It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Noah vs. Utnapishtim (Bible and Gilgamesh)

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 07:31 AM
link   
The link below shows the real Ark of the Sumerians

Sumerian Ark

Believe it or not. Threads like these have ulterior (hidden) motive.


If you believe that the Hebrew was plagiarized from the Sumerian, then hop aboard the Sumerian ark and be saved.


[edit on 6-1-2009 by huckfinn]




posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Here is a great site that give some idea of how long and what Noah's Ark might of looked like.

[urlanswersingenesis.org...[/url]
answersingenesis.org...
answersingenesis.org...


Genesis describes the Ark in three verses, which require careful examination:

6:14—“Make yourself an ark [tebah] of gopher wood; make rooms [qinniym] in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with pitch [kofer].

6:15—“And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits.

6:16—“You shall make a window [tsohar] for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above; and set the door of the ark in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third decks” (NKJV).



The Bible's description of Noah's Ark stands out as a realistic vessel. The dimensions must have been written down and preserved, in contrast to the cube-shaped "Ark" in the Epic of Gilgamesh. Genesis 6:15 can tell us quite a lot about the accuracy and validity of this part of the Bible.



This graphic is based on the range of hull forms tested at the KRISO ship research center in Korea1. They analyzed the Biblical proportions and found Noah's Ark to strike a balance between the conflicting requirements for stability, comfort and strength.

www.worldwideflood.com...





[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by cormac mac airt
 


Lots of good stuff, I'll try to summarize the 400 page book later !!

Heck I'll just make its wisdom into a separate thread.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by huckfinn
 


Howdy Huckfinn


Which wiki had this story about the Ubaid in it?




Believe it or not. Threads like these have ulterior (hidden) motive.


Er like what?





According to some people,


Hans: Like who for instance?




In the period from 4500–4000 BC the literate and sea-faring Ubaid (Pre-Sumerian) culture spread into northern Mesopotamia and along the Arabian littoral (coastline of the Arabian Peninsula).


Hans: Show us this script then and evidence they were literate prior to the Sumerian use of Cuneiform. There was a proto language based on token prior to cuneiform - is this what you are talking about?




Showing the growth of a trading system that stretched from the Mediterranean coast (Modern Lebanon and Israel) through Oman.


Hans: What period of time are referring too?




What the above suggests is that prior to the rise of the Sumerian civilization a well-advanced society existed in a contiguous space stretching from the Mediterranean coast through the desert, down the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, along Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean and Red Sea.


Hans: There are the Natufians prior to that period but they idn’t cover the entire area – so what are these people called? Ubaidian refers to the agricultural people who lived in southern Mesopotamia.




By 4000 B.C., the Ubaid, identified by pottery and such, were present on the Mediterranean coast, the very same coast where the Phoenicians lived (As the Greeks called them) 3500 years later.


Hans: Cite a paper that supports that? The Semitic Eblaite were in that area – is it these you are referring too?




The same people who claimed to have come from along the same shores of the Erythraean Sea (Arabian littoral), according to Herodotus.


Hans: So you are saying they came from Indian ocean area? Cite please

Now that I’ve provided support for the notion

Hans: Actually unevidenced opinion



that those sea-faring people along the eastern Mediterranean coast known to the Greeks as Phoenicians and the Bible as Canaanites and the people at Eridu, known to us as the Ubaid, have links to one another prior to the rise of the Sumerian debacle.



Hans: I believe you are talking about the Syro-Cannanite people. I’m not sure where or how you’ve included the Ubaidians.




My assertion is that the flood story existed prior to the Sumerians.


Hans: Ah something we can agree on and is supported by my chili can.




I have not seen one example of the Sumerian sea-faring merchant, as this was not a part of their society. They were agrarian river folk at best. Their greatest contribution to history is committing the near perfect crime. The group called Sumerians are the regional successors (shores of the Persian Gulf) to a much older society.


Hans: Crime huh? Okay what law was broken then? LOL Which older society – I guess you mean somebody other than the Ubaidians then?




The Sumerians simply re-wrote the story in the new script they created; It didn’t first belong to them. Other successor groups to this larger and older society obtained the story in the same way, they didn’t adopt it from the Sumerians.


Hans: New script yes, rewrote hints that you think there was an earlier written source. By whom?



So, yes, many cultures do incorporate aspects of other, nearby, cultures into their own myths and legends, the Sumerians were possibly the first to do this; they incorporated Ubaid stories into their own society. But they didn’t create anything and pass it down to the Hebrews.



Hans: I think we agree here that the Sumerians probably wrote down an earlier story, where it came from is unknown. It may be likely that this story written down was the basis of the Hebrew story. It is also possible that this unknown source was the direct source for the Hebrew stories-without going thru the Sumerians? Is that your hypothesis? However one can make the case that the known disasterous flood in mesopotamia around 3000 BC was the seed for that story - that or my idea about the chili can.



P.S. If you haven’t guessed it, I am opposed to any attempt to place the Sumerians in an exalted place in history. It is said that History begins at Sumer, but it can also be said that crimes against Humanity began at Sumer.


Hans: Such as?




[edit on 6/1/09 by Hanslune]



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
I know that some will call me a paranoid conspiracy theorist, but I think all these Sumerian threads are a part of a plot to secretly convert people first to Islam then to pull them into the looking glass. Its obvious that Utnapishtim's ark is the Kaaba at Mecca. Suggesting that Noah and Utnapishtim are the same person is a trick. Noah's ark was a three winged temple in the Caucus mountains somewhere, which has most likely been razed to the ground, not a single black box in the desert. Another ark was built in Jerusalem by Solomon, which was also destroyed, rebuilt, destroyed and the one wing that still exists is occupied by Sumerians, I mean Muslims.

To accept as true the idea that the Hebrews plagiarized the Sumerians is logically the same thing as saying that Israel, the entire Western world, has no right to exist. Don't you see the ulterior motive of a thread like this now?

I think that Israel has the right to exist and the Palestinians of Gaza have made a strategic mistake, as you can plainly see from here. Many of you will not soon forget these days.









[edit on 6-1-2009 by huckfinn]

[edit on 6-1-2009 by huckfinn]

[edit on 6-1-2009 by huckfinn]



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by huckfinn
I sourced from Wiki, take it for what it is:

Okay...
but "what it is" is a lie constructed, apparently, by yourself.


Originally posted by huckfinn
According to some people, In the period from 4500–4000 BC the literate and sea-faring Ubaid (Pre-Sumerian) culture spread into northern Mesopotamia and along the Arabian littoral (coastline of the Arabian Peninsula). Showing the growth of a trading system that stretched from the Mediterranean coast (Modern Lebanon and Israel) through Oman.

Pasting a fictional "quote from wiki" to fit your skewed world view is no way to make an argument.

Your source actually says:


Later or "Classic Ubaid" — In the period from 4500–4000 BC saw a period of intense and rapid urbanisation with the Ubaid culture spread into northern Mesopotamia replacing (after a hiatus) the Halaf culture. Ubaid artefacts spread also all along the Arabian littoral, showing the growth of a trading system that stretched from the Mediterranean coast through the Dilmun civilization based in Bahrain to Oman.[citation needed]

I can see why you wouldn't link to your claimed source since it doesn't say what you claim it said.


Originally posted by huckfinn
What the above suggests is that prior to the rise of the Sumerian civilization a well-advanced society existed in a contiguous space stretching from the Mediterranean coast through the desert, down the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, along Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean and Red Sea. By 4000 B.C., the Ubaid, identified by pottery and such, were present on the Mediterranean coast, the very same coast where the Phoenicians lived (As the Greeks called them) 3500 years later. The same people who claimed to have come from along the same shores of the Erythraean Sea (Arabian littoral), according to Herodotus.

The Erythrean Sea includes the Red Sea, and the coast of the Indian ocean, and is not limited to the Arabian Gulf.

IIRC, when Herodotus told of the Phoenecians, he meant they came from along the Red Sea that we know of today, i.e., Canaan.

There's very little doubt at all that the Phoenecians came from what we "moderns" refer to as the Red Sea area.

In fact, the Egyptians referred to the Phoenecians as Keftian, meaning they lived on (or near) the shore of the Mediterreanean.

Long ways from Ur, I'd say, and the Egyptians knew better than Herodotus, since they had dealings with them long before the Greeks even started making city-states.


Originally posted by huckfinn
Now that I’ve provided support for the notion that those sea-faring people along the eastern Mediterranean coast known to the Greeks as Phoenicians and the Bible as Canaanites and the people at Eridu, known to us as the Ubaid, have links to one another prior to the rise of the Sumerian debacle.

However, you have done no such thing.


Originally posted by huckfinnMy assertion is that the flood story existed prior to the Sumerians. I have not seen one example of the Sumerian sea-faring merchant, as this was not a part of their society. They were agrarian river folk at best. Their greatest contribution to history is committing the near perfect crime. The group called Sumerians are the regional successors (shores of the Persian Gulf) to a much older society. The Sumerians simply re-wrote the story in the new script they created; It didn’t first belong to them. Other successor groups to this larger and older society obtained the story in the same way, they didn’t adopt it from the Sumerians.

Assert what you will. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


Originally posted by huckfinnAfter the Sumerians “conquered” the land of Southern Mesopotamia, many people were held in their squalor as hostages, such as Abraham and his family.

Now I wish that I'd finished reading the thread before answering. Surely somebody has already pointed out the almost perfectly pure ignorance in the above statement. If not, well, here you go.

The Sumerians, along witrh Sumer, were long gone when Abraham was born in Ur. Long gone like over 1,000 years before Abraham.

That's like blaming Atilla for last week's oil prices.


Originally posted by huckfinn
P.S. If you haven’t guessed it, I am opposed to any attempt to place the Sumerians in an exalted place in history. It is said that History begins at Sumer, but it can also be said that crimes against Humanity began at Sumer.

I doubt that. The only such thing that begins in Sumer is history, by the definition of the term.

Writing, in other words.

No reason at all to believe the Sumerians invented crimes against humanity. They're just the first culture for which we have a record of such crimes (writing, again) and, by the way, the first that tried to address the issue (Hammurabi.)

Harte



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


I knew a Tennessean would be upset by what I wrote. I never quoted anything. I took bits and pieces from wiki and created what I thought was a plausible scenario. Cops do it all the time. I think its called deduction, but i am lazy on ATS because I know so many of you are pushing a load and there is no purpose in my getting to caught up in any one topic.

The Phoenicians were from the Erythraean Sea, the ancients had a different conception of geography than we do. This sea Included the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf, up to its northern coast; right in Sumeria. But I already wrote that. Your picking out the coast of the Red Sea is random.

The Sumerians are the most famous murderer's in History, I think they created it, along with the written confession; known as the Epic of Gilgamesh.

The Biblical flood story is not plagiarized from the Sumerian.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by huckfinn
reply to post by Harte
 


I knew a Tennessean would be upset by what I wrote. I never quoted anything. I took bits and pieces from wiki and created what I thought was a plausible scenario. Cops do it all the time. I think its called deduction, but i am lazy on ATS because I know so many of you are pushing a load and there is no purpose in my getting to caught up in any one topic.

The Phoenicians were from the Erythraean Sea, the ancients had a different conception of geography than we do. This sea Included the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf, up to its northern coast; right in Sumeria. But I already wrote that. Your picking out the coast of the Red Sea is random.

The Sumerians are the most famous murderer's in History, I think they created it, along with the written confession; known as the Epic of Gilgamesh.

The Biblical flood story is not plagiarized from the Sumerian.

The Egyptians said they were from the Red Sea, not me.

I believe that Ramses III would know a little more than you about the matter.
Nothing random about that.

I note that you assert that nobody was ever murdered prior to the Sumerians inventing the deed then?

What about Abel?

After all, you seem to be attempting to preserve the Judeo-Christian version of existence.

Was Cain Sumerian?

Harte



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


Yes, Cain learned murder from the Serpent. The serpent instructed him in the art of murder for Gain. The Sumerians, the offspring of the Serpent, continued and perfected the art of murder. They also invented the lie, or cover-up, robbery and pimping. All the materials necessary for the veil of darkness that exists in the world.

Money, mack (the ability to use speech to Get) and murder all Sumerian concepts; Strokes of State. They have the whole world believing the Black Stone at the Kaaba is a meteorite, when it is the smooshed up remains of all the Kings they've killed throughout history. That's why they kiss it, like when Judas kissed Jesus. Can't you see?

I don't think I am trying to protect the Judeo-Christian version of exitence, neither Jews nor Christians wrote the flood story. They simply adopted that version, probably because they find it useful and truthful. Even if I was, so what?




[edit on 6-1-2009 by huckfinn]



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by huckfinn
 


Hmmmm, well the archaeological record show instances of death by violence well before that time. We also of course have the body of a murdered man himself, Oetzi, in a freezer. He had an arrow in his back- sucide perhaps? LOL

Men not only killed one another they treated one another as food. Now Huck I know you're not into links but for the others who might be following the thread. It dates Neanderthal cannibalism to 100,000 years ago.

Cannibalism




They have the whole world believing the Black Stone at the Kaaba is a meteorite, when it is the smooshed up remains of all the Kings they've killed throughout history


Wow quite a claim any thing to back it up? Its broken up from having been taken at one point in the middle ages.





[edit on 6/1/09 by Hanslune]

(image tages)

[edit on Tue Jan 6 2009 by Jbird]



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by huckfinn
They have the whole world believing the Black Stone at the Kaaba is a meteorite, when it is the smooshed up remains of all the Kings they've killed throughout history.


Well, that ridiculous (an understatement) claim ends my part in this kooky thread.

Harte



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


That's cool. Your anger may be contagious. Nevertheless, I don't know what is so ridiculous about my statement, all organized Religions have a dark side; including Islam.

I'll illustrate for my own defense that it is not as ridiculous as you say. Is the Kaaba not the "ReflectioN of a house in heaven"? Is not the Black Stone the cornerstone of this House? Is Christ not the capstone of a house in heaven? Do muslims not consider the Kaaba, the intersection of the divine and mundane? Isn't the Christ the real intersection of the divine and mundane? Does not the whole performance down there in Mecca reveal that the muslims have every intention of usurping the Christ's role in the world? Does it not make sense that Islam is naturally at war with God's design and that they will kill his Man when they can? Have they not succeeded in the past at capturing and killing God's only Man?

Is not the Kaaba, the Black Stone, and the Circumabulation a representation of a black hole (the space within the Kaaba), its singularity (the Stone), its event horizon (the structure of the Kaaba) and the abyss (the mass of humanity).

The reflection of anything is not real, it is dead, not possessing any reality of its own, but always depending on the reflected.

If Christ ever coverted to Islam, as if something like this could be achieved, wouldn't the Western world be destroyed post-haste? After the destruction of the Western world wouldn't the remainder be enslaved forever in darkness?

I can be fair though and say that other religious establishments have also done horrible things to the King and his family. But it seems that what I pointed out above is beyond the imagination of most. Religion institutions serve the purpose of the Priesthood first and always have.

The True church is the body of man and the body of man is Prime Feminine; the Kings mother, wife and daughter. The true ruler of the world is the mind of man and the mind of man is the Prime Masculine; the King and his Son. We don't need no education. Nor how to read or write to know good and evil.

yeah, whatever man!







[edit on 7-1-2009 by huckfinn]



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Well now Huck



Does not the whole performance down there in Mecca reveal that the muslims have every intention of usurping the Christ's role in the world? Does it not make sense that Islam is naturally at war with God's design and that they will kill his Man when they can? Have they not succeeded in the past at capturing and killing God's only Man?


Usurping the role of Christ?? In Islam Christ is a respected prophet, but they believe he was man only. Er, ah how can Islam be at war with god's design when they themselves say they worship the same god?

God'd only man? If you mean JC he was done in by the Roman's with local support....

As Harte said this is getting really strange.....



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 



Sorry that everything in the world doesn't come in a nice tight package with easy to understand instructions. But this is one of those things.

You are at War; are you aware of this? Do you know what the War is about? Do you think that is just started?

I would say that MOST muslims, christians, jews want what they say they want, peace of earth, brotherly love, etc., but the people operate the Religious institutions and who actually know the contents of the books and their more subtle meanings also know that they have no intention on any Christ returning or any such nonsense. Most people in this world are nothing more than flak jackets for men with influence and resources.

This post concerns Noah and Utnapishtim...an example of a subtle attempt at planting the seeds of CONfusion. Subverting understanding and clouding the mind. It is a tactic of war. Is it not?

Apparently you see no connection between your own lack of understanding of what exists in the world and the millions of Iraqis that have died or the Palestinians of Gaza. The people you see dying are you...can't you see?



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by huckfinn
 


Well Huckfinn

Considering this is a forum for Ancient and Lost civilizations I think "we've", gone well beyond our area and the OP.

You might want to post your concerns at the religion forum on ATS. I can also recommend the Religion and Ethics BBS located here:

Ethics and Religion

They actually like this strange stuff.



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


I think my replies have always included a reference to the OP Noah vs. Utnapishtim (Bible and Gilgamesh), with direct responses to critics excluded. A discussion including ethics and religion is implied by the topic and fair game. Especially when you consider that the ethics of Noah and the ethics of Utnapishtim are completely different and Gilgamesh's existence in the Bible is implied and he is nothing more than a minor character, not even worth mentioning by name. At least Nebuchadnezzer made it in.

So you can clearly see that the idea that the Bible was plagiarized from Sumerian tales is unreasonable as the Bible is a far more comprehensive document in both mundane and spiritual topics. And the characters in the Bible are of a different nature than the characters in Sumerian tales.

I am sorry that your own participation in this thread has devolved into shots at my posts, instead of contributing.



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by huckfinn
 





I am sorry that your own participation in this thread has devolved into shots at my posts, instead of contributing.


That is the nature of an ATS discussion, you make statements in support of ignorance then I'm duty bound by the ATS motto, deny ignorance, to point out the error.

Most of our discussion has been about disagreeing about your opinions. I must admit your claim on the real composition of the al-Hajar-ul-Aswad was so strange I thought you were kidding. It would seem I was wrong!

I recommend the religion and ethics place, a gentleman who posts there named David Meyers is a specialists in this type of material.

Best of luck



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by dAlen

Originally posted by EdenKaia
Noah's Ark was built over a long, realistic period of time, Utnapishtim's Ark was built in a matter of days. Noah's Ark was built logically to withstand the pressure and force of viscious waves for a long period of time. Viewing the dimensions, Utnapishtim's Ark would have been cubed shaped,


Hmmm, not sure how 'logical' the boat (practical) it was when the claim states that a sample of all the animal species were on board. (minus the fish
)


Obviously, I will concede that there was no way that part would have worked. Keep in mind we are discussing the realism of a Book written by men telling stories long before them all, who believed that every animal in the world lived within walking distance from Noah's house.


All I'm saying here is that the ship itself is more practically sound (seaworthy) than Utnapishtim's. There is no way the Sumerian ship would have been able to survive at sea, animals or no.



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by huckfinn
I sourced from Wiki, take it for what it is:



if you have sourced it from wiki, what is the source? care to give us a link?
No, you couldn't, because such a link or write up doesn't exist in wikipedia (unless it is some obscure other wiki your are sourcing from)

[edit on 11/1/09 by coredrill]



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by coredrill
 



Ubaid

Phoenician

Here is a start for you. It'll probably take you some time ingest.

Just a note in case you don't know. Scholarship is not about repeating facts it is about intergrating information from available sources to gain insight into the world for judgement and decision making. You probably won't see what I see. Nevertheless, it is what I see. Take it for what its worth. Have a nice one.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join