Guide to the Hunter-Gatherers of the Levant

Then prove your dating numbers by means other than the defective carbon dating system. You have just brought this discussion back into the realm of Theology and or Religion, subsequently Science cannot prove nor disprove anything in regards to religious teachings. Deal with religious subjects on religious terms and religious data. Unless of course, if you are declaring that science is a religion, then we can use scientific data,,, but only if science is a religion.

 

Yes.. I know that.. That's the point..

 

What specifically is the point?

 

That Genesis is NOT history or science.......... Its a morality tale.

 

That would apply to the entire Bible.

However, we as Christians MUST BELEIVE:

Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who came to the world as man, was crucified, died, rose again from the dead, redeemed mankind from our sins, and defeated death forever.

If THAT is not LITERALLY TRUE than Christianity has NO VALUE.

 

Prove your claim.

 

LOLOL.. Prove that dinosaurs roamed the earth 6,000 years ago.

 

That is a science issue and is not related to any religious discussions that I am aware of. As such, you are attempting to force this thread back into the realm of science as opposed to religion. My demand for proof that Genesis is not a book of history is in fact related to the religious title of this sub-forum. Science is not relevant in this sub-forum.

But just to show that I am not afraid to answer your question:

"Job 40:15 ¶ Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
Job 40:16 Lo now, his strength [is] in his loins, and his force [is] in the navel of his belly.
Job 40:17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
Job 40:18 His bones [are as] strong pieces of brass; his bones [are] like bars of iron.
Job 40:19 He [is] the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach [unto him].
Job 40:20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
Job 40:21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
Job 40:22 The shady trees cover him [with] their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.
Job 40:23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, [and] hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
Job 40:24 He taketh it with his eyes: [his] nose pierceth through snares."

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=H930

 

The Behemoth is the Nile hippo.. The Leviathian is the Nile Crocodile.

 

Can you prove that claim? Remember, it was mentioned one time in the Bible in the book of Job. One mention of this creature, and you without sufficient evidence proclaim that it was a Nile hippo. Does a Nile hippo have tail that "He moveth his tail like a cedar:"? I have never seen a hippo of any variety that has a tail that is comparable to a 'cedar'. Have you?

 

The Book of Job was written quite late.. Look it up.

Its a teaching narrative.

 

You are evading my previous question. Can you prove that claim?
"The Behemoth is the Nile hippo.. The Leviathian is the Nile Crocodile."

 

Meaning that our instruments run into trouble around 50,000 years or so.

Incorrect. The theory can be confirmed by dating more recent objects with historical authenticity. If we know that a gun is 600 years old for other reasons, we can carbon date the wooden stock and see if it shows the same age. There are older examples with verified historical ages from the ancient egyptians and romans, which have been radiocarbon dated and the results match up with the historical records. That's how they verified that the technique worked.

The issue that opponents of radiocarbon dating have is that radioisotope dating yields consistent results across methods, and even with other forms of archeological or historical dating.

 

How is that unlike other mythologies? Virtually all creation stories explain how the world came to be, how the animals came to be, where humans came from, human relationships with each other and with the creator, etc. Genesis is but one example of a rather classic sort of creation story found in many different cultures. Great turtle, god, they both play the same role in the end.

 

Not seeing why the "rose again from the dead" part is required. It's not really a sacrifice if you get it back in the end.

 

Do you find ANY evidence for Dinosaurs in 700 BC? Less than 3,000 years ago???

http://www.cresourcei.org/books/job.html

Historical Background

A. author is unknown

B. three theories about time of writing: 700 BC, 550 BC, and 400-300 BC

C. place of writing is unknown

D. three theories about Job:

1) a historical figure who spoke all the words attributed to him;

2) a literary creation by the author as a teaching parable;

3) historical kernel adapted by the author to address certain issues. (see Introduction to Job)

E. none of these unknowns or theories play a major role in the book or effect its theological message

 

I can only agree with items labeled "A" and "C". All of the other items deal emphatically with 'theory', and as you know, theory implies that the issue has not been proven.

In a Theological sense, the book of Job was written for the purpose of being placed in the Bible. Those that believe in the Bible will not dismiss the concept that the book was written by the inspiration of God and therefore could contain data that transcends time as we know time. On that same notion of accepting that the book was given by inspiration of God, it could be that the story of 'behemoth' could have carried with it visions of this 'behemoth' as it was in scores of centuries past. Such 'acceptance' of course would require the operation of faith... not logic nor scientific empirical evidence.

 

What you are saying is that dinosaurs roamed the earth LESS than 3,000 years ago and WERE NOT destroyed by Noah's flood.

 

No! Show me where I have stated such a thing. If you read my text again, you will see that I offered a possibility that the dinosaurs might actually have roamed the earth 100's of thousands years ago, but was revealed to Job (or the author of the book of Job) in a vision.

Be more careful in your reading.

 

You simply aren't thinking.. That's exactly what you claimed.. by default.

Don't you think that 3,000 years ago men were digging up fossils in their fields??

 

By default, you admitted that the exact date and location of the book of Job is unknown. So in effect you are admitting the possibility that the book of Job could have been written thousands of years prior to the suggested date of 3000 years ago. As for what men were digging up in their fields 3000 years ago, I could care less, because they were not recognized as anything significant until 3000 years later. An absurd argument you present. Again, you are now attempting to shift the focus of an alleged Religious argument back to the central focus of science. Now is this thread about the religious aspects of those archaeological finds or is this thread needing to be moved to the science forum?

 

You have a "religious" view of Carbon Dating...

 

And you seemingly have a scientific view of religion. This is a sub-forum devoted to religion. If you want to talk science, go to the science forum.

 

Come on Really?

We know the rate of decay for carbon-14, and can measure it. You dont have to be around 1000s of years to know it works.

Sesostris III was a Pharoh who ruled until death in 1839 BC. we know this because it's well documented in the ancient egyptain historal record. Wood from the deck board of his funerary boat was carbon dated 1843 ±50 B.C. Thats just 4 years off, with a 50 year plus or minus. Thats roughly 3,800 years ago, what kind of proof do you need?


there are plenty of documented examples where carbon dating is proven by ancient records.

http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/libby.htm

 

The death certificate (historical record) is sufficient. As for the irony of the carbon dating. So what. It is a known fact that scientists will manipulate the numbers or the formulas when the actual numbers don't match what is expected. So the carbon dating proves nothing.