The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

This is the place to discuss anything to do with scriptural doctrine. It is the primary purpose of this site, and most discussions will be here.
Forum rules
Matt 18:6; Eccl 7:9; 1 Pet 4:8 (If you're not sure what they say then please hover over them with your mouse or look them up in your own Bible before posting)
Message
Author
AmosAu3
Posts: 442
Joined: 1 year ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#161 Post by AmosAu3 » 1 year ago

Hi CI,

I've just watched the Robert Schoch video. I think that he makes some really valid points about the age and water damage of the Sphinx, particularly.

He mentions the last Ice Age ending around 12,000 years ago, plus or minus 4,000 years. My immediate thought was, this could be when the flood occurred, OR when Adam was created. I've believed for a long time that the earth and life on it are much older than commonly accepted by religious institutions. Most of their belief about creation, is based on the work of Bishop Usher.

I've asked so many times, where do we get the 6,000 years from creation to the return of Jesus from? So far I've never received a credible response to this question. I personally believe that we don't have an exact and scientific account of creation OR genealogy in the bible. What we do have is sufficient for us to know the path of salvation.

Thanks for posting these videos.

Regards, Amos.

User avatar
coccus ilicis
Posts: 689
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#162 Post by coccus ilicis » 1 year ago

Bobcat wrote:
1 year ago
A little background on these ones. They are controversial (or "non-mainstream"), as CI mentioned:
Graham Hancock

Randall Carlson (He apparently has similar views as Graham Hancock. They have appeared on podcasts together.)

Robert Schoch

Bobcat

Yes, Bobcat,

There is a big divide in our day between so-called true news and fake news. The majority are still convinced by mainstream media and label any alternative scenarios as pseudoscience, fringe hypothesis or fake. It is interesting that they rarely discuss the evidence but in most cases besmirched the messenger. To me, and this is only my opinion, whenever this is done by anybody, including when I catch myself doing it, it is an attempt to sidestep the issues raised.

Unfortunately, this human proclivity is not just a modern phenomenon but has been part of human nature since early times. Our belief combined with our nature means that we tend to look for supporting evidence and ignore contradictory evidence. This prevails in all activities of human endeavour - research, recorded history, religion etc. This holds true for what is believed and promulgated about peoples, about wars, about religious practices past and present etc. What is believed and promulgated politically and religiously by one's own camp differs completely from that of the opposing camp - does that mean that one's own camp is right and the other side is completely wrong. Does it mean that those responsible for mainstream history, science, news, religions or politics are a better class of persons with better motives than those of the other side? An honest appraisal tells us that this is not so, but it is a truth we prefer to hide from ourselves, it is the rafter we ignore.

It brings to mind a comment by a householder in the door to door ministry. In reference to her non-belief in God, and my asking her why she didn't believe. She replied that there were many unanswered questions that made it impossible for her to believe in God and proceeded to list the questions. When I set out to answer them. She held up her hand up and stopped me and said: 'The reason they are unanswered, is because I don't want them answered because once they are answered I would have to do something about it." I was dumbfounded. Rarely does one come across such candour into one's own motives.

Jehovah understands our proclivity and the need to fool ourselves, he foresaw it and made provision for it. He said to Daniel there would come a time when ...many would rove about and knowledge would become abundant... Dan 12:4 does this not picture our day when the consumer is bombarded with new information, mostly advertising which has proven track record. But when it comes to things that challenge what one believes, many prefer not to know. And unlike that honest householder prefer to believe aspersions cast on that person by mainstream sources. Jesus in reference to himself said: ... if people have called the householder Beelzebub how much more will they call those of his household so? Therefore do not fear them; for there is nothing covered over that will not become uncovered, and secret, that will not become known... Matt 10:25,26
LRW~

Bobcat
Posts: 3353
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#163 Post by Bobcat » 1 year ago

Here is a Wikipedia article discussing the main issue on which Hancock, Carlson, and Schoch collide with mainstream Egyptology.

My main issue would be that the ideas proposed by Schoch and friends would rule out a global flood as presented in the Bible. Indeed, it would rule out the Bible's chronology leading back to Adam as they would have the Sphinx constructed many centuries before even Adam was created.

In contrast, those who comprise the so-called 'mainstream' view, for the most part, also do not give any weight to the Bible's flood account. Yet their general findings about when the great pyramids and (other great Egyptian structures) were built do fit in fairly well with the Bible's chronology, that is, when the post flood patriarchal dating period is corrected by the LXX/SP dating (as shown in this post).

So I can't place either side in any sort of 'true news/fake news' type of scenario. I would imagine that both sides believe they are holding to the viewpoint that they think the facts fit. But at this time, the mainstream view of the origin of the pyramids and sphinx are a bit better fit with the Bible. So if I am going to have 'sympathy' for either side, it would be the side that fits in better with the Bible. (Rom 3:4) Of course, CI, you are free to see things as you see fit.


Bobcat

Index to Main Articles in This Thread

AmosAu3
Posts: 442
Joined: 1 year ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#164 Post by AmosAu3 » 1 year ago

Hi Bobcat,

I will let you know where I'm at on this discussion regarding the age of the Great Pyramid (GP).

I do generally agree with your thoughts. I agree that the GP, must have been built post flood. The Sphinx was probably built pre-flood. Most of the cap stones for the GP have been either used in other constructions, or just plain stolen. The lack of these cap stones may give an appearance of aging and allow for water damage on the remaining building blocks. This could give a much older and pre-flood, appearance to the GP.

As I've stated in other threads, posts, I believe the flood occurred between 3000 BC and 2800 BC. This would give ample time for the population to grow significantly by the traditionally accepted time of construction of the GP. I must add that, my view of this is not set in stone, as there are a number of variables that could make the flood much older still.

Regards, Amos.

John S
Posts: 1159
Joined: 6 years ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#165 Post by John S » 1 year ago

This is what I’ve been saying all along Bobcat.

You’ve thrown out the chronology of the Bible as false and now you bounce around from one theory of untrustworthy men to another.

Like James says you aren’t receiving Gods blessing of faith. And those listening to you are following you to shipwrecked faith.

I told you and told you. Follow the Word . Follow Christ who said of the Bible, “your word is truth.”

I’m saying this as a friend, not as a competitor. The Bible is right. Romans 3:1-4

Bobcat
Posts: 3353
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#166 Post by Bobcat » 1 year ago

Hi Amos,
As I've stated in other threads, posts, I believe the flood occurred between 3000 BC and 2800 BC. This would give ample time for the population to grow significantly by the traditionally accepted time of construction of the GP. I must add that, my view of this is not set in stone, as there are a number of variables that could make the flood much older still.

Well, we are pretty close to each other on the flood date. (And for the same reasons - population concerns.) On this post I narrowed it down to 2953 BCE. (And by the way, thanks again for the heads-up on the LXX/SP dating fix. I've been testing it out and gaining a good bit of confidence in it.)

I'm curious, what other variables in dating do you see? The only thing(s) that could change that 2953 dating for the flood are post-flood changes. Anything pre-flood would only move everything previous to the flood back. (For example, in this post I have the MT/LXX/SP pre-flood dating compared. The LXX has a 584 year difference with the MT that would move Adam's creation back 584 years. But it wouldn't change the year for the flood, since that is built back from 539 BCE. The SP, on the other hand, would move Adam's creation forward 349 years while still not changing the flood date. I stuck with the MT on the pre-flood dating since there are some flaws in both the LXX and SP in the dating for that era.)

In the OP of this thread the 539 date for the fall of Babylon is the anchor that everything previous to that is built on. The split in the kingdom, the exodus, Abraham's covenant, etc are all built back from that. And the understanding presented for the fulfillment of Ezekiel 4 provides a good second witness (so-to-speak) for the dating.

Incidentally, I have some math calculations regarding deep water pressures and granite weights, etc. When I am finished with them I'll post them in a footnote in an older post (for my own reference). I'll let you know where they are at privately if you are interested. But the math doesn't seem to allow for the pyramids to survive the flood. Not even close.

You've mentioned that you don't think God wants us to know all (or some) of this dating. I've been coming to a similar conclusion (slowly) that there might be some truth in that. But not entirely. I am leaning towards Jehovah holding back some understanding for the big finale. (Rev 10:7) The information seems to be there in the Bible. Just not fully assembled. (Yet!)

One other thing, look at John S' post just after yours. What in the world is he talking about? He doesn't seem all that capable of following a complex discussion.


Bobcat

Index to Main Articles in This Thread

AmosAu3
Posts: 442
Joined: 1 year ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#167 Post by AmosAu3 » 1 year ago

Hi Bobcat,

Thanks for your reply. I'm still with you on this. I do believe that many others will see this conversation as problematic.

I've actually been looking into ALL of this type of study for around a decade now. I believe we've only been scratching the surface. I only divert to this type of study when i'm in the right head space for it. I'm sure that you'll agree that it can be very mentally taxing, trying to get things into their right perspective and order.

I can't think of anything else in dating etc, at the moment but will let you know if I come across anything of interest.

Please email as you can, I'm always interested in additional information or calculations.

Regards, Amos.

Stranger
Posts: 1938
Joined: 3 years ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#168 Post by Stranger » 1 year ago

Bobcat wrote:
1 year ago
(And for the same reasons - population concerns.)
Hi Bobcat,

What are your estimations of the population at that time? From what I can find, it ranges between 14 to 17 million people.


Stranger, (Gen 6:13)

Bobcat
Posts: 3353
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#169 Post by Bobcat » 1 year ago

Hi Stranger,

Which "time" in particular are you asking about? (For the flood? the building of the pyramids?)

In the discussion with Amos above, we are referring to the population needed for building the pyramids. Take the Giza pyramid for example. It is thought to be the oldest(?) and largest. (In fact, it remained the tallest manmade structure until about the 14th-16th centuries AD. Apparently some think it is not the first. See here. But contrast with here.) Being so large and requiring the transport of such large stones, and without the help of modern transportation and construction machines, the Giza pyramid would take quite a large group of humans to build. And it is thought to have been built in about 14-20(?) years or so. And remember, those builders also need to eat, and raise other humans to carry on afterwards. So you don't just need the builders. You also need the wives and children for the next generation. And you need the farmers to raise food. And the tool makers and maintainers. And so forth. . . (See this post on why large scale food production is necessary for the specialization that makes up a large civilization, and why the pre-flood curse on the ground would hinder the development of a large civilization.)

Now, the problem is time. As a general rule, human population expands exponentially. This image shows an example of a linear increase (the red line) and an exponential increase (the other two lines).

A linear increase is at a steady rate. An exponential increase starts slower, but builds up 'steam,' so-to-speak, and surpasses the linear increase. But it takes time for that to happen. So the problem, in the case of the Giza pyramid, is the need for enough time to build a population large enough to be able to construct the pyramid.

Another problem for the Giza pyramid is the fact that, according to the scriptures, the division of the languages in Shinar comes before the Giza pyramid is built. This would mean that large portions of earth's population become divided and head off into different directions before the construction at Giza. (The hieroglyphs in the pyramid would be some evidence that the division of the languages of Gen 11:1-10 came before the Giza pyramid.) So, whereas the Giza pyramid would need a fairly large group to construct it, it would only be some fraction of earth's population that was involved.

So, with that backdrop in mind, you have 3 couples (6 people - Shem, Ham, and Japheth, with one wife each, and no children when they debark) who come off the ark, and from which all of mankind descend. (Gen 9:18-19; 1Pe 3:20) So, how much time would it take to reach a population from which a fraction of them could build a Giza pyramid in 14 years or so?

This is the problem Amos and I were referring to.

Egyptologists generally date the Giza pyramid to about 2550+- BCE. It's a rough estimate, to be sure. But let's set that aside for a moment.

Going by the chronology presented in the Masoretic Text (MT), which can be seen here, the flood occurs in 2303 BCE. Peleg is born in 2202 BCE, 101 years after the great flood. An ancient writer claims the division occurred very near his birth (within 13 years) And here is how one web site explains the founding of Egypt:
The Byzantine chronicler Constantinus Manasses (d. 1187) wrote that the Egyptian state lasted 1663 years. If correct, then counting backward from the time that Cambyses, king of Persia, conquered Egypt in 526 BC, gives us the year of 2188 BC for the founding of Egypt,3 about 60 years after the birth of Peleg. About this time Mizraim, the son of Ham, led his colony into Egypt. Hence the Hebrew word for Egypt is Mizraim (or sometimes “the land of Ham” e.g. Psalm 105:23,27).

The quote uses 2188 BC for the founding of Egypt (using James Ussher's figures in Annales Veteris Testamenti, p. 5, or paragraph 51 in the revised work, 1654 AD). J Usher has Peleg being born in about 2247 BCE. And the flood in about 2348 BCE. So correcting these years to a 2303 flood date, puts Peleg's birth ar 2201, and the founding of Egypt (based on the quote above) at about 2141, or about 162 years after a 2303 BCE flood.

So how big could human population become 162 years after the flood? Using this population calculator you can play with the figures.

For example, using starting year=1, ending year=162, starting population=6 and growth rate=0.01 (that's 1%) = 29 people on the face of the earth when Egypt is founded. (Incidentally, 1% growth rate is roughly the current growth rate in the USA.)

0.05 (that's 5% growth rate) = 15,474 for earth's entire population, with some fraction of that for moving to Egypt and building a pyramid.

This is the time problem mentioned above. Exponential human growth requires time to get going. Six humans can only have so many children in a fixed period of time where gestation is 9 1/2 months. On the other hand, longer life spans (meaning longer fertility), and a more general acceptance of polygamy would improve the numbers. But only over time.


Now, look at things from the vantage point of Bible chronology, corrected with the LXX/SP post-flood patriarchal dating (this post).

The flood occurs in 2953 BCE. Peleg is born in 2552 BCE. And just for argument's sake, Egypt is founded in 2492 (60 years after Peleg's birth). Using those figures, starting year=1, ending year=461 (2953-2492=461), starting population=6, and growth rate=0.01 (1%); ending population=583. With a 2% growth rate (0.02), we get ending population=54,288; 3% (0.03)=4.8+ million; 4% (0.04)=410+ million; 5% (0.05)=33.5+ billion.

As you might be able to see, all the numbers, using the LXX/SP dating correction, become much more realistic. Moreover, the standard dating of the Giza pyramid (mentioned above; circa 2550 BCE) begins to fit in quite nicely with Bible chronology, both in the dating (after the flood AND after the division of the languages), as well as in the possible population growth after the flood.

I'll stop there Stranger. This might be more than what you were asking for. But, as they say, 'There it is.' Using the LXX/SP corrected dating, your population estimates look quite good. For population leading up to the building of the Giza pyramid they would work out to slightly above 3% population growth. (3.2-3.3%, or between 0.032 to 0.033). Very realistic given the longer lifespans and polygamy of the times.


Bobcat

Index to Main Articles in This Thread

Bobcat
Posts: 3353
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: The Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered

#170 Post by Bobcat » 1 year ago

Well Amos, I decided to just post my calculations here:


Below are some figures/math I collected regarding the idea of the Giza pyramid being able to survive the great flood of Noah's day.


The Power of Water

It first helps to understand some of the power of water. From Weather.Com comes this warning about flash flooding:
According to FEMA: - Six inches of water will reach the bottom of most passenger cars, causing loss of control and potential stalling. - A foot of water will float many vehicles. - Two feet of rushing water will carry away most vehicles, including SUVs and pickups. Oct 30, 2015

Water is generally thought of as incompressible. (Salt water is actually slightly compressible, but less so as you go deeper.) This characteristic is what gives it much of its potential power. Interestingly, the pressure of water for a given depth can be calculated at .433, that is, water pressure, in pounds per square inch (psi), equals depth in feet times .433. Thus, water 1 foot deep would exert a pressure of .433 psi. Two feet deep would equal .866 psi. An object sitting in 2 feet of standing water would 'feel' a pressure of .866 psi all around its external shape.

This is standing water. Moving water changes the equation. For example, a two ton truck sitting in 2 feet of standing water would not be carried away. But it might float, depending on several factors. The water, theoretically speaking, has enough 'strength' to hold it up off the ground. (Put another way, if the truck weighs less than the water it displaces, it will float if the water is deep enough.) If the water is moving, then, the floating truck will also move. Even if the truck doesn't float, the force of the moving water can soon begin to push the truck. In the same way, things that don't float can also be pushed by moving water.

Take another example. Let's say a 10 pound cement block sitting in 10 feet of standing water. The water pressure all around the block is 4.33 psi (.433 x 10). Now the block, obviously, does not float. But if the water begins moving, things will begin to change. Let's suppose that the block is a cube measuring 5 inches on every side. Each side is a square measuring 5 x 5 inches, or 25 square inches. Meaning that each side of the block is exposed to 108.25 pounds of water pressure (4.33 x 25). In standing water the block doesn't move because the water pressure is the same on all sides.

But if the water begins moving, things change. The water pressure on the side the water is pushing against becomes greater, and the water pressure on the opposite side decreases as that water moves downstream. Theoretically, when the differential in water pressure between the two opposite sides becomes greater than the weight of the block, it becomes possible for the water to move the block. Of course, there might be other factors that change the equation. For example, the block might be attached to the ground with cement, so that the differential water pressure would also have to overcome that before it can move the block. The shape of the block might also be a factor. Some shapes might more easily allow water to flow around versus other shapes that don't (e.g. round versus square).


Pyramids and Granite

Now let's move on to pyramids. This post, near the bottom of the post, has links describing what the pyramids are made of. Among the materials used was granite. And one poster says some of the granite blocks weigh in at up to 100 tons. No doubt, 100 tons is impressive to a human. And granite would definitely be 'water-resistant' (if you will). Some of the other building materials not as much. So, how resistant would a 100 ton block of granite be to a global flood? Let's see. (See the Quora quote in this post for a description of the varied size blocks that actually make up the Giza pyramid.

Granite weighs in at roughly 175 pounds per cubic foot. (It varies by quality.) So, let's try some math: 100 tons of granite = 200,000 pounds. At 175 pounds per cubic foot, a 100 ton block of granite would equal about 1143 cubic feet of granite (200,000 / 175). 1143 cubic feet of granite would equal a cube measuring 10.455 x 10.455 feet on all sides, or, 15,740 square inches on each side. I use a cube since each side would equal the average exposed side of a block of granite. But we need some more information to complete our equations.


Deep Water Pressure

The Giza plateau (where the Giza pyramid sits) is about 180 feet msl (i.e. above sea level; msl=mean sea level). And thus, the peak of the Giza pyramid is at about 660 ft. above sea level (180 + 481 = 661). Everything else at that site is lower in elevation. By comparison, the peak of Mount Ararat (within the range where the ark came to rest) is approximately 16,500 feet msl. So, even if the Ark landed at half that elevation, or even 1/4 of that elevation, that would have put the Giza plateau under thousands of feet of silt and debris laden, surging flood waters. For example, this proposed resting site of Noah's Ark is at 6,500 feet msl. And that's after the ark came to rest! The water would have been even higher before it came to rest. (Gen 7:19-20; This is assuming, of course, that the Giza plateau even existed prior to the flood. The surface of the earth was likely very much changed by the flood. Some places being gouged out and washed away, others being overlain with huge amounts of silt and debris.)

So, what kind of water pressures might the Giza pyramid have been subject to (assuming that it had gone thru the flood)? Well, let's see. Using water 6000 feet deep, times .433 = about 2600 psi. 10,000 feet of water would equal 4330 psi. And with each side of a 100 ton granite cube equaling 15,740 sq.inches, that would mean that, at 6000 foot depth, each side of such a cube would be enduring 20,462 tons of pressure (assuming standing water). At 10,000 foot depth the pressure on each side would be 34,077 tons of pressure per side (again, calculating for standing water). (For comparison, the armored sliding protective cover over a minuteman missile silo is thought to be able to withstand a blast equaling about 5000 psi. In contrast, deep water pressure would be continuous. In nuclear war planning, a 5 psi overpressure is considered enough to collapse most residential buildings.)

Besides standing water pressure, the pyramid would have had to face moving water. Both as the water rose, and as it receded. So how much pressure differential would be needed to equal 100 tons of side force? At 6,000 foot depth it would be: Less than 1/2 of 1% (.4887 of 1%; 100 / 20462). At 10,000 foot depth it would be less than 3/10 of 1% (.2934 of 1%) differential pressure to create a 100 ton side force. Beyond this there would be, theoretically, enough side force to move the cube. So that we are talking about very small amounts of water movement. Larger/faster movements of water would create correspondingly greater side forces. And unlike surface flooding, where the water could pile up along whatever it is pushing against, deep water is under too much pressure to do that. Very deep moving water would create something akin to the water hammer effect.

Besides the titanic water pressures, there would also be the flowing silt and debris undermining foundations and washing away materials between blocks.. There would also likely be seismic shocks of unprecedented scale as the tectonic plates absorbed the tremendous weight of the water and gave way, at the very least, cracking and distorting the structure of the pyramid.

In comparison to the great flood, a pyramid would be little more than "a drop in a bucket." (Isa 40:15) It would have easily been "wiped" from the face of the earth, along with everything else manmade. (Gen 6:7, 17; 7:4, 18, 19, 23; See also Strong's 4229 for some of the sense of "destroy" and "wipe" in these passages and look at how the term is used in other passages.)


Bobcat

Index to Main Articles in This Thread

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests