Seven Days

[Mister Agenda]

Wait, is the earth still formed before the sun in Genesis? Isn't that still a major conflict with science no matter how long a day takes?

 

[temporalillusion]

Are you answering his question? Wouldn't the rocks in question only be relevant if they were the rocks that had the art or was it intended that the art spanned a period of time consisting of 30000 years?

No I'm not answering his question, the part you quoted wasn't even a question.

He said "A lot of dreamtime rock art has been radiocarbon dated between 10000 and 40000 years old."

You said "Thats a 30000 year margin of error."

I'm saying it's not a margin of error unless you assume it's one rock or a bunch of rocks thought to be the same age.

If you date one rock to be 10,000 years old, and another to be 40,000 years old, that's not a 30,000 year margin of error, that's two rocks of different ages.

If you date one rock twice and get 10,000 years and then 40,000 years, that's still not a 30,000 year margin of error but it would be a big margin of error.

Just pointing out that your statement made no sense from what he said.

Would you agree that the following assumptions must all be true in order for radiocarbon dating to be accurate?

I didn't ask for a summary of Carbon dating, I asked for evidence that this conference you claimed took place actually did take place and that they said what you claim they said.

So do you have any?

That wasn't the question.

Yes it was, you asked a bunch of rhetorical questions about things which may impact the results when dating something. I used sarcasm to say that those things and many more are understood and accounted for to make more accurate dating.

1. calibrate - make fine adjustments or divide into marked intervals for optimal measuring; "calibrate an instrument"

 

[lionking]

There's only one picture in that link, of one picture...typical primitive daubings of hunters and their prey. As evidence for 'creation myths' predating the written account of Genesis, that's pretty weak, don't you think?

Neat strawman. Where did I say the rock paintings displayed creation myths? I asked how 29,000 year old pigment rock paintings survived a world-wide deluge.

 

[Limbo]

The Hebrew verb for “created” in Genesis 1:1 is in the perfect state, signifying completion.

Hi David, can I ask you a question about this? Sorry if this has come up already...I confess I haven't read this thread. Did you catch this article when it came out?

God is not the Creator, claims academic

The notion of God as the Creator is wrong, claims a top academic, who believes the Bible has been wrongly translated for thousands of years.

Professor Ellen van Wolde, a respected Old Testament scholar and author, claims the first sentence of Genesis "in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth" is not a true translation of the Hebrew.

She claims she has carried out fresh textual analysis that suggests the writers of the great book never intended to suggest that God created the world -- and in fact the Earth was already there when he created humans and animals.

Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.

She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "spatially separate".

[...]

I was hoping you would respond to this article. Thanks in advance!

 

[Hokulele]

Hi David, can I ask you a question about this? Sorry if this has come up already...I confess I haven't read this thread. Did you catch this article when it came out?

God is not the Creator, claims academic

The notion of God as the Creator is wrong, claims a top academic, who believes the Bible has been wrongly translated for thousands of years.

Professor Ellen van Wolde, a respected Old Testament scholar and author, claims the first sentence of Genesis "in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth" is not a true translation of the Hebrew.

She claims she has carried out fresh textual analysis that suggests the writers of the great book never intended to suggest that God created the world -- and in fact the Earth was already there when he created humans and animals.

Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.

She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "spatially separate".

[...]

I was hoping you would respond to this article. Thanks in advance!

Interestingly enough, Stephen Jay Gould published similar musings on the "creation" story in Genesis. These were inspired not by reading the bible, but by viewing mosiacs inspired by the bible. The essay he wrote is pretty interesting, although the pictures are pretty much required to see his point. Sadly, the following link doesn't include the images, but they were in the original article as well as the reprinting in the book I Have Landed, which was, sadly, his last collection of similar essays. Requiescat in pace.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1134/is_6_109/ai_63290984/

 

[Robin]

Hi David, can I ask you a question about this? Sorry if this has come up already...I confess I haven't read this thread. Did you catch this article when it came out?

God is not the Creator, claims academic

The notion of God as the Creator is wrong, claims a top academic, who believes the Bible has been wrongly translated for thousands of years.

Professor Ellen van Wolde, a respected Old Testament scholar and author, claims the first sentence of Genesis "in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth" is not a true translation of the Hebrew.

She claims she has carried out fresh textual analysis that suggests the writers of the great book never intended to suggest that God created the world -- and in fact the Earth was already there when he created humans and animals.

Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.

She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "spatially separate".

[...]

I was hoping you would respond to this article. Thanks in advance!

And bara can also mean to choose or to fatten.

But it can also mean to create and there is no reason to suppose that the majority of translators have got this wrong.

(PS, not all, Young's Literal Translation says "In the beginning of God's preparing the heavens and the earth "}

 

[Robin]

Wait, is the earth still formed before the sun in Genesis? Isn't that still a major conflict with science no matter how long a day takes?

And the stars were formed after the earth, and the plants before the Sun.

But David is claiming that what is meant is that they become visible as the dust settles.

But that does not jell with what Genesis actually says.

 

[Darat]

Hi David, can I ask you a question about this? Sorry if this has come up already...I confess I haven't read this thread. Did you catch this article when it came out?

God is not the Creator, claims academic

The notion of God as the Creator is wrong, claims a top academic, who believes the Bible has been wrongly translated for thousands of years.

Professor Ellen van Wolde, a respected Old Testament scholar and author, claims the first sentence of Genesis "in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth" is not a true translation of the Hebrew.

She claims she has carried out fresh textual analysis that suggests the writers of the great book never intended to suggest that God created the world -- and in fact the Earth was already there when he created humans and animals.

Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.

She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "spatially separate".

[...]

I was hoping you would respond to this article. Thanks in advance!

Perhaps it's your summary but that is in line with how the Torah has been translated for a longtime, Genesis does not claim that god created the earth in the sense of creating the matter the earth is made from, just that he gave it form, the first few lines of Genesis make this very clear since it talks about how the earth had been prior to the creation story i.e.

Genesis

1:1 In the beginning of God's creating the skies and the earth
1:2 when the earth had been shapeless and formless, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and God's spirit was hovering on the face of the water

 

[David Henson]

Perhaps it's your summary but that is in line with how the Torah has been translated for a longtime, Genesis does not claim that god created the earth in the sense of creating the matter the earth is made from, just that he gave it form, the first few lines of Genesis make this very clear since it talks about how the earth had been prior to the creation story i.e.

Genesis

1:1 In the beginning of God's creating the skies and the earth
1:2 when the earth had been shapeless and formless, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and God's spirit was hovering on the face of the water

The Hebrew word for heaven is the always plural shamayim and the Hebrew word for skies is shachaq so that isn't an acceptable translation. Genesis 1:1 states that God created the heavens and the earth and that act was complete. The earth was formless and waste implies that God, having already created it was about to prepare it for habitation.

 

[David Henson]

And the stars were formed after the earth, and the plants before the Sun.

But David is claiming that what is meant is that they become visible as the dust settles.

But that does not jell with what Genesis actually says.

Yes it does say exactly that according to the original language which I have clearly demonstrated. It loses something in the more inaccurate English translations and that isn't what you are accustomed to but that is in fact what it says.

 

[dafydd]

Yes it does say exactly that according to the original language which I have clearly demonstrated. It loses something in the more inaccurate English translations and that isn't what you are accustomed to but that is in fact what it says.

It's just an old story so what difference does it make?

 

[cwalner]

The Hebrew word for heaven is the always plural shamayim and the Hebrew word for skies is shachaq so that isn't an acceptable translation. Genesis 1:1 states that God created the heavens and the earth and that act was complete. The earth was formless and waste implies that God, having already created it was about to prepare it for habitation.

Again David,

would you care to share your credentials as a Hebrew scholar that I should take your word about Hebrew translations over those of rabbinical councils that have been studying both Hebrew and the particular text in question (in Hebrew) for about 3000 years?

 

[Darat]

The Hebrew word for heaven is the always plural shamayim and the Hebrew word for skies is shachaq so that isn't an acceptable translation. Genesis 1:1 states that God created the heavens and the earth and that act was complete. The earth was formless and waste implies that God, having already created it was about to prepare it for habitation.

Might not be acceptable to you but I'll defer to the actual experts.

 

[devnull]

Neat strawman. Where did I say the rock paintings displayed creation myths? I asked how 29,000 year old pigment rock paintings survived a world-wide deluge.

Wasnt so much of a strawman. I was stating earlier than a lot of cave art in Australia depicts the stories of the dreamtime, which refers to creation.

He merely became confused as to who he was talking to.

Im just waiting for the "no true Aboriginal" fallacy

 

[jiggeryqua]

Neat strawman. Where did I say the rock paintings displayed creation myths? I asked how 29,000 year old pigment rock paintings survived a world-wide deluge.

<sigh> David H. asked "What evidence is there that those Aboriginal myths predate the Bible?" You responded with a link. You added 'the rock paintings certainly do' - so yes, to be scrupulously fair, you never said that the rock paintings were of creation myths...you just introduced them as though they were the evidence asked for. Tut tut. You did indeed go on to ask about the flood -I don't doubt that you said a great many other things too...but it's something of a corn dolly to mention that here, as though I'd interpreted your remark about the flood to be a claim about creation myths.

Is there some kind of point system here for deliberate, worthless and unhelpful conflict?

 

[David Henson]

Again David,

would you care to share your credentials as a Hebrew scholar that I should take your word about Hebrew translations over those of rabbinical councils that have been studying both Hebrew and the particular text in question (in Hebrew) for about 3000 years?

Are you suggesting that you are more likely to blindly adhere to anything they have to say over what I have to say? Not that what they have to say is completely irrelevant but take a copy of the tetragrammaton, in Hebrew of course, and give each of them one and note their response. Carefully note the religious superstition that is their tradition.

 

[jiggeryqua]

Wasnt so much of a strawman. I was stating earlier than a lot of cave art in Australia depicts the stories of the dreamtime, which refers to creation.

He merely became confused as to who he was talking to.

Im just waiting for the "no true Aboriginal" fallacy

I think you may be confused as to who you're talking about...

 

[Foster Zygote]

Are you suggesting that you are more likely to blindly adhere to anything they have to say over what I have to say?

Yes, how silly and dogmatic of us to take the testimony of experts over the testimony of someone who lacks expertise. I think that the next time I have a question about automobile maintenance I'll ask my mother-in-law, who doesn't know a camshaft from a driveshaft, rather than my cousin the certified master mechanic.

 

[David Henson]

Might not be acceptable to you but I'll defer to the actual experts.

Where do you think I got the idea? The trouble is you don't know that. You just want to test what I'm saying. All I am saying is go and see for yourself. You don't want to do that.

 

[paximperium]

Where do you think I got the idea?

Who wants to answer this question first?

Removed breach of Rule 10. Do not attempt to bypass the auto-censor. Also, remember Rule 0 and Rule 12.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL