Genesis 6:5,6

And God seeing that the wickedness of men was great on the earth, and that all the thought of their heart was bent upon evil at all times, t repented him that he had made man on the earth. And being touched inwardly with sorrow of heart,

Haydock comment on Genesis 6 has these comments:

Ver. 5. At all times. Hebrew: only evil continually. They had no relish for any thing else: as we may say of a glutton, he thinks of nothing but his belly. Yet some good thoughts would occur occasionally, and we may grant that they did some things which were not sinful. M. --- If we follow corrupt nature, and live among sinners, we find a law within us warring against the spirit; and a very powerful grace is necessary to rescue us from such a dangerous situation. C. --- Though the expressions in this place seem general, they must be understood with some limitations. W.

Ver. 6. It repented him, &c. God, who is unchangeable, is not capable of repentance, grief, or any other passion. But these expressions are used to declare the enormity of the sins of men, which was so provoking as to determine their Creator to destroy these his creatures, whom before he had so much favoured. Ch. --- God acted outwardly as a man would do who repented. H.

No one of the commenters here was a Church Father, M = Menochius, C = ?, W, Witham, Ch. = Challoner, H. = Haydock.

What about Postilla in libros geneseos?

Videns autem Deus, quod multa malitia hominum et cetera. Posuit hominum culpam poena dignam. Hic ponit justam Dei indignationem, et puniendi dispositionem. Dicitur igitur, videns, etc. videns siquidem non tantum exteriora mala opera, sed interiores cogitationes et internos motus animorum. Unde sequitur, et quod cuncta cogitatio hominis intenta esset ad malum. Videt autem ista visione intelligentiae simplicis, non approbationis. Unde ex hoc incutit nobis timorem, qui non possumus effugere Dei cognitionem. Poenituit eum, quod hominem fecisset. More humano loquitur. Et est quaedam figura, quae anthropospathos dicitur, quando passiones hominum Deo attribuuntur. Mos autem hominum est, quod quando unum opus destruunt, faciunt ex cordis displicentia. Cum etiam aliquid fecerint, et quando putant, quod aliquod malum potest contingere, praeveniendo occurrunt et destruunt, et impediunt, et praetimentes in futurum timore peccata vitant. Tactus dolore cordis intrinsecus. In nobis enim actum detestationis sequitur passio doloris. Et isto modo hic loquitur more humano. Unde vult dicere, quod habuit displicentiam. Et accipit vel significat causam per effectum. Delebo hominem, quem creavi, a facie terrae, ab homine usque ad animantia. Sed quare delevit animantia? Dic, quod in signum detestationis eorum, pro quibus erant facta, et ut ostenderetur, quod non sunt, nec conservantur, nisi propter hominem. CORPUS THOMISTICUM "Ignoti Auctoris" Postilla in libros Geneseos a capite VI ad caput XI https://www.corpusthomisticum.org/xgn06.html

I think "ignoti autoris" is wrong, and the older attributtion to St. Thomas is right, but that he wrote it when young, in Italy, before coming to Paris, probably already when he was still among Benedictines.

For the moment, I am not translating, just noting that he did not bring up what came to my mind. It can be noted, though, that he says, like one Church Father, that beasts were destroyed along with men, because they were created for men.

6:6 And the Lord God, having seen that the wicked actions of men were multiplied upon the earth, and that every one in his heart was intently brooding over evil continually, 7 then God laid it to heart that he had made man upon the earth, and he pondered it deeply. 8 And God said, I will blot out man whom I have made from the face of the earth, even man with cattle, and reptiles with flying creatures of the sky, for I am grieved that I have made them. 9 But Noah found grace before the Lord God. THEODORET OF CYRUS. Why was the bulk of the human race wiped out by the flood? His intention was to annihilate Cain’s line, but since the tribe of the virtuous had intermarried with Cain’s line, it was also involved in the punishment. Wanting to make a beginning of a new way of life, he preserved Noah and his sons along with their wives, for Noah was good and righteous, one who had come from the line of the virtuous men and shunned intercourse with lawlessness. [Theodoret of Cyrus, Question 50 on Genesis] DIDYMUS OF ALEXANDRIA. Even though the brute beasts did not act with free will, it was logical that they should perish along with the human being, for whom they were made to meet his needs, only an ember surviving from them along with Noah. [Didymus of Alexandria, Commentary on Genesis] JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTIANOPLE. I am grieved that I have made them. Not that God regrets; perish the thought; rather, Sacred Scripture recounts it to us in human fashion so as to teach us that the excess of their sins aroused the loving God to such anger. “The Lord God reconsidered what he had done in creating the human being on the earth”- in other words, Surely by doing this I have not been responsible for making him fall into such disaster and become guilty of his own ruin? By doing this I placed him in a position of such dignity right from the very outset and showed such concern for him so that he might choose virtue and be saved from ruin. But since he did not cooperate with my loving kindness, it then proved better to put an end to his evil designs. [John Chrysostom, Homily 22 on Genesis] AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. What in some Latin codices appears written thus: “and repented”. And God said: I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the earth, in Greek, who, rather than “repented,” may mean “reconsidered.” Also some Latin codices present this term. [Augustine of Hippo, Locutiones de Genesi. 14] Patristic Bible Commentaries ~ The Early Church Fathers Commentary on the Bible : Genesis 6 https://litteraldotorg.wordpress.com/genesis-6/

No, they not either ... in a sense perhaps later on Chrysostom on verses 10 to 14 (9 to 13 in the ordinary verse division):

And see how Scripture does not consider mankind worthy of more than unimportant memory, but calls them by the name of earth, at once indicating the gravity of their sins and the wrath of God. Now the earth was corrupt, it says, before God: that is, they did everything differently from how God had instructed them, trampling on His commandments, losing the inborn judge of human nature through idleness. Did you see, beloved, how evil sin is, how it brings it about that men are not worthy to be called by their own name? Again, hear what follows: And the Lord God saw the earth, and it was corrupt. See again how it calls them earth. And afterwards, having called them earth once, and again, and a third time, so that no one might suppose He speaks of the physical earth, it says: For all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth. Nor here does it honor them with the name of man, but calls them flesh: by which it wishes to teach us that it speaks not of this earth, but of men clothed in flesh and devoting themselves completely to earthly works. [John Chrysostom, Homily 22 on Genesis]

Earth may be repeated, not because of being the basest element of the four, as Chrysostom knew them, but because of some kind of globalism. And flesh because of some point involving biology.

This brings us to my point, which no Church Father has directly denied : a man having all his thoughts on evil at all times need not involve his being himself evil, he could be forced by some globalism to think of an evil.

What are masks in the streets supposed to "remind" us of? Well, Covid is an evil. No one pretends it is a good. But could part of the evil of our situation be to be reminded of it "at all times"?

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Mary Magdalene
22.VII.2021

Well Said, Shaun Doyle (No, Creationism is Not Racist)

Just Linking:

Creation: a form of white supremacy?
More mendacious agitprop from Scientific American
by Shaun Doyle | Published: 15 July 2021 (GMT+10)
https://creation.com/creation-not-white-supremacy

Cave Art

Shem the Cave Painter? Or Japheth? · Cave Art · Evolutionists have a war problem

LiveScience

Low oxygen levels would have caused hallucinations, but where the oxygen levels were higher, they found other means, that's how cave art was done, folks!

Answers in Genesis

Says who?

Me:

"40 000 BP" = actual year 2957 BC, namely the Flood. "14 000 BP / 12 000 BC" =* ...

2711 B. Chr.

0.302799 pmC/100, so dated as 12 611 B. Chr.

2688 B. Chr.

0.328739 pmC/100, so dated as 11 888 B. Chr.

(12 611 + 11 888)/2 = 12 249.5 BC = roughly = 12 000 BC
(2711 + 2688)/2 = 2699.5 BC, or 2700 BC, Noah had about a century left to live.

So, whoever started the trend must have been on the Ark.

Altered states of mind? Well, the Ark doing some rollings (without capsizing!) might have had a somewhat hypnotic effect, so, maybe there was some kind of nostalgia or craving for this ... and drawing animals, certainly spending c. 1 year on very close terms with animals would make such drawings a fairly nostalgic moment.

As I think Babel ended at birth of Phalec, 401 after the Flood, I also think it began c. 50 years earlier, when Noah died.

This makes the carbon ages mentioned - and my lineup is fairly useless for non-carbon uniformitarian ones** - into the time when Noah was still alive.

On previous tables, I put it into the time when Shem was still alive, but since then I obviously revised when exactly Babel / Göbekli Tepe fits into the Biblical timeline. If it was Shem's contemporary Japheth, why didn't Japheth or his wife continue?

* Using my famous New Tables:
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

** So, it says nothing about thermoluminiscence age of 40 000 BP for Mungo woman, but it says sth about the carbon age for her, c. 20 000 BP, depending on what tissue.

12,000 Years Ago - How Far Back was that Really?

Terru from Urkesh Thare, father of Abraham? · 12,000 Years Ago - How Far Back was that Really?

Another hat tip to a video by AiG:

Who Is Paying for Baby Parts? - Answers News: April 28, 2021
April 28th 2021 | Answers in Genesis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKtcAaa2v3U

Another article:

New Scientist : Untouched nature was almost as rare 12,000 years ago as it is now
EARTH 19 April 2021, By Layal Liverpool
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2274704-untouched-nature-was-almost-as-rare-12000-years-ago-as-it-is-now/

Key quote:

They found that most – 72.5 per cent – of Earth’s land has been shaped by human societies since as far back as 10,000 BC, including more than 95 per cent of temperate and 90 per cent of tropical woodlands.

And another application of my tables.

Creation vs. Evolution : New Tables
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

Now, where in the tables does 10,000 BC fit? Just before Babel:

2621 B. Chr.

0.406138 pmC/100, so dated as 10 071 B. Chr.

A little caution. The tables were hand made, without computer aid, and the Flood to Babel table ends 2599 BC, while the beginning to end of Babel table begins 2607 BC. So, instead of taking this as "precisely 22 years before Babel" (as per within table I-II) or as "precisely 15 years before Babel" (as between table I-II and table II-III), I prefer you take this as a rough estimate.

This means, the people around back then would have been available in plenty.

It also means, if my identification of Babel is right, that spread of mankind as per Genesis 10 and dispersion of nations as per Genesis 11 are two different events. It also means, therefore, that the sinful intent behind Babel was not refusing to spread, but - for instance, as per my idea that was really Josephus' first - insisting of having a plan B when God had said it would not be necessary.

Genesis 10:32 These are the families of Noe, according to their peoples and nations. By these were the nations divided on the earth after the flood.

Had happened.

Genesis 11:9 And therefore the name thereof was called Babel, because there the language of the whole earth was confounded: and from thence the Lord scattered them abroad upon the face of all countries.

Had not yet happened.

Now, after signing, I will go back to their video, that of AiG, and I will see when in the Biblical timeline they put it.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Anthony-Maria Zaccaria
5.VII.2021

Cremonae, in Insubria, sancti Antonii-Mariae Zaccaria Confessoris, qui Clericorum Regularium sancti Pauli et Angelicarum Virginum fuit Institutor; atque, virtutibus omnibus et mirdculis insignis, a Leone Papa Decimo tertio inter Sanctos adscriptus est. Ejus corpus Mediolani, in Ecclesia sancti Barnabae, colitur.

PS. They do not give an alternative point in time immediately, but they state that human land management has sometimes been for the better and good that the article discovers it. I can confirm from an outing in Bokskogen (close to Malmö), if the landscape (it's a forest) had been pristine, it would have been lots more hazel, alder, brambles, impossible to walk through, since the waters would tend to that kind of moist vegetation. The beeches from which the forest gets its name (bok is both book and beech tree) grew after tilled soil, probably burnt and then tilled, had been re-abandoned. The guide told me that the tilling was "5000 years ago" and that is actually less than 4000 years ago:

1778 B. Chr.

0.859766 pmC/100, so dated as 3028 B. Chr.

It's on table IV to V. It's before Djoser's coffin and him being Joseph's pharao. But arguably, Joseph was already born./HGL

PPS - they use "evolutionary timeline" which, like "uniformitarian timeline" is imprecise, conflating the carbon date with other dating methods, that are not the same and don't reduce to Biblical dates the same way./HGL

Terru from Urkesh Thare, father of Abraham?

Terru from Urkesh Thare, father of Abraham? · 12,000 Years Ago - How Far Back was that Really?

watchJerusalem : Has Abraham’s Father, Terah, Been Discovered?
Near Eastern tablets that name and describe an individual closely matching the biblical patriarch Terah
By Christopher Eames • June 21 (2021)
https://watchjerusalem.co.il/1233-has-abrahams-father-terah-been-discovered

I would say no.

1900 BC or 1800 BC must here be understood as carbon dated.

We are therefore arguably dealing with people who take carbon dates for real dates, even this far back, and on top of that use the Jewish chronology which is severely shortened in the context of the weeks of Daniel.

Masoretic text has same chronology as Vulgate and King James, meaning, if chronologies match in post-Christian times (they have two years more back to destruction of Jerusalem), and there were no shortenng, one would end up with, in 2007, the anno mundi year 2007 + 4004 = 6011. Instead, it was 5777. Now, 6011 - 5777 = 234 years. So, in their view, a date of 1800 BC would be like our 1800 + 234 = 2034 BC. And Thare was certainly already alive then.

But remember, not just do they have too short an OT chronology, they also deal with carbon dates equalling real ones. Back in real 2034 BC, what would an organic object alive then leave as carbon date today?

2041 B. Chr.*

0.766964 pmC/100, so dated as 4241 B. Chr.

2019 B. Chr.

0.778962 pmC/100, so dated as 4069 B. Chr.

It would date some time between 4241 BC and 4069 BC.

Inversely, if sth carbon dates as, no use taking "2034 BC" as it matches in their equivalent of Biblical chronology, but rather 1800 BC, it would be from ...

1588 B. Chr.*

0.97068 pmC/100, so dated as 1838 B. Chr.

1566 B. Chr.

0.97441 pmC/100, so dated as 1776 B. Chr.

... between 1588 BC and 1566 BC, when Moses was growing up as Prince in Egypt.

So, the tablet for Terru is way too late to refer to, individually, someonenot just named Thare, but actually the father of Abraham.

But let's see how many years they are apart : 2034 BC - 1577 BC = 457 years.

Let's compare Gustavs, in Sweden. King Gustav Wasa became king in 1527, 1527 + 457 = 1984, and that's a few years after the death of Gustaf VI Adolf.

If Thare ruled, not just in Urkesh, but anywhere near it (like Urfa), our Terru would have a comparable chronological distance to him as Gustaf VI Adolf to Gustav Wasa. So, he could well be named for him.**

Hat tip to Answers in Genesis who mentioned the discovery:

Did Archeologists Find Terah? - Answers News: June 30, 2021
Diffused directly on June 30, 2021 | Answers in Genesis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbjDpfcTiUw

Unfortunately, while their scepsis for identity is good, but vaguely expressed, they also claim Woolley's Ur is "the traditional" Ur. It's not. Here wikipedia gives a better overview:

Ur is possibly the city of Ur Kasdim mentioned in the Book of Genesis as the birthplace of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim patriarch Abraham (Ibrahim in Arabic), traditionally believed to have lived some time in the 2nd millennium BC. There are however conflicting traditions and scholarly opinions identifying Ur Kasdim with the sites of Şanlıurfa, Urkesh, Urartu or Kutha.

The biblical Ur is mentioned four times in the Torah or Old Testament, with the distinction "of the Kasdim/Kasdin"—traditionally rendered in English as "Ur of the Chaldees". The Chaldeans had settled in the vicinity by around 850 BC, but were not extant anywhere in Mesopotamia during the 2nd millennium BC period when Abraham is traditionally held to have lived. The Chaldean dynasty did not rule Babylonia (and thus become the rulers of Ur) until the late 7th century BC, and held power only until the mid 6th century BC. The name is found in Genesis 11:28, Genesis 11:31, and Genesis 15:7. In Nehemiah 9:7, a single passage mentioning Ur is a paraphrase of Genesis.

In 1625, the site was visited by Pietro Della Valle, who recorded the presence of ancient bricks stamped with strange symbols, cemented together with bitumen, as well as inscribed pieces of black marble that appeared to be seals.

European archaeologists did not identify Tell el-Muqayyar as the site of Ur until Henry Rawlinson successfully deciphered some bricks from that location, brought to England by William Loftus in 1849.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur#Identification_with_biblical_Ur

While Urkesh is near Haran, so is Urfa. Or Şanlıurfa. "Venerable Urfa". Local tradition, both of Jews and of Muslims consider this as the youth residence of Abraham. That they also consider him as contemporary with Nimrod and as inventor of Kebab is perhaps less valuable.

This obviously ties in with my idea of Göbekli Tepe, very close to Urfa, as Babel.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Visitation of the Blessed Virgin
to Elisabeth
2.VII.2021

* Creation vs. Evolution : New Tables
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

pmC/100 means, pmC is by itself a percentage fraction, I have found counting in pure decimal fractions somewhat easier and not changed the results.

And pmC as such - the level of C14 in relation to C12. Measured in percentages of the modern level, corrected to preindustrial values.

** And the present king, Charles XVI, has Gustaf as added second name.