Was the Great Pyramid Built Before Noah's Flood?

fwGod · Jun 9, 2020

Dale said:
I wonder if you are familiar with this passage.

A prayer of Moses the man of God.

1 Lord, you have been our dwelling place
throughout all generations.
2 Before the mountains were born
or you brought forth the whole world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God.

3 You turn people back to dust,
saying, “Return to dust, you mortals.”
4 A thousand years in your sight
are like a day that has just gone by,
or like a watch in the night.

--Psalm 90: 1-4 NIV

"A thousand years in your [God's] sight are like a day ..." In other words, a thousand years to us are like a day to God. If the author of this Psalm were used to dealing with millions or billions he might have said "A million years in your sight are like a day ..." or "A billion years in your sight are like a day ..."

This Psalm is traditionally attributed to Moses, just like the first five books of the Bible. Whoever composed it, the author doesn't share your view that a "day" in the first chapters of Genesis can only mean twenty-four hours as we measure time today. The days in Genesis One could simply be dividers, turning the creation into chapters.

You have tried to use this text in an attempt to say that God took a billion years to create all that exists.
But, it didn't say 'a billion', it said 'a thousand'. It didn't say that God took a billion or a thousand or more years to create the heavens and the earth.

When this Psalm is compared with the Genesis creation account.. you make both of them contradict each other. Yet it's well understood by Christians and Bible scholars alike that the Bible interprets itself.. it does not disagree with itself.

The measuring of time has always been the same back then in the creation as it is today. The Hebrew word translated for day in Genesis is the same word in every other verse with the word day in it, such as the one in this Psalm to express a 24 hour day and night.

The Psalmist provided the timeframe of a thousand years, there's nothing in Genesis or in the Psalm text to indicate that God told him that it took 6 thousand years or any other long time to create the heavens and the earth.

In the Psalm, verses 1-2 talks about the eternal aspect of God then verse 3 in comparison of a thousand years a person turns to dust within 70-90 years average. So for God a man's life span is very short. And many people come and go quickly within the Psalmists suggested timeframe of a thousand years.

In verse 4 the Psalmist said that it's according to being in God's sight, because He is eternal, a thousand years would pass quickly in the same way that we who live for 70 to 90 years, 24 hours occurs to us like the snap of the fingers.

So, with that in mind, going back to Genesis.. God caused creation to happen quickly as stated, within 6 24hr days. It happened and He saw that it was good.

coffee4u · Jun 9, 2020

fwGod said:
You have tried to use this text in an attempt to say that God took a billion years to create all that exists.
But, it didn't say 'a billion', it said 'a thousand'. It didn't say that God took a billion or a thousand or more years to create the heavens and the earth.

When this Psalm is compared with the Genesis creation account.. you make both of them contradict each other. Yet it's well understood by Christians and Bible scholars alike that the Bible interprets itself.. it does not disagree with itself.

The measuring of time has always been the same back then in the creation as it is today. The Hebrew word translated for day in Genesis is the same word in every other verse with the word day in it, such as the one in this Psalm to express a 24 hour day and night.

The Psalmist provided the timeframe of a thousand years, there's nothing in Genesis or in the Psalm text to indicate that God told him that it took 6 thousand years or any other long time to create the heavens and the earth.

In the Psalm, verses 1-2 talks about the eternal aspect of God then verse 3 in comparison of a thousand years a person turns to dust within 70-90 years average. So for God a man's life span is very short. And many people come and go quickly within the Psalmists suggested timeframe of a thousand years.

In verse 4 the Psalmist said that it's according to being in God's sight, because He is eternal, a thousand years would pass quickly in the same way that we who live for 70 to 90 years, 24 hours occurs to us like the snap of the fingers.

So, with that in mind, going back to Genesis.. God caused creation to happen quickly as stated, within 6 24hr days. It happened and He saw that it was good.

Not just good, but very good and not just very good by human standards, but very good by God's standards.

fwGod · Jun 9, 2020

Contenders Edge said:
There is no textual evidence that the Bible left out any names in the genealogical records.

Did you ever make a genealogical record of your family?.. They always require the names of both parents and all children, aunts, uncles, cousins to make a full family tree.

How could the genealogical record in the bible have textual evidence of names that were left out?

Any such statement that there are names left out would have to be by comparison of any similar genealogical records in the bible where some names are missing or mentioned that the other has or doesn't have. Exactly as I have pointed out in my previous post.

Another point to be made. The genealogical record from Adam to Abram has no or few acknowledgement of daughters.

Is that really supposed to mean that none of those fathers in that long list didn't have any daughters? Highly unlikely.

And where in the genealogical record is the mention of the wives?

The hole of the mistake that you have made gets deeper. Since no daughters are mentioned it could just as well be that though they had other sons, they were not mentioned either.

So, out of all of those fathers.. No wives, no daughters, no other sons. Again, highly unlikely.

And you say they don't leave anybody out..?

Contenders Edge · Jun 9, 2020

coffee4u said:
I think that one got closed by a mod. Since I replied to that same post you just quoted which is why I was getting confused as to what thread I was on. It was in the open
Creation & Evolution area, not the Christian area.
I think maybe this thread The Bible Proves Evolution

Then in that case I will reply to the poster's challenges on this thread when I get the chance. Limited on time right now.

Contenders Edge · Jun 9, 2020

fwGod said:
Did you ever make a genealogical record of your family?.. They always require the names of both parents and all children, aunts, uncles, cousins to make a full family tree.

How could the genealogical record have textual evidence of names that were left out?

Any such statement that there are names left out would have to be by comparison of any similar genealogical records in the bible where some names are missing or mentioned that the other has or doesn't have. Exactly as I have pointed out in my previous post.

Another point to be made. The genealogical record from Adam to Abram has no or few acknowledgement of daughters.

Is that really supposed to mean that none of those fathers in that long list didn't have any daughters? Highly unlikely.

And where in the genealogical record is the mention of the wives?

The hole of the mistake that you have made gets deeper. Since no daughters are mentioned it could just as well be that though they had other sons, they were not mentioned either.

So, out of all of those fathers.. No wives, no daughters, no other sons. Again, highly unlikely.

And you say they don't leave anybody out..?

The genealogies are patriarchal genealogies and therefore in many cases, would not include the names of other relatives (siblings, wives, daughters) who would have been contemporaries of the patriarchal names listed anyway but that is not what those claiming gaps in the genealogical records are arguing and no one from either side of that debate is saying that the names listed did not have daughters. What they are arguing is that names signifying each successive generation are missing but there is no evidence supporting this argument.

Dale · Jun 10, 2020

coffee4u said:
Of course I am, I quoted it up thread, or maybe that was another thread, it gets confusing with so many going.

That passage has nothing to do with Genesis but how God is outside of time. If Genesis days were really millions of years (which causes all sorts of issues with scripture such as no death before sin) Then why even say to the ancient Israelites in Exodus that he created in six days and that the seventh is the Sabbath? Why not simply say he created it if it was really millions of years. The point was he created time for us, in Genesis. Not just evening and moring but the stars, moon and sun too.
Genesis 1
14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

I do not see how this is a convincing argument against the days being literal.
We are already in God's rest. We are to rest in him every day.
Matthew 11:28-30
28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

This book was not written the way that Hebrew poetry or parable was written.
There is nothing about the early verses of Genesis that in any way suggest another meaning for the word day.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
And so on.

Yom followed by evening and morning and number only ever means literal 24 hour day.
Does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days? | GotQuestions.org

Then we are told in Genesis 5 that Adam died
5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.
3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.

Only literal people have literal children and literally die. Or are you suggesting this is somehow symbolic as well? If he died 930 years after day 6, how can we still be in it?

Exodus says twice that God created everything in 6 days. He is talking about their week because they understood the seventh was the Sabbath.
Exodus 20:11
For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Exodus 31:17

It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labour, and was refreshed.”

These can't just be ignored. If you believe these are saying something other than what they appear to be saying there needs to be scriptural backup.

This here is the whole crux of the matter. Every single person who quibbles with the plain reading of Genesis does not do so because of the Bible but because of sources from outside of scripture, mostly science. It's always the Bible +
If God intended it to be read any other way there would be something, even one verse in the New Testament suggesting it might be an allegory or a parable or should be taken some other way, there isn't.

Jesus quotes from Genesis.
Matthew 19:4-5

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female'
He talks about Abel, Adam's son as a real person.
Matthew 23:35

35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
He even says when he comes again it will be like the days of Noah
Matthew 24:37-39

37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.
No hint that any of what he talks about is not literal.

Both Paul and Peter carried it on through scripture showing they believed it literally as well.
Romans 5:12–19; 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, 45–47
2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:13–14
Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4–9, and 2 Peter 3:3–7

If scripture interprets scripture where is the scripture that supports any other reading?

1 Corinthians 1:25
For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Why do you assume science has it all correct? How about the fact they are fallible men and woman only working with what they can see and analysis in the here and now. That they have to work on assumptions. Who says those assumptions continue to be correct when talking about the beginning of the world or the fact that God changed some of the worlds governing laws not once but twice. Mankind thought thalidomide was a great cure for morning sickness and that a pigs tooth was a human. Humans make mistakes, God doesn't.

Coffee4u: "It's always the Bible +"

The notion that we should use no sources outside the Bible is not found in the Bible. It is simply not feasible. For instance, can we use arithmetic? How about geometry?

In the OP, I said that the date accepted for the Tower of Babel by many creationists is not workable. To show this in more detail, consider that 112 years is only about four generations. At the time of Noah there are eight people in the world but if Noah and his wife are past having children then there are only six people of reproductive age. If the reproducing population doubles every generation for four generations, there should be somewhere around 96 people in the world by the time that the Tower of Babel is supposed to be built. This just isn't going to work.

Jesus never told us to reject the evidence of our senses. Jesus never told us not to use the available technology. On the contrary, Jesus was a keen observer. There are places in the Bible that show curiosity about the natural world.

Dale · Jun 10, 2020

Tolworth John said:
Basic problem.
The pyramid is built from sedimentary rock and upon sedimentary rock that was laid down by the global flood.
So unless you believe the eruptions had a time machine they built the pyramid after the flood.

Meaning there is a problem with secular dating and of biblical understanding.

fwGod said:
The creation was based on the first words that God said in Genesis 1:1 translated in English "Light be". Therefore the speed of creation occurred at light speed and yet each day is 24hrs long. On the 7th day God ceased creating, the light speed ceased and days are still 24hrs long.

I believe that God created quickly in the same way that I believe that the healing power occurred quickly in Jesus ministry.. Jesus stated that God did the works, so God healed or in some cases created missing body parts of the people at light speed even while all other things continued to pass slowly within 24hrs.

miamited said:
Hi James,

The Scriptures record that on the seventh day God rested from all the work that He had done. Are you arguing that we've mistranslated the Scriptures here or that God's word cannot be trusted as true?

As far as being explainable in human language...why not? I think you've misunderstood our ability to explain how something may have come about with the ability to speak the words to tell how it came about. God did a fairly good job, in my estimation, in telling us 'how', as far as the chronological information the creation came to exist. No, God did not tell us the 'how' as far as what the physiology of matter was experiencing as it formed into all the things that God created. However, God creates by fiat command, as defined by Webster's: 1 : a command or act of will that creates something without or as if without further effort According to the Bible, the world was created by fiat. 2 : an authoritative determination : dictate a fiat of conscience. 3 : an authoritative or arbitrary order : decree government by fiat.

In simple words, God just commands that something of his thinking or desire or design exist...and it does. God says: Let the earth exist. Pretty much immediately, certainly with the span of time it takes for the earth to make a full rotation upon its axis (day), it exists. With all of the magma at its core and rock and crust foundation of its outer structure, and covering of water, that is necessary, according to God's perfect and all knowing wisdom of design, for the earth to be a structure that exists as a planet upon which He will then begin to build the foundation of life upon. That building of a foundation that will, in the final 6th day of His work, be the place where He will grow and nurture a creature that He calls man. A creature, also made in the perfect and all knowing wisdom of His design, that He created to have the capacity to love and to be loved. A creature designed to be dependent upon Him for its life.

God created man pretty much for the same purpose that He created the angels; to live in a relationship of shared love. Man was made, as far as the strength of his abilities, lower than the angels, but as far as His desire to be in a loving relationship with Him...the same. However, sin and rebellion against God's rightful authority over our lives, and the lives of the angels, was challenged. On the day of God's judgment, both men and angles, will receive what they have lived for.

I believe that the Scriptures are clear, both men and angels live in a created realm. Created by the great wisdom and fiat command of God's desire and design. That it will all be brought to an end and on that day, both men and angels will receive their just due. Those who, in the angelic realm remained faithful to God, and those in our earthly realm who became faithful to God, will receive eternal life with Him. Those who chose rather to follow the broader path, will not.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

coffee4u said:
Of course I am, I quoted it up thread, or maybe that was another thread, it gets confusing with so many going.

That passage has nothing to do with Genesis but how God is outside of time. If Genesis days were really millions of years (which causes all sorts of issues with scripture such as no death before sin) Then why even say to the ancient Israelites in Exodus that he created in six days and that the seventh is the Sabbath? Why not simply say he created it if it was really millions of years. The point was he created time for us, in Genesis. Not just evening and moring but the stars, moon and sun too.
Genesis 1
14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

I do not see how this is a convincing argument against the days being literal.
We are already in God's rest. We are to rest in him every day.
Matthew 11:28-30
28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

This book was not written the way that Hebrew poetry or parable was written.
There is nothing about the early verses of Genesis that in any way suggest another meaning for the word day.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
And so on.

Yom followed by evening and morning and number only ever means literal 24 hour day.
Does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days? | GotQuestions.org

Then we are told in Genesis 5 that Adam died
5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.
3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.

Only literal people have literal children and literally die. Or are you suggesting this is somehow symbolic as well? If he died 930 years after day 6, how can we still be in it?

Exodus says twice that God created everything in 6 days. He is talking about their week because they understood the seventh was the Sabbath.
Exodus 20:11
For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Exodus 31:17

It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labour, and was refreshed.”

These can't just be ignored. If you believe these are saying something other than what they appear to be saying there needs to be scriptural backup.

This here is the whole crux of the matter. Every single person who quibbles with the plain reading of Genesis does not do so because of the Bible but because of sources from outside of scripture, mostly science. It's always the Bible +
If God intended it to be read any other way there would be something, even one verse in the New Testament suggesting it might be an allegory or a parable or should be taken some other way, there isn't.

Jesus quotes from Genesis.
Matthew 19:4-5

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female'
He talks about Abel, Adam's son as a real person.
Matthew 23:35

35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
He even says when he comes again it will be like the days of Noah
Matthew 24:37-39

37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.
No hint that any of what he talks about is not literal.

Both Paul and Peter carried it on through scripture showing they believed it literally as well.
Romans 5:12–19; 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, 45–47
2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:13–14
Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4–9, and 2 Peter 3:3–7

If scripture interprets scripture where is the scripture that supports any other reading?

1 Corinthians 1:25
For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Why do you assume science has it all correct? How about the fact they are fallible men and woman only working with what they can see and analysis in the here and now. That they have to work on assumptions. Who says those assumptions continue to be correct when talking about the beginning of the world or the fact that God changed some of the worlds governing laws not once but twice. Mankind thought thalidomide was a great cure for morning sickness and that a pigs tooth was a human. Humans make mistakes, God doesn't.

Contenders Edge said:
There is no textual evidence that the Bible left out any names in the genealogical records.

John Tolworth, fwGod, MiamiTed, Contenders Edge, Coffee4u:

Here is a question for you. The OP mentioned the Tower of Babel.

In the Tower of Babel story, the project is so huge that God decides that it is pure egomania, that it has no purpose but pride. God disperses the workers and the nation behind them. So is the Tower of Babel a project larger than the Great Pyramid? God didn't stop the building of the Great Pyramid and we know where the Great Pyramid is. Where is the Tower of Babel? Even if it was never finished, the ruins should be there.

I see the Tower of Babel story as a parable, a teaching story but creationists see it as real. Very well, where is it?

coffee4u · Jun 10, 2020

Dale said:
Coffee4u: "It's always the Bible +"

The notion that we should use no sources outside the Bible is not found in the Bible. It is simply not feasible. For instance, can we use arithmetic? How about geometry?

In the OP, I said that the date accepted for the Tower of Babel by many creationists is not workable. To show this in more detail, consider that 112 years is only about four generations. At the time of Noah there are eight people in the world but if Noah and his wife are past having children then there are only six people of reproductive age. If the reproducing population doubles every generation for four generations, there should be somewhere around 96 people in the world by the time that the Tower of Babel is supposed to be built. This just isn't going to work.

Jesus never told us to reject the evidence of our senses. Jesus never told us not to use the available technology. On the contrary, Jesus was a keen observer. There are places in the Bible that show curiosity about the natural world.

I wasn't saying we can't use known things like the culture at the time, but the science behind evolution is anything but known, it's assumed because nobody was there and it can't be tested in a repeatable experiment.

I don't believe in using the Bible as some kind of calculator, just knowing it is some thousands of years old is enough for me.

And I knew you would ignore my questions.

coffee4u · Jun 10, 2020

Dale said:
John Tolworth, fwGod, MiamiTed, Contenders Edge, Coffee4u:

Here is a question for you. The OP mentioned the Tower of Babel.

In the Tower of Babel story, the project is so huge that God decides that it is pure egomania, that it has no purpose but pride. God disperses the workers and the nation behind them. So is the Tower of Babel a project larger than the Great Pyramid? God didn't stop the building of the Great Pyramid and we know where the Great Pyramid is. Where is the Tower of Babel? Even if it was never finished, the ruins should be there.

I see the Tower of Babel story as a parable, a teaching story but creationists see it as real. Very well, where is it?

God is not interested in outside appearances but our hearts and the spiritual.
1 Samuel 16:7
But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The LORD does not look at the things people look at. People look at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart."

At that point in time, God had commanded them to move away, they wern't.

It was a completely different situation to the pyramids. These were built by pagan nations, God was not guiding them.

Contenders Edge · Jun 10, 2020

Dale said:
John Tolworth, fwGod, MiamiTed, Contenders Edge, Coffee4u:

Here is a question for you. The OP mentioned the Tower of Babel.

In the Tower of Babel story, the project is so huge that God decides that it is pure egomania, that it has no purpose but pride. God disperses the workers and the nation behind them. So is the Tower of Babel a project larger than the Great Pyramid? God didn't stop the building of the Great Pyramid and we know where the Great Pyramid is. Where is the Tower of Babel? Even if it was never finished, the ruins should be there.

I see the Tower of Babel story as a parable, a teaching story but creationists see it as real. Very well, where is it?

The Egyptian pyramids were not built for the same reasons as the Tower of Babel and therefore were not prevented, but the Tower of Babel was built in willful defiance of God and therefore is no more, but the city in which it originated is still there to this day: It is called Babylon, and that the existence of various different languages also testify to the event as well. No one has been able to explain how the different languages arose apart from Babel.

miamited · Jun 10, 2020

Dale said:
John Tolworth, fwGod, MiamiTed, Contenders Edge, Coffee4u:

Here is a question for you. The OP mentioned the Tower of Babel.

In the Tower of Babel story, the project is so huge that God decides that it is pure egomania, that it has no purpose but pride. God disperses the workers and the nation behind them. So is the Tower of Babel a project larger than the Great Pyramid? God didn't stop the building of the Great Pyramid and we know where the Great Pyramid is. Where is the Tower of Babel? Even if it was never finished, the ruins should be there.

I see the Tower of Babel story as a parable, a teaching story but creationists see it as real. Very well, where is it?

Hi dale,

I appreciate your teaching in this, however...

We don't have any idea how tall the tower actually got, before God intervened. God, knowing the heart and plans of every man, likely knew before the first stone was laid, what the people were up to. Yes, as you say, it seems that God considered the work to be a work of pride and accomplishment in the work of men. However, He would have known that before the foundation lines were established. So, while we know that God did go down and confuse the language of the workers at that place, we have no idea how tall the structure had been built when God did this. It could have been 10 stories tall or it could have merely had the first row of the foundation set. Yes, we look at pictures drawn of the event and we see a fairly high ziggurat standing on a base, but that's a picture from a man's imagination of how that man believed it might have looked. The Scriptures tell us that the group said, "Let's build a tower that reaches to the heavens." We don't have any evidence as to how far they had actually gotten in doing that before God put a stop to it.

So, the answer to your question, as I understand it, is that there was actually a structure that man considered to build that the Scriptures refer to as the tower of Babel. However, that there would necessarily be any remnants remaining of its construction is highly debatable. After all, if the stones used were good building stones, people may have come later and taken them to build other structures. So, what was begun may have been torn back down. It isn't like they called in 'Concrete is Us' to pour a 3' concrete foundation that may have lasted for thousands of generations that we might still have evidence of the structure's existence. Even if there was a 3' thick concrete foundation, we wouldn't have any way of knowing that it was poured as the base of the tower of Babel. It would just be a foundation laying out in the rough lands of the middle east somewhere. While we might surmise that it was the foundation of the tower, I don't think we could prove it.

For me, the Scriptures are true. As far as I'm concerned, pretty much everything we are told that happened in the Pentateuch, did really happen in real life, in real time. The books of the Pentateuch seem to be written in a fairly simple historical narrative form. But I admit that's just my understanding and that there are others.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

Tolworth John · Jun 11, 2020

Dale said:
Suppose that there were no volcanoes before the Flood. That's interesting because Genesis says that Noah and the Ark landed on Mt. Ararat. Mt. Ararat is actually a range of mountains and it is volcanic. If Mt Ararat was created by a volcano during the Flood, Noah would have stepped out of the Ark onto solid lava. Genesis says that Noah got out of the Ark and promptly planted a vineyard. It doesn't mention that Noah had to travel a great distance to find land that could be farmed.

We all have blind spots about how we understand the Bible or what we bring to it.

Yes there are no mention of volcanoes, does that mean there were no volcanoes or that volcanic activity was forever prohibited.

Noah and the ark landed on the mountains of araat. It can be argued that that is not necessarily the single mountain by that name and it can also be argued where does it say that Noah planted a vineyard right next to the Ark.

May I suggest that you read some of the article found in both aug and creation.com about the flood and it's it's afte.

Tolworth John · Jun 11, 2020

Dale said:
Is there such a thing a creation science

Don't take it up with me but take it up with the scientists with one's etc employed by both aug and creation.com.

Dale · Jun 11, 2020

fwGod said:
You have tried to use this text in an attempt to say that God took a billion years to create all that exists.
But, it didn't say 'a billion', it said 'a thousand'. It didn't say that God took a billion or a thousand or more years to create the heavens and the earth.

When this Psalm is compared with the Genesis creation account.. you make both of them contradict each other. Yet it's well understood by Christians and Bible scholars alike that the Bible interprets itself.. it does not disagree with itself.

The measuring of time has always been the same back then in the creation as it is today. The Hebrew word translated for day in Genesis is the same word in every other verse with the word day in it, such as the one in this Psalm to express a 24 hour day and night.

The Psalmist provided the timeframe of a thousand years, there's nothing in Genesis or in the Psalm text to indicate that God told him that it took 6 thousand years or any other long time to create the heavens and the earth.

In the Psalm, verses 1-2 talks about the eternal aspect of God then verse 3 in comparison of a thousand years a person turns to dust within 70-90 years average. So for God a man's life span is very short. And many people come and go quickly within the Psalmists suggested timeframe of a thousand years.

In verse 4 the Psalmist said that it's according to being in God's sight, because He is eternal, a thousand years would pass quickly in the same way that we who live for 70 to 90 years, 24 hours occurs to us like the snap of the fingers.

So, with that in mind, going back to Genesis.. God caused creation to happen quickly as stated, within 6 24hr days. It happened and He saw that it was good.

fwGod: "You have tried to use this text in an attempt to say that God took a billion years to create all that exists.
But, it didn't say 'a billion', it said 'a thousand'. It didn't say that God took a billion or a thousand or more years to create the heavens and the earth."

The Bible is not a science text or a history text. It was never intended to be any such thing.

fwGod:"When this Psalm is compared with the Genesis creation account.. you make both of them contradict each other."

It isn't my intention to show any contradiction except to show that the points that you emphasize are not as important as you think. You seem to think that days are the key to the whole passage yet they are not mentioned when creation is summarized later in the Bible. Creationists are fascinated by Adam, Eve and the Garden of Eden. I have checked and after the first chapters of Genesis they are basically not mentioned again for the rest of the Old Testament. They are not as essential or as important as you think.

fwGod:"Yet it's well understood by Christians and Bible scholars alike that the Bible interprets itself.. it does not disagree with itself."

I don't know what to make of the claim that the Bible interprets itself. The claim has been used to defend unfounded interpretations.

Dale · Jun 11, 2020

fwGod said:
You have tried to use this text in an attempt to say that God took a billion years to create all that exists.
But, it didn't say 'a billion', it said 'a thousand'. It didn't say that God took a billion or a thousand or more years to create the heavens and the earth.

When this Psalm is compared with the Genesis creation account.. you make both of them contradict each other. Yet it's well understood by Christians and Bible scholars alike that the Bible interprets itself.. it does not disagree with itself.

The measuring of time has always been the same back then in the creation as it is today. The Hebrew word translated for day in Genesis is the same word in every other verse with the word day in it, such as the one in this Psalm to express a 24 hour day and night.

The Psalmist provided the timeframe of a thousand years, there's nothing in Genesis or in the Psalm text to indicate that God told him that it took 6 thousand years or any other long time to create the heavens and the earth.

In the Psalm, verses 1-2 talks about the eternal aspect of God then verse 3 in comparison of a thousand years a person turns to dust within 70-90 years average. So for God a man's life span is very short. And many people come and go quickly within the Psalmists suggested timeframe of a thousand years.

In verse 4 the Psalmist said that it's according to being in God's sight, because He is eternal, a thousand years would pass quickly in the same way that we who live for 70 to 90 years, 24 hours occurs to us like the snap of the fingers.

So, with that in mind, going back to Genesis.. God caused creation to happen quickly as stated, within 6 24hr days. It happened and He saw that it was good.

You seem to have a problem with billions of years. Look at it this way. God has always existed. God has infinite patience. Billions of years is not a problem for God. Why is it a problem for you?

Dale · Jun 11, 2020

Contenders Edge said:
One thing that secular archeologists and historians fail to take into account is that Pharaohs did appoint co-regents to help them govern the land of Egypt which makes it possible that some of these co-regent Dynasties may have been mistaken for the Dynasties of Pharaohs. A co-regent was second in command to the Pharaoh and possessed almost as much authority. We also have to remember is that Egypt, in its glory days, was much larger than it presently is today.

Regents and Co-Regents in the history of Egypt are not a problem.

Egyptologists are smart enough to figure that out.

Dale · Jun 11, 2020

Dale said:
Coffee4u:"That passage has nothing to do with Genesis but how God is outside of time. If Genesis days were really millions of years ..."

I could also mention that the Second Epistle of Peter makes the same point.

8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day

2 Peter 3:8 NIV

This shows Peter to be less of a literalist than you would make him out to be.

coffee4u said:
My comment about no death before sin.
Romans 5:12-21
12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned
Is just one of the verses that does not gell with evolutions millions of years of death, is what I was saying.I do not believe that death, Nephesh chayyāh came to be until after the fall.

There are many psalms that talk about creation, but they are psalms, which is poetry and song.
Psalm 98:8
Let the rivers clap their hands, let the mountains sing together for joy;

Verses Exodus
20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

They are completely different literary styles. The first is poetry designed to make us picture a moving river splashing against the rocks and a blooming mountain of flowers blowing in the breeze. Obviously rivers don't have hands and mountains don't sing.
Genesis and Exodus are not poetry. Not to say they don't contain some, but you know when you are reading Miriam's song versus the Ten Commandments.

God tells us very plainly that he took 6 days and you have no rebuttal for it but to quote poetry?

You don't want to accept the Bible says 6 days due to science, but creation was a supernatural event, it can't be tested with science.
You can believe whatever you want, but don't try and pretend the Bible itself teaches millions of years, that is as believable as Paul teaching break dancing.

Coffee,

When you dismissed my use of Psalm 90 and Psalm 104, you ignored post #84, where I quoted II Peter to the same effect. Peter also says that a thousand years is like a day to the Lord. Most likely a "day" in the six days of creation is not a literal day.

coffee4u · Jun 11, 2020

Dale said:
Coffee,

When you dismissed my use of Psalm 90 and Psalm 104, you ignored post #84, where I quoted II Peter to the same effect. Peter also says that a thousand years is like a day to the Lord. Most likely a "day" in the six days of creation is not a literal day.

I will say again, that had nothing to do with creation, but the fact that God is outside of time. He can see forward and backwards and knew the end before the beginning. He is still outside of time, but we are not. Time is important to us. Gods position outside of time has no connection to the time that God created here on the earth or the years that have passed since.

He probably created the heavens and the earth outside of time.

But then he began creation on the earth he created time for us. When God says there is evening and morning and the first day has ended, this was time.

fwGod · Jun 12, 2020

Dale said:
fwGod: "You have tried to use this text in an attempt to say that God took a billion years to create all that exists.
But, it didn't say 'a billion', it said 'a thousand'. It didn't say that God took a billion or a thousand or more years to create the heavens and the earth."

fwGod: The Bible is not a science text or a history text. It was never intended to be any such thing.

It is a history of God dealing with mankind. It has elements of science in it but it is not a science book.

fwGod:"When this Psalm is compared with the Genesis creation account.. you make both of them contradict each other."

Dale said:
It isn't my intention to show any contradiction except to show that the points that you emphasize are not as important as you think.

Since your case failed, now you say that the creation account is not important. You seem to want to discount it while at the same time wanting to emphasize how you interpret it.

I am obliged to say that how you see it is not important.

Dale said:
You seem to think that days are the key to the whole passage yet they are not mentioned when creation is summarized later in the Bible.

The creation is used later for a variety of reasons.. the number of days that make up a week, the number of weeks that make up a month, the moon and it's phases to keep track of holy days and special occasions. And the way to observe the Moeds of God which are Passover, Pentecost, Trumpets, Tabernacles.

But you don't think that days have any importance.

All text is important. And can be used for the purpose of refuting wrong thinking concerning any Bible text.

Dale said:
Creationists are fascinated by Adam, Eve and the Garden of Eden. I have checked and after the first chapters of Genesis they are basically not mentioned again for the rest of the Old Testament. They are not as essential or as important as you think.

The Genesis account of creation is mentioned in pertinent scriptures.. These are just a few.

Gen.1:4-5; Psalm 33:6, 19:1, 104:1-4, 66:4; Neh.9:6; John 1:1-3; Col.1:15,16-18; Heb.1:2; Rom.1:20; 1 Cor.8:6; Rev.4:11, 5:13; John 6:44.

Scripture is also for the purpose of making aware of the fall of Adam and why there is sin. The NT teaches of God's plan to remit sin.

fwGod:"Yet it's well understood by Christians and Bible scholars alike that the Bible interprets itself.. it does not disagree with itself."

Dale said:
I don't know what to make of the claim that the Bible interprets itself.

That is most likely the reason why you've used your own interpretations on a Bible topic. Not realizing that the Bible is a teaching tool to thereby know the truth and not intellectually indulge in using the Bible to make it support as many ideas that any given person may have.

Dale said:
The claim has been used to defend unfounded interpretations.

By using the teachings of the Bible it will prevent unfounded interpretations.

fwGod · Jun 12, 2020

Dale said:
You seem to have a problem with billions of years. Look at it this way. God has always existed. God has infinite patience. Billions of years is not a problem for God. Why is it a problem for you?

This has already been covered in the post using the text in Psalms. Anyone can only be speaking truth according to what God's word says.

To reiterate, the days of creation do not equivocate to billion(s) years, the creation week only speaks of using seven days to accomplish. What is your problem with that?

Was the Great Pyramid Built Before Noah's Flood?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Ted

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency