Constant Mews

Providing some actual support for this contention would be a good place to start. The stories have so few parallels that it is not rational to conclude a single source. This is similar to your problem with Josephus: the few authors that we have been able to check do not corroborate your claim that they all support a ~1,000 year lifespan. In fact, they support the idea that Gods dwelt on the earth in ancient days - something that is directly contradictory to your contention.

Constant Mews

In addition, Dave, the tablets of Genesis would be useless to everyone after the Babel incident, since all languages were confused. All the supposed 'ancient knowledge' would be destroyed.

But since there is no evidence that the flood happened, we need not worry about whether Babel or the flood ever occurred.

Lucretius

I do note that you have chosen to ignore the fact that Faber appears to have mistranslated "audax Iapeti genus" to fit in presumably with his theory that Iapetus was the Japeth mentioned in the Bible .
In no way can this say "From the time of Iapetus " as Faber seems to have wanted it to say
I do find this extraordinary that a 19th Century Bachelor of Divinity should have such a poor knowledge of Latin as the study of the Classics was compulsory for anyone, who wished to progress to a university degree of any sort.
Perhaps I was being kind to good old Faber before by saying his mistranslation was possibly uninentional

Also the fact that all Horace says is that "Death was speeded" up to pararphrase him even if that were true in any case does not in any way imply that people were capable of living for 1,000 years IT DOES NOT SAY THAT

JEST2ASK

Could not find background of P.J Wiseman or anything on Wiseman/Harrison Hypothesis could you supply something ... interesting that it was not developed until the 20th century and not by Jewish scholars. :huh:

Did find quite a bit of other people using the Wiseman's (Father & Son) work but nothing on the actual book and it's reference sources ... this is somewhat an interesting track to persue (well to me anyway) has anyone seen peer reviewed (archelogogical not theological) papers of the book/thesis.

Constant Mews

The essential thought behind Dave's thinking on this point may be shown simply This is the conclusion of Curt Sewell's explication of the Hypothesis.

This is not science; this is not history.

This is just blind faith.

Faid

Dave, since you're in my (ethnic) field now:

Can you please explain, in your own words, exactly how this story of Iapetus, and the tale of the Titans, have "parallels" with biblical stories and long-lived patriarchs? You claimed that the wiki site showed this, but I saw no such thing.

Will you please explain yourself clearly?

Sphincterboy

I tried to read that document. I got to this:

I guess it's easier than acknowledging the *actual* technical basis for not believing the Bible, and address these rather apparent criticisms on their respective merits. Just claim that all science is bunk and move on. Works for some.

SAWells

And since the years of a man's life are three score and ten, or if he have strength, four score, we should die at an age of 70-80 months which is, er, 6 or 7 years.

Constant Mews

Not to mention the small problem of childbirth at roughly eighteen months. No, there is no real way of rationalizing the ages of the patriarchs except as a specialized case of the 'long-lived ancestor' motif that occurs so often in primitive mythologies.

SAWells

The griffin is a personal favourite of mine, as there's a strong case to be made that it's ultimately based on ceratopsian dinosaur skeletons from Central Asia. Have a look at a protoceratops and it really does look like a creature with the beak of an eagle and the claws of a lion. Add in a few centuries of embroidery and one-upmanship and bingo, griffin stories.