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

[People_Lack_Integrity]

Yeah...here's the whole problem with your premise is that the Epic of Gilgamesh was written before Genesis...long before. It's estimated that Genesis was written somewhere around 1400BC. The Epic of Gilgamesh was written around 2100BC, but that's not even the oldest flood story. The oldest is the Sumerian creation myth written around 2900 BC in which Ziasudra rode out a great flood on a barge with a bunch of animals. There's actually even more flood stories than that though and all of them pre-dating the old testament. Now what is more likely....that there was a flood, but was a local one, as described in the Sumerian tradition, which was not supernatural at all, but was indeed an epic event...in which the story spread by word of mouth and got transformed into other flood myths that were based upon this original, but didn't happen as actually described and the Genesis version was just one of many...or that this Genesis story, written much, much later...got it right and the entire world was flooded, but no one seemed to notice?

 

[Magic Man]

That is one piece of evidence that would discredit a literal version of Noah's Ark, but there are many more pieces of evidence that do that and do it better. Taken solely as a myth (in the true sense, not as "a false story"), it doesn't discredit the story of Noah's Ark.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I tend to see the flood as many smaller floods at the same time in various parts of the world. It would do the same job and eliminate the problems for one global flood covering all the mountains. It does not go against what science has discovered.
I see Psalm 104 as being about the creation and not incorporating the flood. If that is true then Psalm 104 denies the truth of one mass global flood that covered the whole earth because it says that the water would not cover the earth again.

Oh, grief… Did you read through the threads?

In the OP & throughout the replies, I provided a lot of evidence in support of it…science has no acceptable, clear-cut answer for most.

What has ‘science discovered,’ you think, that would discredit the Flood?

Keep in mind who’s controlling & misleading people. If you wish to go along with the world & ignore it, that’s on you.

But Jesus himself didn’t… Matthew 24:37-39; cf. John 12:31

 

[People_Lack_Integrity]

That is one piece of evidence that would discredit a literal version of Noah's Ark, but there are many more pieces of evidence that do that and do it better. Taken solely as a myth (in the true sense, not as "a false story"), it doesn't discredit the story of Noah's Ark.

Oh, there's no possible way the Genesis flood story happened as reported. History disproves the notion of a world wide flood since we have histories of many different civilizations, especially Chinese dynasties that went on unbroken and didn't seem to notice this "world wide flood". That being said, other flood myths existing and from the same region only serve to show that the Genesis story was not original and likely just an adapted version to fit christianity as another myth.

 

[People_Lack_Integrity]

You don't actually believe a world wide flood happened and the Genesis flood story actually happened as reported...do you? It's not just about the impossibility of the physics of it, it's about the fact that ancient civilizations were not wiped out and didn't seem to notice this flood and went on unbroken reporting their own histories.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

The fallen angels of before the flood had children which were these giant creatures, Nephilim.

Scary, no doubt! This is the reason the Flood was global. These “sons of God” were the “angels that sinned” which 2 Peter speaks of, and Jude 1:6 says they “forsook their proper dwelling place” — the heavenly realm. And the evidence for this is everywhere: the varied myths sharing a common thread, that of gods sleeping with women and producing kids…. Like Zeus w/ Hercules, etc., etc. ….found in all parts of the Earth, from unrelated cultures, including Hindu to Norse.

Even most ‘worship of the dead’ festivals from widely-disparate cultures occur at the same time of year when the Flood event happened — the Autumn, ie., Oct/Nov.

 

[an anarchist]

Then discussion with you is futile.

I’m sorry you feel that way. All I’m saying is that I know my faith in the Bible is unwavering, and wouldn’t change if man presented me something they found claiming the Bible isn’t authentic. If you think that makes conversation with me futile ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Moonjuice]

I'm surprised there are still people who believe the Noah's ark flood story should be taken literally. I assumed that everyone knows at this point that it's absolutely impossible. The only way this story could be true is if god made it happen with magic - then erased all the evidence that it happened with magic - then created mountains of evidence disproving the the story.

 

[firedragon]

People and “scholars” claim that because there is the Mesopotamian flood myth, Noah’s flood story is discredited as being original. They say the Epic of Gilgamesh exposes Noah’s flood as being a derivative story.
As a creationist and biblical literalist, the existence of the Epic of Gilgamesh makes perfect sense. The people who created the myth of Gilgamesh were descendants of Noah. The flood event was a truthful event, so it makes sense it was recorded by other peoples and assimilated into their myths.
There are many cultures with flood myths: Noah, India (manu and the fish), flood myth of Hawaii, Aztec, Inca, various North American tribes, Greece, Egypt, and Babylon. These are some of the cultures that have flood myths. For someone who believes that the flood literally happened, it makes sense that it is recorded in other mythologies.

What you say is highly probable really.

 

[firedragon]

I'm surprised there are still people who believe the Noah's ark flood story should be taken literally. I assumed that everyone knows at this point that it's absolutely impossible. The only way this story could be true is if god made it happen with magic - then erased all the evidence that it happened with magic - then created mountains of evidence disproving the the story.

See, that's not the point raised in the OP. The OP raises a fantastic point. Its very important to consider what he says but the validity of the story actually taking place in history is also an important topic, but its irrelevant to this particular OP.

 

[an anarchist]

I'm surprised there are still people who believe the Noah's ark flood story should be taken literally.

Biblical literalists aren’t extinct yet! Not while I’m alive at least anyways

 

[firedragon]

People and “scholars” claim that because there is the Mesopotamian flood myth, Noah’s flood story is discredited as being original. They say the Epic of Gilgamesh exposes Noah’s flood as being a derivative story.
As a creationist and biblical literalist, the existence of the Epic of Gilgamesh makes perfect sense. The people who created the myth of Gilgamesh were descendants of Noah. The flood event was a truthful event, so it makes sense it was recorded by other peoples and assimilated into their myths.
There are many cultures with flood myths: Noah, India (manu and the fish), flood myth of Hawaii, Aztec, Inca, various North American tribes, Greece, Egypt, and Babylon. These are some of the cultures that have flood myths. For someone who believes that the flood literally happened, it makes sense that it is recorded in other mythologies.

The epic of Gilgamesh is dated to I believe something like 4000 years to date, max. Abraham, came from Iraq according to the Bible, thus its the same location. Maybe it was Abraham who narrated this story to be written later. Thus, as you said, both stories may have the same source. Or, the Epic of Gilgamesh may have been influenced by the Noahs episode since the flood happened before that. Just to put it into a nutshell.

Even if someone is to be completely skeptical about these events if they really happened or not, the stories may have a single, older source. Thus, as you impressively said, it is highly possible that it all comes from the same source, and the legends were adopted by others. It is only a highly dismissive agenda that would say things like "since this book didnt exist before the other, this one is definitely copied". Its a very shallow approach a lot of mythicists take.

 

[Kooky]

People and “scholars” claim that because there is the Mesopotamian flood myth, Noah’s flood story is discredited as being original. They say the Epic of Gilgamesh exposes Noah’s flood as being a derivative story.
As a creationist and biblical literalist, the existence of the Epic of Gilgamesh makes perfect sense. The people who created the myth of Gilgamesh were descendants of Noah. The flood event was a truthful event, so it makes sense it was recorded by other peoples and assimilated into their myths.
There are many cultures with flood myths: Noah, India (manu and the fish), flood myth of Hawaii, Aztec, Inca, various North American tribes, Greece, Egypt, and Babylon. These are some of the cultures that have flood myths. For someone who believes that the flood literally happened, it makes sense that it is recorded in other mythologies.

I guess it's cool that you managed to make the existence of different flood myths work for you, but don't expect people who don't already believe that the Bible is a factual account of world history to be convinced of this weak argument.

 

[Kooky]

Oh, grief… Did you read through the threads?

In the OP & throughout the replies, I provided a lot of evidence in support of it…science has no acceptable, clear-cut answer for most.

What has ‘science discovered,’ you think, that would discredit the Flood?

Keep in mind who’s controlling & misleading people. If you wish to go along with the world & ignore it, that’s on you.

But Jesus himself didn’t… Matthew 24:37-39; cf. John 12:31

Is there any corrobarating evidence for a worldwide flood, other than Biblical texts?
As in, actual material evidence unearthed by trustworthy archaeology?

 

[Kooky]

Biblical literalists aren’t extinct yet! Not while I’m alive at least anyways

American Biblical literalism as we know it today seems to be a product of the Second and Third Awakenings - a Christian reaction to the challenges and social upheavals brought about by the early and late Industrial revolutions, respectively, consisting of multiple competing attempts to return Christianity to its Biblical origins and to a truer, more "original" Christian faith.

 

[an anarchist]

American Biblical literalism as we know it today seems to be a product of the Second and Third Awakenings - a Christian reaction to the challenges and social upheavals brought about by the early and late Industrial revolutions, respectively, consisting of multiple competing attempts to return Christianity to its Biblical origins and to a truer, more "original" Christian faith.

The reason why I am a literalist is not because of any American Christian denomination I am in. When I read the Bible, it appears to me that it is meant to be taken literally. Since I have faith in the God of the text, I believe the events recorded in the Bible happened literally.

 

[Kooky]

The reason why I am a literalist is not because of any American Christian denomination I am in. When I read the Bible, it appears to me that it is meant to be taken literally. Since I have faith in the God of the text, I believe the events recorded in the Bible happened literally.

You were likely raised in the culture that gave rise to American fundamentalist Christianity and so are primed to gravitate towards literalism in your understanding of Christian faith. This way of approaching the Bible is uncommon outside of American Protestantism, even moreso before the 19th century.

For someone who was, for example, raised in a strongly Catholic tradition, this would sound like an absolutely bizarre approach, because as a Catholic you tend to absorb the expectation that the Bible isn't supposed to be understood literally, but that there are multiple meanings layered above the simple, literal one.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What has ‘science discovered,’ you think, that would discredit the Flood?

One thing that popped out at me when I reflected on my geotechnical engineering courses, particularly the labs:

Underlying soils in the Great Lakes Region - like many other places on Earth - are overconsolidated due to glaciers. This tells us that since the end of the last Ice Age when the glaciers receded, the soils in the region have remained largely undisturbed.

This means that we can be sure that no events that would have caused widespread soil disturbance - e.g. a global flood - have happened since the end of the Ice Age.

I suppose you could argue that Noah's Flood happened before the last Ice Age, but I'm not sure that would fit a literal reading of the Biblical narrative either.

There are countless other ways that science tells us that the flood didn't happen; I just know this one because I've had special training in the properties of dirt specifically.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The reason why I am a literalist is not because of any American Christian denomination I am in. When I read the Bible, it appears to me that it is meant to be taken literally. Since I have faith in the God of the text, I believe the events recorded in the Bible happened literally.

Really?

To me, there are plenty of signs that at least some parts of the story aren't meant to be literal.

Take the Genesis story: a story where the main characters are a man named "Man" and a woman named "Woman" (in the original language) is a big red flag for me that they're intended as allegories or archetypal figures, not literal historical figures.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Is there any corrobarating evidence for a worldwide flood, other than Biblical texts?
As in, actual material evidence unearthed by trustworthy archaeology?

Material evidence?
I think so.
I think the thousands of animals found preserved within the permafrost of the extreme Northern latitudes…. Alaska, Siberia & Canada… is good evidence. The Flood caused dramatic changes in climate (and ushered in an Ice Age), resulting in those animals being submerged in the fresh-water-turned-ice permafrost.

Another line of evidence are the well-defined features of the World’s Mountain ranges! Just look at them, and you’ll see they all aren’t as eroded as millions of years of weathering would cause. (Psalms 104 states ‘the mountains rose, and valleys fell’ when the floodwaters came.)
Some peaks are eroded, because the explanation is they were already existing before the Flood, for eons.
BTW, I don’t believe the Bible claims a literal, 24-hr 6-day creation period.

So the rocks of the mountains are not new, geologically speaking; but the features they form, are.

This is all explained in the threads.