- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote How are you getting on with the Kiwi explanation? Not from aukland. First, I had to find out where that was.
I think I do remember answering this before, or at least attempting to. You couldn't find where you originally asked it could you?
It's 1:15 here, and I need sleep.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egypt
- Ancient Egypt was a civilization in eastern North Africa concentrated along the middle to lower reaches of the Nile River in what is now the modern nation of Egypt. The civilization began around 3150 BC with the political unification of Upper and Lower Egypt under the first pharaoh, and it developed over the next three millennia. Its history occurred in a series of stable periods, known as kingdoms, separated by periods of relative instability known as Intermediate Periods. After the end of the last kingdom, known as the New Kingdom, the civilization of ancient Egypt entered a period of slow, steady decline, during which Egypt was conquered by a succession of foreign powers. The rule of the pharaohs officially ended in 31 BC when the early Roman Empire conquered Egypt and made it a province.
If the flood took place around 2300 BCE, how do you explain this? After all, Moses had to deliver the Israelites from a Pharaoh, right? Did one of Noah's kids go back to Egypt, look around, and say “Shame to let these pyramids go to waste! Plus, I'd love to restore to be the new pharaoh”.
Quote (kejonn @ April 01 2008,20:42) From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egypt - Ancient Egypt was a civilization in eastern North Africa concentrated along the middle to lower reaches of the Nile River in what is now the modern nation of Egypt. The civilization began around 3150 BC with the political unification of Upper and Lower Egypt under the first pharaoh, and it developed over the next three millennia. Its history occurred in a series of stable periods, known as kingdoms, separated by periods of relative instability known as Intermediate Periods. After the end of the last kingdom, known as the New Kingdom, the civilization of ancient Egypt entered a period of slow, steady decline, during which Egypt was conquered by a succession of foreign powers. The rule of the pharaohs officially ended in 31 BC when the early Roman Empire conquered Egypt and made it a province.
If the flood took place around 2300 BCE, how do you explain this? After all, Moses had to deliver the Israelites from a Pharaoh, right? Did one of Noah's kids go back to Egypt, look around, and say “Shame to let these pyramids go to waste! Plus, I'd love to restore to be the new pharaoh”.
There are remains of Australian Aboriginals to be found there from at least 40,000BCE to 2300BCE, and from 2300BCE to the present. How did Noah's progeny repopulate Australia with exactly the same race of people, as if nothing had happened at all?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Australia
Could it be because nothing happened at all?
Stuart
I blame that Satan character. He probably took a few down to hell for protection until the flood was over. Sneaky devil!
The infamous Tower of Babel story is next on our plate.
- Gen 11:1 Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words.
Gen 11:2 It came about as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.
Gen 11:3 They said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks and burn them thoroughly.” And they used brick for stone, and they used tar for mortar.
Gen 11:4 They said, “Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.”
Gen 11:5 The LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built.
Gen 11:6 The LORD said, “Behold, they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them.
Gen 11:7 “Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another's speech.”
Gen 11:8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from there over the face of the whole earth; and they stopped building the city.
Gen 11:9 Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the LORD confused the language of the whole earth; and from there the LORD scattered them abroad over the face of the whole earth.Here's what we have:
(1) This takes place after the flood. Since only Noah's family survived, this would make complete sense. See below.
(2) Why is God so scared of people supposedly being able to build a tower that reaches heaven? This sounds like the fear of a tyrant who is being challenged so he uses his muscle to put people back in their places.The flood, according to many Christian theologists, took place around 2300 BCE. Using that date, here's some problems with the set-up of the “whole world” speaking one language. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_language
- The chronology of written Sumerian can be divided into several periods.
- Archaic Sumerian — 3100 – 2600/2500 B.C.
- Old or Classical Sumerian — 2600/2500–2300/2200 B.C.
- Neo-Sumerian — 2300/2200 – 2000 B.C.
- Late Sumerian — 2000 – 1800/1700 B.C.
- Post-Sumerian — 1800/1700 – 100 B.C.
Alternatively, some versions of the chronology may omit the Late Sumerian phase and regard all texts written after 2000 BC as Post-Sumerian. The term “Post-Sumerian” is meant to refer to the time when the language was already extinct and only preserved by Babylonians and Assyrians as a liturgical and classical language (for religious, artistic and scholarly purposes). The extinction has been traditionally and roughly dated to the fall of the Third Dynasty of Ur, the last predominantly Sumerian state in Mesopotamia, about 2000 BC; however, some scholars believe that Sumerian persisted as a spoken language in a small part of Southern Mesopotamia (Nippur and its surroundings) until as late as 1700 BC. We are fortunate to have many literary texts and bilingual Sumerian-Akkadian lexical lists from the Late Sumerian period scribal school of Nippur. This, along with the particularly intensive official and literary use of the language in Akkadian-speaking states during the same time, is the basis for the distinction between a Late Sumerian period and all subsequent time.
Now did Noah and his family speak Sumerian? Because, as it stands, the Sumerian language originated before the flood and hundreds of years after. But wait, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian_language
- Akkadian (lišānum akkadītum) or Assyro-Babylonian[1] was a Semitic language (part of the greater Afro-Asiatic language family) spoken in ancient Iraq, particularly by the Assyrians and Babylonians. The earliest attested Semitic language, it used the cuneiform writing system derived ultimately from ancient Sumerian, an unrelated language isolate. The name of the language is derived from the city of Akkad, a major centre of Mesopotamian civilization.
- Old Akkadian — 2500 – 1950 BCE
- Old Babylonian/Old Assyrian — 1950 – 1530 BCE
- Middle Babylonian/Middle Assyrian — 1530 – 1000 BCE
- Neo-Babylonian/Neo-Assyrian — 1000 – 600 BCE
- Late Babylonian — 600 BC – 100 CE
Akkadian is divided into several varieties based on geography and historical period:[2]
According to this, the Akkadian language was in existance prior to the flood, and existed until 100 CE. But this disagrees with the bible that said all people spoke one language.
Now, one more “monkey wrench”. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_language
- Egyptian is an Afro-Asiatic language most closely related to Berber, Semitic, and Beja. The language survived until the 5th century AD in the form of Demotic and until the late 17th century AD in the form of Coptic. Written records of the Egyptian language have been dated from about 3200 BC, making it one of the oldest recorded languages known. The national language of modern day Egypt is Egyptian Arabic, which gradually replaced Coptic Egyptian as the language of daily life in the centuries after the Muslim conquest of Egypt. Coptic is still used as a liturgical language by the Coptic Church, and reportedly has a handful of native speakers today.
- Archaic Egyptian (before 2600 BC)
- Old Egyptian (2600 BC – 2000 BC)
- Middle Egyptian (2000 BC – 1300 BC)
- Late Egyptian (1300 BC – 700 BC)
- Demotic (7th century BC – 5th century AD)
- Coptic (4th century AD – 17th century AD)
Scholars group the Egyptian language into 6 major chronological divisions:
Egyptian writing in the form of label and signs has been dated to 3200 BC. These early texts are generally lumped together under the term “Archaic Egyptian.”
As you can see, Egyptian language persisted past the flood as well, calling into question again the idea that all the people spoke one language.
Quote There are remains of Australian Aboriginals to be found there from at least 40,000BCE to 2300BCE, and from 2300BCE to the present. How did Noah's progeny repopulate Australia with exactly the same race of people, as if nothing had happened at all? I have a hypothetical question for you stu.
“If” there was a flood as described in the Bible in which water came from the “heavenly ocean” (deluge) as described in the Bible, and there was a substantially more moisture in the atmosphere, would this alter or effect radio carbon dating?
“There are two basic assumptions in the radiocarbon method. One is that the carbon 14 concentration in the carbon dioxide cycle is constant. The other is that the cosmic ray flux has been essentially constant—at least on a scale of centuries.”—*J.L. Kulp, “The Carbon 14 Method of Age Determination,” in Scientific Monthly, November 1952, p. 261.
Some have suggested that prior to the Flood the waters above the expanse shielded out some of the harmful radiation and that, with the waters gone, cosmic radiation genetically harmful to man increased.
(interestingly, according to the Bible, man's lifespan shortened quite a bit around this time.)
However, the Bible is silent on the matter. Incidentally, any change in radiation would have altered the rate of formation of radioactive carbon-14 to such an extent as to invalidate all radiocarbon dates prior to the Flood.Is that not correct?
To me, it seems you're trying to prove that something is wrong, but if that something is right, it invalidates the very thing you're trying to prove. Hence…. a circle.
Of course, there's many methods of dating. But radio carbon 14 seems to be the most common and considered the most accurate. Yet, it has a few assumptions built into it, does it not. And one assumption, is that there was no flood.
So, how can you use this to prove there was no flood?
I notice you use scientific works that are 30-50 years old when you quote things David. Is that wise in 2008?
Here's a question on the flood: what exactly was its purpose? After all, we have had many wicked people since then. Obviously its was not meant to clean the earth of wickedness then. So was it God just pitching a temper tantrum?
Seriously, the bible does much injustice to the Almighty.
Hi David
Quote I have a hypothetical question for you stu.
“If” there was a flood as described in the Bible in which water came from the “heavenly ocean” (deluge) as described in the Bible, and there was a substantially more moisture in the atmosphere, would this alter or effect radio carbon dating?
Quote “There are two basic assumptions in the radiocarbon method. One is that the carbon 14 concentration in the carbon dioxide cycle is constant. The other is that the cosmic ray flux has been essentially constant—at least on a scale of centuries.”—*J.L. Kulp, “The Carbon 14 Method of Age Determination,” in Scientific Monthly, November 1952, p. 261.
Some have suggested that prior to the Flood the waters above the expanse shielded out some of the harmful radiation and that, with the waters gone, cosmic radiation genetically harmful to man increased.
(interestingly, according to the Bible, man's lifespan shortened quite a bit around this time.)
However, the Bible is silent on the matter. Incidentally, any change in radiation would have altered the rate of formation of radioactive carbon-14 to such an extent as to invalidate all radiocarbon dates prior to the Flood.
Is that not correct? Quote To me, it seems you're trying to prove that something is wrong, but if that something is right, it invalidates the very thing you're trying to prove. Hence…. a circle.
Stop! No more! I’m wetting myself. Black, pot, kettle! Do JWs take courses in this stuff? What a waste of lifetime.Quote Of course, there's many methods of dating. But radio carbon 14 seems to be the most common and considered the most accurate. Yet, it has a few assumptions built into it, does it not. And one assumption, is that there was no flood. So, how can you use this to prove there was no flood? You’re right, your questions are hysterically hypothetical!
What are you thinking of dating by radiocarbon methods?
kejonn is right. You need to update your knowledge of modern dating techniques.
How are you getting on with the post-flood Kiwi explanation?
Stuart
Quote (kejonn @ April 02 2008,03:18) As you can see, Egyptian language persisted past the flood as well, calling into question again the idea that all the people spoke one language.
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/may04.htmldescribes an enterprising effort by one fellow to model populations going forwards to other civilisations from the supposed split at Babel.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ April 02 2008,06:33) Quote (kejonn @ April 02 2008,03:18) As you can see, Egyptian language persisted past the flood as well, calling into question again the idea that all the people spoke one language.
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/may04.htmldescribes an enterprising effort by one fellow to model populations going forwards to other civilisations from the supposed split at Babel.
Stuart
Without looking at that, what about the evidence of Egyptians well before the flood?I'm curious, but I've always wondered at this verse in the bible:
- Exo 4:21 The LORD said to Moses, “When you go back to Egypt see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders which I have put in your power; but I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go.
Why would God purposely manipulate someone to the point where He must then kill all the Egyptian firstborn?
Another point to ponder: cuneiform was used by at least three people's that could have been in contact with the Israelites. In fact, the bible says that Moses was a prince of Egypt so he would have been exposed to the use of cuneiform.
So why did the Israelites not use cuneiform to record things? Why is most of the history found in a book that has been edited over time?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 02 2008,12:39) Hi KJ,
Why?
Who knows?
Did it happen?
Yes.
It is written.
In a book by several anonymous authors that has been edited many times over. Overwhelming evidence shows that there were several different versions of the Pentateuch in existance. And we all know there were many more books written about Jesus that never made the cut.I'd be much more impressed with the cuneiform. Written in stone, hard to edit. Anyone can come hundreds of years later and say whatever they want about supposed history if there is nothing to refute said history.
Hey, it was men who recorded the bible man. After all, could this come from God?
- Exo 21:20 “If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished.
Exo 21:21 “If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.Basically this states that slaves are not of consequence and less than human. Thus you can beat them and if they die, you will simply be punished (doesn't list the punishment). However, if the slave lives, no big deal because he is just a piece if meat you own.
I like this one:
- Exo 21:7 “If a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do.
I don't even need to say anything else about that one.
Quote You’re right, your questions are hysterically hypothetical! What are you thinking of dating by radiocarbon methods?
I guess I'll take your inability to answer the questions as a “yes.”
But, if it wasn't radio carbon dating, what type of dating was used in that instance?
We're speaking of 40,000 years if I remember. Since this is a very short time frame, carbon dating isn't out of the question.
“There are a number of dating techniques that have short ranges and are so used for historical or archaeological studies. One of the best-known is the carbon-14 (C14) radiometric technique.“
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_datingOf course, there are other short term methods. Why don't you tell me which one was used to come up with the 40,000?
Then, I'll explain to everyone how reliable we know it to be.
And, if it turns out that it's radioactive dating of the C-14, then my point will have been very valid.
It's like you're trying to determine if fred is a liar.
And you do this by asking fred. Fred says “no.”
Obviously, a problem here.Same problem potentially exists IF the flood happened as described in the Bible.
You state that the flood didn't happen because of dating techniques that show humans living 40,000 years ago.
But if the flood did happen, and that water was in the atmosphere, it may well affect the very technique that you're trying to use to dismiss the flood.So what technique was used?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
