Bharat Jhunjhunwala
TruthPrevails
Perhaps you can prove the existence of your ancestors in the 10 generation. I cannot.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evidence of NOAH's FLOOD
- Thread starter Little Nipper
- Start date
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
So what? There are no magical stories about my ancestors. The story is still a myth.
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
TruthPrevails
Bye for now.
ChieftheCef
Active Member
It's not really that hard you just have to think. I edited it anyway
gnostic
The Lost One
Local or global, the story of Noah is still a myth. There are no evidence to the existence of Noah, of his ancestors and of his descendants. The Flood never happened, as narrated, plus the Ark are nowhere to be found…certainly not at Ararat.
If anything, if there were flood, any vessels would have floated and moved downslope, not climb up the mountains, as Genesis 8 indicated. So the Ark should have moved away from the peaks, not rest on top of one of those summits.
plus. Where all that water come from, and where did the water go? If the water rose high enough to cover even the shorter of the 2 peaks (Little Ararat), it would have completely changed the average sea level, and taken thousands of years to reach the sea level similar to today…meaning Egypt and Mesopotamia should still be underwater, hundreds of generations after Noah.
As to the Table of Nations (Genesis 10), those are myths too, especially what it write about Egypt and about Nimrod’s cities.
Egypt, or Mizraim as some translations called Egypt, have far longer history than Genesis 10 have claimed, Mizraim or Egypt being a grandson of Noah. Egyptian cultures predated the first dynasty of unified Egypt (started around 3150 BCE), which was around the start of Bronze Age. Prior to the 1st dynasty, Egypt was two kingdoms, hence one of the names for Egypt was tawy or tawj - “the Two Lands” - Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt.
If (hypothetically) the creation of Adam was about 6000 years ago, and Noah’s Flood 1656 years after Adam’s creation, then the Flood should be dated to somewhere about 2340 BCE. This would point to Genesis Egypt being created (again, hypothetically) in the 6th dynasty, and yet the first pyramid the Step Pyramid at Saqqara, was built during the reign of Djoser the founder of the 3rd dynasty (2686 - 2648 BCE).
The Great Pyramid itself (Giza) was constructed during the reign of second king of the 4th dynasty, Khufu (c 2589 - 2566 BCE). These two pyramids alone, squash the apparent Genesis Flood and the post-Flood Table of Nations.
And it says that Nimrod built a number of cities in Shinar (Babylonia) and in Assyria. But archaeologically Nineveh‘s earliest settlement was dated around 6000 BCE, while Calah or Kalhu in Assyria was constructed during the reign of Shalmaneser I (1274 - 1245 BCE). Nimrod couldn’t have built these 2 cities.
And beside that, Babylonia didn’t exist in the 3rd millennium BCE, as the region was called Sumer (Šumeru in Akkadian, or ki-en-ĝir in Sumerian). Babylon was a minor town during the late 3rd millennium, it didn’t become a great city until 18th century BCE, eg the reign of Hammurabi (1797 - 1750 BCE).
Plus, the earliest settlement of Erech or Uruk have been dated to about 5000 BCE, a Neolithic village, but by 4000 BCE and later Uruk was the large city in the world throughout the Chalolithic period or the 4th millennium BCE. There was a ziggurat and 2 temple complexes in 2 districts of Uruk.
As I said the Table of Nations…myth. There are no historical or archaeological values in Genesis 10.
Last edited:
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
If it was just a local flood, than the story in the Bible doesn't really make any sense at all.
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
TruthPrevails
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
TruthPrevails
There are no evidence to the existence of Noah, of his ancestors and of his descendants.
Reply: It is present all over. (We do not expect skeletons to carry names)
The Flood never happened, as narrated,
Reply: The complication lies in the term “as narrated.” My study shows that the Bible only says the flood spread “as far as one could see.”
plus the Ark are nowhere to be found…certainly not at Ararat.
Reply: Negative evidence cannot be relied upon in archaeology.
If anything, if there were flood, any vessels would have floated and moved downslope, not climb up the mountains, as Genesis 8 indicated. So the Ark should have moved away from the peaks, not rest on top of one of those summits.
Reply: You are right. The Bible does not say it rested on a peak.
those are myths too, especially what it write about Egypt and about Nimrod’s cities.
Reply: There is no Egypt in the Bible. Only Mitsrayim. Where Mitsrayim is located is not spelled out. I agree entirely that the references to Mistrayim in Bible do not match up with Egypt. That underscores the need to look at other alternative locations. That does not mean that the Biblical account is incorrect.
Egypt, or Mizraim as some translations called Egypt, have far longer history than Genesis 10 have claimed, Mizraim or Egypt being a grandson of Noah. Egyptian cultures predated the first dynasty of unified Egypt (started around 3150 BCE), which was around the start of Bronze Age. Prior to the 1st dynasty, Egypt was two kingdoms, hence one of the names for Egypt was tawy or tawj - “the Two Lands” - Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt.
Reply: Agree. Mitsrayim not in Egypt.
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
TruthPrevails
I think it makes perfect sense. A particular family made a valiant response to the local flood.
River Sea
Well-Known Member
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala
How did the boat find Vaivaswat Manu, and how did the fish pull the boat? Was it a rope or something tied to the horn of the fish? Or if not a rope, what was it? If there is no information, does one use their imagination to imagine how this was done in detail? How did a fish pull a boat? How was it that Vaivaswat Manu was so prepared? Were people more prepared back when they needed to know how to survive? So always carry ropes and other items in case they need them. What was common to always make sure one had with them to help survive? Was it carrying ropes?
How did the boat find Vaivaswat Manu, and how did the fish pull the boat? Was it a rope or something tied to the horn of the fish? Or if not a rope, what was it? If there is no information, does one use their imagination to imagine how this was done in detail? How did a fish pull a boat? How was it that Vaivaswat Manu was so prepared? Were people more prepared back when they needed to know how to survive? So always carry ropes and other items in case they need them. What was common to always make sure one had with them to help survive? Was it carrying ropes?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
At the literalistic level it doesn't.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Agreed.
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
TruthPrevails
I don't think the fish pulled the boat. There would be some imagination and I some reality here.
gnostic
The Lost One
I have talk of there being “no evidence”, with regarding to the Noah’s story, not “negative evidence”, Bharat.
You are clearly confusing “negative evidence” with “absence of evidence” (or “zero evidence” or “no evidence”).
The "positive evidence" & "negative evidence" are ALL EVIDENCE.
Negative evidence are observations of evidence (just like positive evidence) that don't support a hypothesis or theory, hence they (negative evidence) could refute hypothesis or theory.
What I means by there are “no evidence”, means THERE ARE NOT EVEN “negative evidence”.
Despite what you may think, finding negative evidence are good things, because in science, negative evidence refute weak or incorrect hypothesis.
Archaeologists who cannot accept evidence that counter their models, are biased and incompetent archaeologists.
The Genesis Flood has zero evidence…not negative evidence.
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
TruthPrevails
Perhaps my mistake. We only have evidence or "no evidence" in archaeology. "No evidence" could perhaps be called zero evidence or negative evidence also. I dont understand the distinction between the two. Please explain. Thx
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
All "evidence" is not the same. For example, is scripture "evidence"? Yes, it is, but is it objective? accurate? etc.
River Sea
Well-Known Member
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala Thank you for your help in figuring out what imagination is and what to actually study about how the Meena people survived and managed through their weather. However, I really need your help with this.
From your book, I learned. Fish pulled the boat; what was hooked to the horn of the fish? A net, rope, or what? What was the hook made from, and what did the Meena community carry with them for survival?" Please read below screenshots.
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala I found in your book fish pulled boat. I wanted to know how fish pulled boat? Read further below screenshot.
Something was hooked to the horn of a fish. A net, rope, or what? What was the hook made from, and what did the Meena community carry with them for survival? Did they carry with them hooks, nets, and ropes?
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala
From your website, to which I'll refer at the bottom of the post, mention Luni Valley.
I had never heard of the Luni Valley. There's the Indus Valley and the Luni River. So this confuses me. Due to the Luni River, could then a valley be called the river Luni, so then Luni Valley? Or is this area also called the Indus Valley? In your book, you'll see Luni, who shows headmen.
What is Luni? I need help with this word due to seeing Luni Valley. I would think it's the Indus Valley, and the Luni River goes through the Indus Valley. However, I also see Luni show headmen. How does the river name Luni show the headmen of the community? My question is: What is Luni? River, and what else?
From your book I see Luni River
Now I'll show you my confusion from your website.
I answer my own question from re-reading @Bharat Jhunjhunwala info. Now I understand Yes Meen means Meena. Actually Meen means fish. I'll leave my question here anyways. What is Meen? Does that also mean Meena? Maybe so because I learned one can have either A or drop the A, and it's the same word. For example, Yadav and Yadava are the same word.
Meena people | Meen | fish | tortoise | Varaha | Gautamji temple | Lord Matsya | Matsya Avatar
Notice Fish in this picture also notice Meena people means fish
the Luni basin is the home of the Meena community. The word Meena is derived from the word “meen” which means fish. These people believe that they are descendants of Vaivaswat Manu.
These points suggest that the Flood took place in the Luni basin.
Noah and Vaivaswat Manu were the same person who lived in the Luni Valley
I never heard of Luni Valley nor did I find this in your book. Now I'm confused, I thought it was Indus Valley and the Luni River flowed through the Indus Valley, or is this Luni Valley that the Luni River flown through located in Jalore.
Further above in your website you did mention Jalore
the city of Jalore is where the Flood took place as per our study. The name “Jalore” is made of two parts—”Jal” and “ore.” “Jal” is water and “ore” is city like “Ur.” Thus, Jalore means “city of water” and this locates the Flood in this area.
Here's website where I gotten information from
Common Prophets of the Jews, Christians & Muslims and Hindus -
www.commonprophets.com
I will here add to my edit: Jalore India, see where red is, and see how a bowl shape can collect water. When will the flood over that bowl shape rush into Jalore, or what about that open space? (read below screenshot)
The word Meena is derived from the word “meen” which means fish. These people believe that they are descendants of Vaivaswat Manu (Noah). However my question is, where's the water? How are the Meena community fishing community or is it only referring to this local flood?
Yes Meen means fish. Yes there's the Meena community who still lives in India to this day. They still continue with this story to this day.
Last edited:
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
TruthPrevails
I agree. The relevance of evidence depends upon the subject. We are discussing archeological evidence for the flood. Archaeology is relevant here.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I tend to believe it is likely that some early Jew(s) took the Babylonian flood narrative and modified it to put forth many of the basic of the theological concepts found in Judaism.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I will disagree with this to a point Technically it is correct because believers in the flood myth refuse to create testable models. Without any testable models there cannot be any evidence for or against it. It is pseudoscience. But even if they do that there are some models that can be tested and refuted. For example the claim of YEC's that almost all of the sedimentary rocks older than the Cenozoic are from the flood. That claim is easily tested and refuted. But when we have those with ever shifting flood models, portraying weaker and weaker floods then I will agree, those cannot be tested since a clear testable model of them will not be made by the believers. Then one enters into the scientific worthless area of no evidence.