November 5, 2008

Accounts in the Bible verified in past cultures

I just read something very interesting from an article at ICR by Ava Ford, M.D.

Besides having a very similar upbringing as my own, Dr. Ford wrote of an account she had with Chinese script.

Ancient insight on Faith and the Creator can help us find the truth about origins without referring to just the Bible. Dr. Ford talks of a time she saw Chinese writings and explains an epiphany moment.

Chinese script is expressed through ideographic pictures developed from the picture writings on ancient oracle bones--a kind of "hieroglyphic" of Chinese language. She honed in on two of the characters in particular: "life" and "believe." It struck Ford that these words had relevance to the creation account in Genesis.

Each character can be broken down into component parts. For instance, the word for "life" is made up of "motion" plus "Lord," which reveals the ancient Chinese belief that the Lord is the maker of all life. "Believe" is also comprised of two components: "person" plus "word," which means that placing trust in a word is considered an act of faith or believing. Simple, yet profound, especially when translated within a biblical context. The story of the Roman centurion in Luke 7:2-10 came to her mind; Jesus specifically remarked that this man's "belief" in His Word was greater than what He could find in Israel.

According to research found in Harvard's Yenching Library, the written Chinese language may have originated as far back as 2500 B.C., which coincides closely with the estimated time of the great dispersion of humanity from Babel, as calculated from the biblical genealogies. When all mankind was divided into new linguistic groups and scattered over the face of the earth, ancient Chinese people would have also carried with them an accurate account of early human history.

Noah

Interestingly, the ancient Chinese record Feng-su T'ung-yi (Comprehensive Meaning of Customs) states that all people on earth are descended from "Nu-wa." (Some have suggested this to be a version of the biblical name Noah, as found in other ancient Chinese texts.)

The Chinese were known for meticulous recordkeeping from the time of the Hsia dynasty in 2205 B.C., and according to their most acclaimed set of ancient manuscripts, Shu Jing (The Book of History), many generations of Chinese emperors recited texts of praise during the annual Border Sacrifice as they brought their people together to worship "Heavenly Sovereign Shangdi," the Creator of the universe and the one true God.

Chinese Genesis?

The Chinese wrote: "Of old in the beginning, there was the great chaos, without form and dark. The five elements (planets) had not begun to revolve, nor the sun and the moon to shine. In the midst thereof there existed neither forms nor sound. Thou, O spiritual Sovereign, camest forth in Thy presidency, and first didst divide the grosser parts from the purer. Thou madest heaven; Thou madest earth; Thou madest man. All things with their reproducing power got their being."

Sounds remarkably similar to Genesis, doesn't it?

"Life" does not come through faith in the science of men, but through "belief" in the Creator of life, Jesus Christ.

UPDATE: AIG said: "Hawaiians have a flood story that tells of a time when, long after the death of the first man, the world became a wicked, terrible place. Only one good man was left, and his name was Nu-u. He made a great canoe with a house on it and filled it with animals. In this story, the waters came up over all the earth and killed all the people; only Nu-u and his family were saved.

As the story of the Flood was verbally passed from one generation to the next, some aspects would have been lost or altered. And this is what has happened, as we can see from the chart. However, as seen in the given examples, each story shares remarkable similarities to the account of Noah in the Bible. This is true even in some of the details, such as the name Nu-u in the Hawaiian flood story. “Nu-u” is very similar to “Noah.”

[More Proof] The Epic of Gilgamesh is, perhaps, the one of the oldest written storys on Earth. It comes to us from Ancient Sumeria. Wrote about the flood a great deal even an entire table dedicated to it:

Table 1: “He saw the Secret, discovered the Hidden, the brought information of (the time) before the Flood. He went on a distant journey” and this “raging flood-wave who destroys even walls of stone!” and also “Utanapishtim, the Faraway, who restored the sanctuaries (or: cities) that the Flood had destroyed!

Table XI (11) The Story of the Flood: “The gods were frightened by the Flood,”

47 comments:

  1. And? What does this show? That the ancient Chinese believed in God too? That's hardly news, and says nothing whatsoever about God's existence or the truth of the Bible.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Reynold,

    I rebuked Talk origins a while ago, we don't allow them here. Find other ways and we can consider them. I will read the one you provided: Do Chinese Characters Tell
    Us Something About Genesis?

    ReplyDelete
  3. "Besides having a very similar upbringing as my own, Dr. Ford..."

    Oh! She was raised by superstitious cavement too?

    She had an "epiphany" like I did last week. We had several inches of new snow on the ground and I was walking my dogs in the woods. I stopped and took a pee and when I was done I looked down and realized the image in the snow was....you, Dan. I now know that you are , in fact real.

    Then, evidence for early Chinese who practiced millet agriculture is dated to about 7,000 BC and had their own unique language a LLLLLLOOOOOOOOONGGGG time before the supposed Tower of Babel.
    ------ "Neolithic Period in China". Timeline of Art History. Metropolitan Museum of Art
    "Rice and Early Agriculture in China".
    Legacy of Human Civilizations. Mesa Community College.

    Dan, wake up, the Tower of Babel myth has long since been soundly refuted.

    All pre-scientific people attrinuted superstitious myths to the things they could not understand.
    There are people yet today that apply superstitious myths to explainable natural events. They are called Fundamentalists.

    You find them in several different religions, but mostly the Abrahamic religions- Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

    ""Life" does not come through faith in the science of men, but through "belief" in the Creator of life, Jesus Christ."

    A belief is not an idea that your mind posesses. A belief is an idea that posesses your mind.

    The Frog.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You know, Dan, refusing to browse to TalkOrigins is one thing, but removing the links so that other readers are unable to do so is a bit fascist.

    I understand you are afraid of TalkOrigins, and you dogmatically refuse to even consider anything on that site, but your refusal to read countervailing evidence, scholarship, or opinion -- whatever the case may be -- shouldn't translate to denying that ability to anyone else.

    Just take a moment and recognize your own hypocrisy here. Each of us is willing to visit the sites to which you link, no matter how obviously biased, willfully ignorant, or purely deceptive. We look, we read, and we critique. What do you do?

    Oh, yeah. You delete posts to hide references to the "yucky" TO site, and you refuse to look, read, or critique. I suppose this shouldn't be especially surprising, considering the fact that after one post you were offering to make out with MFT, and after Googling "biblical slavery" to find a Christian perspective which supported your claim (the fourth domain listed, and fifth site overall -- the higher ranking sites support my position), you didn't bother even to critically assess its claims.

    If you don't want to click a valid link which provides relevant insight into a particular topic, then don't click it, but the rest of us might be interested in making our own determination.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  5. Stan,

    I loved how you linked to that website in pure defiance of my wishes. I don't care if you make teeshirts for that website just don't do it here.

    "Each of us is willing to visit the sites to which you link, no matter how obviously biased, willfully ignorant, or purely deceptive. You delete posts to hide references to the "yucky" TO site, and you refuse to look, read, or critique."

    Yes, I fully admit as to my bias to that one website, please forgive me. I will allow any other but just not that one.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dan:

         What objection do you have to TalkOrigins other than the fact that they contradict you? All I have seen about it is that you say they are "rebuked." They don't seem to do anything other than make their claims and present their case.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Pv,

    " What objection do you have to TalkOrigins other than the fact that they contradict you?"

    Start here for an explanation but it boils down to how many atheists rely on it and that they believe evolutions is a fact. Over the past 3 years or so it was referenced hundreds, dare I say, thousands of times to me. It is, for all intense purposes, the atheist's bible or life link. I am full ready to read anything just not from that website because of it's extreme bias against a Creator. I am at least tolerant to Panda's Thumb as a compromise.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Zilch,

    Your comment missed the point. Here we have independent knowledge and meticulous record keeping of the beginning times events (origin), completely independent of the Bible. A reference to Nu-wa as far back as 2500 B.C cannot be written off as you are attempting.

    This shows the fact that an atheist's presuppositions cannot allow evidence to show God or the Bible as truth. You have all been debunked and still do not know it.

    There is nothing that would convince you, even though many atheists claim they could be convinced. Nu-wa is strong very compelling evidence (admissible in a court) and knowledge of a man who built and Ark just as it states in the Bible. But you are all writing it off as false. I am going to go read Reynold's link now to find a counter but this would convince anyone searching for truth. I am suspect the audience here is not doing that. They may be just honing their debate skills which would be a very sad revelation.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I loved how you linked to that website in pure defiance of my wishes.

    Awww. And here I thought you wouldn't notice...

    Yes, I fully admit as to my bias to that one website, please forgive me. I will allow any other but just not that one.

    You understand, I hope, that in this particular instance, I am not attacking your bias at all. Believe it or not, I have not once cited nor even visited (to my knowledge) TO. I have no opinion of it either way, but I'd appreciate the opportunity to decide for myself.

    The problem I have with your removal of links to TO is that a) you are censoring posts, which I loathe under any circumstances (exceptions: spam or abuse), and b) you are exhibiting not bias, but willful ignorance.

    No one is requiring you to click a link to TO, and no one is linking to irrelevant material (much less something obscene or extremely offensive).

    If you don't want to go there, DON'T, but if the link is relevant to the subject at hand, why not let it be picked apart by those who aren't afraid to hear it.

    Or, if you insist on censoring links to TO, then perhaps you should also censor yourself, and prohibit the use of AiG, or ICR -- sites to which I object, because:

    "[I]t boils down to how many [theists] rely on [them] and that they believe evolutions [sic] is [false]. [Since these sites have become known, they have been] referenced [thousands], dare I say, [millions] of times to [atheists]. [They are], for all intense [sic -- author meant "intents and"] purposes, the [Christian's reference] or life link. I am full [sic] ready to read anything just not from [those] website[s] because of [their] extreme bias [toward] a Creator."

    Of course, I'm partially kidding -- despite their extreme bias, I am willing to visit them if they are relevant. What's really humorous here is that your prohibition actually counts as credibility for TO. People who might otherwise read it skeptically are more likely to note your ostriching, and thereby read TO less critically as a result. Your prohibition is counter-intuitive.

    It also serves as a practical example of the definition of the word irrational.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  10. Correction: I said: "and knowledge of a man who built and Ark just as it states in the Bible."

    Which isn't provable but at least:

    Feng-su T'ung-yi (Comprehensive Meaning of Customs) states that all people on earth are descended from "Nu-wa."

    It takes a reasonable mind to connect Nu-wa to Noah

    ReplyDelete
  11. Stan,

    "Your prohibition is counter-intuitive."

    I will take what you said into consideration and evaluate my position more (pray about it) and I am not promising any different results, but I will consider it.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Stan,

    "Your prohibition is counter-intuitive."

    I will take what you said into consideration and evaluate my position more (pray about it) and I am not promising any different results, but I will consider it.

    Reynold,

    I will be reading your link and the links in that link for quite a while but thanks for the counter.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I will take what you said into consideration and evaluate my position more (pray about it) and I am not promising any different results, but I will consider it.

    Good enough. Remember that all I'm asking is that you leave the links (assuming they're relevant and not obviously offensive).

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dan:

         Dan, your link only gives that they start off with an assumption that there is no creator. In essence, you are barring them for no reason other than they contradict your sacred beliefs. That tells me you're not really confident in your beliefs. If you were, you should be able to counter any of their arguments (or at least refer to someone who can.)
         From what you have said, I am inclined to believe that you will block any site that consider too effective at arguing against your position. Really, that's all your reasoning seems to boil down to. Non-christians finds their arguments effective and consistently use them as a reference.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "."

    No, it takes a desparate mind to try to link that type of stuff.

    Just look how your friend, Dani'El does it.

    Any body can do that with anything.

    And thanks for ignoring my earlier content. I knew you couldn't anser my question.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Here we have independent knowledge and meticulous record keeping of the beginning times events (origin), completely independent of the Bible. A reference to Nu-wa as far back as 2500 B.C cannot be written off as you are attempting. [...]

    Nu-wa is strong very compelling evidence (admissible in a court) and knowledge of a man who built and Ark just as it states in the Bible


    Dan- in the first place, you are extrapolating wildly here from your source, which merely states:

    Interestingly, the ancient Chinese record Feng-su T'ung-yi (Comprehensive Meaning of Customs) states that all people on earth are descended from "Nu-wa." (Some have suggested this to be a version of the biblical name Noah, as found in other ancient Chinese texts.)

    No Ark here, is there? No date of 2500 B.C. either. Just the name "Nu-wa" and the belief that all people are descended from him. You must really be careful to not read your beliefs into texts. There's a word for that, you know: eisegesis.

    Secondly, you might also try doing some checking of other sources. After five minutes of googling, I was not able to come up with the text of the Feng-su T'ung-yi, so we have to take your source by its word about Nu-wa. But I did find this:

    The tale of the two heroic brothers was recorded in the Han Dynasty (206 B.C.-A.D. 220) book "Feng Su Tung Yi," or "On Folk Customs," by Ying Shao.

    Hmmm. This is not quite 2500 B.C., now is it? Two things: I suspect your source was deliberately misleading, in calling the Feng Su T'ung Yi "ancient" but not dating it, hoping that people would assume that it was much older, as indeed you did. And being this young, if there is indeed a connection between Noah and Nu-wa, then it was probably in the other direction: the Chinese were influenced by the Tanakh, not the other way around.

    Of course, the similarity of the names might well be coincidental: as I've said before, given a large enough corpus, you are bound to find some seemingly meaningful correspondences if you look long and hard enough. This is of course the basis of the whole Bible Code industry. There's a term for this, too: cherry picking, and pickling, and dyeing red so they look like they came from an orchard on Pluto.

    I hope this has been educational.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Update: the entire surviving Feng-Su T'ung-Yi is indeed available online, but only in Chinese. I don't speak Chinese, so I did a bit more googling, and I did come up with some interesting information. First of all, Ying Shao lived at the very end of the Han Dynasty:

    Ying Shao 應劭 was the Prefect of Taishan (Mount Tai) in the early 190s.

    That makes the Feng-Su T'ung-Yi a rather late source indeed, for any information supposedly corroborating the Tanakh. But it gets better. After googling a bit more, I found another very interesting tidbit about the supposed Chinese record of the Builder of the Ark. It turns out that he is a woman:

    NÜ WA

    Nü Wa, the most ancient “heroine” of north China’s central plain region, was long regarded by the Chinese as the creator/creatrix of the world. As early as the Warring State period (475–221 BCE), Qu Yuan, a poet of the state of Chu, in his epic poem Tian Wen (Questioning Heaven), posed the question: “Nü Wa has a body. [But] who created her?”

    Wang Yi of the Eastern Han Dynasty annotated this line of poetry and made the following comment regarding Nü Wa’s “body”: “It is said the Nü Wa had the head of a human being but the body of a snake and she gave birth [hua, a word simultaneously encompassing the concepts of creation, transformation, and change] to seventy offspring on one day.”


    Gee, Dan, I don't remember all that stuff about Noah- maybe I just have the wrong version of the Bible. It certainly livens up the story a bit: maybe the Old Testament could be revised to include it. That stuff about giving birth to seventy offspring on one day would also help explain the rapid repopulating of the Earth after the Flood. Just a suggestion.

    Is there a moral here? I'll let you think of an appropriate one, Dan.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Pvblivs,

    "That tells me you're not really confident in your beliefs.

    I am very confident and that is why I said to Stan

    "I will take what you said into consideration and evaluate my position more (pray about it) and I am not promising any different results, but I will consider it."

    In the past TO just halts the discussion in a negative way. We don't get anywhere. It stopped at "here is what 'TO' says" and that's it, I got tired of reading anything 'TO' had to offer in the very skewed beliefs they have. It wasn't about my confidence but my frustration.

    I want atheists to stretch their knowledge instead of just one source (Did I just say that?)

    Anyway I am considering it but I just can't find that any good will come from it. Just use anything else, is all I am asking. Is that too much to ask for? Maybe so.

    Zilch, let me take an hour to read your input. Is there crib notes available?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Zilch,

    "No Ark here, is there?"

    That is why I followed up with this

    You must really be careful to not read your beliefs into texts. :)

    "the Chinese were influenced by the Tanakh, not the other way around."

    If that date you provided is correct then possible. So now the date is very important to us.

    "Gee, Dan, I don't remember all that stuff about Noah- maybe I just have the wrong version of the Bible."

    You must keep in mind if these people did come from Babel and had their language change on them, the details could easily get lost besides the Nü-wa part.

    I read that the "Nü" in Nüwa means woman, but I couldn't verify that yet. So it is very likely that they were confused by their own language. Noah was given to them by the ancestors but then since Nü meant woman they just assumed in later generations that it was indeed a woman and went with the story.

    It does fit logically, even though it probably contradicts your presupposition.

    "I hope this has been educational." Cocky we are getting now huh? I am humbled to be here on earth to learn all I can about life. Everything around me is educational, yes even my relationship with you.

    "the entire surviving Feng-Su T'ung-Yi is indeed available online, but only in Chinese. I don't speak Chinese, so I did a bit more googling, and I did come up with some interesting information."

    That is why Google provides translators

    Google can even translate entire web pages

    I hope this has been educational. :)

    Is there a moral here? I'll let you think of an appropriate one, Zilch

    ReplyDelete
  20. I read that the "Nü" in Nüwa means woman, but I couldn't verify that yet. So it is very likely that they were confused by their own language. Noah was given to them by the ancestors but then since Nü meant woman they just assumed in later generations that it was indeed a woman and went with the story.

    Dan: the only "connection" we have here is the resemblance between the names "Nü-Wa" and "Noah", and that both are important religious figures who have lots of offspring. There the resemblance ends, and nothing else fits. In any case, there is no evidence (as far as I can tell) for any mention of Nü-Wa before a couple of centuries B.C., which renders any claim of corroborating the Tanakh moot.

    The moral here? I give up using logic with you, as it seems to have no effect- you can always spin some wild fantasy that seems to fit what you've already decided to be true. Have a nice day.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Are you talking about NuWa the goddess that made everyone and repaired the roof of Heaven after fire god and water god battle?

    Nu Wa
    Nu Wa

    Because she really doesn't sound like Noah at all.

    Some people used to also say that one of the Chinese characters for righteousness was the symbol for “lamb” on top of the symbol for “me”. But it only takes a quick look to prove that untrue.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anyway, I'd be a bit more impressed if the first white people came to Australia and the Aborigines already had a Bible or something.
    Because then the difficultity of spreading "Chinese Whispers" style stories.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Chris,

    I addressed that just before your comment.

    "You must keep in mind if these people did come from Babel and had their language change on them, the details could easily get lost besides the Nü-wa part.

    I read that the "Nü" in Nüwa means woman, but I couldn't verify that yet. So it is very likely that they were confused by their own language. Noah was given to them by the ancestors but then since Nü meant woman they just assumed in later generations that it was indeed a woman and went with the story.

    It does fit logically, even though it probably contradicts your presupposition."

    "I'd be a bit more impressed if the first white people came to Australia and the Aborigines already had a Bible or something."

    Doing a quick search on Goggle produced the Aboriginal flood links.

    In fact the Flood Legends are very common throughout the world.

    AIG said: "Hawaiians have a flood story that tells of a time when, long after the death of the first man, the world became a wicked, terrible place. Only one good man was left, and his name was Nu-u. He made a great canoe with a house on it and filled it with animals. In this story, the waters came up over all the earth and killed all the people; only Nu-u and his family were saved.

    As the story of the Flood was verbally passed from one generation to the next, some aspects would have been lost or altered. And this is what has happened, as we can see from the chart. However, as seen in the given examples, each story shares remarkable similarities to the account of Noah in the Bible. This is true even in some of the details, such as the name Nu-u in the Hawaiian flood story. “Nu-u” is very similar to “Noah.”

    So were you serious and now your willing to convert to Christianity? Or was that a lie?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Here's my paraphrase of the last few comments:

    Chris: The goddess Nuwa looks like a completly different person than Noah.

    Dan: The details were lost.

    Chris: I'd be impressed if the Australian Aborigines had a Bible before they met white people.

    Dan: Here's an Aboriginal story of a flood that can only be found on the "Answers in Genesis" site or sites that link to AIG. Now become a Christian or you're a liar.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Adam,

    "can only be found on the "Answers in Genesis" site or sites that link to AIG"

    Now that isn't true and you know it.

    Although I perfectly understand your frustrations, I have the same with TO.

    Here is another source to appease your mind. Don't be difficult, silly.

    Chris claimed "Anyway, I'd be a bit more impressed if the first white people came to Australia and the Aborigines already had a Bible or something."

    I then proved that point plus I also pointed to the fact that the Hawaiians have a flood story, "only Nu-u and his family were saved."

    Let me guess, that was coincidental also? Is that logical or just being difficult? The evidence is there.

    Again, presuppositions will determine your approach on the evidence. One side is just wrong. There is always someone on the other side of truth.

    ReplyDelete
  26. You have so far linked to two different Australian flood stories. One story is only found in Answers In Genesis or sites that quote AIG. The other is from a magazine published by Creation Ministries.
    There are no references (that I can find)to these two stories or the deities in them in any place that isn't a reference to these two sites. (Most places are from CreationOnTheWeb which is the website of Creation Ministries)

    "Again, presuppositions will determine your approach on the evidence. One side is just wrong. There is always someone on the other side of truth."

    What are your presuppositions?

    ReplyDelete
  27. You said you had already addressed my first post with "the details had been lost"

    I think you are reading your beliefs into the stories... You don't _really_ think Nuwa, the goddess that made everyone and repaired the roof of Heaven after fire god and water god battle is the same thing as the story of Noah, do you? Really? I mean there are Chinese gods with names that sound like "Dan" but you don't get them and yourself mixed up...

    ReplyDelete
  28. So were you serious and now your willing to convert to Christianity? Or was that a lie?

    If it were true, I'd join Christianity, it's not hard to join. Thing is, I don't remember saying I'd become a Christian if you quoted some stuff about Hawaii...

    ReplyDelete
  29. Chris,

    "Thing is, I don't remember saying I'd become a Christian if you quoted some stuff about Hawaii..."

    Oh OK, so further proof is not a good thing, or further proof negates desire for truth. I get it. That is logical then?

    "You don't _really_ think Nuwa, is the same thing as the story of Noah, do you?" (quote mine?)

    "The ancient Chinese record Feng-su T'ung-yi states that all people on earth are descended from "Nu-wa."

    Yes, I read that the "Nü" in Nüwa means woman so it easily could turn into the version of story that you offered to me, that along with all the other flood legends, even Hawaiians claim of only "Nu-u" and his family were saved, is enough compelling evidence for me to show mankind seeing a flood.

    [More Proof] The Epic of Gilgamesh is, perhaps, the one of the oldest written storys on Earth. It comes to us from Ancient Sumeria. Wrote about the flood a great deal even an entire table dedicated to it:

    Table 1: “He saw the Secret, discovered the Hidden, the brought information of (the time) before the Flood. He went on a distant journey” and this “raging flood-wave who destroys even walls of stone!” and also “Utanapishtim, the Faraway, who restored the sanctuaries (or: cities) that the Flood had destroyed!

    Table XI (11) The Story of the Flood: “The gods were frightened by the Flood,”

    I get my worldview from The Bible, history, logic, and common sense. How about you?

    ReplyDelete
  30. ...The ancient Chinese record Feng-su T'ung-yi...
    It's a book of Chinese Mythology. READ IT. NuWa is a goddess with the head of a woman and the tail of a snake who creates people and repairs heaven after some gods fight. And, like I said, it sounds nothing like the legend of Noah.

    Here's a pic from the Shan Hai Jing

    And pronouncation of the name of NuWa has changed over time. It used to be more like "Nügua" (where the "g" is a sound that's a mixture of "g" and "k")

    ReplyDelete
  31. ...And you keep saying "further proof" and "more proof" like you've presented proof in the first place. All you have presented are empty assertions filtered through your world view.

    I don't know anything about the Hawaiian stuff but I do know that all the Chinese assertions you have made are extremely flimsy. The only link you seem to have is that the Goddess Nuwa's name is (now) pronounced a bit like Noah. I doubt Noah created people from mud and rope.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Chris,

    "I doubt Noah created people from mud and rope."

    Sounds like the evolution model, the mud at least. Rope would have to be designed.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I do not appreciate your cowardice, Dan. You're censoring a source that has a large amount of information which also has numerous references to actual scientific literature.

    TalkOrigins is a site that has actual scientists contributing to it. You know, the people who are on the forefront of the manufactured "controversy" you people make out of evolution?

    I just hope you don't make a hypocrite of yourself by complaining about the "censoring" of ID or YEC by "evolutionists/Darwinists" after this.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I'm chinese and I'm offended by you article. Your interpretation of that first chinese character is 100% wrong, 'life' is not a composite character. these two characters you posted are simpified, the traditional versions look different. the same character is often written differently in different time periods so your 'argument' doesn't hold. And how on earth did you manage to link chinese language with christianity, when the dominant religions in greater china are nontheistic (Buddhism and confucianism). You just don't know enough about the chinese language to make any claims as profound (deluded as I see it)as that. Not that you'll ever be able to comprehend the depth of chinese culture, coming from religion that promotes ignorance.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Blogger Chris Mackey said...
    I mean there are Chinese gods with names that sound like "Dan" but you don't get them and yourself mixed up...


    there aren't afaik, but 'dan' does sounds like: but, birth, pills, internal organs, to support in a with a physical body, all kinds of eggs, and finaly it could also mean testicles(balls, bollocks which ever way you prefer).

    ReplyDelete
  36. Dan sounds like a Chinese deity's name in the same way that “Nu-u” is very similar to “Noah.” I.E. If you use your imagination.

    (quoted text from Dan)

    ReplyDelete
  37. Dan sounds like a Chinese deity's name in the same way that “Nu-u” is very similar to “Noah.” I.E. If you use your imagination.

    I agree, but is it relavant?

    you might know this from a comedian, in mandarin, the word 'that' (used in the same way as the english 'umm'), is pronouced in the exact same way as 'niggar' in american english, yes, they are that close! by dan's 'logic' maybe all madarin speakers are racist. I know he's comparing two deitys' name and I'm comparing two random words, but the fact that these are all different words from entirely different cultures, languages, timeframes makes both 'arguments' silly, immature and perhaps offensive.

    edited for spelling errors

    ReplyDelete
  38. I agree, but is it relavant?

    No, it was just a throw-away comment about the uselessness of his (Dan's) method.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Tian,

    "but the fact that these are all different words from entirely different cultures, languages, timeframes makes both 'arguments' silly, immature and perhaps offensive."

    You sound like Andrew now. Words do have meaning and structure in context.

    "As Ostensive definition points out defining "red" by pointing out red objects -- apples, stop signs, roses -- is giving ostensive definition, as is naming. It is thought that children may learn a great deal of their language ostensively.

    Ostensive definition assumes the questioner has sufficient understanding to recognize the type of information being given."

    So when the ancestors point to Noah and the flood as to where we all came from (even if language is changed), and over time it trickles down and changes slightly, the same crust still applies. So even Hawaiians "Nu-u" or Chinese "Nü Wa" or the countless of flood legends throughout the world, there comes a point when logically one has to say it's "possible" or even "probable" that there was a flood and that we all came from Noah's ancestry. Unless someone is in complete denial, this does indeed becomes evidence.

    Is the fact that everyone (Chinese, Hawaiians, Bible) used even the same "Noah" variation, at the very least, circumstantial evidence?

    Now I am offended by you, being illogical and hostile towards me and I don't even know you.

    ReplyDelete
  40. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  41. ..or Chinese "Nü Wa" or the countless of flood legends throughout the world

    NuWa is nothing like a flood legend.

    ...logically one has to say it's "possible" or even "probable" that there was a flood and that we all came from Noah's ancestry.

    Or maybe most of mankind has always lived near bodies of water.
    Besides, if there was a global flood there would be physical evidence. And as some of the cultures on Earth are older than 2348 BC, they probably would have noticed everyone on earth dying except for 8 people.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Chris,

    'Besides, if there was a global flood there would be physical evidence."

    Have you read The Genesis Flood?

    Its the book that started it all. Might be a good read for you.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Have you read The Genesis Flood?
    Its the book that started it all.


    I haven't read it but I have a fair few books by creationists that I still have (from when I was "studying" apologetics). The author seems to be a AIG speaker.

    Here's some quotes from the wiki page:

    The work The Genesis Flood by Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris has been criticized for being scientifically inaccurate.[2] Furthermore, the work takes quotes from scientists either out of context or completely misquoting sources.[3] For example, the writers took sources out of context and left out the date of "millions" without noting the exclusion with ellipse.[3]

    John G. Solum, a geologist with the USGS, has criticized the work for being inaccurate.[4] Solum noted, "Whitcomb and Morris are mistaken about the nature of the rocks associated with thrust faults. Their claim about fossils is based on a YEC misunderstanding of how rocks are dated relative to each other, and how the geologic column was constructed" and, "Morris' explanation of relative dating is not "somewhat oversimplified", it is entirely incorrect."

    ReplyDelete
  44. Chris,

    If you use wiki for any source of information then you are deceived.

    It depends on your sources ultimately. Sure atheists with an agenda would say something like that.

    Here is the review from WIKI(creation) also.

    You do understand I could, right now, go change wiki to reflect whatever I want? Garbage in = Garbage out.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Chris,

    If you use wiki for any source of information then you are deceived.

    It depends on your sources ultimately. Sure atheists with an agenda would say something like that.

    Here is the review from WIKI(creation) also.


    1) wikipedia lists it's sources. Your link has no list of sources.
    2) If you follow the sources, you'll see that it's not only "atheists with an agenda".

    In fact, a certain site has a list of the errors from each page of the book.

    ReplyDelete
  46. "Chris,

    'Besides, if there was a global flood there would be physical evidence.'"

    Out-Of-Place-ARTifacts.

    http://www.s8int.com/

    Elton.

    ReplyDelete

Bring your "A" game. To link: <a href="url">text</a>