[Replying to Quantrill in post #121
No, the genealogical records are true and complete as to their purpose. But they are not given to date the flood or the creation. They are given to show the ancestral connection. That doesn't mean everyone has to be included. And it is common with God to not include everyone.
Again, no claim has been made that the genealogical records were given specifically to date the flood or creation, so I'm not sure why you keep mentioning that. You seem to be entirely missing the point, which is that because these ages and relationships are
given in the bible, they can be used to estimate dates for "creation", and Noah's flood, or other things. Ussher and AIG (and many others) have done just that as shown in the earlier links. And explain how you know that "it is common with God to not include everyone." What leads to you do make that claim, and why would this not be caught by the many people and organizations (like AIG) who do such date estimates? What special information do you have that others evidently do not, which indicates that it is common for the biblical god to not include everyone?
As for the age of the people prior to the flood, you can't trust your dates as the the environmental conditions were nothing like today. As I said before, science 'assumes' everything is always as it has been. And it's tests are based upon that. And that just isn't the case. Thus your dating of the flood and of the creation can't be known.
Again, you are completely missing the point. The ages of biblical characters prior to the flood are not gotten from date estimates for the creation event, the flood, etc. And they don't depend on conditions of that time being the same as today (or not). The ages of many of these characters are explicitly given in the bible directly so there is no need to estimate their ages from begats, etc. Noah is explicitly stated to have lived to 950 years. Adam to 930 years, Methusalah to 969 years. These are given directly in the bible ... here is a list for you:
I am not making up these ages, or estimating them from genealogical records ... they are given explicitly in the bible. But we know from basic biology that it is impossible for a human being to live anywhere near those ages either now, or at any time in the past. And it does not depend on conditions on earth being the same "back then" or not. But "back then" was only about 6000 years ago, or less, and we know that the only members of the genus homo
alive during that time were anatomically modern homo sapiens
. Therefore, none could have lived anywhere near as long as is claimed in the bible.
No, the genealogical records of the Bible are true. But they are not given to date the flood or creation. They prove the ancestor connection. No problem with inspiration or inerrancy.
Then how can you disagree with the dates derived by Ussher, AIG and many others for biblical events if the genealogical records in the bible are true? And again, never has any claim been made that these genealogical records were given specifically to date the flood or any other event. That is something you keep inserting for some reason when no such claim has been made. If you now claim that these genealogical records are correct, then you must accept that the dating for "creation" and Noah's flood that is derived from them has to be correct. Or do you disagree with the methodology used by Ussher and AIG in the early links. If so, what did they do wrong, and why?
Of course science changes it's mind. How could it not if it is willing to learn. Science's knowledge is limited. It always changes it's mind. It doesn't change it's mind about it's faith in science...I agree. But it changes it's mind as it learns.
The phrase "changes its mind' is inappropriate when the process is to add knowledge to the knowledge base, and refine knowledge when new information becomes available. But regardless, what has this got to do with dates for Noah's flood, creation, etc. as derived (not by me) from biblical genealogy? You've yet to make any connection between science "changing its mind" as you put it, and the issue of ridiculous ages for human beings described in the bible, or the dates derived from its genealogy for certain events.