It was not a personal attack. It was to lighten things up a bit. A humorous conspiracy. You're always throwing funny things at us. I knew you could take it.

You're mistaking me for someone else. I wasn't the one who was supporting the hollow earth theory. I was the one that proposed an idea in the hollow earth topic saying that it could be possible that Khufu's pyramid was the "main attraction" of the three pyramids.

I'll stop being off topic from now on. I promise.

[edit on 16-1-2007 by lostinspace]

You're mistaking me for someone else. I wasn't the one who was supporting the hollow earth theory. I was the one that proposed an idea in the hollow earth topic saying that it could be possible that Khufu's pyramid was the "main attraction" of the three pyramids

My apologies
I'm mixing you up with spaceman
hes out there

I don't think it was the main attarction though
they didn't let anyone inside with a camera for 4500 years

I'm not a huge Bible knowitall or anything, so my knowledge on this subject is very limited.
However, after reading into Methuselah a little, it turns out that his great age can be ascribed to innacuracies when comparing Sumerian numerical systems. If this was the case, he would have lived to around 85 (still pretty old for those days), and he would have had his first child at 17. (both of these numbers are very realistic)

it turns out that his great age can be ascribed to innacuracies when comparing Sumerian numerical systems. If this was the case, he would have lived to around 85

where did you read that
got a link ?

Its outlined in a book by Robert Best, and titled 'Noah's ark and the Ziusudra Epic'.

Good read.

ah yeah I heard of it
hes wrong but its still a good book


[edit on 17-1-2007 by Marduk]

I've always thought it might have been a simple miscalculation, seeing as how the people who wrote the different books of the Old Testament weren't there to actually witness some of these events. Such as the birth of the world. However, reading some of this site's post, my perspective is starting to become wider...I'm not sure whether that's good or bad.

Originally posted by JackofBlades

However, after reading into Methuselah a little, it turns out that his great age can be ascribed to innacuracies when comparing Sumerian numerical systems. If this was the case, he would have lived to around 85 (still pretty old for those days), and he would have had his first child at 17.

This sounds like the "month for a year" interpretation. When I checked out the actual ages of Methuselah in the Bible, this is what I found:

first mentioned son he was age 187, a month for a year would be 15.6yrs
He died at age 969, a month for a year would be 80.75yrs

This may sound like this was the real method used but there's a problem.

These are the two biblical characters that demonstrate the problem:

Cainan
first mentioned son he was age 70, a month for a year would be 5.83yrs

Mahalaleel
first mentioned son he was age 65, a month for a year would be 5.42yrs

The human body is obviously not ready to reproduce at the age of 5 years, so this can't be the way to interpret the long life spans.

Its difficult to tell when discussing the bible. There are so many inaccuracies between what was written in the Bible and what was the basis for the teachings.
The original Sumerian texts could have been misinterpreted, leading scholars to believe Methuselah was 969. Then the mistake could have been realised for later generations, but not rectified in Methy's case.

To me, it just seems more believable that Methy was 80 than 960. And it is not impossible for the human body to be sexually mature at an early age (improbable, not imposible).

The original Sumerian texts could have been misinterpreted, leading scholars to believe Methuselah was 969

Methuselah is not mentioned in any Sumerian text
no one is described as living to a great age in any sumerian text
the only place any of these old men are mentioned is in a hewbrew religious text called the bible
this is the one that claims the world was made in seven days by some guy called God
who later decides to flood the world using more water than it actually has ever contained
who then goes on to eradicate any physical evidence that the flood happened
who then creates every different race of man (black, white, yellow, red) from the kids of a sailor called Noah who only had one wife who was a semite like he was.
this god who loves you so much that if you make a mistake he will throw you into a lake of endless fire to be tortured by a red skinned guy with cloven hooves and a pitchfork and horns for all eternity
and who if you're good will take you to an invisible place in the clouds somewhere that there is no sex, alcohol or any type of music except choral singing and harp strumming

you were taking the bible seriously for a minute there weren't you

I'm sorry its actually hyperbaric oxigen treatment..I do appologise for the waste of a comment.

Originally posted by dlbrandt
The thing with the Bible is you can't pick the parts you like and deny the parts you don't like. You either believe it all from cover to cover or you don't.

IMHO that could lead to some serious trouble...

I have had an interest in biblical New testament history for quite some time now and have been reading up on the subject.

When you say "You either believe it all from cover to cover or you don't." you dont leave much room for errors in the Bible do you?

Lets say that you discover an "error" in the New Testament, would that invalidate all your faith you mean?

If I say that Paulus were not in fact the author of several of his letters in the New Testament, would this invalidate your faith? My faith isnt really shattered about this, since I realise that even though the Bible is a "holy book" the texts were still written, edited and compiled by humans.

Remember that the canon we have today was chosen around 350 CE (if I recall correctly) and that there were more texts circulating than are included in "our" New Testament which were used by the early Christians as holy text.

As you may have noticed there is also some quite noticable changes in mood between the Old Testament Jahwe and the New Testament Jesus where the Old Testament Jahwe seems more bloodthirsty than in New Testament?

I have seen different explanations for this fact, but the most natural explanation (at least in my eyes) is that history have always been written (and rewritten) by the winner in a war so any description in the Old Testament where "God" tell the Israelites to go into a town or region and kill everyone, man, women and child just for the sake of it, I would believe was inserted as a way to validate the wars fought between Israel and its neighbours, not so much that God wanted whole regions slaughered.

Can you say mythology?

it could be that the 'patriarchs' who lived hundreds of years
up till the time of Noah,
were actually 'Dynasties' = or a Family Line that reigned for those periods of time.

When another figure rose to leadership, then that family Head became the new 'dynasty' and all generation of that family were known as that 'Partiarchs' name'.

there's never been bones of people from 6-8Thousand years ago , being unearthed that showed other than normal age conditions, (like a leg bone showing 400+years of wear & tear)

[edit on 6-8-2007 by St Udio]

100% oxygen would kill you... quickly, that is if a lightening spark didn't set it off first. That minister should stick to the Bible... he knows nothing of science.

Originally posted by grover
100% oxygen would kill you... quickly, that is if a lightening spark didn't set it off first. That minister should stick to the Bible... he knows nothing of science.

I understand that, but of course a planet's atmosphere could not be completely made up of oxygen. I think he was referring to simply a relatively highly oxygenated atmosphere.

[edit on 6-8-2007 by iceofspades]

great site iceof spades... it is really close to what I was saying. It would also explain why the amount of water needed to flood the earth was present at the time of the flood, but not anymore. It might have come down as rain and slowy decipated into the earth. Cool.