When in your opinion did man begin eating Mammoths and Wooly Rhinos --- Pre or post flood or both?  We have evidences from the Alaska, Canada,  Americas, Europe, Asia, Russia with tools, cut marks and slaughter evidences man was eating lots of mega fauna. Just curious where you place that in context to YE history?  

Views: 52

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

What flood? Where did this "flood" happen? When? How do we talk about this when there is no agreement about the time of the Flood?

SO WHEN DO YOU DATE YOUR "flood"? - it is not the same as those of us who consider this website/forum our home. You don't believe in the same flood that we believe in.

Here, we believe that the BIBLE is true in all that it affirms. You do not believe this. The Bible clearly indicates that the Flood occurred in Noah's 600th year. This is very precisely stated in Genesis 7:11. That means that the Global Flood took place during the year 1656 after the week of Creation. And this is about 350 years before the time of Abraham.

It is not possible to meld the biblical chronology with the dating of the secularists. Our beloved opponent tries to have his cake and eat it to. He rejects the historical accuracy of Genesis, and he rejects the Flood, and then he tries to stir up controversy by asking questions about the Flood. BUT EVERY QUESTION HE EVER ASKS is in an effort to oppose and impugn our views of the Flood and the simple sense of the Creation Account.

The Bible is very clear that All humans on the earth originated AFTER this flood, and they were descendants of the three sons of Noah - AFTER the flood. Mitsrayim (Egypt) "Mizraim" is a descendant of one of the sons of Noah. All the tribes and nations and places of habitation were assigned after the Flood (according to Genesis 10 and 11). THE OPPONENT and ATTACKER of Creation Conversations does not believe this.

Nearly all of the mammoth remains that have ever been recovered are from the Flood or later. BUT SINCE the opponent does NOT affirm the biblical flood, then he will never be talking about the same thing we are talking about here.

Again, a very simple question for the interloper to answer: What flood are you talking about? When did this flood happen in YOUR view of history?

Clearly humans were eating mammoths. They could have been eating them before the Flood too, since the Bible that we believe in says that the earth was filled with violence, and men were always and continually sinning against the will of God.

Mammoth eating was certainly taking place shortly after the Flood - maybe within 4 or 5 years. God gave permission and allowance to the family of Noah to begin eating meat in order to fill their nutritional needs.

But just so we can be on the same Page, we need to hear from the Creation  Conversations attacker when he is going to date the "flood" that he is talking about. If he is going to talk about a flood, there must be some common ground in what all of us mean by the Flood.

Jim wile I am not happy with the way you deliberately disenfranchise information you are unable to deal with, I appreciate your response, as I was not sure how YECs looked at Mammoths...  

Jim to answer back your flood date, the bible is very clear about the flood, what isn't is the actual flood date.  You have a specific date as many YECs, however there are Yec's that believe the date is farther back in history due to the mistakes within the context of Ushers Chronology.  I could only say that the date corresponds to the biblical Characters who were real people and so its not about the bible itself its about incorrect historical chronology.

So as many chronologers an actual date has not been pinpointed for an exact date but someplace within the 7,000 to 9,000 year window frame.  We already know that there are holes in between Ushers chronology (at a minimum 1,500years) which would lead to a slightly older flood date.  Since I believe in the flood we are exactly on the same page, as to the date I don't have an exact date nor do many YECS who have studied this, but we all agree Noah was an eye witness, builder, etc.  

Do you have any idea how we can have peoples of many ancient cultures in the Americas before and after Babel?  Do we have any idea about the TOBA Volcano and its peoples before and after the ash fall?  

The table of nations is interesting becasue it is clearly the middle east (and this Jewish account is indeed of that whole area) but what of the Australian Aboriginal, and also the Asian cultures that existed prior and after Babel?  What of their blood lines who tie to unknown human DNA?  What of the long term occupation of these cultures as well in other lands?   

Jim said:

BUT EVERY QUESTION HE EVER ASKS is in an effort to oppose and impugn our views of the Flood and the simple sense of the Creation Account.

Jim you ask me to be respectful but you treat me like a disrespectful dog!  If I engendered your views in the context you present mine you would be crying insult and making more rude remarks.

My views Jim are mine alone, the fact that "some" of the evidences you infer can not be substantiated still does not make you any less a Christian brother.  But YECS seem to have a propensity for treating others with a different view nasty!  We have seen this on many of the Facebook science pages.  SO while I believe there are other "younger earth" explanations and evidences that can be rectified by the flood geology you support, there are other issues with dispersion and science within the context of the last 5 years especially in the study of DNA is challenging some of these older ideas originally supported by Morris, Ham and others.

SO you have the last word here, I have put this up becasue after considerable study I have to ask these questions given the evidences in nature, science, the biblical narrative and its language, and the known chronology of many issues.  Lord bless you and keep you brother... 

Lou Hamby said:

Jim wile I am not happy with the way you deliberately disenfranchise information you are unable to deal with,

I'm not disenfranchising anything. You are disenfranchising me. I am not unable to deal with information. What we are not able to deal with is the MISINFORMATION that you constantly dump into our forum. The way you pretend to be offended when I call you out on this is not offending me. Actually it is mildly amusing.

Still your posts are constantly attacking and offending this forum however.

This forum affirms the historicity of the Global Flood. You do not affirm the global extent of the Flood, and then you try to say that you do believe in the Flood. Wow. right here it is:

Since I believe in the flood we are exactly on the same page. . .

No, dear beloved brother, we are not on the same page. You do not believe in the same flood. You believe in a local flood, and you are not sure when it happened - so we are not talking about the same flood. We are not on the same page therefore. It is here sheer ignorance or sublte duplicity for you to try to claim that you do believe in the Flood, when you are certainly intelligent enough to know that you have scores of posts on this very website in which you refuse to affirm the global extent of the Flood. Further, you are also intelligent enough to know that if you do not affirm the Global extent of the Flood that this means you DO NOT BELIEVE in the Flood.

I appreciate your response, as I was not sure how YECs looked at Mammoths...

Hmmm. That seems strange. You have stated over and over that you are YEC. So don[t you know how YOU look at Mammoths? The mammoth type creatures, all of which lived before and after the Global Flood - all of them were represent by a single pair on the Ark, or perhaps SEVEN if they were considered noahically clean. Animals seem very clearly to have been carnivorous before the Flood. So it is quite likely that Mammoths that lived before the Flood were being consumed as food - but not by righteous humans. The wicked people whose hearts were only evil continually, and who were filled with violence - indeed they could have been eating meat. But God gave permission to mankind - Noah's family - to eat meat only after the Flood (the flood which you do not affirm - the one that was Global).

Jim to answer back your flood date, the bible is very clear about the flood, what isn't is the actual flood date.

We affirm the historical accuracy of the Genesis Record as revealed in the Hebrew Bible. That Bible reveals very simply that the Flood occurred in the 600th year of Noah's life. And the same infallible Bible that gives us that simple number also shows that the 600th year of Noah's life was the year 1656 after Creation.

You have a specific date as many YECs, however there are Yec's that believe the date is farther back in history due to the mistakes within the context of Ushers Chronology

You don't believe the Flood was further back than the time of Noah? DO YOU? No of course not. SO, you are not allowing us to agree that the time of the Flood was EXACTLY 1656 years AFTER the creation of Adam. You do not believe that the numbers in Genesis are inerrant? Like I said before you don't share our confidence in the authority and accuracy of the Genesis Record.

I could only say that the date corresponds to the biblical Characters who were real people and so its not about the bible itself its about incorrect historical chronology.

But here you do affirm that the event of the Flood corresponds with the biblical characters. THAT IS GOOD. Refreshing. Now if we could only bring you to see that if you are going to accept that the Flood corresponds with Noah that this REQUIRES YOU to believe that the FLOOD of Noah must PREDATE the establishment of the nations and peoples that arose from Noah's descendants. EITHER THAT or you do NOT accept that the Flood corresponds with biblical characters.

Do you understand that the Bible shows quite clearly that all the present nations of the world arose from Noah's 3 sons? (Gen. 9:18-19). . . ?

IF you do not affirm this then it is quite clear that you do NOT really believe that your substitute Flood is not the same flood that we affirm. If Noah was a real person, then his sons and grandsons were also real people, and the establishment of nations were part of their history as real people. It is quite difficult for me to understand how you can claim to believe that they were "real people" and then proceed to deny their accomplishments and their founding of nations as described in Genesis 10.

So as many chronologers an actual date has not been pinpointed for an exact date but someplace within the 7,000 to 9,000 year window frame.

Regardless of the number that you want to place as far as a "year" - still you have indicated that you put it within the life time of the real person Noah. Correct? That means that you agree that the Flood occurred in this REAL HISTORY - but you don't agree that the real history conveys a GLOBAL FLOOD THAT COVERED THE TOPS OF ALL THE MOUNTAINS. AND you don't agree that the history of Genesis 10 in accurate in revealing that all the nations of the world (including the Incas, and the Egyptians) began ONLY AFTER THE TIME OF NOAH - after several generations, after the time of the Tower of Babel. You have denied this repeatedly.

You have denied this when you try to make the claim that Egypt existed before the Flood. But then that is still a remnant of the fact that in your wishy-washy piddly non-flood flood Egypt was not even touched by the waters of the so-called flood.

 We already know that there are holes in between Ushers chronology (at a minimum 1,500years) which would lead to a slightly older flood date.

You are the only person who is talking about Ussher's AND even then you only use it as a red herring to pooh-pooh our recognition that the biblical account is reliable. There is no way to place the historical context of flood as earlier than Noah. You agree to that. But what you don't agree to is that the table of nations found in Genesis 10-11 is equally historical with the account of Noah, and also with the account of Abraham. We believe that Abraham was chosen to be the father of many nations, and to be a blessing to all the nations of the world - ALL OF WHICH had arisen, according to Genesis 10-11, AFTER THE FLOOD.

If you believe that the Flood occurred AFTER THE birth of the nations of the world, then you are NOT believing the same Event that we do. The Flood of the Bible was an actual historical event that occurred in the context of actual historical individuals. While you want to try to affirm that it did indeed take place in the lifetime of Noah, you are at the same time trying to say that it happened after the founding of Egypt and the Incas, and the other early civilizations. By doing this you are creating a new flood that is not the same as the Flood that we are reading about in Genesis six though nine. SEE the difference Lou, is that we accept the sequence of events found in the Bible.

  1. > CREATION OF ALL THINGS IN ALL THE HEAVENS AND ALL THE EARTH (Gen. 1-2)
  2. > THE REAL FALL and beginning of judgment and death (Gen. 3).
  3. > The immediate technological advancement of mankind, and the simultaneous descent into pervasive wickedness and sin.
  4. > The real global Flood that destroyed, wiped out all mankind and all land animals on the entire planet, as Peter says - Gk: kosmos - the world (Gen. 6-8; 2 Pet. 3).
  5. > The refilling of of the entire planet with land animals atop many layers of flood-deposited strata (Gen. 8-9),
  6. > The birth of the descendants of Noah and his sons and the subsequent (post-Babel) scattering of rebellious humans to various places on the globe to establish new nations and civilizations ALSO atop the Flood-deposited strata (Gen. 9:18-19; 10 - 11).
  7. > Then the choosing of Abraham, through whose SEED (singular) the Nations and peoples of the earth would be blessed (Gen. 12:1-3).

BUT you, our dear brother and beloved opponent are diametrically against this approach. You choose instead to embrace the time-lines of the secularists and then endeavor to squeeze their wildly expanded chronologies into the inspired biblical record.

Since I believe in the flood we are exactly on the same page,

Nope dear brother, you do NOT believe in the same Flood, and we are not on the same page, not even remotely.

Do you have any idea how we can have peoples of many ancient cultures in the Americas before and after Babel?  Do we have any idea about the TOBA Volcano and its peoples before and after the ash fall?  

We believe in the Bible and the Flood that it reports. That flood destroyed all peoples that were alive before it occurred. ALL the predecessors of the nations of the world were the descendants of Noah through his 3 sons (Gen. 9-11).

There were no peoples in the Americas before Babel. These land masses were deposited by the sediments of the Flood. We certainly do have firm knowledge of the fact that ALL of the ancient cultures of the Americas came to be here after the tower of Babel. Nothing of the preFlood world has ever been discovered (though we would be glad if something were one day discovered). ALL of the relics that have ever been discovered are from people groups who recall the Flood, which means the arose from the sons of Noah. All of the relics that have ever been discovered are found ATOP FLOOD-DEPOSITED strata.

The table of nations is interesting because it is clearly the middle east (and this Jewish account is indeed of that whole area) but what of the Australian Aboriginal, and also the Asian cultures that existed prior and after Babel?

No, these did not exist prior to Babel. We here at Creation Conversations believe firmly in the record of history found in the inerrant Scriptures. AGAIN there is a fundamental difference between YOU dear brother and the rest of us here at Creation Conversations. We accept the historical accuracy of the Bible which declares that all peoples on the earth are descended from Noah's 3 sons - and that includes Asian cultures. So, if they are not descended from the sons of Noah, then they must not be descended from Adam. . . in your scheme. So then is the redemption of the Second Adam applicable to these folks? Or did they somehow survive the Flood without being on the Ark? Oh consistency . . .

 What of their blood lines who tie to unknown human DNA?  What of the long term occupation of these cultures as well in other lands?   

Again, we accept the historical accuracy and inerrancy of Scripture. Our faith is based on the Word of God, not on the word of geneticists. All humans are humans. They are not any other species with a different DNA. We do not approve of such racism in our view of the unity of the human race, and the pervasiveness of the human condition (sin) and the universal availability of the Redemption of the Savior - "who has made of ONE BLOOD all nations of the world to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation" - surely you don't believe that this verse only applies to the middle east!

Jim said:

BUT EVERY QUESTION HE EVER ASKS is in an effort to oppose and impugn our views of the Flood and the simple sense of the Creation Account.

Jim you ask me to be respectful but you treat me like a disrespectful dog!

No one is treating you like a dog. You come in here to our site and attack us and our statement of faith relentlessly. You are treating us like dogs. You have no respect for the hosts of this site, you always attack us and tell us that we are believing regurgitated error of someone you have maligned and marginalized as a false cult. You are treating us like dogs. AND FOR us to point that out you are still to this day faulting us! You claim that our desire to accept the Scriptures as inerrant in their report of history is rude? Strange. I am inclined to think that you calling us "rude" is itself rather rude and disrespectful. We are the ones hosting this site, and it is OUR statement of faith that you attack. That is called trolling.

If I engendered your views in the context you present mine you would be crying insult and making more rude remarks.

My views Jim are mine alone, the fact that "some" of the evidences you infer can not be substantiated still does not make you any less a Christian brother.  But YECS seem to have a propensity for treating others with a different view nasty!  

You calling us rude is not nasty? You accusing us of being nasty is not nasty? You cannot respond to our positions intelligently so you resort to attacking our character. You have again accused us of questioning your Christian Standing - something we have never done to you. BUT you have continually tried to lump us together with people that you have described as religiously deluded. And then you go on to lump us with others on other public forums - BUT we are talking about what the Bible says - not personalities, not your character, not your standing as a Christian brother. You are our brother. You are just wrong about your approach to the historical accuracy of the Bible, and wrong about the Flood.

We have seen this on many of the Facebook science pages.  SO while I believe there are other "younger earth" explanations and evidences that can be rectified by the flood geology you support, there are other issues with dispersion and science within the context of the last 5 years especially in the study of DNA is challenging some of these older ideas originally supported by Morris, Ham and others.

SO you have the last word here, I have put this up becasue after considerable study I have to ask these questions given the evidences in nature, science, the biblical narrative and its language, and the known chronology of many issues.

And you do not accept the KNOWN chronology of the Bible. You do accept the inflated dating of secularist and God-denying atheists and proponents of Long Ages and evolutionists. And you are a brother in Christ.

 Lord bless you and keep you brother... 

Ditto dear beloved brother. May the Lord bless you and lead you into His truth as expressed so clearly in the inerrant and historically accurate narration of Genesis 6 - 11.

So the simple answer to this simple question, is since we believe in the Flood, then most of the NON-mineralized remains of mega-fauna are from after the Flood. And since they are found in companion with human remains, then that would mitigate for post-flood, and post-Babel settings.

But there is no reason to suggest that sinful humans were not also eating similar species of the same kinds before the GLOBAL flood, which occured in about 2350 BC, according to the innerrant record of 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1&2 Chronicles and Genesis 5, 11, & 12-50.

It could be anytime after the fall. There's a difference between God allowing an event and man obedience to it.

I don't think young earth creationist believe that every feature on earth was settled after the flood. There's been Islands forming, earthquakes, tectonic activity, landslides, floodings, erosion, man-made structures,  etc., etc. A lot of which has taken place and observed in our lifetime.

The flood wasn't a nice neat package.

Jim you said:
Then most of the NON-mineralized remains of mega-fauna are from after the Flood

Can you explain the science that supports your contention. Most every fossil remain including soft tissue have carbon dating of the bones over 10,000 years, I am curious at what has you scientifically meaning real evidences that pre port these are post-flood?  There is absolutely proof that some species of  mini-Mammoth did not die out until about 3, 500 years ago on some remote islands.. These would definitely be post flood. Obviously man and mammoth lived in conjunction with one another....the proof is overwhelming.

You seem to make something about non-mineralized bones, but the fact of the matter these bones carbon dated often are 25,000 years old.Pre-flood man in the Americas and Mammoth bones are well documented... 

Lou,

  1. Is Carbon Dating always accurate?
  2. Is it true that there are several assumptions made about an item prior to the carbon date testing of an item that place, especially fossils, in a certain age or time frame prior to its testing?


Lou Hamby said:

Most every fossil remain including soft tissue have carbon dating of the bones over 10,000 years, I am curious at what has you scientifically meaning real evidences that pre port these are post-flood?  

Still you make no sense since you do not believe in the same flood that we believe in. You do not accept the record of Scripture with respect to the dates that are recorded. You want us to subject the verbal revelation to the fallible opinions of man about the evidences of the natural world. We will never submit to the dictatorship of your fake science. . .

Lou Hamby said:

Jim you said:Then most of the NON-mineralized remains of mega-fauna are from after the Flood

Can you explain the science that supports your contention. Most every fossil remain including soft tissue have carbon dating of the bones over 10,000 years, I am curious at what has you scientifically meaning real evidences that pre port these are post-flood?

You see dear brother, those of us who are members of Creation Conversations believe that there was a world-wide flood that killed all the animals living on the whole planet, as Peter calls it the "WORLD" - not just a local region of Mesopotamia. You can read about this Global Flood in the writings of the Old Testament (Genesis chapters six through nine). This flood produced thousands of feet of strata that are found all over the earth, sedimentary and fossil-filled rock in dozens of layers on every continent. These could not have been formed in any other way than through some sort of Global Flood event. AND THERE IS NO PLACE in all of the Bible that would accommodate this event other than the time the Bible describes - exactly 1656 yeas after creation, which was also precisely 350 years before the birth of Abraham.

All of the remains found atop these layers are from AFTER that flood. 

Can you explain the science that supports your contention. Most every fossil remain including soft tissue have carbon dating of the bones over 10,000 years, I am curious at what has you scientifically meaning real evidences that pre port these are post-flood?

The science is quite simply. A child could understand it, so I know that you being from academia could certainly grasp this. It is a simple matter of geology. If the remains are found in the flood-deposited layers, then very like they are from before the Flood. If they are found ATOP the Flood-deposited layers, then they are from after the Flood. AND if the individual specimens from atop the flood deposits are MOSTLY non-mineralized, then they are likely from after the Flood.

There is absolutely proof that some species of  mini-Mammoth did not die out until about 3, 500 years ago on some remote islands.. These would definitely be post flood. Obviously man and mammoth lived in conjunction with one another....the proof is overwhelming.

Whats you point? We agree that man and mammoth lived together. Man and mammoth were both created on the same day - day six of the creation week, about 6000 years ago. Man and mammoth both were aboard the Ark and immediately after leaving the Ark mammoths had a head start of at least 200 years in reproducing as they began their outward expansion and dispersion away from the Ark in obedience to the directive of God to fill up the earth and multiply and be fruitful. So as mankind had food needs after the Flood the mammoth would be an easy food source for these highly intelligent and resourceful descendants of Noah's three sons.

You seem to make something about non-mineralized bones, but the fact of the matter these bones carbon dated often are 25,000 years old.Pre-flood man in the Americas and Mammoth bones are well documented...

Again, you are in no position to state anything about the flood. There cannot be 25,000 years of history prior to the Flood, since the Bible is very clear that the Flood that we believe took place in the 600th year of Noah which was precisely 1656 years after the Day that Adam was created - day six of the creation week. Don't you believe the Bible? All this time I though you believed in the Bible. Now you are saying something different.

Oh yeah, I remember, you don't believe the dates and times of the Bible are inerrant, so you make up whatever dates agree with the claims of secular science.

Jim one poignant point here.  

I do not make up dates.  

I assure you that the this is not secular science this is actually Christian Science done by Christians. 

The biblical dates are accurate, however the chronology (Not the bible) but the actual Chronology includes thousands of years in between many of the Biblical Characters. THe bible does not give dates, these are extrapolated by man of which you accept.

The 25,000 years keeps coming up with resect to mega fauna over and over and over.     

IF you were absolutely spot on...then how would you explain Dr. Morris and all the original Creationists having a view of YE originally of a minimum of 10,000 to 12,000 years. Obviously in their Biblical explanation and economy there was a different placement for Adam and Eve. Whitcomb, and Woodmorappe were quoted as much higher, one was well stated at 25,000 years back?  So while I appreciate your view, your not sharing real Creationist information, you have a very pointed position which I can appreciate, I just can't seem to rectify it with the bible or Chronology, or scientific facts that are just common sense.  The science I am speaking of is not secular science, its the same type of science that AIG, you and other creationists employ as well.  So please don't disenfranchise what I am saying by trying to paint me into some secular arena which I reject secular science and gradualism, however good science is good.  And common sense and observable evidences in nature surely express what Solomon observed about Gods mighty works...

I appreciate you brother, but biblical Chronology is not as packaged as you purport...Cheers!!

Gary after one of our exchanges in the past I don't have any inclination to respond to you.

Carbon 14 testing using the newer ANS and cleaning methods testing the bone and not the strata around the bone.. has been very accurate.  Or would you reject the Turin, or Egyptian products that are actually dated historically as well as Spanish galleons, and other products but since the half life of is 5,500 years, we are not talking millions of years.  Many Christian groups not only use this method, but also believe the soft tissue and bone dates are very accurate.  Including an allosaurus from Canada that came in at 16,000 years.

So is dating C-14 using the strata around the fossil bone accurate?  Heck no!!!  But dating bone implied to be 67 million years old that when tested come out at 16,000 years?  Tats a huge disparegence wouldn't you say.  At a minimum Gary a bone at 25,000 years is still YE compared to secular science?  

  1. Is it true that there are several assumptions made about an item prior to the carbon date testing of an item that place, especially fossils, in a certain age or time frame prior to its testing?

Of coarse in the old system of testing not only was there the dates from the substrate but the actual layer was assumed to give age.  People ahve moved beyond this for some time.  Again its not the layer or strata, its the actual c-14 found in the bone and why is it there?  It should not be if its old.  Dates continue to come out young, and even Jack Horner famous dino guy sees the disparegence and has said he would like to see more bones tested?  Christians know they are going to come out young.  Of those tested the oldest age was around 40,000 years, but many were on the same as the Mega fauna as well... Many duck bills and others came in at 20 to 22,000 years. 

 
Gary Murray said:

Lou,

  1. Is Carbon Dating always accurate?
  2. Is it true that there are several assumptions made about an item prior to the carbon date testing of an item that place, especially fossils, in a certain age or time frame prior to its testing?


Lou Hamby said:

Most every fossil remain including soft tissue have carbon dating of the bones over 10,000 years, I am curious at what has you scientifically meaning real evidences that pre port these are post-flood?  

Then, Lou... why are you here if not to converse with like-hearted Christians about God's Creation... that is what this site is for... ???

Lou Hamby said:

Gary after one of our exchanges in the past I don't have any inclination to respond to you.



Lou Hamby said:

I do not make up dates.  

Yes Lou, you do make up dates and you do it in this very post. I am telling you date that is very clear from Genesis chapters five and seven. That is that the occurred in the 600th year of Noah (Gen. 7:1), which is 1656 years after the sixth day of Creation. 

But then you come along and say that early creationists (whatever that means) insisted on creation taking place 10,000 years ago, or 12,000, or 25,000 or whatever suits your fancy. You have no explanations, you simply pull numbers out of thin air.

STILL YOU HAVE NOT GIVEN US A DATE FOR THE FLOOD THAT YOU CLAIM TO BELIEVE IN. YOU have no date for Abraham, but Genesis does give us a date for Abraham. The Bible gives us a time span for the length of time that the Children of Israel were in Egypt and for the time of their wanderings in the wilderness. The Bible gives us the lengths of the reigns of various kings, sometimes to the MONTH.

BUT you keep telling us that these numbers cannot be trusted. Meanwhile Paul and Jesus tell us that Jesus rose on the third day. DO YOU HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THAT? Yes?

Then why can you NOT have confidence in the numbers of the book of Genesis, and 1 Kings 6:1? 

You are busily making up dates based on what you perceive to the be the views of "Christian Scientists" or early creationists, or what you incorrectly assume to be the teachings of Morris, or Whitcomb. AND IT IS ALL FALSE. You dates are based on men's ideas, and based upon your false understandings of my own personal friends. 

Whitcomb never believed in 10,000 or 12,000 years at a minimum. The fact is that these authors have allowed 10 or 12 thousand years at a maximum, while asserting with confidence that there is no real reason to set aside the biblical revelation of about 6000 years for the age of the earth.

THEN as to the date of the Flood, there is no wiggle room here - It most certainly did occur - relative to the six days of creation - in the year 1656.

The biblical dates are accurate, however the chronology (Not the bible) but the actual Chronology includes thousands of years in between many of the Biblical Characters.

again, by your double-talk you have said the biblical dates are "accurate" but then you proceed to reject the biblical date asserting undefined gaps of thousands of years between many biblical characters. WHERE? HOW? Where is the gap in the genealogy of chapter five or chapter eleven. You are making things up. It is fiction and it is not Bible. It is certainly not science.

The bible does not give dates, these are extrapolated by man of which you accept.

This is not true. The Bible does give dates and times. It tells us quite clearly the very day on which the Flood began. It is not extrapolated by man. It is your "dates" that are entirely the figment of your fertile imagination. The dates that I have given you are obtained by a simple reading of the Hebrew text of Genesis five, with the help of a sharp pencil and a piece of paper. Then it has been confirmed with a high tech calculator. The flood occurred in 1656 AD.

The 25,000 years keeps coming up with resect to mega fauna over and over and over.     

This is a number that you have made up. 13.7 billion years also keeps coming up from many scientists who are Christians. MILLIONS OF CHRISTIANS believe in that date! Are you suggesting that they are wrong? Of course you are. And I am not suggesting that you are wrong about 25,000 years. I am stating it categorically. 

So please don't disenfranchise what I am saying by trying to paint me into some secular arena which I reject secular science and gradualism, however good science is good.  And common sense and observable evidences in nature surely express what Solomon observed about Gods mighty works...

when we observe the natural world it will always confirm the simple sense of the biblical revelation. You deny what the natural world teaches as certainly as you now have again denied what the Bible simply states. The flood occurred in 1656 Anno Mundi.

I appreciate you brother, but biblical Chronology is not as packaged as you purport...Cheers!!

And cheers to you my friend. The Bible is our authority here and its chronology is inerrant.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

About CC

Connecting Christians who believe in Biblical Creation — discussing beliefs, sharing ideas, and recommending evolution-free resources. Please keep all posts relevant to the topics of this community.

Rules of Engagement
Zero Tolerance Policy
Statement of Faith
Creation Terms
FAQ

Homeschool Curriculum

Members

Creation Conversations 2017

What's new @ CC for 2017? Stay tuned and keep checking back. More ask the experts, more creation networking and much more in store for Creation Conversation Members. You'll not want to miss this new year!

© 2017   Created by Creation Conversations.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service