|
Author
|
Topic: Evidence for the Biblical Record
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Tel Dan? Have you been here?
i have no idea what you're trying to get at???
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 168 by Theodoric, posted 03-20-2010 4:22 AM | | Theodoric has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Tel Dan? Have you been here?
'critics' will always suggest an opposing view whether they are right or not. I dont know how they get 'dod' from 'dwd' The waw in DWD is pronounced in hebrew as a V. But who knows how the critics reason. I believe they throw objections around for the sake of disagreeing.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 170 by Theodoric, posted 03-20-2010 4:46 AM | | Theodoric has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 192 by dwise1, posted 03-21-2010 11:37 PM | | Peg has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Denial Of The Evidence
bluescat48 writes: Israel was not a nation at the time of the alleged tower. It predates Abraham who was a Babylonian, born in Ur, which at the time was a Babylonian city. All of the "Nations" you talk about are derived from Babylon, who controlled all of Mesopotamia at the time. quite correct, but i was speaking of them as a nation from the time of their biblical writings....not back when they were living as small family tribes. Abraham was not a babylonian. He was born from the family of Noahs son Shem who continued to speak the hebrew language after the confusion at Babel. It doesnt matter that he was born in Ur, he was still a hebrew and spoke hebrew. The babylonians came from the decendents of Noahs son Ham.
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Palm That Pea
anglagard writes: Please allow me to clarify: You said "Modern linguists have also created a chart of human language and they've found there there are parent languges from which all other languages are derived." That is a false assertion, as I clearly showed. However instead of dealing with the matter at hand you try to palm the pea, shift the goalposts. its not my problem if you highlight the word 'all' in my sentence rather then the word that shows i was speaking about multiple parent languages. Let me highlight it correctly for you.
peg writes: Modern linguists have also created a chart of human language and they've found there there are parent languges from which all other languages are derived. This is in harmony with the bible account.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 179 by anglagard, posted 03-21-2010 1:38 AM | | anglagard has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Apothecus writes: For pete's sake, Buz, even Peg shot you down on that one. Peg! Admit, please, that interpretation is in the eye of the beholder and let's be done with this rot. Yes thats quite true and its why there are so many differing interpretations about the same passage.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 189 by Apothecus, posted 03-21-2010 6:35 PM | | Apothecus has seen this message but not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Palm That Pea
ZenMonkey writes: Again, so what? The fact that modern languages have older parent languages is also in harmony with the theory that Hermes or Coyote created different languages for people as a practical joke. what it shows is that the account in the bible (written almost 4,000 years ago) has details about language which are in harmony with known facts. Again the bible has shown that it is a book of reliable information in harmony with todays knowledge It provides us with a version of how the languages of the human race became so diverse. You dont have to believe it, but please dont deny that the book provides information in harmony with known fact.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 188 by ZenMonkey, posted 03-21-2010 5:37 PM | | ZenMonkey has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
|
Message 196 of 348 (551250)
03-22-2010 3:38 AM
|
Reply to: Message 191 by anglagard
03-21-2010 11:32 PM
|
|
Re: Palm That Pea
thats a good idea. You go talk to the cat and i wont have to waste time repeating myself because you fail to read english properly.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 191 by anglagard, posted 03-21-2010 11:32 PM | | anglagard has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
|
Message 197 of 348 (551251)
03-22-2010 3:58 AM
|
Reply to: Message 192 by dwise1
03-21-2010 11:37 PM
|
|
Re: Tel Dan? Have you been here?
dwise1 writes: This really is very basic knowledge of Hebrew. This would cast some doubt on your ability to understand linguistics, especially as historical linguistics applies to Hebrew, the primary language in question in these discussions. i appreciate that this may be a basic point. I have only studied the alphabet and word/sentence structures thus far so my knowledge of hebrew is certainly not complete. However many scholars have read it as 'house of david' and many have agreed with them. So this is still evidence until it can be disproved with absolute cirtainty.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 192 by dwise1, posted 03-21-2010 11:37 PM | | dwise1 has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Denial Of The Evidence
OttoTellick writes: Peg, if you're going to assert historical fact for this story, then you should clarify the chronology. How long ago did this happen? That is, what (approximate) date is associated with the specific tower ... a specific chronology -- with evidence to support it -- is what the current thread is asking for. no specific date is mentioned in the account. Genesis 10:25 says that the confusion of the languages happened during ‘the days of Peleg.’ This would mean that it happened at some time during Pelegs lifetime. His birth was in 2269 bce and he died in 2030bce. So the confusion of languages happend during this 239yr timeframe or between 4,279-4,040 years ago.
Otto Tellick writes: Then there's the linguistic and archeological evidence regarding the language represented by the oldest Egyptian hieroglyphics (3300 BCE), and the older written symbols from which that system developed (starting as early as 4000 BCE). It's important to note that when these oldest instances of Chinese and Egyptian writing were created, they were already distinct languages (and were not the language used by the Hebrews). considering all known ancient languages began as pictographs, its a bit far fetched to say that they were completely independent of each other. If pictographs were being used by everyone, then its not impossible that it was because the sons of Noah, and in turn their children, used pictographs. Even acient chinese began as pictographic writing.
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Denial Of The Evidence
yet its interesting that the Chinese character for ship is made up of eight people in a vessel.
Ship is comprised of the following components
boat + eight + mouth = Ship bit of a coincidence, isnt it? Especially if they 'apparently' had no contact with the people in mesopotamia before the language confusion. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 207 by Otto Tellick, posted 03-22-2010 11:49 PM | | Otto Tellick has seen this message but not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
|
|
Message 215 of 348 (551755)
03-24-2010 2:59 AM
|
Reply to: Message 214 by JonF
03-23-2010 7:53 PM
|
|
Re: back to topic of linguistics
JonF writes: ABE: I've done a lot of reading on both sides of the issue on Noah's Fludde. It didn't happen. Therefore, any claim that rests on the assumption that there was a fludde is prima facie wrong. this wasnt a discussion about noahs flood, it was a discussion about the languages of nations. Zen Monkey gave some 'evidence' claiming that the chinese people were already established with a language and writing system before the tower of babel incident implying that they could not have been among the people of mesopotamia. As linguists trace languages thru similarities, i showed that the chinese language has some similarities to the mesopotamia with regard to their word for ship. If you deny that the character for ship consits of the numeral 8, a vessel and mouths/people, then please address the evidence for that as your reply has nothing to do with the topic as it stands. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 214 by JonF, posted 03-23-2010 7:53 PM | | JonF has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 226 by JonF, posted 03-24-2010 7:25 AM | | Peg has not replied | | | Message 270 by JonF, posted 03-28-2010 9:01 AM | | Peg has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Denial Of The Evidence
hooah212002 writes: There were only 8 mouths on the Ark? Do you have solid evidence that this is anything more than mere "coincidence"? Like, perhaps a study of ancient Chinese lettering that says it IS representative of the ark? The only reference to anything remotely similar is apologetics literature. the sign for 'mouth' in chinese i believe is representive of people, not animals. and No, i dont have any evidence that this is anythign more then coincidence, perhaps it is, perhaps it isnt. If it is, its an unbelieveable coincidence i'm sure you'd agree. And if it isnt, then it shows that the chinese did have some link to the mesopotamia.
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Denial Of The Evidence
duh exactly.
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Denial Of The Evidence
hooah212002 writes: So, there is a seperate caricature for non-homo sapiens mouths? i have no idea. Do you?
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Dr Adequate writes: But their error is deeper even than that, because it is simply nonsense to try to read a single Chinese character as though it was a sentence. LOL i dont think i really said that. The chinese characters are made up of a single pictograph or a combination of a few which creates a new word. the idea that the chinese character for ship is strangely similar to the noahs ark story seems too much for some of you to handle.
|
™ Version 4.2
