God Recreated the Earth 6,000 Years Ago!

[Bunyip]

JayJayDee

You keep missing the elephant in the room - if (as you claimed) God made the rules and laws that govern the universe then the first organisms would not have needed to be designed. Funny how you keep missing that.

 

[David M]

I believe in Evolution, for example, but seem to keep finding 70-million-year-old Coelacanths when I deep-sea fish... understand that scientists don't want to be the bad guy and question the party line... in a one-party system!

This old canard again. "Coelacanth" is not a species it is an Order, there are 2 extant species of Coelacanth and they are different species to those found in the fossil record (and live in different environments).

 

[jonathan180iq]

I believe in Evolution, for example, but seem to keep finding 70-million-year-old Coelacanths when I deep-sea fish... understand that scientists don't want to be the bad guy and question the party line... in a one-party system!

Someone's been watching that old VW commercial.

 

[jonathan180iq]

LOL...I read this and couldn't help applying it to the theory of evolution. There is conclusion "massaged" into all the "evidence" as far as I can see. There are no definites because they cannot be sure that what they have concluded from the "evidence" is true, so how can supposition be classified as fact? It is based on faith in the education of those who make the conclusions. Circumstantial at best. You cannot impose the death penalty on circumstantial evidence, yet evolutionists have sentenced God to death on the veracity of their limited interpretation of his early creation.

Scientific understanding has nothing at all to do with denying people religious freedom to believe whatever they hell they want to believe. The only type of god that evolutionary science would kill is one that requires limited fundamentalist understanding in order to exist.

Who is "we"?

Everyone.
If you're going to make an argument that your mythology is 100% verifiably accurate, and then deny the possibility that all of the other mythologies that exist get the same type of leniency just because you are very ardent in your belief of the previous mythology, then you are engaging in the fallacious argument of special pleading. While you might think it's clever to start a response to someone who is trying to help you with "LOL", you should probably make sure that you actually understand what special pleading is.

Feel free to show me how an established science, spanning hundreds of years, and which is corroborated via other independent fields of science, is special pleading though. What you seem to be completely missing is the point that scientific discovery is only a threat to very limited understandings of scripture or religion. When you, for example, create a very rigid understanding of the world around you, then anything that is discovered which doesn't fit that rigid mold will seem threatening. The fact of the matter is, if there was a better explanation for biological understanding, then science would adapt it. We haven't chosen evolution because we hate god or anything even remotely close to that. We haven't chosen evolution at all. It's simply what was discovered and despite our best efforts to disprove the theory, it continues to work out. We've tried different models, and nothing else works like the evolutionary model. It had been tested, demonstrated, explained, tested again...and every single new discovery only seems to enhance our understanding of it.

Geology, for example, wasn't some made up science just to **** off the religious. If you believe that the Earth is a few billion years old, then you reference geology as one of your ways of knowing this, don't you? Geology is a science because that's how the natural world works. Layers are deposited and layers shift. Simple.

Evolution is no different. Give me 8 weeks and a greenhouse and I can show you evolution works. It's not a matter of hating religion or of interpreting data incorrectly. It's just how it works. Simple.

I think what you're most hung up on is the idea that the evolutionary model doesn't explain abiogenesis and you think that it does. It doesn't. We don't know how life started. If you want to attribute that to a god, that's totally cool. No one is ever going to stop you from doing that. But some of us prefer to wait for new information that might actually answer that question.

There's methane on Mars. Lots of it. Methane, for the most part, is produced when biological matter decomposes. The emergence of life, regardless of size, on any other object in the solar system, would simply add to the accuracy of the evolutionary model, wouldn't it? Or would you argue again that it's an issue with interpretation of the data? The evolutionary model is based solely on what we have learned from biology on Earth. If that same biological understanding carries over to anywhere else in the Universe, then it could be accurately stated that our understanding of biology is Universal. That biological understanding is based on evolutionary theory. What happens to all of your arguments in light of an accurate, all encompassing, universal model of existence?

Advice from whom?

I wrote the sentence. It's advice from me.

According to the Bible, the final war of Armegeddon is just ahead of us...

So are you arguing for Intelligent Design or are you just proselytizing?
What does the mythology of battle at Tel Megiddo have to do with snowflakes?

Also, you skipped over some very logical questions that I think you should you try and answer, namely my comparison between your reliance on the Watchtower as worthy source for debating evolutionary theory. To summarize, wouldn't you think it a little foolish of me to try and debate you about what Jehovah's Witnesses believe based on what I read on an anti-JW blog?

 

[BilliardsBall]

If you cannot provide a flood date, it did not happen.

LOL. We can provide dates neither for Creation nor the Big Bang, so neither occurred. You don't exist, nor do I.

 

[BilliardsBall]

There are definitive evidences when Flood occurred in the layer of rocks, due to silt or debris, in certain areas, 5 years ago, 50 years ago, 500 years ago or 5000 years ago, especially with considerably large flood. And usually these flood would drain away in couple of days or a week.

But according to Genesis, the whole Earth was covered in water, in some 4000+ years ago, and everything was underwater for nearly a whole year. A whole year!!! Do you understand the significance of that?

The larger and more destructive the flood, the more evidences can be found for such a flood occurring.

If the whole Earth was under water for a whole year, then surely there would be evidences present, everywhere, AT EXACTLY THE SAME TIME!!!!

There are no such evidences to a global flood at any time in human history.

Sure there are evidences for large, destructive flood, but none of them of global size, which the Genesis is saying. Without any evidence to support a global flood, then the Genesis is a myth.

A large destructive river flood did hit Shuruppak around 2900 BCE, and evidences are quite clear for archeologists and geologists, which they were able to date to specific time. This is most like source for Noah, but the flood legend with the original ark hero - Ziusudra (in the Eridu Genesis, Death of Gilgames, and the King List of Sumer) also known as Atrahasis during Old and Middle Babylonian periods (Epic of Atrahasis), or as Utnapishtim in Middle and Late Babylonian periods, in the Epic of Gilgamesh).

If the dateable evidences are visible to geologists and archaeologists today, shouldn't Genesis flood be even more visible and apparent 6 centuries after Shurruppak's river flood, in every locations around the world?

There were no break in culture and civilisation in Egypt or in Sumer in the 23rd century BCE.

If such Flood had hit Egypt, then everyone would have died, and it would take awhile to repopulate the land of Egypt. There would be break in their civilization and in their culture.

1. Wouldn't the culture in Egypt AFTER the Flood (like with Egypt son of Ham) be totally different to the culture BEFORE the Flood?
2. Wouldn't there be not enough people to continue building tombs like the pyramids for their kings for some generations or some decades after this so-called Global flood? Instead we have pyramids almost continuously being built by each successors.

A global flood doesn't make sense, because Ham didn't have a son named Egypt and other children, until after the Flood, and they would have to take time to grow up to sire other children (as do children of Shem and Japheth would need to grow up before they each could sire children), and these new generations of children would also need to grow before they have new crops of children. So these periods of growing up would take at the very least a decade-and-a-half before each couple can have children of their own.

And these periods of growing up would mean that you can't build kingdoms or civilisations because there wouldn't be enough people around for rebuilding each civilisations.

And consider that Noaẖ's 3 sons only had one wife each, and supposedly each wife had these children, but nowhere does Genesis mention anything about daughters. You'll at the very least, have 2 people - a man and a woman - to have children. So Shem, Japeth and Ham would have to sire enough daughters for a large number of sons that are mention in Genesis by names. So unless these brothers' wives are having twins or triplets of girls, then their wives would have to be constantly pregnant for some decades, for enough girls for each new generations of men.

And pregnancies would take some nine months, more or less, before a child or children being born for each mother.

What I am getting at is that a global flood, would at least take several hundred years or more to recover before new kingdoms or civilisations could crop up. And industries would also take time to be rebuilt. Everything take time, like farming for instance. Crops can't just immediately be ready for harvest.

But there were no such reduction to population in Egypt and Mesopotamia. And that's not to mention civilisations parallel to the Middle East, such as the Chinese and Indian in the east, during the Bronze Age.

A global flood as referred to in the Genesis, is nothing more than a myth, JayJayDee.

1. Where did you get the "approx. 4,000 years" date FROM? It's NOT in the Bible.

2. OF COURSE there's no evidence of a Flood in human history. There was no modern human history BEFORE the Flood.

3. It would be SO AMAZING if some of you ACTUALLY READ THE ACCOUNT before raising "issues" like "whom did Noah's sons marry"? Here is Genesis 7:13:

On that same day Noah and his sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth, as well as Noah's wife and his three daughters-in-law went into the ship. In the same day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark.

This is why we say there were eight (8) people on the ark, providing genetic diversity as well.

But I understand. Skeptics are angry with some kind of Sunday School issue from their youth. The Word of God isn't a coloring book for five-year-olds. It gives authentic, rich, careful details of a worldwide flood.

 

[jonathan180iq]

LOL. We can provide dates neither for Creation nor the Big Bang...

Careful there. You're going to get backed into a corner again.

2. OF COURSE there's no evidence of a Flood in human history. There was no modern human history BEFORE the Flood.

There were people before the flood, which is supposedly why there had to be a flood in the first place, right? That would make those people part of human history...
And besides that, it's not that there is no evidence for a flood within the scale of human history. There is no evidence for a global flood at all - and we've dug further than I think you know.

For example, you've throw out the number 50,000 for the possible number of years ago that the flood mat have happened? You understand that we have a very good idea of what was going on 50,000 years ago, right? It's not like the geologic record only goes back 45,000 years...

But I understand. Skeptics are angry with some kind of Sunday School issue from their youth. The Word of God isn't a coloring book for five-year-olds. It gives authentic, rich, careful details of a worldwide flood.

False. You're assuming that skeptics of a certain mythology care one way or another about what the mythology says. The study of geology cares nothing of what your mythology says. They simply study the strata.

And every mythology on the planet gives rich and colorful details for what they believe to be the story of man and morality. Is every single mythological account accurate? Or do you rely on actual evidence from the sciences to help you refute the claims of the other mythologies, but disavow the sciences when they contradict your chosen mythology?

 

[outhouse]

There was no modern human history BEFORE the Flood

There would have to be a flood first. No date, no flood ever happened.

OF COURSE there's no evidence of a Flood in human history

Because it did not happen.

 

[outhouse]

. It gives authentic, rich, careful details of a worldwide flood.

It factually does not give any authentic details of any major flood.

The Word of God isn't a coloring book for five-year-olds

How would you know?

You refuse all credible education and knowledge.

This is why we say there were eight (8) people on the ark, providing genetic diversity as well.

Oh you mean what most call mythology that an impossible breeding population started an inbred human race. How impossible

 

[Looncall]

1. Where did you get the "approx. 4,000 years" date FROM? It's NOT in the Bible.

2. OF COURSE there's no evidence of a Flood in human history. There was no modern human history BEFORE the Flood.

3. It would be SO AMAZING if some of you ACTUALLY READ THE ACCOUNT before raising "issues" like "whom did Noah's sons marry"? Here is Genesis 7:13:

On that same day Noah and his sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth, as well as Noah's wife and his three daughters-in-law went into the ship. In the same day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark.

This is why we say there were eight (8) people on the ark, providing genetic diversity as well.

But I understand. Skeptics are angry with some kind of Sunday School issue from their youth. The Word of God isn't a coloring book for five-year-olds. It gives authentic, rich, careful details of a worldwide flood.

No physical evidence, no flood. No matter what old campfire tales you dig up.

 

[gnostic]

1. Where did you get the "approx. 4,000 years" date FROM? It's NOT in the Bible.

I had never said that the bible provided dates. The bible provided any date whatsoever.

What the bible does provide are known number of years, in which anyone with half-a-brain, could use these years, add them up, to get some idea of the biblical timeline.

You have not understood anything I have said, have you?

There are no dates in the bible - true.

But the bible does say -

1. how long this or that king rule for,
2. at what age a patriarch sired his son,
3. at what age a person died,
4. and other listed numer of years of when something had happened (like Exodus 12:40-41 or 1 Kings 6:1)

All these years, can be calculated to get AM and BCE (or BC) timelines.

And the main reference-point that I had used to calculate BCE timeline is the known historical date for the fall of Jerusalem and the exile in Babylon - 587 BCE.

You are right that there NO DATES in the bible, but that doesn't mean it is not possible to work with the years found in the bible, to get estimated timeline.

Please don't make me explain to you again, how I work out the the timeline, because there is nothing worse than repeating myself to someone who is unwilling to learn.

2. OF COURSE there's no evidence of a Flood in human history. There was no modern human history BEFORE the Flood.

Biological modern human (Homo sapiens sapiens) have been around at least 30,000 years ago, perhaps even longer.

The oldest human - Homo sapiens - have been around at least 200,000 years ago.

Modern human came out of the ice ages, as the only surviving species 10,000 ago, starting the Neolithic period.

Biologically, there are no differences between us today and that of the earliest Neolithic man, 10,000 years ago.

Modern man didn't start 6000 years ago or 4000 BCE. And there are no evidences global flood in the supposed 6000 BCE or that of about 1656 years with Noaẖ.

Your whole premise of 6000 years ago "re-creation" is nothing more than your conspiracy theory and deluded fantasy.

 

[Not Bob]

Even the city of Jericho is older than 6000 years.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Modern homo sapien has been around for at least 20,000 years. The first humanoids appeared about 200,000 years ago. Not only do we have their remains, we have many, many, many artifacts that are well over 6,000 years old.

 

[Bunyip]

LOL. We can provide dates neither for Creation nor the Big Bang, so neither occurred. You don't exist, nor do I.

The Big Bang occurred 13.798 billion years ago.

 

[gnostic]

Even the city of Jericho is older than 6000 years.

Don't forget the Neolithic Byblos, Damascus, Aleppo, Uruk and Susa in the Middle East.

Argos (5th millennium BCE) and Athens (c 4500 BCE as a town, though there are evidences, of human settlements as early as 11,000 BCE) in Greece.

 

[gnostic]

3. It would be SO AMAZING if some of you ACTUALLY READ THE ACCOUNT before raising "issues" like "whom did Noah's sons marry"? Here is Genesis 7:13:

On that same day Noah and his sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth, as well as Noah's wife and his three daughters-in-law went into the ship. In the same day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark.

This is why we say there were eight (8) people on the ark, providing genetic diversity as well.

It would even be better that if you are going to read the bible, that you are able to distinguish reality from the supernaturals or the fiction(myth) of the bible.

Even if we were to believe in the story, that belief is decided through faith, not evidences. You are certainly not grasping the reality, that what post-Flood Genesis is impossible to restore dozens of new nation being born from 3 couples.

Sure there were 8 survivors in the Genesis Flood, but Noah and his wife don't seem to have any more children after the Flood, so really there were only 3 couples responsible for populating the Earth. But my point is still valid. Shem, Ham and Japheth couldn't be responsible for the nations mentioned, because it would require a lot people than just Noah's children and grandchildren to restart civilisations.

If the Flood (global flood) killed everyone in Egypt, then it would take a lot more people to repopulate the land of Egypt, to become a civilisation again, and that mean people to start building monuments again, like the pyramids.

Take Ham for example, he was supposed to be the father of Cush, Egypt (or Mizraim), Put, and Canaan, with Cush being what we would called Sudan or Ethiopia (or both). And Cush being the father of Nimrod (Genesis 10:, who supposed moved to Shinar (Babylonia and Assyria), and supposedly found Babel (or Babylon in some other translations), Erech (Uruk), and Accad in Babylonia and 4 Assyrian cities Nineveh,Rehoboth-ir, Calah, and Resen. In just 3 generations, Nimrod could have 7 cities built, with what people? There are just not enough people in just 3 generations (after the Flood) to build all these cities.

It would required hundreds or thousands of people to construct these cities? Where did these people come from? Or did God created these magically created these people? Or did God or Nimrod created these cities with magic?

There is only 292 years between the Flood and the birth of Abraham. It is not possible for Noah's sons and grandsons to find each, their own kingdoms or nations without people.

You are deluding yourself, if you take Genesis 10 literally, that all these descendants listed in Table of Nations, somehow found kingdoms, cities and so forth, without more people, to help them build them these cities or kingdoms.

 

[White Power]

It's amazing how some of you ignore scientific fact yet use computers. If you abhor science the internet or any other form of technology is the last thing you should be engaged in. Go move to the rain forest and off the grid if you think the Earth isn't 4.54 billion years old.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The Big Bang occurred 13.798 billion years ago.

And it's been downhill ever since.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I reckon it was space aliens.

 

[psychoslice]

And it's been downhill ever since.

Downhill ?.