Feel free to reprint and to edit collections of my essays! (link to conditions)
"La vérité et l'érudition, en effet, ne sauraient être hérétiques, au point de redouter d'utiliser ce que des érudits, même hérétiques, ont écrit et exposé avec justesse". (Dom Guarin)
Pages
- Accueil
- Blogs by same author
- Un blog a été donné à vos étudiants.
- Where You Looking For Something Else?
- Apologetics Section
- Can we get this straight? I never said I was atheist up to becoming Catholic
- Weakness of CMI : Church History
- A Catholic who will go unnamed
- Reading this on iPad?
- Dixit Aquinas
- Are All Responses to CMI Here?
- What is a Miracle? What Does it Take?
- Link to Haydock Comment
- My Carreer Shouldn't Depend on Merriam Webster Spelling
lundi 23 mai 2022
When was the Upper Palaeolithic? Flood to Babel or post-Babel?
Origen has a few sermons on Genesis. The one on the Flood states that the words of Lamech about Noah (in Genesis 5:29), namely:
And he called his name Noe, saying: This same shall comfort us from the works and labours of our hands on the earth, which the Lord hath cursed.
... are only fulfilled typologically, in Christ, it is impossible to have them fulfilled in the son of Lamech back then.
In fact not. The Palaeolithic means the society of hunter-gatherers. And hunter-gatherers do in fact repose from agriculture.
So, was the Palaeolithic (after the démise of Neanderthals at least) post-Flood or post-Babel?
Kent Hovind compares the post-Flood situation to a Gilligan's Island scenario. CMI and AiG seem to have a preference for putting this Palaeolithic (and even the Neanderthals) post-Babel. Technology loss due to populations splitting up.
And I think the answer is given : it was Noah, not Nimrod, who brought repose from agricultural pursuits./HGL
Inscription à :
Publier les commentaires (Atom)
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire