Friday, February 9, 2018

Twelve Quodlibeticals on Young Earth Creationism (quora)

How did the biblical story of creation survive the flood?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Self Employed at Writer and Composer
Answered 9m ago
Noah had tradition from Adam.

I used to have the Haydock comment to Genesis 3 available, where he consideres that the “minimal overlap” number of generations from Adam to Moses were 8.

With a LXX chronology, it might be more like 12.

Adam can have spoken with Mahalaleel 795 - 1690 AM, but not with Jared born 960 AM. (1, 2)

Mahalaleel can have spoken to Noah 1642 - 2592 AM (2, 3)

Noah 600 B.F. - 350 A.F. can have spoken to Shelah 265 - 725 A.F. (3, 4)

Shelah can have spoken to Reu 659 - 998 A.F. (4, 5)

Reu can have spoken to Nahor 921 - 1129 A.F. (5, 6)

Nahor could of course speak to Abraham 1070 – 1245 A. F. (6, 7)

And so on.

Furthermore, the early chapters of Genesis, up to and including 11 were all very short. This means, each was possible to learn by heart, nearly as easy as learning Nicene Creed by heart.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
2m ago
I thought I had mentioned this more than once:

“First Genesis chapters were written down or memorised (for chapters 1 - 7 each is as long as 2.5*Nicene Creed, which is a text even non-specialists know how to memorise if instructed), then they were collected by Moses into a single book.”

With Alan Whistler / Alan the Atheist on AronRa's Video (but at least once, here)

14.II.2018 with new comments

Lee Wm. Gaudry
4d ago · 1 upvote
from Hans-Georg Lundahl
If you have ever played the parlour game"telephone" you'll know how unlikely it is that the entire legend remained true to the original through 5 generations never mind 8,12 or more. And just because someone could have spoken to another, it doesn't mean they did.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Just now
Upvoted for visibility.

[A set phrase which between quorans means "I upvoted what I just answered to make it more visible" and often implying "and not because I really thought it was good"]

If you have heard anything about how catechism is done or how things like, in RC Church, Apostolic Creed, Our Father, Hail Mary, Glory Be and Ten Commandments are memorised, or in Orthodox Church even Nicene Creed, which is longer than the Apostolic one, you would have known better than to compare it to a telephone game.

It is first of all not very likely any one learning these set pieces of short prose in simple syntax could memorise wrong, after a deliberate effort of memorisation, second not likely if someone remembered wrong he would stand uncorrected by others and third very unlikely someone NOT having learned things properly were the one chosen to carry the tradition on by teaching others these things.

I have compared the pre-Flood and up-to-Flood seven first chapters of Genesis to the Nicene Creed in text mass. Each of them is, in medium, 2.5 times the Nicene Creed.

So, memorisation effort is very unlikely to have failed due to overload even.

I have now not spoken of how many actual generations there were, but the minimal number of overlapping ones.

This means that before Adam had a chance to speak to Mahalaleel, he would have had a chance to speak to Seth, Enos, Cainan and their siblings and their wives. Supposing Mahalaleel somehow had memorised the texts of Genesis 2 and 3 wrong on hearing them from Adam, very unlikely, he could have been corrected by Seth for another 212 years, by Enos for another 410 years, by Cainan for another 605 years.

Before Mahalaleel had a chance to speak to Noah, he would have had a chance to speak to Jared, Henoch, Mathuselah and Lamech. He died when Noah was 48 years, but after that Noah could have been corrected by Jared for another 232 years, by Methuselah for another 566 years, by Lamech for another 517 years.

This is what I mean by “minimal overlap”. Someone having heard the person he’s corrected about before hearing the corrections.

When we get down to Abraham and later, there is no real problem with supposing they used writing. A whole tribe was certainly capable of transporting a few clay tablets or scrolls as well as utensils. And this takes care of anything after Genesis 11.

As for genealogies in Genesis 4, 5 and 11, these were obviously texts handled by incremental tradition : each generation added to the physical genealogy was also added to the textual one.

How you can compare such a situation to a telephone game is beyond me.

“And just because someone could have spoken to another, it doesn't mean they did.”

What exact grandfather or greatgrandfather will let anyone stop him even these days? It is not as if Adam suffered from CPS taking away his children from him so he could not pass tradition on!

What parts of the Bible are lies (said to be true but contradicts facts)? What parts are historical facts? What parts are just literature (like psalms, songs, poems, and hymns)?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Self Employed at Writer and Composer
Answered 5h ago
“What parts of the Bible are lies (said to be true but contradicts facts)?”

None at all.

If “facts” are contradicted by it, they are false facts.

“What parts are historical facts?”

All that is historical, and in prophecy whatever is not metaphor (there is some of that too).

“What parts are just literature (like psalms, songs, poems, and hymns)?”

A very minor part, in quantity, unless you include instrictions on how to live. Then you would gain perhaps up to 50 % of the text, not sure.

Can a Christian be a Darwinist?

[The question has been shortened]

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?
Answered Thu
Can a Christian be a Darwinist?

Ultimately no, both as to common descent of all kinds, and as to descent of men from apes and as to mechanism involving fitness quasi automatically advancing reproduction.

In cases of inconsistency, however, yes.

Or read a book about it at the least?

Yes, most books on Darwinism are not on the Index.

I do recomment reading some of the Creationist books about why Darwinism is wrong.

Here is one:

The Greatest Hoax On Earth? Refuting Dawkins on Evolution

Why do Creationists think that evolution requires the extinction of ancestor or cousin species?

Answer requested
by Michael Bailey

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Blog : "". Debating evolutionists for 15 years +.
Answered Thu
Creationists in general do not think this.

Some seem to take this as a consequence of “natural selection”.

If natural selection favoured man and disfavoured staying a monkey, why are there still monkeys would be a rough translation of what these people are trying to say.

Or perhaps as a consequence of beneficent mutation potential.

If monkeys had the potential to mutate to man, why didn’t they all?

Obviously, this second version reveals a misunderstanding of what Evolutionists are actually saying about the potential for beneficent mutations.

However, if Creationists individually misunderstanding Evolution were to invalidate Creationism, for the same reason Evolutionists individually misunderstanding Creationism would invalidate Evolutionism. There is a misunderstanding of Creationism as if it were stating the complete fixity of Linnean species, perhaps entertained as a voluntary strawman.

Charles Jack
20h ago
There is no “Evolutionism”. The theory f evolution is an essential, evidence supported, and true part of biology.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Just now
There are astronomers who consider Heliocentrism the same way - but they will still call it Heliocentrism.

Are Creationist also Flat Earthers?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Blog : "". Debating evolutionists for 15 years +.
Answered Wed
Some are, most are not.

If All of humanity really did come from Adam and Eve, wouldn't we all be retarded due to generations of in-breeding?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?
Answered Wed
Retarded is not from inbreeding, but from trisomy, usually.

Inbreeding causes double exemplars of bad locus mutations. If the gene is recessive, that is how it surfaces. Colour blind, haemophiliac, sure, that is inbreeding, or for some, in males having a carrier mother.

The generation after Adam and Eve had no such mutations.

Trisomies have been observed in same populations of US as inbreeding, like Ozark rural areas, but the cause is other. Trisomy is usually for a mother being too old when begetting a child. Underlying cause of both, poverty: delays marriage for some and restricts travel for finding marriage partners for others.

If Adam and Eve were the first human beings on earth, does it mean we are all products of incest?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Self Employed at Writer and Composer
Answered Tue
[Originally Answered:]
[If Adam and Eve were the first humans, aren’t we all byproducts of incest?]
[Remove Banner]
Since Adam and Eve were the first humans and the only first humans, we are all products of inbreeding.

That is NOT the same thing as the sin of incest (the generation just after them had a dispensation for sibling marriage and the two after for uncle and niece marriage).

Inbreeding is not bad, unless both people involved have a bad mutation in common.

Inbreeding does NOT cause mental troubles or deficiencies like Downs or Cri de chat, these are more causes by mother being too old.

Do you think Adam and Eve were born as Tamil-speaking creatures?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Blog : "". Debating evolutionists for 15 years
Answered Tue
“Do you think Adam and Eve were born as Tamil-speaking creatures?”

No, for two reasons:

  • 1) they were not born, but created adults;
  • 2) their language was very much more probably Hebrew than Tamil.

How do creationists reconcile flood mythology with Chinese history that was to have happened at the same time?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
History buff since childhood. CSL & Eco added to Medieval lore. + Classics.
Answered Tue
While I would perhaps not call the word “mythology” very appropriate about the Flood account, in the sense of not cavilling at formulation but actually answering the question as such, here is an answer I wrote:

Recorded History of China Too Old For Us?

Do you think there are consent issues with the story of Adam and Eve?

Answer requested
by Leah Sloane Petersen

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Blog : "". Debating evolutionists for 15 years
Answered Tue

  • 1) Adam and Eve certainly married on day one of their existence, but they were created as fully competent and sinless adults. This means they were better suited to know what they were doing than any adults marrying today.
  • 2) As they were not yet sinners, they trusted God and obviously gave their consent to His arranged marriage. It is not as if He forced them.

Does that answer the question?

If creation has been proven false, why don't we bury it and put the matter to rest once and for all?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Blog : "". Debating evolutionists for 15 years +.
Answered Jan 31
"If creation has been proven false,"

It hasn't. But answering the rest, I'll suppose for a moment the truth were false and had been proven so.

"why don't we bury, put the matter to rest once and for all?"

Because there are those guys who actually will not believe those proofs to be definite. This means that there is no human social unanimity on how to treat the matter.

Also, among Evolutionists, who "know the truth", there is no unanimity on how to treat Creationists.

Some debate, some want to treat Creationists like people one could "section", a word I just learned and which I suppose means to put them in mental hospital.

So, the answer to the matter is, disunion among men.

Back to what I really believe : this disunion is predictable by Creationism, since it includes Tower of Babel (Genesis 11).

What continent were Adam and Eve on first?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Self Employed at Writer and Composer
Answered Mon
While the original pre-Flood world may have been one continent, the question can still make sense, insofar as one can ask where that ground is today and what continent it is on.

The four rivers divided from the river from Paradise are not literally seen after the Flood as branching out from a single river, but two of them are very firmly identified as Euphrates and Tigris (Phrat and Hiddekel) two others have more tentative and diverging interpretations, of which one would typically be the Nile, and one could be either Ganges or Danube.

One river has also been identified by Muslims with Syr-Daria or Amu-Daria.

Note, it is not necessary for such identification that a riverbed sloped same direction pre- and post-Flood.

If one of the rivers was Danube, it was arguably a reverse Danube, going from where Black Sea is now (and having gone through the Black Sea) to a mouth at Sea Shore in or near Vienna. The direction I would have from the fact that all of Danube is further West than any other river, and so would have to float East-West rather than reverse, the mouth in Vienna I have from palaeontology.

No comments: