Sven

I know that there are parallels to other myths. So what?
Many parts of the stories are simply what one would expect from a myth. Other parts contradict each other. And there are flood stories and creation myths which don't agree at all with the biblical account.

The only reasonable conclusion is that those stories were probably all made up. Especially in the light of the evidence that humans are not special compared to other animals, and that something like a global flood never happened.

Chaupoline

Then apparently we disagree.

newtype_alpha

Then try this for a theory: (I emphasize "try") god or gods created the entire world and the entire human race in any number of ways from any number of sources. Adam and Eve were god's favorites because he made them himself. But they couldn't keep their hands off his second favorite tree so he booted them before they could get to his real favorite. They are fruitful and multiply and spread across parts of Mesopotamia.

Then in Genesis 6, we see something interesting: the "sons of God" taking human women and mating with them, producing "men of great renown" (depending on which version you're using) who cause great wars and destruction all over the world. There is some debate as to just who the "sons of God" actually were, but the two prevailing theories are they were the direct descendents of Adam, or they were fallen angels (the book of Enoch strongly suggests the latter). If the former were true, that would effectively mean that God's direct creation--namely Adam--and his descendents were indeed made in his image; perhaps demi-gods of great power? Either way, it matters little because the flood wiped out most of them, leaving only Noah and his family.

Noah, also, seems a little like a demigod in his own right since he somehow has the ability to decide the fate of an entire race of people (Canaan) over an otherwise trivial offense. It would also explain how Simeon and Levi single handedly anihilated ALL of the Hamorite men after Sechem raped their sister. Not to mention, the apparent ease by which twelve men somehow manage to plunder an entire city, take the women and children captive, and make off with the entire loot.

It might also explain why the Nephilim are still lurking about well after Noah's flood; they would of course be the mutant offspring of a human woman and a relatively pureblood "son of God."

See? Biblical mythology CAN be fun!

For starters, it's a very bad idea to say "there are parellels in myth" and leave out the obvious contradictions. Hebrew creation myth is virtually one of a kind; most other creation myths usually involve existence as being formed either from either a part of the gods or from something else that was already in existent before the gods did anything at all. (Although this might just be a language trick since an alternate translation of Genesis 1:1 is "in the beginning, when God began to create...")

As for the flood myths, you mention three with these elements and leave out countless others that disagree with at least one of the "common elements" you point out. (let alone the fact that most of these other religions are polytheistic, so the only reason humans survived is because one god trumped the plans of the others).

In the Greek myth there was no boat, the last two humans survived by climbing to the top of a mountain. The "new human race" was created after an oracle told them to throw a few stones, and then the stones grew and became people.

In most Mayan myths I've heard (there are several, it turns out) a certain flood was a punishment from the gods and was only appeased by a certai ritual human sacrifice

Most American Indian Myths contain no global flood.

Japanese myth contains no global flood.

Proxima Centauri

We're just fed up with being told, for example, that we should base our moral principles on the Bible. That book of mythology is outdated and has far too many moral absurdaties. :angry:

Chaupoline

The story of the Nephilim was one of the things in the Genesis that is usually overlooked. It is also the reason why I think that Noah and his family is chosen to live and everyone else had to die.

According to Enoch, the Grigori were instructed to look after all the people of the earth. They have also been referred to as the angelic Watchers. I always believed that this was where the story of the fallen angels and Lucifer came about. The angels were angry because of the special position that man was placed in the sight of God. So they taught mankind things that we were not intended to know about, such as how to make weapons, magic, and astrology. They also began to sleep with the women and created a angelic bloodline amoung mankind. They did this because it would put mankind in a lower status to them and they would have our praise instead of God. The bloodline spread over almost all of mankind. Noah and his family were chosen because they had no angelic ancestry. The story of the Grigori is paralleled by the Greeks with Prometheus and fire, among others. The Nephilim can be paralleled with any number of diffrent demi god myths. These are just a few of the American Indian flood myths. I haven't found a Japanese one yet but China has one.

Sven

Just think about it. You are in a world you have no clue about how it functions. Many "weird" things exist/happen around you:
Your existence. Storms. Rainbows. Floods.

The easiest thing to do it to invent a/some powerful being which pay(s) attention to all those things, in other words: god(s).

Given these belief in god(s), now think about how a myth about a flood should look like - especially one that seemed to be global, that is as far as you could see/go/think. What would we expect?

(1) Since it destroys everything and humans have a tendency to have a bad conscience, an obvious theme would be a punishment from god(s).

(2) Since (some) people survived this flood - which was sent by god(s) and thus was in principal irresistible - they must have had help from god(s).

(3) The most easiest way to escape a flood is -of course - a boat.

(4) Some people actually think a little bit longer about this and conclude that some animals also had to be taken on the boat to explain their survival

Thus we have a perfectly natural explanation for nearly every flood myth.

Now it's your turn: Why do we need the extra elements that a god indeed exist and a global flood indeed happened to explain those myths, although we also have a great explanation which doesn't need these elements? Ever heard about Occam?

Sven

Now all that's left is a reason why this global flood did not left a shred of evidence that it ever happened.

Chaupoline

Your explanation would make sense except this isn't just isolated to one part of the world. Some of these cultures don't even deal with major floods. The flood myths are not proof of the existance of god or gods, they are the proof of the existance of a global flood. The simplest answer would not be that every culture independently created a flood myth just to explain rainbows or storms. The simplest answer would be that either all flood myths initially came from one oral tradition that followed with the expanision of humanity or that there was a major flood that happened all over the world and every culture was affected by it and passed down the story through oral tradition.

Sven

:huh: Why?
Especially since these flood myths occur only (mainly?) in cultures who live in areas with occasional local floods.
Especially since there are cultures without flood myths, and these cultures live in areas where no floods happen (normally).
Especially since there's no shred of physical evidence for a global flood.

That's not what I said. Read my post again:
If I talk about a flood which seems to be global, I obviously meant that there was indeed a flood to explain - but one which was not (necessarily) global.

What? We have loads of local floods, and you need a single origin? This does not make sense at all. Especially in the light of the fact that those flood myths contradict each other heavily.

Nice little hypotheses. There are two "little" problems:
(1) There are many cultures without flood myths. See above.
(2) There's no shred of physical evidence for a global flood. See above. And this evidence should be there - geologist can identify floods easily in old strata.

Chaupoline

The Apaches had a global flood myth and they live in a desert. The only physical evidence that supports a global flood contradicts Charles Lyell's theory of Uniformitarianism. I do not know enough about geology to really debunk either side though. Here are some sites that go into more detail about this theory. I do not know if I believe them though.

http://www.globalflood.org/earthage
http://www.kjvbible.org/greenland_ice_sheet.html
http://www.icr.org/pubs/btg-b/btg-003b.htm

I just believe that something happened and that is why a global flood story would pop up in such frequency instead of a hurricaine story, or a volcano story, or any other natural disaster story.