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

[IndigoChild5559]

I suppose the flood has nothing to do with YEC really but it seems more real and fits with the science and the Bible imo to go with a large local flood or indeed many large local floods.
That does not mean that the flood in the Middle East area was not deep. Noah probably would not be able to see the tops of the high hills until the flood subsided and/or the ark drifted towards the Ararat mountains.
That area has slow drainage and so it could take a long time for the flood to subside completely.
But you might be right and the lack of evidence might be because it is just not known what to look for as evidence of a world wide flood.
It is hard to say what concrete evidence has been found to discredit the flood. There are a lot of little bits that added together give a good anti worldwide flood argument.

What scientific evidence has been found against a world wide flood? Well for one thing, we would find a world wide layer of silt. And its not there.

So, lack of scientific evidence. On top of that, you have the internal problems of the story itself. How is the ark going to house and feed the 900,000 different insect species? There is the problem where one verse in Genesis says there was one pair of each of the clean animals, and another verse that says seven pairs.

You could write a whole book on the evidence against a global flood and the Noah story.

 

[joelr]

There is no consensus amongst scholars that Moses was a myth.

Repeating the statement over and over even after evidence has shown you are wrong is one way to handle loss I guess. Not a great look.

 

[firedragon]

Repeating the statement over and over even after evidence has shown you are wrong is one way to handle loss I guess. Not a great look.

So you never ever addressed the repeated statement. Not a great look.

There is no consensus amongst scholars that Moses was a myth.

 

[joelr]

There are other scholars who say say the stories are true and I go along with them.

No scholar outside of fundamentalist believe any myths are true. The vast majority of historians consider Moses to be a myth, I know of none who believe stories about Gods are real. The last several post have been evidence that the consensus on Moses is myth.

I'll stick with a designer and creator and life giver. That is what the evidence points to for me even if the evidence point to chance for you.

No you will stick with stories about a creator. There is no evidence of any such being. According to this line of thinking any story about a creator must be true because you think the universe is a creation. All myths about Gods start out with an explanation about how they created everything and created people. The Yahweh myth is no different, is known to borrow from older myths and about as likely as any other.

That is what the evidence points to for me even if the evidence point to chance for you.

The evidence of this religion being true is zero. The evidence that it's a copycat myth (like all others) is 100%. Just because the universe has order and life does that mean Krishna is real? Or Zeus? Nope. Yahweh is exactly as mythical. Or Yahweh really liked Egyptian and Mesopotamian myths. Then during 2nd Temple Judaism he really dug the Persian and Hellenistic myths. Even though both cultures invaded Israel and occupied and subjugated the Israelites?
Wow it's almost like Judaism was influenced by Persian and Hellenism?


This always baffles me, the fact that people feel like since there is a universe they have to pick a mythology and believe it's real?

Were you in Egypt 3000 years ago you would be all "You say chance but I say Horus!"

Even weirder is you also have to ignore the fact that the scientific knowledge of self-replicating compounds is growing every year?
The evidence likely points where it points for you because you already believe in a story and are confirmation biasing the heck out of all available data.
Of course when the process of RNA is discovered religious people will be all "yeah but God started the universe and he knew life (specifically us) would arise".
And then you have to also ignore the fact that the universe actually is governed by probability? It's in quantum mechanics?
That would be chance?
If a disease has a 45% mortality rate in the US then if you look at enough data it always kills 45% of the people who are inflicted.
Always. No deity alters that? We already know probability governs everything but suddenly it's a problem?

Self replicating compounds can form a primative RNA. It happened. So it's possible and we almost understand the basics of it. Given the ridiculous size of the universe and hundreds of billions of planets this happening on at least one over billions of years is reasonably probable? You are not even correct about the chance thing?

 

[joelr]

So you never ever addressed the repeated statement. Not a great look.

There is no consensus amongst scholars that Moses was a myth.

Ew, that's even worse. Ignoring vast amounts of evidence and top biblical scholars saying the exact thing you say they don't?

Using my criticism only works when you make an actual point. Not when you are trolling.

 

[joelr]

It is nice to know what happened in the past but it is fantasy to think that one does know exactly what happened. There are possible flood scenarios for a large local flood for Noah, and that could have also included other areas of the earth that flooded at the same time. Someone of faith sees that are realises that the flood of Noah has not been shown to be false if it is taken as a large local flood. People who just want the Bible to be false just seem to deny the possibilities and pretend that they know what happened in the past.

Except every culture has a mythic history that includes a flood myth. And scholars know Genesis was not written as history but was borrowing myths. A local flood may be the inspiration for some flood myths. But not the God speaking part, or collecting every animal or the endless obvious fiction. No flood happened since the Israelites emerged from Canaanite society.
Why do religious people always say to investigate the history of the Bible then when you find out it's widely considered fiction in historicity then you "don't want it to be true"?

I find a need for God to provide the material that could be formed into whatever and to provide life so that the material could live. I find a need for God to invent a system that allowed for evolution and the storing of data in molecules and the use of that data by other chemicals.

Hmm, could that be because you already believe in a religion? Funny no scientist ever wrote a paper saying they feel the need for a God to be part of the natural laws of nature?

 

[firedragon]

Ew, that's even worse. Ignoring vast amounts of evidence and top biblical scholars saying the exact thing you say they don't?

Thats not "scholarly consensus that Moses was a myth".

 

[joelr]

Thats not "scholarly consensus that Moses was a myth".

LOL......

"according to William G. Dever, the modern scholarly consensus is that the biblical person of Moses is largely mythical "

 

[firedragon]

LOL......

"according to William G. Dever, the modern scholarly consensus is that the biblical person of Moses is largely mythical "

Mate. That does not make a scholarly consensus that "Moses is a myth".

 

[firedragon]

@joelr You quoted Bart Ehrman. Where does he say "scholarly consensus is Moses is a myth"? Please direct quotation from one of his books.

 

[joelr]

Mate. That does not make a scholarly consensus that "Moses is a myth".

So lame. Yes, we all get it. To make the literal point I have to call the entire Biblical historicity field over my house and take a poll and link to the video. IS what you say when you can't acccept that you lost.

In the real world one makes a point and when called out they back it up. Say, with the leading Biblical archeologist for example.
Among other historians already given. Then you either find a historian who doesn't agree or accept you are wrong. Or troll like a huge baby.

 

[joelr]

@joelr You quoted Bart Ehrman. Where does he say "scholarly consensus is Moses is a myth"? Please direct quotation from one of his books.

Or you deflect as if William Denver isn't the best source.

I don't have the Ehrman quote and I'm not searching for it because you are just going to troll.

Ehrman was explaining the story of Thomas Thompson who was run out of the field for suggesting Moses was a myth and in the tale he said " and now it's accepted as a standard belief" or something to that effect. Meaning the Biblical stories about him are myth.

 

[firedragon]

Or you deflect as if William Denver isn't the best source.

I don't have the Ehrman quote and I'm not searching for it because you are just going to troll.

Ehrman was explaining the story of Thomas Thompson who was run out of the field for suggesting Moses was a myth and in the tale he said " and now it's accepted as a standard belief" or something to that effect. Meaning the Biblical stories about him are myth.

See, that's not an argument.

You quoted Bart Ehrman. Where does he say "scholarly consensus is Moses is a myth"? Please direct quotation from one of his books.

 

[firedragon]

So lame. Yes, we all get it. To make the literal point I have to call the entire Biblical historicity field over my house and take a poll and link to the video. IS what you say when you can't acccept that you lost.

In the real world one makes a point and when called out they back it up. Say, with the leading Biblical archeologist for example.
Among other historians already given. Then you either find a historian who doesn't agree or accept you are wrong. Or troll like a huge baby.

In the real world, as a gentleman, you must stand to your claim.

There is no scholarly consensus that Moses was a myth.

 

[rational experiences]

What scientific evidence has been found against a world wide flood? Well for one thing, we would find a world wide layer of silt. And its not there.

So, lack of scientific evidence. On top of that, you have the internal problems of the story itself. How is the ark going to house and feed the 900,000 different insect species? There is the problem where one verse in Genesis says there was one pair of each of the clean animals, and another verse that says seven pairs.

You could write a whole book on the evidence against a global flood and the Noah story.

The origin sun attacked earth is in the earth's records Akashic records recorded. I saw it in vision.

Water flood was fresh water. First and Only total earth flood.

You won't find a silt layer as earth was UFO sun radiation water evaporating that changed ground pressure that released volcanic flow. Under water mass.

Water salted from volcanic chemicals.

Fresh atmospheric water then was released into divets of bared earth and is historic.

Noah's flood said it was predicted as wood was burning bush. It flooded as a human atmospheric count which is actually stated for forty days nights until it stopped on top of mountain.

What stopped atop of mountain was UFO that hit ararat. Why UFO was causing flooding a state in heavens. Human life irradiated mutated only had eight DNA healthy families left after.

Everyone believed they would die.
Exactly how it was taught.

Flooding is when earths atmosphere starts to ark contradict to the UFO gas burn.

Humans get informed by God causes science the reasons why as a teaching of psychic relativity.

Natural evaporation should by God acts only produce rain. Ra gods sun eye. Ra in. Natural.

The teaching.

Flooding atmosphere is a God act flooding water to life saving DNA from burnt gases falling. Lying scientists and always have been liars as you told this story yourselves.

 

[joelr]

See, that's not an argument.

You quoted Bart Ehrman. Where does he say "scholarly consensus is Moses is a myth"? Please direct quotation from one of his books.

You've lost terrible and if you want to drag your character into deeper mud feel free.

First it doesn't matter if he says it in a book or in an interview, it's still him saying it.
Second I already backed my claim up with several scholars but you will play the same childs game with 2 scholars if you will do it with one. So wasting my time to find Ehrman saying it is pointless. You have already demonstrated you will act like a huge sore loser.
Denver said it. So counter the evidence with a scholar. But you cannot. So troll away.

 

[firedragon]

You've lost terrible and if you want to drag your character into deeper mud feel free.

First it doesn't matter if he says it in a book or in an interview, it's still him saying it.

Mud, deeper mud, all good, but please do show where Ehrman says "In a book or an interview" as you claimed above that "scholarly consensus is that Moses was a myth".

Thanks.

 

[joelr]

In the real world, as a gentleman, you must stand to your claim.

There is no scholarly consensus that Moses was a myth.

Thankyou, the irony or suggesting someone else isn't being a gentleman here is enjoyable. I don't have to do anything but watch you act out and troll yourself into a spectacle.

 

[firedragon]

Thankyou, the irony or suggesting someone else isn't being a gentleman here is enjoyable. I don't have to do anything but watch you act out and troll yourself into a spectacle.

There is no consensus that Moses is a myth.

 

[joelr]

Mud, deeper mud, all good, but please do show where Ehrman says "In a book or an interview" as you claimed above that "scholarly consensus is that Moses was a myth".

Thanks.

Yeah let me find more evidence so you can copy paste your ridiculous butthurt reply over and over. Nope. Find some evidence. If I come across it I will post it.