Can a Christian Explain to Me...

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]Experiment1 wrote:
No, I was legitimately curious as to how Christians explained the existence of Native Americans after all life outside of the ark was drowned in the genesis flood.

So far the only answers I’ve received were anachronism and canoes so I guess there won’t be a serious answer.[/quote]

And you expected someone to give you a rational argument for how the native americans came to america based on a book that doesnt mentioning them nor the continent of america. Or where you goal to use this “question” as a way of discrediting their faith. I believe the last one. I am a agnostic myself, but I dont understand the urge to disprove other peoples religions all the time.[/quote]

Don’t worry, it’s fairly obvious this feller doesn’t have the wherewithal to disprove much of anything.[/quote]

He`s probably coming here pumped up after watching hitchens and dawkins vids on youtube for six hours and are probably seing himself as the champion of the second enligthentment.

And he`s Probably a pseudo-progressive who thinks its inovative and original to argue against religion, like thats never been done before.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Experiment1 wrote:

Another thing, what about Kangaroos?[/quote]

They’re really cool animals.

What about aardvarks?[/quote]

Personally, I like Sloths…with a lisp!

Mufasa

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Experiment:

Many of us whom have been on “PWI” for a while understand that this thread would degenerate into 2,365 pages of:

  1. My Bible is better than your Bible.

  2. My God is better than your God

  3. My Religion is better than your Religion

  4. Mormons are a Cult (done!)

  5. Somebody is going to Hell AND

  6. Mixing in of the Constitution for good measure.

Mufasa

[/quote]

i like you

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Experiment1 wrote:

Another thing, what about Kangaroos?[/quote]

They’re really cool animals.

What about aardvarks?[/quote]

Personally, I like Sloths…with a lisp!

Mufasa[/quote]

I don’t lisp.

Not every Christian believes that the earth is 10,000 years old and Methuselah lived to be 936 years old. There are those of us who believe that it is important to consider the perspective of the human authors of the Bible. To wit: to assume that each book is written as a 19th, 20th, or 21st Century Westerner would write it is completely off base. Different cultures have different literary styles and perspectives. It is entirely logical, then to assume that the events occurred, but perhaps not when they are depicted in Genesis.

Nothing so complicated.

I wanted to know how Christians explained something that goes against something the Bible lists in fairly absolute terms. I don’t care about disproving their faith, I just want to see how their religion explains it and hope they have an answer that beats the canoes thing.

But hey, if you want to pretend I’m some sort of evil dwarf trying to spew youtube knowledge instead of a curious individual asking a simple question about what appears to be a continent sized hole in someone’s belief, that’s cool too.

If I’m to argue though:

I just went with the general consensus on the crossing of the ice/land bridge and didn’t mention something like the Little Ice Ages because they’re irrelevant to the question.

If they came before the last major ice age, it has no bearing on the question.

We have poof that Native Americans were in the Americas around the end of the last major ice age.

If there were ice ages after that, it still has no bearing on the question.

For this question, there’s no need for a PRECISE point of when Native Americans came to America as long as we can establish it came before Noah’s Ark.

doT that seems like the best answer so far. Slightly better than the canoes.

(Yawn) Oh good another 22 year old Bible scholar…It just never ends around here.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
(Yawn) Oh good another 22 year old Bible scholar…It just never ends around here.[/quote]We do? where?

I thought that the Native Americans crossed the land bridge after the last ice age?

CS

“Acosta was the first to propose the Asian migration hypothesis that is widely accepted today. Analysis
of the genetic drift of Siberian and American indian population suggests that migrants to North America
began leaving Asia approximately 30,000 years ago. The migration was possible because during the last
Ice age, from 70,000 to 10,000 years ago, huge glaciers locked up massive volumes of water and sea levels
where as much as 300 feet lower than they are today. Asia and North America, now separated by
the Bering Straits, were joined by a huge subcontinent of ice-free, tree-less grassland, wich geologists
have named Beringia.”
( Out of many. 2009. page 3 )

Source:

Title: Out of many( fifth edition )

Authors: John Mack Faragher( Yale University ), Mari Jo Buhle( Brown University ),
Daniel Czitrom( Mount Holyoke College ) and Susan H. Armitage( Washington State University )

Publiser: Pearson Education Inc… 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2009.

Well Acording to this source it happend roughly 30,000 years ago during the last ice age and I guess most historians and arceologists would agree with that. So I guess this thread have served its purpose.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
There are other models that don’t demand the 30,000 years.

There really is no question of how native Americans got here, just when. There are no hard and fast absolutes and certainly no “proof.” Anything that happened in ancient, prehistoric times are things that are subject to assumptions and must look for a theory in which to reside.[/quote]

It would be interresting if you could provide a source or preferably a link, as a history
student I would enjoy reading other hypothesis on the subject.

[quote]florelius wrote:<<< It would be interresting if you could provide a source or preferably a link, as a history
student I would enjoy reading other hypothesis on the subject.

[/quote]Even though we disagree on everything, from what I’ve observed you sure are a polite and decent feller I gotta say lol.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:<<< It would be interresting if you could provide a source or preferably a link, as a history
student I would enjoy reading other hypothesis on the subject.

[/quote]Even though we disagree on everything, from what I’ve observed you sure are a polite and decent feller I gotta say lol.
[/quote]

Agreed.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

They’re completely relevant. If you don’t understand how then you didn’t read my post. If you didn’t read my post then why bother with this discourse? If you did read my post and still come to an “irrelevant” conclusion then you’re not smart enough to even begin to bandy this about. [/quote]

Please enlighten me then. How are they relevant to the point?

Native American Artifacts dating from ~9000 BCE have been found, meaning that’s the latest the first natives could have arrived by, so we can safely use this as a starting point for the question. Any ice ages after this are irrelevant because we’ve already established the presence of Native Americans and their ongoing cultures until the European arrival.

Just a question…if Native Indians [I’ve always felt naming them Native Americans was weird…naming the slaughtered people after those that killed them?..not that Native Indians is that much better] were to have come to North America around the the 1500’s - 1600’s as was suggested, does that imply that the Native Indians arrived just before Columbus found the ‘New World’ in 1492? That just seems highly unlikely to me…

OP,

There are all shapes, sizes and beliefs systems when it comes to Christians. Some believe in the literal interpretation of the Old Testament. Others, myself included, take into account when and for who it was written. To satisfy all curiosity, such as yours presented here, the tome would become infinitely large, constantly expanding to include our ever increasing knowledge base.

In the end, the message would be lost in the details. Wisdom would be drown out in the minutia. Therefore a creation myth was required that would provide a point of beginning so that the ultimate story could be told.

You see, at least for me, the most important thing to being a Christian is Christ. His dual nature as both God and man. His life, teachings and example. His death in ransom for our sins. And of course, most importantly, his resurrection and ascension.

The Old Testament was written to be understandable and useful to the people of its time. Ultimately, it was just setting the stage for the story to come. The message and lessons of the new testament concerning the life of Christ are timeless.

Man argues about trivial things such as the age of the Earth. God simply cares for your soul.