The Biblical worldview

Post Reply New Topic

Hello,

The Biblical worldview is only disproven if modern scientific methods are 100% accurate in their resolution, and theoretical model basis. I believe that although we have been able to crack part of the puzzle that is natural law, we have barely scratched the surface, and evidently have not completed the scientific method, as the fields of macro physics, and atomic/subatomic physics are still not bound by a unifying theory.

Hence, I believe that the Biblical model is still remains validated as historical canon, as it is entirely uncontradictory to itself over a 4000 year timespan, and is the longest reputable literary canon we have received in the modern day.

Therefore, when examining both scientific and testimonial data, a firm foundational context I apply is that of the Biblical canon.

In the days of Seth, son of Adam, Gods/Elohim/angels, came down from heaven, and saw the daughters of men, and saw that they were beautiful, and took of all whom they chose and came into them, so that they bore children, and these children were the Nephelim of old; men of renown.

In the flood, all of these mighty men were slain, however, whether their genetic carried on through descendants marrying into the godly line, is not explicitly stated.
After the flood, Noah had three sons.
Ham defiled his father, and was cursed to serve his two brothers, Shem and Japheth, by Noah.
The name Ham means "hot" or "sunburnt" leading many scholars to believe he was black.
Hams descendant nations were Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, and Canaan.
From Shem, Hams brother, son of Noah, came Abraham, who became Israel in his descendent Jacob.
Israel was enslaved by Egypt, and then defeated them. Israel then invaded the land of Canaan, which had been promised to Abraham and his descendants as an everlasting inheritance by the Almighty God, and conquered/exterminated vast swathes of Canaanite territory.

I believe that the current tribe that lives at the intersection of the White and Blue Nile tributaries, are the descendants of the tribe from which the Pharaohs came.
They claim that the Pharaohs were able to become giants.
The Bible claims that Canaan also was a land of giants, first according to the scouts which went into the land.

It is my belief, that taking many of the archeological evidence, and conceding the authority of our relatively temporally expanded scientific timeline to the Biblical timeline in regard to the sequence and time period of events, we find that certain sequences identified in the scientific timeline, rhyme/correlate with biblical events.
For example:
According to the scientific timeline, a sequence of concurrent events is as so:
Around the same time as archeological evidence suggests that Homo Sapiens Sapiens leaves Africa and encounters Neanderthals, Autistic traits begin to be identified in stone tools artifacts.
Evidence from modern intra-genus hybridization studies suggests that hybrids are categorically larger than either of their parents, and do not inherit the sum of the traits of both species in their genome and epigenome, but rather the interplay of these two sets of genetic markers.
Ancient genetic studies of Neanderthals and Denisovan, have identified some genes that have correlation to mental and physical health risks and rewards in modern homo sapiens populations.
2016 research indicates some Neanderthal males might not have viable male offspring with some AMH females. This could explain the reason why no modern man has a Neanderthal Y chromosome.
However, there is also no female Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA in modern humans, so what scientists believe what was most likely was a Neanderthal man impregnated a Sapiens woman, and bore a female child, or if a male Neanderthal baby was being born, it would either kill the mother or require caesarian, due to the size of the skull being too large to fit through the birth canal.
Modern Autistic genetic studies show that there are a variety of known and unknown genetic changes, that are correlated with Autistic traits. Notably are a set of mutated Denisovan genes present in modern human populations.
A risk factor for being undiagnosed as Autistic is not being a man, as females seem to exhibit different intense interests, fewer stereotyped behaviors, and are more likely to mask social deficits.
Their behavior can also be misinterpreted as ‘shyness, bossiness, or perfectionism’.
Hence, I believe that Autism comes from interbreeding from between the descendants of the sons of Noah, each of whom when combined with their wives, bore children who were biologically different enough to be regarded as separate species.
The flood probably decayed all DNA that the earth swallowed up, as suggested by the fossil record.

Last edited by Cornflake on 19 Oct 2022, 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.: Split from the 2014 thread "Aparently we are alien hybrids" [sic] in GAD

the stuff in the bible seems to only go back 6000 years, whereas the neanderthals are supposed to go back much further than that.

The original post fails to drop the other shoe, and fails to make its point.

But he SEEMS to be saying that the Biblical references to "the sons of god mating with female humans" and creating "the Nephilim" (who were giants and 'men of great renown') are distorted memories of an actual prehistoric phenomenon of anatomical modern human females getting it on with Neanderthal, and Denisovan, males to create...the autistic population of today!

Kind of like claiming that Paul Bunyan (the 100 foot tall lumber jack of legend) was real, and that he was a time traveler from the lost kingdom of Atlantis. you're explaining one unproven thing with another unproven thing...actually with a whole string of unproven things.

Regarding the age of the earth and the age of mankind, we are relying on man made measuring tools which are calibrated by the thoughts of man, so the accuracy may be way out and we would not know.

Or we have the Bible to go by and other historical records and beliefs.

When one examines everything one can find from all directions, I believe that it really comes down to these two factors. Does one believe that man is right or that God is right?

i mean if the bible is true there would be no such creatures as neanderthals or sapien anything.

The skulls found would be just different types of human that differ due to diversity.

the science narrative has neanderthals living as a seperate group for many years then interbreeding over many years. It just cant fit with the bible.

Science has identified hominid genomes that are not the same species according to the current scientific definition of a species. However, there are some exceptions to this rule.
For example. Lions and Tigers, Horses and Donkeys, polar bears and grizzly bears, and now Homo Sapiens Sapiens and Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis, and also Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis with Denisovan.

Scientifically, as of present day, 3 distinct lineages have been discovered, which the present population is made up of today.
If you were to map modern human populations phenotypically to their most resemblent ancient hominid cousin, Asians would be most similar to Denisovans and the rest of the non-African population would be most resemblent of
the Neanderthal. The African population is least resemblent of either the Denisovan, or the Neanderthal, and it is suspected that a third ancient hominid population contributed there.
This aligns with the Biblical Narrative of the wives of Shem Ham and Japheth. 3 distinct peoples. Maybe even scientifically separate species. This also explains why inbreeding was only forbidden at Mount Sinai, because before then each person was so genetically diverse that breeding with your sister was safer the further you go into the past.



Regarding the proof of the evolutionary timeline, there is no genetic proof beyond a few isolated data points, only fossils with radioactive properties.
These radioactive properties are matched to an equation of radioactive decay, derived from the measurement of ancient and modern specimines. What they do not take into account, is the significant leeching effect of the flood, which was not only water from the earth, but water from heaven, the potential properties of which are (as far as I know) unknown in the historical record.



To re-use an analogy that is used by evolutionists to date rock sediment layers, I give you the analogy of the rubbish can.
God created the heavens and the earth.
Man created rubbish for 1656 years.
God turned the world into a rubbish processing facility with the intent of utterly destroying all the rubbish until there was nothing left.
The world has now been artificially aged by its creators wrath.

Biblical worldview is a stretch if you consider how many interpretations exist alongside each other, with neither being able to convince the others of being objective truth.

Thus you gotta specify which interpretation of the bible you're going with first, and based on what language translation of the bible, as there are major differences between each. The Hebrew original was translated to greek, and from greek to latin, and finally from latin to various national languages. A lot was lost and changed in transition, and then various theologies and understandings developed based on translation and not the original.

The Bible doesnt even agree with itself.

There are two Genisis stories, that have totally different chronologies.

The canonical Gospels of the New Testament differ on details of the life of Christ.

On top of that the Bible has many flaws in internal logic. If you take the Bible literally then after the Flood humans spread outward from the resting place of the Ark on Mt. Ararat in what is now eastern Turkey and repopulated the whole world (even the Americas) in only a few decades. And animals also spread out the same way, at the same velocity. Within a few generations after the flood of 2300 BC humans and animals had repopulated the world. But somehow each continent ended up with a different set of flora and fauna. The explanation given usually is that humans took the animals with them to the far continents, but for some reason humans on different continents stocked each continent with different flora and fauna.

That would mean that the ancestors of the Australian Aboriginals took the Australian death adder snake, and the inland taipan snake, with them to Australia, but did NOT take cattle, sheep, and chickens with them. They considered the two deadliest snakes on earth to be useful? Or to be cuddly pets? But did not see the value of the chickens, cows, and sheep, that would not be introduced to Australia until thousands of years later by Australia's British colonizers?

In the old testament it sometimes says 'everyone in the city went to see what was going on'
It tends to talk in definite terms like that a lot.
I'm wondering if that was the writing style to not use words like 'most people in the city went to...'
Maybe it was the local area that was flooded like some scientists say.

Well duhhhh.... Of Course the Flood of Genisis couldve been just a local flood in Mesopotamia. Just like Troy, and the Trojan War, in Homer's Iliad seems to have been proven to have been real by Henrich Schlieman finding Troy. But that has nothing to do with the subject.

The topic is do you accept that Evolution is wrong, and that the World began in 4000 BC? Or do acknowledge that the world must be some billions of years older than six thousand years? If you advocate the former than you have to take the Bible as a literal account. If the Bible says that 'the world was flooded' then it was the whole planet that got flooded. And if it says that the waters drowned the tops of every mountain then mount Everest was drowned too.

Last edited by naturalplastic on 22 Oct 2022, 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Both the bible and the Quran make fatal errors with regard to the solar system, astronomy, biology, evolution and the earth. You would expect an all-knowing god to not make such mistakes if they are the literal word of god.

The Bible isn't a science book, and shouldn't ever be used as such.

That is a difficult question

Question. Was mount Everest as tall as it is today in those days?

The original post seems very woolly to me, and doesn't appear to present any take-home message or get to the point, and the OP didn't pose a specific question.

The short answer is yes, it was the same height then.

The long answer is:the Himalayas are rising at one cm a year. According to the King James the Flood happened around 2300 BC. So it would have been 43 meters shorters back then. Forty three meters is to the height of Everest (8700 meters) as a third of an inch is to the stature of a six foot man. Not noticeable.

Last edited by naturalplastic on 28 Oct 2022, 7:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.