CMI caption: "Original picture of King Tut’s tomb showing the unusual way items were placed." - Photo - Harry Burton
Posted on 09/11/2014 7:49:21 AM PDT by fishtank
Egyptian chronology and the Bible. Framing the issues Do the dates ascribed to the Egyptian dynasties falsify the date of biblical creation?
by Gary Bates
Published: 2 September 2014 (GMT+10)
Egyptian chronology can be a challenging subject for biblical creationists. That’s because the secular, majority view about these chronologies extends further back than an objective reading of the biblical chronogenealogies allows for creation: a little over 6,000 years ago. These chronologies are hotly debated among Christians and secularists alike, with the consensus being increasingly challenged. Moreover, some of the incredible Egyptian monuments like the great pyramids on the Giza Plateau have dates ascribed to them that would have them being built before the earth-reshaping Flood of Noah’s time around 4,500 years ago. Following a strict biblical chronology, Egyptian civilization cannot predate creation, nor can the pyramids be pre-Flood constructions.
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
CMI caption: "Original picture of King Tut’s tomb showing the unusual way items were placed." - Photo - Harry Burton
Sticking by a 6000 year earth is crazy and I am no evolutionist.
ping
Noah patriarchs lifespan
There is information in this single graph that cannot be explained by an old-earth mindset. There are several implications in this data. It's worth pondering.
How would they know it was unusual?
No other unplundered tomb has ever been discovered.
Why not?
The earth was inundated by massive tsunami waves that cascaded over the earth, leaving multiple distinct sedimentary layers that are many meters thick.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbagD5bOsoo
The talk starts at 8:00 minutes. (by John Baumgardner, PhD geophysics, writer of the Terra finite element plate tectonics code).
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2000GC000115/full
Role of a low-viscosity zone in stabilizing plate tectonics: Implications for comparative terrestrial planetology
Mark A. Richards1, Woo-Sun Yang2, John R. Baumgardner3 andHans-Peter Bunge4
Article first published online: 23 AUG 2001
Actually, the book Pharaohs and Kings: A Biblical Quest is excellent on matching the Bible to the chronology. As is sometime the case in ‘science,’ the entire chronology is based on one person’s contention and no one worked to disprove an assumption. Ever since then, nearly every archaeologist has runs and worked, based on this assumption.
Egyptian Pharaonic chronology is in turmoil and as such is useless for dating anything.
“Sticking by a 6000 year earth is crazy and I am no evolutionist.”
Oh really?! It is truly not science whenever it attempts to date or recreate history. Neither is it science that ignores or sweeps contradictory facts under the rug.
101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
“Sticking by a 6000 year earth is crazy and I am no evolutionist.”
Oh really?! It is truly not science whenever it attempts to date or recreate history. Neither is it science that ignores or sweeps contradictory facts under the rug.
101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
“Even though certain of the Giza structures are built from the same kind of limestone as the Sphinx, none of them show the same degree of precipitation-induced weathering. . . . The prominent precipitation-induced erosion on the Sphinx indicates that it must have been built when the climate was much wetter. . . . The Khafre complex was built to merge with and complement the Sphinx, not vice versa. . . . Since [the western] side and front weathering is 50 percent to 100 percent deeper, it is reasonable to estimate that the excavation at those points is 50 to 100 percent older than the now 4,500-year-old work at the Sphinx’s rump. This line of thinking dates the original excavation of the Sphinx to somewhere on the order of 7000 to 5000 B.C., a figure that fits with the climatic history revealed in the rain erosion patterns.” -Robert M. Schoch, _Voices of the Rocks: A Scientist Looks at Catastrophes and Ancient Civilizations_, pp.41-43.
An outlook such as this comports with the report of a worldwide deluge within a literal interpretation of the generations as recorded in the Books of Moses.
I would like to be informed as to how studies in plate tectonics preclude, or give answer to, dating the Khafre complex to pre- or post-flood geology.
Silly, it’s because the conclusions have to fit the original assumptions.
BTW, all, this isn’t a ggg topic, that’s a pirate that put in the keyword.
Quibble — the entire conventional chronology of ancient Egypt wasn’t based on one person’s contention; that said, Rohl’s “Pharaohs and Kings” is an interesting introduction to some of the problems with the conventional chronology.
Also as PIF notes, trying to use the conventional chronology to date events in neighboring areas doesn’t yield productive results. The neighboring areas (including the Old Testament Israelite period) make a better set of timelines, which then can be used to straighten out the massive problems with the Egyptian chronology.
Thanks BenLurkin for the ping.
The Sphinx erosion was caused by rain falling over thousands of years, and not in a period of 40 days.
The head of the Sphinx was clearly recarved, as it has very little erosion (including wind erosion which must have occurred during the centuries when only the head was showing above the sand) and is out of scale with the rest of the sculpture.
It would be nice to see what is under the “repairs” which compose nearly 100 percent of the visible front legs and paws, but the body is clearly too large for the head. While it’s possible that the head was recarved in the Old Kingdom, it seems likely that it was recarved (or recarved again) during the New Kingdom, when there was a revival of interest in the Giza monuments.
Besides various pit tombs excavated in the area of the Sphinx (including Campbell’s Tomb, and the recent “tomb of Osiris”), the Menkaure / Mycerinus pyramid was reused for a New Kingdom era burial; the sarcophagus was removed during the 19th c, left by ship for England, and was lost when the ship went down.
Hey, it’s nearly 6018 years old now. ;’)
...the discovery of the Narmer Palette in 1897 which contained the earliest depiction of an Egyptian king and some of the earliest hieroglyphic inscription ever found... was subsequently dated to the 31st century BC. Whatever it does actually represent it was supposedly made some c. 900 years before the global Flood of Noah’s time, which would make its survival impossible.A carved stone couldn't have survived? The writer is a dunce.
While the OT may help with New Kingdom dates, the rest is a total mess which cannot be resolved until Egypt grants open access to many sites now closed, allows dating samples to be taken out of country, and our current crop of Egyptologists take a serious look at sites which no one has looked at since the late 19th and early 20th Centuries.
Then again this could well be a circular argument as much of what is considered New Kingdom and our understanding of Pharonic succession might depend on who did what to whom when in the Archaic and early Old Egyptian Kingdom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.