6,000 Years?

tampasteve · Friday at 10:28 AM

Platte said:
AI
Recorded history began around the 4th millennium BCE (roughly 5,000 to 6,000 years ago) with the invention of writing systems in Sumerian Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt. The Sumerian cuneiform script and Egyptian hieroglyphs are considered the earliest known writing systems that documented actual events

I was writing about how the documents record events older, such as the Sumerian kings list. Some of it is impossibly long (like a king that reigned 28,000 years), but it is undeniable that they do record some sort of history prior to the time it was written.

Amo2 · Friday at 10:32 AM

YEC tend to ignore or use flimsy explanations to explain away evidence such as gobekli tepe, fossils, clear stratified layers of creatures from different times not mixing.

Pleaser do expound, and or provide examples of such, that might be examined or addressed. Not all YEC's see all things the same of course.

BeyondET · Friday at 11:05 AM

Job 33:6 said:
Yea actually, traditionally, the nephelim were the offspring of rebellious angels, and they were essentially demons. Or demons were the spirits of the nephelim.

And that's why they were giant. They were supernaturally evil. Hence why it God wanted them eliminated at the flood and with the conquests of Joshua and David (hence why he defeated the giant Goliath). Goliath was the last of the nephelim.

these were the giants Nephilim, Anakim, Rephaim, Emim, and Zamzummim mentioned in the bible and Nephilim were pre flood so Goliath wasn't an Nephilim.

Platte · Friday at 11:12 AM

tampasteve said:
I was writing about how the documents record events older, such as the Sumerian kings list. Some of it is impossibly long (like a king that reigned 28,000 years), but it is undeniable that they do record some sort of history prior to the time it was written.

Except the first civilization was about 6000 years ago too. Another coincidence?

AI Overview

The first civilization is widely considered to be Sumer, a city-state in Mesopotamia(modern-day Iraq) that emerged around 4000 BCE. Sumerians developed foundational aspects of civilization, including urban settlements, writing (cuneiform), advanced mathematics, irrigation, and the wheel, setting the stage for future civilizations in the region

The Barbarian · Friday at 11:36 AM

BeyondET said:
these were the giants Nephilim, Anakim, Rephaim, Emim, and Zamzummim mentioned in the bible and Nephilim were pre flood so Goliath wasn't an Nephilim.

The Anakim were a race of tall, warlike people, descended from the Nephilim, mentioned by the Israelites during the Exodus. They are found in the Book of Numbers and in Deuteronomy.

BeyondET · Friday at 11:48 AM

The Barbarian said:
The Anakim were a race of tall, warlike people, descended from the Nephilim, mentioned by the Israelites during the Exodus. They are found in the Book of Numbers and in Deuteronomy.

And these Rephaim, Emim, and Zamzummim, all part of the nation of giants, one could conclude all were descendants of Nephilim, the first giants mentioned.

Job 33:6 · Friday at 12:04 PM

The Barbarian said:
That seems to be a foolish motive. When the Southern Baptist Convention apologized for their former support of slavery and segregation, they were quite right praised by everyone for doing so.

Interesting comparison. If you were a parent and you raised your child to be YEC, and later found out that it was all a lie, would it be difficult for you to own that error?

Or what if you were raised in a YEC community, where the most important men, pastors, teachers, and role models were YEC, and you learned that it was a lie, would it be easy for you to accept that reality about the people you looked up to?

Or, what if your community put trust in you to teach them scripture, and you misguided them and taught them YEC for years. If you later learned that it was all a lie, would you be comfortable with that reality?

Some major institutions may have no choice but to accept their errors. But individuals, they can just shut their doors, close their blinds, and turn off their computers. Or they may just go back into YEC internet echo-chambers where they feel loved again. They don't need to change their minds. And few will hold them accountable.

Job 33:6 · Friday at 12:08 PM

Amo2 said:
Evidence is a fickle thing. Many different people viewing the same evidence, all think it supports their very different theories. Revealing the presuppositions of all so called objective "scientists". Thereby allowing each to claim the "evidence" supports their own theory, views, or faith. As a YEC, I frankly admit that my faith or theory, is based upon a literal reading of the creation account in the book of Genesis. What are the presuppositions of your faiths or theories?

But of course YEC isn't actually based upon a literal reading of the Bible.

Genesis 1:1-3 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters. [3] Then God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

Genesis 1:1-3 NRSV
[1] In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters. [3] Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.

If I said, "When I began to create a pizza, or In the beginning when I created a pizza, the pizza was formless and void, and darkness covered the face of the sauce. Then I said, let there be 300 degrees in the oven. And in 7 hours, the pizza was completed and it was good".

Would you then argue that my pizza appeared into existence a mere 7 hours ago?

tampasteve · Friday at 12:33 PM

Platte said:
Except the first civilization was about 6000 years ago too.

Almost certainly not. We are still understanding how far back settled people go. There is strong evidence of at least 9 sites that go way back, the people that built Gobekli Tepe were likely 11K years ago, Jericho looks to have been continuously settled at least 9,0000 years ago, there is a site in the Galilee (Ohalo II) that appears to have been settled around 23,000 years ago.

The issue is that when you start looking for archaeology that far back the evidence just becomes really hard to find. Pretty much only stone would survive, anything made out of wood would be gone, unless it was preserved in a very specific manner and then we just happened to find (such as we did with the Kalambo structure, which is mind boggling) .

The real question is what is a "civilization"? Personally I lean towards a more liberal definition allowing for settled groups of people to be a "civilization". The definition has previously been based around domestication of plants and farming; but that's really rather narrow of an idea, but that's largely where the 6,000 years ago comes from. There is no reason you can't have a "civilization" built around pastoralism and or/hunting, fishing and gathering certain foodstuffs.

Certainly the people getting together in the area at and surrounding Gobekli Tepe were even more than that as we discover more about the site. Right now we only have less than 10% of the site excevated and it has changed all thought on how old some of these sites may be and how advanced the people that made them were.

Platte · Friday at 1:18 PM

tampasteve said:
Almost certainly not. We are still understanding how far back settled people go. There is strong evidence of at least 9 sites that go way back, the people that built Gobekli Tepe were likely 11K years ago, Jericho looks to have been continuously settled at least 9,0000 years ago, there is a site in the Galilee (Ohalo II) that appears to have been settled around 23,000 years ago.

The issue is that when you start looking for archaeology that far back the evidence just becomes really hard to find. Pretty much only stone would survive, anything made out of wood would be gone, unless it was preserved in a very specific manner and then we just happened to find (such as we did with the Kalambo structure, which is mind boggling) .

The real question is what is a "civilization"? Personally I lean towards a more liberal definition allowing for settled groups of people to be a "civilization". The definition has previously been based around domestication of plants and farming; but that's really rather narrow of an idea, but that's largely where the 6,000 years ago comes from. There is no reason you can't have a "civilization" built around pastoralism and or/hunting, fishing and gathering certain foodstuffs.

Certainly the people getting together in the area at and surrounding Gobekli Tepe were even more than that as we discover more about the site. Right now we only have less than 10% of the site excevated and it has changed all thought on how old some of these sites may be and how advanced the people that made them were.

The world’s first civilization was 6000 years ago. The same time recorded history began. And coincidently when creation took place. That is our Historical Record. That is the historical facts that you have.

Play all the games you want. You don’t have to believe it or that creation was 6000 years ago.

But the fact is the worlds first civilization was Mesopotamia ~6000 years ago and Recorded History began ~6000 years ago.

We have no historical records that support any of the claims you mentioned.

Do you need me to post corroboration to what I’m saying?

And getting back to my point. Do you find that coincidence with the timing of creation?

tampasteve · Friday at 1:43 PM

Platte said:
The world’s first civilization was 6000 years ago. The same time recorded history began. And coincidently when creation took place. That is our Historical Record. That is the historical facts that you have.

Play all the games you want. You don’t have to believe it or that creation was 6000 years ago.

But the fact is the worlds first civilization was Mesopotamia ~6000 years ago and Recorded History began ~6000 years ago.

Do you need me to post corroboration to what I’m saying?

I am not "playing games", this matters to me, and it is something that I research a lot. Yes Sumer is still thought of as the oldest "civilization" by many people, but that's frankly based on old ideas and old data. Whether you want to believe the people around were a "civilization" pre-Sumer or not is not so important, the fact is that there were people, people like us, building things and leaving evidence way older than 6,000 years ago.

It matters to me that we had a civilization pre-Sumer, but for the discussion it probably isn't super relevant, what matters is that we have solid archaeological evidence, all over the world, of people doing the things people do - art, building things out of wood and stone, making fires, hunting, etc.

The whole idea of what makes a "civilization" is a hot debate topic in those circles, right now.

Platte said:
And getting back to my point. Do you find that coincidence with the timing of creation?

No, because I don't believe creation was 6,000 years ago and I don't believe civilization happened just 6,000 years ago. Sumer didn't just start doing it all and run with it. The development of the wheel, domestication of plants and animals had been happening for much longer, we have records of that. They are not written records, but we can see the progression of the technology through other archaeological evidence.

Platte · Friday at 2:14 PM

tampasteve said:
I am not "playing games", this matters to me, and it is something that I research a lot. Yes Sumer is still thought of as the oldest "civilization" by many people, but that's frankly based on old ideas and old data. Whether you want to believe the people around were a "civilization" pre-Sumer or not is not so important, the fact is that there were people, people like us, building things and leaving evidence way older than 6,000 years ago.

It matters to me that we had a civilization pre-Sumer, but for the discussion it probably isn't super relevant, what matters is that we have solid archaeological evidence, all over the world, of people doing the things people do - art, building things out of wood and stone, making fires, hunting, etc.

The whole idea of what makes a "civilization" is a hot debate topic in those circles, right now.

No, because I don't believe creation was 6,000 years ago and I don't believe civilization happened just 6,000 years ago. Sumer didn't just start doing it all and run with it. The development of the wheel, domestication of plants and animals had been happening for much longer, we have records of that. They are not written records, but we can see the progression of the technology through other archaeological evidence.

Why are they not written records?

Again, according to History…the world’s first civilization was ~6000 years ago and recorded History began approximately 6000 years ago. Using the genealogies from the Bible creation was ~6000 years ago. I’m not asking whether you believe anything…but how can you not stop and think wow what a coincidence.

How about this: the world’s first civilization (according to History) was in the same region as Eden (Mesopotamia) and the creation setting of mankind. Another coincidence? Those are head scratching facts.

tampasteve · Friday at 2:34 PM

Platte said:
Why are they not written records?

There are no written language records because written language didn't exist. Again however, there are artistic records, archaeological records, and fossil records.

Platte said:
Again, according to History…the world’s first civilization was ~6000 years ago and recorded History began approximately 6000 years ago. Using the genealogies from the Bible creation was ~6000 years ago. I’m not asking whether you believe anything…but how can you not stop and think wow what a coincidence.

How about this: the world’s first civilization (according to History) was in the same region as Eden (Mesopotamia) and the creation setting of mankind. Another coincidence? Those are head scratching facts.

Let me make it crystal clear:
- The 6,000 year old "civilization" idea is being hotly challenged right now due to new archaeological evidence from over the last 25 or so years.
- I don't ascribe to the idea that a "civilization" must have the entire package (wheel, domesticated plants and animals, art, written language, etc.) to qualify as a "civilization", it is honestly such a narrow understanding of how people work together as to be useless.
- Recorded written history began about 6,000 years ago, but it is honestly disingenuous to present it as if there just wasn't' history before then or that the history we can see in the archaeological record doesn't matter since it is not "written". It isn't like history just began when someone started writing cuneiform tablets in Sumer. People were communicating in pictograms before then, writing didn't spring out of nothing.
- Even if you want to date "civilization" to 6,000 years ago we have loads of evidence of people across the globe from before then doing all sorts of the things people do, so it isn't particularly relevant that YEC claim 6,000 years and most historians up to the recent past say "civilization" started 6,000 years ago.

Platte · Friday at 2:56 PM

tampasteve said:
There are no written language records because written language didn't exist. Again however, there are artistic records, archaeological records, and fossil records.

Let me make it crystal clear:
- The 6,000 year old "civilization" idea is being hotly challenged right now due to new archaeological evidence from over the last 25 or so years.
- I don't ascribe to the idea that a "civilization" must have the entire package (wheel, domesticated plants and animals, art, written language, etc.) to qualify as a "civilization", it is honestly such a narrow understanding of how people work together as to be useless.
- Recorded written history began about 6,000 years ago, but it is honestly disingenuous to present it as if there just wasn't' history before then or that the history we can see in the archaeological record doesn't matter since it is not "written". It isn't like history just began when someone started writing cuneiform tablets in Sumer. People were communicating in pictograms before then, writing didn't spring out of nothing.
- Even if you want to date "civilization" to 6,000 years ago we have loads of evidence of people across the globe from before then doing all sorts of the things people do, so it isn't particularly relevant that YEC claim 6,000 years and most historians up to the recent past say "civilization" started 6,000 years ago.

You are not paying attention to History. I expected that. lol. Must be those Tampa schools (I graduated from Pinellas Park)

tampasteve · Friday at 3:07 PM

Platte said:
You are not paying attention to History. I expected that. lol. Must be those Tampa schools (I graduated from Pinellas Park)

To be fair, I think that you are perhaps not paying attention to the developments in history, primarily in the fields of paleontology, archaeology and anthropology. There is honestly a lot happening that is vastly changing what people had thought and been taught for hundreds of years. I am a permit carrying amateur-paleontologist as well as a member at several associations that deal with these subjects, so I am not talking strictly from a place of previously published old books or AI knowledge - I am in the literal field helping to do the study.

Platte · Friday at 4:46 PM

tampasteve said:
To be fair, I think that you are perhaps not paying attention to the developments in history, primarily in the fields of paleontology, archaeology and anthropology. There is honestly a lot happening that is vastly changing what people had thought and been taught for hundreds of years. I am a permit carrying amateur-paleontologist as well as a member at several associations that deal with these subjects, so I am not talking strictly from a place of previously published old books or AI knowledge - I am in the literal field helping to do the study.

Well then you of all people should know. Tell me about the considerations these fields understand and have formulated regarding the environment in a world pre flood that allowed a man to live to be a 1000 years old. What changes did the flood cause to the environment that changed this as God reduced a lifespan to 120 years? Certainly these fields have made many considerations for this - especially in the aging and dating spectrum.

Job 33:6 · Friday at 6:38 PM

So you have layers of soil and rock. The deeper the layer, the older the fossils in that layer.

People with written language are in a shallow layer. People without written language, are in a deeper layer.

So how does that mesh with the idea that there weren't people of earlier civilizations than at sumer, despite there being deeper layers with people in it?

Jipsah · Friday at 6:38 PM

Platte said:
You do realize that God himself said creation took 6 days

He still didn't define the length, in human terms, of those "days", did He?

Platte said:
Just a heads up…might not be a good idea to teach others it wasn’t 6 days if that’s what God directly said.

I'm not keen on majoring in the minors in any case. You tell me that God's "days" are 86,400 seconds long. But they St. Peter s "day" is as a 1000 years, and 1,000 years as a day. You gonna take him to task for saying that?

The thing is, unless God is a trickster and has made the universe He created "look" quite a few millenia older than 6k years, it is in fact just that. And the real downsides to beating the tub for 86,400 second creation, or a flat earth, or a global flood, or any such thing, is that: A) you can't prove it, B) it makes Christians, and Christianity, look goofy, and C) are completely irrelevant to the Christian Faith.

Our Faith is based on God having intervened directly in human history to reconcile sinful human beings to JHimself. To steal a line from William Jennings Bryan, it's about the Rock of Ages, not the Age of Rocks. How long it took, by human reckoning, for God to create the universe has no real bearing on or anything to do with the altogether unarguable facts that:

10 [Christ] was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name

It ain't about how long it took God to create the universe, or whether the earth is flat or not. St. Paul said it best: For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. The old saint understood how things work; don't clutter your message with irrelevant stuff. The message is Jesus Christ.

FaithT · Friday at 7:24 PM

tampasteve said:
Except that it is not. We have visual and archaeological records much older than that. Even Egyptian and Sumerian records record dates further back and paintings preserved in caves record events in the 15K year range. Gobekli tepe is around 11,000 years old.

Good work Tampasteve. I almost thought that Platte had a point. Just for about two seconds.

tampasteve said:
Except that it is not. We have visual and archaeological records much older than that. Even Egyptian and Sumerian records record dates further back and paintings preserved in caves record events in the 15K year range. Gobekli tepe is around 11,000 years old.

FaithT · Friday at 7:25 PM

Job 33:6 said:
For some, there may be too much to gain by holding onto it. Money, authority, control.

While for others, there may be too much to lose by abandoning it. Pride, community relations, identity, perhaps embarrassment.

True.

6,000 Years?

Not everyone who says, “Lord, Lord,” will be saved

Active Member

Earth Treasures

Well-Known Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Earth Treasures

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Not everyone who says, “Lord, Lord,” will be saved

Well-Known Member

Not everyone who says, “Lord, Lord,” will be saved

Well-Known Member

Not everyone who says, “Lord, Lord,” will be saved

Well-Known Member

Not everyone who says, “Lord, Lord,” will be saved

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Blood Drinker

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads