A Bronze Standard

Please stop posting utter irrelevancies to yet another thread.

quote:

---

Please stop posting utter irrelevancies to yet another thread.

---

But you said this in the opening post.

quote:

---

Supposedly the Biblical flood, whichever of the Biblical Flood stories is considered, happened about 2500-2000 BCE.
That firmly places the Biblical Flood, if it had happened, during the Bronze Age.

---

Sorry to break it to you bud, but the Bronze Age started around 3000 BCE.Exodus 12:27 and Galatians 3 (see verse 6 and 17 especially) make the difference between the Septuagint having the flood during or after the Chalcolithic Age.Solomon lived in the late 2nd millennium (not mid 10th century) according to a strict Biblical chronology.The Exodus was 440 years before the Temple in the Septuagint.see 1 Kings 6. The Massorah was 480.The Massorah has the Israelites in Egypt for 400/430 years. Not the Septuagint (which Paul used).I almost think you sound just as ignorant as Faith (or worse) jar. At least she admited there is an issue of difference(she said so in another thread) between the Septuagint and Massorah. You act like the issue doesn't even exist.Did you even see my wikipedia link showing the differing dates for the Patriarchs?I didn't make you post the topic of the Bronze Age jar. You choose to do that yourself.The Massorah and Septuagint can be used in a combo fashion to put the flood back to around 3100 BCE, which is earlier than some would put the Bronze Age in the Middle East (where it started earlier than anywhere else).Jar really should be forced to work out the chronology before he proceeds. He needs to show the various chronological possibilities then decide on which he prefers. He made a claim of the Bronze Age being the date of the flood. I won't be the referee though.

Stop posting irrelevancies, NOW.This is a science forum and what the different bible texts or extra biblical commentary say is irrelevant.If you continue I will have to ask that you be banned from this thread.

Why is it that you cannot see that those two statements do not conflict? The Bronze age starting in 3000BCE and lasting nearly 2000 years is perfectly consistent with the dates assigned by fundamentalists to the flood as listed by jar.

I'm saying that the Septuagint text can be used to push the flood back to 3200 BCE (if one selectively uses the parts of the Massorah that have a higher chronology than the Septuagint, while largely using the Septuagint), which would be earlier than Egyptian (and Levantine)historians place the start of the Bronze Age (the scientific community always has dated the start of the Bronze Age earlier than the historians).It makes a big difference because of the written record issue, plus other issues. The Tower of Babel date then becomes relevant also.Many fundamentalists place the Flood and Tower of Babel at about 3000 BCE. They talk about the Sumerians appearing suddenly around 3000 BCE and connect the language to a new one created by God during the Babel event.This is my last post on this thread though.

I guess you think that January 1, 3000 BCE everyone dropped their neolithic tools and picked up bronze ones? Some sources place the beginning at 3,300 BCE. One way or another the transition took centuries and was different in different places.Of course you realize that you are arguing that Noye had less technology available than he would later? Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

It was a Septuagint type of text.And it had a higher chronology (though not until the Patriarchal Period, as it was actually lower by over 250 years till then).

No connection to what I wrote, I see.

And the key point is that what particular texts say is irrelevant. All that is relevant is what date the believers place on when the Biblical flood would have happened and that is generally 2500-2000 BCE.I does not matter if the dates are correct or accurate based on any given text; all that is important is for the flood believers to say "It happened X years ago."

And no two creationists seem to place the flood at the same time. Each has a favorite time.And when shown that the evidence contradicts that time (i.e., the evidence shows there was no global flood at that time) creationists just change the time. Dates range from about 4,250 years ago to hundreds of millions of years ago. If one date is disproved they just pick another, eventually ending up where they started. Around and around we go.This just shows that creationists are relying on belief, and trying to fit evidence into that belief--no matter how poor the fit or how many are the contradictions.And then they claim to be doing science!

This is false. What "creationists" are you referring to? Most creationists I trust accept a date around 4300 to 4500 years ago, and the only reason I don't have a fixed date is that I keep forgetting how all the numbers add up, but it is certainly possible to pin it down from the Biblical information based on the genealogies given in the Bible. Other dates would have no biblical support. Nonsense. Who does this? A reference please. Oh nonsense. I've stuck to the date range above all along as is common among YECs. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

No connection to what I wrote, I see.

---

Look who is talking.How exactly was your post anything but a non-sequitur response to what I was saying?I brought it back to the actual issue (that I was faithfully covering) of jar's OP (which he wants to disown now).But, on your (off-topic) non-sequitur response, I should (go ahead and respond by) tell(ing) you that an issue relevant would be The Sumerian Problem.GoogleThe Sumerian Problem (should be search term)Here is the only creationist hit that came up on the first page.Home - Associates for Biblical ResearchI am very happy to tell you that this is as good of a creationist case as they will find (it is a quite good historian; I read a book on Egypt by the article author, Charles Aling PhD, and it was very well-informed), and it uses the time period of the pre Bronze Age (transitioning) as the point of interest. Uses the conventional chronology too.And though the author doesn't mention the Septuagint (so far as I know), it is clear the Flood is viewed as predating 3000 BCE as Babel isn't proposed to have happened until about 3000 BCE by the author.

If you accept a date in the 4300-4500 range, why are you concerned with rocks and geological strata? Those are all far older. When no evidence for a global flood is found in soils which date around 4300 years ago, you and many other creationists look to rock layers dated many million to hundreds of millions of years ago. You may think you are sticking to the 4300-4500 date range but your claims for a global flood rely on geological strata that are millions of years old.And in order to perform these mental gymnastics you must use the most tortured of rubber band years, compressing billions of years into a few thousand. Unfortunately for those claims, all the scientific evidence shows that they are incorrect, but as those claims are based on belief rather than evidence this seems to be of no consequence.

Just so this thread isn't one giant non-sequitur type of argument from ignorance, let me clear something up.

quote:

---

Young Earth creationism (YEC) is the religious belief[1] that the Universe, Earth and all life on Earth were created by direct acts of God between 5,700 and 10,000 years ago.[2]

​

Young Earth creationism - Wikipedia

---

One argument is that Matthew 1 has more names in the Adam to Abraham family history than the Genesis text does.The argument that there are gaps in the family history is the main reason.The Septuagint (which Jesus and Paul used) is a major reason why many will place the Flood back before 3000 BCE.Jar has already said "2,500 to 2000" B.C. for the flood, but my Babel/Sumerian link came to a creationist who puts the Flood around 1000 years or so earlier than jar's date.(Faith and jar agree on this issue, and others here seem confused so be that as it is...)

And the fact is that even if the flood were a thousand years earlier it would still fall within the Bronze Age and so your dating is still irrelevant.But thanks for playing.