Ancient flood stories from many parts of the world

[JustWondering2]

The devil put those layers there to confuse scientist and disprove creation! DUH !

 

[gnostic]

Your assumed dates for when this city or that city first existed are only as good as the assumptions on which such dates are based. You would first need proof that your dates are accurate, and that the dating methods are sound and unimpeachible. Otherwise, such dating is simply guessing. I can't count the number of times critics have claimed the Bible is wrong, only to be proven wrong themselves.

It never cease to amaze me that Christian creationists, like yourself, will always deny archaeological evidences when it suit them.

Sorry, but what is your profession, experiences or qualification that you have knowledge or skills to criticize experts in the fields with regarding to dating of prehistoric or ancient cities/towns/settlements?

Have you ever being to those sites and involved with the digs or dating of the foundation or the artefacts found there?

Evidences are easy to prove with cities, towns or villages than with specific people in history.

We have both historical records and evidences of Sargon the Great (reign c. 2270 - c. 2215 BCE). We know that his empire spread beyond his own city Akkad or Agade. We also clearly have records and evidences to support the existence of his dynasty (his successors).

And you speak of Belshazzar and Pontius Pilate: What the hell do either of these two to do with Genesis - or more specifically the Flood?

You are the one who 1st brought up Belshazzar and Pilate. Not only are they unrelated, and that no one is disputing their historical existence, you're setting up a straw man and attacking it.

You're credibility is nothing short but dismissal.

 

[rusra02]

Still not going to touch this one rusra02?

You do realize the Flood only lasted one year or so, right? Wildfires could occur before or after the Flood.

 

[rusra02]

Fallacy of the implied Google search.

or Appeal to Authority, as it is most commonly called.

Really? Research and fact-checking is "fallacy". Puleese.....

 

[rusra02]

It never cease to amaze me that Christian creationists, like yourself, will always deny archaeological evidences when it suit them.

Sorry, but what is your profession, experiences or qualification that you have knowledge or skills to criticize experts in the fields with regarding to dating of prehistoric or ancient cities/towns/settlements?

Have you ever being to those sites and involved with the digs or dating of the foundation or the artefacts found there?

Evidences are easy to prove with cities, towns or villages than with specific people in history.

We have both historical records and evidences of Sargon the Great (reign c. 2270 - c. 2215 BCE). We know that his empire spread beyond his own city Akkad or Agade. We also clearly have records and evidences to support the existence of his dynasty (his successors).

And you speak of Belshazzar and Pontius Pilate: What the hell do either of these two to do with Genesis - or more specifically the Flood?

You are the one who 1st brought up Belshazzar and Pilate. Not only are they unrelated, and that no one is disputing their historical existence, you're setting up a straw man and attacking it.

You're credibility is nothing short but dismissal.

Belshazzar and Pontius Pilate are but two examples of many where Bible critics claimed the Bible is wrong and these persons never existed. No sane person today disputes their historical existence, but that was clearly not the case until archeology confirmed the Bible and disproved it's critics. That is why they are relevant in checking claims that the Bible is not historically correct.

 

[Looncall]

Belshazzar and Pontius Pilate are but two examples of many where Bible critics claimed the Bible is wrong and these persons never existed. No sane person today disputes their historical existence, but that was clearly not the case until archeology confirmed the Bible and disproved it's critics. That is why they are relevant in checking claims that the Bible is not historically correct.

The fact that you can find a few things correct in a collection of folk histories says nothing about the accuracy of other items in those folk histories. To claim otherwise is just dishonest propaganda.

What you creationist liars about dating methods seem to miss is the consilience obtained among various methods and the fact that the researchers who use them are keen on getting accurate results.

 

[camanintx]

You do realize the Flood only lasted one year or so, right? Wildfires could occur before or after the Flood.

So you can't explain evidence for wildfires WITHIN sediment supposedly deposited DURING the flood.

 

[rusra02]

The fact that you can find a few things correct in a collection of folk histories says nothing about the accuracy of other items in those folk histories. To claim otherwise is just dishonest propaganda.

What you creationist liars about dating methods seem to miss is the consilience obtained among various methods and the fact that the researchers who use them are keen on getting accurate results.

The Bible didn't get a few things correct. It got ALL things correct.
I have already pointed out that an Internet search will provide abundant evidence of the problems and uncertainties of scientific dating. And calling people names is rude, arrogant, and doesn't change the facts.

 

[rusra02]

So you can't explain evidence for wildfires WITHIN sediment supposedly deposited DURING the flood.

Your response presupposes facts not in evidence. Who claims they found sediment deposited during the Flood? Who says there is evidence for wildfires within this sediment?

 

[gnostic]

Belshazzar and Pontius Pilate are but two examples of many where Bible critics claimed the Bible is wrong and these persons never existed. No sane person today disputes their historical existence, but that was clearly not the case until archeology confirmed the Bible and disproved it's critics. That is why they are relevant in checking claims that the Bible is not historically correct.

I have largely ignored Belshazzar, because Neo-Babylonian history is not my specialty; Old Babylonian and Middle Babylonian were far more interesting periods. So I don't know much about Belshazzar to question his historicity.

I already know that Pilate already exist. I have never questioned it, because I have read several histories, written by Tacitus and Josephus.

However, even if they do exist, don't prove the accuracy of the Bible's historicity, particularly the narratives of Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel and many other books in the Bible, including the gospels.

But this thread relates to the Flood, so only Genesis is really relevant here, not the Book of Daniel, and not the gospels.

Can you name these critics?

 

[Looncall]

The Bible didn't get a few things correct. It got ALL things correct.
I have already pointed out that an Internet search will provide abundant evidence of the problems and uncertainties of scientific dating. And calling people names is rude, arrogant, and doesn't change the facts.

All things? So one can change the colour of sheep's wool by erecting a coloured post nearby? Pull the other one, it has bells on it.

 

[dust1n]

Really? Research and fact-checking is "fallacy". Puleese.....

:biglaugh: I have an argument against this, but you are going to have to google "appeal to authority" first.

 

[camanintx]

Your response presupposes facts not in evidence. Who claims they found sediment deposited during the Flood? Who says there is evidence for wildfires within this sediment?

Flood geologists claim that sedimentary deposits from Paleozoic era and after were actually deposited during the early part of the flood and that geologic sorting explains the distribution of fossils found within the various strata.

Flood geology - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

The problem with this theory is that there are multiple sub-aerial and fossil charcoal deposits within these strata which could only occur with exposed ground. Here is a paper which disproves flood geology using their own assumptions.

Against Flood Biology

 

[averageJOE]

Your personal insults are beneath contempt, and I won't respond further to them.
Despite the loud claims that such dating is accurate, we find accounts like the South African woman, Joan Ahrens who painted rocks. One of her creations was found in the veld and made it's way to Oxford university. Using it's radio carbon accelerator unit, the university estimated the painting was 1,200 years old. Your bold claim to the contrary that "dating methods have been well validated", anyone can google the facts for themselves simply by searching "problems with carbon dating."

It was wrong then and it's wrong now.

Since this incident is not listed publicly by the University itself nor do any of the creationist sources that I've looked at cite any references at all I have to wonder how you could feel comfortable quoting this as fact without any sort of official source?

I like how you just completely ignored Zoe's reply.

 

[rusra02]

All things? So one can change the colour of sheep's wool by erecting a coloured post nearby? Pull the other one, it has bells on it.

The Bible is not mistaken on this. Jacob obviously believed that placing sticks near his flock when in heat would produce the desired offspring. However, the Bible shows the real reason for Jacob's success was God's blessing, not Jacob's mistaken notion. Later on, Jacob himself said to his step-father Laban: "you kept changing my wages ten times. If the God of my father...had not proved on my side, you would now have sent me away empty-handed." (Genesis 31:41,42) Jacob then understood it was God's blessing, and not Jacob's own efforts, that resulted in his prosperity.

​

​

 

[rusra02]

Flood geologists claim that sedimentary deposits from Paleozoic era and after were actually deposited during the early part of the flood and that geologic sorting explains the distribution of fossils found within the various strata.

Flood geology - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

The problem with this theory is that there are multiple sub-aerial and fossil charcoal deposits within these strata which could only occur with exposed ground. Here is a paper which disproves flood geology using their own assumptions.

Against Flood Biology

You're appealing to Creationist theories about sedimentary deposits? I personally don't subscribe to those theories. As mentioned in other posts, I believe the Flood was a far more catastrophic event than most people seem to think it was, with unique and devastating consequences for the Earth, Earth's climate, and the atmosphere.

 

[rusra02]

I like how you just completely ignored Zoe's reply.

South Africa’s Sunday Times is the original source.

 

[outhouse]

You're appealing to Creationist theories about sedimentary deposits? I personally don't subscribe to those theories. As mentioned in other posts, I believe the Flood was a far more catastrophic event than most people seem to think it was, with unique and devastating consequences for the Earth, Earth's climate, and the atmosphere.

:tsk:


yet all you have is faith and faith alone.

there is zero evidence for your claims. and mountains of evidence it was a legend influenced by a sumerian flood when the Euphrates overflowed its banks in 2900BC

 

[rusra02]

:tsk:


yet all you have is faith and faith alone.

there is zero evidence for your claims. and mountains of evidence it was a legend influenced by a sumerian flood when the Euphrates overflowed its banks in 2900BC

Making bold but unsubstantiated statements does not prove you are right. I believe the evidence supports the global Deluge.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Making bold but unsubstantiated statements does not prove you are right. I believe the evidence supports the global Deluge.

You would do well not to contradict your own argument in the very next sentence after you've made it.