In the Beginning...

[timtofly]

Marduk was the Babylonian national god and why he is the star of their creation epic, Assur was the Assyrian hero whereas An/Anu or Enlil was the Sumerian creator.

The nuclear war or whatever it was destroyed the cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah and a couple other cities/towns. It was part of a war in which Abraham participated, 5 kings vs 4 kings

Ea, An, and Enlil was a triad, (Sound familiar?) of the very first God/s. The Akkadians had them, but they were driven out of Mesopotamia very quickly. They were the first wave of people groups right after the Flood. Nimrod was about their one and only famous leader until Sargon, but another Ashur did build the city of Nineveh. It was Elam and Ashur, the grandsons of Noah who eventually won out. Ashur founded the city and took the god of the same name. Elam settled in Shinar, Babylon, and Ur. Their main god was Marduk, who allegedly killed all the former God's. The last great kings were Urtaki, and Teumman, who were defeated by Assurbanipal. This was the greater part of the 6th century BC. Assurbanipal was the one who took it upon himself to gather all the cuneiform writings that he could in his Library in Nineveh. This is where they found copies of both the Enuma Elis, and the Epic of Gilgamesh. The list of the Assyrian gods includes: Assur, Sin, Samas, Vul, Bel, Nebo, Ishtar of Nineveh, Ishtar of Arbela, Ninip, Nergal, and Nusku.

In the preceding years the great kings were Tiglath-pileser III, Sargon II, Sennacherib of Assyria. They fought and controlled the whole of the middle East from Iran to Ethiopia, and from Lydia to Kuwait. At least that is what their bragging scribes wrote down.

So not only are there other gods, but also gods that needed to be 'trampled'. I don't quite see how more threatened a jealous God can feel, really.

From all indications the gods were attached to a certain idol or statute. These could be stolen or transferred from one nation to another nation. Every time Assurbanipal conquered a nation he added their gods to his list of deities. When he finally conquered The Elamites, he recovered an Ishtar that had been taken from Assyria ages before and was now returned to Assyria.

God wanted the Hebrews to trust in a God they could not see, ie the second commandment. He did not want them to trust in gods who really did nothing for the nations that thought they had their favor.

Humans are neither perfect (they get expelled in the next verses) nor are they gods. Ergo, nowhere does it say in the Bible that God created gods. Not only that but these other gods (who weren't created by God) seem to threaten him to the point of a commandment saying there should be no other gods before him.

No, but it is the earliest. Later texts mention it based on the Bible. That means these later texts cannot be counted as a source, but only the Bible. (And that still doesn't make Abraham a historical person.)

They did not get expelled in the "next verse" Adam and Eve got kicked out of their home, and were essentially homeless.

The "humans" that God created in Genesis 1:26 and 27. Male and female beings created in the image and likeness of God. That sounds like gods to me. It was not until Adam was kicked out of the Garden that Seth was called the first son of man. The first 3 verses of chapter 5 are only talking about how Adam was created along with the rest of the gods. He was not the only one created in the first chapter, because he is not both male and female, and God created male and female gods in the likeness of God. Adam was created in God's image. It says though that Adam was only the father of humans, and that Seth was born in the likeness of Adam, not in the likeness of God. Adam is the only god who lost his god state. Therefore humans are not gods, because their father is no longer mentioned as a god.

It is interesting though, that the other gods had offspring. Yet God only created the mother of humans from Adam. If you are Hebrew you are one through your mom. So Seth was not even a half god, because his mom was just a clone of Adam. I guess it could be read that humans are not gods at all, but the Hebrews and most religions seem to think that we can become one (again). What was lost would be restored.

The OT was the oldest text until the Library of Nineveh was found. The Hebrews had a developed alphabet. The Mesopotamians used cuneiform.


Ok here is a thought. Perhaps Hammurabi and Abraham are the same person. They both are considered to be Amorites, who were more of a nuisance to the Sumerians as they did not settle in cities nor worshipped the gods. They were nomadic and lived in tents. The Amorites also went though a dark ages, where there is little known about them. They did eventually settle in Syria and were a people group that became enemies of the Hebrews, when they were establishing their kingdom.

Some think that the founder of Jerusalem was Shem, the Last of the pre-diluvians who were mighty men. Although the Amorites had some offspring who were also considered to be giants.

 

[Berzerker]

"The Bible suggests... so it was intentional." That's particularly woolly reasoning right there.

It was intentional to the authors

First, calling something a snow line when there's no snow is somewhat off. Frost line would be far more accurate. Second, the asteroid belt is not the result of some cosmic collision producing a debris trail. I'm not even sure why you would ask that, as it can easily be looked up.

Like I said, complain to the people responsible for naming it the snow line. All you can look up are theories, they dont know where this planet formed or that a planet didn't form at the asteroid belt.

I am quite curious where you get such information from. I'm aware that marine fossils have been found up on the Himalayas; this merely means that what is now the Himalayas originally was seabed. The Himalayas, however, hardly contain our 'oldest rock'.

I didn't mention the Himalayas... The oldest rock (zircons) formed in water ~4.4 bya and now some think we had water before the lunar cataclysm.

The statement 'before plate tectonics there was no process by which continents could be built' seems somewhat redundant, seeing as plate tectonics is what produces continents to break, move, and collide.

Plate tectonics produced the continents before they could break, move, and collide. Before plate tectonics water covered the world. Genesis says the dry land appeared from under the water and life began.

Simply because there is nothing off with Mars orbit around the sun; it's perfectly in plane with the other planets. In synch, so to speak. So one may theorize that Mars traveled back and forth through the solar system, but there's no evidence of this.

The grand tack theory says Jupiter was dragged into the asteroid belt by gas and dust and then pulled back by the formation of Saturn. The Earth is over 7 degrees off the solar equator.

Volatile material, not 'building material'.

Volatile material is found in the planets, the gas giants got most of it

While that may be literally correct, you at least suggested it.

I didn't suggest it

Because it isn't one. One may theorize it originates from some debris trail, but it would be more probable that the asteroid belt are simply left overs from the planetary formation process. For the entire asteroid belt to be a debris trail we would need a giant collision, resulting in debris in the outer limits of the solar system. There's nothing against theorizing about that, but theory is not explanation.

Those are both theories... Researchers have made a big mistake thinking asteroids are primordial leftovers that failed to form a planet.

This is theorization, not fact.

I believe researchers have confirmed meteorites from Vesta

He didn't. God is not the author of Genesis. Or any other Bible book.

According to Genesis God gave the firmament a name, and he named it Heaven.

I'm not sure where you are going with this.

The firmament is not the universe

No, it doesn't. And saying 'we had night and day before Earth had a sky' is neither here nor there. 'We' didn't have night and day, because 'we' weren't there. Earth had a night-day cycle, irrespective if there was an atmosphere; the two aren't linked in any way.

The Earth was revealed on the 3rd day and Earth's sky - the lights - appeared on the 4th day. Before the Earth was revealed this world was covered by water and that primordial world had night and day before the dry land was given form.

 

[Agent327]

Like I said, complain to the people responsible for naming it the snow line. All you can look up are theories, they dont know where this planet formed or that a planet didn't form at the asteroid belt.

That's because it's science and science deals in probabilities, not absolute truths. And I wasn't complaining; I was pointing out that 'snow line' makes no sense if there's no snow.

I didn't mention the Himalayas... The oldest rock (zircons) formed in water ~4.4 bya and now some think we had water before the lunar cataclysm.

No, you didn't mention, I did, as an example. Zircon is a mineral, not 'a rock'. Gold is also a mineral.

Plate tectonics produced the continents before they could break, move, and collide. Before plate tectonics water covered the world.

We don't know that at all, but you seem to. Secondly, plate tectonics did not produce the continents; it's the process which describes the movement and formation of continents. This is basic geology, there's no point in trying to argue around it; that's just how plate tectonics is defined.

The grand tack theory says Jupiter was dragged into the asteroid belt by gas and dust and then pulled back by the formation of Saturn. The Earth is over 7 degrees off the solar equator.

I'll repeat: all the planets are in the same orbital plane around the sun. That the Earth is 'over 7 degrees off the solar equator' doesn't really change that. It also is a rather basic argument against Jupiter traveling to the asteroid belt - and back again. As with everything in physics, it's theoretically possible, just not very likely. It may be theoretically possible to curve a bullet, but practically it's impossible. In that case we go with 'bullets don't curve' until further notice.

Volatile material is found in the planets, the gas giants got most of it

I'm sensing you're going to further deviate from what 'volatile materials' are. They are volatile elements. Like can be found in Earth's atmosphere. Because of Earth's electromagnetic field Earth still has an atmosphere (and we are here), whereas Mars no longer does (and nobody is there). You may also notice that the gas giants are on the outer limits of the planetary orbits, showing the limit of the force of solar wind.

I didn't suggest it

Speaking of 'a debris trail' pretty much suggests a single debris trail, not multiple ones.

Those are both theories... Researchers have made a big mistake thinking asteroids are primordial leftovers that failed to form a planet.

They may be both theories, but some theories are more likely to be correct than others. I'm not sure why scientists 'have made a big mistake thinking asteroids are primordial leftovers that failed to form a planet'. Scientists make mistakes all the time; they're human, after all. That doesn't imply that a certain theory is necessarily wrong though.

I believe researchers have confirmed meteorites from Vesta

That's interesting, seeing as Vesta is currently only a theory. An unconfirmed theory.

According to Genesis God gave the firmament a name, and he named it Heaven.

Which should not be confused with the religious concept of Heaven. In both cases, firmament is still space as seen from Earth. Which was my point.

The firmament is not the universe

Nobody claims that.

The Earth was revealed on the 3rd day and Earth's sky - the lights - appeared on the 4th day. Before the Earth was revealed this world was covered by water and that primordial world had night and day before the dry land was given form.

I'm sure. It's not how things actually happened though. There's no point in time where Earth was covered in water. However, water seems to be primordial in Genesis. One may even read it as space being made of water.

Ea, An, and Enlil was a triad, (Sound familiar?) of the very first God/s. The Akkadians had them, but they were driven out of Mesopotamia very quickly. They were the first wave of people groups right after the Flood. Nimrod was about their one and only famous leader until Sargon, but another Ashur did build the city of Nineveh. It was Elam and Ashur, the grandsons of Noah who eventually won out. Ashur founded the city and took the god of the same name. Elam settled in Shinar, Babylon, and Ur. Their main god was Marduk, who allegedly killed all the former God's. The last great kings were Urtaki, and Teumman, who were defeated by Assurbanipal. This was the greater part of the 6th century BC. Assurbanipal was the one who took it upon himself to gather all the cuneiform writings that he could in his Library in Nineveh. This is where they found copies of both the Enuma Elis, and the Epic of Gilgamesh. The list of the Assyrian gods includes: Assur, Sin, Samas, Vul, Bel, Nebo, Ishtar of Nineveh, Ishtar of Arbela, Ninip, Nergal, and Nusku.

In the preceding years the great kings were Tiglath-pileser III, Sargon II, Sennacherib of Assyria. They fought and controlled the whole of the middle East from Iran to Ethiopia, and from Lydia to Kuwait. At least that is what their bragging scribes wrote down.

You seem to be mixing mythology and history. These should best be separated.

From all indications the gods were attached to a certain idol or statute. These could be stolen or transferred from one nation to another nation. Every time Assurbanipal conquered a nation he added their gods to his list of deities. When he finally conquered The Elamites, he recovered an Ishtar that had been taken from Assyria ages before and was now returned to Assyria.

Gods weren't attached to an idol, the idols were representations of the gods.

God wanted the Hebrews to trust in a God they could not see, ie the second commandment. He did not want them to trust in gods who really did nothing for the nations that thought they had their favor.

We can't know what 'God wanted'. This is an arrogance best reserved to priests. What we do know is that there was a trend in early Judaism focusing on monotheism. This trend proved to be victorious. One shouldn't argue back from that. Judaism didn't necessarily have to become monotheistic.

They did not get expelled in the "next verse" Adam and Eve got kicked out of their home, and were essentially homeless.

I didn't say they were expelled in the next verse.

The "humans" that God created in Genesis 1:26 and 27. Male and female beings created in the image and likeness of God. That sounds like gods to me. It was not until Adam was kicked out of the Garden that Seth was called the first son of man. The first 3 verses of chapter 5 are only talking about how Adam was created along with the rest of the gods. He was not the only one created in the first chapter, because he is not both male and female, and God created male and female gods in the likeness of God. Adam was created in God's image. It says though that Adam was only the father of humans, and that Seth was born in the likeness of Adam, not in the likeness of God. Adam is the only god who lost his god state. Therefore humans are not gods, because their father is no longer mentioned as a god.

You seem to be misrepresenting 'in the likeness of God'. It seems more likely to be referring to a physical likeness. I.e. God looks like a human. As a Greek philosopher remarked, if donkeys had gods, they would look like donkeys. Similarly, the Old Testament God shows very human traits (jealousy, wrath, etc).

The OT was the oldest text until the Library of Nineveh was found. The Hebrews had a developed alphabet. The Mesopotamians used cuneiform.

Cuneiform script (as well as hieroglyphic script) is quite a bit older than the alfabet. In fact, the alfabet developed from a pictographic script - just as cuneiform and hieroglyphs did earlier.

Ok here is a thought. Perhaps Hammurabi and Abraham are the same person.

It's a thought that can be immediately repudiated. Hammurabi is a historical king, attested in various texts. Abraham is only attested in the Tanakh.

 

[Arakhor]

It was intentional to the authors

Even assuming that's true, how do you go from a story that slightly resembles certain aspects of a nuclear bomb going off to blithely stating that Abraham participated in a nuclear war? What possible evidence do you have for that?

 

[timtofly]

You seem to be mixing mythology and history.

If you say that all history is mythology, then you can choose what you want to. I do not think that you claim all mythology is history. If the OT and the cuneiform were both written in circa 600 BC, who declares what is history and what is not? I am not even claiming that the OT was written then. That is the claim of those calling it mythology. I claim it was written closer to 1100 BC.

You seem to be misrepresenting 'in the likeness of God'. It seems more likely to be referring to a physical likeness. I.e. God looks like a human. As a Greek philosopher remarked, if donkeys had gods, they would look like donkeys. Similarly, the Old Testament God shows very human traits (jealousy, wrath, etc).

I am pretty sure that it was God who declared the statement about what was created. If a human makes up a god, they can make any claim they want.

Since we are assuming that a God did some creating, why conflate that with the point that gods were graven images carved by a human? A pet can be jealous, and may even get angry, but we do not call them humans and change their species. So taking into acount that God who declares "I am, but I do not have a body" then declares "I will create one in my image", what does that mean other than there was a god like being created?

If a human is creating a statue, is he not declaring what he thinks the god is going to be, or did the god tell him what to fashion?

The Hebrews were not the only people group who claimed that God created all things including gods and devils. Neither does it make sense that they stole the ideas. While one group where Semites, and the other Sumerian, they all lived in the same area, and their origin stories, evolved over the generations. If one group wanted peace, then they interpreted a god of law and peace. If they wanted war, they turned god into a warrior.

That does not prove there was no God, but that humans changed God to fit their lifestyle.

It's a thought that can be immediately repudiated. Hammurabi is a historical king, attested in various texts. Abraham is only attested in the Tanakh.

How about a thought that history recorded him one way through archeology, and the Hebrews claimed him to be Abraham. It is your word against theirs.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

and now researchers think maybe asteroid belts are common around stars as gas giants beyond them wont allow the formation of a planet closer in.

why?

I think they're wrong, it takes a collision to produce an asteroid belt and ours was part of this planet. Why would Jupiter form before a planet twice as close to the sun? They think Saturn formed after Jupiter and its twice as far. And these gas giants grew large over time, they didn't start out as huge monsters - if they have rocky cores they're small.

Did we miss congratulating you for achieving a doctorate in astrophysics?

You do know that they've found other solar systems, right? And that there are gas giants thisclose to the primary stars in some of them?

It should be interesting to see how Vega's solar system develops. Since it's so close that it can be observed within a human lifespan, with bigger and better telescopes we should have a pretty good view of a solar system-in-progress.

Thats 4,000 years ago... Lot's wife was turned to a pillar of salt. But the Mesopotamian word for salt also means vapor, the salt marshes of Sumer produced vapor.

This story is Abrahamic in origin, its possible the later biblical authors saw the pillars of salt lining the Dead Sea and used that meaning rather than telling us she was vaporized...

When nuclear fallout is concerned, 4000 years is recent. Particularly in a continuously-inhabited part of the world. Is that part of the world unusually susceptible to cancer and birth defects, as has happened in other parts of the world that's been subjected to nuclear fallout or reactor leaks? Given modern methods of testing and dating human remains and artifacts and rocks, if there was a nuclear war there 4000 years ago, we'd know. It would be historical fact taught in public schools, not mystical tabloid-style ramblings.

Lot's wife did not literally turn into a pillar of salt. People don't do that unless they're characters in fantasy or science fiction stories (sounds like something Q would do in Star Trek, just for fun). IF she even existed (never proven), her death was likely some normal thing. In the novel Children of the Lion (first in a series by Peter Danielson) the author killed her off by having her run back into the home to grab her jewelry, and she literally got buried under a pile of bricks when the house fell on her - that author attributed the destruction to an accidental fire during a festival that ended up destroying the city because it got too big, too fast, and there weren't any people really equipped to handle it anyway. Of course the author had Lot and his daughters make it out alive, as did the other protagonists.

"Vapors" can also refer to fog. I have no idea if it gets foggy by the Dead Sea, but if so, that could be what's referred to. Getting lost in the fog and not getting found again makes a lot more sense than having one's entire chemical composition changed in a ZAP! MAGIC! situation.

People can be vaporized, by nukes. Some researchers believe it might have been an airburst and intense meteor shower, but the Bible suggests the cataclysm could have been delayed and prevented so it was intentional.

Since the bible authors knew nothing of radiation or even atoms, this is just silly.

Like I said, complain to the people responsible for naming it the snow line. All you can look up are theories, they dont know where this planet formed or that a planet didn't form at the asteroid belt.

Since you haven't provided any links to any reputable theories that Earth did form in the asteroid belt, your "but it could have" argument is essentially meaningless.

How about a thought that history recorded him one way through archeology, and the Hebrews claimed him to be Abraham. It is your word against theirs.

How about realizing that if archaeology contradicts pet notions, archaeology wins.

 

[Lexicus]

It should be interesting to see how Vega's solar system develops. Since it's so close that it can be observed within a human lifespan, with bigger and better telescopes we should have a pretty good view of a solar system-in-progress.

Err, what? It may only be 25 LY away, but planetary system formation happens on timescales a lot longer than a human lifetime.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Err, what? It may only be 25 LY away, but planetary system formation happens on timescales a lot longer than a human lifetime.

When I look at Vega, I see it as it was 26 years ago. That's within my lifetime. It's not as though I'm looking at a star much farther away, when the most recent view could be thousands of years old.

I am quite aware that it takes longer than a human lifetime for a solar system to form, thankyouverymuch.

 

[Lexicus]

Well, I figured you were, which is why your phrasing confused me. It seemed like you were saying that because Vega is relatively close, we'd be able to see its planetary system forming in real-time or something.

 

[Bootstoots]

When nuclear fallout is concerned, 4000 years is recent. Particularly in a continuously-inhabited part of the world. Is that part of the world unusually susceptible to cancer and birth defects, as has happened in other parts of the world that's been subjected to nuclear fallout or reactor leaks? Given modern methods of testing and dating human remains and artifacts and rocks, if there was a nuclear war there 4000 years ago, we'd know. It would be historical fact taught in public schools, not mystical tabloid-style ramblings.

This reminds me of the coolest thing ever. You probably already know about this, but it's a great example of how we can determine if significant nuclear reactions happened 1.7 billion years ago, never mind 4000.

Some background: natural uranium is composed of two significant isotopes, U-235 with an abundance of 0.7% and a half-life of 700 million years, and U-235 with an abundance of 99.3% and a half-life of 4.5 billion years. U-235 is fissile and can sustain a nuclear chain reaction; U-238 is not. Current nuclear reactors require the U-235 to be enriched to a level of around 3% to work with ordinary water as the moderator. But 1.7 billion years ago is 2.5 half-lives of U-238. If you do the math, you find that U-235 made up about 3% of all uranium back then, and ordinary uranium could sustain a chain reaction if it was concentrated in one place and had a good flow of water to moderate the neutrons.

In 1972, the French were processing uranium from the Oklo mine in Gabon for use in their reactors, and discovered something weird: the uranium was only 0.60% U-235, not 0.72% as it should be. They went to investigate and found that there were places where the U-235 level was only 0.44%, and furthermore isotope ratios of several other elements including neodymium, ruthenium, and xenon were way out of normal range. The isotopes of those elements that were enriched were the ones that are normally produced at the end of the decay chain of nuclear fission products, in the ratios you'd expect if a nuclear reactor was there.

It was determined that groundwater had seeped into a highly concentrated uranium deposit and moderated a self-sustaining nuclear reaction which would operate for about half an hour until it got so hot as to boil off the water, at which point the reaction would be stopped and new water would trickle in, and so on every three hours for hundreds of thousands of years! Not only that, but the discovery of a nuclear reactor from that long ago allowed us to determine that the fine-structure constant has not changed in the past 1.7 billion years by more than a 45 parts per billion, which was an independent check of results from astronomy.

Needless to say, we'd definitely notice if there had been an ancient nuclear war. All sorts of isotope ratios would be far out of normal ranges and as you mentioned there would be a bunch of long-lived radioactive nuclei (like for instance technetium-99, iodine-129, cesium-135, uranium-236, several plutonium isotopes, and so on). If we can detect reactions from 1.7 billion years ago, 4000 years would be a piece of cake.

 

[Berzerker]

That's because it's science and science deals in probabilities, not absolute truths. And I wasn't complaining; I was pointing out that 'snow line' makes no sense if there's no snow.

Plenty of people know what a snow line means in astronomy without any problem so it must make some sense.

No, you didn't mention, I did, as an example. Zircon is a mineral, not 'a rock'. Gold is also a mineral.

An example of what? I meant our oldest rock (zircons are the evidence they existed) formed in water.

Secondly, plate tectonics did not produce the continents; it's the process which describes the movement and formation of continents. This is basic geology, there's no point in trying to argue around it; that's just how plate tectonics is defined.

Plate tectonics didn't produce continents but its the process by which continents form?

I'll repeat: all the planets are in the same orbital plane around the sun. That the Earth is 'over 7 degrees off the solar equator' doesn't really change that.

You said Mars is perfectly in plane with the other planets, the Earth's orbital inclination of 7+ degrees and the Moon's ~5 degrees off our equatorial plane show the Earth-Moon system was disrupted after it formed.

I'm sensing you're going to further deviate from what 'volatile materials' are. They are volatile elements. Like can be found in Earth's atmosphere. Because of Earth's electromagnetic field Earth still has an atmosphere (and we are here), whereas Mars no longer does (and nobody is there).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volatiles

You may also notice that the gas giants are on the outer limits of the planetary orbits, showing the limit of the force of solar wind.

They're beyond the snow line and loaded with volatiles so I dont know why you think the solar wind didn't deprive Mars of building material.

Speaking of 'a debris trail' pretty much suggests a single debris trail, not multiple ones.

Why didn't you use the entire quote? Here's what I said:

"the Moon formed from a debris trail following a major impact..."

You argued major collisions didn't leave debris trails and I cited the Moon as evidence they do. If we had several Moons forming from multiple debris trails then I would have mentioned multiple debris trails.

Which should not be confused with the religious concept of Heaven. In both cases, firmament is still space as seen from Earth. Which was my point.

You said: 'Heaven' is a concept completely absent from the OT.

Nobody claims that.

Then why do people claim God created the universe?

I'm sure. It's not how things actually happened though. There's no point in time where Earth was covered in water. However, water seems to be primordial in Genesis. One may even read it as space being made of water.

If the Earth was never covered by water why did our oldest rock form in water?

Even assuming that's true, how do you go from a story that slightly resembles certain aspects of a nuclear bomb going off to blithely stating that Abraham participated in a nuclear war? What possible evidence do you have for that?

Abraham participated in the war of the 5 kings vs the 4 kings, he tried to prevent the use of nukes (or whatever weapons were used to rain fire and brimstone).

 

[Berzerker]

Did we miss congratulating you for achieving a doctorate in astrophysics?

You do know that they've found other solar systems, right? And that there are gas giants thisclose to the primary stars in some of them?

And they believe those planets migrated inward from beyond the snow line

When nuclear fallout is concerned, 4000 years is recent. Particularly in a continuously-inhabited part of the world.

Bikini Atoll is recent...

Is that part of the world unusually susceptible to cancer and birth defects, as has happened in other parts of the world that's been subjected to nuclear fallout or reactor leaks? Given modern methods of testing and dating human remains and artifacts and rocks, if there was a nuclear war there 4000 years ago, we'd know. It would be historical fact taught in public schools, not mystical tabloid-style ramblings.

They dont even know where Sodom and Gomorrah are located

Lot's wife did not literally turn into a pillar of salt.

"Vapors" can also refer to fog. I have no idea if it gets foggy by the Dead Sea, but if so, that could be what's referred to. Getting lost in the fog and not getting found again makes a lot more sense than having one's entire chemical composition changed in a ZAP! MAGIC! situation.

Could she have been turned into a pillar of vapor?

Since the bible authors knew nothing of radiation or even atoms, this is just silly.

They called it fire and brimstone

Since you haven't provided any links to any reputable theories that Earth did form in the asteroid belt, your "but it could have" argument is essentially meaningless.

I provided evidence our water formed there, that isn't meaningless.

@ Lexicus

Funnily he was ignoring the existence of the LHB before I pointed out that his attempts to square the science with Genesis left the LHB out.

Funny, I mentioned the late heavy bombardment before you

 

[onejayhawk]

I think not. Volcanism produces fire and brimstone. This was common enough. No reason to look further.

J

 

[Agent327]

I'm getting the impression some people treat Genesis like it contains some kind of scientific explanation of the universe. Unfortunately, Genesis (nor any other Bible book), does nothing of the sort. The Bible is not a science book. In fact, it shows remarkable little interest in such science as there was at the time of writing. In short, the Bible is not interested in science. It is interested in getting across a message.

Oh, and Berzerker, scientists do not believe planets around distant stars 'migrated inward from the snow line'. In fact, beyond knowing that those planets are there, science knows little more about them. So stop making stuff up.

An example of what? I meant our oldest rock (zircons are the evidence they existed) formed in water.

Yes, we know you believe this, but we haven't seen any evidence unfortunately. (There no more 'zircons' then there are 'golds', by the way.)

Plate tectonics didn't produce continents but its the process by which continents form?

That's absolutely not what I said.

You said Mars is perfectly in plane with the other planets, the Earth's orbital inclination of 7+ degrees and the Moon's ~5 degrees off our equatorial plane show the Earth-Moon system was disrupted after it formed.

No, it does not, and no, I did not say that.

They're beyond the snow line and loaded with volatiles so I dont know why you think the solar wind didn't deprive Mars of building material.

Atmosphere does not constitute 'building material'; it's something a planet may have after it's formed. Certainly not before.

You argued major collisions didn't leave debris trails and I cited the Moon as evidence they do. If we had several Moons forming from multiple debris trails then I would have mentioned multiple debris trails.

No, I did not argue that at all. And no, the moon is not evidence of 'a debris trail'.

You said: 'Heaven' is a concept completely absent from the OT.

In the sense of afterlife, yes. But we weren't discussing heaven in the sense of afterlife, were we.

Then why do people claim God created the universe?

Your guess is as good as mine. We have no evidence to support it.

If the Earth was never covered by water why did our oldest rock form in water?

That's for you to explain, isn't it. It's not part of my belief system that óur oldest rocks formed in water'.

Abraham participated in the war of the 5 kings vs the 4 kings, he tried to prevent the use of nukes (or whatever weapons were used to rain fire and brimstone).

You do realize this is like putting faith in a very dodgy fairy tale?

 

[Arakhor]

Abraham participated in the war of the 5 kings vs the 4 kings, he tried to prevent the use of nukes (or whatever weapons were used to rain fire and brimstone).

I asked for evidence of any sort to support this assertion, not for you to simply repeat it in slightly different words.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

There are descriptions of simmilar weapons in the ancient hindu scriptures. As it is described there one could have wiped out the entire army with one of these but the conduct of war at that time has prohibited such a use and instead it was supposed to be used against an opponent who had a simmilar capacity or even possibility to neutralise such a weapon. There is also description of flying airplanes in those times but there have been only few in number and together with these weapons their energy source differs from ours.

 

[Arakhor]

There's an exacting description of Noah's Ark in the Bible, but that's hardly evidence that it existed.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

There's an exacting description of Noah's Ark in the Bible, but that's hardly evidence that it existed.

One must approach these things both with scepticism and an open mind. Just becouse we couldnt build the egyptian pyriminds without our modern technology doesnt mean they were not build like the evidence shows.

 

[Arakhor]

One must approach these things both with scepticism and an open mind. Just becouse we couldnt build the egyptian pyriminds without our modern technology doesnt mean they were not build like the evidence shows.

That seems like yet another awfully bold assertion for no good reason.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

That seems like yet another awfully bold assertion for no good reason.

Maybe not:

The Great Pyramid a true masterpiece and has rightly earned the title of a “Wonder”. It was built with such precision that our current technology cannot replicate it. Historical analysis shows that the Pyramids were built between 2589 and 2504 BC. There are so many interesting facts about this Pyramid that it baffles archeologists, scientists, astronomers, and tourists. Here are the facts:

Spoiler :

The pyramid is estimated to have around 2,300,000 stone blocks that weigh from 2 to 30 tons each and there are even some blocks that weigh over 50 tons.
The Pyramid of Menkaure, the Pyramid of Khafre and the Great Pyramid of Khufu are precisely aligned with the Constellation of Orion.
The base of the pyramid covers 55,000 m2 (592,000 ft 2) with each side greater than 20,000 m2 (218,000 ft2) in area.
The interior temperature is constant and equals the average temperature of the earth, 20 Degrees Celsius (68 Degrees Fahrenheit).
The outer mantle was composed of 144,000 casing stones, all of them highly polished and flat to an accuracy of 1/100th of an inch, about 100 inches thick and weighing approx. 15 tons each.
The cornerstone foundations of the pyramid have ball and socket construction capable of dealing with heat expansion and earthquakes.
The mortar used is of an unknown origin (Yes, no explanation was given). It has been analyzed, and its chemical composition is known, but it can’t be reproduced. It is stronger than the stone and still holding up today.
It was originally covered with casing stones (made of highly polished limestone). These casing stones reflected the sun’s light and made the pyramid shine like a jewel. They are no longer present being used by Arabs to build mosques after an earthquake in the 14th century loosened many of them. It has been calculated that the original pyramid with its casing stones would act like gigantic mirrors and reflect light so powerful that it would be visible from the moon as a shining star on earth. Appropriately, the ancient Egyptians called the Great Pyramid “Ikhet”, meaning the “Glorious Light”. How these blocks were transported and assembled into the pyramid is still a mystery. – http://www.gizapyramid.com/general.htm
Aligned True North: The Great Pyramid is the most accurately aligned structure in existence and faces true north with only 3/60th of a degree of error. The position of the North Pole moves over time and the pyramid was exactly aligned at one time.
Center of Land Mass: The Great Pyramid is located at the center of the land mass of the earth. The east/west parallel that crosses the most land and the north/south meridian that crosses the most land intersect in two places on the earth, one in the ocean and the other at the Great Pyramid.
The four faces of the pyramid are slightly concave, the only pyramid to have been built this way.
The centers of the four sides are indented with an extraordinary degree of precision forming the only 8 sided pyramid; this effect is not visible from the ground or from a distance but only from the air, and then only under the proper lighting conditions. This phenomenon is only detectable from the air at dawn and sunset on the spring and autumn equinoxes, when the sun casts shadows on the pyramid.
The granite coffer in the “King’s Chamber” is too big to fit through the passages and so it must have been put in place during construction.
The coffer was made out of a block of solid granite. This would have required bronze saws 8-9 ft. long set with teeth of sapphires. Hollowing out of the interior would require tubular drills of the same material applied with a tremendous vertical force.
Microscopic analysis of the coffer reveals that it was made with a fixed point drill that used hard jewel bits and a drilling force of 2 tons.
The Great Pyramid had a swivel door entrance at one time. Swivel doors were found in only two other pyramids: Khufu’s father and grandfather, Sneferu and Huni, respectively.
It is reported that when the pyramid was first broken into that the swivel door, weighing some 20 tons, was so well balanced that it could be opened by pushing out from the inside with only minimal force, but when closed, was so perfect a fit that it could scarcely be detected and there was not enough crack or crevice around the edges to gain a grasp from the outside.
With the mantle in place, the Great Pyramid could be seen from the mountains in Israel and probably the moon as well.
The weight of the pyramid is estimated at 5,955,000 tons. Multiplied by 10^8 gives a reasonable estimate of the earth’s mass.
The Descending Passage pointed to the pole star Alpha Draconis, circa 2170-2144 BCE. This was the North Star at that point in time. No other star has aligned with the passage since then.
The southern shaft in the King’s Chamber pointed to the star Al Nitak (Zeta Orionis) in the constellation Orion, circa 2450 BCE The Orion constellation was associated with the Egyptian god Osiris. No other star aligned with this shaft during that time in history.
Sun’s Radius: Twice the perimeter of the bottom of the granite coffer times 10^8 is the sun’s mean radius. [270.45378502 Pyramid Inches* 10^8 = 427,316 miles]
The curvature designed into the faces of the pyramid exactly matches the radius of the earth.
Khufu’s pyramid, known as the great pyramid of Giza, is the oldest and largest, rising at 481 feet (146 meters). Archeologists say it was the tallest structure in the world for about 3, 800 years.
The relationship between Pi (p) and Phi (F) is expressed in the fundamental proportions of the Great Pyramid.