Ancient Egypt and a young Earth

[QED]

Up until last night, watching a BBC dramatization of the translation of the Rosetta Stone (a proclamation by Pharaoh Ptolemy V written in three different texts), I hadn't appreciated that Champollion (the Frenchman credited with being the first to understand the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs) was on a mission to find out about the age of the world.

Thanks to his work subsequent translations of the copious written material found in tombs has provided us with a comprehensive list of individuals dating to and around the same era as Noah's Flood -- supposed to have happened in 2370 BCE. From the archeology this would have been during the fifth dynasty, more specifically during the reign of a King called Djedkare who was living from around 2450-2300 BCE

So how can it have been business as usual in Egypt while the rest of the world was supposed to have been submerged? In the 1820's the Roman Catholic Church was breathing down Champollion's neck nervous of what he might uncover. It seems that Champollion took some of his own discoveries to his grave for fear of the heresy it represented.

But the facts and figures have been readily available ever since so I'd like to see a convincing explanation for this mismatch between the information acquired from the Archeology in Egypt and the supposed dating of the Noahic Flood from the YEC perspective. Searching these Forums for king "Djedkare" came up with nothing so perhaps this hasn't been debated before. I know there are a few YEC's active here so I hope we can have a good debate about it now.

[phoenixfire]

Modern evolutionary scientists are not "neo-Darwinist literalists".
Revelation, on the other hand, is supposed to be verbally inspired from a superhuman source. It must be literally correct. Theists are betting their very souls on that!

My book on systematic theology defines Biblical inerrancy as 'Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact'

Following that are sections titled 'The bible can be inerrant and still speak in the ordinary languge of everyday speech', 'the bible can be inerrant and still include loose or free quotations', 'it is consistent with inerrancy to have unusual or uncommon grammatical constructions', etc.

For instance, if a writer of a narrative said '8000 men were killed in battle' he is not implying that he counted everyone. In the context and genre of what the write is saying, exact numbers are not expected. He is still mkaing a true statement even though 8246 men may have been killed in battle.

When people believe the Bible is inerrant it does not mean every single phrase is literally true. But skeptics like to imply this is what the ignorant Christians believe and then they disprove the Bible by pointing out how some sentence somewhere is not literally true when the sentence was never meant to be taken that way.

In regards to the dating of the flood, the Bible itself does not give an exact date, but it is clear that it happened. The approx time frames of the flood are mostly based on the geneologies, but if you study Jewish geneologies you will know there is room for error and thus any date calculated based on those geneologies is only approximate. However, it would be ridiculous to assume millions of years of gaps in the geneologies so there is an upper limit to the historical dates they imply.

I have read things from many different creationist sources and only a few hold very firm dates as to the age of the Earth. Most will give ranges anywhere from 6000 to 30,000 years.

[jcrawford]

In regards to the dating of the flood, the Bible itself does not give an exact date, but it is clear that it happened. The approx time frames of the flood are mostly based on the geneologies, but if you study Jewish geneologies you will know there is room for error and thus any date calculated based on those geneologies is only approximate. However, it would be ridiculous to assume millions of years of gaps in the geneologies so there is an upper limit to the historical dates they imply.

I have read things from many different creationist sources and only a few hold very firm dates as to the age of the Earth. Most will give ranges anywhere from 6000 to 30,000 years.

A very wise and intelligently designed post, phoenixfire. Some people just don't know 'how' to read the Bible and substitute neo-Darwinist mtDNA theories for Jewish genealogies.

[McCulloch]

For instance, if a writer of a narrative said '8000 men were killed in battle' he is not implying that he counted everyone. In the context and genre of what the write is saying, exact numbers are not expected. He is still making a true statement even though 8246 men may have been killed in battle.

Yes, it is called rounding. However, if it says that 8 246 men were killed in the battle then we would expect that an exact number is being reported.

When people believe the Bible is inerrant it does not mean every single phrase is literally true. But skeptics like to imply this is what the ignorant Christians believe and then they disprove the Bible by pointing out how some sentence somewhere is not literally true when the sentence was never meant to be taken that way.

It would be really great if the Christian interpreters of the Bible could agree on which passages were meant to be literal and which ones were meant to be taken as metephors and parables. Would you be able to provide some universally agreed upon principles? Noah, Lot, Jonah, Adam and Eve. Literal or figurative?

In regards to the dating of the flood, the Bible itself does not give an exact date, but it is clear that it happened. The approx time frames of the flood are mostly based on the geneologies, but if you study Jewish geneologies you will know there is room for error and thus any date calculated based on those geneologies is only approximate. However, it would be ridiculous to assume millions of years of gaps in the geneologies so there is an upper limit to the historical dates they imply.

True. The accumulated error should be smaller than the time span described.

I have read things from many different creationist sources and only a few hold very firm dates as to the age of the Earth. Most will give ranges anywhere from 6000 to 30,000 years.

I have looked at the geneologies in detail. Please show me how the geneological information in the Bible could possibly be stretched to 30 000 years. I can, with the right assumptions, get it to about 9 000 at the very most.

[phoenixfire]

When people believe the Bible is inerrant it does not mean every single phrase is literally true. But skeptics like to imply this is what the ignorant Christians believe and then they disprove the Bible by pointing out how some sentence somewhere is not literally true when the sentence was never meant to be taken that way.

It would be really great if the Christian interpreters of the Bible could agree on which passages were meant to be literal and which ones were meant to be taken as metephors and parables. Would you be able to provide some universally agreed upon principles? Noah, Lot, Jonah, Adam and Eve. Literal or figurative?

I think there is pretty good consensus among scholars who hold to an inerrant, authoritative view of scripture. I would say that most scholars would classify Genesis as historical-narrative (which I think is what it comes across as to any first-time reader). As such, all the figures you mentioned should be properly interpreted as historical figures. However, it should not be read like a science textbook where every term has a very definite and exact meaning.

I dislike the term 'literal' as it implies that you should always interpret every line 'literally' and ignore any metaphors or consideration for context and genre. So I like to say that scripture should be read 'plainly' for the plain meaning as the author intended, not 'literally'.

I have looked at the geneologies in detail. Please show me how the geneological information in the Bible could possibly be stretched to 30 000 years. I can, with the right assumptions, get it to about 9 000 at the very most.

I may have at one point read something where someone tried to extend the geneologies out several thousand years...I think they may have even said 100,000 years or so. But I don't remember the reasoning. Personally, I have a hard time believing that interpretation as well and I think the Bible most likely implies an age of 7-12k.

[McCulloch]

I may have at one point read something where someone tried to extend the geneologies out several thousand years...I think they may have even said 100,000 years or so. But I don't remember the reasoning. Personally, I have a hard time believing that interpretation as well and I think the Bible most likely implies an age of 7-12k.

This is still quite a high margin of error. Age of the Earth = 9 500 ± 2 500.
Let's break it down

1. 1 ce to present = 2004 ± 0 years
2. Flood to 1 ce 2650 ± 350 years (13%), assuming we date the flood between 2300 and 3000 BCE
3. Creation to flood 4850 ± 2850 (59%).

... same era as Noah's Flood -- supposed to have happened in 2370 BCE. From the archeology this would have been during the fifth dynasty, more specifically during the reign of a King called Djedkare who was living from around 2450-2300 BCE

Does anyone think that Egypt had time for five dynasties between 3000 BCE (an early estimate for dating the universal flood) and 2450 BCE (a date for Djedkare)? Five dynasties in 550 years. Average 110 years per dynasty. It could be done.
But, how long after the Flood (world population 8 ) would it take for the population to grow to a size where Egyptian dynasties would have any meaning? 200 years? Five dynasties in 350 years. Average 70 years per dynasty. That is less likely. It looks to me as if those who believe that the Biblical story of the history of the world, including the universal flood, will have to somehow prove either that

• there is room in the genealogies for more than 3000 years between the flood and 1 ce OR
• King Djedkare ruled Egypt later than 2450 BCE OR
• Djedkare ruled in a dynasty earlier than the fifth

[jcrawford]

Personally, I have a hard time believing that interpretation as well and I think the Bible most likely implies an age of 7-12k.

Most scientists who study creation find no need for any years beyond 10k since outside of the Bible there is no recorded human evidence of anything on earth prior to 8 tya.

[jcrawford]

But, how long after the Flood (world population 8 ) would it take for the population to grow to a size where Egyptian dynasties would have any meaning? 200 years? Five dynasties in 350 years. Average 70 years per dynasty. That is less likely. It looks to me as if those who believe that the Biblical story of the history of the world, including the universal flood, will have to somehow prove either that

• there is room in the genealogies for more than 3000 years between the flood and 1 ce OR
• King Djedkare ruled Egypt later than 2450 BCE OR
• Djedkare ruled in a dynasty earlier than the fifth

Since the Babylonian diaspora is dated prior to any human migration to, or settlement in, Egypt or Africa, and the building of the Tower of Babel by Noah's descendents itself was post-Flood, the Flood logically occured centuries or millenia before any Egyptian civilization on earth. Keep in mind that the earth was divided in those days and the amazing lifespans of Noah's Neanderthal descendents only gradually decreased to less than 200 years during Abraham's lifetime.

[QED]

The Egyptians belief in multiple Gods (apart from Akhenaten's brief experiment with monotheistic sun worship) is interesting in the context of a civilization recently descended form Noah. But hey, men stray! Of course the ancient Greeks and every other civilization we know of in the ancient world were all polytheistic as well.

This has never really made much sense to me. If the biblical story of the Noahic Flood is depicting a real historical event then surely the descendants of Noah had very good reason to be monotheistic? With so much first-hand evidence how could people so readily revert to the pagan ways? The first settlements in jericho are thought to be of the Mesolithic Age dating to around 8,500 BCE. I guess it will be argued that we quickly lost the plot. But on the strength of a "refresher" we are supposed to have been given 2000 years ago, without the very tangible evidence of world-wide catastrophe all around us, we have steadfastly (in the main) stuck with just the one God ever since. I find it remarkable that after so much "hands-on" intervention in Noah's day people were not the least bit interested in the wrath of the one and only Almighty God!

[jcrawford]

The Egyptians belief in multiple Gods (apart from Akhenaten's brief experiment with monotheistic sun worship) is interesting in the context of a civilization recently descended form Noah. But hey, men stray! Of course the ancient Greeks and every other civilization we know of in the ancient world were all polytheistic as well.
This has never really made much sense to me. If the biblical story of the Noahic Flood is depicting a real historical event then surely the descendants of Noah had very good reason to be monotheistic? With so much first-hand evidence how could people so readily revert to the pagan ways?

I can appreciate your confusion concerning the polytheistic Egyptian and Greek descendents of Noah, but during the destruction of the Tower of Babel and the division of the earth, God confused their language too, if you read and follow the story, which apparently the Greeks and Egyptian didn't.

The first settlements in jericho are thought to be of the Mesolithic Age dating to around 8,500 BCE. I guess it will be argued that we quickly lost the plot. But on the strength of a "refresher" we are supposed to have been given 2000 years ago, without the very tangible evidence of world-wide catastrophe all around us, we have steadfastly (in the main) stuck with just the one God ever since.

I suppose it takes a Moses, Jesus, Mohammed or Martin Luther to remind people of the Word of God.

I find it remarkable that after so much "hands-on" intervention in Noah's day people were not the least bit interested in the wrath of the one and only Almighty God!

Yes, the historic Fall of Man is remarkable. He no sooner finishes building one civilization than it falls to pieces around him.

[palmera]

Most scientists who study creation find no need for any years beyond 10k since outside of the Bible there is no recorded human evidence of anything on earth prior to 8 tya.

There are human remains older than 8kya here in the Americas. This statement simply isn't true.

I suppose it takes a Moses, Jesus, Mohammed or Martin Luther to remind people of the Word of God.

Yes, and yet, Martin Luther was an anti-semite. God works in mysterious ways.


Also, any biologist will tell you the possibility of human life expectancy going down throughout the course of our evolution from 800 + yrs to <100 is infinitely small- and when you get right down to it, a ridiculous assertion. Biblical genealogies listing ages upwards over 500 yrs, even 200 yrs, goes against what we know about human development. Not to mention that our life expectancy has only increased as a species over the last 2000 yrs. as our physical quality of life has gotten better.