 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
VoodooChild
German Shepherd
Joined: 02 Jun 2004
Posts: 346
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:07 am Post subject: |
 |
|
noah,
| Quote: | First let's review a photograph of the gravisite of Neferefre that someone tried to date:
CHECK LINK
|
I'm not following, what does this have to do with the flood?
| Quote: | Here's a chart of the revised Egyptian chronology by David Down:
CHECK LINK
Here's the complete article by field archaeologist David Down (a good read):
CHECK LINK |
Ahhh, David Brown... Can you give me any citations to mainstream (Non YEC) archeologists and egyptologists that support his hypothesis.
Also, what about the Longshan civilization in China, the Sumerians and Akkadians that were around during this time. Why is their no indication of their eradication during the time period.
_________________
Knowledge is the enemy of faith |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
joman
Tiger
Joined: 07 Jun 2004
Posts: 823
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
from www.pathlights.com
| Quote: | MANETHO'S LIST
Manetho's jumbled list was made the first key to Egyptian dating.
At some time between 300 and 250 B.C. Manetho, an Egyptian priest, wrote a list of 31 Egyptian dynasties of kings. Greece ruled the world at the time, and Manetho wanted to prove that Egypt previously had been a great nation also. So he wrote these king lists.
But certain facts need to be kept in mind:
1 - It is well-known among historians that ancient Egyptian writers frequently exaggerated, or lied outright, when it best served their purposes. They slanted information to magnify the greatness of their rulers and nation. Egyptian stone monuments, for example, gloated over victories and never mentioned defeats.
2 - All we have from Manetho are these king lists. Fortunately, we have two copies of his lists. But having two copies only adds to the problem,—for the two lists do not agree with one another! The number of years assigned to each king, and time covered by each dynasty, is different in the two lists. —Yet ancient dating is keyed to Manetho's king lists!
3 - The lists seem to deal with two simultaneously reigning sets of kings. (It is well-known that ancient Egypt was divided into "Upper Egypt" and "Lower Egypt.") If one set of rulers were reigning when the other was, this fact alone would divide in half the total length of years in which those early Egyptian kings reigned.
4 - A number of scholars believe that Manetho fabricated names, events, numbers, and history, as did many ancient Egyptian pharoahs and historians, in order to glorify the nation and its rulers.
5 - Manetho, living about 250 B.C., prepared king lists which are unlike anything written earlier. Many of those names we cannot compare with anything! There is no indication they have ever existed. All we have is Manetho's assurance that they were once alive.
6 - How could Manetho prepare such lists, when, to the best of our knowledge, he had so little to base them on? In other words, how could he be assumed to know so much and be so accurate?
7 - *James Breasted, a leading archaeologist in the 1920s, declared that Manetho's lists were ridiculous, did not agree with Egyptian history, and should be discarded.
With such a background, can Manetho be trusted to provide us with the basic keystone chronology that all modern archaeological excavation is based on? Clearly not.
Why then are Manetho's king lists treasured by humanists as the best of all ancient lists? Because those lists provide us with dates which are older than those of any other dating records anywhere in the world. Therefore the humanists treasure them.—p. 17.
VELIKOVSKY AND COURVILLE
Two researchers who uncovered the fraud.
Two men challenged the assumption that Manetho's king lists were consecutive and not overlapping.
Velikovsky's studies. Immanuel Velikovsky was a Russian who practiced psychoanalysis until the mid-1930s, at which time he devoted the rest of his life to unraveling ancient chronologies and time periods.
Turning to the oldest and largest ancient history book in the world, the Bible, he compared it with secular records of all kinds.
He found that, although the Bible recorded many contacts between Egypt and Israel, mid-20th century archaeologists said they could not correlate any of them with their findings. How could this be? Velikovsky wondered. He determined to find out.
He discovered that the problem centered on a gullible acceptance of Manetho's king lists, as a single, trustworthy time-span listing.
Eventually, Velikovsky wrote three major books: Ages in Chaos, 1952; Peoples of the Sea, 1977; and Ramses II and His Time, 1978, detailing his reasons.—pp. 17-18.
Courville's studies. In 1956, Donovan A. Courville, a biochemist at Loma Linda University, read Ages in Chaos, and began his own research in ancient history. Fifteen years of in-depth research followed.
In the main, Courville agreed with Velikovsky's conclusions regarding the Middle Kingdom. But Courville carried the dating back further than Velikovsky had—all the way to the first dynasty,—and came upon a variety of reasons why many of Manetho's dynasties occurred simultaneously with one another.
According to Courville's findings, the "Old Kingdom" occurred at the same time as the "Middle Kingdom" rather than preceding it by 400-500 years.
Courville's careful analysis reduced the length of Egypt's dynasties, and placed its first double-ruler dynasty at around 2150 B.C. This would be approximately 200-350 years after the Flood, according to whichever date one wished to set for that cataclysm. (From his studies, the present writer sets the date of the Flood at c. 2348 B.C.)
In 1971, Courville wrote his monumental book, The Exodus Problem and Its Ramifications, in 1971.—pp. 18-19. |
As with many of the seemilngly authoritative comments of atheists and evo's I remind everyone who cares.
All you need to do to counter any bogus notion the enemies of the Book attempt to establish as valid is go to any search engine, ignoring their scientifically useless propaganda sites, and type in "silly notion" "+" "problems with" or "criticism' excetra.
What you'll discover is how shallow their lies are. And, you'll note that the enemies of the Book won't research anything contary to their notions. that is, I for one don't wish to converse much with the enemies of Christ because they aren't seriouly studying even their own beliefs. If they were we wouldn't have to do it for them. And, normally I don't but, I realize that someone might think they have a point sometimes and get burned.
Joman. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admin
Beloved Admin
Joined: 28 Sep 2000
Posts: 1803
Location: Macau, China
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
I decided to heed your words and I did as you suggested. Actually simpler, I just typed in Google "pathlights com" to find out info on the link you posted.
What I found shows me that source to be unreliable and fabricated.
Result #2, after the actual website, is:
http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Pathlights
Which begins as this:
Pathlights is a Young Earth Creationist website which has been described as having "the dubious honor of being the worst piece of creationist literature ever written." [1] Of particular interest to those involved in the creation-evolution debate is the Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia [2], which summarizes the alleged creation evidences from several books that the organization has written. Based on the description in the introduction to the website, these books are mostly lists of quotes from scientists [3], which may raise concerns to anyone familiar with the creationist practice of quote-mining.
Like most modern creationists, Pathlights equates evolution with atheism, racism, communism, eugenics, crime and immorality. [4] Furthermore, they use the word evolution as a catch-all for virtually all of modern science from astronomy to geology to abiogenesis to the Big Bang.
Result #3
A representation of intellectual dishonesty:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mark_vuletic/gamow.html
********************
What I found shows me that source to be unreliable and fabricated.
_________________
Cybermonsters (Most Beloved Admin)
Favorite Octopus Video! - My Site - Studio
Have a question or need help with your account? E-mail: forum @ askland.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8237
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joman wrote: |
As with many of the seemilngly authoritative comments of atheists and evo's I remind everyone who cares.
All you need to do to counter any bogus notion the enemies of the Book attempt to establish as valid is go to any search engine, ignoring their scientifically useless propaganda sites, and type in "silly notion" "+" "problems with" or "criticism' excetra.
What you'll discover is how shallow their lies are. And, you'll note that the enemies of the Book won't research anything contary to their notions. that is, I for one don't wish to converse much with the enemies of Christ because they aren't seriouly studying even their own beliefs. If they were we wouldn't have to do it for them. And, normally I don't but, I realize that someone might think they have a point sometimes and get burned.
|
Joman, how on Earth can you think that some hack internet site is somehow more intellectually legitimate than ALL of the science ever done?
Pathlights is dishonest. If you believe in Jesus, then you should spurn that site.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6290
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joman wrote: | | And, you'll note that the enemies of the Book won't research anything contary to their notions. |
You'd probably consider me an "enemy of the Book," but you'd be surprised how much I've researched Christianity. I simply came to a different conclusion than you did.
On the other hand, I've found that most creationists don't bother to look past sources pandering to the bias they already hold. That you'd actually link to pathlights as if it were authoritative is a perfect example of this.
| joman wrote: | | that is, I for one don't wish to converse much with the enemies of Christ because they aren't seriouly studying even their own beliefs. |
It was studying my own beliefs which led me to reject Christianity in the first place.
By the way, remember this post? You know, how evolutionists simply avoid answering your questions? | joman wrote: | | God has put evidence against all evolutionary thought right in front of everyone’s face. Do you really think I don’t know why you folks avoid answering (probably even considering) my questions? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
noah
Tadpole
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 25
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 5:42 pm Post subject: www.4106bce.info |
|
|
I've moved the content to www.4106bce.info. The web page and all content was written by my hand and developed between Jan 2006 and May 2007.
Hebrews 11:1-3,6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6290
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, when he was warned about things not yet seen, with reverent regard constructed an ark for the deliverance of his family. Through faith he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
Noah had personal contact with God. Faith? 
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8237
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 7:24 am Post subject: Re: www.4106bce.info |
|
|
| noah wrote: | I've moved the content to www.4106bce.info. The web page and all content was written by my hand and developed between Jan 2006 and May 2007.
Hebrews 11:1-3,6 |
Nice, but too bad it's totally wrong and the universe is billions of years old...
You've obviously made a mistake somewhere along the line...
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
digitalartist
Not So Newbie
Joined: 19 May 2005
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
The problem with setting the date of creation to 4106 BCE (BC) is that things are not taken into account. For me the most important verse is Genesis 4:17 that basically says Cain lay with his wife. This brings up questions which can have an impact on the date.
If Adam and Eve were indeed the only humans then Cain would have had to marry his sister. Since he lays with her prior to mention of any other of Adam and Eve's children, that prospect is unlikely and to be honest I don't see where God would approve of something like that. So we come to the question of what tribe/civilization did she belong to? How long did they exist before Cain met his wife?
If indeed other men and their families did exist when were they created? Part of what is needed for that estimation would be when Cain married. If for example he married at age 17 then it is much more likely that the other tribe(s) were created before Adam and Eve. If however he married after several hundred years of life, then it is possible that the other tribes were created at the same time as Adam and Eve.
The possibility of the other tribes/nations/civilizations poses it's own problem since I don't remember their creation as being recorded in Genesis but that is a topic for another day.
Now if the other tribes were created prior to Adam and Eve that would push the date back, possibly by a considerable ammount. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admin
Beloved Admin
Joined: 28 Sep 2000
Posts: 1803
Location: Macau, China
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| digitalartist wrote: | | The problem with setting the date of creation to 4106 BCE (BC) is that |
.....it is not supported by any bodies of research in mainstream science.
_________________
Cybermonsters (Most Beloved Admin)
Favorite Octopus Video! - My Site - Studio
Have a question or need help with your account? E-mail: forum @ askland.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2658
Location: Salem Oregon
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
The dating by Bishop Usher was totally incorrect even in Biblical terms since he ignored skips in generations and fathers being confused with sons.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.
Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admin
Beloved Admin
Joined: 28 Sep 2000
Posts: 1803
Location: Macau, China
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What would be your estimation of the age of the earth?
_________________
Cybermonsters (Most Beloved Admin)
Favorite Octopus Video! - My Site - Studio
Have a question or need help with your account? E-mail: forum @ askland.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TwoPutt
Fierce Puppy
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 227
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Great discussion. I have recently changed my position from a YEC (6000 year proponent) to an OEC (not long after leaving a ministry with the Landmark Baptist church to join with the Christadelphians). Here is a series of articles written by a professor of material science and engineering at the University of Michigan (who is also a Christadelphian) on the Bible and science.
The Bible and Science
If you're interested it is a very good read. I'll tell you right now that the link above takes you to a Christadelphian website though the author doesn't promote Christadelphian teachings per se (Christadelphia doesn't have any official position on the dating of creation; I personally know both YEC and OEC within the group). Rather, he attempts to show the connection between the Bible and modern science. The portion about quantum mechanics and how it possibly explains Jesus' movements into "sealed" rooms after his resurrection is pretty interesting.
Here's an excerpt from the relevant chapter (7) of the book --
| Quote: | Through locked doors
As an interesting aside, there is a passage in the scriptures that gives skeptics a field day. The verse in question is in the gospel of John 20:19. It says, speaking of the Lord Jesus Christ after his resurrection visiting his disciples while they where eating in a sealed room: On the evening of the first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” (NIV) The difficultly is the phrase ‘doors locked’. The skeptics often dismiss this passage as a fable or fabrication. However, the event was witnessed by a large number of people and the disciples were neither foolish nor ignorant.
The gospel record is explicit in this detail when it didn’t have to be. In other words, the miracle of Jesus coming to his disciples in a sealed room is, in a sense, simply a passing comment. Why would Matthew make this comment if he hadn’t been an eyewitness and if he wasn’t certain that all the others who had evidenced the same event would back him up? Why add a story that would simply encourage incredulity if it didn’t indeed happen exactly as recorded?
If one only knew classical physics, one could dismiss the whole record here as simply impossible, but from what we now know about quantum mechanics (and from the little slice of it that I have given above), we can be certain that no laws of physics were violated. In fact, the laws of physics guarantee that it was not only possible, given the right amount of manipulation of energy, the event was absolutely certain! Under the right circumstances, there is a finite probability that we could do it ourselves; given our level of energy, it just might take a little longer to get into a sealed room! |
Wouldn't it be fascinating to see the laws of physics applied to the spiritual realm as well? What I mean by that is that maybe what we know of the law of physics is but a drop in the hat of what the scope of that reality might be? Perhaps God has -- within the entirety of His creation, both spiritual and physical -- laws set forth to define their characteristics?
God bless,
2P |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FFT wrote: | Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, when he was warned about things not yet seen, with reverent regard constructed an ark for the deliverance of his family. Through faith he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
Noah had personal contact with God. Faith? |
Does the Bible state that God spoke audibly to Noah? I believe He did to Adam and Moses... but Noah? I'm not saying He didn't, just curious if you have passage demonstrating as much.
Thanks...
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| admin wrote: | | digitalartist wrote: | | The problem with setting the date of creation to 4106 BCE (BC) is that |
.....it is not supported by any bodies of research in mainstream science. |
Neither is ToE (goo-to-you)... but that doesn't stop you or others on this board for believing in it. 
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
