limited to certain places but unknown to us. I agree, Genesis gives account of the four Rivers, that being the case, are you 100% sure that picture painted is some where visible or perhaps someone too more advanced than we or the scientist would not allow them visualize it but give them a twin to that actual information to satisfy their curiosity. This is what a better advanced to our advancement can do.

The point is I do not believe the Google Map sees everything on this earth.

Bros, I just hope you understand what I am trying to say.

OkaiCorne:


On what grounds? Historic accounts from different sources points to the existence of Eden...in the distant past.

I have a question for you...

Where was Eden located? In which country and on what planet?

Freeze007:


Again taking us aback, do we think Google Map covers every part of these earth? I am not shifting, I am saying this technology is also Limited to certain places but unknown to us. I agree, Genesis gives account of the four Rivers, that being the case, are you 100% sure that picture painted is some where visible or perhaps someone too more advanced than we or the scientist would not allow them visualize it but give them a twin to that actual information to satisfy their curiosity. This is what a better advanced to our advancement can do.

The point is I do not believe the Google Map sees everything on this earth.

Bros, I just hope you understand what I am trying to say.

Yes bro...I understand you...

But at least you can place some degree of reliability on google map pointing out the location of rivers in the world...

And reliance on satellite images to also locate extinct river routes...

Humanity might not be so advanced in terms of technology yet...but at least credit should be given for what has been achieved thus far...

dalaman:


Where was Eden located? In which country and on what planet?

I have a question for you, but let me answer yours first...

1) Eden is submerged in the Persian gulf where research has shown four rivers once met there. Even current maps shows that Tigris and Euphrates are traceable to the Persian gulf.

2) Based on the above...obviously, Eden was on earth...

Now onto my question...

OkaiCorne:


I have a question for you, but let me answer yours first...

1) Eden is submerged in the Persian gulf where research has shown four rivers once met there. Even current maps shows that Tigris and Euphrates are traceable to the Persian gulf.

2) Based on the above...obviously, Eden was on earth...

Now onto my question...

That means the first man originated from the Persian Gulf?

Ask your question.

dalaman:


Where was Eden located? In which country and on what planet?

If a boy who lived among the uncivilized and lost tribes of the Amazon dies sometime in 1950 with no evidence of identification or history records to prove his existence....does it mean the boy never existed?

If no, how can you prove the boy once existed in the absence of written materials or videos or any finger prints or any other evidence except from various eye witness accounts?

dalaman:


That means the first man originated from the Persian Gulf?

Ask your question.

Nope...we were having a discussion on this before some atheists derailed the thread...

The location of the garden of Eden is impossible to pinpoint for obvious reasons. in line with the Bible, the garden was land-locked by four rivers, 2 of that are of common knowledge: the tigris and the river.
If we tend to ignore the Pangean continent (one massive continent), the garden seems to possess been located over Republic of Iraq and Islamic Republic of Iran.
Now, several controversial theories regarding human origin and civilization have circled the masses for years. one of the theories talks a couple of combined sort of the Mesopotamian and also the Indus valley Civilization. several historians believe that it absolutely was actually one large civilization stretching from the Tigris/Euphrates within the West to the river within the East. The region just west of the Indus was called Assyria (Land of Assuras or demons in Hindu mythology). Assyria is mentioned as a boundary within the Bible.
Considering the age of the Bible, i. e. 5000 B. C. it may be possible that the middle eastern land was one thing more than simply a huge civilization in its preceding years or The Garden of Eden.

Have a look Pentecostal Church in San Antonio Texas for all of your query.

OkaiCorne:


Yes bro...I understand you...

But at least you can place some degree of reliability on google map pointing out the location of rivers in the world...

And reliance on satellite images to also locate extinct river routes...

Humanity might not be so advanced in terms of technology yet...but at least credit should be given for what has been achieved thus far...

I appreciate them for their achievements. Do, they in turn appreciate the giver of knowledge even though I know they will still be limited.

Does it truly identify all Rivers, please be 100%, I could be wrong here. Google Map is limited in its technology- I am so sure

OkaiCorne:


Before you conclude on Plato's deluge being mythical, corroborate with scientific and archaeological findings if indeed there were deluges in the ancient past...

Deluge? Yes, localised ones. And with the limits in the ability to see no further than ones immediate vicinity, I can see why people may think their deluge was a world wide one. But one that covered the entire earth? Not likely.

Freeze007:



I appreciate them for their achievements. Do, they in turn appreciate the giver of knowledge even though I know they will still be limited.

Does it truly identify all Rivers, please be 100%, I could be wrong here. Google Map is limited in its technology- I am so sure

with the aid of the GPS technology, google map cover a limited dimension of the earth. i agree not absolute but very much. google map has been useful. thanks to military and aviation sector. the tracking system adopted by mobile giant like APPLE and Samsung is a proof of the progress.

OkaiCorne:


If a boy who lived among the uncivilized and lost tribes of the Amazon dies sometime in 1950 with no evidence of identification or history records to prove his existence....does it mean the boy never existed?

If no, how can you prove the boy once existed in the absence of written materials or videos or any finger prints or any other evidence except from various eye witness accounts?

Sorry to butt in on this one, the boy existed, eye witness accounts say so, and unless one has reasons to disbelieve the eye witness accounts (if they said he had 2 heads for instance, or had 4 eyes or was born by immaculate conceptions), why doubt it?

Basically, some evidence (eye witness accounts, in this case), is required in order to say anything about the boy's existence. Otherwise, who is to say that the exact boy one talks about is the same one who existed?

The only question may be the credibility of the eye witnesses account.

OkaiCorne:


If a boy who lived among the uncivilized and lost tribes of the Amazon dies sometime in 1950 with no evidence of identification or history records to prove his existence....does it mean the boy never existed?

If no, how can you prove the boy once existed in the absence of written materials or videos or any finger prints or any other evidence except from various eye witness accounts?

Nope it doesn't mean he didn't exist. It depends on the type of written materials. We can get to know about the boy based on a careful study of the written materials.

budaatum:

Sorry to butt in on this one, the boy existed, eye witness accounts say so, and unless one has reasons to disbelieve the eye witness accounts (if they said he had 2 heads for instance, or had 4 eyes or was born by immaculate conceptions), why doubt it?

Basically, some evidence (eye witness accounts, in this case), is required in order to say anything about the boy's existence. Otherwise, who is to say that the exact boy one talks about is the same one who existed?

The only question may be the credibility of the eye witnesses account.

Very good, so at this point... I expect you would place more reliance on a consistent feedback from different eye witnesses right? particularly focusing on the consistencies in their narratives to get the facts on ground abi?

Also bear in mind there might be parts of the feedback you get from the different eye witnesses...but however the consistent part of their story would indicate the fact this boy once existed, right?

dalaman:


Nope it doesn't mean he didn't exist. It depends on the type of written materials. We can get to know about the boy based on a careful study of the written materials.

I've ruled out written materials as a source of evidence in the question I asked...the only evidence are various eye witness accounts...

OkaiCorne:


I've ruled out written materials as a source of evidence in the question I asked...the only evidence are various eye witness accounts...

Depending on the credibility of the eye witness account.

dalaman:


Depending on the credibility of the eye witness account.

Very good, and the perfect acid test for assessing the credibility of these eye witness accounts are consistencies in their stories ...even though on a granular level there might be differences on the feedback you get from them if you consider the level of intelligence and understanding of these eye witnesses, ability to express themselves and differences on their perspective on a common matter...

The central theme of their feedback would point to the existence of this boy...

OkaiCorne:


Very good, and the perfect acid test for assessing the credibility of these eye witness accounts are consistencies in their stories ...even though on a granular level there might be differences on the feedback you get from them if you consider the level of intelligence and understanding of these eye witnesses, ability to express themselves and differences on their perspective on a common matter...

The central theme of their feedback would point to the existence of this boy...

Consistency is part of the measure of credibility but it's not all. Accuracy of reporting also matters and other things as well.

dalaman:


Consistency is part of the measure of credibility but it's not all. Accuracy of reporting also matters and other things as well.

Consistency helps a detective in establishing accuracy...yes or no?

Because different angles to a story needs to be considered first for consistency, before an accurate version to the story is figured out by the detective...

This is what I find very annoying about atheists on nairaland...

You are all quick to label someone as a theist or atheist without having the patience of understanding someone's thought process...

I can understand the paranoia you all have by thinking that my findings on Eden automatically validates the Bible account on the story of creation in 6 days...

Whereas I clearly stated I do not believe everything written in the Bible as we know it. The part I can validate through research...I believe, the part I can't, I remain neutral on the matter...

I am sick and tired of all these needles theist vs atheist fight as though it can solve life's challenges everyone is facing...

Have an open mind and seek the Truth...And the truth is not limited to the bible or any religious book or even science in itself...

But these things have elements of truth in them...examine them and pick out patterns cos that's where the truth resides...

OkaiCorne:
This is what I find very annoying about atheists on nairaland...

You are all quick to label someone as a theist or atheist without having the patience of understanding someone's thought process...

I can understand the paranoia you all have by thinking that my findings on Eden automatically validates the Bible account on the story of creation in 6 days...

Whereas I clearly stated I do not believe everything written in the Bible as we know it. The part I can validate through research...I believe, the part I can't, I remain neutral on the matter...

I am sick and tired of all these needles theist vs atheist fight as though it can solve life's challenges everyone is facing...

Have an open mind and seek the Truth...And the truth is not limited to the bible or any religious book or even science in itself...

But these things have elements of truth in them...examine them and pick out patterns cos that's where the truth resides...

cool quote

I don't get where you are going with this. You began with a boy who existed but there was no evidence, then you provided eye witness evidence. Sounds to me like there therefore was evidence that a boy existed all along.

It would be odd if they were making it up that a boy existed. However, people do tend to make things up sometimes, knowing full well they are lying, or trying to prove a point, or are just plain mistaken. Even I allowed myself to be accused of one of those by Ronpet777 just yesterday! And I keep going on about the million pounds in my bank account with which I plan to buy a spanking brand new red Ferrari someday.

Fact is, not all statements are evidence of true facts, so one must be diligent and unbiased in ones search for evidence, as I found to my embarrassment recently.

OkaiCorne:


Very good, so at this point... I expect you would place more reliance on a consistent feedback from different eye witnesses right? particularly focusing on the consistencies in their narratives to get the facts on ground abi?

Also bear in mind there might be parts of the feedback you get from the different eye witnesses...but however the consistent part of their story would indicate the fact this boy once existed, right?

Oh, and the fact that all witnesses say the same thing does not necessarily make what they say true! They may all be mistaken!

OkaiCorne:


Very good, so at this point... I expect you would place more reliance on a consistent feedback from different eye witnesses right? particularly focusing on the consistencies in their narratives to get the facts on ground abi?

Also bear in mind there might be parts of the feedback you get from the different eye witnesses...but however the consistent part of their story would indicate the fact this boy once existed, right?

budaatum:
I don't get where you are going with this. You began with a boy who existed but there was no evidence, then you provided eye witness evidence. Sounds to me like there therefore was evidence that a boy existed all along.

It would be odd if they were making it up that a boy existed. However, people do tend to make things up sometimes, knowing full well they are lying, or trying to prove a point, or are just plain mistaken. Even I allowed myself to be accused of one of those by Ronpet777 just yesterday! And I keep going on about the million pounds in my bank account with which I plan to buy a spanking brand new red Ferrari someday.

Fact is, not all statements are evidence of true facts, so one must be diligent and unbiased in ones search for evidence, as I found to my embarrassment recently.

OkaiCorne:

The Genesis account is a story of re-creation of a pre-existing world put in chaos...

OkaiCorne, Good day Sir. Please i would like you to explain more on the above statement. I once read something similar to the statement you made but it was confusing. Thank You.

Nelson21:


OkaiCorne, Good day Sir. Please i would like you to explain more on the above statement. I once read something similar to the statement you made but it was confusing. Thank You.

I would discuss this later, let me continue with the atheists first, I still have more questions for them...

budaatum:
Oh, and the fact that all witnesses say the same thing does not necessarily make what they say true! They may all be mistaken!

Interesting, so all witnesses could sit down and tell a consistent lie even if you decide to increase your sample size of witnesses abi?

Very very interesting...

budaatum:
I don't get where you are going with this. You began with a boy who existed but there was no evidence, then you provided eye witness evidence. Sounds to me like there therefore was evidence that a boy existed all along.

It would be odd if they were making it up that a boy existed. However, people do tend to make things up sometimes, knowing full well they are lying, or trying to prove a point, or are just plain mistaken. Even I allowed myself to be accused of one of those by Ronpet777 just yesterday! And I keep going on about the million pounds in my bank account with which I plan to buy a spanking brand new red Ferrari someday.

Fact is, not all statements are evidence of true facts, so one must be diligent and unbiased in ones search for evidence, as I found to my embarrassment recently.

If they are all telling a lie, then there should be significant and conflicting variations in the feed back you are getting from most of them.

On a side note, I cannot dispel or totally authenticate the Biblical account of the story of creation in 6 days. But I have a question to ask you that is if you have made up your mind not to believe it me unlike me that has a neutral ground.

I also want to be sure you are up to date with events and findings in the science field...so my question goes thus....

Between the chicken and the egg, which one came first?

Can't answer that question. Sorry.

OkaiCorne:


If they are all telling a lie, then there should be significant and conflicting variations in the feed back you are getting from them.

On a side note, I cannot dispel or totally authenticate the Biblical account of the story of creation in 6 days. But I have a question to ask you that is if you have made up your mind not to believe it me unlike me that has a neutral ground.

I also want to be sure you are up to date with events and findings in the science....so my question goes thus....

Between the chicken and the egg, which one came first?

budaatum:
Can't answer that question. Sorry.

Why sir?

After all, atheists are certain a Creator does not exist...so they should be able answer this question to back up their claims...

You can give others a chance to tackle this...

OkaiCorne:


Interesting, so all witnesses could sit down and tell a consistent lie even if you decide to increase your sample size of witnesses abi?

Very very interesting...

Yes. Evidence and research has shown that people who witness an event can be mistaken in what they report, or be deceived by what they are shown, or not understand what they have seen, or have vested interest so lie, or be on drugs or deluded.

Consistency in witness reports is not evidence of validity. And increasing my witness sample may involve bringing in those less close to the event who just parrot what they are told.

OkaiCorne:


Why sir?

After all, atheists are certain a Creator does not exist...so they should be able answer this question to back up their claims...

You can give others a chance to tackle this...

The question has nothing to do with atheism! And I am not stopping anyone from engaging with it if they so wish!