Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is the Bible the Word of God II?
John
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 97 (13184)
07-09-2002 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Martin J. Koszegi
07-09-2002 7:43 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Martin J. Koszegi:
Regarding the population growth following Noah's Flood; just as all of Adam's and Eve's sons and daughters are not registered in the scriptures, Noah's sons' offspring were not all mentioned. Just as Cain went out and married some woman (his sister) who is not mentioned by name, there were plenty of other sons and daughters born to Noah's sons who are not listed in the scriptures. I believe that the potentials of this "perspective" on the post Flood world, could handle the historical problem you were posing.

I put a great deal of effort into this very subject in another thread You may find it interesting.
------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-09-2002 7:43 PM Martin J. Koszegi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-10-2002 4:52 PM John has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 76 of 97 (13264)
07-10-2002 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Martin J. Koszegi
07-10-2002 4:52 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Martin J. Koszegi:

If I understood your response(s), you conceded that there may have been a gap between the Flood and the Pharaoh culture of Egypt that exceeded 1000 years, right?
It isn't that I need to condede anything really. Its that the longer the timeframe the more you stretch the biblical narrative. Stretch it too far and it breaks. This is not a problem for me. I think a thousand years is dangerously close to that breaking point. Four or five hundred years is much more realistic.
quote:
Also, regarding the mortality rate issue: the closer in time that a culture is to when physical corruption BEGAN (Adam's Fall), the more resilient its people were to the causes of death. The physical environment may have also been significantly more likely to increase mortality rates the further one gets from the time of Adam. The decline in the range of years a woman could produce offspring could easily have been far more years than what the discussion reflected, from possibly an incredible number of years for each woman immediately after the Flood, tapering down over time to what is indicated by the details of Abram's wife.
Evidence Martin? For any of this?
------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-10-2002 4:52 PM Martin J. Koszegi has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 97 (13592)
07-15-2002 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Martin J. Koszegi
07-15-2002 3:27 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Martin J. Koszegi:
I don't believe that this indicates a problem other than the tendency of Fallen creatures to reject the ways of the true God.
But you've forgotten something else about human nature. Fear. A god that had just destroyed the world would have fear on his side, and have it in spades. This is the kind of fear that lasts far longer than a few hundred years.
quote:
And very early groups could've branched out to begin in new areas that became alienated from the influence of Noah.
There isn't enough time for the groups to grow, split and grow again to the population densities required.
------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-15-2002 3:27 PM Martin J. Koszegi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-16-2002 3:07 PM John has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 86 of 97 (13646)
07-16-2002 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Martin J. Koszegi
07-16-2002 4:04 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Martin J. Koszegi:
QUOTE:
To obtain a more accurate estimate we could take the nine generations from Shem to Abraham and calculate each son begetting 5 sons. That would give us 1,953,125 male descendents of Shem. If we do the same for Japheth and Ham we arrive at 5,859,375 males. Again taking a 1;1 male to female ratio, we arrive at a world population estimate of 11,718,750 people.
Reply:
Indeed, and further, the above analysis unnecessarily projects limitations (numbers of generations within a time span for Japeth and Ham, based on Shem's line; limiting the equation to 5 sons or to only those mentioned by name in the biblical record; for example). We're certainly getting warmer.
In remembrance that only Jesus must be reckoned with . . . (martinkoszegi@yahoo.com)
--Marty

But you fellas are ignoring all of the factors that limit reproduction in the real world. Most notable, food supply.
------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-16-2002 4:04 PM Martin J. Koszegi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-16-2002 7:08 PM John has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 97 (13649)
07-16-2002 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Martin J. Koszegi
07-16-2002 3:07 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Martin J. Koszegi:
[b]What makes one wonder a bit, is why people (even today) who are every bit as convinced of the reality of God as Noah's family was, would live as though they won't have to give an account of their lives to God.[/QUOTE]
[/b]
I don't believe anyone today could be as convinced as Noah's family must certainly have been, but this is not a point I can argue really.
[QUOTE][b]Is it possible that there was enough time for people to leave the original groups before the original groups grew substantially, to then settle in Egypt and multiply?[/QUOTE]
[/b]
You would be starting out with very tiny groups-- four or five individuals. This is not much of gene pool. Even then, populations don't grow at the rates required. Too many other factors limit the growth rate.
------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-16-2002 3:07 PM Martin J. Koszegi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-16-2002 5:47 PM John has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 97 (13657)
07-16-2002 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Martin J. Koszegi
07-16-2002 5:47 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Martin J. Koszegi:
Of course, you're assuming that what you say here is true.
I did a considerable amount of reseach on population growth not too long ago, in response to a debate on another thread. Not to suggest that you should merely take my word for it....
quote:
There are very legitimate ways of disagreeing with what you say here.

Ok. I'm game. What are those legitimate ways?
------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-16-2002 5:47 PM Martin J. Koszegi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-16-2002 7:20 PM John has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 97 (13673)
07-16-2002 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Martin J. Koszegi
07-16-2002 7:20 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Martin J. Koszegi:
What's to stop the earth from becoming lush with an incredible abundance of food once the seeds start to grow all over the place after Noah's Flood?
First there is the question of the survival of the seeds themselves under the conditions of the flood. Most seeds do not survive under water for very long, particularly important in this case are the grains. Grains absorb water and burst, or just simply rot. Try it.
Of course, they could plant seeds kept on the ark but this wouldn't solve the problems I am about to mention. Nor would it account for the survival of the seeds of inedible plants.
Secondly, there is the topsoil. There wouldn't be any after such a catastrophic flood.
Third, what dirt is laying around ought to be very salty due to the ocean surges onto land. Not many plants like that environment, though some do.
Fourth, the environment would be a mess (especially if you subscribe to the idea, as TB and TC, that the flood was driven by massive volcanism)
There are more specific issues related to the survival of Noah's family, such as:
Even in the best of cases it would take many months before a harvest. What do they eat in the meantime? They have already been on the ark for a year, along with the animals, eating the stores of food they brought along.
------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 07-16-2002 7:20 PM Martin J. Koszegi has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024