Re: Fitting Bible literalism into history

[Athetotheist]

I originally posted this in Random Ramblings and it was suggested that I come up with a question to start a discussion. So here it is:


2348 BCE (Ussher calculation)---A global flood wipes out every human being on earth except Noah and his closest relatives.

2345 BCE (three years after the flood)---Teti becomes pharoah of Egypt, beginning that country's sixth dynasty.

2334 BCE (fourteen years after the flood)---Sargon I conquers southern Mesopotamia and founds the Akkadian Empire.

So for a question: Can Bible literalists explain why historical records don't have gaps in them where there should be gaps from the flood? And what does giving up a literal interpretation of Genesis mean for interpreting the rest of the Bible?

[Miles]

.

2345 BCE (three years after the flood)---Teti becomes pharoah of Egypt, beginning that country's sixth dynasty.

2334 BCE (fourteen years after the flood)---Sargon I conquers southern Mesopotamia and founds the Akkadian Empire.

It should be obvious that both dates are fabrications made to make the Bible look bad.


.

[bjs1]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

The Bible is a lengthy collection of books with at least 40 separate authors written over the course of hundreds of years. It includes various literary styles and techniques. Talking about biblical literalists (who take every passage literally) or saying “You can’t take it literally” (as if there are no literal and historically accurate passages in the Bible) is a guaranteed way to get a false understanding of the Bible.

[Tcg]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

The Bible is a lengthy collection of books with at least 40 separate authors written over the course of hundreds of years. It includes various literary styles and techniques. Talking about biblical literalists (who take every passage literally) or saying “You can’t take it literally” (as if there are no literal and historically accurate passages in the Bible) is a guaranteed way to get a false understanding of the Bible.

So what is the correct understanding, in your opinion, in light of the dates presented and the Genesis tale of a great flood?

It is also important to note that the first question for debate asks about "Bible literalist." That is the focus of this thread:

"Can Bible literalists explain why historical records don't have gaps in them where there should be gaps from the flood?"


Tcg

[Tcg]

I originally posted this in Random Ramblings and it was suggested that I come up with a question to start a discussion. So here it is:


2348 BCE (Ussher calculation)---A global flood wipes out every human being on earth except Noah and his closest relatives.

2345 BCE (three years after the flood)---Teti becomes pharoah of Egypt, beginning that country's sixth dynasty.

2334 BCE (fourteen years after the flood)---Sargon I conquers southern Mesopotamia and founds the Akkadian Empire.

So for a question: Can Bible literalists explain why historical records don't have gaps in them where there should be gaps from the flood? And what does giving up a literal interpretation of Genesis mean for interpreting the rest of the Bible?

One way to deal with these problematic dates would be to question their validity. Some balk at the idea that the flood happened this recently, but for those who take the Bible literally, many if not most agree with the date you present from Ussher or at least a date close to it. I suppose one could also question the dates of the historical events given.

As far as giving up a literal interpretation, some point out that Jesus spoke of the flood in Matthew 24. He seems to be referring to it as a literal event, but he could simply be using the story to make a point in the same way we could use the story of the Hare and the Tortoise to teach diligence.

The text of 2 Peter 2 is harder to dismiss as the tale of the flood is compared with other events that the author seemingly considers literal.


Tcg

[1213]

...2348 BCE (Ussher calculation)---A global flood wipes out every human being on earth except Noah and his closest relatives.

2345 BCE (three years after the flood)---Teti becomes pharoah of Egypt, beginning that country's sixth dynasty.

2334 BCE (fourteen years after the flood)---Sargon I conquers southern Mesopotamia and founds the Akkadian Empire.

So for a question: Can Bible literalists explain why historical records don't have gaps in them where there should be gaps from the flood? And what does giving up a literal interpretation of Genesis mean for interpreting the rest of the Bible?

Wrong the historical record may be, twisted by the enemies of God and truth.

[Tcg]

...2348 BCE (Ussher calculation)---A global flood wipes out every human being on earth except Noah and his closest relatives.

2345 BCE (three years after the flood)---Teti becomes pharoah of Egypt, beginning that country's sixth dynasty.

2334 BCE (fourteen years after the flood)---Sargon I conquers southern Mesopotamia and founds the Akkadian Empire.

So for a question: Can Bible literalists explain why historical records don't have gaps in them where there should be gaps from the flood? And what does giving up a literal interpretation of Genesis mean for interpreting the rest of the Bible?

Wrong the historical record may be, twisted by the enemies of God and truth.

Well that's interesting supposition. Can you present any verifiable evidence that such a thing has happened?


Tcg

[TRANSPONDER]

...2348 BCE (Ussher calculation)---A global flood wipes out every human being on earth except Noah and his closest relatives.

2345 BCE (three years after the flood)---Teti becomes pharoah of Egypt, beginning that country's sixth dynasty.

2334 BCE (fourteen years after the flood)---Sargon I conquers southern Mesopotamia and founds the Akkadian Empire.

So for a question: Can Bible literalists explain why historical records don't have gaps in them where there should be gaps from the flood? And what does giving up a literal interpretation of Genesis mean for interpreting the rest of the Bible?

Wrong the historical record may be, twisted by the enemies of God and truth.

That's one argument I've seen. There an effort to try to redate the Egyptian Chronology though even then it only shifted it by a couple of hundred years - if it was correct.

Another is to tr to have the Flood about the date of the Pyramids. Some claimed slat water marks in the great pyramid. I haven't seen that substantiated. Another effort was to take an Egyptian creation - myth and try to relate it to the Noachian Flood. That didn't work any better than trying to wangle the Flood into Chinese tradition, which of course doesn't have a global flood legend.

The claim you posted (with a wink, noted ) of course begs the question: show that the dating is wrong, otherwise it's just denial.

[1213]

....Another is to tr to have the Flood about the date of the Pyramids. Some claimed slat water marks in the great pyramid. I haven't seen that substantiated. Another effort was to take an Egyptian creation - myth and try to relate it to the Noachian Flood. That didn't work any better than trying to wangle the Flood into Chinese tradition, which of course doesn't have a global flood legend.

The claim you posted (with a wink, noted ) of course begs the question: show that the dating is wrong, otherwise it's just denial.

I think those who make the claim of the dates, should prove them correct. I have not seen any good proof for them, which is why I think they are just baseless belief.

But, that claim about water marks and also that it appears that the great pyramid and other structures were not finished really. That may indicate that there was some great catastrophe.

[Tcg]

I think those who make the claim of the dates, should prove them correct. I have not seen any good proof for them, which is why I think they are just baseless belief.

You suggested this as an explanation:

Wrong the historical record may be, twisted by the enemies of God and truth.

Do you intend to provide any evidence that would suggest that this is true? Additionally, who are these, "enemies of God and truth" you suspect would be responsible?


Tcg