• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Dating the Flood back 650 years

 
 
 
We had a poster here a while ago who considered himself a Young-Earth Creationist. When asked the age of the earth, he answered that it was 12,000 to 15,000 years old.

I asked him where he got that figure--it's more than twice as large as what's held by a hard-core YEC, yet still far, far smaller than the scientific estimates. He was smart enough to know that the standard YEC answer of 6,000 years old was impossible due to our understanding of history. Too many civilizations are older than that.

The best that I could figure was that he took a superficial look at the oldest documented history (not carbon-dated history, of course) and decided that we have written evidence going back about 10,000 years old. Then he added a fudge factor, tacked on a couple thousand years and decided that was when the world came into being. He couldn't support his guess, neither with science nor with biblical accounts. But he was satisfied.

If tomorrow a written document showed up dating back 20,000 years, then I presume his new estimate would change to become "20,000 to 25,000 years ago."

Ironically, he also argued for a kind of documentary hypothesis, asserting that the reason Moses was able to write down such intimate details about the events in the first books of Genesis was because Adam, and Cain, and Noah, and Abraham all wrote them down, somehow passing the written tables on to the next generation for centuries, until Moses was able to compile them into the Torah.

Truly amazing, that.
 
Sarpedon said:
Ok, I think other people have addressed the bonkers age assumption sufficiently, so I don't have to.

And since excreationist refuses to address the compartmentalization of his argument, I'll let that stand as it is.

However, I'd like to point out another problem with this dating, that reveals another dishonest tactic used by creationists (and our so called excreationist). By dating the flood at 3000 BC, this revised date places it pre-pyramids, which evades many (but not all) the awkward objections to having the flood drown the pyramid builders, who must then be replaced by new people who, suspiciously have the exact same culture. However, this gambit is nullified by the fact that Ancient Egypt is a lot older than the pyramids, and the revised chronology would put the flood smack in the middle of the First Dynasty. The dishonest tactic here is the fact that the people who are peddling these lies assume that their target audience is to ignorant to know when the First Dynasty was, who Narmer was, and that Egypt had a developed system of writing centuries before the pyramids, and even before the date given here. So the problem of Egypt doesn't go away: only the ignorant will think it does.

Even if you claim that the dates of the First Dynasty are incorrect, and Narmer came after the flood, you still have the same problem: Even though no detailed records of the Predynastic period of Egypt exist, there was obviously an advanced and populous culture there, which only lacked the political unity that would allow it to develop more fully later. And you still have Sumeria to think about. But again, no problem for the ignorant.
Click to expand...
Also, no one in China noticed the 'global flood'. :/
 
Worldtraveller said:
Sarpedon said:
Ok, I think other people have addressed the bonkers age assumption sufficiently, so I don't have to.

And since excreationist refuses to address the compartmentalization of his argument, I'll let that stand as it is.

However, I'd like to point out another problem with this dating, that reveals another dishonest tactic used by creationists (and our so called excreationist). By dating the flood at 3000 BC, this revised date places it pre-pyramids, which evades many (but not all) the awkward objections to having the flood drown the pyramid builders, who must then be replaced by new people who, suspiciously have the exact same culture. However, this gambit is nullified by the fact that Ancient Egypt is a lot older than the pyramids, and the revised chronology would put the flood smack in the middle of the First Dynasty. The dishonest tactic here is the fact that the people who are peddling these lies assume that their target audience is to ignorant to know when the First Dynasty was, who Narmer was, and that Egypt had a developed system of writing centuries before the pyramids, and even before the date given here. So the problem of Egypt doesn't go away: only the ignorant will think it does.

Even if you claim that the dates of the First Dynasty are incorrect, and Narmer came after the flood, you still have the same problem: Even though no detailed records of the Predynastic period of Egypt exist, there was obviously an advanced and populous culture there, which only lacked the political unity that would allow it to develop more fully later. And you still have Sumeria to think about. But again, no problem for the ignorant.
Click to expand...
Also, no one in China noticed the 'global flood'. :/
Click to expand...
The Wall protected them from the flood. ;)
 
excreationist said:
Answers in Genesis, etc, date the Flood to be 2350 BC while the pyramids of Giza are dated at 2550 BC. But it seems that a more Biblical dating of the Flood is actually about 3000 BC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI1yRTC6kGE
This makes the Biblical record seem more reliable though I still believe in an old earth.
Click to expand...

Funny that.. I was just noticing that my neighbor's dog had a bald spot on his neck. This makes Aesop's account of the Dog and the Wolf more reliable, but I still don't believe that dogs can talk.
 
Worldtraveller said:
Also, no one in China noticed the 'global flood'. :/
Click to expand...

China did not have a developed writing system before the Shang Dynasty, considerably later (1500 years) than this proposed date. Also, the Chinese have also always been troubled by floods, so the many tales of them are not surprising.
 
excreationist said:
Ok let's say that he was 65 YEARS old when he was a father:
Genesis 5:15-17:
"When Mahalalel had lived 65 years, he became the father of Jared. After he became the father of Jared, Mahalalel lived 830 years and had other sons and daughters. Altogether, Mahalalel lived a total of 895 years, and then he died."

So you are ok with 65 being literal years and you'd say the 830 and 895 involve months... "After he became the father of Jared, Mahalalel lived 830 years" - if that is months, that means he lived 70 more years after the birth of Jared.
Click to expand...
An interesting look at this is that we used to have living breathing demigods on the planet, and apparently nothing at all occurred of any relevance other than births and deaths.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
excreationist said:
Ok let's say that he was 65 YEARS old when he was a father:
Genesis 5:15-17:
"When Mahalalel had lived 65 years, he became the father of Jared. After he became the father of Jared, Mahalalel lived 830 years and had other sons and daughters. Altogether, Mahalalel lived a total of 895 years, and then he died."

So you are ok with 65 being literal years and you'd say the 830 and 895 involve months... "After he became the father of Jared, Mahalalel lived 830 years" - if that is months, that means he lived 70 more years after the birth of Jared.
Click to expand...
An interesting look at this is that we used to have living breathing demigods on the planet, and apparently nothing at all occurred of any relevance other than births and deaths.
Click to expand...

Fair point. Compared to the goings-on of the Greek and Roman pantheons, the demigods of India, China, the proto-histories of the Aztecs and Incas, why the first chapters of Genesis are downright dull.

"There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown."
Click to expand...

And....that's it.
 
1500 years... and all we have is a fruit eating incident, a brother kills his brother, something about giants porking women for a short while, and that's it. Adam to Lamech all lived along the same time. No interaction, no events, no history?! Granted, there would appear to be hints of history (or stories), such as Enoch disappearing so "quickly" and Methuselah being so old... though only 7 years older than Jared; but apparently that stuff didn't make the cut (which is incredible based on how drawn out the Tanakh can be at times). It is really sad, you have all of these patriarchs that mattered at one time, and in the end, it'd be the equivalent of the text reading, "And then the Avengers were formed and defeated Thanos" instead of four feature length films. I wonder if there is a Director's Cut for the Book of Genesis.

One interesting tidbit is Genesis 4:26 which indicates that not until the birth of Enosh (year 235), that people started calling on god.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
One interesting tidbit is Genesis 4:26 which indicates that not until the birth of Enosh (year 235), that people started calling on god.
Click to expand...

That is interesting, especially since Cain and Abel offered sacrifices to Jehovah. That practice is what makes fundamentalists claim that Christianity (via Judaism by proxy) is the world's oldest religion (and therefore the best religion, natch.)

But yeah, if people were a-religious up until the time of Enos, then it's almost as if the early chapters of Genesis are like an anthology of stories loosely edited, and not a historical document.
 
James Brown said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
One interesting tidbit is Genesis 4:26 which indicates that not until the birth of Enosh (year 235), that people started calling on god.
Click to expand...

That is interesting, especially since Cain and Abel offered sacrifices to Jehovah. That practice is what makes fundamentalists claim that Christianity (via Judaism by proxy) is the world's oldest religion (and therefore the best religion, natch.)

But yeah, if people were a-religious up until the time of Enos, then it's almost as if the early chapters of Genesis are like an anthology of stories loosely edited, and not a historical document.
Click to expand...
Only the Jewish believe that. It isn't like it is their holy scripture, so what would they know. ;)

I looked up the line for a little commentary, found this.
website said:
When the Bible says People began to call upon the name of the Lord there are several different interpretations of what this means.

1.There are some who feel these people were defying God by attributing deity to themselves.

2.It may emphasize that people still trusted God in spite of Cain and his ungodly family.
Click to expand...
In other words, "I don't know what it means". The Bible, full of statements that no one can make sense of... spiritually inspired nonsense.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Worldtraveller said:
Sarpedon said:
Ok, I think other people have addressed the bonkers age assumption sufficiently, so I don't have to.

And since excreationist refuses to address the compartmentalization of his argument, I'll let that stand as it is.

However, I'd like to point out another problem with this dating, that reveals another dishonest tactic used by creationists (and our so called excreationist). By dating the flood at 3000 BC, this revised date places it pre-pyramids, which evades many (but not all) the awkward objections to having the flood drown the pyramid builders, who must then be replaced by new people who, suspiciously have the exact same culture. However, this gambit is nullified by the fact that Ancient Egypt is a lot older than the pyramids, and the revised chronology would put the flood smack in the middle of the First Dynasty. The dishonest tactic here is the fact that the people who are peddling these lies assume that their target audience is to ignorant to know when the First Dynasty was, who Narmer was, and that Egypt had a developed system of writing centuries before the pyramids, and even before the date given here. So the problem of Egypt doesn't go away: only the ignorant will think it does.

Even if you claim that the dates of the First Dynasty are incorrect, and Narmer came after the flood, you still have the same problem: Even though no detailed records of the Predynastic period of Egypt exist, there was obviously an advanced and populous culture there, which only lacked the political unity that would allow it to develop more fully later. And you still have Sumeria to think about. But again, no problem for the ignorant.
Click to expand...
Also, no one in China noticed the 'global flood'. :/
Click to expand...
The Wall protected them from the flood. ;)
Click to expand...
That must be what FFvC wants a Yuuge Wall :D

More seriously, circa 3,000 BC the people in Sumer were busy doing fun stuff with their newish cuniform script, like recording how to make beer. Pushing the silly Deluge tale back another 600ish years does nothing...never mind the geological records never noticing the fake Deluge.

beer.jpg

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuneiform
 
The Owl and the Pussycat: Impossible? It has to be, right?

A brief examination of a story related by David Lear, well known 19th century epileptic.

While some will claim the story of the Owl and the Pussycat should be accepted on faith alone, there are just too many details which cannot be true, given the laws of Nature, as we understand them. An owl might be able to pluck the strings of a guitar, but the real problem with nearly every detail is neither creature possesses an opposable thumb. We won't question how they operated a boat on the open ocean. Since the text does not specify they were alone, there could be a human crew aboard. The thumb problem cannot be overlooked, even if one is to give tacit approval to inter-species sexual encounters, within or without matrimony. The couple buy the nose ring from a pig, but how do they remove the ring? If a pig could remove its own nose ring, do you really think any pig could be found with a ring? The incredible details are mounded one atop the other, until they eat with a spoon and dance hand in hand, despite the fact that neither owls or cats have hands. The only believable part of the story is the dancing by the light of the moon. Both being nocturnal creatures, it is the sort of thing they would do.


The Owl and the Pussy-cat went to sea
In a beautiful pea-green boat,
They took some honey, and plenty of money,
Wrapped up in a five-pound note.
The Owl looked up to the stars above,
And sang to a small guitar,
"O lovely Pussy! O Pussy, my love,
What a beautiful Pussy you are,
You are,
You are!
What a beautiful Pussy you are!"

II
Pussy said to the Owl, "You elegant fowl!
How charmingly sweet you sing!
O let us be married! too long we have tarried:
But what shall we do for a ring?"
They sailed away, for a year and a day,
To the land where the Bong-Tree grows
And there in a wood a Piggy-wig stood
With a ring at the end of his nose,
His nose,
His nose,
With a ring at the end of his nose.

III
"Dear Pig, are you willing to sell for one shilling
Your ring?" Said the Piggy, "I will."
So they took it away, and were married next day
By the Turkey who lives on the hill.
They dined on mince, and slices of quince,
Which they ate with a runcible spoon;
And hand in hand, on the edge of the sand,
They danced by the light of the moon,
The moon,
The moon,
They danced by the light of the moon.
 
skepticalbip said:
If nothing else, the bibleflood story illustrates the amazing survival ability of American Indians and Australian Aborigines. Those suckers were able to tread water for a year.
Click to expand...

No, no, no. They are all descendants of Noah's sons. They didn't need to tread water; Just to swim across the Atlantic and the Torres Strait, respectively. And then suffer total collective amnesia; And invent a detailed but totally fictional history for themselves; And forge archaeological evidence to support their new fictional history.
 
skepticalbip said:
If nothing else, the bibleflood story illustrates the amazing survival ability of American Indians and Australian Aborigines. Those suckers were able to tread water for a year.
Click to expand...
After the Flood in Genesis 11 the people were worried about being scattered over the face of the whole earth (verse 4). Then God did that (verse 8 and 9). So I guess they were carried around the earth or teleported or something.
 
excreationist, you haven't read a single one of the links or other information that was given to you in this thread, have you?

Given that, why should anyone continue to even try to engage with you (except for our own amusement)?
 
Worldtraveller said:
excreationist, you haven't read a single one of the links or other information that was given to you in this thread, have you?

Given that, why should anyone continue to even try to engage with you (except for our own amusement)?
Click to expand...
See #34 and #36
"As far as evidence for the flood goes - I believe in an old earth so I don’t need to prove the flood"

I'm just saying some problems are fixed by changing the date of the flood. And the genealogies can't involve months instead of years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom