Genesis Account of Creation: Firmament

[Audie]

The clay tablets claiming that a Flood event happened in the Euphrates River Basin does not prove that any such event happened there or that the event they describe is the same event described in the Genesis account.

It is impossible to determine if the Genesis account is describing a global Flood event.

If genesis is "true" in any sense it is not-though it plainly is-
describing a world wide flood with only those on the
boat surviving.

And since there was no such event, it
is a bs story. But that is news of the
obvious.

 

[shunyadragon]

That's stating the obvious.

Actually not so obvious considering your view of the Biblical scriptures as true based on their claim.

 

[shunyadragon]

The clay tablets claiming that a Flood event happened in the Euphrates River Basin does not prove that any such event happened there or that the event they describe is the same event described in the Genesis account.

There is significant geologic evidence that a catastrophic flood took place in the Tigris Euphrates valley that corresponds to what the Sumerian cuneiform tablets describe. There is no other evidence of any other flooding event in the Middle East that fits the Biblical nor the other cuneiform records synario.

It is impossible to determine if the Genesis account is describing a global Flood event.

I am not sure what you are referring to as 'impossible to determine,' but It is simply a matter of literal fact that the Genesis account describes a global event.

 

[gnostic]

Sunken cities have been found all over the world.

Your points, JesusKnowsYou?

There are some cities, but if you were to look at the evidence, each ones of them are dated to different times.

If you think they (sunken cities) were all the result of single global flood, then they would be and should be all pointed to a single date or year. They clearly don’t.

Both geological and archaeological evidence don’t support a single global flood at any point of human history.

You are merely empty claim about sunken cities. Each ones occurred in different times, different periods.

 

[Audie]

Your points, JesusKnowsYou?

There are some cities, but if you were to look at the evidence, each ones of them are dated to different times.

If you think they (sunken cities) were all the result of single global flood, then they would be and should be all pointed to a single date or year. They clearly don’t.

Both geological and archaeological evidence don’t support a single global flood at any point of human history.

You are merely empty claim about sunken cities. Each ones occurred in different times, different periods.

Like the frozen mammoths supposedly killed in the "flood"
but whivh date to a spread of 50 k years.

 

[sooda]

There is significant geologic evidence that a catastrophic flood took place in the Tigris Euphrates valley that corresponds to what the Sumerian cuneiform tablets describe. There is no other evidence of any other flooding event in the Middle East that fits the Biblical nor the other cuneiform records synario.



I am not sure what you are referring to as 'impossible to determine,' but It is simply a matter of literal fact that the Genesis account describes a global event.

The Tigris/Euphrates river basin often flooded.. That's why its called the Fertile Crescent. Flooding laid down fertile soil on the banks of the river.

The reason for flooding was spring snowmelt from the Zagros Mountains combined with spring rains to cause the river bank to overflow.

The retelling of a particularly terrible flood was the inspiration for the mythic story.

 

[shunyadragon]

The Tigris/Euphrates river basin often flooded.. That's why its called the Fertile Crescent. Flooding laid down fertile soil on the banks of the river.

This flooding event was the most extensive and catastrophic in recorded history, and it involved several extreme events in sucesion. .

 

[sooda]

This flooding event was the most extensive and catastrophic in recorded history, and it involved several extreme events in sucesion. .

Nope.. It was a four day flood and while it may have been a particularly bad one it was by no means the "worst in history"..

We don't know what the "worst in history" was. What "successive events"?

 

[gnostic]

It is impossible to determine if the Genesis account is describing a global Flood event.

Contextually, that’s what Genesis 7 is saying, especially verse 19:

17 The flood continued forty days on the earth; and the waters increased, and bore up the ark, and it rose high above the earth. 18 The waters swelled and increased greatly on the earth; and the ark floated on the face of the waters. 19 The waters swelled so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered; 20 the waters swelled above the mountains, covering them fifteen cubits deep.

“...that all the high mountains under the whole Heaven were covered...”

That’s pretty unambiguous, “all the high mountains” and “under the whole Heaven”. Then it followed that by the water covering the peaks by 15 cubits.

Now, from Genesis 6 and 7, it never mentioned in recognizable landmarks, and without the landmarks, we have no idea, if it is talking about the whole world, or only all mountains in the Middle East, or just mountains in Mesopotamia.

It is not until Genesis 8, we are finally given a geographical location,

4 and in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.

Now, there are actually two peaks at Mount Ararat, one over 5100 metres (Greater Ararat) and the other nearly 3900 metres. In the Middle East, only Mount Damavand in Iran is higher at 5600 metres.

(I didn’t include Noshaq (almost 7500 m) in Afghanistan because I am not sure if Afghanistan is part of the M.E., since this mountain is also part of the Hindu Kush.)

Do you even understand the concept of sea level?

Normally large storms causing massive local or regional flooding, and yet it wouldn’t cause much increase in the sea level.

But if the water went higher than Mount Ararat, this would cause the sea level to rise by 5000 metres higher. There would be no way naturally possible for the sea level to drop uncovered Mesopotamia in a matter of half-a-year, which Genesis claimed.

And trees and other plants don’t just grow back, because the over 5000 metre depth would have destroyed all plant life, due to water pressure.

Most submarines cannot even withstand a crushing depth of 730 metres. So I don’t see how trees can still survive if the depth is 5000 metres.

 

[sooda]

Contextually, that’s what Genesis 7 is saying, especially verse 19:


“...that all the high mountains under the whole Heaven were covered...”

That’s pretty unambiguous, “all the high mountains” and “under the whole Heaven”. Then it followed that by the water covering the peaks by 15 cubits.

Now, from Genesis 6 and 7, it never mentioned in recognizable landmarks, and without the landmarks, we have no idea, if it is talking about the whole world, or only all mountains in the Middle East, or just mountains in Mesopotamia.

It is not until Genesis 8, we are finally given a geographical location,



Now, there are actually two peaks at Mount Ararat, one over 5100 metres (Greater Ararat) and the other nearly 3900 metres. In the Middle East, only Mount Damavand in Iran is higher at 5600 metres.

(I didn’t include Noshaq (almost 7500 m) in Afghanistan because I am not sure if Afghanistan is part of the M.E., since this mountain is also part of the Hindu Kush.)

Do you even understand the concept of sea level?

Normally large storms causing massive local or regional flooding, and yet it wouldn’t cause much increase in the sea level.

But if the water went higher than Mount Ararat, this would cause the sea level to rise by 5000 metres higher. There would be no way naturally possible for the sea level to drop uncovered Mesopotamia in a matter of half-a-year, which Genesis claimed.

And trees and other plants don’t just grow back, because the over 5000 metre depth would have destroyed all plant life, due to water pressure.

Most submarines cannot even withstand a crushing depth of 730 metres. So I don’t see how trees can still survive if the depth is 5000 metres.

In earlier flood myths the ark landed in Bahrain.

 

[gnostic]

In earlier flood myths the ark landed in Bahrain.

Yes, Dilmun, , in Sumerian, does appear in the Eridu Genesis, the translation of the Eridu Genesis.



Sources:

Eridu Genesis

ETCSL translation: t.1.7.4 The Flood Story, 2006, ETCSL (Electronic Text Corpus Of Sumerian Literature), University of Oxford​

 

[sooda]

Yes, Dilmun, , in Sumerian, does appear in the Eridu Genesis, the translation of the Eridu Genesis.


Sources:

Eridu Genesis

ETCSL translation: t.1.7.4 The Flood Story, 2006, ETCSL (Electronic Text Corpus Of Sumerian Literature), University of Oxford​

Most American Christians seem to be blissfully unaware of Dilmun and the NagHammadi or the Ugaritic tablets.

I read History Begins at Sumer around 1980.. Fascinating.

 

[gnostic]

Most American Christians seem to be blissfully unaware of Dilmun and the NagHammadi or the Ugaritic tablets.

I read History Begins at Sumer around 1980.. Fascinating.

At that time, I was mainly interested in the history of Ancient Greece and Rome, and medieval Europe.

My knowledge then of ancient Egypt, Levant and Mesopotamia were pretty limited.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Most American Christians seem to be blissfully unaware of Dilmun and the NagHammadi or the Ugaritic tablets.

I read History Begins at Sumer around 1980.. Fascinating.

Or at least literalists are blissfully unaware of this. Most of them have learned that they have to ignore science and history if they want to maintain their beliefs.

 

[sooda]

Or at least literalists are blissfully unaware of this. Most of them have learned that they have to ignore science and history if they want to maintain their beliefs.

I wonder.. Perhaps its just a complete lack of curiosity. Some people never read a book after High School.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Actually not so obvious considering your view of the Biblical scriptures as true based on their claim.

That's weird.

Why would I share that view when I don't believe it?

Can you actually try to quote me sharing this view?

Or are you going to explain why you are misrepresenting my views?

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

There is significant geologic evidence that a catastrophic flood took place in the Tigris Euphrates valley that corresponds to what the Sumerian cuneiform tablets describe. There is no other evidence of any other flooding event in the Middle East that fits the Biblical nor the other cuneiform records synario.

Nothing you just said here conflicts with what I said.

I am not sure what you are referring to as 'impossible to determine,' but It is simply a matter of literal fact that the Genesis account describes a global event.

That is not a fact, but an interpretation.

 

[shunyadragon]

That is not a fact, but an interpretation.

I am not considering facts, which in the factual context of history Genesis is a mythology of a world flood based on more ancient flood myths.

There are many interpretations of Genesis, pretty much all diverse often conflicting interpretations to suit one's own agenda.

You asked to cite scripture as descriptive of a world flood. I cited Genesis as literally describing a world flood in response to your request, and beyond that you gave one of many interpretations that do not fit the literal account in Genesis.

 

[shunyadragon]

That's weird.

Why would I share that view when I don't believe it?

Can you actually try to quote me sharing this view?

Or are you going to explain why you are misrepresenting my views?

I am not misinterpreting your views. Your interpretation is one of many. I just cited Genesis where it literally describes Noah's flood as a world flood as you requested.. My understanding and interpretation are very different.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

No its not .. Look at the years between the flood and the Tower of Babel.

I think that you are responding to my claim that the Genesis account recorded a span of "thousands of years".

If that is the case, then I want you to know that the Genesis account ends at the death of Joseph, son of Israel, in Egypt and that was at approximately 2,310 years after the Fall of Adam and Eve.

The Genesis account does not end at the Tower of Babel.

Noah lived a very long time—950 years total. The flood occurred when Noah was 600 years old—in the year 1656 since creation, and Noah and the others left the ark the next year—1657 since creation.

You are correct about the Genesis account's claim about how long Noah lived, what year of his life the Flood event occurred and how long they stayed in the Ark...

...but...and I know I am going to be considered a "stickler" for mentioning this, but all of these years should be measured from the time that Adam and Eve left the Garden, not from the Creation.

No one knows how long the Creation took. The word that was translated into "day" in the original Hebrew actually better translates into "a period of time with a discernible beginning and end."

Considering that a "day" is also "a period of time with a discernible beginning and end", I don't blame later English translators, but the Creative Periods were not necessarily 24-hour periods of time.

Also, no one knows exactly how long Adam and Eve dwelt in the Garden before they were cast out.

So, just for the sake of clarity, these years you mentioned should begin at the time when Adam and Eve left the Garden, not the Creation.

The incident known as the Tower of Babel took place when Noah was 940 years old—in the year 1996 since creation.

I do not believe this to be accurate. At least, not according to my reading of the text.

Even though the Genesis account does not record exactly when the Tower was built and subsequently destroyed - we can approximate it using other information from the text.

The Genesis account claims that soon after they exited the Ark, the sons of Noah began having children. Shem, at least, had his son Arphaxad only two years after the Flood (Genesis 11:10).

Arphaxad had his son, Salah, at the age of 35 - which made Noah approximately 638 years old when he became the great-grandfather to Salah through Shem.

So, take this into account when we discuss Noah's other sons and their soon-to-be-families, because they probably followed a similar pattern (although their ages are not mentioned in the Genesis account for some reason.)

The Genesis account claims that Ham had a grandson named Nimrod (Genesis 10:6-9) and that he, Nimrod, began the kingdom, known as Babel, in the land of Shinar. (Genesis 10:10)

Yes, this was the same land and kingdom where the Tower was later built (Genesis 11:1-9).

Nimrod was Noah's great-grandson through Ham, and if Ham followed the same pattern as Shem, it is possible that Nimrod was born at about the same time (relatively) as Salah, which would make Noah approximately 638 years old when Nimrod was born.

When the kingdom of Babel began is anyone's guess, but Nimrod most likely would have needed to have been considered a grown man before beginning it so, if we follow the Biblical tradition of marriage and "begetting" children to be when a boy becomes a man (as well as the pattern set by Shem's descendants), Nimrod was most likely approximately 30 years old when he began building his kingdom in the land of Shinar.

Which would have made Noah approximately 668 years old at the time that Nimrod began his kingdom.

The Genesis account also claims that those who settled in Shinar (under Nimrod) chose a certain plain to build both their city and tower (Genesis 11:2-5).

It was not like they built a city, dwelt there for a few centuries, and then decided to build a tower. At least, not from my reading of the Genesis account.

"And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there.

And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar.

And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth." (Genesis 11:2-4)

So, it is my opinion, based on my reading of the Genesis account, that the construction of the Tower could have began while Noah was approximately 668 years old.

The Genesis account does not mention how long construction on the Tower took place before God destroyed it, but other records claim that it could have lasted just over 100 years, and I don't see any reason to assume that God waited approximately 272 years (when Noah was 940) to destroy the Tower and confound the language of the people.

We do know that Noah was 894 years old when Abraham was born and that the events at the Tower took place before Abraham's birth.

I believe that Noah was approximately 750-800 years old when the Tower was destroyed.