space.com dates Noah's flood to 2350 B.C.

by aChristian 251 Replies latest jw friends

aChristian

Alan,
You wrote: I also thought you might find the references useful. ... The stuff I posted is not from a CDROM; I typed it in by hand.
Ouch! Make that double thanks then. Like you, I'm keeping your post for future reference. Thanks again.
Mike
aChristian

IW,
You wrote: We will always disagree on Paul and other things recorded in the Bible.
Maybe not. For, as you said, "God will at his appointed time grant us the blessing of having his spirit in full measure." And as Paul said, "Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now we know in part; then we shall know fully." (1 Cor. 13:12)
clash_city_rockers

AChristian Posted:
” Will you please stop your attacks? I believe in Christ's virgin birth. I believe in Christ's miracles. I believe in Christ's sacrificial death. I believe in Christ's resurrection and in His ascension to heaven. I have never said anything to the contrary. Now, please leave me alone and I'll leave you alone.
Response: If you truly believe in Christ’s miracles as you say then you will believe in Christ’s creation in the space of 6 days. Instead, you believe in evolution and base not on the text but on the basis of unbelieving atheistic scientists who in their worldview do not hold to and have no room for miracles of any kind Christ or no Christ. Since you go to a non bible believing church with women leaders I know for a fact that your church does not teach with any vigor any historical doctrinal teaching. Your church is not based on any theological teaching from the pulpit. You notice that ONLY unbelievers like AlanF, 6of9, IW just to name a few take your side name me any bible believers that would take your side? Again you are doing all this funky stuff in order to jocky for a position to deny the fall and original sin and the imputation of Adam’s sin to us which is an indirect attack to the doctrine of Christ’s substitutionary death on the cross.
6of9 wrote with such barbaric eloquence:
lol, ya stoooopid dumbfuck, I researched the bible and found that there is zero intelligent arguments for it coming from a supernatural source.
Response: First of all you should be rebuked for your vile use of bad language. Just because aChristian in his liberal Christianity tolerates such filth (that’s because his church doesn’t preach against sin and tolerates the breaking of God’s law) doesn’t mean your filthy trap is acceptable. All you do is demonstrate the truthfulness of God’s word with your folly of your mouth being an open grave. Roman 3:13. You did not do any research on the bible your rejection of the bible is due to your sinful nature and your unwillingness to repent and trust Christ as your savior not because you have any intelligent argument against the Christian faith.
6of9 demonstrating a lack of self-control:
If you could read and comprehend, shitforbrains, you'd know that I am not attracted to aChristians writings. Actually, I have to take that back a bit, his calm, loving demeanor in this thread has soothed my bible induced rage, and I find myself loathe to attack him, e'en though I think he is pimping spiritual filth by pushing the bible as God's word.
Response: How can you know what spiritual filth is if you have no standard to judge what is spiritual filth and what isn’t? And if you where consistent by your standard that aChristian’s responses are not in a loving demeanor the only reason why you except aChristian’s behavior is because of his aberrant doctrinal views and his stance against me. You are not neutral.
Alan who is not a bible believing Christian but is birds of a feather with aChristian writes:
Sure, and you completely misrepresented the full extent of what these fine references said. Let's see how:
: I went to the "New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis --- Ed. By Willem VanGemerern ---1997 Zondervon, (in Grand Rapids) ISBN 0-310-20217-5". From vol. 2 pg. 419, speaking of the word yom (3427 NIV Exhaustive Concordance Number since the dictionary is based off the NIV)
: "daylight, day as in (24 hours), eschatological day"
But of course, we know very well that, being a thorough reference, this said a lot more. You simply left it out, just as you stupidly/dishonestly left out most of what Vine's said.
Next you go on to make one of the stupidest quotes I've ever seen:
: From vol. 2 pg. 420, speaking of the Hebrew word yom
: "as a measurement of time the term (yom) has three principal uses. (a) Its primary meaning is the time of daylight as distinct from the period of darkness, the night. For example in Gen 1:5 God called the light day (also Gen 7:4; 8:22; 29:7; Ex 24:18; Ps 139:1...). (b) The term is also used for day in the sense of the complete cycle that includes both daytime and nighttime e.g. Gen 1:5 "and there was evening and there was morning-the first day" (cf. Gen 7:24; 50:3; Lev 8:35; Job 3:6)."
As I showed above, this completely disproves your claim -- that yôm exclusively means a 24-hour day. This once again proves that you either don't read and/or understand the material you post, or you're totally dishonest.
Response: First of all you did made a claim
“But of course, we know very well that, being a thorough reference, this said a lot more. You simply left it out, just as you stupidly/dishonestly left out most of what Vine's said.”
Have you read VanGemermen’s work? Yes or no? Then how can you know I misrepresented the New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis if you have never read the reference? Be careful to make ill advised universal statement like that when the burden of proof is on you. But further more you made an unsubstantiated charge because outside of the vines you have never taken the time to read any of the reference that I spoke of. So liar, why do you make such a charge since you are too lazy and to dishonest to look up the passages.
Again you say:
As I showed above, this completely disproves your claim -- that yôm exclusively means a 24-hour day. This once again proves that you either don't read and/or understand the material you post, or you're totally dishonest.
Response: You are a liar misrepresenting my views in order to prove your case. My position does not limit (yom) to a literal 24 hour period only I did state and quoted from the reference that you refused to look at "(c) The term day is also used in a variety of extended meanings, for instance, to indicate one's lifetime or reign in his days (Gen 26:1; 1Kings 10:21)". I have no problem with that, but my miopic friend look at the context of this reference the other meanings of yom are in context outside of creation that is something you purposely ignored. I do believe that the usage of yom to mean a literal 24 hour only in the creation passages of Genesis 1-3.
Here is my challenge you show me from any of the citations and again I invite you to if you want introduce other citations from conservative bible believing scholars that use (yom) in Genesis 1-3 as meaning and unspecified number of time. To be more clear can you have to disprove the usage of yom meaning 24 hours in the Genesis text from the references that were stated.
Let me give an example:
yôm (yôm, 3117), "daylight; day; time; moment; year." ... Yôm has several meanings. The word represents the period of "daylight" as contrasted with nighttime... The word denotes a period of twenty-four hours... Yôm can also signify a period of time of unspecified duration: "And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made" (Gen. 2:3). In this verse, "day" refers to the entire period of God's resting from creating this universe. The "day" began after he completed the creative acts of the seventh day and extends at least to the return of Christ. Compare Gen. 2:4: "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day [beyôm] that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens...." Here "day" refers to the entire period envisioned in the first six days of creation. Another nuance appears in Gen. 2:17, where the word represents a "point of time" or "a moment": "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day [beyôm] that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Finally, when used in the plural, the word may represent "year": "Thou shalt therefore keep this ordinance in his season from year to year [yamîm]" (Exod. 13:10)...
The first biblical occurrence of yôm is found in Gen. 1:5 "And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day." The second use introduces one of the most debated occurrences of the word, which is the duration of the days of creation. Perhaps the most frequently heard explanations are that these "days" are 24 hours long, indefinitely long (i.e., eras of time), or logical rather than temporal categories (i.e., they depict theological categories rather than periods of time).
The "day of the Lord" is used to denote both the end of the age (eschatologically) or some occurrence during the present age (non-eschatologically). It may be a day of either judgment or blessing, or both (cf. Isa. 2).
Can you prove Alan that these references are totally excluding a literal 24 hour interpretation of yom in the Genesis 1-3? The burden of proof is on you show me the exact reference that rules out any interpretation of Gen 1-3 usage of yom to be a sun up to sun down or any equivalent or 24 hour. On the flip side you MUST prove from the references that the usage of (yom) exclusively means unspecified time only.
So Alan you filthy liar you can not prove your case if so prove me wrong and site the reference properly not like the WT does.
Showing his dishonesty Alan writes:
But once again you've left out the other meanings for "day" that the Baker Encyclopedia gave. Have you no shame? Or are you just so stupid that you have no comprehension of what you read?
Response: How do you know I miss quoted the Baker the Baker Encyclopedia? Have you read it for yourself? Yes or no If not then your slanderous accusations have to stop. Read the Reference I cited and get your facts strait before you look more like a fool than you already are. I read the books you haven’t. Alan, for someone who is as educated and illuminated as you boastfully claim you sure do sound so ignorant on the issues that you speak of. AChristian doesn’t have a good apologetics buddy with you, but then again he goes to a church that doesn’t do apologetics and theology but then that’s the curse of having women leadership in the church, just a church with vacant and empty theological content.
Finally, the references do with out a shadow of a doubt disproves the claim that yom in Genesis 1-3 excusively means unspecified period of time. Not only that but when the references in mentioned speak of yom in Genesis 1-3 it is more in the contexts of a specified time like 24 hours or sun up sun down or evening to evening. So aChristians view of Genesis 1-3 passage exclusively meaning millions and billions of years is bogus according to the Hebrew references.
Alan and aChristian,
Let’s look at this phrase:
Yôm can also signify a period of time of unspecified duration
If a period of time is unspecified? Then how can you give a specific period of time of creation from the text as meaning billions and millions of years do you understand the contradiction of your claim?
Again if a word in the text means unspecified time then how can you give a specific particular duration of time when the text doesn’t call for it. This is a dialectical tension in your herminudical grid. Just being consistent (reductio ad abserdum)
No, you and your apologetic buddy Alan, who is not a Christian have been refuted by the evidence and the lack of exegesis and internal inconsistency.
See ya,
Jr
IslandWoman

IW,
You wrote: We will always disagree on Paul and other things recorded in the Bible.
Maybe not. For, as you said, "God will at his appointed time grant us the blessing of having his spirit in full measure." And as Paul said, "Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now we know in part; then we shall know fully." (1 Cor. 13:12)

AMEN!!
AlanF

I'm only going to deal briefly with your standard nonsense here, Clashing Cymbal. There is simply no reasoning with a moron such as yourself.
First, all you have to do in order to prove that you did not leave out anything important from the references I know you've misrepresented is to post the full text of them. If you don't, then you'll have proved once again to be dishonest, just as you did when you quoted Vine's. Since you've already demonstrated yourself a liar this way, I have nothing left to prove.
Second, you've nicely reconfirmed that you're a complete moron with this gem:
: Let's look at this phrase:
: "Yôm can also signify a period of time of unspecified duration "
: If a period of time is unspecified? Then how can you give a specific period of time of creation from the text as meaning billions and millions of years
"Billions and millions of years" is a completely unspecified period of time, you dolt.
: do you understand the contradiction of your claim?
Do you understand that "billions and millions of years" is not a specific period of time?
: Again if a word in the text means unspecified then how can you give a specific particular duration of time when the text doesn't call for it.
Your reasoning ability fits well with your spelling, grammar and punctuation skills.
AlanF
Faithful2Jah

Clashy: You just said, "The burden of proof is on you show me the exact reference that rules out any interpretation of Gen 1-3 usage of yom to be a sun up to sun down or any equivalent or 24 hour."
I know I probably shouldn't ask this. But don't fundamentalists teach that God did not create the sun until the fourth "day" of creation?Doesn't that sort of "rule out any interpretation of" the first three creative days in Genesis chapter one as being "sun up to sun down" days?
Clashy: You just said to AF, "So Alan you filthy liar ... you are too lazy and to dishonest ... you liar ..."
You then said to AF, "Your slanderous accusations have to stop."
Clashy, you are truly amazing.
anewperson

This verse shows yohm/day in Biblical Hebrew as in English (e.g. in Napolean's day, in my dad's day) can mean other than a literal 24 hours, and in fact can encompass still other days or time periods:
"This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in THE DAY that Jehovah God made earth and heaven." (Ge 2:4)
So here all the creative days/time periods are lumped together as one yohm/day.
anewperson

This verse shows yohm/day in Biblical Hebrew as in English (e.g. in Napolean's day, in my dad's day) can mean other than a literal 24 hours, and in fact can encompass still other days or time periods:
"This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in THE DAY that Jehovah God made earth and heaven." (Ge 2:4)
So here all the creative days/time periods are lumped together as one yohm/day. Nothing indicates the exact amount of time incorporated into each creative yohm/day, each of which could have been millions or billions of years.
Faithful2Jah

I wonder how a worldwide flood person reacts to stuff like this article I just read on the Net. Anthropologists have just found cave art which they have dated as being 70,000 years old. Wouldn't a worldwide flood have destroyed such things if they were made before the flood. If they were made after the flood then the "worldwide" flood must have been longer than 70,000 years ago. Does anyone know when fundamentalists date their worldwide flood?
They Found WHAT In South Africa?
By Cathryn Conroy, CompuServe News Editor
Cave art--and it's far older than anything previously found. Anthropologists have found prehistoric art in a cave about 180 miles east of Cape Town, South Africa. What makes this find extraordinary is that it dates back 70,000 years--tens of thousands of years earlier than conventional wisdom holds that humans could do such things. What was found were elaborately carved pieces of ocher, a red stone still used today to make powder and paint.
The tools are utilitarian and decorative. "I think these are abstract images, deliberately carved, which have some symbolic value or some symbolic meaning to the person who carved them and also to other people in the cave site who lived there," Christopher Henshilwood, an anthropologist at Iziko Museums of Cape Town in South Africa and also of the State University of New York, told Reuters. The abstract carvings, which are similar in design to cave art dating back 35,000 years, could indicate these early cave dwellers had modern language. In others words, humans 70,000 years ago were mentally evolved. They were more than thugs. They created art. The Blombos cave site which is located on a 120-foot-high cliff has been a bonanza for anthropologists, who have previously found 28 decorative bone tools there. Henshilwood's team found evidence these humans fished. "Fishing is also one of the markers used for modern human behavior," he told Reuters, adding that it is significant the carvings were found in Africa where humans originated.
aChristian

Some fundamentalists now allow for the possibility that Noah's flood may have occurred a few thousand years earlier than the date a very strict reading of the Bible's chronological record indicates. (That date, as published by James Ussher over 350 years ago, is 2350 BC) They do so by saying that there may be some "gaps" in the Genesis genealogies.
Whitcomb and Morris, in the final paragraph of their book The Genesis Flood, wrote, "It would seem to us that even the allowance of 5,000 years between the flood and Abraham stretches Genesis 11 almost to its breaking point. The time has come when those who take the testimony of God's infallible word with seriousness should begin to look with favor upon the efforts of those who are examining and exposing the unwarranted assumptions and false presuppositions of uniformitarianism as it applies to the dating of early man."
In other words, fundamentalists believe that they should always put their belief that the Bible definitely teaches that our planet was completely flooded with water just a few thousand years ago ahead of the findings of modern science when it comes to determining how long mankind has widely, and continually, inhabited our earth. Their reaction to stories such as the one you just posted is always to say, "The findings of scientists pertaining to the dating of early man must be in error, because our interpretations of the Bible cannot be."

space.com dates Noah's flood to 2350 B.C.

Share this