Answering Questions

[GardenLady]

There is no "supporting evidence" in science,

You will not find actual practicing research scientists who agree with this assessment. The indications of functionality that you describe are EVIDENCE.

 

[nPeace]

Dude, it would be nice if you were slightly educated on the subject you quote because once again, the source you are quoting doesn't support your position. For example, the dating of cities of mesopotamia or high antiquity aren't done by carbon dating exclusively but by several tools, including carbon dating and dating via other isotops. Hell, we can use tree rings to date objects back in time up to 10 000 years ago or so. There is no doubt that humans civilization predates your literal view on the Bible. To claim that this could be wrong and you right is the equivalen that because it's possible to confuse a horse and an ocapi at a distance of 50 meters that it's possible, even reasonable, to assume that you can confuse a horse for a cricket at the same distance.

Does not matter. Name whatever method, and I will provide the link showing the same result as posted.

PS
@epronovost trees are not people. Every Christian knows that trees existed thousands of years before people.

 

[nPeace]

In the light of the examinable evidence showing that ─

The universe is something like 13.8 bn years old

The solar system ─ sun, earth, other planets ─ is something like 4.5 bn years old

Life on earth is something like 3.8 bn years old.

Life with multiple-celled creatures has been around for something like 1.7 bn years

Animal life on land has been around for something like 380 million years

Mammals have been around for something like 200 million years

Primates have been around for something like 65 million years

Hominidae have been around for something like 25 million years

Homo sap has been around for something like 250, 000 years

Modern homo sap has been around for something like 70,000 years

Civilization has been around for something like 10,000 years

Worship of Yahweh has been around for something like 3,500 years

The claim that Yahweh is the sole god has been around for something like 2500 years

The claim that God is triune has been around for something like 1,650 years

God's distaste for slavery has been around for two hundred and something years at best

and so on
​

why would any objective onlooker thing the bible was a reliable guide to the real history of the earth?

Would they not very much sooner conclude it's simply a record of the beliefs and understandings and politics and stories of a particular local group of ancient people?

Yet you cannot prove anything you just said... Can you? I'll wait.

 

[PureX]

Why would anyone be expected to think they are wrong, when their source of knowledge is proves reliable?

Because they can be. They ALWAYS can be. And because they are, often enough.

Does not make sense, unless one is using a hit and miss system that time and time again, misses... Need we say what that is?

I hope you're not implying that your never wrong. That YOUR "system" isn't "hit or miss" because you never miss. That would be insane.

 

[PureX]

You will not find actual practicing research scientists who agree with this assessment. The indications of functionality that you describe are EVIDENCE.

You are confusing observations with "evidence", and hypothesis with "conclusions". But don't feel too bad about it. More and more people have fallen into this weird 'science as a new religion' thing in recent years. You are not alone in this confusion.

 

[nPeace]

Because they can be. They ALWAYS can be. And because they are, often enough.

I hope you're not implying that your never wrong. That YOUR "system" isn't "hit or miss" because you never miss. That would be insane.

Please explain why.
Also, please note, it's not my system.
In that case, I can be wrong, and need to adjust to what is correct.

 

[blü 2]

Yet you cannot prove anything you just said... Can you? I'll wait.

As I said, they're based on examinable evidence. Choose an example and I'll take you through it.

But before we do that, please clarify this for me.

In the bible, there's no concept of gravity, orbits, solar systems, the speed of light, deep space, the nature of stars, the existence of galaxies, the Big Bang, the expansion of the universe ─ and so on.

Instead the bible is consistent in saying the earth is flat, and immovably fixed, and the heavenly bodies move around it, and the sky is a solid dome you can walk on, to which the stars are affixed such that if they come loose, they'll fall to earth.

From memory I've previously shown you the bible quotes setting out these things ─ pretty much the cosmology of Babylon ─ but you can read them >here< again.

Are those your views too?

 

[joelr]

How literal do you take the flood story?
As literal as the writers of the books of the Tanakh and the Christian Greek scriptures take it. (Matthew 24:36-42) It's recorded as a historical event.

Matthew is a creative re-interpretation of Mark, which is a myth.

- The four canonical gospels were probably written between AD 66 and 110.[5][6][7] All four were anonymous (the modern names were added in the 2nd century), almost certainly none were by eyewitnesses, and all are the end-products of long oral and written transmission.[8] Mark was the first to be written, using a variety of sources;[9][10] the authors of Matthew and Luke, acting independently, used Mark for their narrative of Jesus's career, supplementing it with the collection of sayings called the Q document and additional material unique to each;

Noah is a re-working of the Epic of Gilamesh. Few comparisons.



Noah - Also he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground; But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned


Gilamesh - When the seventh day dawned I loosed a dove and let her go. She flew away, but finding no resting- place she returned.


Noah - And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat. And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.


Gilamesh - When the seventh day dawned the storm from the south subsided, the sea grew calm, the flood was stilled;


Noah - And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake;


Gimamesh - , I made a sacrifice and poured out a libation on the mountain top. Seven and again seven cauldrons I set up on their stands, I heaped up wood and cane and cedar and myrtle. When the gods smelled the sweet savour, they gathered like flies over the sacrifice.


Noah - The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.

And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.


Gimamesh - “Wisest of gods, hero Enlil, how could you so senselessly bring down the flood? Lay upon the sinner his sin, Lay upon the transgressor his transgression, Punish him a little when he breaks loose, Do not drive him too hard or he perishes; Would that a lion had ravaged mankind Rather than the flood, Would that a wolf had ravaged mankind Rather than the flood, Would that famine had wasted the world Rather than the flood, Would that pestilence had wasted mankind Rather than the flood


Gilamesh - ‘For six days and six nights the winds blew, torrent and tempest and flood overwhelmed the world, tempest and flood raged together like warring hosts. When the seventh day dawned the storm from the south subsided, the sea grew calm, the flood was stilled;


Noah - And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth.

Noah - And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.


Gilamesh - I looked for land in vain, but fourteen leagues distant there appeared a mountain, and there the boat grounded; on the mountain of Nisir the boat held fast,

Noah - The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.
And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.



Gimamesh - “Wisest of gods, hero Enlil, how could you so senselessly bring down the flood? Lay upon the sinner his sin, Lay upon the transgressor his transgression, Punish him a little when he breaks loose, Do not drive him too hard or he perishes; Would that a lion had ravaged mankind Rather than the flood, Would that a wolf had ravaged mankind Rather than the flood, Would that famine had wasted the world Rather than the flood, 26 Would that pestilence had wasted mankind Rather than the flood




Noah - And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

Gilamesh - Gilgamesh, the son of Ninsun, lies in the tomb.

 

[joelr]

[

Is there really "overwhelming" evidence for a literal interpretation of the flood?
Would people believe it, if there wasn't? Maybe there are people who would, I don't know, but I don't know of any.
I can share the overwhelming evidence for a literal flood with you, a little later, if you would like.

.

Modern science rules out a global flood in many many ways. There is zero evidence for any of the flood myths being real.

Modern geology and flood geology
Modern geology, its sub-disciplines and other scientific disciplines utilize the scientific method to analyze the geology of the earth. The key tenets of flood geology are refuted by scientific analysis and do not have any standing in the scientific community. Modern geology relies on a number of established principles, one of the most important of which is Charles Lyell's principle of uniformitarianism. In relation to geological forces it states that the shaping of the Earth has occurred by means of mostly slow-acting forces that can be seen in operation today. By applying these principles, geologists have determined that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. They study the lithosphere of the Earth to gain information on the history of the planet. Geologists divide Earth's history into eons, eras, periods, epochs, and faunal stages characterized by well-defined breaks in the fossil record (see Geologic time scale). In general, there is a lack of any evidence for any of the above effects proposed by flood geologists and their claims of fossil layering are not taken seriously by scientists.


Erosion
The global flood cannot explain geological formations such as angular unconformities, where sedimentary rocks have been tilted and eroded then more sedimentary layers deposited on top, needing long periods of time for these processes. There is also the time needed for the erosion of valleys in sedimentary rock mountains. In another example, the flood, had it occurred, should also have produced large-scale effects spread throughout the entire world. Erosion should be evenly distributed, yet the levels of erosion in, for example, the Appalachians and the Rocky Mountains differ significantly.


Geochronology
Geochronology is the science of determining the absolute age of rocks, fossils, and sediments by a variety of techniques. These methods indicate that the Earth as a whole is about 4.54 billion years old, and that the strata that, according to flood geology, were laid down during the Flood some 6,000 years ago, were actually deposited gradually over many millions of years.

Paleontology
If the flood were responsible for fossilization, then all the animals now fossilized must have been living together on the Earth just before the flood. Based on estimates of the number of remains buried in the Karoo fossil formation in Africa, this would correspond to an abnormally high density of vertebrates worldwide, close to 2100 per acre. Creationists argue that evidence for the geological column is fragmentary, and all the complex layers of chalk occurred in the approach to the 150th day of Noah's flood. However, the entire geologic column is found in several places, and shows multiple features, including evidence of erosion and burrowing through older layers, which are inexplicable on a short timescale. Carbonate hardgrounds and the fossils associated with them show that the so-called flood sediments include evidence of long hiatuses in deposition that are not consistent with flood dynamics or timing.


Geochemistry
Proponents of Flood Geology are also unable to account for the alternation between calcite seas and aragonite seas through the Phanerozoic. The cyclical pattern of carbonate hardgrounds, calcitic and aragonitic ooids, and calcite-shelled fauna has apparently been controlled by seafloor spreading rates and the flushing of seawater through hydrothermal vents which changes its Mg/Ca ratio.
Sedimentary rock features
Phil Senter's 2011 article, "The Defeat of Flood Geology by Flood Geology", in the journal Reports of the National Center for Science Education, discusses "sedimentologic and other geologic features that Flood geologists have identified as evidence that particular strata cannot have been deposited during a time when the entire planet was under water ... and distribution of strata that predate the existence of the Ararat mountain chain." These include continental basalts, terrestrial tracks of animals, and marine communities preserving multiple in-situ generations included in the rocks of most or all Phanerozoic periods, and the basalt even in the younger Precambrian rocks. Others, occurring in rocks of several geologic periods, include lake deposits and eolian (wind) deposits. Using their own words, Flood geologists find evidence in every Paleozoic and Mesozoic period, and in every epoch of the Cenozoic period, indicating that a global flood could not have occurred during that interval. A single flood could also not account for such features as unconformities, in which lower rock layers are tilted while higher rock layers were laid down horizontally on top.

 

[joelr]

Did it happen a little over 4000 years ago?
According to Biblical chronology.
While modern historians would extend the period of human habitation on the earth much farther back than 4026 B.C.E., the facts are decidedly against the position they maintain. The thousands of years of “prehistory” they argue for are dependent on speculation, as can be seen from this statement by prominent scientist P. E. Klopsteg, who stated: “Come, now, if you will, on a speculative excursion into prehistory. Assume the era in which the species sapiens emerged from the genus Homo . . . hasten across the millenniums for which present information depends for the most part on conjecture and interpretation to the era of the first inscribed records, from which some facts may be gleaned.” (Italics ours.)—Science, December 30, 1960, p. 1914.
The period of the post-Flood era begins with the year 2369 B.C.E.
While appeal is sometimes made to datings based on the radiocarbon (C-14) technique, this method of dating has definite limitations. Science magazine of December 11, 1959, p. 1630, reported: “What bids to become a classical example of ‘C14 irresponsibility’ is the 6000-year spread of 11 determinations for Jarmo . . . , a prehistoric village in northeastern Iraq, which, on the basis of all archeological evidence, was not occupied for more than 500 consecutive years.” There is thus no solid or provable evidence to favor an earlier date than 2369 B.C.E. for the start of the post-Flood human society.

.

No. The Israelites who eventually worshipped Yahweh emerged around 1200BC but Genesis was written much later and used legends of the time. Before this there was no Yahweh, no Israelites or anything in these myths.
When Epic of Gilamesh was written in 2100 BC there was no mention of Yahweh, or monotheism or any Israelite customs, beliefs or aspects of the Noah tale. There were many Gods active.
The Noah flood happened when a writer wrote it down in Genesis sometime after 1200BC.



From the Gilamesh page:

-Various themes, plot elements, and characters in the Hebrew Bible correlate with the Epic of Gilgamesh – notably, the accounts of the Garden of Eden, the advice from Ecclesiastes, and the Genesis flood narrative.

-Andrew George submits that the Genesis flood narrative matches that in Gilgamesh so closely that "few doubt" that it derives from a Mesopotamian account.[66] What is particularly noticeable is the way the Genesis flood story follows the Gilgamesh flood tale "point by point and in the same order", even when the story permits other alternatives.


-
Garden of Eden[edit]
The parallels between the stories of Enkidu/Shamhat and Adam/Eve have been long recognized by scholars.[63][64] In both, a man is created from the soil by a god, and lives in a natural setting amongst the animals. He is introduced to a woman who tempts him. In both stories the man accepts food from the woman, covers his nakedness, and must leave his former realm, unable to return. The presence of a snake that steals a plant of immortality from the hero later in the epic is another point of similarity. However, a major difference between the two stories is that while Enkidu experiences regret regarding his seduction away from nature, this is only temporary: After being confronted by the god Shamash for being ungrateful, Enkidu recants and decides to give the woman who seduced him his final blessing before he dies. This is in contrast to Adam, whose fall from grace is largely portrayed purely as a punishment for disobeying god.



Religion Identity and the Origins of Ancient Israel.



KL Sparks, PhD Hebrew Bible, Baptist Pastor,


As a rule, modern scholars do not believe that the Bible’s account of early Israel’s history provides a wholly accurate portrait of Israels origins. One reason for this is that the earliest part of Israel’s history in Genesis is now regarded as something other than a work of modern history. It’s primary author was at best an ancient historian (if a historian at all) who lived long after the events he narrated, and who drew freely from sources that were not historical (legends and theological stories), he was more concerned with theology than with the modern quest to learn “what actually happened” (Van Seters 1992; Sparks 2002 pp. 37-71)

 

[nPeace]

As I said, they're based on examinable evidence. Choose an example and I'll take you through it.

Examinable evidence?
Isn't that the claim of both sides here?
Why not just start with any of the statements you made. It doesn't matter. Prove one.

But before we do that, please clarify this for me.

In the bible, there's no concept of gravity, orbits, solar systems, the speed of light, deep space, the nature of stars, the existence of galaxies, the Big Bang, the expansion of the universe ─ and so on.

When you say there is no concept of these things, what do you mean... that the Bible does not speak of them?
Well I wouldn't expect the Bible to mention these expressions, since they are merely concepts of men living only a few years - not even two hundred years.
Isaac Newton did not even hear of Big Bang. Nor Nicolaus Copernicus.
So what is so significant about these names?

Did you know?
Even though the Bible is not a science text book, the Bible says the universe had a beginning.
Scientists learned that contrary to their earlier belief that the universe always existed, it actually had a beginning.

The Bible says a lot of other things too, which scientists are discovering to be true.

Instead the bible is consistent in saying the earth is flat, and immovably fixed, and the heavenly bodies move around it, and the sky is a solid dome you can walk on, to which the stars are affixed such that if they come loose, they'll fall to earth.

From memory I've previously shown you the bible quotes setting out these things ─ pretty much the cosmology of Babylon ─ but you can read them >here< again.

Wow. You actually remember! Here you go... You earn one, for remembering.
I would have given you more, but you cancelled them out by thinking that giving me stupidity again... what is it now, 7 times?... would be useful

For the 7th time, the Bible does not say what you want to believe.

Are those your views too?

Post it an eighth time... see what that gets you.
You don't see believers repeatedly posting what they already posted a few times to Atheists, do you.
Why do you think that is?

Are Atheists trying to convince themselves of something, by posting their beliefs repeatedly... beliefs they cannot prove. Sounds like Atheist Pastors.

 

[blü 2]

Examinable evidence?
Isn't that the claim of both sides here?

The low hanging banana here is Noah's Flood, which, had it happened in reality, would have left us with a genetic bottleneck in every species of land animal, all of them dating to the same time in the last ten thousand years; and with a single geological flood layer all over all continents and islands and the ocean floor also dated in the last ten thousand years; and of course a billion cubic miles or more of water over and above the water presently on the earth ─ instead of which there's a very loud and informative absence.

When you say there is no concept of these things, what do you mean... that the Bible does not speak of them?

It speaks of the things I mentioned ─ a flat earth immovably fixed at the center of creation, the heavenly bodies moving round it, the sky a hard dome you can walk on, with the stars attached to it.

You forgot to tell me whether these express your own view.

It has no concept of heliocentry, gravity, orbits, satellites, the nature of stars, or galaxies, or deep space, or the speed of light ─ no disgrace in the first millennium BCE since neither did anyone else.

Even though the Bible is not a science text book, the Bible says the universe had a beginning.

A magical beginning. Is that what you believe?

Scientists learned that contrary to their earlier belief that the universe always existed, it actually had a beginning.

Yes, they found out what was correct because they kept looking at the evidence. Even Einstein had to be persuaded. But of course there's no concept of the Big Bang or an expanding universe in the bible.

For the 7th time, the Bible does not say what you want to believe.

Quite right. Instead it said what was generally thought at the times and places it was written ─ flat earth, hard sky, stars as "lights" for "signs" and so on.

As you can see from the quotes on that link.

If you think the bible knew about heliocentry and gravity and orbits and the nature of satellites and planets and stars and galaxies, quote me the relevant quotes. Don't pretend the ones I've linked don't mean what they say.

 

[nPeace]

The low hanging banana here is Noah's Flood, which, had it happened in reality, would have left us with a genetic bottleneck in every species of land animal, all of them dating to the same time in the last ten thousand years; and with a single geological flood layer all over all continents and islands and the ocean floor also dated in the last ten thousand years; and of course a billion cubic miles or more of water over and above the water presently on the earth ─ instead of which there's a very loud and informative absence.

Do you remember that you made these assertions, all those other times too.
You never did prove this. Are you going to do so for us, this time?

It speaks of the things I mentioned ─ a flat earth immovably fixed at the center of creation, the heavenly bodies moving round it, the sky a hard dome you can walk on, with the stars attached to it.

You forgot to tell me whether these express your own view.

As in the case of the other six times, I told you, but you did not listen, as is evident here also.
Mind telling us why Atheists spend so much time just listening to themselves... repeat themselves?

It has no concept of heliocentry, gravity, orbits, satellites, the nature of stars, or galaxies, or deep space, or the speed of light ─ no disgrace in the first millennium BCE since neither did anyone else.
A magical beginning. Is that what you believe?

You made this assertion the other times too... and you again are not listening to any response but yours, because that's not what any of us said.
Why keep repeating yourself, if you don't care to hear the other person?
How does that benefit you?
Is it the case, you have nothing better to do with your time, than listen to yourself... repeat yourself, when you have no interest in any response ?

This is a debate forum right? Is that not where there is dialogue?
If the dialogue goes... "I don't care about anything you say. I will just say whatever I have have to say, and every post throughout the thread, even if I have to say what you have not said.", how is that time spent doing something useful?

Provide proof for your assertions, so that we can debate them. That would be useful, I believe.

Yes, they found out what was correct because they kept looking at the evidence. Even Einstein had to be persuaded. But of course there's no concept of the Big Bang or an expanding universe in the bible.

The Bible is not a science textbook, so I don't think any rational person, would go looking for those thing in it.
If they wanted to learn how to brush their teeth properly, or drive a car, they would not pick the Bible up, looking to find those there either... unless they were mad... totally bonkers.

Quite right. Instead it said what was generally thought at the times and places it was written ─ flat earth, hard sky, stars as "lights" for "signs" and so on.

As you can see from the quotes on that link.

If you think the bible knew about heliocentry and gravity and orbits and the nature of satellites and planets and stars and galaxies, quote me the relevant quotes. Don't pretend the ones I've linked don't mean what they say.

I have better things to do with my time blü 2.
I am not here to spend time typing on pages of threads for someone who don't care about anything I say, and is only interested in what they say.
In fact, I gotta go talk to @joelr as he probably is awaiting my response.

When you have proof for your assertions, or are interested in considering a two way dialogue that involves responding to, and and considering responses from, on something that actually goes somewhere other than repeatedly circling, then we can talk.

Otherwise, try to remember what I told you the last time... about three times.

 

[nPeace]

This should be short.

Matthew is a creative re-interpretation of Mark, which is a myth.

Says the guys who must be right, because they believe they are.
Sorry. I don't believe your belief is correct. In fact, it's a belief that does not stand up to careful scrutiny.

- The four canonical gospels were probably written between AD 66 and 110.[5][6][7] All four were anonymous (the modern names were added in the 2nd century), almost certainly none were by eyewitnesses, and all are the end-products of long oral and written transmission.[8] Mark was the first to be written, using a variety of sources;[9][10] the authors of Matthew and Luke, acting independently, used Mark for their narrative of Jesus's career, supplementing it with the collection of sayings called the Q document and additional material unique to each;

Ah. They probably were? I see. So your guess is as good as the six year old whom you ask.

Noah is a re-working of the Epic of Gilamesh. Few comparisons.

Noah - Also he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground; But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned

Gilamesh - When the seventh day dawned I loosed a dove and let her go. She flew away, but finding no resting- place she returned.

Noah - And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat. And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.

Gilamesh - When the seventh day dawned the storm from the south subsided, the sea grew calm, the flood was stilled;

Noah - And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake;

Gimamesh - , I made a sacrifice and poured out a libation on the mountain top. Seven and again seven cauldrons I set up on their stands, I heaped up wood and cane and cedar and myrtle. When the gods smelled the sweet savour, they gathered like flies over the sacrifice.

Noah - The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.

And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

Gimamesh - “Wisest of gods, hero Enlil, how could you so senselessly bring down the flood? Lay upon the sinner his sin, Lay upon the transgressor his transgression, Punish him a little when he breaks loose, Do not drive him too hard or he perishes; Would that a lion had ravaged mankind Rather than the flood, Would that a wolf had ravaged mankind Rather than the flood, Would that famine had wasted the world Rather than the flood, Would that pestilence had wasted mankind Rather than the flood

Gilamesh - ‘For six days and six nights the winds blew, torrent and tempest and flood overwhelmed the world, tempest and flood raged together like warring hosts. When the seventh day dawned the storm from the south subsided, the sea grew calm, the flood was stilled;

Noah - And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth.

Noah - And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.

Gilamesh - I looked for land in vain, but fourteen leagues distant there appeared a mountain, and there the boat grounded; on the mountain of Nisir the boat held fast,

Noah - The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.
And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

Gimamesh - “Wisest of gods, hero Enlil, how could you so senselessly bring down the flood? Lay upon the sinner his sin, Lay upon the transgressor his transgression, Punish him a little when he breaks loose, Do not drive him too hard or he perishes; Would that a lion had ravaged mankind Rather than the flood, Would that a wolf had ravaged mankind Rather than the flood, Would that famine had wasted the world Rather than the flood, 26 Would that pestilence had wasted mankind Rather than the flood

Noah - And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

Gilamesh - Gilgamesh, the son of Ninsun, lies in the tomb.

Again, that belief is as thin as melted butter on a hot iron.

How about...
There are similarities, though the Epic is quite lacking in simplicity, and detail.
For example, was the flood just a torrent? Six days and six nights would probably cover flat land, but high hills? A 200 ft vessel?

There are differences between that, and the Biblical narative, which merit our consideration.
One example, is the dimensions of the vessel. The Bible provides dimensions that are reasonable. In fact quite accurate for a vessel of that size, since the proportion of the ark (length 6 to width 1) are similar to those used by modern naval architects.
That's significant. Impressive, I think.
The period of time too, for the rainfall, is reasonable.

The Epic of Gilgamesh is really a report of the Flood from an Assyro-Babylonian point of view
Though that version was dated to the seventh century B.C.E., scholars realized that the source material used in its composition was much older. Today some of the more ancient accounts have been discovered. The oldest known non-Biblical Flood account is found in a Sumerian narration. Fragments of that narration on a broken clay tablet were found at Nippur in southern Mesopotamia. Some experts believe that it was written between the 21st and 18th centuries B.C.E.

One important point to consider therefore, is this...
Though they differ greatly in details, they have some common features. These indicate an origin in some gigantic and unforgettable cataclysm. Despite vivid colorations over the centuries, their underlying theme is like a thread that ties them to one great event - the global Deluge related in the simple, uncolored Bible account.

This is one piece of evidence.
Thanks for drawing attention to it. Different sources. One event - a real historical event.

 

[nPeace]

Modern science rules out a global flood in many many ways. There is zero evidence for any of the flood myths being real.

Modern geology and flood geology
Modern geology, its sub-disciplines and other scientific disciplines utilize the scientific method to analyze the geology of the earth. The key tenets of flood geology are refuted by scientific analysis and do not have any standing in the scientific community. Modern geology relies on a number of established principles, one of the most important of which is Charles Lyell's principle of uniformitarianism. In relation to geological forces it states that the shaping of the Earth has occurred by means of mostly slow-acting forces that can be seen in operation today. By applying these principles, geologists have determined that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. They study the lithosphere of the Earth to gain information on the history of the planet. Geologists divide Earth's history into eons, eras, periods, epochs, and faunal stages characterized by well-defined breaks in the fossil record (see Geologic time scale). In general, there is a lack of any evidence for any of the above effects proposed by flood geologists and their claims of fossil layering are not taken seriously by scientists.

Please, please. Be honest.
Not taken seriously by scientists?
You don't get the privilege of deciding who is a scientist.
Many scientists - in all the fields mentioned, do believe there is evidence in the earth, for a global flood.
...and what's with the 4.54 billion years old... what does that have to do with a flood 4000+ years ago?

Erosion
The global flood cannot explain geological formations such as angular unconformities, where sedimentary rocks have been tilted and eroded then more sedimentary layers deposited on top, needing long periods of time for these processes. There is also the time needed for the erosion of valleys in sedimentary rock mountains. In another example, the flood, had it occurred, should also have produced large-scale effects spread throughout the entire world. Erosion should be evenly distributed, yet the levels of erosion in, for example, the Appalachians and the Rocky Mountains differ significantly.

Geochronology
Geochronology is the science of determining the absolute age of rocks, fossils, and sediments by a variety of techniques. These methods indicate that the Earth as a whole is about 4.54 billion years old, and that the strata that, according to flood geology, were laid down during the Flood some 6,000 years ago, were actually deposited gradually over many millions of years.

Paleontology
If the flood were responsible for fossilization, then all the animals now fossilized must have been living together on the Earth just before the flood. Based on estimates of the number of remains buried in the Karoo fossil formation in Africa, this would correspond to an abnormally high density of vertebrates worldwide, close to 2100 per acre. Creationists argue that evidence for the geological column is fragmentary, and all the complex layers of chalk occurred in the approach to the 150th day of Noah's flood. However, the entire geologic column is found in several places, and shows multiple features, including evidence of erosion and burrowing through older layers, which are inexplicable on a short timescale. Carbonate hardgrounds and the fossils associated with them show that the so-called flood sediments include evidence of long hiatuses in deposition that are not consistent with flood dynamics or timing.

Geochemistry
Proponents of Flood Geology are also unable to account for the alternation between calcite seas and aragonite seas through the Phanerozoic. The cyclical pattern of carbonate hardgrounds, calcitic and aragonitic ooids, and calcite-shelled fauna has apparently been controlled by seafloor spreading rates and the flushing of seawater through hydrothermal vents which changes its Mg/Ca ratio.
Sedimentary rock features
Phil Senter's 2011 article, "The Defeat of Flood Geology by Flood Geology", in the journal Reports of the National Center for Science Education, discusses "sedimentologic and other geologic features that Flood geologists have identified as evidence that particular strata cannot have been deposited during a time when the entire planet was under water ... and distribution of strata that predate the existence of the Ararat mountain chain." These include continental basalts, terrestrial tracks of animals, and marine communities preserving multiple in-situ generations included in the rocks of most or all Phanerozoic periods, and the basalt even in the younger Precambrian rocks. Others, occurring in rocks of several geologic periods, include lake deposits and eolian (wind) deposits. Using their own words, Flood geologists find evidence in every Paleozoic and Mesozoic period, and in every epoch of the Cenozoic period, indicating that a global flood could not have occurred during that interval. A single flood could also not account for such features as unconformities, in which lower rock layers are tilted while higher rock layers were laid down horizontally on top.

This is your opinion.
Archaeologist, geologists, and other ists disagree with that opinion.

 

[nPeace]

No. The Israelites who eventually worshipped Yahweh emerged around 1200BC but Genesis was written much later and used legends of the time. Before this there was no Yahweh, no Israelites or anything in these myths.
When Epic of Gilamesh was written in 2100 BC there was no mention of Yahweh, or monotheism or any Israelite customs, beliefs or aspects of the Noah tale. There were many Gods active.
The Noah flood happened when a writer wrote it down in Genesis sometime after 1200BC.

...and the writer wrote this... This is the history of Noah... in the same book... right after relating the event.
You are supposed to be smart, aren't you?

From the Gilamesh page:

-Various themes, plot elements, and characters in the Hebrew Bible correlate with the Epic of Gilgamesh – notably, the accounts of the Garden of Eden, the advice from Ecclesiastes, and the Genesis flood narrative.

-Andrew George submits that the Genesis flood narrative matches that in Gilgamesh so closely that "few doubt" that it derives from a Mesopotamian account.[66] What is particularly noticeable is the way the Genesis flood story follows the Gilgamesh flood tale "point by point and in the same order", even when the story permits other alternatives.


-
Garden of Eden[edit]
The parallels between the stories of Enkidu/Shamhat and Adam/Eve have been long recognized by scholars.[63][64] In both, a man is created from the soil by a god, and lives in a natural setting amongst the animals. He is introduced to a woman who tempts him. In both stories the man accepts food from the woman, covers his nakedness, and must leave his former realm, unable to return. The presence of a snake that steals a plant of immortality from the hero later in the epic is another point of similarity. However, a major difference between the two stories is that while Enkidu experiences regret regarding his seduction away from nature, this is only temporary: After being confronted by the god Shamash for being ungrateful, Enkidu recants and decides to give the woman who seduced him his final blessing before he dies. This is in contrast to Adam, whose fall from grace is largely portrayed purely as a punishment for disobeying god.



Religion Identity and the Origins of Ancient Israel.



KL Sparks, PhD Hebrew Bible, Baptist Pastor,


As a rule, modern scholars do not believe that the Bible’s account of early Israel’s history provides a wholly accurate portrait of Israels origins. One reason for this is that the earliest part of Israel’s history in Genesis is now regarded as something other than a work of modern history. It’s primary author was at best an ancient historian (if a historian at all) who lived long after the events he narrated, and who drew freely from sources that were not historical (legends and theological stories), he was more concerned with theology than with the modern quest to learn “what actually happened” (Van Seters 1992; Sparks 2002 pp. 37-71)

Oh. More of your beliefs in opinion.
The modern creation movement is mostly driven by those with primarily scientific qualifications. Some of a theological bent argue that we scientists don’t understand the ‘genre’ of Genesis (i.e. we are theological ignoramuses) and that Genesis is not meant to be understood as history. In part answer to this, I have listed here just some of those with theological qualifications who have taken a public stand for understanding Genesis as straightforward history, just as we scientists do. Those listed represent a wide spectrum, from pastors and evangelists to professors of church history, theology, and Hebrew, and from various church affiliations.

(Note: this list is not meant to be exhaustive. So, the absence of names of staff from a given theological institution should not be read as meaning that there are none at that institution. Also, we will update this article periodically with additional names.)

NB
nPeace does not endorse the views of the comments following .

 

[blü 2]

As in the case of the other six times, I told you, but you did not listen

No, you've never given a frank yes or no to the question whether you think the world is flat as the bible says it is.

You simply pretend the bible doesn't reflect the cosmology of its time and place.

Of course I know very well by now that evasion evasion and of course evasion are your style.

So greatly to your relief, we'll leave it there, where it always ends.

 

[paarsurrey]

The simple idea that you believe there is no solid evidence for the existence of humans prior to 4026 BCE is an insult to intelligence. We have found ruins of towns housing over 5000 people that are twice older than that. We have human bones and settlement traces that date back from 315 000 years ago in Morrocco. We have traces of advanced literate human civilization around the globe and even in Mesopotamia prior, during and after the so called flood without any interruption; that's unless you believe the city of Harrapan was built by three person, while Sargon of Akkad had an army of about a dozen and was Noah's great grand son at most and lived in an enormous city filled with nobody.

I agree with one here.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

This is a very good point.

Most theories in science are wrong to some degree and they remain theories because the scientists exploring them know they can be wrong. They go to considerable effort to try and eliminate the bias of ignorance and presumption via the experimental process, but they understand that they can still be quite wrong.

Biblical inerrantists, however, accept no such possible error, either in the text or in their interpretation of it. This in itself implies a lack of honesty and humility that seriously undercuts the validity of their theories. (Theories that they can't even view as theories.)

" Biblical inerrantists, however, accept no such possible error, either in the text or in their interpretation of it. "

Jesus did not write anything in Bible. If Jesus comes, he will deny the Pauline-Christianity and the Pauline-Bible has anything to do with him.
Right?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Correct thats how science works using "scientific theories", i.e an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results.

Of course new evidence can cause the theory to be modified, example the theory of evolution has developed a little since Darwins day but the theory remains basically the same.

A scientific theory is not the layman's idea of a best guess that said layman thinks sounds about right and shrugging it off as though it is as many people do smacks very much of deliberate ignorance.

So tell me when was the last time new evidence caused the theory of gravity to be changed?

What causes the gravity to get created, please?

Regards
____________
Gravity is one of the mysteries to be solved in order to get a complete understanding of how the Universe works.