| Author |
Message |
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 669 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 11:55 am: |      |
Oh, so you admit Genesis is already thrown out before you started debating Genesis is the document under question. Remember? The flood story is in Genesis. You are asserting that the flood story found in Genesis is true. I am asserting that it is false. If you attempt to use the claims in Genesis to prove Genesis what kind of fallacy would you be committing? Think HARD Bob. ... I could sort of feel something like that radiating out of your karma!!!! I was unaware that you were into eastern mysticism.
|
   
Bob Sands (Bob_2)
member Username: Bob_2
Post Number: 9000 Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 12:15 pm: |      |
The premise of Davidson was the Bible proving Creation using literary devices and reference in other places in the Bible than just Genesis. So are you a promonent of throwing out those books that refer to creation as I have suggested you do???? “I am not an Athiest... .”“I cannot believe that God plays dice with the world.” -- Albert Einstein |
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 671 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 12:35 pm: |      |
The premise of Davidson was the Bible proving Creation using literary devices and reference in other places in the Bible than just Genesis. That is a false statement. Please reread the premise of Davidson's piece. Alternatively, you might try emailing him. Once he stops laughing he might tell you that you do not exhibit a 3rd grader's reading comprehension. |
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 672 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 12:41 pm: |      |
Here... I'll help you out so you don't look moronic to one of your "favorite thinkers". quote:The extent of the Genesis Flood has been vigorously debated by biblical scholars. For those who accept a recent creation week of six literal consecutive, twenty-four-days, a universal Flood is necessary to explain the existence of the geologic column. The thesis of this study is that only the traditional interpretation which posits a literal, universal, world-wide Genesis Flood does full justice to all the relevant biblical data. The author summarizes twenty-two lines of biblical evidence — including terminological, thematic, contextual, grammatical-syntactical, literary-structural, logical-conceptual, theological, canonical, and typological which support the universality of the Genesis Flood.
There are two camps of interpretation about the EXTENT of the flood: 1. Local flood 2. Universal (he can't call it global as the writers did not know they lived on a globe) He is going to use 22 lines from the Bible to PROVE THAT THE BIBLE TEACHES A UNIVERSAL FLOOD INSTEAD OF A LOCALIZED FLOOD. That has nothing to do with proving that a flood occurred or that creation occurred or anything of the sort. He is trying to use the Bible to prove a BIBLICAL premise which is necessary for him to reach the SDA conclusion that the Biblical Creation was 6 literal days. This whole paper of Davidson's is only one small part in a larger agenda about the interpretation of the Creation to be 6 DAYS. |
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 673 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 12:49 pm: |      |
PS... If you had read much of your "favorite thinker" you might have never jumped to your hasty misinterpretation. NOTE that I said "might". I am not sure what you might have concluded as your thinking is seriously flawed. ("seriously flawed" is a conclusion supported by evidence in your posts) |
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 674 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 1:23 pm: |      |
We'll see as we use other than evolutionary theorists. Good night guys!!!! Here's a THEIST, SDA even, that acknowledges that the Bible story is WRONG BASED ON EVIDENCE. And he wrote it in 1945, long before all the evidence that we have today. I believe that the "Kahun Papyrus" was found in the late 1800's.
quote:Scholarly Articles Written by SDA Theologians on Genesis 1-11 First compiled by Warren H. Johns, November 1998. Updated by Jim Gibson, January 2006. - limited to scholarly, exegetical and theological studies prepared by theologians - does not include general devotional material or that written by scientists ****************** Wood, Lynn H. "The Kahun Papyrus and the date of the Twelfth Dynasty", Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 99(Oct., 1945):5-9. — This does not deal directly with the chronology of Genesis 11, but it establishes Egyptian chronology on a secure basis, using the Sothic Cycle. Thus the Old Kingdom was said to have begun about 2800 B.C. This being true, the Flood could not possibly have been in 2348 B.C. as proposed by Ussher.
http://www.grisda.org/resources/GRI_ref-sda-theo.htm#genealogies Don... is this the Lynn Wood that Lynn Wood Hall was named for at Southern? |
   
Bob Sands (Bob_2)
member Username: Bob_2
Post Number: 9006 Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 2:13 pm: |      |
Gibberish!!
quote:Determining the date of a heliacal rise of Sothis has been shown to be difficult, especially considering the need to know the exact latitude of the observation.[1] Another problem is that because the Egyptian calendar loses one day every four years, a heliacal rise will take place on the same day for four years in a row, and any observation of that rise can date to any of those four years, making the observation not extremely precise.[1] A number of criticisms have been leveled against the reliability of dating by the Sothic cycle. Some are serious enough to warrant consideration (for example, was the civil calendar unchanged through the thousands of years of Egyptian history?), while others are not (for example, there is no explicit mention of the Sothic cycle in ancient Egyptian writing). Some have recently claimed that the Theran eruption marks the beginning of the XVIII dynasty in Egypt, and because dendrochronologists believe it took place in 1626 BC, that the Sothic cycle is off by 50–80 years. The claim that the Thera eruption is in fact the subject matter of the Tempest Stele of Ahmose I is disputed, and most Egyptologists reject this problem outright. Egypt maintained diplomatic ties with other foreign powers, which allows for comparative chronologies to be made, and it is virtually impossible to move the entire chronology of the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyria, and Babylon earlier by over half a century. Peter James' book Centuries of Darkness (London, 1991: [1]) is a good introduction to attacks on Sothic dating from the perspective of the revisionists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sothic_cycle “I am not an Athiest... .”“I cannot believe that God plays dice with the world.” -- Albert Einstein |
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 676 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 2:18 pm: |      |
So you cry and whine about using wiki quotes, I use an SDA quote, and now you quote wiki to discredit the SDA. Later dude. You are insane. |
   
Bob Sands (Bob_2)
member Username: Bob_2
Post Number: 9009 Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 2:27 pm: |      |
I never claimed to believe in all SDA sources, but some author that gives up that easily and uses a faulty system, is not who I would quote for my arguements. Neal's definition of insane - not using just SDA sources. OOPS, can't be that because he used other sources to talk about the 11th millenium BCE when we were using SDA sources. Who's insane in this conversation anyway. “I am not an Athiest... .”“I cannot believe that God plays dice with the world.” -- Albert Einstein |
   
John Alfke (John8verse32)
member Username: John8verse32
Post Number: 4208 Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 8:12 pm: |      |
insane? probably not. ...religious crack pot???...probably its frightening: Half the people I know are below average. (apparently present company included on some threads here) |
   
Don Sands (Don)
member Username: Don
Post Number: 4988 Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 8:25 pm: |      |
Don... is this the Lynn Wood that Lynn Wood Hall was named for at Southern? I think so. Here is why:
quote:Lynn Wood Hall & Heritage Museum Constructed in 1924 and called College Hall, this structure was renamed Lynn Wood Hall in 1945 to honor Lynn H. Wood, president in 1914-15 and 1918-22.
Notice the date, 1945. His journal citation also dates from 1945; same initials, too. Here is some info on Lynn H. Wood:1910-11 He taught Science, Mathematics and Building Construction at the Foreign Missions Seminary, Washington, D.C. Source #1; Source #2 1912 He helped establish the church in Baltimore, Maryland. Source; my Adventist History blog post. 1913 He was at Union College in Nebraska. Source; The Adventist History blog post. 1914 He was in charge of the Southern Training School, Graysville, Tennessee. Source; The Adventist History blog post. 1915 February 18. A fire occurred in the girls' dorm; two injuries, no loss of life. He reported the incident in the Review and Herald. Source; The Adventist History blog post. The September 23, 1915 Review and Herald states that he was Educational and Missionary Volunteer secretary of the Southern Union Conference.
Some further thoughts: This is just a beginning of a biographical timeline for Lynn H. Wood. I am impressed with his clarity of thought. He writes expressively, as well. Re: our discussions about EGW; Lynn Wood demonstrates his creative use of EGW's writings. He used them to motivate precise action. Eg. His work in establishing a church in Baltimore and his rationale for specific education projects found their beginnings in her counsels. More later, I hope.
|
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 677 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2008 - 5:09 am: |      |
Don Thanks for the information. Lynn Wood Hall was the location for the class for which I wrote the paper on the Wedding Feast Wine Miracle. Guess that's been thirty years ago now. An anecdote.... over the years in Collegedale I heard questions about why such a large building was constructed from wood (it was deteriorating in the '70's- may not even be there now). The local legend was that it was built in a flimsy method due to the belief that it would be needed for only a short period of time. The End of Time was going to occur ANY DAY. They build out of concrete and bricks now. |
   
Don Sands (Don)
member Username: Don
Post Number: 4993 Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2008 - 6:19 am: |      |
may not even be there now According to the heritage link in the prior post, in 2006 it was a museum. Adventism has changed in concrete ways, huh; even its architecture. I wonder if anyone has made a study of those structural changes. The earlier buildings at our school here were large wooden structures. They both were demolished and replaced back in the 80's or before. These DJVU sites #2 #3 Notice the building behind the people. offer pictures of key structures at our colleges. Lynn Wood Hall was the location for the class for which I wrote the paper on the Wedding Feast Wine Miracle. Did you keep a copy of your paper?
|
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 679 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2008 - 6:37 am: |      |
Did you keep a copy of your paper? No. That was back in the "carbon paper" days. I never imagined they would destroy it. If I had considered destruction as a possible outcome I would have made a copy. That paper was the result of many many hours of research in the library. By the way, that was a very good library for the size of the school. As you recently remarked some of the resources for good research were incredible. In my case, they had sufficient resources to lead to my conclusions in that paper. Maybe they wished the library had been SMALLER after looking through my bibliography!
 |
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 680 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2008 - 6:39 am: |      |
...pictures of key structures.... Thanks for those links. The photos are very interesting. |
   
Bob Sands (Bob_2)
member Username: Bob_2
Post Number: 9054 Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, August 31, 2008 - 1:38 am: |      |
http://www.atomorrow.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=8&post=86966#POST86966 Gibberish Good for a laugh, eh Neal, but still Gibberish. “I am not an Athiest... .”“I cannot believe that God plays dice with the world.” -- Albert Einstein |
   
Bob Sands (Bob_2)
member Username: Bob_2
Post Number: 9055 Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, August 31, 2008 - 1:43 am: |      |
http://www.atomorrow.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=8&post=86921#POST86921 I said it was based on literary evidence if you read my opening remarks, he's not a scientist, but a theologian. Thought you knew that. Thought he did a fair job as a Theologian and using literary references from the Bible. This post referenced above, Gibberish. “I am not an Athiest... .”“I cannot believe that God plays dice with the world.” -- Albert Einstein |
   
Neal Walls (Nwalls)
member Username: Nwalls
Post Number: 692 Registered: 5-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, August 31, 2008 - 6:05 am: |      |
I said it was based on literary evidence.... The problem is not what his argument was BASED on, but what Davidson was PROVING from that evidence. You have asserted that he was proving the flood. That is false. He was proving that the Bible spoke of a universal flood versus the claim of some apologists that the Bible story could have been a local flood. His paper had nothing to do with whether the flood actually happened. |