re post 537
“History is an academic discipline, with it's OWN rules.” uh - yeah - ok - but what is your point?
“"History" (as was pointed out above) was not something the culture recognized. Even Rome, (far more advanced), was not discussing the meaning of "writing history" until the turn of the millennium.
Reading ancient literature as "history" is nothing but uneducated ignorant American Fundamentalism.
The editors/redactors/assemblers of ancient texts had no actual way to know what happened centuries before.”
If Alexander the Great was reading & even studying Xenophon - then I wonder who Xenophon had been studying? It seems to me like books to these primitive brutes, Alexander & Xenophon, (I believe appx 300-400 b.c.) were seen as books are seen today - repositories of knowledge or information. Your assertions of all of the above do not seem to be valid.
Did Alexander the Great read Xenophon?
McGroarty, Kieran
Hermathena – A Trinity College Dublin Review, No.181 (2006)
Introduction: It has been assumed by writers, ancient and modern, that Xenophon’s literary output had a direct influence on Alexander the Great. But is there any evidence to prove that it did? In spite of the paucity of references to Xenophon in the surviving Alexander sources, many writers, both ancient and modern, have no doubts concerning the influence of Xenophon’s writings on Alexander. An extreme position is suggested by Eunapius, the sophist and historian born at Sardis c. AD 345, when he says in his Lives of the Sophists (VS I, 453): ‘Alexander the Great would not have become great if there had been no Xenophon’. However, Eunapius might mean little more than Alexander had heard of, and been inspired by, what Xenophon had done in Asia. We are looking for evidence that Alexander had read Xenophon; most modern literature is in no doubt that he did. Almost all the major monographs on Alexander, those by Wilcken, Robinson, Tarn, Hammond and Lane Fox, among others, take it for granted that Alexander had read and learned from Xenophon.
“BTW thanks for telling us you accept the concept of common ancestor.”
Need not thank me - I subscribe to the Bible - Adam & Eve - we all came from them. This is not complicated.
“Science knows the general mutation rates of various genes.”
Quite interesting statement in that yes, gene mutations have some very interesting conclusions to be drawn from them. It is quite supportive of the Biblical timeline of universe, earth, man being approximately 6,000 years old.
I’ve heard the following but can’t vouch for it. If we were (as a species - mankind) even one hundred thousand years old - it is most likely that we would’ve mutated our race out of existence.
Claim 8: Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosome Adam probably weren’t an actual couple. - What does the evidence say?
“No doubt copied from a Creationist web site ... no supporting documentation. A mere assertion.”
Actually the website from where I used the two claims appears to be an evolutionist type site. https://evolutionnews.org/2018/03/adam-a...onclusion/
as for the flood - we have the testimony of the God who was there. Genesis 7:11, 12 “In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. The rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights.” What “all the fountains of the great deep burst open” I do not know - but it sure sounds like a lot of water to me. It is likely that this is where the bulk of the water came from.
repopulation issues are no problem - the math works out with no games being played
Tower of Babel - what’s the problem? Where do you find it’s size? I must’ve missed that.
Also, are you ignorant of that the problem was the unity of evil that man was conspiring in against God? Hence the confusion of languages, which made for the dispersion of man, & consequent people groups or nationalities. Genesis 11:8 “...they stopped building the city.” How curious that the tower is not mentioned here as it really is not the focus of the story.
Scripture is straightforward. It is easily understood.
The ark - most amazing vessel for people who weren’t seamen! How curious that it’s dimensions are exactly (as modern marine science shows) right for the best stability. How lucky for Noah & company.
“Greenland, that would be check mate.
Literalism is total bullshit.”
Sorry, I do not get your point here. Maybe it’s because I play twixt & checkers instead of chess?
“History is an academic discipline, with it's OWN rules.” uh - yeah - ok - but what is your point?
“"History" (as was pointed out above) was not something the culture recognized. Even Rome, (far more advanced), was not discussing the meaning of "writing history" until the turn of the millennium.
Reading ancient literature as "history" is nothing but uneducated ignorant American Fundamentalism.
The editors/redactors/assemblers of ancient texts had no actual way to know what happened centuries before.”
If Alexander the Great was reading & even studying Xenophon - then I wonder who Xenophon had been studying? It seems to me like books to these primitive brutes, Alexander & Xenophon, (I believe appx 300-400 b.c.) were seen as books are seen today - repositories of knowledge or information. Your assertions of all of the above do not seem to be valid.
Did Alexander the Great read Xenophon?
McGroarty, Kieran
Hermathena – A Trinity College Dublin Review, No.181 (2006)
Introduction: It has been assumed by writers, ancient and modern, that Xenophon’s literary output had a direct influence on Alexander the Great. But is there any evidence to prove that it did? In spite of the paucity of references to Xenophon in the surviving Alexander sources, many writers, both ancient and modern, have no doubts concerning the influence of Xenophon’s writings on Alexander. An extreme position is suggested by Eunapius, the sophist and historian born at Sardis c. AD 345, when he says in his Lives of the Sophists (VS I, 453): ‘Alexander the Great would not have become great if there had been no Xenophon’. However, Eunapius might mean little more than Alexander had heard of, and been inspired by, what Xenophon had done in Asia. We are looking for evidence that Alexander had read Xenophon; most modern literature is in no doubt that he did. Almost all the major monographs on Alexander, those by Wilcken, Robinson, Tarn, Hammond and Lane Fox, among others, take it for granted that Alexander had read and learned from Xenophon.
“BTW thanks for telling us you accept the concept of common ancestor.”
Need not thank me - I subscribe to the Bible - Adam & Eve - we all came from them. This is not complicated.
“Science knows the general mutation rates of various genes.”
Quite interesting statement in that yes, gene mutations have some very interesting conclusions to be drawn from them. It is quite supportive of the Biblical timeline of universe, earth, man being approximately 6,000 years old.
I’ve heard the following but can’t vouch for it. If we were (as a species - mankind) even one hundred thousand years old - it is most likely that we would’ve mutated our race out of existence.
Claim 8: Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosome Adam probably weren’t an actual couple. - What does the evidence say?
“No doubt copied from a Creationist web site ... no supporting documentation. A mere assertion.”
Actually the website from where I used the two claims appears to be an evolutionist type site. https://evolutionnews.org/2018/03/adam-a...onclusion/
as for the flood - we have the testimony of the God who was there. Genesis 7:11, 12 “In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. The rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights.” What “all the fountains of the great deep burst open” I do not know - but it sure sounds like a lot of water to me. It is likely that this is where the bulk of the water came from.
repopulation issues are no problem - the math works out with no games being played
Tower of Babel - what’s the problem? Where do you find it’s size? I must’ve missed that.
Also, are you ignorant of that the problem was the unity of evil that man was conspiring in against God? Hence the confusion of languages, which made for the dispersion of man, & consequent people groups or nationalities. Genesis 11:8 “...they stopped building the city.” How curious that the tower is not mentioned here as it really is not the focus of the story.
Scripture is straightforward. It is easily understood.
The ark - most amazing vessel for people who weren’t seamen! How curious that it’s dimensions are exactly (as modern marine science shows) right for the best stability. How lucky for Noah & company.
“Greenland, that would be check mate.
Literalism is total bullshit.”
Sorry, I do not get your point here. Maybe it’s because I play twixt & checkers instead of chess?
