Super-Continent Pangaea

[Loudmouth]

The scientific evidence is the photos from the space satellite. They conform how accurate and true the Bible is.

What space satellite images have the Garden of Eden in them? You haven't produced a single one.

IF the Bible were not true science could show that. The Flood was NOT a world wide flood, the evidence for that is overwelming.

It appears that you just proved that the Bible is not true science with your own words. There was no world wide flood.

So now you on your part have to provide evidence that the Garden of Eden did not exist and you have zip, zero, nothing.

False. You are the one who claims that the Garden of Eden is found in a specific place. It is up to you to provide evidence of that claim. You don't get to make up stories, and then have them accepted as true without any evidence to back them.

Produce the evidence that the Garden of Eden actually exists, or withdraw the claim.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What space satellite images have the Garden of Eden in them? You haven't produced a single one.

What is your problem? This is getting to be very redundant. You simply are NOT clicking on the links I am giving you. Or if you are then you simply do not want to admit that I have overwhelming evidence from hundreds of thousands of articles that confirms that the Bible is accurate and true beyond any doubt.

 

[joshua 1 9]

You are the one who claims that the Garden of Eden is found in a specific place.

Yes, the Garden in Eden was a very real place in the Tigris Euphrates River Valley in the Middle East. What we call modern day Iraq. The current evidence shows that Eden is under water right now. Under the Persian gulf. This is based on what the Bible says and the photos from the satalites. "The present shorelines was reached shortly before 6000 yr ago" You do not want to click on the links so I will just cut and past it for you.

Sea-level change in the Persian Gulf since the time of the last maximum glaciation at about 18 000 yr BP is predicted to exhibit considerable spatial variability, because of the response of the Earth to glacial unloading of the distant ice sheets and to the meltwater loading of the Gulf itself and the adjacent ocean. Models for these glacio-hydro-isostatic effects have been compared with observations of sea-level change and palaeoshoreline reconstructions of the Gulf have been made. From the peak of the glaciation until about 14000 yr BP the Gulf is free of marine influence out to the edge of the Biaban Shelf. By 14000 yr BP the Strait of Hormuz had opened up as a narrow waterway and by about 12500 years ago the marine incursion into the Central Basin had started. The Western Basin flooded about 1000 years later. Momentary stillstands may have occurred during the Gulf flooding phase at about 11300 and 10500 yr BP. The present shorelines was reached shortly before 6000 yr ago and exceeded as relative sea level rose l-2 m above its present level, inundating the low-lying areas of lower Mesopotamia. These reconstructions have implications for models of the evolution of the Euphrates-Tigris-Kan delta, as well as for the movements of people and the timing of the earliest settlements in lower Mesopotamia. For example, the early Gulf floor would have provided a natural route for people moving westwards from regions to the east of Iran from the late Palaeolithic to early Neolithic.

http://people.rses.anu.edu.au/lambeck_k/pdf/171.pdf

What part of 6,000 years ago are you having problem understanding?
Because this is the date we read in our Bible and this is the date that Science confirms for us.
What part of "timing of the earliest settlements in lower Mesopotamia" are you having trouble understanding?

The history of Mesopotamia describes the history of the area known as Mesopotamia, roughly coinciding with the Tigris–Euphrates basin, from the earliest human occupation in the Lower Palaeolithic period up to the Muslim conquests in the 7th century AD. wiki

"Around 2,300 BC, the independent city-states of Sumer were conquered by a man called Sargon the Great of Akkad, who had once ruled the city-state of Kish. Sargon was an Akkadian, a Semitic group of desert nomads who eventually settled in Mesopotamia just north of Sumer. The Sumerian king, Lugal-Zaggisi, tried to form a coalition of Sumerian city-states against Sargon, but he was defeated by the Akkadian. Sargon is considered the first empire builder. Sargon made Agade the capital city of his empire."

My wife happens to be a Sargon and her family name goes back 4300 years. She was asking me to do some more research on this for her. So I will be glad to look at that Science and the Bible says about: "Sargon the Great of Akkad" Because I know he has many descendants that are alive today. Again we can use Science to confirm the Bible is accurate and true.

There is a connection between the city of Nimrod of Genesis 10 with Sargon of Akkad. Sargon of Akkad (Agade) reigned from 2334-2279. Isaiah 20:1 "In the year that Tartan came unto Ashdod, (when Sargon the king of Assyria sent him,) and fought against Ashdod, and took it;"

Sargon just like everyone else we read about in our Bible is a VERY real person and there is an overwhelming Scientific evidence to confirm this. These people were real, the cities were real, the battles were real. The Bible talks about chariot wheels and science can confirm that this is accurate and true: Exodus 14:25 "And took off their chariot wheels"

 

[Gene2memE]

You haven't established that the Garden of Eden was extant, or of it was, located where you claim.

Ergo, shifting shorelines in the Tigris Euphrates river valley are irrelevant, until you can substantiate both of the above claims.

 

[joshua 1 9]

shifting shorelines in the Tigris Euphrates river valley are irrelevant

This is not relevant scientific evidence that the Bible is accurate and true. Hundreds of Thousands of books could be written showing Scientific Evidence for what we read in the Bible. So we could go on and on and on with vast, huge, overwhelming amounts of evidence showing how accurate and true the Bible is.

You have NOTHING to show the Bible is not accurate and true. You bring NOTHING to the table.

A shifting shoreline may seem rather minor to you. But we are talking about the Garden of Eden and the beginning of farming the beginning of civilization, the beginning of cities. So all of this is significant. So the article talks about the effect of the shifting shoreline on the settlements at the time.

This is a children's story. Noah was a farmer and his farm was going to flood. So he came up with a plan to build a boat to save the domesticated plants & animals and to move them to higher ground.

Ur of course is the city Abraham was from. There are still remains of ur there today. The soldiers in Iraq under president Bush went there to see the ruins.

 

[joshua 1 9]

You haven't established that the Garden of Eden was extant, or of it was, located where you claim.

This is not my claim, this is the claim of modern science. I first saw this on a science program on TV. If you have cable there are a lot of programs that give scientific evidence for the Bible.

 

[bhsmte]

This is not my claim, this is the claim of modern science. I first saw this on a science program on TV. If you have cable there are a lot of programs that give scientific evidence for the Bible.

Cable programs are science?

Hilarious!!!

 

[Gene2memE]

You have NOTHING to show the Bible is not accurate and true. You bring NOTHING to the table.

That's not how this works, as I suspect you well know. My position is one of skepticism of your claims. The burden of proof does not lie with me to prove your claims are false, but it lies with you, to prove your claims are true.

You need to establish:
There was a 'Garden of Eden'
It was located where you say it was

Until you can accomplish this, I will remain unmoved by your claims. As David Hume said: "A wise man apportions his beliefs to the evidence."

 

[joshua 1 9]

That's not how this works, as I suspect you well know. My position is one of skepticism of your claims. The burden of proof does not lie with me to prove your claims are false, but it lies with you, to prove your claims are true.

You need to establish:
There was a 'Garden of Eden'
It was located where you say it was

Until you can accomplish this, I will remain unmoved by your claims. As David Hume said: "A wise man apportions his beliefs to the evidence."

Abraham was actually from the city of Ur and there are remains of that city.

 

[bhsmte]

Abraham was actually from the city of Ur and there are remains of that city.

Cool picture.

 

[Gene2memE]

Abraham was actually from the city of Ur and there are remains of that city.

First of all, that Ur and the Ur Kasdim of the Torah/Bible are distinctly different places (and guess what, we know where the former is, but not the latter).

Second, even if Abraham was born in Ur, that provides no evidence to support your claims. You need to establish:
There was a 'Garden of Eden'
It was located where you say it was

Once you've substantiated your claims, then we can move the discussion forwards.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Cool picture.

I like the picture of the soldiers at the city of Ur.

Gen11 3 "They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

 

[joshua 1 9]

That's not how this works, as I suspect you well know.

It does not matter. I have hundreds of thousands of peer review articles that can prove the Bible is accurate and true. What do you have in science evidence to show the Bible is not true? Nothing, absolutely nothing.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What space satellite images have the Garden of Eden in them? You haven't produced a single one.

You need four river heads and that shows up on the satellite photo. Without the photos then you only have the Tigris and Euphrates because the other two rives are dried up and you can only see them in the photo from the Satellite.

Genesis 2
2:10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.
2:11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;
2:12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.
2:13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.
2:14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.
2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

 

[joshua 1 9]

There was a 'Garden of Eden'

The Bible is very clear about the animals that we expect to find in the Garden of Eden. Science knows quite a bit about bio-diverse eco-systms and that is exactly what Eden was and there is overwhelming scientific evidence that Eden existed as a eco-system. I have lots and lots and lots of articles in peer reviewed science journals that deal with the Ancient Plants (Botany) and the animals that we find in Eden. Animals need food, grains to eat. This was a whole ecosystem that Noah was able to rescue and save when it was on the brink of destruction. We have lot of species that are going extinct and we can not save them today. Lots of mass extinctions have taken place but thanks to Noah Eden in the Middle East was not one of those extinctions. Even Science uses the words" Adam, Eve & Eden. There is a reason why they use those Bible words.

 

[bhsmte]

First of all, that Ur and the Ur Kasdim of the Torah/Bible are distinctly different places (and guess what, we know where the former is, but not the latter).

Second, even if Abraham was born in Ur, that provides no evidence to support your claims. You need to establish:
There was a 'Garden of Eden'
It was located where you say it was

Once you've substantiated your claims, then we can move the discussion forwards.

At this point, you have to just try and enjoy the entertainment.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Second, even if Abraham was born in Ur, that provides no evidence to support your claims.

Line upon line, precept upon precept. A little bit here and a little bit there and it all adds up so something substantial. All the little bits of evidence here and there adds up and becomes substantial.

1. Written records from over 4,000 years ago. Dr. Paolo Matthiae, Director of the Italian Archaeological Mission in Syria, "hit an archeological jackpot" in 1975. He discovered "the greatest third-millennium [B.C.] archive ever unearthed." It included "more than 15,000 cuneiform tablets and fragments" and unveiled a Semitic empire that dominated the Middle East more than four thousand years ago. Its hub was Ebla, where educated scribes filled ancient libraries with written records of history, people, places and commerce.[5]

"These early tablets display an ease of expression, an elegance that indicates complete mastery of the cuneiform system by the scribes," said Dr. Giovanni Pettinato, former epigraphist of the Italian Mission, who worked closely with Dr. Matthiae. "One can only conclude that writing had been in use at Ebla for a long time before 2500 B.C."

The Ebla tablets verified the worship of pagan gods such as Baal, Dagan and Asherah "known previously only from the Bible."[5] They mention the name "Abraham" and "Ur of Chaldees" (the Biblical Abraham's birthplace) as well as other familiar cities and places:

"The names of cities thought to have been founded much later, such as Beirut and Byblos, leap from the tablets. Damascus and Gaza are mentioned, as well as two of the Biblical cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah. ... Most intriguing of all are the personal names found on the Ebla tablets. They include Ab-ra-mu (Abraham), E-sa-um (Esau)...."[5]

When God changed a person's name and gave him a new name, it was usually to establish a new identity. God changed Abram's "high father" name to “Abraham,” "father of a multitude" (Genesis 17:5) and his wife's name from “Sarai,” “my princess,” to “Sarah,” “mother of nations” (Genesis 17:15). wiki

 

[Gene2memE]

It does not matter. I have hundreds of thousands of peer review articles that can prove the Bible is accurate and true.

Would you like to provide a link to one of these papers, or quote a relevant passage?
If you indeed have 100,000s of articles, this should be trivial.

The Bible is very clear about the animals that we expect to find in the Garden of Eden.

The Genesis account makes no mention of any specific animals (bar the talking snake). The naming of the animals passage is just a vague reference to "livestock", "birds in the sky" and "wild animals."

I have lots and lots and lots of articles in peer reviewed science journals that deal with the Ancient Plants (Botany) and the animals that we find in Eden. Animals need food, grains to eat. This was a whole ecosystem that Noah was able to rescue and save when it was on the brink of destruction.

Again, would you like to provide a link to one, or quote a relevant passage?

The Biblical verses you quote are the claim, not the evidence.

There's a difference between claiming things - which is what you are doing - and providing evidence for things - which is what I'm asking for.

I'll ask you once more to provide evidence for the existence of the 'Garden of Eden' and that it was located where you claim it was, or I'll come to the conclusion that you are incapable or unwilling to do so, which makes further discussion pointless.

 

[Gene2memE]

Line upon line, precept upon precept. A little bit here and a little bit there and it all adds up so something substantial. All the little bits of evidence here and there adds up and becomes substantial.

1. Written records from over 4,000 years ago. Dr. Paolo Matthiae, Director of the Italian Archaeological Mission in Syria, "hit an archeological jackpot" in 1975. He discovered "the greatest third-millennium [B.C.] archive ever unearthed." It included "more than 15,000 cuneiform tablets and fragments" and unveiled a Semitic empire that dominated the Middle East more than four thousand years ago. Its hub was Ebla, where educated scribes filled ancient libraries with written records of history, people, places and commerce.[5]

"These early tablets display an ease of expression, an elegance that indicates complete mastery of the cuneiform system by the scribes," said Dr. Giovanni Pettinato, former epigraphist of the Italian Mission, who worked closely with Dr. Matthiae. "One can only conclude that writing had been in use at Ebla for a long time before 2500 B.C."

The Ebla tablets verified the worship of pagan gods such as Baal, Dagan and Asherah "known previously only from the Bible."[5] They mention the name "Abraham" and "Ur of Chaldees" (the Biblical Abraham's birthplace) as well as other familiar cities and places:

"The names of cities thought to have been founded much later, such as Beirut and Byblos, leap from the tablets. Damascus and Gaza are mentioned, as well as two of the Biblical cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah. ... Most intriguing of all are the personal names found on the Ebla tablets. They include Ab-ra-mu (Abraham), E-sa-um (Esau)...."[5]

When God changed a person's name and gave him a new name, it was usually to establish a new identity. God changed Abram's "high father" name to “Abraham,” "father of a multitude" (Genesis 17:5) and his wife's name from “Sarai,” “my princess,” to “Sarah,” “mother of nations” (Genesis 17:15). wiki

None of which provides evidence that Abraham was born in Ur, or evidence for the existence of the Garden of Eden.

 

[Jimmy D]

Yes the word 'erets is used in the Bible to mean the whole earth. The word used in the story about Noah and the flood is Adamah. Meaning the land of Adam. There is no conflict between the Bible and Science. Even Science goes a long way to prove the Bible AND to help us understand the Bible and how to apply the teaching of the Bible to our generation today.

I followed your link and it clearly says 'erets again and again the Noah story.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/6/13/t_conc_6013
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/6/13/t_conc_6017

Admittedly here it say Adamah
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/7/1/t_conc_7004

Here it says every living thing on the Earth was destroyed
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/7/1/t_conc_7023

I suggest your 50 years of Bible study was wasted if you can't get basic things like this right, your own links show that you are either wrong or dishonest.

So does science 'prove' that every living thing on the Earth destroyed several thousand years ago? (We'll stick with Ussher's timeline as I know you're a fan).