[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For all those who understand

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Alex here, I'm back. I'll make a SAFemail ASAP for those who'd like to contact me. 1-8-16

File: 1457590170101.jpg (106.76 KB, 640x384, 5:3, risen[1].jpg)

9a5730 No.259752

Not a christfag but just saw pic related and really liked it. Are there any other good Christian movies that are historically accurate (outside of the religious parts of course)?

Bonus points if it's set Before Christ or right after.

689bb0 No.259762

File: 1457596998797.jpg (22.42 KB, 510x371, 510:371, talio gola.jpg)

>(outside of the religious parts of course)?


5d413b No.259763

File: 1457599024208.jpg (46.07 KB, 550x404, 275:202, *dibs bedora xDDD*.jpg)

>(outside of the religious parts of course)?


f491e1 No.259789

>>259762

>>259763

Sorry I don't believe in shit like the great flood or anything else that basic history says is wrong.


51c932 No.259790

>>259789

When you next see this fellow Mr. Basic History tell him I said he's a hack fraud.


2d9024 No.260049

What about the Passion of the Christ? I'm sure parts of it are inaccurate but at least they attempted to use the languages of the time, and the brutal way the crucifixion is portrayed is apparently pretty accurate.


1afe5a No.260053

File: 1457731414910.jpg (259.45 KB, 700x449, 700:449, noah111.jpg)

Speaking of le basic history, what ever happened with this?


941f44 No.260054

Want to watch movie.

If anyone has a working stream please post


941f44 No.260055

>>260053

Proven to be real, turkey build a museum for it and just as expected its censored in western media.


7dde82 No.260056

>>260053

What are A, B, C, and D here?


18efeb No.260066

>>260055

I wouldn't even be surprised, western media seems hell bent on censoring anything that might strengthen the Christian faith or prove parts of the Bible real.


1d2621 No.260076

>>260053

Wouldn't this just be pareidolia?

t. skeptic


1afe5a No.260082

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>260076

I'm not too well educated on it but apparently the measurements match up exactly with the Bible. The last news I've heard on it was from a Chinese expedition, supposedly they entered the Ark and found a wooden interior. Video related.


8125b2 No.260115

File: 1457752269890.jpg (82.53 KB, 750x422, 375:211, la-ol-jesus-wife-forgery-s….jpg)

>>260082

We need to be careful about these kinds of things as they (like most "evidence" for natural selection evolution) have been found false.

http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/bogus.html

But this is very interesting, and I find it odd that the only major article I saw regarding it was essentially a desperate hit piece by National Geographic, who went so far as to turn to a "young earth Christian scholar" in order to somehow rebuke the radiocarbon-dating.

>Skepticism of the new Noah's ark claim extends to at least one scholar who interprets the Bible literally.

>Biologist Todd Wood is director of the Center for Origins Research at Bryan College in Tennessee, which pursues biology in a creationist framework.

>As a creationist, Wood believes God created Earth and its various life-forms out of nothing roughly 6,000 years ago.

>"If you accept a young chronology for the Earth … then radiocarbon dating has to be reinterpreted," because the method often yields dates much older than 6,000 years, Wood said.

>Radiocarbon dating estimates the ages of organic objects by measuring the radioisotope carbon 14, which is known to decay at a set rate over time. The method is generally thought to reach its limit with objects about 60,000 years old. Earth is generally thought to be about four and a half billion years old.

>Across the board, radiocarbon dates need to be recalibrated, Wood believes, to reflect shorter time frames.

This coming from National Geographic, the typical evolution-is-perfectly-legit promoters. Find it odd that they needed to turn to people like this, people they would typically mock and deride with impunity, in order to get something against this discovery.

Is it actually legit? Is it not? We'll find out eventually, but the media won't report on it until it's as solid as gravity.

P.S. Remember that "Jesus and His wife" papyrus they supposedly discovered that was ALL OVER the news a few years ago? You know, on newspaper covers, on the Daily Show (featuring John LIEbowitz) etc.

Turns out they jumped the gun hard on that, because despite all media outlets hailing this discovery, it was a bonified falsified hunk of crap:

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-jesus-wife-forgery-sexism-20140516-story.html

Then they claimed sexism once this fact was made known.

"SCIENTIFIC" COMMUNITY




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]