Originally posted by: Zakath15
Actually, the flood story is more widespread than you think. Every single culture in the known world has a flood story - including cultures that had no contact with Judeo-Christian culture until the last few centuries.
10. Historical Aspects
Why is there no mention of the Flood in the records of Egyptian or Mesopotamian civilizations which existed at the time? Biblical dates (I Kings 6:1, Gal 3:17, various generation lengths given in Genesis) place the Flood 1300 years before Solomon began the first temple. We can construct reliable chronologies for near Eastern history, particularly for Egypt, from many kinds of records from the literate cultures in the near East. These records are independent of, but supported by, dating methods such as dendrochronology and carbon-14. The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 B.C. +/- some small delta, placing the Flood around 2250 B.C. Unfortunately, the Egyptians (among others) have written records dating well back before 2250 B.C. (the Great Pyramid, for example dates to the 26th century B.C., 300 years before the Biblical date for the Flood). No sign in Egyptian inscriptions of this global flood around 2250 B.C.
How did the human population rebound so fast? Genealogies in Genesis put the Tower of Babel about 110 to 150 years after the Flood [Gen 10:25, 11:10-19]. How did the world population regrow so fast to make its construction (and the city around it) possible? Similarly, there would have been very few people around to build Stonehenge and the Pyramids, rebuild the Sumerian and Indus Valley civilizations, populate the Americas, etc.
Why do other flood myths vary so greatly from the Genesis account? Flood myths are fairly common worldwide, and if they came from a common source, we should expect similarities in most of them. Instead, the myths show great diversity. [Bailey, 1989, pp. 5-10; Isaak, 1997] For example, people survive on high land or trees in the myths about as often as on boats or rafts, and no other flood myth includes a covenant not to destroy all life again.
Why should we expect Genesis to be accurate? We know that other people's sacred stories change over time [Baaren, 1972] and that changes to the Genesis Flood story have occurred in later traditions [Ginzberg, 1909; Utley, 1961]. Is it not reasonable to assume that changes occurred between the story's origin and its being written down in its present form?
Originally posted by: Zakath15
Originally posted by: CZroe
You forget that the flood has scientific evidence. The correct origin may not exist, but the Bible's roots can be traced much farter back than that of any other manuscript in existance, predating all other writings. It has yet to be proven wrong on ANY count, and so far stands by its promise as being the one true record of mankind's creation.Originally posted by: rahvin
Originally posted by: Tominator
Amazing!
We have no dinosaur bones. We have fossils!
Even if one were to prove a timeline of earth's existence, which is presently impossible, it is purely speculative when dinosaurs actually lived and the reason they died out.
The Bible describes 'behemoths' and other unexplained animals. No explanation is given.
Remember all the posters in school. The ones showing an ape and it's stages to becoming human? It was a lie and science has proven itself wrong so many times to lean on it as proof one way or the other is laughable at the least yet promotes theories as fact.
I do not know and neither do you!
I would rather trust a method that works to solve it's own imperfections than rely on the supposed perfections of:
The Bible consists of a collection of sixty-six separate books. These books were chosen, after a bit of haggling, by the Catholic Council of Carthage in 397 A.D.--more than three hundred years after the time of Jesus. This collection is broken into two major sections: The Old Testament, which consists of thirty-nine books, and The New Testament, which consists of twenty-seven books. (Catholic Bibles include an additional twelve books known as the Apocrypha.)
The Old Testament is concerned with the Hebrew God, Yahweh, and purports to be a history of the early Israelites. The New Testament is the work of early Christians and reflects their beliefs about Jesus; it purports to be a history of what Jesus taught and did.
The composition of the various books began in about 1000 B.C. and continued for more than a thousand years. Much oral material was included. This was repeated from father to son, revised over and over again, and then put into written form by various editors. These editors often worked in different locales and in different time periods and were usually unaware of each other. Their work was primarily intended for local use and it is unlikely that any author foresaw that his work would be included in a "Bible."
No original manuscripts exist. There is probably not one book which survives in anything like its original form. There are hundreds of differences between the oldest manuscripts of any one book. These differences indicate that numerous additions and alterations were made to the originals by various copyists and editors.
Many biblical authors are unknown. Where an author has been named, that name has sometimes been selected by pious believers rather than given by the author himself. The four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are examples of books which did not carry the names of their actual authors. The present names were assigned long after these four books were written. In spite of what the Gospel authors say, biblical scholars are now almost unanimously agreed that none of the Gospel authors was either a disciple of Jesus or an eyewitness to his ministry.
Although some books of the Bible are traditionally attributed to a single author, many are actually the work of multiple authors. Genesis and John are two examples of multiple authorship.
Many biblical books have the earmarks of fiction. For example, private conversations are often related when no reporter was present. Conversations between God and various individuals are recorded. Prehistoric events are given in great detail. When a story is told by more than one author, there are usually significant differences. Many stories--stories which in their original context are considered even by Christians to be fictional--were borrowed by the biblical authors, adapted for their own purposes, given a historical setting, and then declared to be fact.
The Flood story is an example of this kind of adaptation. Its migration from the earliest known occurrence in Sumeria, around 1600 B.C., from place to place and eventually to the Bible, can be traced historically. Each time the story was used again, it was altered to speak of local gods and heroes.
Actually, the flood story is more widespread than you think. Every single culture in the known world has a flood story - including cultures that had no contact with Judeo-Christian culture until the last few centuries.
Originally posted by: rahvin
Originally posted by: Zakath15
Actually, the flood story is more widespread than you think. Every single culture in the known world has a flood story - including cultures that had no contact with Judeo-Christian culture until the last few centuries.
Please don't make assumptions about what I know. Every single culture in the world does NOT have a flood myth, the only people that circulate those notions are the same that tell children tons of other lies.
Originally posted by: djheater
Originally posted by: CZroe
That must be the single STUPIDEST post I've ever seen on Anandtech!
Stick around.... you ain't seen nothin yet... the post you referred to doesn't even scratch the surface... (and it was a joke.... dork.)
Originally posted by: CZroe
Also MAY attest to it being truly a worldwide event. Also rememebr that in the time before Lot the known world was one large land mass that the Bible describes as seperating.
Originally posted by: Zakath15
Originally posted by: rahvin
Originally posted by: Zakath15
Actually, the flood story is more widespread than you think. Every single culture in the known world has a flood story - including cultures that had no contact with Judeo-Christian culture until the last few centuries.
Please don't make assumptions about what I know. Every single culture in the world does NOT have a flood myth, the only people that circulate those notions are the same that tell children tons of other lies.
What kind of lies are you talking about?
It was my understanding that most (if not all) ancient cultures have a record of some sort of catastrophic flood occuring sometime in the far past - there are discrepencies, but the sheer magnitude and probability of so many cultures having such a common story may attest to some sort of historical event.
No contact? You can't say that until you prove that they are not decendants of the Ark's inhabitants. All of this predates, Jews, Hebrews, and written history and therefore EVERY culture knew about it before it was written in Genesis.
Originally posted by: CZroe
Originally posted by: djheater
Originally posted by: CZroe
That must be the single STUPIDEST post I've ever seen on Anandtech!
Stick around.... you ain't seen nothin yet... the post you referred to doesn't even scratch the surface... (and it was a joke.... dork.)
A "joke" that I have seen many people actually try and use in real life conversation as fact because that's what the schools have provided as fact instead of theory. That post was not distinguished from those other conversations in any way and if it truly was a joke as you claim it wasn't delivered correctly. "You better go after your refridgerator because it's running!"
Originally posted by: rc5
Dinosaurs didn't exist. The bones we saw today were made by God for some freakin' reasons.
Originally posted by: bthorny
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Ahahahaha..try to convince the Asians of thatPeople, let's take one important thing into consideration. Back than, people only knew of Europe and Middle East
LMAO
Originally posted by: fatbaby
Originally posted by: rc5
Dinosaurs didn't exist. The bones we saw today were made by God for some freakin' reasons.
perhaps they were the bones of dinosaurs Created By God?
This can go on and on and on
Originally posted by: ChrisCramer247
Yes they did exist.
I find it amusing that all of these religious zealots come out to say they don't and the world is 6,000 - 10,000 years old. Most of them I'm assuming are baptists or a reformed protestant religion.
The old testament was meant to be a guide to morality by reading the stories and being able to tell what the moral and religious objects were and what you are supposed to learn from it. You really don't believe that Jonah was eaten by a whale? The old testment is a great read for both religious and non religious people. Also, have you ever read the word "gone to the bathroom" or "vacated his bowels" So Because of this we don't believe we piss and crap huh?
The old testament is full of fallability, but the meaning from them are infallable.
Originally posted by: VFAA
Originally posted by: ChrisCramer247
Yes they did exist.
I find it amusing that all of these religious zealots come out to say they don't and the world is 6,000 - 10,000 years old. Most of them I'm assuming are baptists or a reformed protestant religion.
The old testament was meant to be a guide to morality by reading the stories and being able to tell what the moral and religious objects were and what you are supposed to learn from it. You really don't believe that Jonah was eaten by a whale? The old testment is a great read for both religious and non religious people. Also, have you ever read the word "gone to the bathroom" or "vacated his bowels" So Because of this we don't believe we piss and crap huh?
The old testament is full of fallability, but the meaning from them are infallable.
Finally someone said something that I've been trying to say for the past day.
Actually I said them earlier. Not my fault some of you can't read English .Originally posted by: rahvin
Originally posted by: VFAA
Originally posted by: ChrisCramer247
Yes they did exist.
I find it amusing that all of these religious zealots come out to say they don't and the world is 6,000 - 10,000 years old. Most of them I'm assuming are baptists or a reformed protestant religion.
The old testament was meant to be a guide to morality by reading the stories and being able to tell what the moral and religious objects were and what you are supposed to learn from it. You really don't believe that Jonah was eaten by a whale? The old testment is a great read for both religious and non religious people. Also, have you ever read the word "gone to the bathroom" or "vacated his bowels" So Because of this we don't believe we piss and crap huh?
The old testament is full of fallability, but the meaning from them are infallable.
Finally someone said something that I've been trying to say for the past day.
So stop trying to say things and just say them. Gosh it's like it our fault you can't communicate.
Originally posted by: ChrisCramer247
Yes they did exist.
I find it amusing that all of these religious zealots come out to say they don't and the world is 6,000 - 10,000 years old. Most of them I'm assuming are baptists or a reformed protestant religion.
The old testament was meant to be a guide to morality by reading the stories and being able to tell what the moral and religious objects were and what you are supposed to learn from it. You really don't believe that Jonah was eaten by a whale? The old testment is a great read for both religious and non religious people. Also, have you ever read the word "gone to the bathroom" or "vacated his bowels" So Because of this we don't believe we piss and crap huh?
The old testament is full of fallability, but the meaning from them are infallable.
Originally posted by: CZroe
Originally posted by: Zakath15
Originally posted by: CZroe
You forget that the flood has scientific evidence. The correct origin may not exist, but the Bible's roots can be traced much farter back than that of any other manuscript in existance, predating all other writings. It has yet to be proven wrong on ANY count, and so far stands by its promise as being the one true record of mankind's creation.Originally posted by: rahvin
Originally posted by: Tominator
Amazing!
We have no dinosaur bones. We have fossils!
Even if one were to prove a timeline of earth's existence, which is presently impossible, it is purely speculative when dinosaurs actually lived and the reason they died out.
The Bible describes 'behemoths' and other unexplained animals. No explanation is given.
Remember all the posters in school. The ones showing an ape and it's stages to becoming human? It was a lie and science has proven itself wrong so many times to lean on it as proof one way or the other is laughable at the least yet promotes theories as fact.
I do not know and neither do you!
I would rather trust a method that works to solve it's own imperfections than rely on the supposed perfections of:
The Bible consists of a collection of sixty-six separate books. These books were chosen, after a bit of haggling, by the Catholic Council of Carthage in 397 A.D.--more than three hundred years after the time of Jesus. This collection is broken into two major sections: The Old Testament, which consists of thirty-nine books, and The New Testament, which consists of twenty-seven books. (Catholic Bibles include an additional twelve books known as the Apocrypha.)
The Old Testament is concerned with the Hebrew God, Yahweh, and purports to be a history of the early Israelites. The New Testament is the work of early Christians and reflects their beliefs about Jesus; it purports to be a history of what Jesus taught and did.
The composition of the various books began in about 1000 B.C. and continued for more than a thousand years. Much oral material was included. This was repeated from father to son, revised over and over again, and then put into written form by various editors. These editors often worked in different locales and in different time periods and were usually unaware of each other. Their work was primarily intended for local use and it is unlikely that any author foresaw that his work would be included in a "Bible."
No original manuscripts exist. There is probably not one book which survives in anything like its original form. There are hundreds of differences between the oldest manuscripts of any one book. These differences indicate that numerous additions and alterations were made to the originals by various copyists and editors.
Many biblical authors are unknown. Where an author has been named, that name has sometimes been selected by pious believers rather than given by the author himself. The four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are examples of books which did not carry the names of their actual authors. The present names were assigned long after these four books were written. In spite of what the Gospel authors say, biblical scholars are now almost unanimously agreed that none of the Gospel authors was either a disciple of Jesus or an eyewitness to his ministry.
Although some books of the Bible are traditionally attributed to a single author, many are actually the work of multiple authors. Genesis and John are two examples of multiple authorship.
Many biblical books have the earmarks of fiction. For example, private conversations are often related when no reporter was present. Conversations between God and various individuals are recorded. Prehistoric events are given in great detail. When a story is told by more than one author, there are usually significant differences. Many stories--stories which in their original context are considered even by Christians to be fictional--were borrowed by the biblical authors, adapted for their own purposes, given a historical setting, and then declared to be fact.
The Flood story is an example of this kind of adaptation. Its migration from the earliest known occurrence in Sumeria, around 1600 B.C., from place to place and eventually to the Bible, can be traced historically. Each time the story was used again, it was altered to speak of local gods and heroes.
Actually, the flood story is more widespread than you think. Every single culture in the known world has a flood story - including cultures that had no contact with Judeo-Christian culture until the last few centuries.
No contact? You can't say that until you prove that they are not decendants of the Ark's inhabitants. All of this predates, Jews, Hebrews, and written history and therefore EVERY culture knew about it before it was written in Genesis.
Originally posted by: Ameesh
its nuts but some people on this board believe the earth is only 5-10 thousand years old!