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

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

the ratios of Noah’s Ark, reduced to 30(L):5(W):3(H), are ratios used in modern shipbuilding for seaworthiness!

Lol, not a single Ark replica is seaworthy.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

You present some good disputations....

Actually, it's not so much about what science DID discover as it is about what science did NOT discover....
See, the literal biblical flood myth, makes 2 very very testable predictions:

1. there should be a global flood layer in the geological column

2. there should be a MASSIVE genetic bottleneck in ALL species, which dates to the same period as the previously mentioned flood layer in the geological column.

Regarding your #1..
For the most part, geology only records events that last a long time
But, although the Deluge was world wide, it only lasted just over a year. It was a quick event, relatively speaking. So we shouldn’t expect to see much, from the water. It wasn’t like fire, I know you’re aware of that. Water cleans, and there’s evidence of fast erosion in places. There is alsoevidence of a worldwide sandstone layer quickly deposited. And the Permafrost still exists, and it is revealing quite a lot, during this climate change we’re experiencing.

Regarding your #2...
Testable doesn’t necessarily mean accurate, does it?

Some evidence of bottleneck deficiencies in testing:
“The identification of population bottlenecks is critical in conservation because populations that have experienced significant reductions in abundance are subject to a variety of genetic and demographic processes that can hasten extinction. Genetic bottleneck tests constitute an appealing and popular approach for determining if a population decline has occurred because they only require sampling at a single point in time, yet reflect demographic history over multiple generations. However, a review of the published literature indicates that, as typically applied, microsatellite-based bottleneck tests often do not detect bottlenecks in vertebrate populations known to have experienced declines. This observation was supported by simulations that revealed that bottleneck tests can have limited statistical power to detect bottlenecks largely as a result of limited sample sizes typically used in published studies. Moreover, commonly assumed values for mutation model parameters do not appear to encompass variation in microsatellite evolution observed in vertebrates and, on average, the proportion of multi-step mutations is underestimated by a factor of approximately two. As a result, bottleneck tests can have a higher probability of ‘detecting’ bottlenecks in stable populations than expected based on the nominal significance level. We provide recommendations that could add rigor to inferences drawn from future bottleneck tests and highlight new directions for the characterization of demographic history.”

Source...Error - Cookies Turned Off

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Lol, not a single Ark replica is seaworthy.

Source? No, you should present a ref. before you make statements, Kelly...
Here’s one that refutes what you stated:
University of Leicester physics students says Noah’s Ark would have floated with two each of 35,000 species of animal

??

 

[Magical Wand]

As a creationist and biblical literalist, the existence of the Epic of Gilgamesh makes perfect sense.

There's just a very small problem with your alternative interpretation. Young earth creationism (motivated by a literal reading of Genesis) must be false given the evidence of Darwinian evolution and of a billion years old earth/universe (and also evidence that a worldwide flood never took place). ㅤ:）

Of course, you may reject the overwhelming evidence, but I doubt serious scholars will also reject it.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Time changed Jesus from being a hot head to God's son. Time does all types of things.

And Yahweh goes from a fierce and violent being to a still small voice after the other gods were demoted.

 

[blü 2]

No. Thats wrong. If Noahs story is true, it could have happened before the Epic was written. Anyway if you like read post #32

If it didnt happen, it is still possible that both stories are taken from one single source.

That possibility's not really in dispute.

But the story exists in Sumer in the third millennium BCE for sure (and maybe earlier), and there's abundant attestation that it's well-known in Semitic Akkad (whence Babylon) by 2000 BCE.

Yahweh doesn't come into existence until c. 1500 BCE in the southern parts of Semitic Canaan.

 

[firedragon]

That possibility's not really in dispute.

But the story exists in Sumer in the third millennium BCE for sure (and maybe earlier), and there's abundant attestation that it's well-known in Semitic Akkad (whence Babylon) by 2000 BCE.

Yahweh doesn't come into existence until c. 1500 BCE in the southern parts of Semitic Canaan.

Why YHWH? Thats not relevant. I thought this is about the flood. If you want to discuss YHWH, that's a whole different topic.

 

[blü 2]

Why YHWH? Thats not relevant. I thought this is about the flood. If you want to discuss YHWH, that's a whole different topic.

Noah's Flood is borrowed from Uta-Napishti's Flood which is borrowed from Ziasudra's Flood.

Ziasudra's Flood is not known to be borrowed from anywhere else.

However, once we get to Noah, the Flood is attributed to Yahweh, the Abrahamic god.

That's all.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

The question is did the bible authors borrow the flood narrative from an earlier story, like the Epic of Gilgamesh.

IMO, no. I mean, both are describing the same incident, but they’re completely unrelated.

Why?

Answer this question:
To me, there’s no doubt which story is older; the E of G. But…
Which Arks’ description is the one that is seaworthy?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

There's just a very small problem with your alternative interpretation. Young earth creationism (motivated by a literal reading of Genesis) must be false given the evidence of Darwinian evolution and of a billion years old earth/universe (and also evidence that a worldwide flood never took place). ㅤ:）

Of course, you may reject the overwhelming evidence, but I doubt serious scholars will also reject it.

The problem here, for me at least, is equating the Flood account with a Young Earth.
But I’m not a YEC. So the “21 reasons” article has no bearing on my claims.

In fact, I’m sick and tired — no attack on you is meant — of Flood detractors who “marry” the two ideas together. By using this tactic…in discrediting the one (YEC, which is easy to do), the other (Flood) is also.

But YEC - to me an inaccurate claim - does not automatically have to be merged with the Flood!

In fact, it’s the Flood that cut through those billion-year-old rock layers, and formed the Grand Canyon!
Because, claiming the Colorado River caused the erosion, creates a problem: where’s the debris? There should be tons of it.
But No delta material, anywhere.

The Flood explains the lack of it.

Geology based on naturalism, can’t provide any concrete reason…. it’s an unknown.

 

[blü 2]

IMO, no. I mean, both are describing the same incident, but they’re completely unrelated.

Surely they're related?

The story comes from Mesopotamia and the Sumerians and certainly exists by the middle of the 3rd millennium BCE; and by the end of that millennium it's well and truly been passed on to the neighboring Akkadians, who unlike the Sumerians are Semitic; and from there it goes to Semitic Babylon; and why would it not then go to Semitic Canaan, with whom there were strong cultural and trading links.

And plainly the early Hebrews who worshiped Yahweh adapted it as they saw fit, substituting their god for the gods of Mesopotamia, and renaming the hero, and reshaping the ark, and waxing specific about the heights of the mountains covered and so on, all things a reasonably sophisticated story teller would do.

After all, as geology and genetics and hydrology show, there never was a flood of anything like Noachian proportions, never a time when there was no dry land on earth, unless at the very beginning more than four billion years ago. So it really is a very much embellished tale.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Surely they're related?

The story comes from Mesopotamia and the Sumerians and certainly exists by the middle of the 3rd millennium BCE; and by the end of that millennium it's well and truly been passed on to the neighboring Akkadians, who unlike the Sumerians are Semitic; and from there it goes to Semitic Babylon; and why would it not then go to Semitic Canaan, with whom there were strong cultural and trading links.

And plainly the early Hebrews who worshiped Yahweh adapted it as they saw fit, substituting their god for the gods of Mesopotamia, and renaming the hero, and reshaping the ark, and waxing specific about the heights of the mountains covered and so on, all things a reasonably sophisticated story teller would do.

After all, as geology and genetics and hydrology show, there never was a flood of anything like Noachian proportions, never a time when there was no dry land on earth, unless at the very beginning more than four billion years ago. So it really is a very much embellished tale.

Did you read the rest of my short post? I gave the reason.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

After all, as geology and genetics and hydrology show, there never was a flood of anything like Noachian proportions, never a time when there was no dry land on earth, unless at the very beginning more than four billion years ago. So it really is a very much embellished tale.

Hey, blü2! Hope you and yours are doing well.



Here’s something for you to peruse, if you’d like (keep in mind, I’m not a YEC):
Flood Evidences — revised

Take care, my cousin.

 

[firedragon]

Noah's Flood is borrowed from Uta-Napishti's Flood which is borrowed from Ziasudra's Flood.

Can you prove that its all borrowed since you make that hard claim?

However, once we get to Noah, the Flood is attributed to Yahweh, the Abrahamic god.

Thats not relevant. And pls try not to pronounce the name of the Jewish God. I am no trying to force you or something, its just most Jews value it too much.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

And pls try not to pronounce the name of the Jewish God. I am no trying to force you or something, its just most Jews value it too much.

FWIW, I’m not trying pick a fight, but was that King David’s view? No…
In Psalm 145:1-3 ASV, David says…

“I will extol thee, my God, O King; And I will bless thy name for ever and ever.

ב

2Every day will I bless thee;
And I will praise thy name for ever and ever.

ג

3Great is Jehovah, and greatly to be praised; And his greatness is unsearchable.”
And Jehovah appreciates us praising His name…Respectfully, of course….

Malachi 3:16,
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
“These things the worshipers of LORD JEHOVAH have spoken, each man with his neighbor, and LORD JEHOVAH listened and he heard and he wrote them in a scroll of memorial before him for his worshipers and for those who praise his name.”

And the Jerusalem Catholic Bible, at Exodus 3:15, says:

“And God also said to Moses, ‘You are to say to the sons of Israel: “Yahweh,[*b] the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you”. This is my name for all time; by this name I shall be invoked for all generations to come.”


Unfortunately, this superstition to stop using His Name has caused people to forget it.

Sort of against what God wanted, don’t you think?

Take care.

 

[firedragon]

FWIW, I’m not trying pick a fight, but was that King David’s view? No…
In Psalm 145:1-3 ASV, David says…

“I will extol thee, my God, O King; And I will bless thy name for ever and ever.

ב

2Every day will I bless thee;
And I will praise thy name for ever and ever.

ג

3Great is Jehovah, and greatly to be praised; And his greatness is unsearchable.”
And Jehovah appreciates us praising His name…Respectfully, of course….

Malachi 3:16,
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
“These things the worshipers of LORD JEHOVAH have spoken, each man with his neighbor, and LORD JEHOVAH listened and he heard and he wrote them in a scroll of memorial before him for his worshipers and for those who praise his name.”

And the Jerusalem Catholic Bible, at Exodus 3:15, says:

“And God also said to Moses, ‘You are to say to the sons of Israel: “Yahweh,[*b] the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you”. This is my name for all time; by this name I shall be invoked for all generations to come.”


Unfortunately, this superstition to stop using His Name has caused people to forget it.

Sort of against what God wanted, don’t you think?

Take care.

The Jews revere that name too much to pronounce it, I just like to try my best to not pronounce it in their presence. Thats all that matters to me. Maybe there is a necessity to discuss it linguistically and at that point maybe I will pronounce it. Its just my wish, and maybe I should not speak of that with others.

If not pronouncing his name makes people forget the name, I will doubt their faith.

Peace.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Which Arks’ description is the one that is seaworthy?

It was a seasonal flood over a dry area of land and not a sea. Some times, flood damage is small, the other times it is large. We have them every year, parts of India are presently under flood, even in the desert region of Thar. People make make-shift floating platforms to escape floods and save their belongings and animals.This month's images:
Flood in Rajasthan - Google Search

Seems like a bed!

 

[Brian2]

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

For me it is more about agreement between what the Bible says and what science has found or even theorised.
It is interesting that the translation of the Bible can be legitimately done to agree with a more localised flood, and of course this same sort of flood could have happened in other places at the same time, taking out more people.
I think the Noah story is just one of many localised stories about the same flood but different groups that were saved.
I could be wrong.

 

[Aupmanyav]

In fact, it’s the Flood that cut through those billion-year-old rock layers, and formed the Grand Canyon!
Because, claiming the Colorado River caused the erosion, creates a problem: where’s the debris? There should be tons of it.
But No delta material, anywhere.

Very funny. If the Canyon is not form by slipping of two earth crusts (Rift Valley) and by erosion, then the 'debris' has to be there in the lower course of the river or in the sea where the river empties. Even the erosion in a rift valley after its formation will cause deposition of sediments.
Sediments for rivers, and detritus or moraines for glaciers (Rivers of ice).
Large areas of Pakistan, India and nearly the whole of Bangladesh is where the Himalayan rivers deposited their 'debris':

Colorado River Delta

Moraine, Moraine after millions of years.

 

[Moonjuice]

In fact, it’s the Flood that cut through those billion-year-old rock layers, and formed the Grand Canyon!
Because, claiming the Colorado River caused the erosion, creates a problem: where’s the debris? There should be tons of it.
But No delta material, anywhere.

No Delta material anywhere? Do you not have access to satellite images of what is at the end of the Colorado River? What do you call this?