• 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 we know that there was no Flood of Noah.

gnostic

The Lost One
The biblical flood story of the inundation of the known civilized world of that day around 2350 B C, predate the accounts of the Chaldean (pre-Babylonian) flood myth, as told by Berosus, an ancient Chaldean historian living in the time of Alexander the Great in the 4th century B.C.E, and that of the story recorded on the clay tablets discovered by George Smith 2,000 years after Berosus.
No, The Anointed.

The "biblical flood story" from Genesis 6 to 8 didn't exist - weren't written until 800 BCE or later. There are no biblical authorship in the Bronze Age, let alone in the 2350 BCE.

There are no biblical story written during the Bronze Age, not in the 2nd millennium BCE, and certainly not written in the 3rd millennium BCE.

The oldest "literary" evidence of anything related to biblical authorship, come from the fragments of the Silver Scrolls, found in the cave just outside of ancient Jerusalem, called Ketef Hinnom, that served as a tomb.

The contents of this tomb, plus the scroll fragments, have been dated to the late 7th century or early 6th century BCE. The fragments only have part of the passage of Numbers 6, concerning the Priestly Blessing.

There are nothing older than this scrolls.

The story may be set in 2350 BCE, but there have been no writings until the 1st millennium BCE.

You are nothing correctly, and you certainly have no understanding of history of the times.
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
Wrong again and watch the name calling.

You can't support your ignorant claims. I can support mine. You have only a book of myths to rely on. Actual scholars can tell you when different parts of the Bible were written and how they know that.

I am correct, as proven by the Second SIS Cambridge Conference, you are wrong.

I see that you did not bother to read the Report on Second SIS Cambridge Conference, where nearly a hundred astronomers, historians, archaeologists and others gathered in Cambridge to discuss the near-simultaneous ending of the Bronze Age civilisation, which, depending on ones chronology and the geographic region under discussion started around 3,500 B C, when the great catastrophic event around Ireland and the coasts of the Mediterranean area in the days of Noah occurred.

And I didn’t call you an irrational person, you did that yourself, when you who abandoned your faith and chose to join the atheist movement, said that a ration person cannot choose to believe.
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
No, The Anointed.

The "biblical flood story" from Genesis 6 to 8 didn't exist - weren't written until 800 BCE or later. There are no biblical authorship in the Bronze Age, let alone in the 2350 BCE.

There are no biblical story written during the Bronze Age, not in the 2nd millennium BCE, and certainly not written in the 3rd millennium BCE.

The oldest "literary" evidence of anything related to biblical authorship, come from the fragments of the Silver Scrolls, found in the cave just outside of ancient Jerusalem, called Ketef Hinnom, that served as a tomb.

The contents of this tomb, plus the scroll fragments, have been dated to the late 7th century or early 6th century BCE. The fragments only have part of the passage of Numbers 6, concerning the Priestly Blessing.

There are nothing older than this scrolls.

The story may be set in 2350 BCE, but there have been no writings until the 1st millennium BCE.

You are nothing correctly, and you certainly have no understanding of history of the times.

You mean that nothing older than that scroll is still in existence.

There are no extant records of the flood of 2350 B C, and you will find very few extant writing of only 2,000 years ago, let alone 4,500 years.

Atheists refuse to accept anything that is recorded in the scriptures and that is their God given right.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I am correct, as proven by the Second SIS Cambridge Conference, you are wrong.

I see that you did not bother to read the Report on Second SIS Cambridge Conference, where nearly a hundred astronomers, historians, archaeologists and others gathered in Cambridge to discuss the near-simultaneous ending of the Bronze Age civilisation, which, depending on ones chronology and the geographic region under discussion started around 3,500 B C, when the great catastrophic event around Ireland and the coasts of the Mediterranean area in the days of Noah occurred.

And I didn’t call you an irrational person, you did that yourself, when you who abandoned your faith and chose to join the atheist movement, said that a ration person cannot choose to believe.
Wrong again. At best it appears that you have no clue on what that discussion was about. Why did you not link an article on it? You are not a source. Your say so is worthless in a debate. Meanwhile I can and have supported my claims.

This demonstrates that you are the irrational thinker here.


Can you promise to at least try to think rationally?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You mean that nothing older than that scroll is still in existence.

There are no extant records of the flood of 2350 B C, and you will find very few extant writing of only 2,000 years ago, let alone 4,500 years.

Atheists refuse to accept anything that is recorded in the scriptures and that is their God given right.
Since the Bible has been shown to be wrong countless times of course we reject it as a source.

You keep avoiding the obvious questions. Why don't you try to learn how we know that you are wrong?
 

gnostic

The Lost One
You mean that nothing older than that scroll is still in existence.

There are no extant records of the flood of 2350 B C, and you will find very few extant writing of only 2,000 years ago, let alone 4,500 years.

As badly fragmented as the clay tablets to the Eridu Genesis is, it is the earliest Sumerian source to the flood, with Ziusudra as its hero.

The Eridu Genesis is written in Sumerian during the 3rd dynasty of Ur (c 2112 - c 2004 BCE), but Eridu Genesis is based on the older oral tradition.

The 3rd dynasty of Ur is often referred to as the “Sumerian Renaissance”, because of art and literature were flourishing in the late Sumerian civilisation.

And Ziusudra is mentioned in a Sumerian poem of Gilgamesh, called the Death of Gilgames (or Bilgames), where the Gilgames met Ziusudra, as well as the Flood being alluded to.

Ziusudra is also mentioned in even earlier text than the Eridu Genesis, known as The Instructions of Shuruppak. Shuruppak is historically the name of Sumerian citystate, as well as the name of its king, and judging by the Instructions, Ziusudra was Shuruppak’s son.

This father and son relationship, also appeared in one of the versions of the Sumerian King List (WB-62, a recession of the earlier king list).

Anyway, back to Eridu Genesis. What does survive concerning the flood is about the Ziusudra sacrificing to the 4 great gods of Sumer, after leaving the vessel, which is basically very similar to the one in the Old Babylonian Epic of Atrahasis (17th century BCE), and in the 11st tablet of the Epic of Gilgamesh (from the 7th century BCE, Assyrian Library of Nineveh).

Based on the similarities between Ziusudra and Atrahasis, and between Ziusudra-Atrahasis to Utnapishtim, we can assume they are the same person, with Ziusudra being the original character.

You don’t seem to understand the popularity of Sumerian culture and literature, especially the Epic of Gilgamesh, because a fragment of the tablets were found in Megiddo, during the late Bronze Age (dated to about mid-2nd millennium BCE). Tablets of Gilgamesh have also been found in the Hittite capital Hattusa, in Ugarit (northwest Syria), and in Amarna, Egypt (Akhenaten’s capital), all dated to around the same times as the Megiddo tablet fragments.

Most scholars think due to the popularity of Babylonian myths, they were known to the 1st millennium Israelites during the two kingdoms. It is obvious that Israelites writers adopted and adapted the Utnapishtim story, modified for Jewish audience/readers.

Sorry, but all Sumerian, Babylonian and Assyrian surviving literature are earlier than the oldest Old Testament texts.

Moses definitely didn’t write the Torah, because if he did live, he would have predated the Hebrew alphabets. But there are no historicity to Moses, to the Exodus, nor are there any evidences that Joshua ever invaded Canaan.

And before the invention of the alphabets, the Bronze Age Levant, like those in Mesopotamia, were writing their own versions of cuneiform. Cuneiform were invented by the mid-4th millennium BCE, Uruk, a city that Genesis 10 don’t exist until Nimrod built it. But the archaeology demonstrated that Uruk was the largest city in the world at that time.

It just show how little Iron Age Jews about ancient Mesopotamia.
 
Last edited:

Audie

Veteran Member
I am correct, as proven by the Second SIS Cambridge Conference, you are wrong.

I see that you did not bother to read the Report on Second SIS Cambridge Conference, where nearly a hundred astronomers, historians, archaeologists and others gathered in Cambridge to discuss the near-simultaneous ending of the Bronze Age civilisation, which, depending on ones chronology and the geographic region under discussion started around 3,500 B C, when the great catastrophic event around Ireland and the coasts of the Mediterranean area in the days of Noah occurred.

And I didn’t call you an irrational person, you did that yourself, when you who abandoned your faith and chose to join the atheist movement, said that a ration person cannot choose to believe.

ah yes, another woo woo group.

Velikovsky, no less.

Droll.





The SIS logo, designed by the then editor, Malcolm Lowery.


An early ad-hoc design of the SIS logo by Malcolm Lowery.
The Society for Interdisciplinary Studies (SIS) is a membership-based organization "formed in 1974 in response to the growing interest in the works of modern catastrophists, notably the highly controversial Dr Immanuel Velikovsky
 

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Wrong again and watch the name calling.

You can't support your ignorant claims.

What a circle jerk. First sub accuses someone of name calling and then in the same statement calls this person "ignorant".

In other circles this would appear as egg in you face; Mr. master sub
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
What a circle jerk. First sub accuses someone of name calling and then in the same statement calls this person "ignorant".

In other circles this would appear as egg in you face; Mr. master sub
No, you name called, a clear breaking of the rules to no point. I pointed out quite correctly that your claims are ignorant and offered a solution.

Learn the difference.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
What a circle jerk. First sub accuses someone of name calling and then in the same statement calls this person "ignorant".

In other circles this would appear as egg in you face; Mr. master sub

"In you face"? :D

Saying someone is ignorant, esp when they so demonstrably are, is not name calling.

"You are a cow", now that is name calling.
"Cow" is a noun. You need a noun for name calling.

"Ignorant" is an adjective, however rightly applied.

This is name calling-complete with some perverted
sexual innuendo. You going to report yourself for it?

"Mr. master sub"


 
Last edited:

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
The problem when most creationists who accept the movement of tectonic plates, is that they think these continents have rocket launchers strapped to it, and on wheels, going at 100 miles per day.

Before 70 million years ago, Indian tectonic plate was going at rate of only 15 cm per year. About 50 million years ago, the ocean flood have already started to thrust faulted and folding; around this time onward, the rate of move dropped to 6 to 4.5 cm per year.
One would think that someone having 4 engineering degrees would appreciate the physics behind the amount of energy required to rapidly move entire continental plates. Plus, many mountain ranges across the globe are not tectonic, but are batholiths (granite), which would have to form and then rapidly cool under the YEC flood story. Those alone would require a miracle to keep the earth's water from boiling off.

Simply put, there's a reason the world's earth scientists moved on from flood geology over 200 years ago and have never come back.....not only is there no evidence of such an event, there are a lot of things out there that directly contradict it.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
One would think that someone having 4 engineering degrees would appreciate the physics behind the amount of energy required to rapidly move entire continental plates. Plus, many mountain ranges across the globe are not tectonic, but are batholiths (granite), which would have to form and then rapidly cool under the YEC flood story. Those alone would require a miracle to keep the earth's water from boiling off.

Simply put, there's a reason the world's earth scientists moved on from flood geology over 200 years ago and have never come back.....not only is there no evidence of such an event, there are a lot of things out there that directly contradict it.

Ha. The continents simply slid downslope.
Dont you know your hydroplate theory?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
One would think that someone having 4 engineering degrees would appreciate the physics behind the amount of energy required to rapidly move entire continental plates. Plus, many mountain ranges across the globe are not tectonic, but are batholiths (granite), which would have to form and then rapidly cool under the YEC flood story. Those alone would require a miracle to keep the earth's water from boiling off.

Simply put, there's a reason the world's earth scientists moved on from flood geology over 200 years ago and have never come back.....not only is there no evidence of such an event, there are a lot of things out there that directly contradict it.
His degrees are more in software than anything else. An understanding of the hard sciences is not necessary for that.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
What a circle jerk. First sub accuses someone of name calling and then in the same statement calls this person "ignorant".

In other circles this would appear as egg in you face; Mr. master sub
Claiming someone's post shows an ignorance of subject matter is not name calling.

ETA: I don't believe in reporting any ill behavior. This is a forum, not a preschool classroom.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
(I gather that the thread is still going strong, and there's more bad news ...)

Same old news. Believers in the myth refuse to learn and show false indignity when their ignorance is mentioned. It would not take much effort on their part to learn, rather they try to use their lack of knowledge as a weapon.
 

A Son of God

Daniel 12:4
Ok, first you must admit you are not God. If that is a good assumption then read on if you believe you are God then you already know what I'm thinking and no need to continue.
Next, the bible says the waters were removed from the seas. As you know, 2/3 of the earth is water. If you were to remove the waters from the seas there would be more than enough water to flood the earth. That debunks your theory already not knowing the scriptures.
Geological evidence proves the Earth was once covered with water. You can find sea shells in the desert and on mountains. If there were not a flood how did that occur?
Your turn...
 
Top