tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post116134975588656436..comments2007-02-08T06:34:42.977-06:00Todd Bolenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06156730661243501832tbolen91@bibleplaces.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1165757814217486622006-12-10T07:36:00.000-06:002006-12-10T07:36:00.000-06:00Dear David Ben Ariel -<BR/><BR/>We are in the period of the desecration as foretold in the Bible. Believe! Believe! For G-d will restore the Temple.<BR/><BR/>If the desecration was foretold in the Scriptures, then we can be assured that the restoration will also come.<BR/><BR/>May G-d bless you, indeed.Hepzibah The Watchmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10991804621412372329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1164045505347653952006-11-20T11:58:00.000-06:002006-11-20T11:58:00.000-06:00Sad to see folks get hung up on somebody's speculation about the age of artifacts rather than the whole idea that the Nazi-Muslims, with complete disregard for history and religion, dumped further archaeological evidence to prove Jewish attachment to the Temple Mount in the Kidron Valley and continue to practice religious discrimination daily against Jews and Christians who want to pray at the <I>Temple</I> Mount. May the Nazi-Muslim occupation of the Temple Mount soon be history.David Ben-Arielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17172111596385523999noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1161966220336848852006-10-27T11:23:00.000-05:002006-10-27T11:23:00.000-05:00By the way, it would be helpful to define "scholar", Todd. Is it only limited to someone who teaches in a school? If so, I'm certainly not one. Or were you only thinking of scholars with History degrees?<BR/><BR/>Also, let's agree that Young-Earth includes anyone who believes God created everything less than 100k years ago with no Genesis 1 gaps since most creationists will disagree over 6k, 10k, or 12k years ago. Genesis genealogy-gaps are open for interpretation (I personally don't see any reason to believe there are any significant gaps; i.e., > 1k years' worth). The key point is that they believe God created it all, & that they disagree with the majority scientific opinion of millions/billions of years of evolution (cosmological & biological). This is also distinct from those who believe in Genesis 1 gaps to accommodate Old Earth theories. The AiG page I cited in my previous post links to <A HREF="http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/about/faith.asp" REL="nofollow">this statement page--see section D number 2 (also 4)</A>. This opens the door for the aforementioned Young-Earth scientists to believe in 6k-12k, but certainly not millions/billions.G.M. Grenahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16715203546886901296noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1161960637791574012006-10-27T09:50:00.000-05:002006-10-27T09:50:00.000-05:00Todd, AiG maintains a <A HREF="http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/bios/" REL="nofollow">list of degreed scientists from a wide range of disciplines who opt for a 6k history</A>. In one of your comments, you said you knew of "not one [Young Earth] scholar", but I believe you're starting with the bias that anyone who believes in a 6k history is immediately disqualified as a scholar. Correct me if I'm wrong. Check out some of the scientific articles published by the <A HREF="http://www.icr.org/" REL="nofollow">Institute for Creation Research</A>. I have a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from a major university (WVU), & I know stamped jar handles well enough to be considered a scholar on that narrow ANE topic. For years I accepted the concept of "pre-history", but have recently rejected it after actually delving into it & studying the subject for myself with a clean slate. But just so that you will no longer be able to say you don't know of any 6k historian/scholar, check out <A HREF="http://www.kennedycommentary.org/default.asp?pg=djk" REL="nofollow">James Kennedy's credentials at the bottom of this page of his website</A>. Though you may not believe it right now, all of your concerns about Egyptian/Mesopotamian dating are answerable. And for clarity, let me emphasize that I'm not saying Young-Earth is right & all others are wrong; I'm saying Young-Earth is viable & tenable based on scientific evidence.G.M. Grenahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16715203546886901296noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1161952204082194762006-10-27T07:30:00.000-05:002006-10-27T07:30:00.000-05:00apologies: Mr. Sarfati's article may be accessed at: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/v17n3_Chronogenealogies.pdfRoberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16445493105593170535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1161952104879389762006-10-27T07:28:00.000-05:002006-10-27T07:28:00.000-05:00Todd,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your note. The issue of the apparent gaps in the genealogies of Genesis 11 are interesting indeed. However, there is an interesting body of linquistic evidence that explains why these apparent gaps may not be gaps at all. <BR/><BR/>Perhaps one of the most intriguing publications is Jonathan Sarfati's 2003 article titled Biblical Chronogeneologies:<BR/>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i2/beginning.asp<BR/><BR/>Regards.Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16445493105593170535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1161933413456864972006-10-27T02:16:00.000-05:002006-10-27T02:16:00.000-05:00Robert - there are many who believe in a young earth, but none who hold to a 4000 BC date of creation (at least not one scholar I can think of). Young earth adherents are usually defined as those who believe the world was created 10,000 years ago or less. It simply is untenable to suggest that the world was created in 4000 and the flood was in 2500 (think pyramids and written history and other elements of civilization which are easily dated to before 2500). And the apparent gaps in the genealogies of Genesis 11 indicate that the Bible doesn't suggest a 4000 date either. For more on that, see the appendix in Whitcomb and Morris, The Genesis Flood. In any case, you certainly cannot expect secular scholars to hold to a biblical view of the creation of the earth.Todd Bolenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06156730661243501832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1161905018737410922006-10-26T18:23:00.000-05:002006-10-26T18:23:00.000-05:00Todd,<BR/><BR/>I enjoy your blog and have great respect your opinion, but - with all due respect, the the most conservative Bible scholars (of both the Christian and Jewish traditions) do indeed hold that scripture does not permit placing the age of the Earth at more than 6,000 years. Indeed, most estimates based on a literal interpretation of the Hebrew Bible, and in particular the belief that the Hebrew word "yom" refers to a literal 24 hour day, "cluster around 6,000 years." <BR/><BR/>We also have the surprising testimony of nature. Here's one article that that details why nature mandates a young Earth:<BR/><BR/>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4005.asp<BR/><BR/>Best regards.Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16445493105593170535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1161852493844063292006-10-26T03:48:00.000-05:002006-10-26T03:48:00.000-05:00Robert - I haven't seen the artifacts in question and do not know their basis for dating, so I can't speak about them. I do not agree that Scripture teaches a much younger age for the earth than 10,000 years; even the most conservative Bible scholars do not believe this.Todd Bolenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06156730661243501832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20570989.post-1161781039649688172006-10-25T07:57:00.000-05:002006-10-25T07:57:00.000-05:00Too bad that Dr. Gabriel Barkay and team date the oldest artifacts at about 10,000 years. Scripture clearly teaches a much younger age for the earth. What's your opinion on this?Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16445493105593170535noreply@blogger.com