Why do we find ancient references to 8 people in a large boat in diverse cultures and languages

[whirlingmerc]

We don't.

The closest story to Noah's flood is the Sumerian version, which is likely the precursor. However, it is substantially different. The story was altered in many ways over time.

The fact that there are flood myths, however different, in many other cultures, simply speaks to how traumatic local floods can be.

The necessary geological evidence for a global flood is simply missing, and there are ample logistical problems with the story of Noah's ark. It is strictly a teaching story about the nature of man and the nature of God.

Actually the geological evidence is quite compelling for a global flood of Noah (and followed by a short ice age which would have caused a land bridge from Russian to Alaska allowing land animals to spread out over the earth)

Interestingly even in the ice age much of Alaska was unaffected while New York was under 2 kilometers of ice. That gives animals a migration path from Asia to the Americas post flood.

Worldwide Flood, Worldwide Evidence

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually the geological evidence is quite compelling for a global flood of Noah (and followed by a short ice age which would have caused a land bridge from Russian to Alaska allowing land animals to spread out over the earth)

Interestingly even in the ice age much of Alaska was unaffected while New York was under 2 kilometers of ice. That gives animals a migration path from Asia to the Americas post flood.

Worldwide Flood, Worldwide Evidence

AiG is not a valid site. They require their workers to swear not to use the scientific method. That makes any of their science claims worthless. Can you support your claims with valid sources?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Actually the geological evidence is quite compelling for a global flood of Noah (and followed by a short ice age which would have caused a land bridge from Russian to Alaska allowing land animals to spread out over the earth)

Interestingly even in the ice age much of Alaska was unaffected while New York was under 2 kilometers of ice. That gives animals a migration path from Asia to the Americas post flood.

Worldwide Flood, Worldwide Evidence

There is not, i.e., a layer of sediment in the same place all over the world, which you would have to have in the event of a global flood.

 

[whirlingmerc]

There is not, i.e., a layer of sediment in the same place all over the world, which you would have to have in the event of a global flood.

Also one would not expect sediment to harden the same way in ocean as that left on land

 

[shunyadragon]

Actually the geological evidence is quite compelling for a global flood of Noah (and followed by a short ice age which would have caused a land bridge from Russian to Alaska allowing land animals to spread out over the earth)

Interestingly even in the ice age much of Alaska was unaffected while New York was under 2 kilometers of ice. That gives animals a migration path from Asia to the Americas post flood.

Worldwide Flood, Worldwide Evidence

Simply no and bogus beyond any reasonable doubt.

Also one would not expect sediment to harden the same way in ocean as that left on land

No, I am a geologist and geomorphologist, and this in true.

 

[shunyadragon]

Actually the geological evidence is quite compelling for a global flood of Noah (and followed by a short ice age which would have caused a land bridge from Russian to Alaska allowing land animals to spread out over the earth)

Interestingly even in the ice age much of Alaska was unaffected while New York was under 2 kilometers of ice. That gives animals a migration path from Asia to the Americas post flood.

Worldwide Flood, Worldwide Evidence

The claims of the bogus website are not remotely based on the evidence of science.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Post ice age. So what are those glaciers doing on Antarctica and Greenland?

They may soon disappear leaving something like this (soon in geologic sense could be anything, 50 years or 500 years):

 

[Aupmanyav]

It is strictly a teaching story about the nature of man and the nature of God.

Humans have rich imagination. Many times they get carried away by their imagination. The concept of God is one such thing.
If the whole world was covered by water to the extent of 15 cubits on the highest mountain, where did all that water go?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Also one would not expect sediment to harden the same way in ocean as that left on land

You really should learn why we know that you are wrong.

We can date igneous rocks absolutely using radiometric dating. We can date sedimentary rocks relatively. We know how old the various deposits are by combining the two. Creationists simply cannot explain sedimentary rocks. What is observed does refutes their models, even though they are too cowardly to put them in the form of testable hypotheses.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Also one would not expect sediment to harden the same way in ocean as that left on land

In your expert opinion as a geologist, how would it be different?

 

[BilliardsBall]

So what?!?!?! Geologist and Paleontologists have clearly recognized local and regional floods have occured all the time all over the world at different times. You need to give a more coherent argument that any of these are remotely associated with the Biblical flood. You keep repeating this statement like a broken record without providing anything beyond this that would be meaningful.

None of them could possibly be global in scale, because the primitive cultures could not comprehend the global, and second all the flood stories have been documented as specifically natural caused floods on a local and sometimes regional floods occurring at many different times, and not remotely associated with the Biblical flood.

1) Over 120 ancient cultures speak of a flood, per anthropologists/historians

2) Commonalities include God judging, a large boat with species, 8 people on the boat, the worldwide nature of the Flood, etc.

3) These flood stories are intertwined with their creation stories

It is remarkable that most ancient cultures speak of a time when the human population was utterly thinned to a few, not just created with original parents.

Occam's says there was a Flood.

Your concepts that our ancestors were stupid, like "the primitive cultures could not comprehend the global", are not only self-immolating (do we all have stupid ancestors?) but deny how ancient Flood culture myths are intimately tied to their God-judging and creation mythologies. Anyone who hears "In the beginning, the gods made the first parents/family, then soon after judged, so that only a few escaped by boat" then comes up with your revisionist "interpretation" is wrong.

Occam's says if your concepts are true, then the stories would be "In the beginning, the gods made the first parents/family, then soon after judged, so that only a few escaped drowning here, in our cradle of local civilization" and not "our thinned ancestors went by boat from Place X to Place Y".

 

[Subduction Zone]

1) Over 120 ancient cultures speak of a flood, per anthropologists/historians

Yes, that is likely true.

2) Commonalities include God judging, a large boat with species, 8 people on the boat, the worldwide nature of the Flood, etc.

No, you do not seem to know what "commonalities" means. Very few have only 8 people on the boat. Some have species on the boat.

3) These flood stories are intertwined with their creation stories

Yes, myths are intertwined at times.

It is remarkable that most ancient cultures speak of a time when the human population was utterly thinned to a few, not just created with original parents.

Yes, people were terribly ignorant back then. Once again, so what?

Occam's says there was a Flood.

No, he doesn't. You do not understand Occam's Razor either.

Your concepts that our ancestors were stupid, like "the primitive cultures could not comprehend the global", are not only self-immolating (do we all have stupid ancestors?) but deny how ancient Flood culture myths are intimately tied to their God-judging and creation mythologies. Anyone who hears "In the beginning, the gods made the first parents/family, then soon after judged, so that only a few escaped by boat" then comes up with your revisionist "interpretation" is wrong.

Wrong again. We know that they were ignorant. Ignorant is not stupid. Now modern people that are ignorant appear stupid because they can only maintain their ignorance by refusing to learn. Their ignorance is often self imposed by beliefs in myths etc.. The people of that time had a valid excuse for their ignorance. Why they were wrong had not been discovered yet. Just like you were not stupid before you learned how to add and subtract and you were not all of a sudden smart after you learned how to add and subtract. You were only no longer ignorant in regards to addition.

Occam's says if your concepts are true, then the stories would be "In the beginning, the gods made the first parents/family, then soon after judged, so that only a few escaped drowning here, in our cradle of local civilization" and not "our thinned ancestors went by boat from Place X to Place Y".

No, let's look at Occam's Razor:

'Occam’s razor, also spelled Ockham’s razor, also called law of economy or law of parsimony, principle stated by the Scholastic philosopher William of Ockham (1285–1347/49) that pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, “plurality should not be posited without necessity.” The principle gives precedence to simplicity: of two competing theories, the simpler explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed as “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.” '

Your application failed. Demanding that a god intervened is always more complex than a natural explanation. A much simpler explanation is that people that live along water get flooded at times. Stories grow over the years. Therefore flood myths, which do vary quite a bit, are to be expected. No need to invoke a god therefore much simpler than your version. Occam does not like your explanation of the flood myths.

 

[shunyadragon]

1) Over 120 ancient cultures speak of a flood, per anthropologists/historians.

Again so what?!?!?! All these floods have been documented from natural causes at different times in history even recent history.

2) Commonalities include God judging, a large boat with species,

It is common in ancient cultures attribute God as punishment, no meaning. Many as in China are dettailed historicall and not attributed to Divine retribution.

8 people on the boat,

Not meaningful. The Egyptian and Chinese references have no context of Noah and the flood. Pretty much all the floods have been documented as river floods, Tsunamis, and glacial floods and nothing else.

the worldwide nature of the Flood, etc.

There is no worldwide attribution of a Noah flood.

3) These flood stories are intertwined with their creation stories.

No they are not.

It is remarkable that most ancient cultures speak of a time when the human population was utterly thinned to a few, not just created with original parents.

No they do not.

Occam's says there was a Flood.

Occam's razor goes with the simplist answer, and that is a natural explanation.

Your concepts that our ancestors were stupid, like "the primitive cultures could not comprehend the global", are not only self-immolating (do we all have stupid ancestors?)

No they are not stupid it is just a matter of fact that the ancient cultures could not comprehend the world as a whole.

. . . but deny how ancient Flood culture myths are intimately tied to their God-judging and creation mythologies. Anyone who hears "In the beginning, the gods made the first parents/family, then soon after judged, so that only a few escaped by boat" then comes up with your revisionist "interpretation" is wrong. ]/quote]

You have not made any references to suport these assertions based on a religious agenda.

Occam's says if your concepts are true, then the stories would be "In the beginning, the gods made the first parents/family, then soon after judged, so that only a few escaped drowning here, in our cradle of local civilization" and not "our thinned ancestors went by boat from Place X to Place Y".

egregious misuse of Occam's razor to justify your religious agenda. Occam's razor goes for the simplist answer based on the evidence, and you do not have any objective verifiable evidence for your claims.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

1) Over 120 ancient cultures speak of a flood, per anthropologists/historians

All that means is a lot of local floods.

2) Commonalities include God judging, a large boat with species, 8 people on the boat, the worldwide nature of the Flood, etc.

This is incorrect. Just because something is online doesn't mean it's true.

3) These flood stories are intertwined with their creation stories

Even the story of Noah is not intertwined with Genesis 1-3. It just goes to show how inaccurate your information is.

 

[Shad]

1) Over 120 ancient cultures speak of a flood, per anthropologists/historians

A flood not the flood. You would know this if you actually looked at these stories.

2) Commonalities include God judging, a large boat with species, 8 people on the boat, the worldwide nature of the Flood, etc.

Which reflects the primitive thinking of humans. This does not help you in anyway.

3) These flood stories are intertwined with their creation stories

Not all. See above

It is remarkable that most ancient cultures speak of a time when the human population was utterly thinned to a few, not just created with original parents.

Assumption on your part and those of the myths authors. After all these primitives couldn't figure out what caused flooding

Occam's says there was a Flood.

Not applicable as the scientific view has vastly more evidence then your view ergo the proposals are not equal so the Razor does not apply. Look up the term you are using.

Your concepts that our ancestors were stupid, like "the primitive cultures could not comprehend the global", are not only self-immolating (do we all have stupid ancestors?) but deny how ancient Flood culture myths are intimately tied to their God-judging and creation mythologies. Anyone who hears "In the beginning, the gods made the first parents/family, then soon after judged, so that only a few escaped by boat" then comes up with your revisionist "interpretation" is wrong.

This just hammers home the point these people were primitives.

Them "Oh no a flood! A god must be angry"
Me: "It is called snowmelt"

Occam's says if your concepts are true

You have yet to fulfill this criteria.

then the stories would be "In the beginning, the gods made the first parents/family, then soon after judged, so that only a few escaped drowning here, in our cradle of local civilization" and not "our thinned ancestors went by boat from Place X to Place Y".

Religious babble

 

[BilliardsBall]

Again so what?!?!?! All these floods have been documented from natural causes at different times in history even recent history.



It is common in ancient cultures attribute God as punishment, no meaning. Many as in China are dettailed historicall and not attributed to Divine retribution.



Not meaningful. The Egyptian and Chinese references have no context of Noah and the flood. Pretty much all the floods have been documented as river floods, Tsunamis, and glacial floods and nothing else.



There is no worldwide attribution of a Noah flood.



No they are not.



No they do not.



Occam's razor goes with the simplist answer, and that is a natural explanation.



No they are not stupid it is just a matter of fact that the ancient cultures could not comprehend the world as a whole.



egregious misuse of Occam's razor to justify your religious agenda. Occam's razor goes for the simplist answer based on the evidence, and you do not have any objective verifiable evidence for your claims.

You seem honest, but statements like this, both general and uninformed, belie either a naive, trusting nature or a stupidity you only rarely exhibit:

bb: 3) These flood stories are intertwined with their creation stories.

"No they are not."

 

[BilliardsBall]

A flood not the flood. You would know this if you actually looked at these stories.



Which reflects the primitive thinking of humans. This does not help you in anyway.



Not all. See above



Assumption on your part and those of the myths authors. After all these primitives couldn't figure out what caused flooding



Not applicable as the scientific view has vastly more evidence then your view ergo the proposals are not equal so the Razor does not apply. Look up the term you are using.



This just hammers home the point these people were primitives.

Them "Oh no a flood! A god must be angry"
Me: "It is called snowmelt"



You have yet to fulfill this criteria.



Religious babble

I'd reply, but your "facts" and "arguments" remind me of grade school.

 

[shunyadragon]

You seem honest, but statements like this, both general and uninformed, belie either a naive, trusting nature or a stupidity you only rarely exhibit:

bb: 3) These flood stories are intertwined with their creation stories.

"No they are not."

Actually no, though Creation stories do exist in many cultures, they are separate from the flood stories, and they are more a mix of polytheistic animalist and anthropomorphic Creation stories that do not resemble the Biblical Creation. The flood stories are overwhelmingly specific referring to river floods, and Tsunamis, The catastrophic geologic regional and local floods related to the melting of the glaciers, are for the most part not recorded by the ancient cultures.

You have no references to document what you have described above.

Trusting the actual geologic objective verifiable evidence does confirm the ancient records and stories as being catastrophic river floods and tsunamis. In Japan, Northwest Americas and around the Pacific rim are stories that specific tsunami events documented by the physical evidence. The catastrophic river flood of China is also extremely well documented by both Chinese written records, and geologic evidence.

Your argument is indeed general and uninformed of the specific scientific evidence, and based only on your religious agenda. You have not provided nor cited any specific scientific nor archaelogical evidence to support your assertions.

 

[Audie]

Yes, different cultures have different flood myths. So what?

It is a thing one could study, the myths cultures
hold in common.

Stories of mermaids, dragons, little people, giants,
invincible warriors, god-kings that die but will return,
and, I guess, big floods are found world wide and
through history.

Why is a good question. A facile answer that the
one we want to pick out must be true is not it.

I notice that our creofriends never give anything like
a scholarly look at myths held in common, to fit
the flood thing into context.

 

[Audie]

It is strictly a teaching story about the nature of man and the nature of God.

Is it? How do you know that? It is presented as
being true.
The latter day revisionism in bible-interpretation
is a bit disingenuous, imo.
The earth as center of the universe had to be
abandoned, the bible re interpreted to fit.

The creation story was literal until 6 days,
everything poofed into place became too
obviously false, then days became of mu;lti-
million year length.

Where do you stop, with "just a teaching-story"?

There are lots of those, and even little red riding hood
is closer to possible than the flood.

It teaches a better lesson, too.

The nature of man? Nothing new or insightful
in the story.

The nature of god,?. The nature of something
that does not even exist, but if it did, it is "love". (?)

The flood story makes god out to be a bungling
psycho monster. Destroy the innocent for the
sins of the guilty, kill kill kill. And in a slow horrible
way, besides, (before tossing them in a lake of
fire)

What the hell kind of lesson is that?