Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Darwin - Half Right
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hans Blaster" data-source="post: 75938689" data-attributes="member: 396028"><p>Who says that "Bronze age = before writing"?</p><p></p><p>The general definition of "pre-historic" is before written records.</p><p></p><p>The general definition of "Bronze Age" is a technology using bronze (alloy of tin & copper) for tools and weapons rather than stones tools or iron tools. There are also usually an intermediate period between stone and bronze with copper tools prior to the discovery of the copper alloy (or due to a lack of tin).</p><p></p><p>There are many "Old World" literate, Bronze Age civilizations: Sumerians, Akkadians, Minoans*, Indus Valley civilization*, Assyrians, Amorites, Egyptians (Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms), Hittites, Eblaites, and Hurrians, to name a few.</p><p></p><p>Bronze/Iron isn't the "historical" divider, it is writing (as you noted correctly).</p><p></p><p>The OT isn't the product of Bronze-age goatherders (another part of the invective some times used) but of Iron-age scribes.</p><p></p><p>Quit trying to discredit scholarly terms by misusing them, about evolution or history.</p><p></p><p>*Texts not deciphered by modern scholars.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hans Blaster, post: 75938689, member: 396028"] Who says that "Bronze age = before writing"? The general definition of "pre-historic" is before written records. The general definition of "Bronze Age" is a technology using bronze (alloy of tin & copper) for tools and weapons rather than stones tools or iron tools. There are also usually an intermediate period between stone and bronze with copper tools prior to the discovery of the copper alloy (or due to a lack of tin). There are many "Old World" literate, Bronze Age civilizations: Sumerians, Akkadians, Minoans*, Indus Valley civilization*, Assyrians, Amorites, Egyptians (Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms), Hittites, Eblaites, and Hurrians, to name a few. Bronze/Iron isn't the "historical" divider, it is writing (as you noted correctly). The OT isn't the product of Bronze-age goatherders (another part of the invective some times used) but of Iron-age scribes. Quit trying to discredit scholarly terms by misusing them, about evolution or history. *Texts not deciphered by modern scholars. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Darwin - Half Right
Top
Bottom