Did the Deluge ever happen?

SM
you consistently state that there is only one god

posted by Sunmatrix
Maybe you can figure out why Baal is a title meaning Lord and also a false god. Maybe you can figure out why Nimrod=Baal=Marduk=Osiris. All your genius and you are stuck on step one

now you are claiming that Baal is several gods

guess we can see where you got that idea because of someone you call lord

posted by Sunmatrix
there are other lords of which Satan is one

www.abovetopsecret.com...
and elsewhere you state

posted by Sunmatrix
The world would be so much better without religion.......When Satan created the Babylonian religion that spead all over the earth he knew exactly what he was doing. Satan is Lucifer........the bringer of light.......

www.abovetopsecret.com...
and then you state

posted by Sunmatrix
I have no use for religion

after which you claimed
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Think what the world would be like if everyone loved God and obeyed him.........No illegimate children.....no theft........no divorce.....no homeless children......no murder........no lies........ no deception....no starvation.....limited disease

www.abovetopsecret.com...
and at the same time

posted by Sunmatrix
if you don't respond to the weak minded that gives them a green light to constantly harass. A good punch in the nose is about all a bully understands

www.abovetopsecret.com...
so what you're saying is that there is only one God
you call him Lord Satan who bought light to the world
he created religion and if everyone worshipped him the world would be at peace
except for the weak minded who should be subjected to physical violence
and youre trying to say that I'm confused
hey guess what
you just got served again




[edit on 17-4-2007 by Marduk]

BIBLE FIGHT! BIBLE FIGHT!

Heh, Sorry. I just had to get the 4chan out of me. Anyways, back to discussion!

Several months ago, I was wandering in my local christain book store seeing if they had the latest "Adventures in Oddessey" CD collection. Then I saw this awesome book.

Yes, that is a T. Rex on the boat with Noah...

Besides having totally silly pictures of dinos lining up to get on the ark, (Which begs the question, why are they all gone?) the book goes in detail on the "discovery" of the ark on Mt. Ararat. For a kid's book, it's quite detailed on the scientific how and why the boat got there. I was sorely tempted to buy the book, but I didn't feel like paying $13 for it.

The author was John Morris Now before you all boo and hiss, he does go on record in this statement here that the most popular landing site theory is bogus, brought on by a pair of money hungry hoaxers.

But the hoax was good enough to include in his book...

Still, Morris makes a good point in his final statements:

The potential discovery would have incredible impact. Not only would it demolish evolution's foundation of uniformitarianism, but since the Ark is such a precious picture of Christ, i.e. the method of salvation for believers during time of judgment of sin, its discovery would focus the attention of many on our present day Ark of Salvation, Jesus Christ.

What do you think, sirs?

some people know this is just a cartoon

others think its a documentary
but as they say
takes all sorts
just a pity some of them are so dumb

Originally posted by Marduk
hey guess what
you just got served again

I guess panic mode has set in now. You are'nt used to be proven wrong EVERYTIME.........are you? Embarrassment has now turned to panic.

I suggest that you get used to it........as I can feel you are about to pop.

Nimrod = Marduk

Let's get back on topic and talk about the flood.....if you can.

How about we discuss the Canaanite proto Hebrew god you brought up.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
I guess panic mode has set in now. You are'nt used to be proven wrong EVERYTIME.........are you? Embarrassment has now turned to panic.

see you're still having problems with reality then

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
I suggest that you get used to it........as I can feel you are about to pop.

ah so now you think you're darth vader
let me know when you think you're Napoleon Bonaparte I have some questions about your russian campaign

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
Let's get back on topic and talk about the flood.....if you can.

are you sure
you haven't posted once on topic in this thread so far

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
How about we discuss the Canaanite proto Hebrew god you brought up.

ok nice straw man argument
heres what I said again

posted by Marduk
and I'm still waiting to hear how you explain how the canaanite proto hebrews didn't have a flood god until they were enslaved by the Babylonians who did have one

see what this means is that the Hebrews who originate in Canaan didn't have a flood god until after they were enslaved in Babylon
now seeing as you are claiming elsewhere that all religion and therefore all gods originate in Babylon why are you having difficulty accepting this
or have they changed the medication on you again ?

or is it because you don't understand the word proto
heres some help with that

proto
adjective
indicating the first or earliest or original

so the phrase canaanite proto hebrew means - the canaanites who later became hebrews, its just an easier way of saying it
sorry you missed that
now if you look again at what I said

posted by Marduk
waiting to hear how you explain how the canaanite proto hebrews didn't have a flood god until they were enslaved by the Babylonians

see I'm actually saying they didn't have a flood God
so where you are now claiming

posted by SunMatrix
How about we discuss the Canaanite proto Hebrew god you brought up.

is quite frankly a lie
I never claimed there was such a God
in fact as I have just proved I am saying there wasn't one
so either you are now
1. fabricating evidence in a vain attempt to save face (pretty pointless)
or
2. you simply don't understand english

who's for both

Marduk, while I don't think Sun Matrix is talking much sense, I think you are being deliberately obtuse in understanding what they are claiming. As far as I can make out - and far be it for me to put words into anyone's mouth - they are saying something like this:

The Old Testament is broadly correct. Certain truths were revealed by God to mankind in ancient times. Man was at one with God. Then at some later point in time, an evil being called they call Satan came and spread heretical ideas amongst the civilisation of ancient Mesopotamia. This being spun stories of multiple gods, and established ritualised religious practices as a way to prevent the civilisation actually being able to be "at one" with God any more. These damaging beliefs then (somehow) spread worldwide. The Hebrews (later/eventually) preserved the "original" truths uncorrupted though.

Therefore there is one "God", and mankind is meant just to know and obey him. Religoious "praxis" is a way for evil beings (who exist, and who are not gods, who may go by many names and appearences) to disturb that original intended state of affairs.

I don't want to go further into it, as I don't think I know (or much care) about the ins and outs of Sun Matrix's novel approach. I don't agree with it, and I find no evidence for it anywhere relevant (which would be fields of practical and historical philosophy and anthropological study of belief structures in modern and ancient religions: it certainly isn't found in source-study or dirt-archeology in itself).

Perhaps if SunMatrix wants to propound or explain this creative revisionism they might want to open a thread on BTS to expound what they mean.

In the meantime, I don't understand why you, Marduk, continue to be drawn to irrelevant bait in threads which ostensibly have nowt to do with this area, why you want to post lots of quotes from other threads (where their presence was equally irrelevant) or why SunMatrix rises to your challenge almost every time. Just ignore irrelevant interjections.

On topic however, is there any compelling reason why the myth (whether in Sumerian or Hebrew retelling - both of which are possibly much later than the actual event than is the length of time between the two versions [I find the attention to the deviations between comparitively comtemporary accounts, give or take a millennium or two, a bit pointless considering the event could have taken place comparatively far earlier than both]) could not have arisen from some of the other possibilities laid out here:

en.wikipedia.org...

viz.:
Persian Gulf (c.10,000 BC) - slow refilling (maybe locally in fits and starts?)
Sea of Azov (c.9,600 BC) - earthquake-induced sudden refill (but maybe the wrong bit of the world for where the myths seem to originate)

Cheers.

PS - and sorry for the extravagent nested parentheses in the paragraph above the link!

posted by D60844
In the meantime, I don't understand why you, Marduk, continue to be drawn to irrelevant bait in threads which ostensibly have nowt to do with this area,

boredom and because I'm English
not taking any is a national trait you know
its what gets us in trouble all the time like when we started a war with Hitler
and then Later when we started a war with Argentina
stuff like that

posted by D60844
On topic however, is there any compelling reason why the myth (whether in Sumerian or Hebrew retelling - both of which are possibly much later than the actual event than is the length of time between the two versions [I find the attention to the deviations between comparitively comtemporary accounts, give or take a millennium or two, a bit pointless considering the event could have taken place comparatively far earlier than both]) could not have arisen from some of the other possibilities laid out here:

yes
the main reason is that none of those examples affected the ancestors of the groups who later tell flood stories, some of those examples speak of floods that took place before Homo sapiens had evolved

when people think of flood stories they tend to think
"ok theres the one in the Bible, the one from mesopotamia, the one from greece etc"
they don't realise that the Mesopotamian texts don't just speak of one or two floods
they speak of nothing but floods
there are floods attributed to pretty much every Anuna god on record
Enlil did it
Iskur did it
Inanna did it
etc
for every reason
God was annoyed at his creation
God was attacking something and used water as a weapon
God accidentally did it
Gods enemy did it
etc
the fact that only one of these "Gilgamesh" is now talked about a lot is purely because it is the one that was copied out by later Hebrews scribes who knew a good story when they read one
the only two things that are consistent are that the flood affects mountains and that it is usually wet


it is quite clear that as Egypt has no flood story (except for the one involving sekhmet and the beer which is derived from a story starring Inanna) the only Culture responsible for disemminating flood stories around the ancient world was Mesopotamia

so ideally
tracing back the migratory path of the proto Sumerians until they cross a point that was affected by a great flood should yield results
now of course you are expecting me to say that despite all we know about mtdna migration patterns and the archaeogeology or central eurasia this attempt to find the flood cannot be reconciled with any event
well I'm not going to say that
fact of the matter is that the Sumerian ancient migration route crosses an area that was officially affected by the largest flood ever to affect mankind during the holocene
but you'd be surprised at how many people aren't interested in this basic truth
as I am surprised at how many people haven't even heard of this event
mainly because they've made up their minds already
or had them made up for them by the local priest

if you like
you could look at the table on page 9 of this pdf article here
pubs.usgs.gov...
but i'll be buggered if I'm going to post anything about this very real event which occured around 9500bce because every time I do post the truth about biblical fairy tales I get personally attacked by religious zealots and no one sticks up for me at all
not that I'm bothered
but you don't get anything for free in this life do you

because every time I do post the truth about biblical fairy tales I get personally attacked by religious zealots and no one sticks up for me at all

Why not just ignore religious zealots? By definition they will convince themselves that black is white, and only the ignorant or simple minded will accept their 'truth', so you're not going to educate them either.

Boredom is no excuse for attempting to respond to farcical witterings of a hare-brained troll. Even playing I Spy with a goldfish would be a better use of your time, and would be far more British, especially if you play in shorts and suspenders. And polish your shoes first.

Going back to the beginning or rather in-between it - I have looked at this, not in an overly scientific way but all the same I have given it a lot of thought and I came to exactly the same conclusion as Uberarchanist. The water level rose by 500 feet at the end of the last ice-age and if you look at the effect that has on the various regions it makes sense.

I'm completely secular, but I have recently been reading the Bible for a number of reasons, and really it is fascinating, especially when compared to our pre-history archaeology and anthropology. There are definately parallels. I have found it quite the revelation.

Before Iraq was invaded, archaeologist were working on what they thought was the ancient city of Uruk. They had found evidence of not only flooding but canal systems, this would indicate that the high water level occurred over an extended period. What else could have been discovered will now probably never be known as US forces are reputedly destroying ancient sites - they have already knocked the Gate of Ishtar to nothing....though not intentionally of course.

Originally posted by Marduk
so ideally
tracing back the migratory path of the proto Sumerians until they cross a point that was affected by a great flood should yield results
...
fact of the matter is that the Sumerian ancient migration route crosses an area that was officially affected by the largest flood ever to affect mankind during the holocene
...
if you like
you could look at the table on page 9 of this pdf article here
pubs.usgs.gov...
but i'll be buggered if I'm going to post anything about this very real event which occured around 9500bce
...

OK. You mean Altai. That pdf is misleading as it describes it as late Pleistocene (very late in fact) as opposed to you as Holocene. Not that it makes much difference. The same general time anyhoo. c.10,000 BC.

But. Ummm. How do you know the migration route and timings of the proto-Sumerians prior to arriving in Mesopotamia? Some info a quick search throws up is the Wikipedia article. This says the origin of Sumer is unknown, although the implication is of a migration from the north of modern Iraq (eg. Samarra, mountains in NW Iran, the Caspian littoral or modern Armenia) to sourthern Iraq. Some other sites suggest an ultimate origin somewhere round the Caspian, or even modern Pakistan. But this is still the period 8000-6000BC, not as early as the Altai floods.

Incidentally, if you have access to it, this article has some interesting things to say about the existence of a Irano-Semitic culture in Mesopotamia before the arrival of the Sumerian culture: 'The Sumerian Problem', The History Teacher (Vol. 5/2, 1972) (Jonathan R. Ziskind). But that is 30 years old now.

That aside, this article claims they came from India, and derive from a common ancestor of Austric languages, which then migrated both SE (to SE Asia and Australisia) and W (to Mesopotamia). A shame the journal referenced "Language Forum" [mispelled as "Language Form"] appears to be virtually unknown in any academic establishment library I have searched through . India would however put them safely clear of the Altai flooding.

I find it hard to accept that the civilisation existed in a meaningful sense (in migration) way back at the Altai floodings, and in just the right place. They would have to be actually in the Altai flood basin, where I have not heard postulated a culture existed. A pretty darn cold and nasty place at the end of the ice age too. While not impossible, it would require more evidence for me to back it up than mere possibility. Elsewhere, the flood may have lef to local river flooding, but nothing necessarily cataclysmic.

Or do I need educating?

Best wishes.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
They had found evidence of not only flooding but canal systems, this would indicate that the high water level occurred over an extended period.

This has been long known. The only way the civilisation existed was to be able to manage the annual flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Southern Iraq is dry, very dry, in the dry season. No use for farming. You need to build canals, channels and reservoirs in order to make full use of the annual floods, to irrigate land, to prevent inundation of settlements and cities. Canal systems don't represent a response to one long flood but the normal management of the normal annual flood.

Cheers.

Originally posted by Marduk

the fact that only one of these "Gilgamesh" is now talked about a lot is purely because it is the one that was copied out by later Hebrews scribes who knew a good story when they read one
the only two things that are consistent are that the flood affects mountains and that it is usually wet


it is quite clear that as Egypt has no flood story (except for the one involving sekhmet and the beer which is derived from a story starring Inanna) the only Culture responsible for disemminating flood stories around the ancient world was Mesopotamia

Like taking candy from a baby.

So Egypt had no flood stories..........and yet Moses who wrote the first books of the Bible was an Egyptian Hebrew who never entered the land of Canaan.

Your BS is shot down from both ends..........as usual.........wrong AGAIN.





[edit on 17-4-2007 by Sun Matrix]

Although there is evidence for a great floods, any probably many throughout the world. I mean just looks at the tsunami in SE Asia, or Hurricane Katrina, both caused great floods, which could understandbly in an early time lead to flood myths. Although the notion that the whole world as we know being flooded is quite ludacris. Althoug i cannot remembers all the facts, one of the greatest arguements of a full world flood, is that there isnt enough water on earth for such a thing to happen. But local flood that covered their "world" very probably happened

Originally posted by Marduk
so the phrase canaanite proto hebrew means - the canaanites who later became hebrews, its just an easier way of saying it

It's to the point of being ridiculous now. How can someone that thinks they are a genius be wrong everytime? How many times need I prove you wrong before you pull your head out and wake up.

THE HEBREWS DID NOT COME FROM THE CANAANITES.
Abram or Abraham as he became, came from Ur of the Chaldeas.

www.biblicalstudies.org.uk...

Sooner or later I'm hoping it will sink in that you are clueless...........there is a God whether you think so or not. Just go with the percentages.....I have proven you wrong on every post.........the law of averages say that you are wrong about God.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
...you are wrong about God.

May I be wrong about God too? Pretty Please?

While looking up a crater I saw on google earth, ran across a relevant link for this discussion and thought I share

www.earth2class.org...

Mostly it's about a comet impact in the Indian ocean in 2800ish BC and the resulting tsunamis, land disruptions.

Anyways a few of these over the history of mankind would be remembered in tales and legend no doubt. Two or more could happen thousands of years apart in totally different areas of the world leading to multiple flood origin myths.

Originally posted by d60944

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
They had found evidence of not only flooding but canal systems, this would indicate that the high water level occurred over an extended period.

This has been long known. The only way the civilisation existed was to be able to manage the annual flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Southern Iraq is dry, very dry, in the dry season. No use for farming. You need to build canals, channels and reservoirs in order to make full use of the annual floods, to irrigate land, to prevent inundation of settlements and cities. Canal systems don't represent a response to one long flood but the normal management of the normal annual flood.

Cheers.

I've only just started reading about this region so have huge gaps in knowledge - never thought about river movements - just becuase the river is a way away now doesn't mean it was always so. Thanks for your pointers. Irrigation of course - duh! I suppose similar to the Nile situation where flooding equals fertility - annual fertility also explains the initial reverence towards women and their subsequent demotion when the annual flooding ceases or crops fail etc.

I'm still inclined to beleive that the high waters of the ice age correlate to the biblical flooding - or much more likely the stories of it passed on verbally generation to generation. It could also help explain evolutionary bottlenecks, populations seperated and isolated by flooding - but then that all depends on whether there is a multi-location of the emergence of humanity or a single.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
Like taking candy from a baby.

So Egypt had no flood stories..........and yet Moses who wrote the first books of the Bible was an Egyptian Hebrew who never entered the land of Canaan.

Your BS is shot down from both ends..........as usual.........wrong AGAIN.

[edit on 17-4-2007 by Sun Matrix]

I fail to see where any "BS" is being shot at, much less shot down, in your post, Sun Matrix.

There are no Egyptian deluge myths. None. Nada. Zip and sometimes zilch. The closest you get is Ra getting peeved at the unification of the two kingdoms. When the kingdoms are united, Ra was no longer respected by the people of Lower Egypt. So he sent out Sekhmet to kill them all, in the form of a lioness. She grew fond of the taste of blood, and could not be stopped, until Ra took pity on humanity and made a sea of blood-colored beer (yum!) that Sekhmet drank up, and became docile and loving.

This is not a "flood story".

As for Moses, well, sadly for the bible scholar, there is no trace of the Egyptians holding the Israelites as slaves. No slaves means no birth restrictions means no Moses in a red basket means no adoption by the wife of the Pharaoh, means no Moses, Prince of Egypt. There's also no record at all of the plagues, if you want to follow. Call me a nutbar if you want, but I think that if fire, locusts, frogs and lice all rained down on Egypt in the same week that all water turned into blood and the firstborn of all men and beasts died, some Egyptian dude would have recorded it.

Besides, if Moses existed as a historical figure, he was an adopted Israelite who converted to Israelite theology and culture. If he believed in an Israelite flood story, then that still doesn't make it an Egyptian story, any more than the presence of churches in Australia makes Jesus into an Aboriginal legend.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
any more than the presence of churches in Australia makes Jesus into an Aboriginal legend.

Yeah in Papua New Guinea they changed the goat sheep cattle to PIG in the bible.
That is Christianity.

The Walking Fox,

The Legend of Re and Hathor is an egyptian flood story.
www.africawithin.com...

[edit on 18-4-2007 by undo]