Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which is... how many years ago from now? Or, let me know if your historical records come without a timeline, in which case, any argument would be moot for they would cease to be "historical records".
My friend it would be near impossible to repopulate a land with 3 couples in 1000 years.
Not really. Not only was it possible to repopulate the land with 3 couples, they actually did it. Extrapolate it out.
"Consider the descendants of Jacob (Israel) who numbered 70 persons (Ex. 1:5, Dt. 10:2) when they went down to stay there while Joseph was Prime Minister. They remained 400 years (Gen. 15:13, Acts 7:6; Ex. 12:41 says "430 years"), and numbered 600,000 able-bodied men, plus women and children when they left under Moses (Ex. 12:37, Nu. 11:21). If a generation was 40 years, then 10 generations is the total. A total population of 2 million would be generated, starting with only couple, if the average number of children per family was 8, which is an entirely reasonable number, since Genesis 47:27 says the Jews "multiplied exceedingly" during their sojourn in Egypt. If a generation were 30 years, then the number of children per family would have averaged 5.6. The lifespans of the average person were evidently longer than today, Moses lived 120 years (Ex. 33:39) and his brother Aaron 123. Their father Amram lived to be 137 (Ex. 6:20). " World Population Since Creation (end of quote).
There could have been millions of Israelites when Israel left Egypt, if Egypt was not enforcing abortion on the Israelites about a hundred years prior to leaving Egypt.
The following plot is a rough estimate of world population from the time of the Flood of Noah, until the birth of Jesus, (53 generations). For discussion purposes the population at the time of Abraham, eleven generations after the Flood, has been taken to be one million people. The population at the time of Christ was assumed to be 300 million people. The date of the Flood was taken to be about 3500 BC, based on Barry Setterfield's chronology.
Quote:
Unless somehow infant, and child mortality rates were near zero. And the death toll among childbirth zilch it is pretty much impossible. Oh lord once you are proven wrong you have to reach into the depths of support ships to try and prove your point? Even those carriers were 100 ft longer then noahs ship.
Not really. 450 feet carriers and 450 feet ark = the same length. If someone tells me I'm lying about the carriers then they better back up their side. At least I backed up my side.
You can't even get your facts right about population growth.
Which is... how many years ago from now? Or, let me know if your historical records come without a timeline, in which case, any argument would be moot for they would cease to be "historical records".
Google the question: "When did Noah live." The truth is out there.
What makes you think it's possible for any living thing other than plant life to live that long.
Noah's age is one of the most ridiculous things in the entire Bible.
I'm waiting with anticipation for your response to this absurdity.
The very same way of reckoning how long a person lived prior to the world-wide flood was the exact same way of reckoning how long a person lived after the world-wide flood.
Prior to the invasion of China into Tibet there were masters high up in the mountains who were reported to be living well over 200 years.
Life was different prior to the flood. Life was different post-world-wide flood. People began to live shorter lives post-flood.
Google the question: "When did Noah live." The truth is out there.
Indeed it is. The truth IS out there.
Hermann Gunkel, in Legends of Genesis, writes
The clearest criterion of legend is that it frequently
reports things which are quite incredible.
This poetry has another sort of probability from that
which obtains in prosaic life, and ancient Israel considered
many things to be possible which to us seem
impossible. Thus many things are reported in
Genesis which go directly against our better knowledge:
we know that there are too many species of
animals for all to have been assembled in any ark;
that Ararat is not the highest mountain on earth;
that the "firmament of heaven," of which Genesis
i. 6 ff. speaks, is not a reality, but an optical illusion;
that the stars cannot have come into existence
after plants, as Genesis ii. IO-I4 reports ; that the
rivers of the earth do not come chiefly from four
principal streams, as Genesis ii. thinks, that the
Tigris and the Euphrates have not a common
source, that the Dead Sea had been in existence
long before human beings came to live in Palestine,
instead of originating in historicai times, and so on.
Of the many etymologies in Genesis the majority
are to be rejected according to the investigations of
modern philology. The theory on which the
legends of the patriarchs are based, that the nations
of the earth originated from the expansion of a
single family, in each case from a single ancestor,
is quite infantile.• Any other conclusion is impossible
from the point of view of our modern historical
science, which is not a figment of imagination but
is based upon the observation of facts.
(pp. 7-8, Trans. W.H. Carruth, Chicago, 1901)
Claus Westermann, in his introduction to Genesis, writes
The discovery of the flood story in the Gilgamesh epic has shown the
biblical narrative stands in a well-established tradition. (A recent comprehensive
presentation is that of A. Heidel, The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels,
Chicago 1946.) The stories show such similarities, even to agreement in
details, that it is impossible to deny some sort of relationship. It was the Babylonian
flood story that set in motion what has been called the Babel-Bible controversy
(Friedrich Delitzsch, Die grosse Tauschung, 1920)....
The situation today is very different from that at the time of the BabelBible
controversy, and even from that which was the background of Gunkel's
commentary on Genesis. The present discussion is no longer concerned with the
relationship between the biblical and Babylonian flood stories, but with the
relationship of these two to a stream of tradition in which other forms have been
handed down, e.g., accounts which have been assumed into the Gilgamesh Epic
and the Atrahasis Epic as episodes, and the Sumerian form which has come down
as an individual narrative (cf. A. Heidel, op. cit., pp. 102-136). There is no
longer a place for the earlier question whether J and P may have used a literary
model from the Gilgamesh Epic in constructing their accounts of the flood. The
flood narrative has made it abundantly clear that its background is a tradition of a
thousand years or more which must be considered carefully before making comparisons
or judgments.
S.N. Kramer in his essay "The Epic of Gilgamesh and Its Sumerian
Sources, a Study in Literary Evolution," JAOS 64 (1944) 7-23, has demonstrated
that almost every section of the Gilgamesh Epic exists as a separate entity
in Sumerian - including the flood....
The discovery of the Sumerian myths has made us familiar with a stage
in the development of the great Babylonian epics when the individual episodes
were still independent stories (e.g., the flood in the Oilgamesh epic). The Sumerian
myths of primeval time show a great number of characteristics which
point back to an earlier stage and which occur quite often in the corresponding
stories of the primitive cultures. The biblical story, for example, allows the snake
to speak and takes it for granted. This points clearly to a pre-mythical stage.
When one reflects that these stories are spread over the whole world, and that
they are one of the most important elements which link the primitive and the
high cultures, then one cannot pass them over when surveying the material at
hand in the biblical stories.
(Genesis: Introduction, p. 48, 5, Trans. John J. Scullion, Fortress Press, 1974)
"Of the many etymologies in Genesis the majority
are to be rejected according to the investigations of
modern philology. The theory on which the
legends of the patriarchs are based, that the nations
of the earth originated from the expansion of a
single family, in each case from a single ancestor,
is quite infantile.• Any other conclusion is impossible
from the point of view of our modern historical
science, which is not a figment of imagination but
is based upon the observation of facts.
(pp. 7-8, Trans. W.H. Carruth, Chicago, 1901)"
Hermann Gunkel was wrong. There were three families which re-kick-started the re-population of the
earth after the world-wide flood. Not just one family.
Google the question: "When did Noah live." The truth is out there.
I'm looking for details in the historical evidence you speak of. Do you have none, or there is no such documentation that involves dating?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
