Warning: History Geek alert!OK, now the warning is out of the way I can continue :o)
I mentioned in the comments to my last post that the story of Noah and the Flood has parallels in other Ancient Near Eastern literature besides the Bible. For those who are interested, here are a few parallels to biblical stories in other Ancient Near Eastern texts, which you can look up if, like me, you find this sort of thing interesting. The links will take you to online versions of the texts.
The Flood
Biblical passage: Genesis chapters 6-9
ANE parallels: The Atrahasis Epic, the Gilgamesh Epic and the Sumerian Flood Story
Monotheistic praise
Biblical passage: Psalm 104
ANE parallel: The Great Hymn to the Aten
Wisdom literature
Biblical passage: Proverbs 22:17-24:22
ANE parallel: The Instruction of Amenemope
If you want to learn more about the Ancient Near Eastern documents here, information about all of them should be available on Wikipedia.
Posts
15 comments:
I find this stuff fascinating but not enough to actually do any leg work so I really appreciate you bringing it up.
I have always thought that the ice age was a good explanation to the fact that the world was once covered in water. Is there anything in that theory?
Not really. During the Ice Age the polar ice sheets expanded but they hardly covered the whole world, and there was no more water than is currently on earth. For the biblical flood to have happened, with enough water to cover every mountain on earth, the huge volume of water would have had to go somewhere afterwards. Where is it? Also there would be enormous sediment deposits all ofver the world, of less than 6000 years in age, that just aren't there. It's a myth, not a historical fact.
Science does not have the answers to that long ago as much as some of them blow their horn to think they do.
We're talking about water here ... evaporation would have taken care of a lot of water and there may be underground lakes and rivers that were not there before made after the flood. How long does it take to make sediment ... 40 days?
You are of the opinion that there was no flood. I don't think you can prove it any more than anyone else can.
Scientists work with what they know, which is not all, and they theorize that there was no flood. Interestingly not all scientific minds agree as to what happened that many ears ago.
As far as these ancient writings you have found this could let us know that there were possibly more Noah's on the face of the earth and he may have just been one of the many men of God who made boats.
Actually, science can have answers to what happened that long ago, and even further. I've studied geology and part of that dealt with sedimentation and the formation of sedimentary rocks. Sediments are being deposited by water all the time. If the world had been covered by a cataclysmic flood as claimed in Genesis, huge amounts of sediment would have been churned up and would have been deposited in a layer that would have been uniformly spread across the entire world as the water receded. That layer simply does not exist. There is absolutely no geological evidence for a flood, though there is ample geological evidence for normal sediment deposition both before, during and after the supposed time of the flood. This is not a theory - it is a fact.
Think about the volume of water needed to flood the entire world, covering all the mountains. That volume of water just cannot be accounted for by clouds, underground streams and the polar ice caps. So where is it, if the flood happened?
As there is absolutely no geological evidence for Noah's flood, the obvious conclusion is that it didn't happen. To say otherwise is equivalent to insisting there's been a murder, even though no-one has died (the lack of a body being ample proof), simply because it was reported in the newspaper.
As I've said elsewhere, I'm of the opinion that the early chapters of Genesis were intended as a polemic against other religions of the Ancient Near East - sort of "We accept your version of events, but it was OUR God that did it, not your gods." That accounts for the similarity in the ancient stories from that region.
For more evidence that the biblical flood just did not happen, read this.
I've always been of the belief that it was something in between. I saw a show that explained of evidence that there was a major flood event in the Mediterranean about 10000 years ago. For the people who wrote the bible, it would have *seemed* that the entire earth had been flooded. They had no way of knowing anything outside of their immediate surroundings. They would have traded stories of encounters with neighboring villages and among trade routes, but that's all.
But I suppose perspective has to do with how literally correct one believes the bible to be. All that "inspired word of God" stuff that means the bible is literal and scientifically correct doesn't "hold water" with me. :)
Taking the Bible seriously is a good thing. Taking it literally is quite another thing, however, especially when the physical evidence is against it. Yes, I've heard various local flood hypotheses too - it could have been some sort of ancestral memory of a local disaster that was exaggerated into a worldwide flood in the stories.
Go to my site Barry and you will get a chuckle ;-)
Love it! :oD
I'm appreciate your writing skill.Please keep on working hard.^^
Hey Barry,
I have seen geological evidence that proved the great flood happened.
So it is like global warming. People see different evidence, shoose to believe some, and not others.
Just like churches follow some verses and not others. But now it seems to me you are very much on a kick to disprove the bible. Interesting. We'll see what comes.
Nate: Trying to disprove the Bible? No, not at all. Trying to disprove biblical literalists? Very much so. I'm just trying to show that some parts of the Bible were not meant to be taken literally, including the Flood story.
What evidence have you seen that the Flood happened? I'd be interested to know - if I'm proven wrong, great, but I'm very skeptical until that point.
Science will never have all the answers and we can burn a lot of cycles trying to prove or disprove things.
Those who want to have things proven would never believe even if it hit them in the face. I very rarely find people who want to know data from an honest open point of view.
I remember the debate of King David...did he really exist? Then we started digging up sherds that had the Davidic kingdom etc inscribed. What was the first response, "they must be forged". I find it all very amusing.
Mike: If I told you the world was created by seven magic horses during an afternoon of boredom, or that God once set the Atlantic Ocean on fire, would you believe it, even if I produced an ancient book that said so? I would hope not. Proof would be required, I'm sure. This is the same thing.
"I very rarely find people who want to know data from an honest open point of view" - what is that supposed to mean? That anyone who believes differently to you isn't open or honest? Show me actual evidence for a world-wide flood and I'll be happy to take it into account, but the fact of the matter is that I have never seen any (nor do I expect to, for the same reason that I don't expect to see evidence for the burning of the Atlantic any time soon).
As for digging up pottery sherds with David's name on them, don't be so quick to dismiss the idea that they might be forgeries (if they have actually been found, that is - I'm no archaeologist, but I don't remember hearing of any such finds). It was claimed fairly recently that Jesus' ossuary had been found, until it was shown to be a fake. You can't only take into account the evidence that supports what you believe; all the evidence is important. If it disproves what you believe then you're nearer to the truth and you find a hypothesis that fits the evidence better. That's how science works. Starting with the conclusion and then searching for evidence to support is just bad science, however amusing the alternative might seem to you.
For anyone who might be interested in taking this further, I recommend reading Genesis, Geology and Catastrophism by Michael R. Johnson (ISBN 0-85364-472-1). Johnson puts the case against creationism and biblical literalism in much more detail than I am able to here.
Post a Comment