Question for evolutionists

Into the Night said:
Floods have no feet.

Venice floods quite often. The city hasn't been destroyed yet!
Port Royal has been underwater for many years. It's still there. It's a popular diving spot now. There are several such underwater cities. They are all not only recognizable cities, they are in remarkably good shape.

The Great Flood, according to the Bible lasted only 40 days.
Click to expand...

Floods leave a layer of sediment.


Noah's flood lasted one year and 11 days.
 
Into the Night said:
No, he was describing a 'day'. In the Hebrew language, a 'day' can be any unit of time, not necessarily an actual length of a single day on Earth.
Click to expand...

Nope.. DAY is specific in Hebrew........


The Jewish Day - Jewish Calendar

About the Jewish Calendar

"And it was evening and it was morning, one day" (Genesis 1:5). Jewish Calendar Date. When G‑d created time, He first created night and then day. Therefore, a Jewish calendar date begins with the night beforehand. While a day in the secular calendar begins and ends at midnight, a Jewish day goes from nightfall to nightfall.

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/526873/jewish/The-Jewish-Day.htm
 
According to Jewish tradition, the Flood was in 2104 BCE (the year 1656 in the Jewish reckoning, which is counted from Creation).
 
kudzu said:
Nope.. DAY is specific in Hebrew........


The Jewish Day - Jewish Calendar

About the Jewish Calendar

"And it was evening and it was morning, one day" (Genesis 1:5). Jewish Calendar Date. When G‑d created time, He first created night and then day. Therefore, a Jewish calendar date begins with the night beforehand. While a day in the secular calendar begins and ends at midnight, a Jewish day goes from nightfall to nightfall.
Click to expand...


Nope. 'Day' is not a specific length in Hebrew.
 
Into the Night said:
Not necessarily.

150 days, actually, according to the Bible. See Genesis 8:3.
Click to expand...

There are TWO flood stories .. one from Israel and one from Judah. Its called a doublet.

http://contradictionsinthebible.com/the-flood-narratives/


In 6:14-22 God is referred to as “Elohim”, and only one pair of each species of animal was put in the ark, whereas in 7:1-5 the word for God is “Yahweh” and Noah is told to put in the ark seven pairs of clean animals and one pair of unclean animals.

There are also discrepancies with how long the flood lasted: 40 days (7:17), 150 days (7:24), or one year (compare 7:11 with 8:13)?
 
Last edited:
kudzu said:
There are TWO flood stories .. one from Israel and one from Judah. Its called a doublet.

http://contradictionsinthebible.com/the-flood-narratives/


In 6:14-22 God is referred to as “Elohim”, and only one pair of each species of animal was put in the ark, whereas in 7:1-5 the word for God is “Yahweh” and Noah is told to put in the ark seven pairs of clean animals and one pair of unclean animals.

There are also discrepancies with how long the flood lasted: 40 days (7:17), 150 days (7:24), or one year (compare 7:11 with 8:13)?
Click to expand...

There are no discrepancies. Judah IS Israel. The rains lasted 40 days, the flood didn't recede for 150 days after that.
 
Into the Night said:
There are no discrepancies. Judah IS Israel. The rains lasted 40 days, the flood didn't recede for 150 days after that.
Click to expand...

How long has it been since you read Genesis?


The Kingdom of Israel (or Northern Kingdom, or Samaria) existed as an independent state until 722 BCE when it was conquered by the Assyrian Empire, while the Kingdom of Judah (or Southern Kingdom) existed as an independent state until 586 BCE when it was conquered by the Neo-Babylonian Empire.


The northern kingdom is called “Israel” (or sometimes “Ephraim”) in Scripture, and the southern kingdom is called “Judah.” From the divine viewpoint, the division was a judgment on not keeping God’s commands, specifically the commands prohibiting idolatry.

Each kingdom had its advantages and its disadvantages. (1) The northern kingdom, from the material point of view, was far superior to the southern. It had a larger and more fertile country. It had three times as many people and a much better military equipment.
 
Since my Father was an Anglican clergyman, I have heard it read in full many times. What I find about the fundamentalists is that they have certain bits they read over and over again, because they don't challenge their own limited beliefs. I find it logical, now, to stick to the New Testament, not because the Old is not interesting but because the New deals with everything relevant clearly enough, namely, how we might sensibly behave if we want a decent world.
 
iolo said:
Since my Father was an Anglican clergyman, I have heard it read in full many times. What I find about the fundamentalists is that they have certain bits they read over and over again, because they don't challenge their own limited beliefs. I find it logical, now, to stick to the New Testament, not because the Old is not interesting but because the New deals with everything relevant clearly enough, namely, how we might sensibly behave if we want a decent world.
Click to expand...

My Sunday school training was probably fairly typical.. Bible stories and memorizing verses.. a couple of decades of that before I sat down and read it cover to cover.. And then AGAIN cover to cover... and again.
 
iolo said:
Since my Father was an Anglican clergyman, I have heard it read in full many times. What I find about the fundamentalists is that they have certain bits they read over and over again, because they don't challenge their own limited beliefs. I find it logical, now, to stick to the New Testament, not because the Old is not interesting but because the New deals with everything relevant clearly enough, namely, how we might sensibly behave if we want a decent world.
Click to expand...

Do you have proof about your father?
 
CFM said:
Do you have proof of that claim?

Why are you so fearful about providing something to prove what you claim you've done?
Click to expand...

As you have demonstrated repeatedly, you reject proof anyway, why bother with dolts like you?

The banjo came to America with the slaves, and musicologists have long looked in West Africa for its predecessors. Much of the speculation has centered on the ngoni and the xalam, two hide-covered stringed instruments from West Africa that bear some resemblance to the banjo. But they're just two of more than 60 similar plucked stringed instruments found in the region.
Click to expand...
https://www.npr.org/2011/08/23/139880625/the-banjos-roots-reconsidered

European explorers encountered the “gourd with neck and strings” on expeditions to Africa, and African slaves brought versions of the instrument to the New World by 1620, several sources have said. Banjo-like instruments proliferated during the days of slavery in America, with early versions made from calabash gourds and animal-skin heads attached with nails or tacks. Some had a flat, fretless neck, and many had three or four strings made of whatever material was at hand.
Click to expand...
https://reverb.com/news/a-brief-history-of-the-banjo-americas-oldest-instrument

The banjo is a four-, five-, or six-stringed instrument with a thin membrane stretched over a frame or cavity as a resonator, called the head, which is typically circular. The membrane is typically made of plastic, although animal skin is still occasionally used. Early forms of the instrument were fashioned by Africans in the United States, adapted from African instruments of similar design.[1][2]
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banjo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top