RED DAVE

Not to negate the direction that this thread has taken, but I just want to recall that there is the issue of the contradiction between existence and dating of the Flood and the uninterrupted history of Egypt.

RED DAVE

Dave Reed

Here's a thought. It's been reasonably well established that
the Sahara was once much wetter than it currently is, perhaps
even a rain forest. The discovery of water erosion on the
sphynx, presumably from a lot of rain, and some NASA, or JPL
photos have helped to push this idea. (couldn't find any NASA
link, but I'm pretty sure it's out there)

http://library.thinkquest.org/16645/.../saha_tp.shtml

I would certainly think that an area that size, going from wet
to arid would be recorded somewhere in the hieroglyphs. It
may not necessarily be "once wet, now dry", because it may
have been gradual. However there should be some indicator
from the writings of the once very wet condition, I would think,
unless the previous culture mysteriously quit writing, or
disappeared. This is just an idea.

Gracchus

I believe that the existence of continuous civilizations in China, Mesopotamia, Egypt, et al. was the reason that most YEC's have abandoned Ussher's 6,000 year old earth. Most seem to claim now that the Earth is more like 10,000 years old.

Creationists may not be very creative, but they are adaptable.

:devil1:

Gracchus

The change pre-dates civilization and writing. It was apparently the climatic change and desertification of the Sahara, that prompted the settlement of the Nile valley.

:wave:

Weltall

If you planned to use this as evidence for a global flood, you didn't think it through carefully. A) The Sahara started drying before writing. B) One alleged missing society doesn't change the fact that there are many cultures who were writing during the period of the supposed flood that failed to notice their entire world was suddenly underwater.

Dave Reed

If you planned to use this as evidence for a global flood, you didn't think it through carefully.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++
No, I am beyond that. If you'll notice the post immediately before it, you
will see that it is in reference to that
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++
Not to negate the direction that this thread has taken, but I just want to recall that there is the issue of the contradiction between existence and dating of the Flood and the uninterrupted history of Egypt.

RED DAVE

Still waiting for your response to the OP, praxeus.

RED DAVE

Steven Avery

Red Dave, I find that such discussions become tedious and try to involve myself in edifying discussions here.

As an example, when I point out that marine fossils on top of mountains around the earth are clearly evidence of a flood and that great minds puzzled over them throughout history then the post-facto pseudo-'prediction' of plate tectonics is offered. Despite the fact that the marine fossils are given as a primary evidence for tectonics in tectonics apologetics !

And a whole subchapter is opened up where the powerful evidence is being denied, hands firmly over eyes. The humongous difficulties in current tectonics theories are denied (technically those weaknesses are often delineated in more detail by the global expansion theorists than the creationists).

When I point out that Cainan in Luke 3:36 shows that Bible believers view possible gaps in the Tanach begats the simple exposition is not understood and accepted. Was it you who tried so hard to make the case that begats must be parent-child and then had to come up with exception clause after exception clause ?

And of course we would have to get into the precision of civilization dating.

All in all we are apparently talking about a potential gap of some 100's of years, or a millennium, in matching secular history to the Bible flood, out of some many millions or billions of years. There is an interesting irony that all of recorded history is such a small fraction of time compared to the supposed lengths of the universe and earth.

If you want me to spend time in discussion on the 100's of years issue I might find it interesting. First things first, is it actually the creationary view that there was a pre-flood Egyptian civilization as you assume in the OP or is that assumption actually embedded in the interpretation of chronology issues ?

You can help out by quoting some creationary sources since you are representing their position as a-b-c. I have on occasion heard discussion of possible water damage to pyramids as flood related however I would like to first see if you are quoting the major creationary writers properly in claiming that it is their view that the global flood buried an Egyptian civilization.

Shalom,
Steven

RED DAVE

From praxeus (in the OP):
Now, here, you've made a statement about time span. I take "somewhat more" to mean a relatively brief period of time.

From praxeus (POST 38):
And now, you're waffling.

Let's start by laying down some facts or alleged facts.

1) Do you stand by your remark that the Flood took place "at least 4500 years ago, or perhaps somewhat more, per the Bible account"?

2) How much is "somewhat more" according to you?

RED DAVE

Steven Avery

There was no 'waffling'. I have not examined all the evidences and time chronologies involved. So I give general figures. At any rate a few hundred years or a millenium qualifies as somewhat more than four and a half millenium. Simple English.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RED DAVE 1) Do you stand by your remark that the Flood took place "at least 4500 years ago, or perhaps somewhat more, per the Bible account"? 2) How much is "somewhat more" according to you? RED DAVE

See above.

You have a responsibility to demonstrate that creationary belief is actually that there was a pre-flood Egyptian civilization, or, if not, to acknowledge that that was your own spin.

Until you properly address that very germane issue of the OP I will not continue to play 20 Dave Waffle questions.

Majors first.

Shalom,
Steven