Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Migration to continents in bibl. creationism

Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 12:04:11 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
Studies show that homo sapiens first arrived in the American continents 15 000 years ago, and to Australia as far back as 50 000 years ago. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org... ) So if the Earth is 6000 years old, there would be many questions regarding these human migrations.

* At what historical period in the Out Of Eden theory is it supposed that the native Americans arrived in the Americas, and when is it supposed that the aboriginal Australians arrived in Australia?
* Are there proofs showing the supposed claims would be true?
* Would it even be possible for humans to have migrated to these continents in such a short timespan?
ethang5
Posts: 4,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 7:13:16 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 12:04:11 AM, Jovian wrote:

Studies show that homo sapiens first arrived in the American continents 15 000 years ago, and to Australia as far back as 50 000 years ago. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org... ) So if the Earth is 6000 years old, there would be many questions regarding these human migrations.

* At what historical period in the Out Of Eden theory is it supposed that the native Americans arrived in the Americas, and when is it supposed that the aboriginal Australians arrived in Australia?
* Are there proofs showing the supposed claims would be true?
* Would it even be possible for humans to have migrated to these continents in such a short timespan?

First thing is Jovian,

The Bible offers us no chronological time span of history. The Earth being 6,000 years old is not a teaching of the Bible. The Bible does not tell us how old the Earth is or the date of human creation. It would behoove you to know of what you criticize.

But those aren't the main reason I responded to your post. My main reason is the arrogant assumptions in your post. You begin by telling us that "studies" have shown, and then demand that we explain why the Bible doesn't agree with your "studies".

Do you have any clue how often those "studies" have changed their conclusions? Obviously not. Have you offered anything to show your "studies" are correct? No, you assume it and expect us to assume long with you. Does the Bible say what you are assuming it says? No.

I bet you were thinking that your post was so solid no Christian could respond. lol. It seems like none of them thought the effort in first educating you was worth it. I'm different.
VirBinarus
Posts: 323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 7:22:09 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 12:04:11 AM, Jovian wrote:
Studies show
can you cite them?
"Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."
1 thessalonians, 5:11
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 9:15:11 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 7:13:16 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/7/2016 12:04:11 AM, Jovian wrote:

Studies show that homo sapiens first arrived in the American continents 15 000 years ago, and to Australia as far back as 50 000 years ago. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org... ) So if the Earth is 6000 years old, there would be many questions regarding these human migrations.

* At what historical period in the Out Of Eden theory is it supposed that the native Americans arrived in the Americas, and when is it supposed that the aboriginal Australians arrived in Australia?
* Are there proofs showing the supposed claims would be true?
* Would it even be possible for humans to have migrated to these continents in such a short timespan?

First thing is Jovian,

The Bible offers us no chronological time span of history.

Sure, but there should be scholars and scientist believing in the Bible who present data out of a biblical perspective.

The Earth being 6,000 years old is not a teaching of the Bible. The Bible does not tell us how old the Earth is or the date of human creation. It would behoove you to know of what you criticize.

The young earth creationists do not agree with you. And I should had specified in the title that I aim this thread to them.

But those aren't the main reason I responded to your post. My main reason is the arrogant assumptions in your post. You begin by telling us that "studies" have shown, and then demand that we explain why the Bible doesn't agree with your "studies".

Then I should had rephrased myself to "Science says". My goal with this thread has not been to embarrass any group. I just like to problematize the Christian teachings, and I'm well aware that such a problematizing could be eloquently answered by many.

Do you have any clue how often those "studies" have changed their conclusions? Obviously not. Have you offered anything to show your "studies" are correct? No, you assume it and expect us to assume long with you. Does the Bible say what you are assuming it says? No.

I am of course aware of how science changes over time. But let me then rephrase myself to "As far us our science has proceeded right now, it's 15 000 and 50 000".

I bet you were thinking that your post was so solid no Christian could respond. lol. It seems like none of them thought the effort in first educating you was worth it. I'm different.

I didn't at all thought no Christians would answer. Christianity is a wide ideology which has been defended by scholars for 2000 years. Christians have answers on pretty much everything. It would be quite absurd for Christians to have lived along with native Americans for 500 years without ever wondering when the natives arrived in the Americas, now wouldn't it?
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 9:18:19 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 7:22:09 AM, VirBinarus wrote:
At 3/7/2016 12:04:11 AM, Jovian wrote:
Studies show
can you cite them?

I cited the link to a map on Wikipedia. There should be sources to the studies there.
ethang5
Posts: 4,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 11:19:38 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 9:15:11 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 3/7/2016 7:13:16 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/7/2016 12:04:11 AM, Jovian wrote:

Studies show that homo sapiens first arrived in the American continents 15 000 years ago, and to Australia as far back as 50 000 years ago. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org... ) So if the Earth is 6000 years old, there would be many questions regarding these human migrations.

* At what historical period in the Out Of Eden theory is it supposed that the native Americans arrived in the Americas, and when is it supposed that the aboriginal Australians arrived in Australia?
* Are there proofs showing the supposed claims would be true?
* Would it even be possible for humans to have migrated to these continents in such a short timespan?

First thing is Jovian,

The Bible offers us no chronological time span of history.

Sure, but there should be scholars and scientist believing in the Bible who present data out of a biblical perspective.

Sure, but then you should be aware that you aren't citing a problem to Christian Doctrine. The Bible cannot be used as a timeline. A person calling himself "Christian" can post heresy.

The Earth being 6,000 years old is not a teaching of the Bible. The Bible does not tell us how old the Earth is or the date of human creation. It would behoove you to know of what you criticize.

The young earth creationists do not agree with you.

YOUR thread title said "Biblical Creationism", those views do not come from the Bible and even YECs will admit that. The question is, what does the Bible say? Not what some special brand of "believers" say.

And I should had specified in the title that I aim this thread to them.

Yes. You seem to aim almost all your threads to them. Perhaps that is because your paint-by-the-numbers argument works with only them? My experience with obsessed anti-YEC atheists is that you will try to shoehorn me into YEC and debate me as if I am one.

But those aren't the main reason I responded to your post. My main reason is the arrogant assumptions in your post. You begin by telling us that "studies" have shown, and then demand that we explain why the Bible doesn't agree with your "studies".

Then I should had rephrased myself to "Science says". My goal with this thread has not been to embarrass any group. I just like to problematize the Christian teachings,

Ok. But then you should choose an actual Christian Teaching. The total set of "Christian Teaching" comes from the Bible.

...and I'm well aware that such a problematizing could be eloquently answered by many.

Ah. I hold truth higher than eloquence. I would be more interested in finding out if you are aware that such problematizing could be truthfully answered by many.

Do you have any clue how often those "studies" have changed their conclusions? Obviously not. Have you offered anything to show your "studies" are correct? No, you assume it and expect us to assume long with you. Does the Bible say what you are assuming it says? No.

I am of course aware of how science changes over time. But let me then rephrase myself to "As far us our science has proceeded right now, it's 15 000 and 50 000".

But if a person should show that his doctrine agrees with "science" now, what is he to do when "science" changes? And if science changes, of what value is it to say some doctrine or other temporarily agrees with it at some particular time?

You seem to be implying that agreeing with "science" now is a standard for truth. But the next generation of atheists will condemn that very doctrine when they see it doesn't agree with their current version of "truth". Thus I find your demand of Christians naive at best and disingenuous at worst.

I bet you were thinking that your post was so solid no Christian could respond. lol. It seems like none of them thought the effort in first educating you was worth it. I'm different.

I didn't at all thought no Christians would answer. Christianity is a wide ideology which has been defended by scholars for 2000 years. Christians have answers on pretty much everything.

Yes. I am only interested in the answers the Bible has. And only those answers do I call "Christian Doctrine". You are free to differ.

It would be quite absurd for Christians to have lived along with native Americans for 500 years without ever wondering when the natives arrived in the Americas, now wouldn't it?

Just as I predicted. You will now try to get me to play your YEC partner. Why would Christians wonder when there is no time frame given in the Bible? Why would Christians think the Earth was only 6,000 to 10,000 years old?

I know your YEC arguments are unfit for anyone other than YECs. I am not a YEC so you'll probably want to find one with whom to debate.

Have a good day.
bulproof
Posts: 25,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 2:09:26 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 11:19:38 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Ok. But then you should choose an actual Christian Teaching. The total set of "Christian Teaching" comes from the Bible.
Who makes this claim and what veracity does it have and upon what is that veracity based?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 2:21:27 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 11:19:38 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/7/2016 9:15:11 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 3/7/2016 7:13:16 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/7/2016 12:04:11 AM, Jovian wrote:

Studies show that homo sapiens first arrived in the American continents 15 000 years ago, and to Australia as far back as 50 000 years ago. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org... ) So if the Earth is 6000 years old, there would be many questions regarding these human migrations.

* At what historical period in the Out Of Eden theory is it supposed that the native Americans arrived in the Americas, and when is it supposed that the aboriginal Australians arrived in Australia?
* Are there proofs showing the supposed claims would be true?
* Would it even be possible for humans to have migrated to these continents in such a short timespan?

First thing is Jovian,

The Bible offers us no chronological time span of history.

Sure, but there should be scholars and scientist believing in the Bible who present data out of a biblical perspective.

Sure, but then you should be aware that you aren't citing a problem to Christian Doctrine. The Bible cannot be used as a timeline. A person calling himself "Christian" can post heresy.

Fair enough.

The Earth being 6,000 years old is not a teaching of the Bible. The Bible does not tell us how old the Earth is or the date of human creation. It would behoove you to know of what you criticize.

The young earth creationists do not agree with you.

YOUR thread title said "Biblical Creationism", those views do not come from the Bible and even YECs will admit that. The question is, what does the Bible say? Not what some special brand of "believers" say.

Yes you are right. I excused myself about this in my previous post.

And I should had specified in the title that I aim this thread to them.

Yes. You seem to aim almost all your threads to them. Perhaps that is because your paint-by-the-numbers argument works with only them?

Meh, that would probably be the case because such an age of the Earth is the easiest one to problematize, if you compare it to today's science.

My experience with obsessed anti-YEC atheists is that you will try to shoehorn me into YEC and debate me as if I am one.

I can admit I thought YEC was the most prevalent view upon the age of the Earth. That's because I've read Conservapedia and other things. How many are YEC really then, if not a majority?

But those aren't the main reason I responded to your post. My main reason is the arrogant assumptions in your post. You begin by telling us that "studies" have shown, and then demand that we explain why the Bible doesn't agree with your "studies".

Then I should had rephrased myself to "Science says". My goal with this thread has not been to embarrass any group. I just like to problematize the Christian teachings,

Ok. But then you should choose an actual Christian Teaching. The total set of "Christian Teaching" comes from the Bible.

...and I'm well aware that such a problematizing could be eloquently answered by many.

Ah. I hold truth higher than eloquence. I would be more interested in finding out if you are aware that such problematizing could be truthfully answered by many.

Sure.

Do you have any clue how often those "studies" have changed their conclusions? Obviously not. Have you offered anything to show your "studies" are correct? No, you assume it and expect us to assume long with you. Does the Bible say what you are assuming it says? No.

I am of course aware of how science changes over time. But let me then rephrase myself to "As far us our science has proceeded right now, it's 15 000 and 50 000".

But if a person should show that his doctrine agrees with "science" now, what is he to do when "science" changes?

Correct himself after it or problematize the new science.

And if science changes, of what value is it to say some doctrine or other temporarily agrees with it at some particular time?

Because science is a process. And some scientific data are absolute. You wouldn't problematize that the human heart looks how it's painted to look like, despite never having seen it, now would you?

You seem to be implying that agreeing with "science" now is a standard for truth. But the next generation of atheists will condemn that very doctrine when they see it doesn't agree with their current version of "truth". Thus I find your demand of Christians naive at best and disingenuous at worst.

Read above. At least I have never claimed to know everything for certain.

I bet you were thinking that your post was so solid no Christian could respond. lol. It seems like none of them thought the effort in first educating you was worth it. I'm different.

I didn't at all thought no Christians would answer. Christianity is a wide ideology which has been defended by scholars for 2000 years. Christians have answers on pretty much everything.

Yes. I am only interested in the answers the Bible has. And only those answers do I call "Christian Doctrine". You are free to differ.

It would be quite absurd for Christians to have lived along with native Americans for 500 years without ever wondering when the natives arrived in the Americas, now wouldn't it?

Just as I predicted. You will now try to get me to play your YEC partner.

Calm down now. I just said there should be scientific data from a YEC perspective about the arrival of aborignials and natives. I didn't demand you to take their role.

Why would Christians wonder when there is no time frame given in the Bible? Why would Christians think the Earth was only 6,000 to 10,000 years old?

Take it with them. I'm not a Christian.

I know your YEC arguments are unfit for anyone other than YECs. I am not a YEC so you'll probably want to find one with whom to debate.

You are misunderstanding this completely. I am not demanding you to take on their role.

Have a good day.

You too.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 12:16:22 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 12:04:11 AM, Jovian wrote:
Studies show that homo sapiens first arrived in the American continents 15 000 years ago, and to Australia as far back as 50 000 years ago. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org... ) So if the Earth is 6000 years old, there would be many questions regarding these human migrations.

* At what historical period in the Out Of Eden theory is it supposed that the native Americans arrived in the Americas, and when is it supposed that the aboriginal Australians arrived in Australia?
* Are there proofs showing the supposed claims would be true?
* Would it even be possible for humans to have migrated to these continents in such a short timespan?

A few points on this:

1: there is no demonstrably accurate measure of time beyond history. Why? Because there is no way of knowing what may have caused radiation decay rates to change. The events leading up to the flood would, for a start, have removed the protective layer of water from round the earth ad allowed radiation levels hitting the earth (and leaving it) to increase possibly exponentially.

2: Who says the earth is only 6,000 years old? The Bible certainly doesn't. Scripture deliberately gives us no indication whatever of the age of the earth.

3: As the Bible tells us, the earth only had one continent originally, but that continent divided post flood. (Genesis 10:25-26). Geology confirms that fact. Therefore animals and human may have been all across that one continent as it split, which would mean no migration was needed. Also don't forget the continents are still moving even now as the tectonic plates sub-duct under each other. That is also why Everest is still getting higher, albeit only about 4mm per year.