Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-26-2017 10:56 PM
416 online now:
Coyote, LamarkNewAge (2 members, 414 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 801,994 Year: 6,600/21,208 Month: 2,361/2,634 Week: 24/525 Day: 24/11 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
3Next
Author Topic:   A Bronze Standard
jar
Member
Posts: 28434
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 16 of 41 (788424)
07-31-2016 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by LamarkNewAge
07-31-2016 1:12 PM


Re: What about the "sight to the blind" issue, Faith?
Please stop posting utter irrelevancies to yet another thread.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2016 1:12 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2016 2:21 PM jar has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 17 of 41 (788429)
07-31-2016 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by jar
07-31-2016 1:15 PM


Re: What about the "sight to the blind" issue, Faith?
quote:

Please stop posting utter irrelevancies to yet another thread.

But you said this in the opening post.

quote:

Supposedly the Biblical flood, whichever of the Biblical Flood stories is considered, happened about 2500-2000 BCE.
That firmly places the Biblical Flood, if it had happened, during the Bronze Age.

Sorry to break it to you bud, but the Bronze Age started around 3000 BCE.

Exodus 12:27 and Galatians 3 (see verse 6 and 17 especially) make the difference between the Septuagint having the flood during or after the Chalcolithic Age.

Solomon lived in the late 2nd millennium (not mid 10th century) according to a strict Biblical chronology.

The Exodus was 440 years before the Temple in the Septuagint.see 1 Kings 6. The Massorah was 480.

The Massorah has the Israelites in Egypt for 400/430 years. Not the Septuagint (which Paul used).

I almost think you sound just as ignorant as Faith (or worse) jar. At least she admited there is an issue of difference(she said so in another thread) between the Septuagint and Massorah. You act like the issue doesn't even exist.

Did you even see my wikipedia link showing the differing dates for the Patriarchs?

I didn't make you post the topic of the Bronze Age jar. You choose to do that yourself.

The Massorah and Septuagint can be used in a combo fashion to put the flood back to around 3100 BCE, which is earlier than some would put the Bronze Age in the Middle East (where it started earlier than anywhere else).

Jar really should be forced to work out the chronology before he proceeds. He needs to show the various chronological possibilities then decide on which he prefers. He made a claim of the Bronze Age being the date of the flood. I won't be the referee though.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by jar, posted 07-31-2016 1:15 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by jar, posted 07-31-2016 2:28 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 19 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2016 7:03 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28434
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 18 of 41 (788430)
07-31-2016 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by LamarkNewAge
07-31-2016 2:21 PM


Re: What about the "sight to the blind" issue, Faith?
Stop posting irrelevancies, NOW.

This is a science forum and what the different bible texts or extra biblical commentary say is irrelevant.

If you continue I will have to ask that you be banned from this thread.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2016 2:21 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9324
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 19 of 41 (788443)
07-31-2016 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by LamarkNewAge
07-31-2016 2:21 PM


Re: What about the "sight to the blind" issue, Faith?
supposedly the Biblical flood, whichever of the Biblical Flood stories is considered, happened about 2500-2000 BCE.
That firmly places the Biblical Flood, if it had happened, during the Bronze Age.

Sorry to break it to you bud, but the Bronze Age started around 3000 BCE.

Why is it that you cannot see that those two statements do not conflict? The Bronze age starting in 3000BCE and lasting nearly 2000 years is perfectly consistent with the dates assigned by fundamentalists to the flood as listed by jar.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2016 2:21 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2016 7:30 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

    
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 20 of 41 (788447)
07-31-2016 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by NoNukes
07-31-2016 7:03 PM


Re: What about the "sight to the blind" issue, Faith?
I'm saying that the Septuagint text can be used to push the flood back to 3200 BCE (if one selectively uses the parts of the Massorah that have a higher chronology than the Septuagint, while largely using the Septuagint), which would be earlier than Egyptian (and Levantine)historians place the start of the Bronze Age (the scientific community always has dated the start of the Bronze Age earlier than the historians).

It makes a big difference because of the written record issue, plus other issues. The Tower of Babel date then becomes relevant also.

Many fundamentalists place the Flood and Tower of Babel at about 3000 BCE. They talk about the Sumerians appearing suddenly around 3000 BCE and connect the language to a new one created by God during the Babel event.

This is my last post on this thread though.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2016 7:03 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by JonF, posted 07-31-2016 8:58 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 21 of 41 (788452)
07-31-2016 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by LamarkNewAge
07-31-2016 7:30 PM


Re: What about the "sight to the blind" issue, Faith?
I guess you think that January 1, 3000 BCE everyone dropped their neolithic tools and picked up bronze ones? Some sources place the beginning at 3,300 BCE. One way or another the transition took centuries and was different in different places.

Of course you realize that you are arguing that Noye had less technology available than he would later?

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2016 7:30 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2016 9:04 PM JonF has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 22 of 41 (788454)
07-31-2016 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by JonF
07-31-2016 8:58 PM


My point was about the text used by New Testament quotations.
It was a Septuagint type of text.

And it had a higher chronology (though not until the Patriarchal Period, as it was actually lower by over 250 years till then).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by JonF, posted 07-31-2016 8:58 PM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by JonF, posted 07-31-2016 9:12 PM LamarkNewAge has responded
 Message 24 by jar, posted 07-31-2016 9:13 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 23 of 41 (788455)
07-31-2016 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by LamarkNewAge
07-31-2016 9:04 PM


Re: My point was about the text used by New Testament quotations.
No connection to what I wrote, I see.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2016 9:04 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by LamarkNewAge, posted 08-01-2016 10:09 AM JonF has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28434
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 24 of 41 (788456)
07-31-2016 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by LamarkNewAge
07-31-2016 9:04 PM


Re: My point was about the text used by New Testament quotations.
And the key point is that what particular texts say is irrelevant. All that is relevant is what date the believers place on when the Biblical flood would have happened and that is generally 2500-2000 BCE.

I does not matter if the dates are correct or accurate based on any given text; all that is important is for the flood believers to say "It happened X years ago."


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2016 9:04 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Coyote, posted 07-31-2016 11:08 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5540
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 25 of 41 (788468)
07-31-2016 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by jar
07-31-2016 9:13 PM


Re: My point was about the text used by New Testament quotations.
...all that is important is for the flood believers to say "It happened X years ago."

And no two creationists seem to place the flood at the same time. Each has a favorite time.

And when shown that the evidence contradicts that time (i.e., the evidence shows there was no global flood at that time) creationists just change the time. Dates range from about 4,250 years ago to hundreds of millions of years ago. If one date is disproved they just pick another, eventually ending up where they started. Around and around we go.

This just shows that creationists are relying on belief, and trying to fit evidence into that belief--no matter how poor the fit or how many are the contradictions.

And then they claim to be doing science!


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 07-31-2016 9:13 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Faith, posted 08-01-2016 9:53 AM Coyote has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 23978
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 26 of 41 (788489)
08-01-2016 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Coyote
07-31-2016 11:08 PM


Re: My point was about the text used by New Testament quotations.
And no two creationists seem to place the flood at the same time. Each has a favorite time.

This is false. What "creationists" are you referring to? Most creationists I trust accept a date around 4300 to 4500 years ago, and the only reason I don't have a fixed date is that I keep forgetting how all the numbers add up, but it is certainly possible to pin it down from the Biblical information based on the genealogies given in the Bible. Other dates would have no biblical support.

And when shown that the evidence contradicts that time (i.e., the evidence shows there was no global flood at that time) creationists just change the time.

Nonsense. Who does this? A reference please.

Dates range from about 4,250 years ago to hundreds of millions of years ago. If one date is disproved they just pick another, eventually ending up where they started. Around and around we go.

Oh nonsense. I've stuck to the date range above all along as is common among YECs.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.

2Cr 10:4-5 (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God...

Political Correctness is Cultural Marxism


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Coyote, posted 07-31-2016 11:08 PM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Coyote, posted 08-01-2016 10:33 AM Faith has responded

    
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 27 of 41 (788493)
08-01-2016 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by JonF
07-31-2016 9:12 PM


Re: My point was about the text used by New Testament quotations.
quote:

No connection to what I wrote, I see.

Look who is talking.

How exactly was your post anything but a non-sequitur response to what I was saying?

I brought it back to the actual issue (that I was faithfully covering) of jar's OP (which he wants to disown now).

But, on your (off-topic) non-sequitur response, I should (go ahead and respond by) tell(ing) you that an issue relevant would be The Sumerian Problem.

www.google.com

The Sumerian Problem (should be search term)

Here is the only creationist hit that came up on the first page.

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/...age-in-Ancient-Sumer.aspx

I am very happy to tell you that this is as good of a creationist case as they will find (it is a quite good historian; I read a book on Egypt by the article author, Charles Aling PhD, and it was very well-informed), and it uses the time period of the pre Bronze Age (transitioning) as the point of interest. Uses the conventional chronology too.

And though the author doesn't mention the Septuagint (so far as I know), it is clear the Flood is viewed as predating 3000 BCE as Babel isn't proposed to have happened until about 3000 BCE by the author.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by JonF, posted 07-31-2016 9:12 PM JonF has not yet responded

    
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5540
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.5


(2)
Message 28 of 41 (788494)
08-01-2016 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Faith
08-01-2016 9:53 AM


Re: My point was about the text used by New Testament quotations.
Coyote writes:

And no two creationists seem to place the flood at the same time. Each has a favorite time.

Faith writes:

This is false. What "creationists" are you referring to? Most creationists I trust accept a date around 4300 to 4500 years ago, and the only reason I don't have a fixed date is that I keep forgetting how all the numbers add up, but it is certainly possible to pin it down from the Biblical information based on the genealogies given in the Bible. Other dates would have no biblical support.


If you accept a date in the 4300-4500 range, why are you concerned with rocks and geological strata? Those are all far older.

Coyote writes:

And when shown that the evidence contradicts that time (i.e., the evidence shows there was no global flood at that time) creationists just change the time.

Faith writes:

Nonsense. Who does this? A reference please.


When no evidence for a global flood is found in soils which date around 4300 years ago, you and many other creationists look to rock layers dated many million to hundreds of millions of years ago.

Coyote writes:

Dates range from about 4,250 years ago to hundreds of millions of years ago. If one date is disproved they just pick another, eventually ending up where they started. Around and around we go.

Faith writes:

Oh nonsense. I've stuck to the date range above all along as is common among YECs.


You may think you are sticking to the 4300-4500 date range but your claims for a global flood rely on geological strata that are millions of years old.

And in order to perform these mental gymnastics you must use the most tortured of rubber band years, compressing billions of years into a few thousand. Unfortunately for those claims, all the scientific evidence shows that they are incorrect, but as those claims are based on belief rather than evidence this seems to be of no consequence.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Faith, posted 08-01-2016 9:53 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 08-01-2016 11:57 AM Coyote has acknowledged this reply

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 29 of 41 (788495)
08-01-2016 10:48 AM


My last post on this thread.
Just so this thread isn't one giant non-sequitur type of argument from ignorance, let me clear something up.

quote:

Young Earth creationism (YEC) is the religious belief[1] that the Universe, Earth and all life on Earth were created by direct acts of God between 5,700 and 10,000 years ago.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism


One argument is that Matthew 1 has more names in the Adam to Abraham family history than the Genesis text does.

The argument that there are gaps in the family history is the main reason.

The Septuagint (which Jesus and Paul used) is a major reason why many will place the Flood back before 3000 BCE.

Jar has already said "2,500 to 2000" B.C. for the flood, but my Babel/Sumerian link came to a creationist who puts the Flood around 1000 years or so earlier than jar's date.

(Faith and jar agree on this issue, and others here seem confused so be that as it is...)


Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by jar, posted 08-01-2016 10:54 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28434
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 30 of 41 (788496)
08-01-2016 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by LamarkNewAge
08-01-2016 10:48 AM


Re: My last post on this thread.
And the fact is that even if the flood were a thousand years earlier it would still fall within the Bronze Age and so your dating is still irrelevant.

But thanks for playing.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by LamarkNewAge, posted 08-01-2016 10:48 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by LamarkNewAge, posted 08-01-2016 11:20 AM jar has not yet responded

  
Prev1
2
3Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017