|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 0/34 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Would Evolutionists accept evidence for Creation? | |||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: The Bible doesn't say anything like that. The division seems to refer to the peoples dividing up after Babel. There's no mention of the land mass dividing up or of volcanoes forming. And of course we know that there were volcanoes and continental drift happening long before there were any humans on the scene. Even if your scenario did happen we'd find evidence of the Flood - it wouldn't erase everything. But we don't. And we don't find real evidence for your scenario or even the Babel story either.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Indeed we will.
quote: So, no mention of the land-mass dividing or volcanoes.
quote: They wouldn't name a dead person after something that happened after he died, so of course he was. Not that the verse you quote actually says any such thing.
quote: So even you admit that there was no mention of volcanoes. And there's no suggestion that the scattering had already happened - nor is there an explicit reference to the land mass dividing. You should ask yourself why, if this event is so important you believe that it was only mentioned vaguely in passing. On the other hand Genesis 10:32 says:
These are the families of the sons of Noah, according to their genealogies, by their nations; and out of these the nations were separated on the earth after the flood.
Why should this separation not be the division mentioned in 10:25 ?
quote: The Bible does not say that the division took the form of the land physically moving. It does not say that the continents formed at that time. It does not say that mountains formed at that time. That is a scenario of your invention.
quote: Then why did you not produce the verse which says that mountains were built by this division ? Or the verse which says that it caused volcanoes to erupt ? Or the verse which says that it caused continents to form ? I'll tell you why. It is because you are presenting a scenario of your own invention - not simply pointing out what the Bible says.
quote: Then how can you say that the scattering at the Tower of Babel happened before the division of the lands ? It seems that that, too, is part of your scenario - and not something the Bible says.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: So no mention of continents or mountains forming. And what makes you think that Genesis 11:17 comes chronologically after Genesis 11:9 ? (And here's what Genesis 1:10 really says:
God called the dry land earth, and the (gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good.
So no, it doesn't say that the land was just in one place) Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Everyone agrees that the Bible is collection of works. Why would proving an event in one correct prove all the events in another ? And then there are the contradictions. If we prove that there was a census of Judaea under Quirinius how could it prove that Jesus was born then - AND that he was born more than ten years earlier ?
And why isn't the Koran a good example ? The Koran even claims to be the direct word of God - unlike the Bible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: There are just two problems with that. Firstly Peleg also appears BEFORE the Babel story in Chapter 10 - and that's the reference you're reading as referring to massively accelerated continental drift suddenly occuring (contrary to scientific understanding). Secondly you would have to say that Genesis 11:10 also comes after the Babel story:
These are the records of the generations of Shem. Shem was one hundred years old, and became the father of Arpachshad two years after the flood;
So by that thinking you would have to put the Babel story before Noah's Flood - which of course appears even earlier in Genesis. Your rule can't be consistently applied. What we really have is: Chapter 10 is a listing of descendants of Noah's sons, who separate to found the nations. It is not unreasonable to consider that the Babel story marks that separation and that is the event that Peleg is named for. This interpretation fits the text and doesn't require us to assume that the event Peleg was named for mysteriously got left out of the Bible. Chapter 11 is the Babel story and a more detailed listing of Shem's descendants. Which suggests that the Bebel story - which is not otherwise dated - took place in the lifetimes of at least some of those listed. There's nothing in the Bible that rules out the possibility that it is the event that Peleg is named for.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: You mean that he would have DIED 189 years after Babel by that estimation. But what's the basis for it ? You yourself said that the Bible didn't provide a timeline and the Babel story doesn't contain anything to date it in relation to the genealogy.
quote:IF the estimate you refer to is correct. But you've offered no reason to think that it is. In fact you said that there ISN'T any way to know when Babel happened, other than sometime in the period covered in the genealogies. quote: IIRC that word has a wide usage (similar to the English "land") - it can refer to all of the land on the planet or just a single geographical area.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: So please explain how the time of the Babel story can be figured out, instead of dodging the question.
quote:In fact I pointed out that just relying on the order of the verses to work out the order of events was messed up. And I explained exaclty why it was messed up. So in fact I pointed out that your method of working out a timeline didn't work. quote:Which is only of use to this discussion if you can produce an actual date for the Babel story out of it. So are you going to explain how that is done ? quote: Just because I believe that those parts of the Bible are myth and legend doesn't mean that I don't care about representign them accurately. YOu would think that people who beleive that they are true would also care about that. Oddly enough it appears that they don't.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote:WHich historical books ? How do they work the date out ? Have you noticed that it is DIFFERENT from the last source you used, by well over 100 years ? quote: If it's so obvious then why can't you come up with any valid arguments ? And why are you so determined to add a major scientific error into the Bible anyway ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: "Some guy says so" is not a valid argument. What's that basis for the chart - in particular how does it calculate the date when the Babel story supposedly happened ?
quote: Attempting to nit-pick the wording is also not a valid argument. The land was divided between the nations.
quote: And you're wrong. That is your interpretation - and one you have great difficulty supporting. The absence of any direct reference to the event or any explicit reference to a physical division of the land is a difficulty you need to deal with. And if the Bible did say that then it would be WRONG. So I ask again, why are you so determined to read a major scientific error into the Bible ? Is it that important to you that the Bible should say what you want ?
quote: Yes. And that layer would be millions of years old because thats how long it would take for mountains to form and for different oceans to form. Since Noah's Flood didn't happen millions of years ago and we haven't had any new mountains or oceans since the time it was meant to have happened the point is moot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
That would be the work described here. It's a midrash and it is relatively recent (first published 1552 AD - although according to Wikipedia the only evidence for that is an assertion in the first known edition from 1625).
It can't be considered a reliable source:
In his endeavors to explain all Biblical subjects the author invented entire narratives, interweaving them with certain passages of the Bible.
And that explains why many people ignore it (as your earlier source did).
quote:No, I'm not - as you should know if you have been following what I have said. I'm saying that it happened milliosn of years ago and that continental drift happens at speeds within an order of magnitude of those observed today. What did NOT happen is a far faster break-up in the last 5000 years or so - and THAT is what you are claiming. quote:Science says that the continents had started to break up more than 200 million years ago. Long before there were any humans. quote: And that division almost certainly refers to the forming of the nations in Genesis 10:32. The "sea gathered in one place" does not mean that the land was gathered in one place (that is your twisting) There is NO reference to a sudden and catastrophic physical movement of the land in the Bible for that period. Nor is there any scientific evidence that such an event took place at that time. All you have is your interpretation of an off-hand reference in a genealogy - a reference which you claim is not explained in the Bible (although it should be) and refers to something that is not mentioned anywhere in the Bible (nor even in "The Book of Jasher" used to compile the chart you referred in in Message 63)
quote: If the Bible was important to you you wouldn't be so determined to force your own false ideas into it. So let us be clear. The Bible does not mention ultra-rapid continental movement Mainstream science does not include ultra-rapid continental movement - and dates the break-up of Pangaea to long before humanity existed. That is your idea. Please learn to distinguish it from what the Bible says and what science says.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: As you should already have known.
quote: That's your interpretation. You can't find one single clear explicit reference to this breakup. And if your interpretation was correct there should be one. Moreover it HAS to be quick to fit into the time.
quote: In Message 57 you stated that Peleg was born around 2250 BC. That's within the timeframe I suggested. And you got that from the Bible. There may be uncertainties in that dating - which is why I allowed a broad range. But they are of the order of centuries, not tens or hundreds of millions of years.
quote: I stated that nations DIVIDED the Earth.
quote: This has no logical connection to the point. It is possible for one of them to be in one place and the other not. In all the diagrams the water appears to be in "one place", yet the land is not really in any of them - even in the first there are channels cutting off two land masses in the south.
quote: The Bible does not even mention the continents moving ! That is your scenario, and your scenario require the movement to be many times more rapid than the measured speeds.
quote:Because it IS your idea. You're the one who said it happened in the lifetime of Peleg. And that means that it has to be fast. quote:Science DOES say that there were no humans 225 million years ago (and no known mammals, even). Therefore science says that Peleg cannot have lived then, and so science denies that the breakup of Pangaea could have occurred in the lifetime of Peleg. quote: This is wholly wrong. Science does not say anything so silly as the idea that all the water being in "one place" means that all the land is in one place. Nor does the Bible (you really are determined to put your own errors into the Bible - I guess that the real Bible isn't inaccurate enough for you). However the discussion is not about that. It is about your assertion that the "division" that occurred in the lifetime of Peleg refers to the breakup of Pangaea. As we have seen that is a dubious interpretaion that you have either invented or copied from someone else. THere is no real support for it in the Bible and in fact it is wholly incompatible with scientific understanding.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024