|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,918 Year: 4,175/9,624 Month: 1,046/974 Week: 5/368 Day: 5/11 Hour: 0/2 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evidence for a recent flood | |||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: If you alsolist factors which are historically accurate to the period, and not seen previously [as with Mount Ararat and the listing of numerous nations] yes it means it is accurate. Yes there were older writings - but none which is older than 6000; and alphabetical books older than the Hebrew.
quote: That Adam is the oldest speech endowened human/life form: The Hebrew calendar, 5772 years, the oldest active one we have. That the universe and the earth are billions of years old, and the first such claim made: the seperation actions listed in Genesis, prior to the advent of life forms. Namely, the seperation of light from darkness; day from night; water from land. These account for billions and millions of years.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: I see it as the first historical/geographical description humanity possesses, akin to a modern day aerial photography time-line. And you do not have a similar writings anywhere. Produce one with such historical/geographical listings?!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
I suspect you are after details of longtitude descriptions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: That would make the text authentic of its period too. Whyn not ask for a wiki description also?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Every one of such claims have been found as bogus. Did you not wonder why no transit imprints between 8600 and 6000 are seen? If what you say is true, why do we not have alphabetical Chinese books listing 1000's of years of ancient history?
quote: No buts here. The tangible signficance is that Adam is the first recorded name humanity possesses. Its big stuff.
quote: You bring up a one only 'CONJURED" myth, yet dispute tangible evidenced writings with factually evidenced historical landmarks!? Note the terms conjured, perhaps, probably, etc. Note that this is listed as 18thC BCE:
quote: quote: Correction. Genesis does not list any 'first' day: it says DAY ONE [for the first], then goes on to say SECOND, THIRD, day, etc. This is astutely correct: a first means first of previous and other days!
quote: The listing of the actions mentioned before life emerged do account for billions of years; it cannot be after the fact because the premise of billions was as yet not in the human vocab or mindset; this is in fact the first alluding to such a time scale of a finite universe's age, well before the term science was coined. It is said in a mode understandable by all generations of mankind, a feat in itself. It is not a superfluous verse: of note it is placed in the creation chapter - and it is an anticipatory action of forthcoming life. We now know that life could not/ would not have emegred but for such anticipatory actions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
There has never been confusion of the region's vicinity any place, including in all scholarly appraisals, and the text adequately confirms it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
The point is Mount Ararat shows the general vicinity of the flood - backed by listing of other nations and regions of its surrounds; it cannot be retrospective if it is the first such listing of that mount.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: And that would not become a proof this is not a contemporary writings - seeing that longitudes yet never existed in the human vocab? Would you also like a video recording?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
Does everyone agree, at the very least, the Noah story stands up to historical scrutiny based on a regional flood?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: It didn't grow; there is no imprints of it - it just emerged.
quote: Not so in a region where the rains fall more than it can be disposed into an ocean. In recent tsunamies we saw whole cities submerged.
quote: Sure, but gathering only domestic animals of Noah's household [the texts] would not show such problems.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: The term 'or' is not credible here; more precise infrmation is already contained in the texts - namely surrounding nations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: If a report includes many factual stats it does not mean it is true of being contemporary; it can still be retrospective reporting. But if those stats are mentioned for the first time - the situation alters dramatically.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: What makes it a fact? Who says Noah's household [domestic animals] and a person by the name Noah, makes it non-factual?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: It has no impact on the Noah story.
quote: We have no older names than Adam; factual landmarks affirm historical credibility; your chinese writings does not show the same. Correction. Genesis does not list any 'first' day: it says DAY ONE [for the first], then goes on to say SECOND, THIRD, day, etc. This is astutely correct: a first means first of previous and other days! Wow, semantics much?!?! My translation says first, second, third, etc, not that it matters. You said that Genesis indicates that the universe is millions of years old. I disputed that using the very source you claim corroborates your assertion. Explain why Moses' language explicitly denotes literal days and not long epochs of time if what you say is true.
quote: Do you understand that first is not one, but many others preceding it? Analogy: is the sprinter who comes first the first or one of many sprinters? Genesis is astutely correct - and its no typo! Of note, Genesis goes on to correctly state the following days as SECOND; THIRD; etc. Why so?
quote: I am making no assumptions; I am listing the text! The text does not have the luxury of knowing what we know today!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3699 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: It does matter. You reading a European, Christian edition, which is hardly a credible source.
quote: Wrong again. The actions of depicting the universe's age is not in days because DAY and WEEK were introduced in Genesis; billions was not yet in the human vocab. This is the mark of authentic writings true to its time.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024