• 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!

How does the Epic of Gilgamesh discredit the story of Noah’s flood?

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Unless a Christian handles rattlesnakes, I don't believe they are truly literalists.

Mark 16:15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Okay, I guess it doesn't literally say rattlesnakes, but with a rattlesnake it takes care of handling snakes and the poison verse also. Oh man, it says they got to drink the poison. Oh well, how many Christians literally do all of those things even the way it is written?

Heck, I used to handle snakes all of the time when I was a kid. Getting poison was a problem so I never drank it.

By the way, that translation is incorrect since snakes are not poisonous. There is no poison to get from them.


EDIT:

Dang it, if I milked rattlesnakes I could have done the whole gamut:

Venomous Snake FAQs!
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Are you saying that Allah is a peanut butter and jelly sandwich again or can you back up that claim?

See, if you think that making insulting remarks using the arabic word Allah is making an argument, its pretty pathetic and ignorant. ;)

Yes, they are assuming. Any scholar making this assumption is making an assumption. And of course, you have not engaged with the argument. So I dont know who you are mate, but you are just gonna make another insult on "Allah" as your argument.

The issue is this, and this has been discussed enough and more. The flood episode could be an older record that both of these episodes, vis a vis, epic of Gilgamesh and the writer of genesis have copied from. Its an assumption based on some kind of probability.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
The version recorded by Moses in the Bible is divinely inspired, the belief goes. These other flood myths, Gilgamesh included, are not inspired, hence the differences

That seems to be so, that both are remembering the same event.

One reason we (who believe the Bible is inspired) say that the Genesis account is divinely inspired, is from examining the ratios of the Ark.....they are ideal! The ratios, reduced to 30(L): 5(W): 3(H), are identical to the ratios of many modern ships!

If the argument is that those ratios were known in ancient times, then why don’t we read other ancient accounts of the Flood, describing vessels with those same ideal ratios? Or similar? (Usually, those details aren left out.)

Was Moses, who recorded & described the account, just “lucky” to get it right?

The boat in the Epic of Gilgamesh was way off!! It’s dimensions were 90 x 90 x 120! A ship with those ratios would not exhibit any seaworthiness! At all!

And understanding how Psalms 104 8-9 adds supporting details to the Event, it clarifies a lot.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
That's really replacing the scriptures and saying they are false because of a theory of a particular flood.
I guess people also do that sort of thing when it comes to the Exodus and conquest of Canaan. People are willing to say the scriptures are false and that Moses was a mythological figure because of the ideas of some historians.
These days people also are willing to write off the miracles and resurrection of Jesus because of modern ideas.
In all of this I am talking about Christians.
But it does show a particular attitude to the scriptures which I don't like.
There is no evidence at all of a flood that covered the earth.

A global flood as described in this story is inconsistent with the physical findings of geology, paleontology and the global distribution of species.[3][4][5] A branch of creationism known as flood geology is a pseudoscientific attempt to argue that such a global flood actually occurred.

Genesis flood narrative - Wikipedia
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
IMPE most people who claim to be "Biblical Literalists" aren't actually that familiar with scripture.

I agree with you that some things from Scripture you just can’t take literally, even tho most do.

Like the Earth the Planet being “burned up”. That makes no sense. (I mean, why? Did the planet do something bad?) Plus, it contradicts Ecclesiastes 1:4
Yet that’s what many are taught.

Is there another way to understand it? Yes, just by reading Genesis 11:1, where we see “earth” refers to people.

So then, people will be “burned up by fire”? Not literally....

(I hope you can follow me, because what I’m about to explain applies also to the Lake of Fire, or what some may call Hellfire. There’s actually no such term in the Greek Scriptures.)....

So according to the Bible, the Fire is not literal? Nope. Because at Revelation 20 13-14, we read “death is cast into the LoF”

Now, can you burn death? No, it is not a tangible thing.
So what does Fire here, mean? Well, if you throw something into a literal fire, are you ever gonna get it back? No that item is gone forever, it is no more.

So death being “thrown lints the LoF”, means that it will be gone? Yes, that’s what the Bible means.
For in the very next chapter of Revelation, @ Revelation 21 3-4, it states “death will be no more.”

If no death for humans, that means everlasting life...and that’s the promise the Bible holds out! John 17:3; Romans 6:23

Christendom has scared its members for centuries, over a concept that’s been completely misunderstood.

Have a good day.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
There is no evidence at all of a flood that covered the earth.

A global flood as described in this story is inconsistent with the physical findings of geology, paleontology and the global distribution of species.[3][4][5] A branch of creationism known as flood geology is a pseudoscientific attempt to argue that such a global flood actually occurred.

Genesis flood narrative - Wikipedia

That seems true to me also but as you say, there is evidence of a large local flood and so why no Ark to save Noah and family and animals in the area?
The Bible actually can be translated to mean a large local flood btw.
It took a long time to build the Ark and Noah could have walked away but we don't know what conditions were like for travellers then in a world full of evil and God no doubt wanted Noah to hang around and be a witness for the people in the area of what was going to happen, so that they would repent.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
That is more than a bit of a strawman. The reasons that Moses is thought to be a fictional character is far more involved than the failure of the flood myth. And the failure of the flood myth is based upon all of the endless evidence that contradicts it. And not just scientific evidence, historical, archaeological, even mythological 'evidence' refute the story.

What should bother you is people that abuse scripture by insisting that it is literally true.

In reality there is no need for saying that a large local flood did not happen and there is no reason to say that Moses and the Exodus were not real. There is evidence for both but people prefer the versions that tell us that the Bible is false. Maybe they are the loudest voices these days.
It concerns me that young people are told by YEC people that evolution is wrong and it concerns me that young people are told by atheists that evolution is 100% correct without the need for a God.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
In reality there is no need for saying that a large local flood did not happen and there is no reason to say that Moses and the Exodus were not real. There is evidence for both but people prefer the versions that tell us that the Bible is false. Maybe they are the loudest voices these days.
It concerns me that young people are told by YEC people that evolution is wrong and it concerns me that young people are told by atheists that evolution is 100% correct without the need for a God.
What? It appears that you do not wish to know what is real or not. There is no reliable evidence for the flood myth. But if you think that you have some please do tell.us what it is.

Some people do want to know what happened in the past. Some people may prefer to live in the land of fantasy.

Lastly you appear to be mischaracterizing what is said. Evolution does not appear to need a God at all and theists cannot seem to find a need for God either.
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
It is also possible that both flood episodes had an older source and both are copied from that, said since we are making assumptions.

Unlike other flood myths the Epic has some very specific details that were copied over to Noah so it's likely that this was the source. The 2 creation stories in Genesis also have close similarities to both Mesopotamian creation stories. So the authors of Genesis probably has some access to these stories.The Mesopotamian version may be a take on a Sumerian story?
There may have been a local flood from the The Euphrates that inspired writing a fictional tale about Gods sending a world flood.
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
In reality there is no need for saying that a large local flood did not happen and there is no reason to say that Moses and the Exodus were not real. There is evidence for both but people prefer the versions that tell us that the Bible is false. Maybe they are the loudest voices these days.
It concerns me that young people are told by YEC people that evolution is wrong and it concerns me that young people are told by atheists that evolution is 100% correct without the need for a God.

No reason? Except that academia has been in consensus about Exodus and Moses since the 1970's? THomas Thompsons work in the 70's was more than enough peer-reviewed evidence to demonstrate Moses and the Patriarchs were mythical figures.
For Exodus there is no evidence and Biblical archeologists now know that Israel emerged from Canaanite society, without armed conflict. SO those stories are a myth. In fact they are considered a national foundation myth to unite the new culture.
Archeologist Carol Mayers explains Moses and Exodus here:
NOVA | The Bible's Buried Secrets | Moses and the Exodus | PBS

Notice she's talking about Canaanites because that is who the Israelites were.

Genesis is not a historical text. It's a collection of myths rewritten for a new society.

As this Pastor/PhD Hebrew Bible explains:

Religion Identity and the Origins of Ancient Israel

K.L. Sparks (ordained Baptist Pastor, PhD in Hebrew Bible/Ancient Near East)


As a rule, modern scholars do not believe that the Bible's account of early Israel's history provides a wholly accurate portrait of Israel's 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 all 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; Maidman 2003).

As a result, the stories about Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph are better understood as windows into Israelite history than as portraits of Israel's early history. Almost as problematic as an historical source is the book of Exodus. This book tells the story of Israel's long enslavement in Egypt and of it's eventual emancipation; it also narrates the first stages of Israel's migration from Egypt toward Palestine. The trouble with this story, historically speaking, is that the Egyptians seem to have known nothing of these great events in which thousands of Israelite slaves were released from Egypt because of a series of natural (or supernatural( catastrophes - supposedly including the death of every firstborn Egyptian man and beast.


It concerns me that young people are told by YEC people that evolution is wrong and it concerns me that young people are told by atheists that evolution is 100% correct without the need for a God.

It's about what science is saying. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming and is not in question. scientists do not take aspects of nature they do not yet fully understand and say "maybe God did this part"? No God has been demonstrated ever and until it is it doesn't get to be part of a theory.
The progress on evidence and understanding about self-replicating chemicals into pre-cursors to RNA is constantly growing. It is likely we will eventually have a complete model.
Young people should hear different opinions and they should also be encouraged to seek out the available evidence and also learn what confirmation bias and brainwashing are and how they happen with religious ideas. Anyone who evaluates the available evidence without bias will clearly see there simply is no evidence for any God.
Evolution is understood. The actual creation of life still has gaps. But to suggest there need be some God in this gap is clearly bias towards some myth.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Unlike other flood myths the Epic has some very specific details that were copied over to Noah so it's likely that this was the source.

No its not Joelr. It may very well be that both had an older single source. So saying that one option is "very likely" is a possibility, but history or/and criticism does not work on possibilities.

The general mythicist approach is that. There is another source, so this is copied form that. ;) Its not a very sophisticated approach, though many who call themselves scholars have engaged in this kind of literature.

So the authors of Genesis probably has some access to these stories.The Mesopotamian version may be a take on a Sumerian story?
There may have been a local flood from the The Euphrates that inspired writing a fictional tale about Gods sending a world flood.

It is absolutely possible that there was some local flood that grew so large in mythology. So it is possible that both sources were inspired independently. Rather than simply making assumptions, this has to be explored further.

If Noah lived, according to the Bible it was prior to the Epic of Gilgamesh was put down. Abraham also came from Iraq.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
No reason? Except that academia has been in consensus about Exodus and Moses since the 1970's? THomas Thompsons work in the 70's was more than enough peer-reviewed evidence to demonstrate Moses and the Patriarchs were mythical figures.

There is no consensus that Moses is mythology. Some scholars think its mythology because there is no archeological evidences. But that's an extreme mythicist view. If you think that's a scholars consensus, you are absolutely wrong. There is no scholarly consensus on that. It is a fringe view. Scholars dont really go there. Scholars generally work with the text, take a methodological approach of naturalism, and make criticisms based on already developed techniques or some may even intent new techniques.

There are some scholars who engage in mythicism and mind you there are some highly educated and valid scholars in the field, but that's not "consensus".
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Unless a Christian handles rattlesnakes, I don't believe they are truly literalists.

Mark 16:15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Okay, I guess it doesn't literally say rattlesnakes, but with a rattlesnake it takes care of handling snakes and the poison verse also. Oh man, it says they got to drink the poison. Oh well, how many Christians literally do all of those things even the way it is written?

This is not in the oldest bibles.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Actually they are not. At least not for scholars. They have to justify their conclusions. The correct claim is to say that "scholars have determined". As to the Noah's Ark myth the similarities to the clearly older Epic of Gilgamesh is rather clear evidence that is where it came from.

Thats a fringe opinion. A mythicists opinion. When you say 'scholars' a word thrown around a lot, who do you mean? You will get to specific scholars, a few. There is no consensus. Its just a nice idea and an interesting one.
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
That seems to be so, that both are remembering the same event.

One reason we (who believe the Bible is inspired) say that the Genesis account is divinely inspired, is from examining the ratios of the Ark.....they are ideal! The ratios, reduced to 30(L): 5(W): 3(H), are identical to the ratios of many modern ships!

If the argument is that those ratios were known in ancient times, then why don’t we read other ancient accounts of the Flood, describing vessels with those same ideal ratios? Or similar? (Usually, those details aren left out.)

Was Moses, who recorded & described the account, just “lucky” to get it right?

The boat in the Epic of Gilgamesh was way off!! It’s dimensions were 90 x 90 x 120! A ship with those ratios would not exhibit any seaworthiness! At all!

And understanding how Psalms 104 8-9 adds supporting details to the Event, it clarifies a lot.


You have no interest in what is true, just anything to desperately make this story true.
The boat in Gilamesh was not built to take every animal and was only for 6 days. 6 days, no animals yeah, really similar events? The copying are all the other details but this is clearly not a story based on a similar event. The thought that it's "way off" shows you have no idea what you are even debating?

Where did you get this - "90 x 90 x 120!"??

The Israelites understanding the basics of a boat ratio (there are so many more important measurements) does not imply myths are real. Boat technology in the Middle East was extremely high. The Greeks had a huge navy which defeated the Persian navy. People knew how to make ships.
Focusing on a ration that was already known and allowing all the obvious issues to pass over your head is pure confirmation bias.
The weight of all animal kinds and massive amounts of food would be impossible.
The spread of Mammal species from the end of this voyage is literally impossible when you look at what continents have the largest populations of Mammals.
Covered here at 18:48
Also Genesis is 100% a mythic text and a world flood has been ruled out by geologists using several different lines of evidence.
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
There is no consensus that Moses is mythology. Some scholars think its mythology because there is no archeological evidences. But that's an extreme mythicist view. If you think that's a scholars consensus, you are absolutely wrong. There is no scholarly consensus on that. It is a fringe view. Scholars dont really go there. Scholars generally work with the text, take a methodological approach of naturalism, and make criticisms based on already developed techniques or some may even intent new techniques.

There are some scholars who engage in mythicism and mind you there are some highly educated and valid scholars in the field, but that's not "consensus".

You have a strawman argument that has nothing to do with the work of Thomas Thompson. All historians are in consensus that Moses is a myth. Fransesca Stravopolou, Elaine Pagels, Carrier, Ehrman, Goodacre, you clearly do not read actual historicity.
Jesus mythicism is a smaller belief but OT is all myth. No scholar thinks otherwise who is a historian. Just fundamentalist theologians. Scholarship does not think there was a world flood and so on.
Even most Christians do not believe these stories are anything but myth.


Moses - Wikipedia
Generally Moses is seen as a legendary figure,

Biblical archeologist Carol Meyers:


"
Q: Let's turn to one of the most vivid figures in the Bible, Moses. Who is the Moses of the Bible, and could there have been such a person?

Meyers: The Moses of the Bible is larger than life. The Moses of the Bible is a diplomat negotiating with the pharaoh; he is a lawgiver bringing the Ten Commandments, the Covenant, down from Sinai. The Moses of the Bible is a military man leading the Israelites in battles. He's the one who organizes Israel's judiciary. He's also the prophet par excellence and a quasi-priestly figure involved in offering sacrifices and setting up the priestly complex, the tabernacle. There's virtually nothing in terms of national leadership that Moses doesn't do. And, of course, he's also a person, a family man.

Now, no one individual could possibly have done all that. So the tales are a kind of aggrandizement. He is also associated with miracles—the memorable story of being found in a basket in the Nile and being saved, miraculously, to grow up in the pharaoh's household. And he dies somewhere in the mountains of Moab. Only God knows where he's buried; God is said to have buried him. This is highly unusual and, again, accords him a special place.



The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives: The Quest for the Historical Abraham Paperback – November 1, 2002
by Thomas L. Thompson
Completely dismantles the historic patriarchal narratives. His impeccable scholarship, his astounding mastery of the sources, and rigorous detailed examination of the archaeological claims makes this book one I will immediately take with me in case of a flood. And it still hasn't been refuted. I am well aware of the excellent work of William G. Dever, and his critique of the "minimalists" and his harping against Thompson, but it is his other books Dever has the most beef against. This one stands stellar and strong. I was absolutely bowled over by it. The second time through is even more astonishing.


Thomas Thompson's PhD professor was a Cardinal who refused to accept his PhD. He had to go to Canada to work. Over the years scholars realized his work was brilliant and was peer-reviewd and is now a classic. Moses is a myth.

Why you would need a archeologist to tell you that ancient myths from all nations were myths, every nation had their "one true God" and religious figures and laws from God, this is how societies worked then. Now we know it's made up by people.

The creation stories and flood stories mirror Mesopotamian stories, Job has a Babylonian counterpart, Exodus is a foundation myth, Yahweh started out as a warrior God who's consort was Ashers (a Canaanite goddess). Just because one culture has myths that survived doesn't make them any more real than Egyptian or Greek myths.
 
Last edited:

joelr

Well-Known Member
Thats a fringe opinion. A mythicists opinion. When you say 'scholars' a word thrown around a lot, who do you mean? You will get to specific scholars, a few. There is no consensus. Its just a nice idea and an interesting one.

It's consensus in academia that OT stories are myth.

Christian mythology - Wikipedia

"
Christian mythology is the body of myths associated with Christianity. The term encompasses a broad variety of legends and stories, especially those considered sacred narratives. Mythological themes and elements occur throughout Christian literature, including recurring myths such as ascending to a mountain, the axis mundi, myths of combat, descent into the Underworld, accounts of a dying-and-rising god, flood stories, stories about the founding of a tribe or city, and myths about great heroes (or saints) of the past, paradises, and self-sacrifice.

Various authors have also used it to refer to other mythological and allegorical elements found in the Bible, such as the story of the Leviathan. The term has been applied[by whom?] to myths and legends from the Middle Ages, "


Flood myths
Main article: Flood myth
Many cultures have myths about a flood that cleanses the world in preparation for rebirth.[62][63] Such stories appear on every inhabited continent on earth.[63] An example is the biblical story of Noah.[62][64] In The Oxford Companion to World Mythology, David Leeming notes that, in the Bible story, as in other flood myths, the flood marks a new beginning and a second chance for creation and humanity.[62]


All stories in the OT are myths traced back to older variations, they are not original stories told by a God or events that happened. This is known and accepted by all scholars except radical fundamentalists.

Jewish mythology - Wikipedia

Jewish mythology is the body of myths associated with Judaism. Elements of Jewish mythology have had a profound influence on Christian mythology and on Islamic mythology, as well as on world culture in general. Christian mythology directly inherited many of the narratives from the Jewish people, sharing in common the narratives from the Old Testament. Islamic mythology also shares many of the same stories; for instance, a creation-account spaced out over six periods, the legend of Abraham, the stories of Moses and the Israelites, and many more.

The Genesis flood narrative has similarities to ancient flood stories told worldwide. One of the closest parallels is the Mesopotamian myth of a world flood, recorded in The Epic of Gilgamesh. I

National myth
The Patriarchs


The Patriarchs in Hebrew bible are Abraham, his son Isaac, and Isaac's son Jacob, also named Israel, the ancestor of the Israelite
 
Top