Christian Theological/Philosophical Book Club discussion

The Cafe - Open Discussion > The Unfortunate Absence of Ante-Deluvian Chinese

Comments Showing 1-22 of 22 (22 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by [deleted user] (new)

Yahweh opened the windows of Heaven in 2348 BCE, and let in the water of the biblical universe outside, and drowned all the men and the women and the innocent little children and unborn babies who had never heard of this genocidal, mythological Middle East deity.

Consequently, every last African, Chinese and Zulu one of us under the dome of Heaven, is descended from the Middle East patriarch, Noah.

Goodreads author and group member Joshua Woodward ...

... believes (so it must be true) that Chinese people did not exist before the mythological Bible Flood.

And he also gives credence to Robert Core's conclusion that Chinese people with their "Oriental eye" may have been descended from the biblical Cain. That would mean that one of the unnamed wives on the Ark (you don't really need to give women much of a mention in the Bible) must have been a descendant of Cain.

For some, this stuff is still, quite literally, God's own truth.

Joshua gives us his understanding:

And I must thank you for pointing me to the Chinese. I didn't realise they have the great flood recorded in their history. In their records it happened around 2500 BC. stunning.

Maybe Robert is right about them being Cain's decendants.

From: Post 57 and others

So, is this Gods own truth? It's still in all the Bibles I can find.

message 2: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 1864 comments Just for the record:
I believe Noah's Flood was localized in the Sea of Marmara about 3 million years ago (the Garden episode was about 6 million years ago). Cain was a son of Adam (well before Noah's excellent adventure) and his descendants could have migrated ANYWHERE. The Bible just leaves them hanging with just a few notes about some of the more prominent tribesman. IF the mark of Cain was the "oriental eye" then it became a viable heritable trait in the Far East, surviving intact until today. In other locales, it was bred out over time. This is pure speculation, based upon putting a few salient points together, but that's what book writers do!

message 3: by [deleted user] (new)

Robert wrote: "Just for the record:
I believe Noah's Flood was localized in the Sea of Marmara about 3 million years ago (the Garden episode was about 6 million years ago). Cain was a son of Adam (well before Noa..."

So there we are, we've got "I believe" to kick us off. Always very handy to preface things you have no evidence for with "I believe" - especially if your audience/congregation is used to hearing you utter this in a very theatrically severe and convincing tone - and then you can continue to spout whatever nonsense your faith has allowed you to dream up.

The biblical version of far more ancient Middle East "Flood" myths has the "Flood" covering Mt Ararat - making it 4.5 kilometres deep. More than enough to drown Cain's descendants in China (if we play along with this rubbish) so you have to throw your Bible in the bin if you want to push the localised barrow.

Counting the begats gives you Yahweh's non-existent mythological "Flood" in precisely 2348 BCE - not 3,000,000 years ago. You have to throw your Bible in the bin again to try and make the mythology fit your clutching at scientific straws.

You used the term "pure speculation" here and the term "imagination" in another post.

As I say, Christianity is very much made up of just such fantasy.

No one I know of demonstrates a single claim regarding Jesus that goes beyond imagination and pure speculation, based entirely - that is without external corroboration - on the propaganda of Jesus' followers. And even the authorship of the propaganda - which Christians offer as "The Word of God" - can't be verified.

Some ancient writers make mention of the followers of Christ long after Jesus had left the Middle East to visit the proto-Mormon Christians - but that is it. The followers could have been the Jewish equivalent of Harry Potter fans. Jesus may have been no more than a fictional character in Jewish literature.

message 4: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 1864 comments Stuart - time as we know it began with Abraham about 4000 years ago. Anything before that is visionary so time and "facts" are highly elastic. Outside of belief that God created precisely what He said He created, early Genesis (before Abraham) is considered allegorical by most. Fundamentalists take it literally and are so rabid about it that they are looked at askance by most Christians. As a scientist, I tried to explore the visions through a modern microscope in Creation Strikes Back. Many liked it, some didn't, but it was a real hoot doing research and publishing findings and theories. Hence, the imagination part.

message 5: by Joshua (new)

Joshua Woodward | 556 comments So nice to see you are still talking about me after all this time. The flooding recorded in the biblical record and Chinese history is remarkably coincident. I don't know how that all works of course. But it's worth consideration.

I don't follow Christ because I think the scriptures are scientific documents. I follow Jesus Christ because He lives.

message 6: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 1864 comments Joshua = whether a document is scientifically oriented or not is immaterial. God created the phenomena that are currently investigated under the province of science and they are inescapably intertwined with any in-depth explanatory effort. Your Faith isn't an arena where Scientific Method establishes a foothold. If you believe Jesus Christ lives (as do I) that guides your journey through life - not some never-ending debate about how life evolves.

message 7: by Izaiah (new)

Izaiah Dawkins (EagleIProphet) | 51 comments I agree totally my belief in God isn't based on the scripture, but the scripture is the way of life for the believer . Honestly you can't believe him without truly following his teachings. Just as an aside science and the Bible align in certain areas because the word of God is true.

message 8: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 1864 comments Izaiah - well stated!!

message 9: by Izaiah (new)

Izaiah Dawkins (EagleIProphet) | 51 comments Thank you, sir

message 10: by [deleted user] (new)

My viewpoint as someone who works in science is that science is a study based on experiences in the known universe. Or, that is, empirical, to use the philosophical terminology. Where or how that known universe may have originated isn't a matter that is susceptible to being experienced, or to being extended to by principles, like mathematics, derived from experience. So the creation is compatible with science and so is any miracle that could be thought of as a little piece of extra creation. The law that anti-religious people bring to bear against this idea, Occam's Razor or the principle of parsimony, only says that to posit creation or the miraculous is to add too much extra stuff into your explanations, to make a story that is too complicated to be believable. Cut all that extra stuff out and you come down to a 'via negativa' that has a big bang or some equivalent start-up from nothing or from homeostasis (everything the same) and then complete consistency thereafter, no miracles.

This is all very well as a sort of matronly tidiness of the mind, but it isn't necessarily the case and need not be accepted by any scientist. We do try to repeatedly verify things as well as we can in empirical life, but there is one interfering factor that is often not taken account of. The book I've written explains this to some degree. The issue is that opportunistic systems, which are systems that are largely able to modify their own causal basis of operation at a certain level through recursive processes (like evolution, major environmental self-alteration, change of heart, epiphany, personal growth, repentance) are never quite the same twice, and so no proposition about them can ever be fully verified or falsified, except in a limited and often temporary way. Deterministic systems, like physics, chemistry and math, which are not able to change their own working rules, are the places where verifiability and falsifiability work best. So, Occam's razor is often not truly applicable in opportunistic systems, and the number of influences on whether mosquito species X increases or decreases over 3,000 years, or whether I decide to wear my black shirt or my blue shirt today, may be beyond estimation, and certainly unlikely to be exactly repeatable. Parsimony doesn't apply.

God also, if we suggest his existence is real, is then also to be seen as master of a field of opportunity, certainly possessing the ability of all conscious entities to self-modify ("change his mind"). He (who need not be seen as male) may also flout the rule of parsimony and tweak our cosy bed of maths, the universe, with other causal inputs at will. Think of it as writing in a few extra lines of code into a program your wrote and then removing them again after the program has done its procedure.

Science and religion need not be at odds at all. That, then, forces religion to be very self-critical and not see everything in the light of giddy superstition, making up miracles willy-nilly, but I think we can handle the responsibility. Obviously more could be said about that but my time is up for now.

message 11: by Izaiah (new)

Izaiah Dawkins (EagleIProphet) | 51 comments I agree totally, science and religion go hand in hand .

message 12: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 1864 comments As a plant geneticist who manipulates the genomes of crops sold for cash in order to maximize their market value, I must admit I tend to see science as a vehicle for improvement of man's existence. This would be true for any type of engineer or rose, dog, and horse breeder. Science for science's sake is a luxury enjoyed by ancient university researchers long unconcerned with tenure. In either case, Mark, you are correct in stating Occam's Razor is not applicable. I don't know if God is opportunistic as I would be in stretching the limit's of a species DNA, but He certainly has a Master Plan. That will play out largely in accordance with the book of Revelation, but the timing is uncertain, even for Him. Mankind could delay the 2nd Coming by somehow keeping the Word paramount globally or speed Jesus' return by turning universally toward Idols. When I put on my prophesy hat, I believe the time is pretty well nigh.

message 13: by Izaiah (new)

Izaiah Dawkins (EagleIProphet) | 51 comments I agree the signs of Christ's return are among us . I am just awaiting the time for the word of the book of prophesy: Revelations to come to pass.

message 14: by Ariela (new)

Ariela Solsol (arielah) Many years I had a prophetic divine encounter in which I saw Revelations 18 come to life before my spiritual eyes. Now the entire world is seeing them unfold before their physical eyes.

message 15: by Izaiah (new)

Izaiah Dawkins (EagleIProphet) | 51 comments wow the manifestation of God

message 16: by Ariela (new)

Ariela Solsol (arielah) Greetings, Izaiah!
There was much more to the revelation which included prophesies and God's plan of salvation from His perspective and how He views sin and forgiveness! The account is now on .99 promo. Would love your feedback..if you read it. Bless you!


message 17: by Izaiah (new)

Izaiah Dawkins (EagleIProphet) | 51 comments Thank you so much I will definately look into this book. May God Bless and Increase you.

message 18: by [deleted user] (last edited Oct 19, 2015 09:27AM) (new)

In the town where I grew up, many free magazines were given out sponsored by Herbert W. Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God. It propagated many such millennialist preachings, along with its own distinct ideology that stated that Britain and the USA had been revealed as the lost tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, and that in the final years of this world, they would be all but overwhelmed by what the mags called the 'yellow races.'

Various histories of alleged sexual misconduct eventually humbled the mighty television empire. The concept of racial election in Christianity has all but vanished.

I don't personally take imminent millennialism seriously and abide by the broader interpretation of the saying "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."

The Son himself said that it would arrive before the end of his own generation, or at least, it seems he said that, so clearly he was correct in saying that even he did not know the day. If he wasn't given the accurate revelation, who was?

message 19: by Izaiah (new)

Izaiah Dawkins (EagleIProphet) | 51 comments I've heard that I have heard those teachings . I personally believe that the only true revelation is in the Word of God . If you allow it to interpret itself for you your understanding of the world will be enhanced .

message 20: by Izaiah (new)

Izaiah Dawkins (EagleIProphet) | 51 comments Revelation a : an act of revealing or communicating divine truth. b : something that is revealed by God to humans. 2. a : an act of revealing to view or making known. b : something that is revealed; especially : an enlightening or astonishing disclosure
-It's only going to be revealed to who God wants to disclose it to.

message 21: by Ariela (new)

Ariela Solsol (arielah) Exactly! A true revelation of God is always Biblically sound and never adds or takes away from His Word. Not everything spiritual is 'of' God. If the revelation is in harmony with His Word...then it is 'of' Him.

message 22: by Izaiah (new)

Izaiah Dawkins (EagleIProphet) | 51 comments I believe that's one of the biggest problems with the church : they think that everything spiritual is of God honestly prophets and revelation is sent to confirm the things God has already spoken in his Word and over His people.

back to top


Christian Theological/Philosophical Book Club

unread topics | mark unread

Books mentioned in this topic