Marsupial in arctic supports that man was on Pangaea.

dad · Feb 23, 2019

helmut said:
Really?
Your scene implies that Terah and Nahor were merely the younger folks who served other gods while Noah, Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah, Eber and so on served God.

Not sure how you get all that from a simple fact that Abraham and Noah were alive for awhile at the same time.
Now for you to answer a few questions.

1) Do you believe there was a real flood with only 8 people surviving?
2) Do you believe God created Adam and Eve and an actual garden?
3) Do you believe Jesus will come back to earth and rule here 1000 years?

If you want to talk about Scripture we should know where you stand.

Joshua 24:2 does not sound like that. This is no proof, but a hint that makes it likely that there are indeed many gaps in the genealogy of Genesis 10.

Let's look at the verse and see then.

2 And Joshua said unto all the people, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood in old time, even Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father of Nachor: and they served other gods.

I really have no idea how this applies to the topic, or how someone could invent some gap to insert. Sorry. What I see is it is being noted that Abraham's dad was involved (as is well known) in the idolatry business. So?

If we take as maximum the sum of the life-spans in Genesis 10, there could be up to 3000 years between Abraham and the flood. Which brings the span of about 5100 to 2400 BC as the time when the flood occurred. How to get more precise is a mystery, unless you chose to ignore the biblical evidence for gaps in the genealogies.

In Jewish tradition, Abraham was contemporary with Noah.

"
In Jewish tradition, Abraham is called Avraham Avinu (אברהם אבינו), "our father Abraham," signifying that he is both the biological progenitor of the Jews and the father of Judaism, the first Jew.[19] His story is read in the weekly Torah reading portions, predominantly in the parashot: Lech-Lecha (לֶךְ-לְךָ), Vayeira (וַיֵּרָא), Chayei Sarah (חַיֵּי שָׂרָה), and Toledot (תּוֹלְדֹת).

In Jewish legend, God created heaven and earth for the sake of the merits of Abraham.[20] After the deluge, Abraham was the only one among the pious who solemnly swear never forsaking God,[21] and studied in house of Noah and Shem to learn about "Ways of God,"[22]and continuing the line of High Priest from Noah and Shem, then he descended the office to Levi and his seed forever. Before leaving his fathers' land, Abraham was miraculously saved from the fiery furnace of Nimrod following his brave action of breaking the idols of the Chaldeans into pieces.[23] During his sojourning in Canaan, Abraham was accustomed to extend hospitality to travelers and strangers and taught how to praise God also knowledge of God to those who had received his kindness.[24]"

Abraham - Wikipedia

We see in the bible that from Abraham to David was 14 generations.

Matt 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

This seems to be backed up, once again by Jewish tradition.

"Matthew 1:11. The Jews had a sort of technical method of summing up generations in this way. In Synopsis Sohar, p. 132, n. 18, we have the following words; "From Abraham to Solomon were fifteen generations; and then the moon was at the full. From Solomon to Zedekiah were other fifteen generations; the moon was then in the wane, and Zedekiah's eyes were put out." That is, the regal state came to its zenith of light and glory in the time of Solomon; but decreased gradually, till it became nearly extinct in the days of Zedekiah. See Schoetgen."

Matthew - Chapter 1 - Adam Clarke Commentary on StudyLight.org

So I am not sure how you get a lot of gaps into that.

Helmut-WK · Feb 23, 2019

dad said:
If you had it you wouldn't need to ask. You don't.

What counts as a proof is different from person to person, because they have different believes (or axioms). Just think of the ontological proof of God's existence: You will hardly find anyone who accepts it as a valid proof today, but it was taken as that for the majority of educated people in Europe for several centuries in the middle-ages (simple-minded persons think they could not reason logically, but this is an illusion).

I repeat: I don't know, whether I have a proof for you for "same nature", but tell me what would be a proof for you, and I will see whether I have one or not.

If you doin't want to say what would be a valid proof for you, this could be because there is no proof conceivable (which almost certainly means that this is not a matter of fact, but of believes).

dad said:
": During the time of the flood Genesis tells us that 150 days started on the 17th day of the second month, and ended on the 17th day of the seventh month or exactly five months later (Genesis 7:11, 24 and 8:3-4). 150 days ÷ 5 months = 30 days per month. 30 days × 12 months = 360 days per year."

This is fact. But the crucial question is: Are the 30 days per month an exact value as you think, or an approximate value as implicit in Dan 8:14? Address this question. Same with Revelation.

dad said:
?? The amount of food elephants or mammoths or hippos or horses or cattle needed was 'rather limited'!!!? Ridiculous.

Well, how much did they ate during the time on the ark?

dad said:
It seems to me that squirrels and giraffes and birds of many types, and monkeys and etc etc etc all need trees. It also occurs to me that huge elephants and other animals might find it hard sitting there waiting for grasses to grow. The best answer and simplest explanation is that trees and plants grew fast.

Well, there was plenty of time between the dove returning with oil twig and the opening of the ark for grass to grow, the animals found grass enough when they got out. As to trees, you cannot rule out trees that survived the flood and recovered to produce new food.

dad said:
Looking at the future we see ... plants will grow fast and abundant again.

Where is this prophesied?

dad said:
Ps 72:16 - There shall be an handful of corn in the earth upon the top of the mountains; the fruit thereof shall shake like Lebanon: and they of the city shall flourish like grass of the earth.

This is abundant, but fast???

dad said:
I don't think Luke was trying to give a record for the purpose of knowing the years!

LOL, the record which shows we can't know the number of years was certainly not given for the purpose of knowing the years. One reason (not necessarily the most important one) this was given was the hint we can't calculate the time of the babel tower as you do.

dad said:
No. Angels did not marry women and live on earth in Abraham's day.

Those who did were punished and could not live on earth in Abrahams time, those who obeyed God did not what was forbidden. But the attempt tp enforce something like this is reported in Gen 19, and Jude pairs it with the account in Gen 5.

dad said:
To change the way man understands is something that requires more than nature!

This is a supernatural act (though a language can split into several languages unintelligible to one another, it happened many times), I already said it. But the nature that allow man to learn a mother tongue and to communicate in it remained the same, so it was not an change in nature.

Helmut-WK · Feb 23, 2019

dad said:
We see in the bible that from Abraham to David was 14 generations.

430 years in Egypt, 480 years from the exodus to Salomo -> more that 800 years from Abraham to David -> about 60 years per generation. Sure there are no gaps (which would lower the number of years per generation?).

dad said:
Matt 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

I changed the emphasis to the period where we know there are gaps.Just compare to the OT.

Helmut-WK · Feb 23, 2019

In additon:

dad said:
In Jewish legend

Well, I'm

Titus 1:14 said:
not devoting [myself] to Jewish myths and the commands of people who turn away from the truth

A naive reading of Mt 1:8 would give that Joram begat Uzziah, yet Joram was the father of Jehoash, who was the father of Amaziah, who was the father of Uzziah. According to Mt 1:11, Josiah seems to be the father of Jehoiachin, while he was his grand-father.
Likewise, a naive reading of Gen 11:13 leads to the conclusion that Arpachshad begat Shelah, while we see from Luke he was his grandfather. Gap proved.

What I say is based on Scripture, what you say on Jewish myths.

dad · Feb 23, 2019

helmut said:
What counts as a proof is different from person to person, because they have different believes (or axioms). Just think of the ontological proof of God's existence: You will hardly find anyone who accepts it as a valid proof today, but it was taken as that for the majority of educated people in Europe for several centuries in the middle-ages (simple-minded persons think they could not reason logically, but this is an illusion)

Well, science has certain standards for evidences. What evidence that is considered scientific do you have for the same nature in the past? We are not talking philosophy or something that is different for everyone...but hard evidence from science.

The answer is no, they cannot prove it, they just believe it and claim it and use it in all models of the past!

This is fact. But the crucial question is: Are the 30 days per month an exact value as you think, or an approximate value as implicit in Dan 8:14? Address this question. Same with Revelation.

Look, the star and end dates given both in days and years as well as months in Revelation as well as Genesis are exact values.

Well, how much did they ate during the time on the ark?

I have debated with people who claim that there was no way enough supplies could have been on that boat to feed all animals life and people. I argue that there was. I raised the possibility that God may have induced a hibernation or semi hibernation for many of the animals much of that flood year. But I think it is safe to say that at the end there was not a whole lotta food left! They needed vegetation and plenty of it and trees.

Well, there was plenty of time between the dove returning with oil twig and the opening of the ark for grass to grow, the animals found grass enough when they got out. As to trees, you cannot rule out trees that survived the flood and recovered to produce new food.

Trees in most cases take YEARS to bear fruit. Grasses do grow fairly fast now, but how much do you think grew in all the areas the animals and birds would travel to in a week or two? Not like animals can it around waiting for grass and trees to grow. They need to eat.

Where is this prophesied?

Here is one, for example

Amos 9:13 Behold, the days come, said the LORD, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that sows seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt.

This is abundant, but fast???

Well, when those gathering crops overtake those planting them, that is fast!

LOL, the record which shows we can't know the number of years was certainly not given for the purpose of knowing the years. One reason (not necessarily the most important one) this was given was the hint we can't calculate the time of the babel tower as you do.

14 generations is close enough. We can actually get the lifespans and what kids people had and etc also. Not rocket science.

Those who did were punished and could not live on earth in Abrahams time, those who obeyed God did not what was forbidden. But the attempt tp enforce something like this is reported in Gen 19, and Jude pairs it with the account in Gen 5.

Yeah, Abraham's dad was a real sinner. So?

This is a supernatural act (though a language can split into several languages unintelligible to one another, it happened many times), I already said it. But the nature that allow man to learn a mother tongue and to communicate in it remained the same, so it was not an change in nature.

? Name one time people suddenly could not understand each other?

dad · Feb 23, 2019

helmut said:
430 years in Egypt, 480 years from the exodus to Salomo -> more that 800 years from Abraham to David -> about 60 years per generation. Sure there are no gaps (which would lower the number of years per generation?).

Grea, so there is no big mystery when Abraham lived or when Noah lived. Abraham's tomb is even still there in Israel.

I changed the emphasis to the period where we know there are gaps.Just compare to the OT.

So now you are talking pre Noah?

dad · Feb 24, 2019

helmut said:
In additon:

Well, I'm

A naive reading of Mt 1:8 would give that Joram begat Uzziah, yet Joram was the father of Jehoash, who was the father of Amaziah, who was the father of Uzziah. According to Mt 1:11, Josiah seems to be the father of Jehoiachin, while he was his grand-father.
Likewise, a naive reading of Gen 11:13 leads to the conclusion that Arpachshad begat Shelah, while we see from Luke he was his grandfather. Gap proved.

What I say is based on Scripture, what you say on Jewish myths.

Apparently Ussher and many others never got hung up on this.

"It is the legal genealogy which is given here, that is to say, the genealogy of Joseph, of whom Christ was the rightful heir according to Jewish law. The evangelist has omitted three kings of the parentage of Ahab, in order to have the fourteen generations in each period. Jehoahaz and Jehoiakim are also omitted. The object of the genealogy is not at all affected by this circumstance. The point was to give it as recognised by the Jews, and all the kings were well known to all."

Matthew - Chapter 1 - Darby's Synopsis of the New Testament on StudyLight.org

I don't think that an obvious omission affects the purposes of Luke's legal genealogy. Nor does it affect the dating of Abraham.

Have you some evidence that people have the flood dates wrong?

By the way, Jewish tradition and history is not the sort of traditions Jesus talked about as what was being put before God and Scripture. He was talking about the traditions like rituals, and commandments of men such as forbidding to do good on the Sabbath!

Bungle_Bear · Feb 24, 2019

dad said:
? Name one time people suddenly could not understand each other?

Any time you got involved in a conversation?

Helmut-WK · Feb 24, 2019

dad said:
Well, science has certain standards for evidences. What evidence that is considered scientific do you have for the same nature in the past? We are not talking philosophy or something that is different for everyone...but hard evidence from science.

I'm somewhat surprised. They way you talked with others seemed to indicate that scientific evidence is of little value to you.

As you said, there are certain levels of scientific standard. One is simplicity of theories - make no assumptions that can be avoided without conflicting to the fact, i.e. chose the most simple hypothesis. It is sometimes called Occam's razor, after the theologian William of Occam (or Ockham), 1288-1347.

One simple assumption is that natural laws are the same for any time and any place, so in the realm of science it is the one who postulates a change in nature who has the burden of proof.

Another level is (non-)falsification. A theory should be falsificatable in principle, i.e. there are data conceivable which are not consistent with this theory. As to same nature during the last 5-6000 years, these were records documenting such a change. Remember the discussions about the Egyptians? No Egyptian that noted any change in nature as you postulate means, that many possible counter-facts (that are very likely to have been recorded, if such a change had occurred) are non-existent, which is a rather strong proof that the "null hypothesis" of same nature is correct.

This can be corroborated with other evidence, e.g. dendrochronology shows no indication that the growing of trees ever changes, same with warves ...

If you really are prepared to accept a scientific proof, this should be enough. But in other postings you rather laughed at scientific evidence, so I suppose you will be not convinced by it. So the question remains: What on earth will convince you?

dad said:
Look, the star and end dates given both in days and years as well as months in Revelation as well as Genesis are exact values.

With the "null hypothesis" that the usage of months is the same in Daniel 8:14 as in Genesis and Revelation, is is clear that these are not exact values, but rather rounded values. What evidence do you have that Genesis and Revelation follow another pattern of usage than Daniel?

dad said:
I have debated with people who claim that there was no way enough supplies could have been on that boat to feed all animals life and people. I argue that there was.

So if we estimate how much food was in the ark and how many animals, we can estimate how much food they needed when they got out. And there is no reason to suppose that, given recent growth values, there was not enough food grown in the months (!) between the ark landing somewhere in the Ararat mountains and the opening of the ark.

dad said:
Trees in most cases take YEARS to bear fruit.

Trees that suffered under very hard conditons do not need years to recover.

dad said:
Grasses do grow fairly fast now, but how much do you think grew in all the areas the animals and birds would travel to in a week or two?

Given the time it could grow, about half a meter high ... should be sufficient.

dad said:
Amos 9:13 Behold, the days come, said the LORD, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that sows seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt.

Plowman overtaking the reaper: No delay between harvest and new ploughing (did I got the right word in English?). Treader of grapes overtaking the sewer: Well, grapes are not sewn, so there are two different plants, grapes and another species (some cerial?). This will be surely a blessed time. But where is the evidence of fast growing?

dad said:
Well, when those gathering crops overtake those planting them, that is fast!

Do you know the difference between "plowman shall overtake the reaper" and "reaper shall overtake the plowman"?

dad said:
14 generations is close enough.

We speak about 15+X generations (X may be zero, but this is by no means certain), not 14. Luke give evidence for the 15th generation (the Kainan generation missing in Genesis 11), and given that evidence I notice that there ist no guaranty whatsoever that here are not more generation which ought to be inserted lest we miscalculate the time span.

dad said:
We can actually get the lifespans and what kids people had and etc also. Not rocket science.

But then we see that "Arpachshad begat Shelah" is really "Arpachshad begat Kainan and Kainan begat Shelah" - and what this means for the figures given is by no means clear. Given the gaps in Mt 1, we even cannot exclude the possibility that there is more than one generation missing between Arpachshad and Shelah.

How on earth can you base an "exact" calculation on data that is known to be incomplete?

dad said:
Yeah, Abraham's dad was a real sinner. So?

What does that have to do with what I wrote about angels?

dad said:
Name one time people suddenly could not understand each other?

I have said several times that I beleive the confusion of languages at the Babel tower was a supernatural act of God.
I had (one time) mentioned in passing a possible natural explanation, which runs as follows:

The people began to disperse, though not over the whole earth, and he language split
In order to prevent more dispersion, all were called together to build the tower ...
... but they found out that they couldn't understand each other group enough to cooperate in such a project, so it failed.

And I had said immediately that I reject this theory on biblical grounds.

It is you who always return to that what neither you nor I support, why?

My point was: A Chinese speaking Chinese and a Chinese speaking German as her mother tongue (I once met such a girl) are not separated by any difference in nature, they have learned by the same nature different mother tongues (due to their linguistic environment). Therefore, people speaking one language have the same nature as people unintelligible to each other, in other word, the miracle of the Babel tower was no change in nature. The nature of mankind didn't change when the languages were confused, only the linguistic situation changed.

Helmut-WK · Feb 24, 2019

dad said:
Grea, so there is no big mystery when Abraham lived or when Noah lived. Abraham's tomb is even still there in Israel.

When Abraham lived is no great mystery, I never said anything to the contrary.

dad said:
So now you are talking pre Noah?

Are you kidding? I highlighted the time between David and the Babylonian exile (as mentioned in Mt 1:17, and talked about that, and you call this pre-Noah?

If you have that much difficulties to understand what I write, how can you dare to say you understand the Bible in any meaningful way?

Helmut-WK · Feb 24, 2019

dad said:
Apparently Ussher and many others never got hung up on this.

They neglected biblical evidence, presumly out of the wish to get at exact dates ...

dad said:
"It is the legal genealogy which is given here, that is to say, the genealogy of Joseph, of whom Christ was the rightful heir according to Jewish law. The evangelist has omitted three kings of the parentage of Ahab, in order to have the fourteen generations in each period. Jehoahaz and Jehoiakim are also omitted. The object of the genealogy is not at all affected by this circumstance. The point was to give it as recognised by the Jews, and all the kings were well known to all."

In short: Gaps do not touch the validity of a genealogy. So if we assume gaps in Gen 11, this does not touch the validity of that genealogy.

dad said:
I don't think that an obvious omission affects the purposes of Luke's legal genealogy. Nor does it affect the dating of Abraham.

We don't discuss the dating of Abraham, we discuss the dating of Noah ...

dad said:
Have you some evidence that people have the flood dates wrong?

Post-flood civilizations that antedate the flood date is no evidence the date is wrong? You try to save it with a change in nature that is not told in Scripture, although you try to twist it out of Scripture ...

dad said:
By the way, Jewish tradition and history is not the sort of traditions Jesus talked about as what was being put before God and Scripture. He was talking about the traditions like rituals, and commandments of men such as forbidding to do good on the Sabbath!

Well, the kind of tradition these Jewish traditions come from can be seen by these examples:

According to Jewish tradition, all Scripture got lost in the times of Ezra, and then Ezra wrote it don all by memory.
According to Jewish tradition, even the shape of the letters (which got their present shapes in the first centuries AD) was revealed to Mose ...
... and even the vowel signs (which their present shapes in thew 8th century AD) are part of the inspired text given to Mose.

"Chinese whispers" can create a tradition utterly wrong over centuries. You can see it in the RC church, or in Jewish tradition, or in other places.

dad · Feb 24, 2019

helmut said:
I'm somewhat surprised. They way you talked with others seemed to indicate that scientific evidence is of little value to you.

As you said, there are certain levels of scientific standard. One is simplicity of theories - make no assumptions that can be avoided without conflicting to the fact, i.e. chose the most simple hypothesis. It is sometimes called Occam's razor, after the theologian William of Occam (or Ockham), 1288-1347.

One simple assumption is that natural laws are the same for any time and any place, so in the realm of science it is the one who postulates a change in nature who has the burden of proof.

The result of this assumption is a complicated mishmash of patched together godless leaps of faith and complicated theories.

Another level is (non-)falsification. A theory should be falsificatable in principle, i.e. there are data conceivable which are not consistent with this theory. As to same nature during the last 5-6000 years, these were records documenting such a change.

No way. Those dates are BASED on you assuming nature was the same, and a result of that belief. Nothing else. Circular.

Remember the discussions about the Egyptians? No Egyptian that noted any change in nature as you postulate means, that many possible counter-facts (that are very likely to have been recorded, if such a change had occurred) are non-existent, which is a rather strong proof that the "null hypothesis" of same nature is correct.

We are talking at the early start of the civilization and before. Notice Egypt claims gods were the first kings!? Notice that they used pictures for communication in a written form? What did you expect, some English record tucked away from before they even cooked up what pictures to use to get a message across? I hear that some of the meanings of the original hieroglyphics may even have changed over time, so that we may not even know the full or original meanings in all cases. How about some small change in alignment with stars? Well, I hear some old temples were rebuilt with a new direction. How about all the stories of the gods, could there be any clues in there? How about the preoccupation with death and tombs? That fits a changed nature where people lived a lot less time! Etc etc.

This can be corroborated with other evidence, e.g. dendrochronology shows no indication that the growing of trees ever changes, same with warves ...

Show us a close up picture of tree rings from a living tree that is 5000 plus rings deep? Besides, if a tree grew in weeks rather than years, what exactly do you think would make rings look different to the eye?? There were still rings.

If you really are prepared to accept a scientific proof, this should be enough. But in other postings you rather laughed at scientific evidence, so I suppose you will be not convinced by it. So the question remains: What on earth will convince you?

The so called proof means nothing without your same nature in the past belief. If I look at the same evidences/proofs they make more sense seen in a different natured past perspective! Remember, science does not prove a same state past, it uses a belief in one to interpret all evidences.

With the "null hypothesis" that the usage of months is the same in Daniel 8:14 as in Genesis and Revelation, is is clear that these are not exact values, but rather rounded values. What evidence do you have that Genesis and Revelation follow another pattern of usage than Daniel?

The length of the flood and days given were obviously nor rounded values! You are grasping at straws.

So if we estimate how much food was in the ark and how many animals, we can estimate how much food they needed when they got out. And there is no reason to suppose that, given recent growth values, there was not enough food grown in the months (!) between the ark landing somewhere in the Ararat mountains and the opening of the ark.

The water was receding. The rocks were probably bare of course. Soil takes time to form does it not? Do you claim that the post flood world as they left the ark was some lush paradise??

Trees that suffered under very hard conditons do not need years to recover.

Dunk a tree in water for several months and get back to us with the results. See if you can feed all life on earth with it!

Given the time it could grow, about half a meter high ... should be sufficient.

?? Half a meter high grass? Plant a lawn sometime and do it on soil that is like a world covered in water for a year! Then call us when it is half a meter high! I suspect the animals waiting to eat it would be long dead.

Plowman overtaking the reaper: No delay between harvest and new ploughing (did I got the right word in English?). Treader of grapes overtaking the sewer: Well, grapes are not sewn, so there are two different plants, grapes and another species (some cerial?). This will be surely a blessed time. But where is the evidence of fast growing?

Google it. I read a bunch of verse on that very topic last week. Yes, plant growth will be fast.

We speak about 15+X generations (X may be zero, but this is by no means certain), not 14. Luke give evidence for the 15th generation (the Kainan generation missing in Genesis 11), and given that evidence I notice that there ist no guaranty whatsoever that here are not more generation which ought to be inserted lest we miscalculate the time span.

When are you trying to get Abraham or Peleg to have lived?

What does that have to do with what I wrote about angels?

I have said several times that I beleive the confusion of languages at the Babel tower was a supernatural act of God.

Yes, and it affected mankind.

I had (one time) mentioned in passing a possible natural explanation, which runs as follows:

The people began to disperse, though not over the whole earth, and he language split

In order to prevent more dispersion, all were called together to build the tower ...

... but they found out that they couldn't understand each other group enough to cooperate in such a project, so it failed.

And I had said immediately that I reject this theory on biblical grounds.

Great so you are dropping theories as needed.

My point was: A Chinese speaking Chinese and a Chinese speaking German as her mother tongue (I once met such a girl) are not separated by any difference in nature, they have learned by the same nature different mother tongues (due to their linguistic environment).

Irrelevant to Babel.

Therefore, people speaking one language have the same nature as people unintelligible to each other, in other word, the miracle of the Babel tower was no change in nature. The nature of mankind didn't change when the languages were confused, only the linguistic situation changed.[/QUOTE Since all men suddenly had a change, it was not natural.

dad · Feb 25, 2019

Bungle_Bear said:
Any time you got involved in a conversation?

Just ask if you get dazed.

Helmut-WK · Feb 27, 2019

dad said:
The result of this assumption is a complicated mishmash of patched together godless leaps of faith and complicated theories.
No way. Those dates are BASED on you assuming nature was the same, and a result of that belief. Nothing else. Circular.

In other words: You reject science and scientific methods/argumentation.

dad said:
We are talking at the early start of the civilization and before. Notice Egypt claims gods were the first kings!? Notice that they used pictures for communication in a written form? What did you expect, some English record tucked away from before they even cooked up what pictures to use to get a message across? I hear that some of the meanings of the original hieroglyphics may even have changed over time, so that we may not even know the full or original meanings in all cases. ...

The old trick: "We don't know everything, therefore we do know nothing".

dad said:
How about some small change in alignment with stars? Well, I hear some old temples were rebuilt with a new direction. How about all the stories of the gods, could there be any clues in there? How about the preoccupation with death and tombs? That fits a changed nature where people lived a lot less time! Etc etc.

Loose suggestions, no coherent theory visible - just remember that most of the Egyptian Gods had the shape of animals - do you want to say that animals reigned as kings over men?

dad said:
Show us a close up picture of tree rings from a living tree that is 5000 plus rings deep?

To see the rings, the tree has to be cut, and is no more alive. We know tree rings of wood from every century, so there is a complete picture of tree ring, not from one single tree, but from many trees.

dad said:
Besides, if a tree grew in weeks rather than years, what exactly do you think would make rings look different to the eye?? There were still rings.

Rings form because of different weather conditions: the tree grows faster or slower from time to time. You suggest a nature where the weather changed in a week comparable to weather changes in the seasons of the year, and the change to or seasons of the year (instead of seasons of the week) occurring the same time as the slowing of the tree growth, and not even that, but even that the two changes having the effect that there is nothing to see in tree rings that indicate a change occurred.

dad said:
Remember, science does not prove a same state past, it uses a belief in one to interpret all evidences.

If there are facts that indicate nature changed or changes, this is taken into consideration. Indeed, science started with assumption like "natural laws are in space, or heaven, not the same as on earth" or "organic chemistry is governed by other laws than inorganic chemistry", and they were proven incorrect. On the other hand, some theories were more generalized to account for changes in space or time of what were laws of nature.

dad said:
The length of the flood and days given were obviously nor rounded values! You are grasping at straws.

You mean to say that Mose used month differently from Daniel? Why should we suppose that?

dad said:
The water was receding. The rocks were probably bare of course. Soil takes time to form does it not? Do you claim that the post flood world as they left the ark was some lush paradise??

You are grasping at straws. A flood usually does not leave bare rocks but clay. There were plenty of plants uprooted, their seeds would give new plants. Large plants that were not wholly covered with clay and robust enough to survive being under water for some time would grow again.

No paradise, but enough for the animals that survived. Some may have lived from carcass for some time, others ate grass ...

dad said:
Dunk a tree in water for several months and get back to us with the results. See if you can feed all life on earth with it!

The result will depend on what kind of tree ...

dad said:
?? Half a meter high grass? Plant a lawn sometime and do it on soil that is like a world covered in water for a year!

Not for a year. It took 150 days until the whole world was covered under water, for it is said that the waters grew for 150 days. Ant then subtract the time when the waters receded while Noah was still waiting in the ark.

dad said:
I read a bunch of verse on that very topic last week. Yes, plant growth will be fast.

You ignored the counter-arguments that you got the meaning wrong: What you quoted indicated no fast growing, but no delay between harvest and new sowing.

Maybe you got the meaning wrong at the whole bunch of verse?

dad said:
When are you trying to get Abraham or Peleg to have lived?

Abraham can be calculated using numbers from the Bible, Peleg not. Abraham: 480+430 years before Solomon built the temple. Peleg: We don't know.

dad said:
Yes, and it affected mankind. Great so you are dropping theories as needed.

A theory I did not take up cannot be dropped by me.

dad said:
Irrelevant to Babel.

Well, a pair of humans that differ as the people before and after Babel differed. It was to make clear that Babel diffusion of language did not change the nature of man, so this was no change in nature.

dad said:
Since all men suddenly had a change, it was not natural.

A supernatural change, but no change in nature.

Helmut-WK · Feb 27, 2019

Oh, I forgot, there still. is the question: If scientific evidence will not convince you, what will convince?

dad · Feb 27, 2019

helmut said:
In other words: You reject science and scientific methods/argumentation.

No, in other words beliefs are not science and I see no reason to pretend they are.

The old trick: "We don't know everything, therefore we do know nothing".

Better than 'I know not, therefore I know it all'

Loose suggestions, no coherent theory visible - just remember that most of the Egyptian Gods had the shape of animals - do you want to say that animals reigned as kings over men?

The serpent in the garden was an animal, do you want to say there was no direct connection to Satan? However ancient Egyptians pictured gods that point remains that they believed in spirit beings. one of their gods, was named Troth.

"He also appears as a dog-faced baboon or a man with the head of a baboon when he is A'an, the god of equilibrium.[23] In the form of A'ah-Djehuty he took a more human-looking form.[24]These forms are all symbolic and are metaphors for Thoth's attributes. The Egyptians did not believe these gods actually looked like humans with animal heads.[25] For example, Ma'at is often depicted with an ostrich feather, "the feather of truth," on her head,[26] or with a feather for a head.[27]"

Thoth - Wikipedia

Again, your point is absolutely mooted.

To see the rings, the tree has to be cut, and is no more alive. We know tree rings of wood from every century, so there is a complete picture of tree ring, not from one single tree, but from many trees.

Rather than focus on a bristlecone pine that was cut with over 5000 rings in it, you want to focus on piecing together dead trees with short lifespans and play 'add all the rings' That doesn't help at all, because now I will ask you to produce the rings from over 5000 years (imaginary years based on slow tree growth also in the past). Then I will ask you how you know trees at that time grew in this nature! Your circular position cannot stand.

Rings form because of different weather conditions: the tree grows faster or slower from time to time. You suggest a nature where the weather changed in a week comparable to weather changes in the seasons of the year, and the change to or seasons of the year (instead of seasons of the week) occurring the same time as the slowing of the tree growth, and not even that, but even that the two changes having the effect that there is nothing to see in tree rings that indicate a change occurred.

Trees do grow a certain way in this present nature. Irrelevant. Your job is to prove nature was the same in the far past on earth, so that we could assign similar rates to those rings. You can't simply wish real hard, refuse to believe anything else and try to force people into your beliefs.

If there are facts that indicate nature changed or changes, this is taken into consideration.

Not true. You don't even know what to look for, and I haven't seen anyone really looking anyhow!

You mean to say that Mose used month differently from Daniel? Why should we suppose that?

God uses months a certain way. From Genesis to Revelation. It doesn't matter what man does. Man will of course use the current realities and orbits and etc to set a calendar.

You are grasping at straws. A flood usually does not leave bare rocks but clay. There were plenty of plants uprooted, their seeds would give new plants. Large plants that were not wholly covered with clay and robust enough to survive being under water for some time would grow again.

Fine make your front yard out of wet clay, then try to grow some grass. We'll have some elephants and hippos and cows etc waiting around to eat when it grows high enough. Good luck with that. Also, please show experiments with various plants submerged for a year that quickly start growing in moist clay?

No paradise, but enough for the animals that survived. Some may have lived from carcass for some time, others ate grass ...

The thing is, God guides and God provides. If He sent animals on that ark, He new they would be fed. Your idea seems to have them dying and cannibalizing, and eating magic surviving plants growing at breakneck speed from clay! Ha. By the way, if water covered the highest mountains and the flood asted a year, would there be lots of fleshy corpses to eat still after the year was over? We should remember that sea creatures still lived! Toss a pig into the middle of the Pacific ocean with a waterproof microchip implanted in a bone, and check back a year later. Let us know what sort of meal is left eh?

Not for a year. It took 150 days until the whole world was covered under water, for it is said that the waters grew for 150 days. Ant then subtract the time when the waters receded while Noah was still waiting in the ark.

The 150 days was the time the waters kept growing higher. In no way does that mean that plant life and animals were still alive. That just means that more water kept coming. The highest mountains were totally covered all over the planet. If we covered the earth right now with water, so that only some mountain tops were sticking out after 40 days or whatever....how much trees and animals do you think there would be on those peaks?? Likewise, when the waters stared getting somewhat lower, what trees would you claim existed on those high areas? You seem to claim it is scientific and natural for grasses and plants to grow and trees etc in those conditions? The type of tree that the dove brought a fresh leaf from was an olive tree. So now we need an olive tree up there right after the waters went down a bit! I suggest God replanted the earth. I suggest He did that in that former nature also, when plants grew very fast. Ask yourself what best fits the bible and evidences?

You ignored the counter-arguments that you got the meaning wrong: What you quoted indicated no fast growing, but no delay between harvest and new sowing.

"Verse 13. The ploughman shall overtake the reaper
All the seasons shall succeed in due and natural order: but the crops shall be so copious in the fields and in the vineyards, that a long time shall be employed in gathering and disposing of them; so that the seasons of ploughing, sowing, gathering the grapes, treading the wine-press, other; so vast will be the abundance, and so long the time necessary to gather and cure the grain and fruits. We are informed by travellers in the Holy Land, Barbary, vintage at Aleppo lasts from the fifteenth of September to the middle of November; and that the sowing season begins at the close of October, and lasts through all November. Here, then, the ploughman, sower, grape-gatherer, and operator at the wine-press, not only succeed each other, but have parts of these operations going on at the same time. But great fertility in the land, abundance in the crops, and regularity of the seasons, seem to be the things which the prophet especially predicts"

Amos - Chapter 9 - Adam Clarke Commentary on StudyLight.org

Ps 72:16 - There shall be an handful of corn in the earth upon the top of the mountains; the fruit thereof shall shake like Lebanon: and they of the city shall flourish like grass of the earth.

"Verse 16. There shall be a handful of corn
The earth shall be exceedingly fruitful. Even a handful of corn sown on the top of a mountain shall grow up strong and vigorous; and it shall be, in reference to crops in other times, as the cedars of Lebanon are to common trees or shrubs: and as the earth will bring forth in handfuls, so the people shall be multiplied who are to consume this great produce."

Psalm - Chapter 72 - Adam Clarke Commentary on StudyLight.org

If the nature in Noah's day was similar, a tree growing fast on a high area would be natural!

Abraham can be calculated using numbers from the Bible, Peleg not. Abraham: 480+430 years before Solomon built the temple. Peleg: We don't know.

Well, we do know how long after the flood he was born. Not sure what is the mystery.

Well, a pair of humans that differ as the people before and after Babel differed. It was to make clear that Babel diffusion of language did not change the nature of man, so this was no change in nature.

The nature that exists dictates how man exists. If the inability to comprehend speech suddenly happened, that would be a result of a God ordered change in nature. The language confusion would of course not be the CAUSE, but an effect.

A supernatural change, but no change in nature.

It that was the only change at the time you might have a point worth looking at. There are other major changes though at about the same time. The example of life spans in the order of something like 13 times longer before Peleg's days, than in modern times! (if we use 70 years as a basis) If you want to use today's actual average life spans that would be about say, 75 or so..(?) it is still a sudden and astronomical change!

Helmut-WK · Feb 27, 2019

dad said:
Better than 'I know not, therefore I know it all'

Still better: "We don't know everything, but we know enough to exclude a change in nature during the times of the Egyptians". You blurred this by your allegations.

dad said:
Again, your point is absolutely mooted.

This instance you are right, I was wrong with the Egyptian Gods.

dad said:
Rather than focus on a bristlecone pine that was cut with over 5000 rings in it

You sounded as if no such tree existed, and I explained why. But if such a tree exists, then show that there are any traces of natural change in its rings.

dad said:
Trees do grow a certain way in this present nature. Irrelevant. Your job is to prove nature was the same in the far past on earth, so that we could assign similar rates to those rings. You can't simply wish real hard, refuse to believe anything else and try to force people into your beliefs.

Well, suppose some person claims the earth and the universe came into existence in 2002, and everything that seems older (including our memories of earlier times) are just part of the creation. There is no counter-argument against that claim, for everything that could be counter-evidence is only evidence under the supposition the earth is older than 2002. Likewise, I see no argument left against your claim.

Not because the fact support you, you dismiss everything that could be evidence against it. You have little argument for such a change, and absolute none it happened at the time of the Babel tower.

dad said:
God uses months a certain way. From Genesis to Revelation. It doesn't matter what man does. Man will of course use the current realities and orbits and etc to set a calendar.

OK, lets collect the facts:

Every time months are used and calculated into days in the Bible, it is 30 days a month.
There are instances (at least one) where the real length of a month is proven to have been less than 30 days, but calculated as 30 days (using rounded numbers)
There are no instances in the Bible where it is proven the real length of months was 30 days and not the 25.53... days as now.

Working with the principle that Scripture is the key to understand Scripture, I conclude that the 30 days are always rounded. You claim they were exact in genesis and revelation, without giving any arguments why we should take them as exact value.

dad said:
Fine make your front yard out of wet clay, then try to grow some grass. We'll have some elephants and hippos and cows etc waiting around to eat when it grows high enough.

Where did these elephants, hippos etc. trampling on the ground while all animals were still in the ark came from?

From the day the dove didn't come back to the day Noah and the animals left the ark were about three month, do you want to say that no grass grew in that time?

dad said:
The 150 days was the time the waters kept growing higher.

So when were the tops of the mountains covered? Surely not at the first day of these 150 days ...

dad said:
You seem to claim it is scientific and natural for grasses and plants to grow and trees etc in those conditions?

Which conditions where there after the waters were gone and the animals and Noah still waiting in the ark? The top of the mountains came into sight about 5 month before the ark was opened, and more three months after the dove found an olive twig - and you think there was no place for plants growing, or not enough such places to feed the animals?

But great fertility in the land, abundance in the crops, and regularity of the seasons, seem to be the things which the prophet especially predicts"

As I sad, the verse speaks of great fertility, and not about fast growing. Same with the other verses. It will take the same length of time top produce fruit, but it will be more fruit, what is a very good year now will be the regular case.

dad said:
Well, we do know how long after the flood he was born. Not sure what is the mystery.

We don't know how long the time span was between Abraham and the flood, because of the proven gap (and likely other gaps).

dad said:
If the inability to comprehend speech suddenly happened, that would be a result of a God ordered change in nature.

If you take "change in nature" in a way that a miraculous healing can be called a change in nature: yes. But you use the expression in a different way. Man has the ability to learn and speak a mother tongue, he had this before and after the language diffusion. The nature of man was the same.

dad said:
There are other major changes though at about the same time.

You have no proof of "same time", only conjecture.

dad said:
The example of life spans in the order of something like 13 times longer before Peleg's days, than in modern times!

13 times was before the flood, after the flood it was somewhat lower, and lowering. And you don't know how to relate the tower of Babel to the genealogy. Maybe the language confusion happened in a generation that is hidden in one of the gaps? We don't know ...

To be true to Scripture includes that you do not guess at things the Bible doesn't tell us.

dad · Feb 28, 2019

helmut said:
Still better: "We don't know everything, but we know enough to exclude a change in nature during the times of the Egyptians". You blurred this by your allegations.

Why would I blur a pile of steaming nonsense? If you knew better we would see the proof.

This instance you are right, I was wrong with the Egyptian Gods.

You sounded as if no such tree existed, and I explained why. But if such a tree exists, then show that there are any traces of natural change in its rings.

I have never found anyone able to show a close up picture of rings over 5000 'years'. So how would we know if there were any visible changes or if you would be able to recognize them if there were? What sort of changes in rings would you expect??

Well, suppose some person claims the earth and the universe came into existence in 2002, and everything that seems older (including our memories of earlier times) are just part of the creation. There is no counter-argument against that claim, for everything that could be counter-evidence is only evidence under the supposition the earth is older than 2002. Likewise, I see no argument left against your claim.

I could get an old newspaper from 2001.

Not because the fact support you, you dismiss everything that could be evidence against it. You have little argument for such a change, and absolute none it happened at the time of the Babel tower.

I dismiss nothing except the blind faith you seek to proclaim as knowledge.

OK, lets collect the facts:

Every time months are used and calculated into days in the Bible, it is 30 days a month.

There are instances (at least one) where the real length of a month is proven to have been less than 30 days, but calculated as 30 days (using rounded numbers)

There are no instances in the Bible where it is proven the real length of months was 30 days and not the 25.53... days as now.

If the months changed around the time Noah lived, where would we look for your instances??

Working with the principle that Scripture is the key to understand Scripture, I conclude that the 30 days are always rounded. You claim they were exact in genesis and revelation, without giving any arguments why we should take them as exact value.

Rounded means squat. The days and weeks and months and years are given for certain events and the year works out to 360 days!

Where did these elephants, hippos etc. trampling on the ground while all animals were still in the ark came from?

From the ark when the green light was given to go. They had to eat. Your claim of clay grown trees and abundant grasses half a meter high simply is not supported by anything but your imagination.

From the day the dove didn't come back to the day Noah and the animals left the ark were about three month, do you want to say that no grass grew in that time?

Wrong! The waters started to decrease in the middle of the seventh month, but the TOPS of mountains were not even seen till the tenth month!!!

5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.

The earth was still underwater. Only the tops of mountains were seen. Then 40 days later Noah started sending the birds to scout. The dove returned empty handed. The world was still not growing trees or anything that the birds could live with. That was the state of this world a mere week before the doves were sent. So he waited a week and sent it out again. That night the dove returned with evidence of a new tree grown up!

So when were the tops of the mountains covered? Surely not at the first day of these 150 days ...

Says...who?

As I sad, the verse speaks of great fertility, and not about fast growing. Same with the other verses. It will take the same length of time top produce fruit, but it will be more fruit, what is a very good year now will be the regular case.

Yet the bible commentary I posted says something else.

We don't know how long the time span was between Abraham and the flood, because of the proven gap (and likely other gaps).

Jewish tradition says Abraham and Noah were alive at the same time at some point. Unless you have more than baseless doubts to support a counter claim, sorry I have no reason to think you know.

If you take "change in nature" in a way that a miraculous healing can be called a change in nature: yes. But you use the expression in a different way. Man has the ability to learn and speak a mother tongue, he had this before and after the language diffusion. The nature of man was the same.

A city and a great tower were being built. Suddenly people could no longer process information in the way they used to and they had to stop the project because of the utter confusion. That is not natural in any way.

You have no proof of "same time", only conjecture.

False. The life spans are listed for Peleg and his dad and his sons etc etc. No one lived more than 230 years or so after Peleg and the life spans fell from there fast. The change was at the same time.

13 times was before the flood, after the flood it was somewhat lower, and lowering.

If nature changed in Pelegs day, then that explains the lowering. Noah still lived 950 years!!! He entered the ark when he was only 600 years old. It was not the flood year where the life spans changed.

And you don't know how to relate the tower of Babel to the genealogy. Maybe the language confusion happened in a generation that is hidden in one of the gaps? We don't know ...

People were scattered after Babel. Languages nations etc. Babel was not long after the flod and Peleg was born about the right time. Peleg is listed in Jewish tradition as being alive at the time of Babel also. You offer no reason to question this, only shadowy hunches and baseless doubts and some strange desire to make it seem impossible that man was on Pangaea.

Have you a better explanation for how languages and animals and man spread around to the continents?

You have not been debating honestly because I have not seen you answer the questions I asked. Do you actually believe there was a real flood, and a real garden of Eden, and a real tower of Babel?

Helmut-WK · Mar 1, 2019

dad said:
I have never found anyone able to show a close up picture of rings over 5000 'years'. So how would we know if there were any visible changes or if you would be able to recognize them if there were? What sort of changes in rings would you expect??

So you have no proof for your suggested changes from trees. It would be rather unlikely that they happened in a way to balance their impact on tree rings, so we should expect some deviation from the normal pattern of rings.

And while climate changes do not affect the tree rings uniform around the globe (see e.g. the extremely cold winters in parts of the US, caused by global warming), a change as you suggest should be visible globally.

dad said:
I could get an old newspaper from 2001.

So what? One who thinks the earth was created in 2002 will ask for a proof the newspaper was really from 2001 and not created in 2002, together with the whole universe. This is no proof, You have nothing in your hands. Same with most rejections of science and reason (e.g. hollow earth).

dad said:
I dismiss nothing except the blind faith you seek to proclaim as knowledge.

It is not blind faith. The eyes are still open for evidence to the contrary.

dad said:
If the months changed around the time Noah lived, where would we look for your instances??

Why should we suppose there was a change when nothing in Scripture hints at that?

dad said:
Rounded means squat.

So Dan 8:14 is squat?

It is your imagination that the numbers should be precise, yet there are many instances of rounded numbers in Scripture, e.g. Pi=3.

dad said:
From the ark when the green light was given to go

So they were not there when the grass I mentioned grew, in the time span between the waters having gone and the "green light". 3 months at minimum.

dad said:
Wrong! The waters started to decrease in the middle of the seventh month, but the TOPS of mountains were not even seen till the tenth month!!!

Beginning of 10th month, which is about 5 months to the end of the 2nd month next year (and if it was a leap year, one month more). The three months you are objecting are calculated from the day the dove didn't return.

dad said:
That was the state of this world a mere week before the doves were sent. So he waited a week and sent it out again. That night the dove returned with evidence of a new tree grown up!

... of twig grown up.

dad said:
Says...who?

Reason. When it took almost 2 months from the top of the mountains visible (whether they emerged on that day, or some time early and not visible because of fog or the like, we don't know) to the dove not returning, and the waters rising for 5 months, the only reason why I should suppose the top of the mountains were covered on the very first day of the flood can be a verse in the Bible that tells me so.

dad said:
Yet the bible commentary I posted says something else.

Really? I can't remember that, and seeing that you quoted a commentary on Amos which speaks of fertility to support fast growing (which the commentary did not say) it's an easy guess that the commentary said not what you try to twist out of it.

dad said:
Jewish tradition says Abraham and Noah were alive at the same time at some point. Unless you have more than baseless doubts to support a counter claim, sorry I have no reason to think you know.

Doubts are not baseless, they are based on the fact the genealogy has gaps (one proven by scripture!), and on what we know about history.

And the Jews didn't know about the Scriptural hint in Luke that showed the weak point in their calculation.

dad said:
A city and a great tower were being built. Suddenly people could no longer process information in the way they used to and they had to stop the project because of the utter confusion. That is not natural in any way.

I never said it was natural, I said the nature of man was not changed. They could "process information" by the same means as we do, before and after the language confusion, the change affected parameters that are usually calibrated by language acquisition and social interaction in times of (gradual) language change.

To explain it with a hypothetical example:
Someone tells a mountain to fall into the sea, and it happens. The nature of mountains, the gravitational forces, the tectonic equilibrium which supports mountains by having them "roots" in the earth's mantle are not changes, only a mountain disappeared and the sea got somewhat shallower in a certain region ... This is no change in nature (in the way you use this term), yet it is supernatural. Same with the language confusion: supernatural, but no change in nature.

dad said:
False. The life spans are listed for Peleg and his dad and his sons etc etc. No one lived more than 230 years or so after Peleg and the life spans fell from there fast. The change was at the same time.

You base it on the assumption there was no gap in the genealogy. But you can't know whether there was a gap or not.

dad said:
If nature changed in Pelegs day, then that explains the lowering. Noah still lived 950 years!!! He entered the ark when he was only 600 years old. It was not the flood year where the life spans changed.

Perhaps Noah was too old to be affected by that change? Do you really want to say the life span of his sins was shortened only after he was dead?

dad said:
People were scattered after Babel. Languages nations etc. Babel was not long after the flod and Peleg was born about the right time.

You cannot calculate when Peleg lived, because you don't know enough about the gaps, so saying that was the "right time" is just a guess. Besides: What you are saying now comes close to the traditional interpretation that "earth divided" refers to the division of the land under the many nations, i.e. division=scattering of the peoples.

dad said:
Peleg is listed in Jewish tradition as being alive at the time of Babel also.

Given the unreliability of these tradition, this is ... how did you say ... a squat.

dad said:
Have you a better explanation for how languages and animals and man spread around to the continents?

They did by land and by sea. There is no need to look for a better explanation.

dad said:
Do you actually believe there was a real flood, and a real garden of Eden, and a real tower of Babel?

I gave up to be a "Creationist" long ago. There was too much fake science in Creationism (notably the faked "human footprints" in Glen Rose).

I believe God created the world, and I believe the Bible is true. I can't say there was no Eden, Flood, or Babel for the Bible tells so, and I can't say they were literally, maybe my understanding of Scripture is wrong. I'm somewhat "agnostic" in these matters.

A "solution" that deviates from Scripture (you not taking in account the gap shown by Luke, but instead relying on Jewish traditions) is not better than this state of uncertainty.

Helmut-WK · Mar 1, 2019

Sorry, double posting

Marsupial in arctic supports that man was on Pangaea.

Undefeated!

Member

Member

Member

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

Whoot!

Member

Member

Member

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

Member

Member

Undefeated!

Member

Undefeated!

Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency