Freethought & Rationalism Archive

outhouse · 05-02-2012, 09:49 PM

This forum is heavy into Hjesus

Not enough of these flood myth legend debates here.

100% myth? or a historical core?

Im betting no one can reasonably dispute that Noahs legend originates in Mesopotamia.

Im betting no one can reasonably dispute that Mesopotamian's migrated to Israel after 1200 BC bringing these earlier legends with them.

Im betting no one can dispute the fact there are multiple flood legends originating from Mesopotamia, the exact same place Noah is said to originate from.

The oldest of these flood legends is a river flood where a man goes down the Euphrates on a barge loaded with livestock and good's where he lands next to a hill and burns a animal sacrifice.

heres the kicker

There was a real man Ziusudra mentioned on the kings list, this is the same man in the legend

The flood is real. The Euphrates flooded in 2900 BC after a 6 day thunderstorm on a already swollen river. this flood devistated the flat land surrounding the river.

no flood legends exist in the area previous to the attested flood, and many afterwards.

Noahs flood solved.

Toto · 05-02-2012, 10:07 PM

Repeated from the other thread:

This appears to be outhouse's source:

http://www.flood-myth.com/

Noah's Ark and the Ziusudra Epic: Sumerian Origins of the Flood Myth (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amazon reviewer Steve Wiggins

I read Best's book while I was a full-time professor of Bible some years back. Not a stickler for dull academic work, I welcome the creative voices of non-specialists into the sometimes dull world of academic discussion. Nevertheless, Best's hypothesis seeking to ground the Bible's flood myth to a historical episode was fraught with difficulty from the start. To begin with, the field he attempts to tap for support -- Sumerology -- is a highly complex field. I hold a doctorate in Ancient Near Eastern religions, and I seldom attempt to tackle the complexities of Sumerian tablets. A fair deal more caution would have been warranted in Best's case. A second major difficulty with his treatment is the problem of historicity. The story of Noah is clearly a myth, as is amply demonstrated by the Near Eastern material that Best himself utilizes. Attempting to force myths into an historical mold does damage to both history and myth. The creation of a fictionalized Ziusudra was inventive, but not reliable. The book deserves credit for creativity, but in the balance of credibility it is weighed in the scales and is found severely wanting.

Toto · 05-02-2012, 10:13 PM

Ziusudra

has a cite to Best's book:

R. M. Best, Noah's Ark and the Ziusudra Epic, Eisenbrauns, 1999, ISBN 0-9667840-1-4.

Except he was not published by Eisenbraun - the book was published by Enlil Press.

:facepalm:

outhouse · 05-03-2012, 08:57 AM

Ah yes. I do like that top link.

never the less, we have a real flood, a real man, and a boat and loss of life. familiar??

funinspace · 05-03-2012, 09:03 AM

Please use small words, as my anus won't keep up.(I didn't bother adjusting to your somewhat newer version in this thread)..

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

The flood of the Euphrated in 2900 BC places the legend exactly where noah is said to originate and the flood time is almost dead nuts.

Now getting deeper, have your anus keep up please, i dont want to have to go through this again

Ziusudra is a verfied king from the kings list who reigned at the time of the attested flood [that means its a real flood in case you didnt know that word] Its also the oldest of the flood legends that describes the real river flood that devistated the cities along the river that had never experienced a 5000 year flood [or longer] the real flood was very bad leaving meters of silt in places.

So we have a real devistating flood, and we have a real man.

Now I could certainly be wrong, as I am certainly no expert in Sumerian archeology…but what we know of Ziusudra, is from hundreds of years after the attributed flood. It does seem reasonable that Ziusudra was a king of Shuruppak, and he could have been king around 2900BC. And Uruk and Kish did flood circa 2900BC. However, there were many major floods over the hundreds of years to pick from as well. But that appears to be about all we know, and about how accurate it might be. Of course there is no shortage of opinions (big surprise)…

The oldest myth copy we have:
http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingLi...tamiaSumer.htm

Quote:

The Sumerian myth of Ziusudra exists in a single copy, the fragmentary Eridu Genesis, which is datable by its script to the seventeenth century BC.
<snip>
The Sumerian king list also mentions a great flood, and excavations in Iraq have shown evidence of a flood which left deposits at Shuruppak, Uruk and Kish somewhere between 2900-2750 BC. The king of Kish, Etana, supposedly founded the first post-diluvian Sumerian dynasty: 'after the Flood, the kingship was handed down from Heaven a second time, this time to the city of Kish which became the seat of kingship.' The flood might have been no worse than that experienced in south-western England during summer 2007, but to a purely agrarian society it might have seemed like the end of the world.

The age of the Sumerian Kings lists:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...12/n3/sumerian

Quote:

The original King List was probably composed during the reign of Utu-hegal of Uruk (2119–2112 BC) and the antediluvian section added after the reign of Sin-magir (1827–1817 BC) of the Isin dynasty.

A good summary of the various possible floods the Sumerian myth could be built around (By a Baptist of all things, interesting guy I just stumbled upon):
http://pursiful.com/2008/01/can-the-...genesis-flood/

Quote:

Which Flood?
The first thing to note is that there is, in fact, an embarrassment of riches for anyone looking for evidence of a massive flood in ancient Mesopotamia. A page at Livius.org provides dates for four possible eras for the biblical flood:
1. The end of the Ubaid period (Ur, c. 4000-3600 BC)
2. The end of the Jemdet Nasr period (Uruk and Kish, c. 2900 BC)
3. The end of the Early Dynastic I (“EDI”) period (Shurrupak, c. 2800 BC)
4. The middle of the Early Dynastic III period (Kish, c. 2500 BC)
<snip>
Conclusion
It is, of course, possible to assert that “the” Flood was the one occurring at the end of the Jemdet Nasr period, or perhaps even the one at the end of EDI. If the list of cities in the Sumerian King List is taken at face value, this is almost certainly the case because only in the Jemdet Nasr period do we have conclusive evidence that all five antediluvian centers in fact existed.

But there are anomalies: other data from early Sumerian literature, if taken at face value, argue for a much earlier Flood as the inspiration for the legends surrounding the flood-hero Ziusudra (and, of course, Noah). If the details of Enmerkar’s reign are accepted, we must conclude that the Flood came before
• the invention of writing
• the architectural expansion of Uruk and its temple complex
• the introduction of the cult of Inanna at Uruk

All of these may be dated to the Late Uruk period (specifically, to Uruk stratum IV), which leaves us with only one flood candidate that accounts for all of the details surrounding the post-flood accomplishments of Gilgamesh and Enmerkar: the late Ubaid flood, immediately before the start of the Uruk period. This is so regardless of the relative size or impact of the Ubaid flood itself. Even if the scope of this flood was remarkably exaggerated as the story was retold over the centuries, it remains the one flood candidate that properly locates Gilgamesh and Enmerkar in their correct archeological horizons.

The Ubaid flood was responsible for the 11-foot deposit of silt at Ur discovered by Sir Leonard Woolley in 1929. It is also the candidate David Rohl favors, for the archeological reasons I have outlined, in Legend: The Genesis of Civilization. Even if one does not agree with Rohl’s chronological revision, his overall arguments in favor of the Ubaid flood are worth consideration.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Ziusudra is said to have went down the river on a barge loaded with goods and livestock only to land on a hill and burn a animal sacrifice. [sound familiar?] the mythology created surrounding this matches noah's flood in places word for word. As do many other flood myths in the levant and Mesopotamian regions. AND we know for a fact Mesopotamian's migrated to Israel bringing these legends with them in oral tradition. No scholar worth hi salt would ever doubt that.

Yeah, it does seem reasonable that there was some legend borrowing, along with a few other interesting story tidbits like the Nin-ti, as the lady of the rib/lady who makes live. Just as the later Akkadians and Babylonians borrowed.

funinspace · 05-03-2012, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

no flood legends exist in the area previous to the attested flood, and many afterwards.

Well, from what I understand of the development of Sumerian writing, it would be unlikely to find anything earlier, as literary style writing probably didn’t really emerge until sometime around 2600BC. So anything previous would have also been in the oral club, just as the Sumerian one probably existed in oral form for quite a while before it hit clay.

outhouse · 05-03-2012, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Now I could certainly be wrong, as I am certainly no expert in Sumerian archeology…but what we know of Ziusudra, is from hundreds of years after the attributed flood. It does seem reasonable that Ziusudra was a king of Shuruppak, and he could have been king around 2900BC. And Uruk and Kish did flood circa 2900BC. However, there were many major floods over the hundreds of years to pick from as well. But that appears to be about all we know, and about how accurate it might be. Of course there is no shortage of opinions (big surprise)…

Actually your spot on.

with one aspect to add.

the archeology done on this flood shows it to be the worst of any flood in the area since it happened.

that makes this a epic flood 4900 years ago.

Quote:

Well, from what I understand of the development of Sumerian writing, it would be unlikely to find anything earlier, as literary style writing probably didn’t really emerge until sometime around 2600BC. So anything previous would have also been in the oral club, just as the Sumerian one probably existed in oral form for quite a while before it hit clay.

Correct again.

All the flood legends in the area can be traced back to this real event

sotto voce · 05-03-2012, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Ah yes. I do like that top link.

never the less, we have a real flood, a real man, and a boat and loss of life. familiar??

There is not a boat, exactly. There is an ark or chest, without rudder, port-holes, oars or sails, pilot or crew. It is made of wood, like the sticks carried by Isaac on which a ram was sacrificed; like the doorpost covered in the blood of lambs in Egypt; like the cross of Jesus, the one called 'the Lamb of God' by John. The Ark is a place of atonement by a ransom. This is the relevant meaning of the Hebrew used in Genesis.

There was no flood, except in the foreknowledge of deity. In the biblical view, there will be a 'flood', by which all who are not 'in Christ' by faith in the atonement made by Christ's ransom, will perish.

funinspace · 05-03-2012, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Now I could certainly be wrong, as I am certainly no expert in Sumerian archeology…but what we know of Ziusudra, is from hundreds of years after the attributed flood. It does seem reasonable that Ziusudra was a king of Shuruppak, and he could have been king around 2900BC. And Uruk and Kish did flood circa 2900BC. However, there were many major floods over the hundreds of years to pick from as well. But that appears to be about all we know, and about how accurate it might be. Of course there is no shortage of opinions (big surprise)…

Actually your spot on.

with one aspect to add.

the archeology done on this flood shows it to be the worst of any flood in the area since it happened.

that makes this a epic flood 4900 years ago.

However, you are placing certainty on this particular flood when there were other older ones that were also severe. How old the oral tradition was, is unknown, and we don't know if or how many times the big storm tale grew.

Quote:

Well, from what I understand of the development of Sumerian writing, it would be unlikely to find anything earlier, as literary style writing probably didn’t really emerge until sometime around 2600BC. So anything previous would have also been in the oral club, just as the Sumerian one probably existed in oral form for quite a while before it hit clay.

Correct again.

All the flood legends in the area can be traced back to this real event

I would posit that the legends can be trace back to several possible floods, as the links I provided argue. The Ubaid/Ur flood could have been just as bad or worse.

Quote:

The Euphrates flooded in 2900 BC after a 6 day thunderstorm on a already swollen river.

I think you are again reading to much certainty into the fable. The 6 day storm is only part of the fable, so it is no more real that the thousand year old kings, though it is at least reasonably possible to have been a week long storm front.

But I would still agree that the Noah Deluge tale grew, or was adapted, from the fables passed along from the ancient Sumerians. There probably are higher odds that a real Ziusudra existed, than a real Noah existed. But we can't even really know if he was around during the 2900BC flood.

Tom Sawyer · 05-03-2012, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

There is not a boat, exactly. There is an ark or chest, without rudder, port-holes, oars or sails, pilot or crew. It is made of wood, like the sticks carried by Isaac on which a ram was sacrificed; like the doorpost covered in the blood of lambs in Egypt; like the cross of Jesus, the one called 'the Lamb of God' by John. The Ark is a place of atonement by a ransom. This is the relevant meaning of the Hebrew used in Genesis.

There was no flood, except in the foreknowledge of deity. In the biblical view, there will be a 'flood', by which all who are not 'in Christ' by faith in the atonement made by Christ's ransom, will perish.

Well, that's convenient. If the historical accuracy of the Flood isn't bearing out with the evidence, just pretend that it's talking about future history instead of past history. This also solves the problem of how Noah gets all the animals on the Arc by his just taking DNA samples and cloning them instead of needing to house and feed them for a month.

05-02-2012, 09:49 PM	#1
outhouse Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Auburn ca Posts: 4,269	Noahs flood This forum is heavy into Hjesus Not enough of these flood myth legend debates here. 100% myth? or a historical core? Im betting no one can reasonably dispute that Noahs legend originates in Mesopotamia. Im betting no one can reasonably dispute that Mesopotamian's migrated to Israel after 1200 BC bringing these earlier legends with them. Im betting no one can dispute the fact there are multiple flood legends originating from Mesopotamia, the exact same place Noah is said to originate from. The oldest of these flood legends is a river flood where a man goes down the Euphrates on a barge loaded with livestock and good's where he lands next to a hill and burns a animal sacrifice. heres the kicker There was a real man Ziusudra mentioned on the kings list, this is the same man in the legend The flood is real. The Euphrates flooded in 2900 BC after a 6 day thunderstorm on a already swollen river. this flood devistated the flat land surrounding the river. no flood legends exist in the area previous to the attested flood, and many afterwards. Noahs flood solved.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-02-2012, 10:13 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Ziusudra has a cite to Best's book: R. M. Best, Noah's Ark and the Ziusudra Epic, Eisenbrauns, 1999, ISBN 0-9667840-1-4. Except he was not published by Eisenbraun - the book was published by Enlil Press. :facepalm:

05-03-2012, 08:57 AM	#4
outhouse Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Auburn ca Posts: 4,269	Ah yes. I do like that top link. never the less, we have a real flood, a real man, and a boat and loss of life. familiar??

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.