nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 107:
Line 107: + + + +
Talk:World History Lecture One (view source)
Revision as of 19:56, February 5, 2009
, 19:56, February 5, 2009→More on dates and other problems: Expanding on my previous remarks
: Regardless, thanks for your insights above. As to the Wisdom books, I think it is commonly recognized that some of the Psalms are very old, as old as the Book of Job.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:34, 5 February 2009 (EST)
: Regardless, thanks for your insights above. As to the Wisdom books, I think it is commonly recognized that some of the Psalms are very old, as old as the Book of Job.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:34, 5 February 2009 (EST)
:: When I said that 2300 B.C. was a "common approximation", I meant that it was a common approximation ''among those who accept a biblically-derived date of 2349 B.C.'' That is, it's a common approximation ''of 2349 B.C.''
:: The evidence of writing and civilisation back to 3000 B.C. is part of the package of questionable secular dates. Almost all middle-eastern history is tied into the questionable Egyptian chronology. So, to be hypothetical, a tablet considered to be the oldest known example of writing is found, which cannot be directly dated, but describes events in, say Assyrian history, and that Assyrian history can be tied in to Egyptian history, and a chronology of Egyptian history has been worked out, so the Assyrian tablet can be given a date. But that date is therefore based on the Egyptian chronology, which, as I said, is being questioned (and not just by creationists), and is also in conflict (on other points) with a biblical chronology. Given the disagreement in the two chronologies, I know which one I consider to be more accurate.
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 14:56, 5 February 2009 (EST)