More proof the bible is correct and modern science is a lie.

[AV1611VET]

So sad that no evidence of this universal language has survived, right? No stone tablets from many places on earth all written in the same script.

Those are called autographs.

And you are correct.

No autographs exist anywhere.

Father Time filed them under: DECOMPOSED.

 

[Nithavela]

What's with putting an ess on the end of "donkey"?

That's like saying, "I don't believe that all those abiogeneses occurred."

I know that there is only one instance of a talking donkey in the bible, but that doesn't make it any more believable. So let's not argue semantics, okay? (Also, please remember that English is not my first language and that I may have problems to express my exact thoughts from time to time.)

Also, if one believes that abiogenesis occured once, it would stand to reason that it could have also happened more then once. (Matter of fact, I would argue that abiogenesis had to happen multiple times because even when you have a puddle with some primitive life, or self replicating molecules or whatever, in it, a thousand things can go wrong where those life goes extinct shortly after coming into existence. There's no way to verify this, of course, so you can chalk that up to my personal beliefs.)

 

[Nithavela]

Those are called autographs.

And you are correct.

No autographs exist anywhere.

Father Time filed them under: DECOMPOSED.

Archeologists have found babylonian script (called Cuneiform), as well as even older scripts, most of them varying wildly. Those were written on stone or clay, which doesn't exactly decompose all that well.

 

[AV1611VET]

I know that there is only one instance of a talking donkey in the bible, but that doesn't make it any more believable. So let's not argue semantics, okay?

Except that mentioning a race of talking donkeys pushes God into the background.

A one-time incident could be filed under: MIRACLE.

(Also, please remember that English is not my first language and that I may have problems to express my exact thoughts from time to time.)

You aren't the only one that does it though.

It is the word of choice among those who have been indoctrinated in the halls of higher burning ... I mean ... learning.

 

[AV1611VET]

Archeologists have found babylonian script (called Cuneiform), as well as even older scripts, most of them varying wildly. Those were written on stone or clay, which doesn't exactly decompose all that well.

So?

 

[Armoured]

First of all, up until the Tower of Babel, they had to speak some language.

What language was that?

What's the best candidate?

In Revelation we see ...

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

What are these books that are mentioned?

I believe they are the 66 books of the KJB.

Thus we have all peoples, nations, languages and tongues, standing before the Judgement Seat, being read to from the KJB.

Thus if they speak Jacobean English in Heaven, I assume they spoke it on earth at first.

Just a speculation.

Uh-huh. Well thanks for answering my question.

 

[Armoured]

So?

So it's not in Jacobean English.

 

[bhsmte]

Those are called autographs.

And you are correct.

No autographs exist anywhere.

Father Time filed them under: DECOMPOSED.

If God performed the miracles claimed in the bible, why couldn't he perform another and make sure the original autographs were maintained?

 

[AV1611VET]

So it's not in Jacobean English.

Do we have the autograph of the Epic of Gilgamesh?

If not, those writings you're talking about came after the Tower of Babel -- not before it.

 

[AV1611VET]

If God performed the miracles claimed in the bible, why couldn't he perform another and make sure the original autographs were maintained?

Because God isn't a Mormon, and we're not dealing with golden plates.

 

[Armoured]

Do we have the autograph of the Epic of Gilgamesh?

If not, those writings you're talking about came after the Tower of Babel -- not before it.

When do you date the babel incident?

 

[AV1611VET]

When do you date the babel incident?

Don't quote me on this, but I think Ussher dates it at 100 years after the Flood.

I could check, but I'm feeling lazy right now.

In any event, I believe Nimrod built Babylon, then wrote the Epic of Gilgamesh (in Jacobean English, of course) as a mockery of the Flood.

 

[Armoured]

Don't quote me on this, but I think Ussher dates it at 100 years after the Flood.

I could check, but I'm feeling lazy right now.

In any event, I believe Nimrod built Babylon, then wrote the Epic of Gilgamesh (in Jacobean English, of course) as a mockery of the Flood.

Sorry... it's a while since I read Genesis, wasn't Nimrod from before the Flood?

Also, could you date the Tower of Babel in terms of BC? I'm curious to know how long ago people stopped speaking Jacobean English the first time?

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry... it's a while since I read Genesis, wasn't Nimrod from before the Flood?

Noah → Ham → Cush → Nimrod

Also, could you date the Tower of Babel in terms of BC?

2247 BC ... one thousand years after the Flood.

 

[Armoured]

Noah → Ham → Cush → Nimrod

I accept and appreciate your correction.

2247 BC ... one thousand years after the Flood.

so... how would you explain writings that date earlier than that that arent in Jacobean English?

 

[AV1611VET]

I accept and appreciate your correction.

Thank you.

so... how would you explain writings that date earlier than that that arent in Jacobean English?

Simple -- I'll use an example.

If I take a sheet of paper and write today's headline on it from the newspaper; and that sheet of paper is carbon dated, it would be wrong to assume that the news depicted in the headline occurred prior to I writing it.

Let's go macro with this.

If I took a piece of zircon and wrote on it, would it constitute the oldest writing in the world?

In other words, what it was written on is what is being dated -- not when it was written on.

 

[Armoured]

Thank you.

Simple -- I'll use an example.

If I take a sheet of paper and write today's headline on it from the newspaper; and that sheet of paper is carbon dated, it would be wrong to assume that the news depicted in the headline occurred prior to I writing it.

Let's go macro with this.

If I took a piece of zircon and wrote on it, would it constitute the oldest writing in the world?

In other words, what it was written on is what is being dated -- not when it was written on.

Uh-huh. You are aware that there are ways to date a piece of archeological evidence other than carbon dating it's material, right?

 

[AV1611VET]

Uh-huh. You are aware that there are ways to date a piece of archeological evidence other than carbon dating it's material, right?

Not really.

But if you're saying you have original Babylonian writings from between Genesis 10 and Genesis 11, I find that very hard to believe.

 

[Armoured]

Not really.

hmmm. Maybe worth looking into, do you think?

But if you're saying you have original Babylonian writings from between Genesis 10 and Genesis 11, I find that very hard to believe.

again, specify dates, please? Nd why Babylonian? Wouldn't any non Jacobean English text do?

 

[HitchSlap]

So why do you believe this if the Bible doesn't teach it?

Because he's xenophobic and ethnocentric. If he spoke Swahili it wouldn't have been "Jacobean" English.