The Pyramids vis a vis the Flood

Ok, how about you suggest a better way at recording the Biblical history that includes the entirety of human history right down to each individual person and every single detail in a small enough volume so that it could be passed down from one generation to the next.

---

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

Nope - the point is is that if GOD DID do it, there'd be signs that He did it and we wouldn't be having this discussion. Actually I do agree, there would be far better ways of starting over but since this is the method put forth, this is the one we need to deal with.IF He did it after the pyramids, where are the water marks inside the pyramids? Simple question.Or, if He did it before the pyramids were built, who built them? Simple question.For a moment, let's assume the Flood is a theory - in the scientific definition. For it to be true, there cannot be a single piece of evidence that goes against the theory. If evidence were to be found, the theory would have to be adapted to account for that evidence. I've proposed evidence against the theory so either explain how this fits within the theory or adapt the theory to accept the evidence. Simple.This goes for the ToE as well. Evidence that goes against the theory must be accounted for. ANY EVIDENCE! Find something that can't be explained and the theory must by definition be changed. A modern skull in the same strata as a dino's bones would suffice. A formed arrowhead within a dino skeleton would work as well. Any scientist could come up with a million scenarios that would cause serious harm to the ToE.

---

The Bible has to be true - no one could make all that up.

I choose to dodge your questions.Anyway, read my new proposed topic about the literalness of the bible here.

---

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

True. But there's more than one usage of the word "world" in the English language, isn't there? Questionable. But I didn't say that the rest of us weren't talking bollocks, nor that your post was the most ludicrous. This is a thread on Catastrophology, after all, so catastrophic arguments can be expected.I was replying to someone who actually appeared to be unsure whether your post was serious or not, which highlights the problem of parodying Catastrophologists and the kind of things they say.For example, I once saw a post from a YEC on another board which began:

quote:

---

The earth is young, it began after the last ice age....

---

It's hard to outdo the the genuine fundy in the "talking bollocks" department when he or she is on top form.

It's amazing how loud the crickets get when the questions get tough. I've read lame brain justifications for the sorting of fossils in the geologic layers and how 900 cubic miles of material can be moved in a year, but as soon as you ask a simple "what came first" question, everyone leaves.

---

The Bible has to be true - no one could make all that up.

dbs944, it's a question of faith. You want to go to the feary pit of hell or the eternal blissed heaven?

My question has nothing to do with faith or going to hell or heaven. It's what came first, the pyramids or the flood. If the pyramids, where is the evidence of water inside, if the flood, who built the 100 or so pyramids in Eqypt post flood? If you want to just go on faith, I could propose that the world was created yesterday and there's nothing that could be said to disprove it.I also have issues with a god who would damn someone forever for looking at physical evidence and asking 'why?'.

quote:

---

Nope - the point is is that if GOD DID do it, there'd be signs that He did it and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

---

Unless God was a big fat liar and hid all of the evidence.

The typical YEC would put the Flood before the Pyramids. And the earlier Mastaba tombs. In fact before all Egyptian archaeology (which goes back quite a way pasdt the Dynastic period. Many would even say that the limestone of the Giza Plateau was formed after the Flood.Because YECs need to use the Flood to "explain" away the geological and paleontological evidence that refutes their beliefs they have no option. And so the archaeology of Egypt becomes just one more line of evidence that they need to deny.OECs have less of a problem, because they are prepared to stretch out the Biblical chronology (not that that is really viable). They, too would place the Flood earlier - while keeping the dates.

Hi Paul, maybe I am reading your post incorrectly, but to me this.. reads as if we do not have any Egyptian archaeological remains prior to c. 2400 BCE, the time the Bible gives for the Flood.
But there is a wealth of Egyptian archaeological remains before 2400 BCE.Am I reading your post incorrectly?

Yes, you're misreading it.You need to remember that I was talking about what YECs would say, not the real facts. YEC's are pretty much stuck with the order of events as I describe it, because it's the only option that is not so hopelessly bad that even a YEC would hesitate to accept it. As a consequence they have to reject the dates provided by archaeology for the first few dynasties AND for the pre-dynastic remains.And this is part of my point - not only must they move the building of the pyramids by a few hundred years, they also need to redate and account for ALL the precedign archaeological material. Just talking about the pyramids is letting them off too lightly !

No probs Paul.I remember Ray trying to 'double up' 600 years of Egyptian history a while back, and Rohl has essentially tried the same, although I'm sure Rohl was in it for the money.

are any of you aware that the pyramid specifically the one at Giza was originally covered with casing stones?

Yes. What does that have to do with anything, or are you going to suggest the flood washed them away? In that case, how come the egyptians never mentioned that, or even better, how come there were even any egyptians at all after the event?

---

I hunt for the truth

please don't tell me that this is the level of discussion here.per the very first post in this thread, the question is posed.why are there no watermarks on the outside of the Great Pyramid?and no i am not suggesting a ridiculous thing that the flood washed them away.it is well known that arabs took to casing stones to rebuild the mosques in Cairo.