Bible Question

According to the Bible there was a planet-wide flood in ~2400 b.c., which killed humans and land animals; only 8 people and their animals survived.

According to non-biblical history and archeology there was a line of pharaohs and dynasties dating back to ~3100 b.c. Also, in 2400 b.c. people were living in China and present-day South-America.


Please reconcile.
Please explain population growth, and migration from Middle-East to America.

Good question! And lamentably, one which certainly cannot be suitably answered by a post or two on a message board. While I don't pretend to be an authority on the subject, I would refer you to "Kingship at its Source" by Dr. John Davis Pilkey, which deals with your question head-on.

Ultimately, regarding the dates, reconciliation between secular chronology and biblical chronology can only take one of four forms. Either the secular timeline is pure bunk (a view to which no one I know holds), or the biblical timeline is pure bunk (non-believers tend to embrace this one), or the biblical timeline is truncated, likely via genealogical gaps (this view is held by a lot of liberal Christians), or the secular timeline is protracted (this view is held by most conservative Christians). I'm inclined toward the view that the secular timeline is protracted, but as far as arguing the finer points, I'm perfectly content to concern myself with matters of theology and leave these sorts of matters to experts like Dr. Pilkey (who, I believe, holds the same view that I do).

As far as population growth is concerned, I'm not entirely sure I understand your question. Would you mind elaborating on it?

As for the migration to America, this is fairly easily accounted for. Prior to the flood, there was but one m***ive continent. During the global catastrophe, such damage was dealt to the earth's surface that the land m*** split into several continents. Those continents began to visibly separate and drift away from one another in the years following the flood (see Gen. 10:25. In the days of Peleg, "the earth was divided"). There would've been ample time for some descendants of Noah to settle in the land-m*** that would in time become the American continents.

Hopefully that all made some sort of sense, and was at least somewhat helpful. :)

The Bible is not the only account of a great flood. Numerous different civilizations have told that story, and long before Christianity even existed. It is likely that a flood did happen, however it is physically, and logically impossible for the story of Noah to be anything more than a nice little fairy tale to tell the kids before bedtime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IncitingRiots

The Bible is not the only account of a great flood. Numerous different civilizations have told that story, and long before Christianity even existed. It is likely that a flood did happen, however it is physically, and logically impossible for the story of Noah to be anything more than a nice little fairy tale to tell the kids before bedtime.

---

Would you care to expand on that? I'd be interested in hearing your reasoning behind this statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Gunn

.... or the biblical timeline is truncated, ....
Would you mind elaborating on it ?

---

That is the problem, if the timeline is truncated:
1) what sort of inspiration would that be ?
2) what else is open to examination, reconciliation with extra-biblical facts ?
3) that would make the whole book just a story compiled by who knows who, and for who knows what purpose ?
4) if the genealogy is broken then the lineage of Jesus is in question -- along with many other things ?
5) if the story of Noah is questionable, then, perhaps, the more detailed story of UtnaPishtim is the one we should read ?

Did the word "world" mean the whole planet to the writer of the Noah story ?

Population:
Humans are not rabits to multiply exponentially. What was the planet's population at the time of Nimrod ? Can, and did, 8 people produce that many children in 200 years ?

Completely disagree on the migration of continents. The waters receded because the ocean floor receded and the continents rose (then the mountains rose). The continents are where they were 4000 years ago. (what sort of cataclysm would it cause if the continent of America moved from Europe to America in Peleg's life time ?)

A side question:
Ken Ham calls attention to the fact that according to the Bible kangaroos once lived in the Middle-East. Was there enough time for them to get to Australia before the water rose ? Are there any kangaroo bones outside Australia ?

(I went to the John Davis Pilkey website, but that is just a place where he sells his book; in any case it is not just a question for me)

It seems to me the criteria you are setting is "if the Bible does not suit wind 11's ideal, then it is not inspired." Isn't that putting yourself up on a pretty high pedestal?

What if there was a bigger purpose to the Bible than the Noachian flood, hmm? Shoots down your inspiration criteria.

Let me ask you. What's your take on scientific dating methods? Do you see anything convoluted in them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IncitingRiots

The Bible is not the only account of a great flood. Numerous different civilizations have told that story, and long before Christianity even existed. It is likely that a flood did happen, however it is physically, and logically impossible for the story of Noah to be anything more than a nice little fairy tale to tell the kids before bedtime.

---

Actually, IR, if you're referring to the Gilgamesh Epic, it is quite different in many details from the story of Noah and the flood. http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/...amesh/tab1.htm

Exactly what other flood stories are you referring to? I know of several that support the biblical details. Please list the ones you know of that do not support the biblical story along with credible data. Academic arguments should be specific with historical or archaeological evidence noted--broad statements with no citations are simply opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

According to the Bible there was a planet-wide flood in ~2400 b.c., which killed humans and land animals; only 8 people and their animals survived.

According to non-biblical history and archeology there was a line of pharaohs and dynasties dating back to ~3100 b.c. Also, in 2400 b.c. people were living in China and present-day South-America.


Please reconcile.
Please explain population growth, and migration from Middle-East to America.

---

No, according to some people's interpretation of the Bible, there was a planet-wide flood in 2400 B.C.

I think this is a better biblical and scientific ****ysis:

http://www.biblediscoveries.com/content/view/17/34/

>>>It seems to me the criteria you are setting
No, what seems to you is that you are purposly twisting my words because you don't want to talk about the question.
Inspiration cannot be incorrect. What sort of bigger purpose can be based on a legend ? for, if the flood mentioned in the Bible really took place in ~9500 B.C., it is only a legend plagirazed from the sumerians. If Genesis is not history of the universe and history of planet Earth and the people on it, the bigger purpose is just some invention of some apostate pharisee who took it upon himself to misguide the non-hebrews.
The New Testament refers to the Old Testament as if fact and history.
Suggested lecture:
http://www.yamaguchy.netfirms.com/wa...youngEarth.mp3
Please download, then listen

>>>>What's your take on scientific dating methods ?
As far as I heard, everyone of them has problems, and everyone of them contradicts the Bible. Somebody must be incorrect.

>>>>No, according to some people's interpretation of the Bible
The Bible presents a line of people with dates of birth from Adam to Noah, to Jacob, to king David, to Jesus. If that is open to interpretation, the whole book is. If the flood took place in 3300 b.c., as Dr. TV Oommen suggests, the genealogy needs to be adjusted, the gap needs to be filled with people.

Re. 1 John 3:1---
If Genesis is in-correct, or open to interpretation, who is this God and what need do we have for his attachment ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

...The Bible presents a line of people with dates of birth from Adam to Noah, to Jacob, to king David, to Jesus. If that is open to interpretation, the whole book is. If the flood took place in 3300 b.c., as Dr. TV Oommen suggests, the genealogy needs to be adjusted, the gap needs to be filled with people.
...

---

I'm sorry, but that's a strawman. It was common for genealogies to include only the "most significant" members of the lineage, with "significance" determined by the intent of the author recording the genealogy. One can see this illustrated by comparing overlapping genealogies from different portions of Scripture. Such an understanding is within the bounds of most current views of "inerrancy."


Now, I happen to believe in a literal Adam and Eve, and a literal Flood that destroyed all but 8 humans. I believe this because there are some rather important theological points in the NT that rely on this truth.

Since geneticists affirm that it is impossible for current humanity to have descended from a single pair of modern humans in any feasible time frame, or from a set of 8 (some of whom were related) even more recently, I understand that modern genetic science is incomplete or faulty. And since I understand that, I may as well believe the other sciences are similarly lacking, and take the earth as being extremely "young" compared to what standard science ***erts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norrin Radd

Since geneticists affirm that it is impossible for current humanity to have descended from a single pair of modern humans

---

And what is their theory, there were many ape-to-human evolutions, from many monkies ? That would really paint them into a corner. What would that do for race-relation ? (wasn't there a racist theory based on such notion?)

Didn't geneticists, through back sequencing, ended up at one mitochondrial Eve (even if 140,000 years ago), then said that 'of course we have to ***ume there were many more women' ?

In your opinion, should the blood-lines and dates of births from the ark's landing to Nimrod be interpreted strictly or openly ?

Quote:

---

Arphaxad was born to Shem at the age of 100, two years after the Flood.
Salah was born to Arphaxad at the age of 35.
Eber was born to Salah at the age of 30.
Peleg was born to Eber at the age of 34. The earth was divided in his day.

Cush begat/became the father of Nimrod. Nimrod is the great-grandson of Noah. Noah is still alive.

---

Peleg is born 101 years after the Flood, in his life-time the continents are divided. How many people were born up to then ?
No date for Nimrod, but could we ***ume that he was contemporary with Noah's other great-grandsons ?
question:
Were there enough people 100-150 years after the Flood to form a kingdom, to engage in such ambitious project as a tower to outer space ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

>>>It seems to me the criteria you are setting
No, what seems to you is that you are purposly twisting my words because you don't want to talk about the question.
Inspiration cannot be incorrect. What sort of bigger purpose can be based on a legend ? for, if the flood mentioned in the Bible really took place in ~9500 B.C., it is only a legend plagirazed from the sumerians. If Genesis is not history of the universe and history of planet Earth and the people on it, the bigger purpose is just some invention of some apostate pharisee who took it upon himself to misguide the non-hebrews.
The New Testament refers to the Old Testament as if fact and history.
Suggested lecture:
http://www.yamaguchy.netfirms.com/wa...youngEarth.mp3
Please download, then listen

>>>>What's your take on scientific dating methods ?
As far as I heard, everyone of them has problems, and everyone of them contradicts the Bible. Somebody must be incorrect.

>>>>No, according to some people's interpretation of the Bible
The Bible presents a line of people with dates of birth from Adam to Noah, to Jacob, to king David, to Jesus. If that is open to interpretation, the whole book is. If the flood took place in 3300 b.c., as Dr. TV Oommen suggests, the genealogy needs to be adjusted, the gap needs to be filled with people.

Re. 1 John 3:1---
If Genesis is in-correct, or open to interpretation, who is this God and what need do we have for his attachment ?

---

Wind11,

If we are to interpret the OT through the light of the NT perhaps we can use this as a clue:

Jn 21:25 Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

God saw fit to only preserve the outline of the life and ministry of our Lord. He gave us enough but not every minute detail. Almost a Cliff's Notes view of the life of Christ. I think that we have the same in the Genesis "timelines". Remember Moses wrote it all down. Most of it all happened waaaay before him it's not suprising then for God to have given him a synopsis like in Luke. I am sure science has it's dating/timeline flaws but the bible is a middle eastern collection of books that deal with relationships and is not much of a western science book.

Quote:

---

Inspiration cannot be incorrect.

---

But it may "incomplete" from our point of view.

So what's in it is true. What's in it is most important for what's eternally important.

Blessings,

MacG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

>>>It seems to me the criteria you are setting
No, what seems to you is that you are purposly twisting my words because you don't want to talk about the question.

---

Not at all. I love to talk about biblical things. Again, you ***ert your will over the facts. I am merely pointing this habit of yours out.

Quote:

---

Inspiration cannot be incorrect.

---

Depends on whose doing the inspiring. Gloria Steinem "inspired" many incorrect things which convoluted an otherwise much needed women's movement.

Divine inspiration is not incorrect. On that point we agree.

Quote:

---

What sort of bigger purpose can be based on a legend ? for, if the flood mentioned in the Bible really took place in ~9500 B.C., it is only a legend plagiarized from the Sumerians.

---

The fact that there are ancient global flood legends that predate the Genesis account of the flood does the precise opposite of what you suggest: it corroborates the Genesis account.

1. The legends were handed down from generation to generation of the same catastrophic event.
2. It would stand to reason that the p*** downs would get contaminated with lore and legends and myths
3. Genesis is a later account of the same event with the book of Genesis and the rest of the Bible showing itself time after time to be inspired from a Source beyond time and space, by his ability (among other abilities) to see the future before it happens and have it written down in his Bible
4. So the Genesis account (God's personal eyewitness account as dictated to Moses his scribe) is therefore corroborated by the other myths and legends that are p*** downs from the ancient people who saw the same event

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnd

the Genesis account ( as dictated to Moses )

---

Then, the timeline has to be correct and explainable. (the article Jill referred to, suggests there could be 900 year discrepancy)
So, did the Flood take place around 4400bc ? how many years after that did Nimrod live ? could there have been enough people ?

The fact that there are many (200?) flood legends indicates that there was a planet-wide flood and cataclysm; many people may have survived and preserved the story of it. If the Flood took place in 9500bc and not in 4400bc there is a lot of explaining to do.

Quote:

---

Frank C. Hibben, The Lost Americans

In many places the Alaskan muck is packed with animal bones and debris in trainload lots. Bones of mammoth, mastodon, several kinds of bison, horses, wolves, bears, and lions tell a story of a faunal population. ...

The Alaskan muck is like a fine, dark gray sand. ... Within this m***, frozen solid, lie the twisted parts of animals and trees intermingled with lenses of ice and layers of peat and mosses. It looks as though in the midst of some cataclysmic catastrophe of ten thousand years ago the whole Alaskan world of living animals and plants was suddenly frozen in midmotion in a grim charade. ...

The Pleistocene period ended in death. This is no ordinary extinction of a vague geological period which fizzled to an uncertain end. This death was catastrophic and all-inclusive. ... The large animals that had given their name to the period became extinct. Their death marked the end of an era.

Throughout the Alaskan mucks, too, there is evidence of atmospheric disturbances of unparalleled violence. Mammoth and bison alike were torn and twisted as though by a cosmic hand in Godly rage.
The animals were simply torn apart and scattered over the landscape like things of straw and string, even though some of them weighed several tons.

---

Were you brave enough to download and listen to Ken Ham's lecture ?


______
MacG>>>>the bible is a middle eastern collection of books that deal with relationships
Are you trying to undermine the credibility of the Old Testament ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

MacG>>>>the bible is a middle eastern collection of books that deal with relationships
Are you trying to undermine the credibility of the Old Testament ?

---

My viewpoint hardly undermines the credibility for me. Here's why:

The New Testament gospels contain the life of Christ with the vast majority of them focusing on the last 3 1/2 years. If we look at only what is recorded we can account for only about 6 months of activity spread out over 3 1/2 years. This we can accept as an accurate but incomplete record of the life of Christ. I apply the same logic to the Old Teastment. Genesis 1 and 2 differ in the creation account. From a letterest point of view they are irreconcilable but when we allow for literary middle eastern Hebrew genre we of the western mindset can make more sense of it.
The ancient middleast mindset thought differently than the modern western mind. Much in the same way men and women think differently about things. Since it was wrtten to by and for middle easterners in their ancient time frame in makes sense why we don't "get it" all of it all of the time in the 21st century. So it is best to remember that the main things are the plain things and plain things are the main things.

Blessings,

MacG

LOL. What a small minded person you are. My courage or lack thereof has nothing to do with your schemes or measures. I'd call it bullying on your part, if it were not so comical.

Getting beyond Courage and Cowardice here...

Ken Ham and ICR go way back in Santee California about 5 miles from where I lived for 5 years and took full advantage of the Woodside drive address museum. That was before his move back east to head up Answers in Genesis.

I may not be up to speed on any new theories he has, but unless he or anyone in the scientific community comes up with a better / more reliable dating method than Carbon 14 (good only as far back as 5000 years) then all his theories about dates (or anyone else's) are just theories.

That's the bottom line. You say they say she says he says holds no weight with facts or facts in evidence. The Bible says only 8 people survived the flood.

Do you understand that the Bible is the only reliable historic document? And (imho) the only reliable document of all time (past present future)?

Why not try spending your time learning what the Bible says rather than trying to bully others over which foot Alexander the Great put first when he walked?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

Then, the timeline has to be correct and explainable. (the article Jill referred to, suggests there could be 900 year discrepancy)
So, did the Flood take place around 4400bc ? how many years after that did Nimrod live ? could there have been enough people ?

The fact that there are many (200?) flood legends indicates that there was a planet-wide flood and cataclysm; many people may have survived and preserved the story of it. If the Flood took place in 9500bc and not in 4400bc there is a lot of explaining to do.


Were you brave enough to download and listen to Ken Ham's lecture ?


______
MacG>>>>the bible is a middle eastern collection of books that deal with relationships
Are you trying to undermine the credibility of the Old Testament ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnd

LOL. What a small minded person you are.

---

:-)
How liberal of you.

If you are a student of the Bible, and if the Bible is the only reliable document, you should have no problem answering the question (if you dare to face it): How long after the Flood did Nimrod live ? How many people were on the planet in Nimrod's life time ?

____________
MacG
Genesis ch 1 tells the story of general creation, Genesis ch 2 tells what took place in the Garden

The number of years is the same for everyone, hebrew or swede or zulu

Quote:

---

Arphaxad was born to Shem at the age of 100, two years after the Flood.
Salah was born to Arphaxad at the age of 35.
Eber was born to Salah at the age of 30.
Peleg was born to Eber at the age of 34.

---

Without Old testament, there is no New Testament. If the timeline of the Old Testament is broken, the New Testament is just a tale. If the Old Testament was written for hebrews only, why bother with it ?
_____
HomeWork for the both of you:
download Walter Martin's "Cult of liberal theology" and listen to it, several times, until you comprehend the concept

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

MacG
Genesis ch 1 tells the story of general creation, Genesis ch 2 tells what took place in the Garden

---

U sure? Ch2 says there was no vegetation on the earth because God had not yet sent rain while ch1 says that God spoke and there was vegetation appeared all in one day with no mention of rain. Which timeline is correct?

Quote:

---

The number of years is the same for everyone, hebrew or swede or zulu

---

How about the length of the years?

Quote:

---

Without Old testament, there is no New Testament. If the timeline of the Old Testament is broken, the New Testament is just a tale. If the Old Testament was written for hebrews only, why bother with it ?

---

I do not think it is broken. So I bother with it :) Don't you think the New Tesatment stands on it's own? The history of the new testament does need the OT to verify it. When I say the OT was written for the Hebrews by inspired Hebrews, God's chosen people I mean God communicated to His beloved Hebrews in their language, recorded their history in a meaningful way utilzing accepted literary tools of their era. Hebrew does not have a seperate set of characters for numbers like we do. Letters of the Aleph Bet double as numbers and without vowels. You have to think differently to "get it" in a foreign language. Especially one that is not Alpha-Numeric when that is what we are used to thinking in. It may be that God kept their history to a History 101 level for the common man and not the detailed pride cultivating PhD level. Still not inaccurate but enough to see through the gl*** darkly.

Quote:

---

HomeWork for the both of you:
download Walter Martin's "Cult of liberal theology" and listen to it, several times, until you comprehend the concept

---

I have been called a lot of names in my time but never a Liberal! It maybe that a California conservative is a liberal elsewhere :) Please do not put me in the same demythologizing pool as Rudolph Bultmann et al. See I have listened to the tape and comprehend it. ;)

You apparantly are not aware that Walter Martin held to the flood being localized. Wherever man and his animals were, else how do you explain the kangaroos in Austrailia found no where else in the world? He also was comfortable with the earth being millions of years old. Perhaps Walter should have listened to his own tape. So now don't throw out the Walter Martin baby with the million year old bathwater ;)

Blessings,

MacG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

:-)
How liberal of you.

If you are a student of the Bible, and if the Bible is the only reliable document, you should have no problem answering the question (if you dare to face it): How long after the Flood did Nimrod live ? How many people were on the planet in Nimrod's life time ?

---

Suppose you tell us.

Quote:

---

____________
MacG
Genesis ch 1 tells the story of general creation, Genesis ch 2 tells what took place in the Garden

The number of years is the same for everyone, hebrew or swede or zulu

Without Old testament, there is no New Testament. If the timeline of the Old Testament is broken, the New Testament is just a tale. If the Old Testament was written for hebrews only, why bother with it ?
_____
HomeWork for the both of you:
download Walter Martin's "Cult of liberal theology" and listen to it, several times, until you comprehend the concept

---

The listing of the messianic line does not ean they were the only ones born to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MacG

U sure? Ch2 says there was no vegetation on the earth because God had not yet sent rain while ch1 says that God spoke and there was vegetation appeared all in one day with no mention of rain. Which timeline is correct?

You appearantly are not aware that Walter Martin held to the flood being localized. Wherever man and his animals were, else how do you explain the kangaroos in Austrailia found no where else in the world ?

---

Yes, I am sure, otherwise there would be a contradiction, right there, at the beginning of the Bible. (in ch 1 Elohim created out-of-nothing, in ch 2 Yahweh Elohim formed from already existing dust; ch 2:5 cannot contradict ch 1:11-12)
No, I was not aware of Martin's views. As I mentioned above, if "world" meant to Noah only his local world, a lot of possibilities open up, including survivers other than Noah's household. I asked the question regarding kangaroos, too.
I certainly do not think the New Testament can stand without the Old. (for one thing, without an original sin and sinner(s) what need is there for God to send someone to suffer other people's punishment?)

Now listen to Ken Ham above, he explains the predicament very eloquently.
(the reason I brought up the "Liberal Theology" lecture is because in it Martin spells out that there is no room for error or interpretation 'if Jesus is not lord of all, he is not lord at all', 'if Jesus was a child of his time, and could have been mistaken regarding the mustard seed')
_____
http://emahiser.christogenea.org/ind...chronology.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IncitingRiots

It is likely that a flood did happen, however it is physically, and logically impossible for the story of Noah to be anything more than a nice little fairy tale to tell the kids before bedtime.

---

I wouldn't advise telling any story that mentions water to kids 'before' bedtime. :rolleyes:

Yowzers!!!

What we have here is a lot of heat and no action, we need to spice it up. Ready!!!!!!!!!! Who was there when the earth was formed? Anyone????? Seriously I'm not joking, who was there when a flood did or did not occur???? Anyone??? Seriously someone had to be there, okay, where's the documentary footage??? History Channel??? Scientist, surely you were there to record all the events using the scientific method and such??? No one was there, big shocker, then how do you know anything. You don't you are purely basing it on conjecture that has at best a limited reliability and is in no way shape or form conclusive.

For those of you who doubt the bible's account that is fine, but I'd be far less concerned with the account, accuracy, and time frame of Noah's flood and much more concerned with the unmistakable truth that your going to die and when you do you will face your creator and give an account of your life. Are you prepared, or will your creator test you and find you wanting?

I guess the wind done left wind11's sails...

couldn't even answer my one simple question...

actually their own question... how long and how many in Nimrod's day?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

According to the Bible there was a planet-wide flood in ~2400 b.c., which killed humans and land animals; only 8 people and their animals survived.

According to non-biblical history and archeology there was a line of pharaohs and dynasties dating back to ~3100 b.c. Also, in 2400 b.c. people were living in China and present-day South-America.


Please reconcile.
Please explain population growth, and migration from Middle-East to America.

---

There are no such dates in the Bible.
People that try to claim they have a date for the flood are only attempting to do "Bible Math"
All the people that do Bible math will sooner or later teach error/

Another thing to remember about the flood of Noah and the creation account. These were eyewitness accounts dictated to God's scribe Moses.

All else (the various creation and flood epics) were handed down through generations of human traditions myths and supers***ions. That there is any semblance to them and the eyewitness account tells us the historic event took place and had enough of an impact on ancient people to p*** down the details and act as a testimony from an unreliable witness (humanity).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wind11

According to the Bible there was a planet-wide flood in ~2400 b.c., which killed humans and land animals; only 8 people and their animals survived.

According to non-biblical history and archeology there was a line of pharaohs and dynasties dating back to ~3100 b.c. Also, in 2400 b.c. people were living in China and present-day South-America.


Please reconcile.
Please explain population growth, and migration from Middle-East to America.

---

The number you used for the age of the flood story is not found in the Bible...Therefore the question is moot