[_ Old Earth _] Bible & world's apparent first city/civilization match

[kendemyer]

Bible & World's Apparent First City/Civilization Match


PREFACE

One would not be surprised if the Tigris-Euphrates area was the "cradle of civilization" if Biblical Creationism was true since the Bible says that this was man's first homeland and people are often drawn to their homeland (I realize that Noah's ark according to the Bible landed in the Ararat area).



WHERE DOES THE BIBLE SAY THE ARK LANDED?

Here is what one source says about the location where the Bible says that Noah's ark landed:

Quote:
"The Ark came to rest somewhere in the Ararat Mountains" (Genesis 8:4)

This verse tells us that the Ark did not rest upon a particular mountain but in the region of the "Ararat Mountains." The Hebrew expression "hare Ararat" must be interpreted by taking into account the use of the plural "hare," in "the Ararat Mountains," that is to say, the Armenian Mountain range.

taken from: http://www.aiias.edu/ict/vol_26A/26Acc_057-077.htm

MESOPOTAMIANS CAME FROM ARARAT REGION?


Here is something I found to be very interesting:

The Sumerians, an ancient peoples and one of the first civilizations in the world called Ararat, Arrata. In their great epic poems of Gilgamesh and Arrata, they tell of the land of their ancestors, the Arratans in the Highlands of Armenia.

taken from: http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/ararat.html

MAN'S FIRST CITY IN TURKEY?


Here is something additional I found stated regarding city in modern day Turkey:

7000-5500 BC: Çatal Höyük, world's first city:

Old Stone Age (Paleolithic era): Çatal Höyük (50 km southeast of Konya) arose from obsidian trade, and became one of the earliest known cities in the world. Jericho (in the present day West Bank) may be older, dating from 8000 BC, but Çatal Höyük appears more culturally advanced around 7000 BC.

taken from: http://www.photoseek.com/Turkhist.html

IS MESOPOTAMIA MAN'S FIRST CIVILIZATION?


Here are some resources which claim Mesopotamia was man's first civilization:

http://college.hmco.com/history/west/mo ... ule16.html

http://www.v-a.com/ashurai/



IS JERICHO WORLD'S OLDEST CITY OR AT LEAST WORLD'S OLDEST CONTINUALLY INHABITED CITY?

Here is something I found that points to creationism being true regarding what maybe the world's oldest city (or possibly the world's oldest continually inhabited city):

The City of Palms is more commonly known as Jericho. Jericho is in Palestine and some say it is 10,000 years old. This is an amazing city. The cities' towers were built 4,000 years before the Egyptian pyramids. Besides maybe being the oldest city, it is also the lowest. It is 260 meters below sea level. This city is one of the most frequently mentioned cities in the bible. Many archaeologists claim that pottery was invented here along with animal domestication. One title that seems to be assured is that Jericho is the world's oldest continuously inhabited city.

taken from: http://aboutfacts.net/Ancient17.htm

NY TIMES REGARDING MAN'S FIRST WRITING


Here is what the people at the New York Times say about scholars opinions regarding man's first writing:

http://www.english.uga.edu/~hypertxt/04 ... iting.html




SUMMARY

Why does the first city appear to be in the homeland of where the Bible says man first lived (or lived after the ark landed in the Ararat area) ? Because creationism is true of course!


Here are some excellent articles:

“Reasonable Science†and the Antiquity of Man by Alden Bass
http://www.apologeticspress.com/articles/2313

Which Came First, the Pyramids or the Flood? by Alden Bass
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2503

 

[Mr. Lee]

The Sumarians did not believe Noah's ark landed in their
mountains. Perhaps Utnapishti's ark landed there.
His ark predates Noah by many centuries, and is probably where
the Old Testament story started from.
Of course, he had several Gods helping him--secretely of course.
The top God was in a snit and wanted to destroy all humans for
being sinful. Luckily, a lower-level God warned Utnapishti.
After all, if all the humans were wiped out, it would take so much
'time to retrain a new batch to worship the Gods.
Oh, the top-God (second to top really. Creator God did not involve
himself in humans) regretted destroying the Earth.

 

[maranatha_man]

...and for the heck of it...let's throw in some goings-on from the "other" side of the world:


>>10,000-400BC: The Jomon culture of Japan is associated with the introduction of rice agriculture and the use of metal, coming from the Asian mainland.<<

>>8000 BC: Evidence of the first indigenous settlements in mainland China<<

>>Circa 7000BC: China: A flute dating to this time is found in the 1980s in Jiahu. 6 flutes from the hollow wing bones of cranes were found in Zheng-zhou province from
about this time.<<

>>5500-4000BC: In Japan at the Sannai Maruyama site in northern Honshu, uncovering of postholes of houses and longhouses, graves, figurines and animal remains of the
early to middle Jomon period.<<

>>3600 BC – Chinese BRONZE AGE begins first smelting & usage of bronze implements.<<

>>3300 BC - FU XI – First ruler of China<<

>>2600 BC: Cultivation of silkworms<<

>>Xia Dynasty, China - 2100 – 1600 BC<<

>>Shang Dynasty, China – 1600 – 1066BC<<

 

[reznwerks]

noahs ark

Noahs ark has not been found. Noahs ark is an impossibility. The sighting on Ararat has been confirmed to be an anamoly. The most recent expedition which was supposedly started last summer has remained silent or cancelled without any fanfare. The logistics are impossible the flood evidence is non existant. Need I say more?

 

[peace4all]

ever wodner why alot of ppl here dont liek science?

it proves things

 

[reznwerks]

Re: Bible & world's apparent first city/civilization mat

Bible & World's Apparent First City/Civilization Match


PREFACE

One would not be surprised if the Tigris-Euphrates area was the "cradle of civilization" if Biblical Creationism was true since the Bible says that this was man's first homeland and people are often drawn to their homeland (I realize that Noah's ark according to the Bible landed in the Ararat area).

Another slam dunk:
EARTH'S OLDEST CITY FOUND IN INDIA
Human civilisation could be thousands of years older than we previously thought, according to a report in last week's New Scientist. Archeologists working off the coast of India have uncovered a site that could be the worlds earliest "city". They've found all sorts of things - bits of pottery, wood and even human teeth. According to a technique called "radio-carbon dating" these relics are almost ten thousand years old (9500). Until now, archeologists thought that the world's first city was built in Mesopotamia three thousand years ago. But the new findings show that ancient Indians were around six thousand years before the Mesopotamians
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:xZ ... y%22&hl=en

 

[cubedbee]

I've always been astounded that YECs who believe the Earth was created about 4,000BC have no hesitation in using all this evidence of ancient civilizations that lived before they claim the Earth was created in order to "prove" YEC. The Earth being created in 8,000 BC raises the exact same problems that the Earth being created 4 billion years ago does---it contradicts a literal reading of Genesis.

 

[Khaine]

While not smashing the 8,000 YEC claim, here is another ancient civilization.

Found: Europe's oldest civilisation
By David Keys, Archaeology Correspondent
11 June 2005


Archaeologists have discovered Europe's oldest civilisation, a network of dozens of temples, 2,000 years older than Stonehenge and the Pyramids.

More than 150 gigantic monuments have been located beneath the fields and cities of modern-day Germany, Austria and Slovakia. They were built 7,000 years ago, between 4800BC and 4600BC. Their discovery, revealed today by The Independent, will revolutionise the study of prehistoric Europe, where an appetite for monumental architecture was thought to have developed later than in Mesopotamia and Egypt.

In all, more than 150 temples have been identified. Constructed of earth and wood, they had ramparts and palisades that stretched for up to half a mile. They were built by a religious people who lived in communal longhouses up to 50 metres long, grouped around substantial villages. Evidence suggests their economy was based on cattle, sheep, goat and pig farming.

Their civilisation seems to have died out after about 200 years and the recent archaeological discoveries are so new that the temple building culture does not even have a name yet.

Excavations have been taking place over the past few years - and have triggered a re-evaluation of similar, though hitherto mostly undated, complexes identified from aerial photographs throughout central Europe.

Archaeologists are now beginning to suspect that hundreds of these very early monumental religious centres, each up to 150 metres across, were constructed across a 400-mile swath of land in what is now Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and eastern Germany.

The most complex excavated so far - located inside the city of Dresden - consisted of an apparently sacred internal space surrounded by two palisades, three earthen banks and four ditches.

The monuments seem to be a phenomenon associated exclusively with a period of consolidation and growth that followed the initial establishment of farming cultures in the centre of the continent.

It is possible that the newly revealed early Neolithic monument phenomenon was the consequence of an increase in the size of - and competition between - emerging Neolithic tribal or pan-tribal groups, arguably Europe's earliest mini-states.

After a relatively brief period - perhaps just one or two hundred years - either the need or the socio-political ability to build them disappeared, and monuments of this scale were not built again until the Middle Bronze Age, 3,000 years later. Why this monumental culture collapsed is a mystery.

The archaeological investigation into these vast Stone Age temples over the past three years has also revealed several other mysteries. First, each complex was only used for a few generations - perhaps 100 years maximum. Second, the central sacred area was nearly always the same size, about a third of a hectare. Third, each circular enclosure ditch - irrespective of diameter - involved the removal of the same volume of earth. In other words, the builders reduced the depth and/or width of each ditch in inverse proportion to its diameter, so as to always keep volume (and thus time spent) constant .

Archaeologists are speculating that this may have been in order to allow each earthwork to be dug by a set number of special status workers in a set number of days - perhaps to satisfy the ritual requirements of some sort of religious calendar.

The multiple bank, ditch and palisade systems "protecting" the inner space seem not to have been built for defensive purposes - and were instead probably designed to prevent ordinary tribespeople from seeing the sacred and presumably secret rituals which were performed in the "inner sanctum" .

The investigation so far suggests that each religious complex was ritually decommissioned at the end of its life, with the ditches, each of which had been dug successively, being deliberately filled in.

"Our excavations have revealed the degree of monumental vision and sophistication used by these early farming communities to create Europe's first truly large scale earthwork complexes," said the senior archaeologist, Harald Staeuble of the Saxony state government's heritage department, who has been directing the archaeological investigations. Scientific investigations into the recently excavated material are taking place in Dresden.

The people who built the huge circular temples were the descendants of migrants who arrived many centuries earlier from the Danube plain in what is now northern Serbia and Hungary. The temple-builders were pastoralists, controlling large herds of cattle, sheep and goats as well as pigs. They made tools of stone, bone and wood, and small ceramic statues of humans and animals. They manufactured substantial amounts of geometrically decorated pottery, and they lived in large longhouses in substantial villages.

One village complex and temple at Aythra, near Leipzig, covers an area of 25 hectares. Two hundred longhouses have been found there. The population would have been up to 300 people living in a highly organised settlement of 15 to 20 very large communal buildings.

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/st ... ory=645976

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

Re: Bible & world's apparent first city/civilization mat

Bible & World's Apparent First City/Civilization Match


PREFACE

One would not be surprised if the Tigris-Euphrates area was the "cradle of civilization" if Biblical Creationism was true since the Bible says that this was man's first homeland and people are often drawn to their homeland (I realize that Noah's ark according to the Bible landed in the Ararat area).

Another slam dunk:
EARTH'S OLDEST CITY FOUND IN INDIA
Human civilisation could be thousands of years older than we previously thought, according to a report in last week's New Scientist. Archeologists working off the coast of India have uncovered a site that could be the worlds earliest "city". They've found all sorts of things - bits of pottery, wood and even human teeth. According to a technique called "radio-carbon dating" these relics are almost ten thousand years old (9500). Until now, archeologists thought that the world's first city was built in Mesopotamia three thousand years ago. But the new findings show that ancient Indians were around six thousand years before the Mesopotamians
www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/shows/2002.02.03.htm+%22earth%27s+oldest+city%22&hl=en]Dressed Link[/url]

[url=http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:xZL0uQ3ZDCEJ:[url]www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/shows/2002.02.03.htm+%22earth%27s+oldest+city%22&hl=en][/url] Dressed Link[/url]

This is how we dress our links so they don't mess with the format of the page.

 

[kendemyer]

Anyone read the NY Times article cited in the initial post. Were did the first writing probably come from?

 

[reznwerks]

yep

Anyone read the NY Times article cited in the initial post. Were did the first writing probably come from?

Yep, been there done that. Here you have been debunked again.
"Earliest writing found in China?
Signs carved into 8,600-year-old tortoise shells found in China may be the earliest written words, say archaeologists. The symbols were written down in the late Stone Age, or Neolithic Age. They predate the earliest recorded writings from Mesopotamia - in what is now Iraq - by more than 2,000 years. So it appears your king of URUK may have been influenced by the Chinese ability to communicate with symbols.Give it up already. "

http://www.cronaca.com/archives/000749.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2956925.stm

 

[kendemyer]

"It may come as a shock to some, but fewer than 50 percent of the radiocarbon dates from geological and archaeological samples in northeastern North America have been adopted as `acceptable' by investigators."â€â€*J. Ogden III, "The Use and Abuse of Radiocarbon," in Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol. 288, 1977, pp. 167-173.

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/06dat5.htm

"The first shock Dr. Arnold and I had was that our advisors informed us that history extended back only 5,000 years . . You read books and find statements that such and such a society or archaeological site is [said to be] 20,000 years old. We learned rather abruptly that these numbers, these ancient ages, are not known; in fact, it is about the time of the first dynasty in Egypt that the last [earliest] historical date of any real certainty has been established."â€â€*W.F. Libby, "Radiocarbon Dating," in American Scientist, January 1956, p. 107. [Libby was the one who pioneered the discovery of Carbon !4 dating.]

taken from: http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/06dat5.htm

 

[reznwerks]

SCIENTISTS

"It may come as a shock to some, but fewer than 50 percent of the radiocarbon dates from geological and archaeological samples in northeastern North America have been adopted as `acceptable' by investigators."â€â€*J. Ogden III, "The Use and Abuse of Radiocarbon," in Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol. 288, 1977, pp. 167-173.

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/06dat5.htm

[quote:f5ac9]"The first shock Dr. Arnold and I had was that our advisors informed us that history extended back only 5,000 years . . You read books and find statements that such and such a society or archaeological site is [said to be] 20,000 years old. We learned rather abruptly that these numbers, these ancient ages, are not known; in fact, it is about the time of the first dynasty in Egypt that the last [earliest] historical date of any real certainty has been established."â€â€*W.F. Libby, "Radiocarbon Dating," in American Scientist, January 1956, p. 107. [Libby was the one who pioneered the discovery of Carbon !4 dating.]

taken from: http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/06dat5.htm

[/quote:f5ac9]

All of the scientists you quote , ( if they can be called that) are not real scientists skilled in the disipline they comment on and are not qualified to comment. They are at the outset Christian apologists. You would know that had you done your homework. The term "creation scientist" is an oxymoron. Anyone not using the scientific method cannot be considered a scientist.

 

[maranatha_man]

oops btw let's make that:

>>10,000-4000BC: The Jomon culture of Japan ....etc

not "400 bc" my typo :