Jun Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...html?source=rss Could the "Bible's" great flood be simply the retelling of this or a similar earlier event? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neverclear5 Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Whats the betting the christian camp back all the scientific evidense.......except the date! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Could the "Bible's" great flood be simply the retelling of this or a similar earlier event?Wrong time frame. YECs claim the Earth is, at the most, 6000 years old. This flood was 2000 years before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astreja Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Sounds plausible to me. (Possibly because I just had a tsunami whack the city of Ur in this year's NaNoWriMo novel...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neverclear5 Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Could the "Bible's" great flood be simply the retelling of this or a similar earlier event?Wrong time frame. YECs claim the Earth is, at the most, 6000 years old. This flood was 2000 years before that. I think his point was that it was a retalling of an older event which made its way into the bible as an enhanced myth with an adjusted date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jun Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 Could the "Bible's" great flood be simply the retelling of this or a similar earlier event?Wrong time frame. YECs claim the Earth is, at the most, 6000 years old. This flood was 2000 years before that. I think his point was that it was a retalling of an older event which made its way into the bible as an enhanced myth with an adjusted date. Yep, that's what I was thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 I think his point was that it was a retalling of an older event which made its way into the bible as an enhanced myth with an adjusted date.The story came from an area that wasn't involved in that tsunami. I like the hypothesis that the story came from a larger than normal flood, a "century flood", in the Tigrus/Euprhates river valley. The Epic of Gilgamesh is the first place the flood story shows up. That would put the most likely origin of the story in Baghdad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neverclear5 Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 The story came from an area that wasn't involved in that tsunami. I like the hypothesis that the story came from a larger than normal flood, a "century flood", in the Tigrus/Euprhates river valley. The Epic of Gilgamesh is the first place the flood story shows up. That would put the most likely origin of the story in Baghdad. okay fine, but It may have been an amalgamation of various events. Proving specific events around the time is a bit dodgy to say the least............ which is one reason why the bibles claims arn't just laughed at by everyone else...........except me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 okay fine, but It may have been an amalgamation of various events. Proving specific events around the time is a bit dodgy to say the least............ which is one reason why the bibles claims arn't just laughed at by everyone else...........except meWhich is why I don't think the claim the story was based on a tsunami a long ways away from the origin of the story makes much sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Paineful Truth Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 If I may, I have a quickly developed theory that the flood stories could be based on this event that I'd like to float here. (The 6000 years or whatever, was based on some nutjob Bishop Usher's WAG using all kinds of assumptions, the worst of which was that the Bible is the revealed word of God.) It is likely to suppose that Etna, prior to the cataclysmic collapse, was especially active, throwing ash and whatnot into the atmosphere, generating ominous clouds and possibly widespread rain and flooding. Throw in the final big eruption with more ash and monster tsunami, and everywhere in the region, even as far away as the sparsely inhabited at the time Armenia and Mt. Ararat, and including all of the fertile crescent which was more verdant back then, could well have experienced vast flooding. Add 8000 years to this seemingly universal calamity and voilà, history is morphed into mythology. Even today, people are warned about and experience natural disasters that they understand logically, but still think the world's coming to an end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts