The global flood: The sorting of fossils and sediments

[outhouse]

Ziusudra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 (see also Panbabylonism).[20]

"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
​

"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.
​

"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


take into account ziusudra is the oldest flood story in the levant
​

 

[outhouse]

Panbabylonism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One of the two Bible creation myths was probably derived from the much older Mesopotamian creation myth "Enuma Elish".


The six days of creation in the Genesis myth parallel the six generations of gods in the Enuma Elish myth in type of god in Enuma Elish that is created (i.e. god of the earth) to what is created or happens on the corresponding day in Genesis (i.e. the waters are gathered together to expose dry land).
Marduk the sixth generation god makes man as a slave so the other gods can rest. God (Elohim) makes man on the sixth day and he himself rests.
Although the plot line of the Enuma Elish and the Genesis creation account are completely different it is possible to see some very basic connections between the two creation myths



really there is no debate among scholars that ancient hebrews were heavily influenced by egyptian and sumerian/babylonian sources.

 

[outhouse]

• Both stories have divine anger
• The heroes are warned by a god that a great Flood is going to happen
• The hero is given specific instructions on how the god wants him to build the boat
• The hero takes both his family and animals on the boat with him
• The hero releases three birds to find out if the Flood is beginning to subside
• When the Flood begins to subside, the boats are sitting on top of a mountain[2]:56-57

 

[javajo]

All the available evidence shows that they chug on at a pretty stately pace. Otherwise we wouldn't get the magnetic banding in the rocks... as the rocks need to cool to record the magnetic field they were exposed to.
We can even tell when the plates changed direction as they bump into each other.

Here is an interesting rebuttal of the Young Earth Model that you may appreciate... it's from an Old Earth Creationist. So, still looking at things from a Christian perspective.
Racing Plate Tectonics Nonsense

wa:do

Thanks for your time and input, I appreciate it. While the article didn't say a whole lot to me, it was interesting and Baumgardner's model was what I had read about although the book was 20 years old. I'll have to check online to see if they have discarded that by now, but, I am borrowing my daughter's laptop and will have to work again next week, so not much time!

I have enjoyed reading articles at that site, Answers in Creation from time to time, although I haven't come to agree with them. They believe in Creation, but that the earth is old, which many Christians believe in an old earth, evolution, progressive creation, the gap theory, and etc. I am not dogmatic as I was not there, but I still lean toward the young earth creation with the Flood being global and from which we get most of the fossils (which I know you all say is nuts, I know, no need to argue or chastise me, I know).

Whether God used millions of years or not and the theory of evolution is interesting to study. Since I believe God's Word is true, while I try not to be biased, it does influence my thinking when I consider origins. That may sound terrible, I know, but I have read that science actually grew when, from the Bible, men began to see the universe as real and possible to investigate. Many branches of science were founded, co-founded or greatly advanced by scientists who believed the Bible. (I understand a lot of science was hindered by religious leaders who had wrong understanding of the Bible)

As I said, I believe a man rose from the dead, which isn't scientifically acceptable today. I don't mean to frustrate or anger people who only go by what they consider the facts and just the facts, so I tend not to discuss my ideas much as I have such a profoundly different world view. Anyway thanks for answering my question on the cataclysmic plate tectonics idea. And if I don't get a chance, I wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving!

 

[outhouse]

wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving!

Thanks bud

 

[painted wolf]

Outhouse.... the story of Ziusudra may be more a story rather than a literally recorded event.

You presented it as a recorded fully factual event... rather than an extrapolation from a fragmentary story.

wa:do

 

[outhouse]

Outhouse.... the story of Ziusudra may be more a story rather than a literally recorded event.

You presented it as a recorded fully factual event... rather than an extrapolation from a fragmentary story.

wa:do

The Euphrates flood of 2900BCE is a attested flood the likes the levant hasnt seen since.

It is also the exact origination place of noahs flood per the bible.


as for the factual event, the flood is, and the hero is. the hero is not mythological.

The flood was recorded by sumerians and the even the storm before hand




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

Ziusudra being a king from Shuruppak is supported by the Gilgamesh XI tablet (see below) making reference to Utnapishtim (Akkadian translation of the Sumerian name Ziusudra) with the epithet "man of Shuruppak" at line 23


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.[7] Polychrome pottery from the Jemdet Nasr period (ca. 3000–2900 BCE) was discovered immediately below the Shuruppak flood stratum,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziusudra#cite_note-7

 

[outhouse]

Now take into account all the cultures telling this story wrote a myth regarding the event as did the sumerians.

But all these stories go back to this one said REAL flood and real king

 

[Agnostic75]

Thanks for your reply. Such a fascinating subject.

And the sorting of fossils and sediments is also a fascinating subject, but not to very many creationists since it provides very good evidence that a global flood did not occur.

Your personal religious beliefs are irrelevant in a science forum. I started this thread for the specific purpose of discussing the sorting of fossils and sediments. Please respect my reasons for starting this thread, as I would respect your reasons for starting a thread. There are more appropriate forums for you to preach. You can start as many threads as you want about preaching in some of the other forums.

As far as science is concerned, and this is a science forum, you have lost the debate about the sorting of fossils and sediments. The sorting of fossils and sediments reasonably proves that the Bible is not inerrant.

 

[javajo]

As far as science is concerned, and this is a science forum, you have lost the debate about the sorting of fossils and sediments. The sorting of fossils and sediments reasonably proves that the Bible is not inerrant.

I wasn't aware that I had entered a debate. I saw Shawn's cool pics of the continents moving apart and had a question about whether that was from plate tectonics and then whether the cataclysmic plate tectonics theory had been abandoned or whatnot. I'm sorry I asked, I know it was off-topic but I was curious as I had been reading about it.

I am reluctant to enter a debate about sorting of fossils by the flood as most accept the geological column of proof of evolution while I can also see the positions of the fossils as what I would expect to see from a flood and fast settling of sediments and pressure and all that. Both positions have strengths and weaknesses. I enjoy studying these things as I enjoy a good book in the solitude of my home, but not so much arguing about it, it isn't fun or productive for anyone. Whenever people talk about it online it just turns into an argument and insults, and that's not my bag. Happy Thanksgiving!

 

[Agnostic75]

.......I can also see the positions of the fossils as what I would expect to see from a flood and fast settling of sediments and pressure and all that. Both positions have strengths and weaknesses.

You have not demonstrated scientifically that both positions have strengths and weaknesses. I have posted lots of scientific evidence that supports my position, evidence that you cannot explain. According to the laws of gravity, fossils and sediments have to settle in certain ways. A global flood could not sort fossils and sediments in the ways that they are sorted. I obviously started this thread in order to discuss the sorting of fossils and sediments. Do you wish to discuss that topic? If not, please start your own threads and discuss what you want to discuss there. Please respect my intentions for starting this thread, just as I would respect your intentions for starting a thread.

Many Christians are interested in discussing evidence. If you are not interested in discussing evidence, just say so. If that is the case, then I do not have anything to discuss with you.

 

[shawn001]

There was a mass extintion in the permian period that killed 95% of life on earth and some of those animals became fossilized.

Then the dinosaurs evolved and they lasted 180 million years and got it by a meteorite 65 million years ago and some of them became fossilized. A flood didn't fossilize both groups of animals.

You also have amber which is not the same process as a fossil with ancient animals.

Again billion of facts support evolution and the geologic record around the world shows there was no global flood.

 

[shawn001]

Happy thanksgiving javajo and to all.

 

[JustWondering2]

Can we say "I'm sticking my head in the sand so I can't hear you, that can't be true!" LOL

:run::yes: :ignore:

 

[outhouse]

Can we say "I'm sticking my head in the sand so I can't hear you, that can't be true!" LOL

:run::yes: :ignore:

Pretty much

 

[javajo]

Well, when you search the internet, there are so many sites with so many different 'proofs' of their position that arguing it seems like a he said she said merry-go-round. But just for fun, here is some of what one site says about fossils, (hang on let me take cover!):

What does the fossil record teach us about evolution?

See this page in: Chinese, French, Indonesian, Spanish

What does the fossil record really teach concerning the theory of evolution? Do the fossils demonstrate the progression from simple structures to complex organisms? The following facts need to be considered:

• Abrupt appearance of animals. All the different, basic kinds of animals appear abruptly and fully functional in the strata - with no proof of ancestors. "Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them." (David Kitts, paleontologist and Evolutionist) Darwin was embarrassed by the fossil record. It contains no proof for macroevolution of animals.
• Plants appear abruptly, too. Evolutionist Edred J.H. Corner: "… I still think that to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation." (Evolution in Contemporary Thought, 1961, p.97) Scientists have been unable to find an Evolutionary history (beginning to end) for even one group of modern plants.
• Animals unchanged. Contrary to common belief, most fossils are not of extinct types of animals. Most fossils are very similar (and often totally identical) to creatures living today. It is said there are many more living species of animals than there are types known only as fossils. If Evolution is true, one may wonder why the case is not just the reverse! Evolutionary history is supposed to be filled with temporary, intermediate stages of Evolution, from amoeba to man.
• Sufficient fossils. There is a continuing lack of evidence for Evolution despite an enormous number of fossils. Although scientists will continue to discover new varieties of fossil animals and plants, it is generally agreed that the millions of fossils already discovered (and the sediments already explored) provide a reliable indication of which way the evidence is going. That is, there will continue to be little or no fossil evidence found to support Evolutionism.
• Fast strata formation. There is increasing evidence that many sedimentary rocks, which some thought took thousands or millions of years to accumulate, almost certainly were deposited in only months, days, hours, or minutes.
• Rapid coal formation. The old Evolutionary theory about coal forming in swamps is wrong. There is increasing evidence that massive coal deposits were formed in deep flood waters. Various coal layers in the U.S. consist mainly of sheets of tree bark abraded from huge masses of uprooted trees. The bark layers were buried in mud and carbonized into coal. Coal formation is relatively quick when heat is applied.
• Fossilization requires very special conditions. Dinosaur and other fossils could not have formed in the way suggested by most Evolutionary books. Animals almost never fossilize unless they are buried quickly and deeply - before scavengers, bacteria and erosion reduce them to dust. Such conditions are highly unusual. In almost all cases, the very existence of the fossils, in the types and numbers discovered, strongly indicates catastrophic conditions were involved in their burial and preservation. Without such conditions, there seems to be no plausible way to explain their existence. Huge dinosaurs, huge schools of fish, and many diverse animals are found entombed by massive muddy sediments which hardened into rock. Almost all fossils are found in water-laid sediments.
• Wrong order for evolution. It has been reported that "80 to 85% of Earth's land surface does not have even 3 geologic periods appearing in 'correct' consecutive order" for Evolution.

The fossil record does not provide evidence in support for Evolution.

"Fossils are a great embarrassment to Evolutionary theory and offer strong support for the concept of Creation." (Dr. Gary Parker, Ph.D., Biologist/paleontologist and former Evolutionist)
​

[ If this information has been helpful, please prayerfully consider a donation to help pay the expenses for making this faith-building service available to you and your family! Donations are tax-deductible. ]
Authors: Mark Van Bebber and Paul S. Taylor of Eden Communications
This page is located at: What does the fossil record teach us about evolution?

 

[Agnostic75]

Message to javajo: I can easily find hundreds of opposing experts for every creationist expert that you can find. So, quote against quote will not settle anything. I suggest that we discuss one issue at a time, starting with my opening post. I will pick one issue, we can discuss it in detail, and then you can pick an issue, and we can discuss it in detail. After a few months of discussions, you might admit that the only evidence that you really have that a global flood occurred is faith.

Isn't it your position that it is reasonble for inerrantists who know very little about science to reject anything that science says that disagrees with the Bible?

 

[JustWondering2]

And what creationist site did you get this from? Also where is their over welming evidence? Sounds like opinion to me!

JustWondering

 

[javajo]

Message to javajo: I can easily find hundreds of opposing experts for every creationist expert that you can find. So, quote against quote will not settle anything. I suggest that we discuss one issue at a time, starting with my opening post. I will pick one issue, we can discuss it in detail, and then you pick an issue, and we can discuss it in detail. After a few months of discussions, you might admit that the only evidence that you really have that a global flood occurred is faith.

I don't have access to a pc and I gotta work after the holiday, but I will try to discuss it with you if you like as much as I am able.

 

[JustWondering2]

Oh OK I saw the link. Just consider the source of your data for a minute. The are biased and have an agenda. That being keeping folks in the pews and the donations coming. If they agreed with what science says, that would mean the Bible connot be taken literally. As I said stick your head in the sand. Or a better way would be to look at both sides, as I have done and see for yourself who is telling the truth by what the evidence shows and who is interpriting it to fit their agenda. Science looks for answers in the evidence, those folks start out with the answers and try to make the evidence fit their answers! That's lia=ka a child saying there must be a Santa Clause cause he brings me what I want every year, if I'm good.