Ancient flood stories from many parts of the world

[rusra02]

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

Stating what I believe is simply that, stating what I believe. You would do well to stay on topic rather then to nitpick.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Stating what I believe is simply that, stating what I believe. You would do well to stay on topic rather then to nitpick.

It's not nitpicking to say that you are being tremendously hypocritical for dismissing others on the basis of making "bold, unsubstantiated claims" while simultaneously believing a bold, unsubstantiated claim. It indicates that you are being entirely unreasonable in your approach to this subject, and avoiding actual debate.

 

[outhouse]

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

unsubstanciated is intellectual dishonesty on your part.

my statement is backed with facts, you only have faith and faith alone.

Why doesn't the geographical distribution of species reflect the Noah story?

 

[AdamsDream]

Did you know that the God told Noah exactly what the dimensions of the ark were to be? Did you know that we now know these dimensions would give the ship optimal stability?
I ask you: Did the bible authors have so much science that they knew how to build the most stable ship, or did the God of the bible really design it?

I don't think it is faith alone

You obviously don't read enough creationist literature. Even among them there is a lot of discussion on which 'cubic' to take for measurement. Because they realized most designs wouldn't have been seaworthy even in normal conditions. So please get your facts from your own literature before posting it here. They even try out one cubic for lenght and another for width or depth and offcourse there is allways the problem of instability by all those panicking animals in the heavy storms, ;-).
And offcourse if you know how to build a ship it's easy to imagine building a supership.
I do like the picture and the stretch of imagination it takes for believing this as a reality. Rains were constantly pouring down so heavily you couldn't get on deck. There was no ventilation and you had tens of thousands of animals defecating till the whole ship was a pile of dung. People and animals suffocated by lack of air while brothers and sisters were having incest to pass the time and produce the next generation. A kind of wells spewed boiling water, mountains were flattened and then rose again so you had tsunami's several hundreds of meters high that sucked the ship underwater for days. (No known wood has the strenght to resist that). Volcano's were erupting all over the place so they passed through poisonous gas clouds and for years after had a nuclear winter.
Even if they survived it the salty muds couldn't produce food for ages and don't forget you still had to feed your tens of thousands of animals which by now weren't baby's anymore (creationists calculate the ark had to contain food for 40 days but forget that you needed enormous quantities afterwards, which even the biggest ark with the fewest species couldn't contain). So did lions eat the baby sheep afterwards or were they fasting vegetarians? One kind of each? How long does it take for big antelopes to grow to a sufficient flock to feed the predators? A problem creationists like to ignore but predators were mathematically impossible: you only start with one couple of (baby?) prey. It takes years to have a sufficient flock to feed even one couple of predators with baby's. By then all predators are dead. But you have the same problem with vegetarians: most will starve before their food source has grown back to sufficient proportions, don't even think about what an elephant or hippo needs. Or reindeer: reindeer moss takes decades to grow just a little.
The whole concept is so silly no serious biologist has ever studied this, they see too many impossibilities so it's only plausible to those who don't know a thing about geology, biology, meteorology, agriculture,...but it's real fun imagining it.

 

[outhouse]

You obviously don't read enough creationist literature. Even among them there is a lot of discussion on which 'cubic' to take for measurement. Because they realized most designs wouldn't have been seaworthy even in normal conditions. So please get your facts from your own literature before posting it here. They even try out one cubic for lenght and another for width or depth and offcourse there is allways the problem of instability by all those panicking animals in the heavy storms, ;-).
And offcourse if you know how to build a ship it's easy to imagine building a supership.
I do like the picture and the stretch of imagination it takes for believing this as a reality. Rains were constantly pouring down so heavily you couldn't get on deck. There was no ventilation and you had tens of thousands of animals defecating till the whole ship was a pile of dung. People and animals suffocated by lack of air while brothers and sisters were having incest to pass the time and produce the next generation. A kind of wells spewed boiling water, mountains were flattened and then rose again so you had tsunami's several hundreds of meters high that sucked the ship underwater for days. (No known wood has the strenght to resist that). Volcano's were erupting all over the place so they passed through poisonous gas clouds and for years after had a nuclear winter.
Even if they survived it the salty muds couldn't produce food for ages and don't forget you still had to feed your tens of thousands of animals which by now weren't baby's anymore (creationists calculate the ark had to contain food for 40 days but forget that you needed enormous quantities afterwards, which even the biggest ark with the fewest species couldn't contain). So did lions eat the baby sheep afterwards or were they fasting vegetarians? One kind of each? How long does it take for big antelopes to grow to a sufficient flock to feed the predators? A problem creationists like to ignore but predators were mathematically impossible: you only start with one couple of (baby?) prey. It takes years to have a sufficient flock to feed even one couple of predators with baby's. By then all predators are dead. But you have the same problem with vegetarians: most will starve before their food source has grown back to sufficient proportions, don't even think about what an elephant or hippo needs. Or reindeer: reindeer moss takes decades to grow just a little.
The whole concept is so silly no serious biologist has ever studied this, they see too many impossibilities so it's only plausible to those who don't know a thing about geology, biology, meteorology, agriculture,...but it's real fun imagining it.

valiant effort

but your trying to use reason and knowledge on people that refuse it.

 

[CG Didymus]

I agree with Outhouse. Adamsdream's reply is a valiant effort. I think they are winning, but, unfortunately, it's not a level playing field. Just when they've proven everything as being physically impossible, the other side can always pull out the miracle card.

Who cleaned the stalls? God. Who fed the animals? God. He could have done it online, or he could have called. "Hello, Petsmart. I like to have ten tons of pet food delivered. You don't have a delivery truck that large? Let me give you the dimensions and instructions on how to build one." Where did the topsoil come from? God. During that year he composted all the animal dung, some of the dead floating bodies (that's why only some animals are found in the fossil layer), and added some decaying vegetable matter.

The flood is only a small miracle compared to the miracle of making a 450 foot or so wooden ship. Then, keeping the animals alive in it? And then, the miracle of getting the animals to the right continents, then moving continents, making new mountains, then selectively replanting the Earth with the plants needed for the type of animal put on that region of the Earth. Oh yeah, I've got another question--Did the ice cap melt or float? 'Cause if it floated then an Eskimo or a polar bear could have rode out the storm. And, who saved the creatures that lived at the seashore? Did a pair of crabs join the voyage? So many questions, but there is always that divine answer, that mystically easy answer--with God all things are possible.

 

[Dubio]

Well, if someone wants to play the miracle card, I would say why would God put Noah and his sidekicks through all of the work of building a monstrous ship, stock it with food and gather millions of creatures? Why not put Noah, his family and millions of creatures in suspended animation inside floating bubbles? Or better yet, beam them all temporarily to another planet?

 

[outhouse]

Well, if someone wants to play the miracle card, I would say why would God put Noah and his sidekicks through all of the work of building a monstrous ship, stock it with food and gather millions of creatures? Why not put Noah, his family and millions of creatures in suspended animation inside floating bubbles? Or better yet, beam them all temporarily to another planet?

because there is a historical core from Sumerian history that turned into Mesopotamian history.

before Israelites decided to write their own account influenced soley on the Mesopotamian version.


the first flood legend has a actaull King Ziusudra going down a river on a barge, during a real river flood.


No one ever stated it was all fiction

 

[Zoe Doidge]

Well, if someone wants to play the miracle card, I would say why would God put Noah and his sidekicks through all of the work of building a monstrous ship, stock it with food and gather millions of creatures? Why not put Noah, his family and millions of creatures in suspended animation inside floating bubbles? Or better yet, beam them all temporarily to another planet?

Pretty much this. If God didn't like a group of people he could just snap his cosmic fingers and make them disappear from the universe. Quick, efficient and mess free.

The very fact that he supposedly had to intervene in his own creation means the original creation was flawed in some way, which shouldn't be possible for God.

 

[Dubio]

Makes sense except a literalist will say God gave humans free will(because he didn't want robots worshiping Him) and humans chose to sin. Bunny rabbits don't kill each other so why didn't God create man without the urge to kill?

 

[AdamsDream]

I agree with Outhouse. Adamsdream's reply is a valiant effort. I think they are winning, but, unfortunately, it's not a level playing field. Just when they've proven everything as being physically impossible, the other side can always pull out the miracle card.

Who cleaned the stalls? God. Who fed the animals? God. He could have done it online, or he could have called. "Hello, Petsmart. I like to have ten tons of pet food delivered. You don't have a delivery truck that large? Let me give you the dimensions and instructions on how to build one." Where did the topsoil come from? God. During that year he composted all the animal dung, some of the dead floating bodies (that's why only some animals are found in the fossil layer), and added some decaying vegetable matter.

The flood is only a small miracle compared to the miracle of making a 450 foot or so wooden ship. Then, keeping the animals alive in it? And then, the miracle of getting the animals to the right continents, then moving continents, making new mountains, then selectively replanting the Earth with the plants needed for the type of animal put on that region of the Earth. Oh yeah, I've got another question--Did the ice cap melt or float? 'Cause if it floated then an Eskimo or a polar bear could have rode out the storm. And, who saved the creatures that lived at the seashore? Did a pair of crabs join the voyage? So many questions, but there is always that divine answer, that mystically easy answer--with God all things are possible.

Well, I like to stick to the story, makes it more fun. God didn't fly over with a Hercules to drop the food, the airplanes he didn't invent till Ezechiel. No sir, he told Noah to gather enough food, it's in the bible. Among them were a couple of hyrax, who couldn't quite decide if they were to ruminate or 'chew the cud'. Finally they decided they didn't like it, not even to chew on their own dung like rabbits (they just move their jaws a bit when nervous) which makes them the most hated animals of the whole earth and beyond for creationists: the bible says they do, very explicit so.
Meanwhile, in creation institutes dozens of young enthusiastics are calculating how much food Noah and his sons gathered. They have little spacen by all calculations so they'ld want very much to make all those animals baby's. Just weaned offcourse, else with mammals you'ld need the mother. But those baby's take too long to grow for the predators afterwards..
Another fun thing: To fit in the Ark we need to reduce all species to some 15.000-20.000 'kinds'. So you have the dog kind that later becomes the wolf, the jackall,.. The cat kind for tigers, lions, jaguar, hyena,..and cats. Only way to do it. This in turn means you need to accept 'micro-evolution'. And this is the real fun: in about 900 years every one of this kinds has evolved in the multitude of sometimes very different species. Try to imagine how a cat kind suddenly becomes tiger and hyena; a 'bear kind' polar bear and panda. In 850-900 years! -(the flood was in 2345 BC, Leviticus who writes about contemporary animals was written about 900 years later).
All their arguments against the possibility of evolution now work against them. How big is the 'chance' of all those countless mutations to occur and survive in such a short time? None, they themselves would conclude. In 200 years we have not even seen one species evolve into another, they allways maintain.

But never matter. They are but a dream from Adam, who had a vision of what the future would be if he swallowed that piece he bit from the apple. Within this dream creationism itself has given proof of this when it explained that the stars we see are not stars, that their light can't be more than a few thousand years old and all is but an illusion. As real scientists they are on the brink of discovering that this means that allso the light that travels from this screen you are looking at to your eyes is subject to the same laws and so what you and they are reading part of the same illusion.
A dream within the Dream of Adam.

Waking up Eve will be there and eternal bliss in Eden, all fussy creationists lost like a memory in the wind.

 

[Zoe Doidge]

Makes sense except a literalist will say God gave humans free will(because he didn't want robots worshiping Him) and humans chose to sin. Bunny rabbits don't kill each other so why didn't God create man without the urge to kill?

Same problem. If he gives us free will and then interferes he's made a mistake, either by interfering or giving us free will in the first place.

 

[rusra02]

I agree with Outhouse. Adamsdream's reply is a valiant effort. I think they are winning, but, unfortunately, it's not a level playing field. Just when they've proven everything as being physically impossible, the other side can always pull out the miracle card.

Who cleaned the stalls? God. Who fed the animals? God. He could have done it online, or he could have called. "Hello, Petsmart. I like to have ten tons of pet food delivered. You don't have a delivery truck that large? Let me give you the dimensions and instructions on how to build one." Where did the topsoil come from? God. During that year he composted all the animal dung, some of the dead floating bodies (that's why only some animals are found in the fossil layer), and added some decaying vegetable matter.

The flood is only a small miracle compared to the miracle of making a 450 foot or so wooden ship. Then, keeping the animals alive in it? And then, the miracle of getting the animals to the right continents, then moving continents, making new mountains, then selectively replanting the Earth with the plants needed for the type of animal put on that region of the Earth. Oh yeah, I've got another question--Did the ice cap melt or float? 'Cause if it floated then an Eskimo or a polar bear could have rode out the storm. And, who saved the creatures that lived at the seashore? Did a pair of crabs join the voyage? So many questions, but there is always that divine answer, that mystically easy answer--with God all things are possible.

The Bible provides sufficient information to place the global Deluge in it's time and place in history. Your arguments against it's historicity are not convincing. The Ark was not a "ship". It was a large wooden chest. The Bible indicates the earth's climate changed due to the Flood, as did it's oceans, mountains, and doubtless continents. The Bible indicates the earth was once surrounded with a water canopy above earth's atmosphere that apparently kept the Earth at a uniformly warm temperature; that is, until the Flood. 2 Peter 3:5,6 speaks of "an earth standing compactly out of water and in the midsth of water by the word of God; and by those means the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water."
Who cleaned the stalls? Who fed the animals? God's instructions to Noah made it clear that Noah and his family would care for the animals in the ark: "And as for you, take for yourself every sort of food that is eaten; and you must gather it to yourself, and it must serve as food for you and for them.” (Genesis 6:21)
It is unreasonable to argue that God would tell Noah to build an ark for the saving of his household, bring a global Deluge to destroy the wicked, and then fail to protect his servants. Persons who claim God can not or does not perform miracles simply don't know the true God, in my opinion.
This scoffing at God's word really fulfills a Bible prophecy: "For you know this first, that in the last days there will come ridiculers with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires and saying: “Where is this promised presence of his? Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep in death, all things are continuing exactly as from creation’s beginning.” For, according to their wish, this fact [about the Deluge]escapes their notice." (2 Peter 3:3-5)

 

[rusra02]

Same problem. If he gives us free will and then interferes he's made a mistake, either by interfering or giving us free will in the first place.

People who argue that free will is a "mistake" would probably not appreciate it if their freedom to choose was taken from them. Freedom has limits, of course.

​

The Bible tells us to "Be as free people, and yet holding your freedom, not as a blind for badness, but as slaves of God." (1 Peter 2:16) As for Jehovah making a mistake, Deuteronomy 32:4,5 states: "perfect is his activity, For all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness, with whom there is no injustice; Righteous and upright is he. They have acted ruinously on their own part; They are not his children, the defect is their own."
Both spirit creatures and humans have misused their free will to ignore God and violate God's commands. The mistake is theirs, not God's. Not a smart thing to do, I think.​

 

[AdamsDream]

The Bible provides sufficient information to place the global Deluge in it's time and place in history. Your arguments against it's historicity are not convincing. The Ark was not a "ship". It was a large wooden chest. The Bible indicates the earth's climate changed due to the Flood, as did it's oceans, mountains, and doubtless continents. The Bible indicates the earth was once surrounded with a water canopy above earth's atmosphere that apparently kept the Earth at a uniformly warm temperature; that is, until the Flood. 2 Peter 3:5,6 speaks of "an earth standing compactly out of water and in the midsth of water by the word of God; and by those means the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water."
Who cleaned the stalls? Who fed the animals? God's instructions to Noah made it clear that Noah and his family would care for the animals in the ark: "And as for you, take for yourself every sort of food that is eaten; and you must gather it to yourself, and it must serve as food for you and for them.” (Genesis 6:21)

This scoffing at God's word really fulfills a Bible prophecy: "For you know this first, that in the last days there will come ridiculers with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires and saying: “Where is this promised presence of his? Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep in death, all things are continuing exactly as from creation’s beginning.” For, according to their wish, this fact [about the Deluge]escapes their notice." (2 Peter 3:3-5)

To a lot of creationists the ark was no wooden chest (which would have no balance at all) but indeed a ship. There are many studies about this, all with varying cubics (Babylonian, Egyptian, big one, small one,...). The discussion among creations is proof enough that the bible does not give a historic and detailed or precise account.

What this prophecy tells us is the last days have allready passed a long time ago. Because from time immemorial this prophecy has been quoted again and again so either they have passed and now we live in the afterlife or...
Or the word 'day' is not something one can take literally. If last days could encompass a thousand years, or 500, or 1500 that tells us something of the other 'days' in the bibles.

Oh, a little detail: Noah and co couldn't clean the stalls, you should know that. It was raining so heavily it would be like standing under a waterfall while tsunami's came rolling with waves of hundreds of meters high, whole mountain ranges were uplifted, the great continent broken up and underwter volcano's were displaying a violence we can hardly imagine.
You could hardly move on that boat, you cetainly couldn't shovel all the dung of 40.000 animals '(not even with 50 sons and daughters) and then get on deck to get rid of it. You'ld need heavy automated machinery for that and the bible doesn't mention the existence of such machinery.

 

[outhouse]

The Bible provides sufficient information to place the global Deluge in it's time and place in history.

that would be false

only a monk hundreds and hundreds of years later tried to plave a date to the mythical flood.

and guess what!!! other cultures around the world, show no break in writing or anything else at that time.

 

[rusra02]

To a lot of creationists the ark was no wooden chest (which would have no balance at all) but indeed a ship. There are many studies about this, all with varying cubics (Babylonian, Egyptian, big one, small one,...). The discussion among creations is proof enough that the bible does not give a historic and detailed or precise account.

What this prophecy tells us is the last days have allready passed a long time ago. Because from time immemorial this prophecy has been quoted again and again so either they have passed and now we live in the afterlife or...
Or the word 'day' is not something one can take literally. If last days could encompass a thousand years, or 500, or 1500 that tells us something of the other 'days' in the bibles.

Oh, a little detail: Noah and co couldn't clean the stalls, you should know that. It was raining so heavily it would be like standing under a waterfall while tsunami's came rolling with waves of hundreds of meters high, whole mountain ranges were uplifted, the great continent broken up and underwter volcano's were displaying a violence we can hardly imagine.
You could hardly move on that boat, you cetainly couldn't shovel all the dung of 40.000 animals '(not even with 50 sons and daughters) and then get on deck to get rid of it. You'ld need heavy automated machinery for that and the bible doesn't mention the existence of such machinery.

And how did you divine the number of animals on the Ark as 40,000? There is nothing in the Bible to indicate how many animals were in the Ark. Where did your number come from?
Yes, it rained heavily for 40 days, which would certainly have been a difficult period for all on board the ark. The Bible simply does not give details about life aboard the Ark. Speculating on how waste would be removed is simply that, 'wasteful' speculation.
As to the shape of the Ark, let's see what the Bible itself says: "Make for yourself an ark out of wood of a resinous tree. You will make compartments in the ark, and you must cover it inside and outside with tar.And this is how you will make it: three hundred cubits the length of the ark, fifty cubits its width, and thirty cubits its height. You will make a tso′har [roof; or, window] for the ark, and you will complete it to the extent of a cubit upward, and the entrance of the ark you will put in its side; you will make it with a lower [story], a second [story] and a third [story]." (Genesis 6:14-16)
No mention of a bow, nor keel, rudder, or sail. The same word is later used to describe the basket Moses was placed in as a baby. (Exodus 2:3)
I believe the last days are marked by more then a single prophecy. The Bible presents detailed descriptions of what would occur during the last days. The prophecy about ridiculers is just one facet of the evidence we are living in the time of the end for this wicked system of things.

 

[rusra02]

that would be false

only a monk hundreds and hundreds of years later tried to plave a date to the mythical flood.

and guess what!!! other cultures around the world, show no break in writing or anything else at that time.

Nonsense! Bible chronology allows us to determine events in the stream of time all the way back to the beginning of human history. The Bible records not just the year but the month and day the Flood began. " In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on this day all the springs of the vast watery deep were broken open and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. And the downpour upon the earth went on for forty days and forty nights." (Genesis 7:11,12)
As to writings that supposedly pre-date the Flood, the dates are based on speculation and unreliable dating methods. Thus, I think the no break in writing applies to the post-Flood period.

 

[outhouse]

Nonsense!

intellectual dishonesty on your part

Bible chronology allows us to determine events in the stream of time all the way back to the beginning of human history

science considers this a blatant LIE!

and you do not have the education and lack the knowledge to challenge the status quo, that man evolved.

your method of history is outlawed from public schools

As to writings that supposedly pre-date the Flood, the dates are based on speculation and unreliable dating methods.

intellectual dishonesty on your part

you are no one to question dating dating methods

 

[Looncall]

Nonsense! Bible chronology allows us to determine events in the stream of time all the way back to the beginning of human history. The Bible records not just the year but the month and day the Flood began. "In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on this day all the springs of the vast watery deep were broken open and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. And the downpour upon the earth went on for forty days and forty nights." (Genesis 7:11,12)
As to writings that supposedly pre-date the Flood, the dates are based on speculation and unreliable dating methods. Thus, I think the no break in writing applies to the post-Flood period.

My, my, lieing about dating again, eh? Is this what religion does to the intellect?