The Deluge

[David Henson]

I have to say this. This gentleman is trying. He at least isn't standing pat on the bible and saying cliches like the bible says it I believe it and thats all there is to it. He's wrong but he's trying. Debating some atheists (such as myself) he is saying things that only a scientist or historian can easily rebut. But he is still getting excellant rebuttle from the experts in here.

Hmmph.

Heres a question for you Mr. David Hensen. Is God good? I say he is not. Plagues, baby killing, pregnant mother ripping open says bad guy to me. Can you rebut that? Excuse me for getting off topiic. I'll leave the rebuttle to the experts.

Well, first of all, what is good is subjective. To me God is good but he has had to do some things that I wouldn't want to have had the authority to do, even some things that, like the David of Bible times, I didn't agree with or at least wasn't very happy with.

Some of the "bad" things he had to do I understand and I would have had to do the same. The flood, for example. The Bible doesn't say this so it is my own speculation, but I believe the flood had to have taken place or mankind would have destroyed itself.

The examples you used above . . . you have to give me scriptural citations, buddy, at least go that far.

 

[David Henson]

BS. http://www.touregypt.net/hdyn1.htm

You just lie.

Paul

If this guy calls me a liar can I call him an idiot? No? Okay. Just checking.

 

[Nonpareil]

The examples you used above . . . you have to give me scriptural citations, buddy, at least go that far.

Plagues of Egypt cover the first two. Not sure what the "pregnant mother" bit is from, though.

 

[Marduk]

If this guy calls me a liar can I call him an idiot? No? Okay. Just checking.

You can only describe someone if theres evidence supporting it, so you could legitimately be described as a liar and an idiot whereas paulhoff is neither
hope this helps


or try this

You'll notice that the current world population is a result of a slow increase going back to before the holocene and that there isn't a sudden drop around 2300bce
why do you suppose that is ?

 

[David Henson]

WHY? <snip>



Fine. Basically, Egyptian civilization began at around 10,000 BC. Happy?

No. I can say something contrary to that - like, Egyptian civilization began at around 45,000 B.C.E. It doesn't mean anything. I have already given a huge post on the subject which you probably didn't even read. I already know that you disagree with the Bible, you know.

EDIT: Meanness snipped. I'm sick and my head is killing me. Apologies.

I completely understand, dude, I really do. I'm doing the best I can myself. No worries from my end.

 

[Paulhoff]

If this guy calls me a liar can I call him an idiot? No? Okay. Just checking.

Call me what you what, we have the evidence that what you post about the time line of Egypt is an out and out lie, therefore you are a liar.

Paul

 

[Nonpareil]

No. I can say something contrary to that - like, Egyptian civilization began at around 45,000 B.C.E. It doesn't mean anything. I have already given a huge post on the subject which you probably didn't even read.

The problem is that your post is not backed up by archaeological and radiometric findings.

I completely understand, dude, I really do. I'm doing the best I can myself. No worries from my end.

Thanks.

 

[David Henson]

Call me what you what, we have the evidence that what you post about the time line of Egypt is an out and out lie, therefore you are a liar.

Paul

Really? You, uh . . . you know withholding evidence isn't very nice. Why so secretive about it or did I miss something among all the inane babel?

 

[Paulhoff]

Really? You, uh . . . you know withholding evidence isn't very nice. Why so secretive about it or did I miss something among all the inane babel?

There is lots of evidence that the history of Egypt goes way before your so-called flood date. Grow up, your idea of the bible is way off base.

Paul



http://www.touregypt.net/ehistory.htm

 

[Nonpareil]

Really? You, uh . . . you know withholding evidence isn't very nice. Why so secretive about it or did I miss something among all the inane babel?

Here's some: http://www.aeraweb.org/how_old.asp

A little more: http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=c2b444ce178a923cf730dad8f66c6caf

 

[Marduk]

or you could watch these animations
these were put together using shoreline data from Proudman oceanographic labs,
http://www.pol.ac.uk/
as such it is the most accurate data available on earth for sea levels during the Holocene
heres Europe last 10,000 years

the caribbean, same period, last 10,000 years

Australia, same period

Indonesia


you might notice theres no sudden rise around 2300bce in any area of the world
This data can't be argued with, if there was a global flood it would be impossible to model the sea levels prior to the inundation. That isn't the case ergo there was no global inundation

got an answer for that have you David ?

 

[Shalamar]

Let us also try this:

Can you point to evidence of a global flood, a bottleneck in human population, and the diversity of animal species from a single point on the globe that does not use the bible?

 

[MarekM]

The last ice age ended thousands of years before your supposed flood, eliminating land bridges to Australia and the Americas. How were these continents repopulated?

 

[paiute]

We are not amused

I would like to think

And I would like to be Her Imperial Highness, The Queen of England.

 

[Paulhoff]

Indian History........

http://www.iloveindia.com/history/timeline-of-india.html

Paul

 

[Paulhoff]

China's Timeline

http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/prehistory/china/timeline.html

Paul

 

[godless dave]

playing devil's advocate briefly:

At the time of the supposed flood, the witnesses and writers couldn't have had much handle on the size of the planet. A big local flood would appear as an event that engulfed the planet. Someone may have tried to float it out, and brought along some basic domestic animals in hopes of finding a less flood-prone place to start over.

If everything you could see was flooded, and even several days of travel, which might have been as little as 30 miles, revealed no dry ground, it sure would look like the whole world was flooded.

That's a good point, but it's not playing devil's advocate. The position of the original poster seems to be that a literal global flood happened that covered all the earth. That is certainly the position of many American Christians. They maintain that the story of the flood as told in Genesis was the historical truth as inspired by God, not human impressions of a historical event.

 

[Mirrorglass]

The last ice age ended thousands of years before your supposed flood, eliminating land bridges to Australia and the Americas. How were these continents repopulated?

Actually, it's still possible to walk from Russia to America on some winters, and anyway, why couldn't the people have used boats?

 

[MarekM]

Actually, it's still possible to walk from Russia to America on some winters, and anyway, why couldn't the people have used boats?

I was referring more to the repopulation of fauna, particularly those unique to the regions.

 

[Simon39759]

You know what, I think you may be on to something. I know nothing about the facts of history . . . I need a knowledgable fact finder like you who could help me out. Here is something I worked out a while back, maybe you can help me with it. You know . . . some constructive criticism (. . .)

This long post seems totally irrelevant to the subject of the flood.

Let's put it that way (simplified version). Around the time of the Babylonian captivity; Hebrew priest (probably inspired by their Babylonian overlord) set to write down the history of their people (and rulers).
Because this was new to the Jewish people, they did not have records and used their memories/ oral tradition.
Some of these traditions were actually quite accurate, the "Book of king" for example, mostly because the events were still quite fresh. On the other hands, many ancient events were but myths. The earliest periods covered by the books of king, for example, let alone the books of Exodus and Genesis.
So, it is not surprising to find some concordance for the later events, but it has no bearing on the reliability of the mythical parts.

This, by the way, is in no way a extraordinary development. If you go back to the history of Egypt, while most of the list of kings and dynasty seems pretty reliable, the earliest name mentioned include divinity and mythical monarch. Similarly, Roman historians wrote down a long list of rulers, that stretch back to Romulus; Aeneas and the Homeric account of the Trojan war...

In other words; the more distant from the time of the writings the event are; the less reliable the accounts.
In the case of ancient Egypt; we know that by the time of the alleged flood; the Egyptian civilization was actually well established.
They had been using the same hieroglyphic script for 400 years and they had a firmly established aristocracy and priesthood with an empire able to build pyramids within a couple hundred years. In other word; they already were able to produce a reliable paper stone trail.

We don't have any reason to even start doubting the core validity of such chronology.