-
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!
The global flood
- Thread starter Agnostic75
- Start date
outhouse
Atheistically
well that reply was based on a previous exchange with said person
he claims a meteor cause said flood. there is no accurate dating for his version.
There is no mystery we are talking about a regional flood and not a global flood
There is no mystery the Euphrates flood of 2900 BCE EXACTLY where noahs story is said to originate from was the largest flood in the levant that the story could have originated from.
Add the fact the wording matches and we can see the oral tradition being passed down. And in no way shape or form does cross cultural oral tradition over 1700 + years remain true and in tact.
Now I would ask you for your hypothesis on noahs flood and legend
outhouse
Atheistically
Absolutley
The earliest sumerian version has a verfied attested regional flood and a man found in the known king's list.
Sumerian, Babylonian, and Genesis flood myths analyzed
. There were several river floods in Sumer during the third millennium BC. The flood layer in Ur discovered by Leonard Woolley occurred about the same time as a flood in Nineveh, but is dated in the late Ubaid period. The Ubaid period flood was too early to be the flood of Ziusudra which was dated by archaeologist Max Mallowan at the end of the Jemdet Nasr period and the beginning of the Early Dynastic I period. This flood was radiocarbon dated at about 2900 BC flood and corresponds to flood layers attested at the Sumerian cities Shuruppak, Uruk, and the oldest of several flood layers at Kish. This flood of 2900 BC left a few feet of yellow mud in Shuruppak.
According to the Sumerian King List, a legendary king named Ziusudra lived in Shuruppak at the time of the flood. There was also a flood myth about king Ziusudra which includes several story elements very similar to the Genesis flood myth. Shuruppak was also the flood hero's city according to the Epic of Gilgamesh. The flood myth in the Epic of Gilgamesh was adapted from an earlier myth, the Epic of Atrahasis which is also very similar to the Genesis flood myth. Six of these Ancient Near East flood myths contain numerous distinctive story elements that are very similar to the Genesis flood myth and indicate a literary affinity or dependency on a common body of myths about the flood hero Ziusudra and based on the Euphrates River flood of 2900 BC.
outhouse
Atheistically
Noah's Ark and the Ziusudra Epic, a mythology book.
thats the best link
Ziusudra was king of the Sumerian city Shuruppak at the end of the Jemdet Nasr period about 2900 BC. A six-day thunderstorm caused the Euphrates River to rise and flood Shuruppak and a few other cities in southern Sumer. The ark was a commercial river barge that was hauling grain, beer, and other cargo including a few hundred animals when the storm began.
The runaway barge floated down the river into the Persian (Arabian) Gulf where it grounded in an estuary at the mouth of the Euphrates River. Ziusudra then offered a sacrifice at the top of a hill. The word hill was later misunderstood to mean mountain by storytellers who falsely assumed that the nearby barge had grounded on the top of a mountain.
thats the best link
Ziusudra was king of the Sumerian city Shuruppak at the end of the Jemdet Nasr period about 2900 BC. A six-day thunderstorm caused the Euphrates River to rise and flood Shuruppak and a few other cities in southern Sumer. The ark was a commercial river barge that was hauling grain, beer, and other cargo including a few hundred animals when the storm began.
The runaway barge floated down the river into the Persian (Arabian) Gulf where it grounded in an estuary at the mouth of the Euphrates River. Ziusudra then offered a sacrifice at the top of a hill. The word hill was later misunderstood to mean mountain by storytellers who falsely assumed that the nearby barge had grounded on the top of a mountain.
Agnostic75
Well-Known Member
Edit: Deletion of unnecessary post.
Last edited:
Agnostic75
Well-Known Member
fallingblood said:
You are correct that the article at Beliefs of the U.S. public about evolution and creation does not specifically mention the age of the earth, but it implies a young earth since it is well-known that most people who believe that God created humans about 10.000 years ago are also young earth creationists.
The statistic in that poll is 40%, which is the same figure that another poll gives for people who believe that a global flood occurred. Obviously, most people who believe that a global flood occurred are young earth creationists.
Last edited:
No, its not. I hate to say this, but if you watch enough t.v. you'll know exactly what it is.
According to Nat Geo, the Discover channel and the History channel, its a single document describing what a merchant did to escape a local flood.
It has no validity outside of the document itself.
Outhouse claims to have researched the hebrew religion and has hypothesized from that research that he/she is 100 percent accurate about their theories of the great flood.
But the closest thing they've ever left to a legitimate source is a few wiki links.
My guess is they've spent time researching wiki and now see themselves as experts.
outhouse
Atheistically
this is two parts
#1 it is a attested flood and a legend starts right after
#2 the king named was a real person.
you discount wiki even though I did not post a wiki link then you claim your TV version is better LOL :faint:Now back your statement, sources please.
outhouse
Atheistically
document
maybe you should look up a little word called cuneiform this proves you dont have a clue about what your talking about.
You're silly. That's why I like you
I left the source, the name of the man himself. The individual who's theories I'm talking about.
Do you have the same?
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Not really. Especially since why would they have a want to kill everyone?
You having been using the phrase, there is no mystery, quite often. Yet, there are more mysteries then you allow. Sure, it was probably a regional flood. Or more likely, a series of regional floods. But there is still much about it that we don't know.
That isn't when Noah's flood is said to have happened. Neither the context of the story, or the various dating ideas show that. More so, saying it is exactly where the Noah story is said to originate is misleading. The Euphrates is a very large river that covers quite a bit of ground. So this exactly is actually a fairly large area.
So the Epic of Gilgamesh is a historic account? Because that is where the record of this flood comes from (that or an earlier epic, the Epic of Atrahasis). They are not historical accounts, they are epics. And really, that is what Noah's flood story is a part of as well, an epic.
And really, the link you provide, call the Epic of Gilgamesh, as well as the Epic of Atrahasis, myths. And I think this just shows your biases. The Bible is a myth, yet, the Epic of Gilgamesh isn't?
Haven't read, the book, but did watch a documentary based on it. First, the author is basically unknown. Doesn't mean he doesn't know his stuff, but that one has to examine him more. Second, he offers scant evidence to support his claim. Much of his story is nothing more that speculation, and probably not even good speculation. If that's the best link, then I don't have much hope for such an idea.
Hardly good evidence at all. Many epics, and even fairy tales, will include historical ideas. That doesn't mean they are historical accounts.
This I don't understand at all. What's wrong with calling it a document? So anything written in cuneiform can't be called a document? I'm confused.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Do you have a link to that other poll?
Also, it is not obvious that those who believe in a global flood are YEC. The two don't go hand in hand. So I think you're wrong there as well.
Finally, the link you supplied does not imply anything about a young earth. YEC put the dating of the world to about 6,000 years ago. So that would suggest that your statement simply is wrong.
outhouse
Atheistically
Ziusudra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In the WB-62 Sumerian king list recension, Ziusudra, or Zin-Suddu of Shuruppak is recorded as having reigned as both king and gudug priest for 10 sars, or periods of 3,600.[5] In this version, Ziusudra inherited rulership from his father Šuruppak (written SU.KUR.LAM) who ruled for 10 sars.[6] The line following Ziusudra in WB-62 reads: Then the flood swept over. The next line reads: After the flood swept over, kingship descended from heaven; the kingship was in Kish. The city of Kish flourished in the Early Dynastic period soon after an archaeologically attested river flood in Shuruppak (modern Tell Fara, Iraq) and various other Sumerian cities. This flood has been radiocarbon dated to ca. 2900 BCE
In the WB-62 Sumerian king list recension, Ziusudra, or Zin-Suddu of Shuruppak is recorded as having reigned as both king and gudug priest for 10 sars, or periods of 3,600.[5] In this version, Ziusudra inherited rulership from his father Šuruppak (written SU.KUR.LAM) who ruled for 10 sars.[6] The line following Ziusudra in WB-62 reads: Then the flood swept over. The next line reads: After the flood swept over, kingship descended from heaven; the kingship was in Kish. The city of Kish flourished in the Early Dynastic period soon after an archaeologically attested river flood in Shuruppak (modern Tell Fara, Iraq) and various other Sumerian cities. This flood has been radiocarbon dated to ca. 2900 BCE
outhouse
Atheistically
"the storm had swept...for seven days and seven nights" — Ziusudra 203
"For seven days and seven nights came the storm" — Atrahasis III,iv, 24
"Six days and seven nights the wind and storm" — Gilgamesh XI, 127
"rain fell upon the earth forty days and forty nights" — Genesis 7:12
"For seven days and seven nights came the storm" — Atrahasis III,iv, 24
"Six days and seven nights the wind and storm" — Gilgamesh XI, 127
"rain fell upon the earth forty days and forty nights" — Genesis 7:12
"He offered a sacrifice" — Atrahasis III,v, 31
"And offered a sacrifice" — Gilgamesh XI, 155
"offered burnt offerings on the altar" — Genesis 8:20
"built an altar and sacrificed to the gods" — Berossus.
"And offered a sacrifice" — Gilgamesh XI, 155
"offered burnt offerings on the altar" — Genesis 8:20
"built an altar and sacrificed to the gods" — Berossus.
"The gods smelled the savor" — Atrahasis III,v,34
"The gods smelled the sweet savor" — Gilgamesh XI, 160
"And the Lord smelled the sweet savor..." — Genesis 8:21
"The gods smelled the sweet savor" — Gilgamesh XI, 160
"And the Lord smelled the sweet savor..." — Genesis 8:21
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
If the Biblical flood is based off the Sumerian flood, then it does have historicity.
outhouse
Atheistically
The Hebrew flood story of Genesis 6–9 dates to at least the 5th century BC. According to the documentary hypothesis, it is a composite of two literary sources J and P that were combined by a post-exilic editor, 539–400 BC. Hans Schmid believes both the J material and the P material were products of the Babylonian exile period (6th century BC) and were directly derived from Babylonian sources
outhouse
Atheistically
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
These really are not remarkable. Considering the last ones are about a very common practice, especially when there is a disaster, and a gods response, it is not surprising at all.
The first one is distinctly different. First, the amount of time it rained is quite different. Also, the flood story (or flood stories, as there are two in the Bible) don't talk about just rain.
The similarities are wishful at best.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
So is the Epic of Gilgamesh.