"The Whole Silly Flood Story"

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by Becoming
People tend to think in modern terms when looking at the flood story.

When modern people say global they know that the world is a lot bigger then a few hundred miles. People back in the biblical period had no concept that the world is as big as it is. A giant flood for them would be global for them. They had no concept of North or South America, Australia and just about 90 percent of the rest of the world.

A truly global flood is unlikely in todays world. In biblical times a global flood would encompass a far less amount of land then we would think and to them it would be entirely possible.

And BINGO, we have a winner!!!
A global flood is beyond ridiculous and coming up with crazy, not backed-up, arguments to "make the global flood story fit" is kind of sad given that we live in the 21st century and can dismiss all those claims scientifically.

How brainwashed do you have to be to completely ignore evidence and facts just to protect your fantasyland picture of the world???

Well then how can we account for the worldwide distibution of "the flood" story. I would agree with you but the tales share to much of the same info to believe they were all tales of local floods.

reply to post by Logarock


Well...how is it surprising that people talk about floods when local floods happen all the time?? The Egyptians wrote about floods in Egypt...the Aztecs did the same and wrote about their floods.

reply to post by MrXYZ


I have restricted my collection to floods said to have reached the tops of mountains with great death and destruction and gods are said to be involved, just for that reason.

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

I have restricted my collection to floods said to have reached the tops of mountains with great death and destruction and gods are said to be involved, just for that reason.

And today we have people writing Angelina's leaving Brad just because some paparazzi saw them having a small argument in the road. People love to exaggerate, today...and hundreds/thousands of years probably too judging from a lot of those stories

reply to post by MrXYZ


Oh I see what going on here anything anywhere that looks like it might have something in common with the bible version has just got to be crap. Well you better find another issue becouse this is the prime area where the bible does relate to the same historical events recorded by cultures worldwide. And if you are ever going to study this topic you will have to be inclusive here even if you believe it all to be a big story. Why? Well for one even if it is a big story it shows contact, a mutual point in time and this raises other questions.

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Oh I see what going on here anything anywhere that looks like it might have something in common with the bible version has just got to be crap. Well you better find another issue becouse this is the prime area where the bible does relate to the same historical events recorded by cultures worldwide. And if you are ever going to study this topic you will have to be inclusive here even if you believe it all to be a big story. Why? Well for one even if it is a big story it shows contact, a mutual point in time and this raises other questions.

The bible makes no claims regarding cultures worldwide. Aztecs...not mentioned. Mayans...not mentioned. Native Americans...not mentioned. Aborigines...not mentioned. Asians...not mentioned.

Of course the bible contains some accurate descriptions of historic events...but that does NOT make them all true. We know some of them are true because we have CREDIBLE EVIDENCE other than the bible to back up the claims. If you suddenly start accepting things without requiring backup, you have to go full-out and accept everything...including talking snakes, the advice to beat slaves only hard enough so they don't die right away as this would be a sin, rape of "enemies" is fine, humans popped up in their present form even if we know that's not what happened, and a ton of other hogwash. No rational/logical person could ever do such a thing if he's honest with himself.

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Oh I see what going on here anything anywhere that looks like it might have something in common with the bible version has just got to be crap. Well you better find another issue becouse this is the prime area where the bible does relate to the same historical events recorded by cultures worldwide. And if you are ever going to study this topic you will have to be inclusive here even if you believe it all to be a big story. Why? Well for one even if it is a big story it shows contact, a mutual point in time and this raises other questions.

The bible makes no claims regarding cultures worldwide. Aztecs...not mentioned. Mayans...not mentioned. Native Americans...not mentioned. Aborigines...not mentioned. Asians...not mentioned.

We are talking about cultures that spoke of a flood not each other. Otherwise you are just talking like a nut.

reply to post by Logarock


Trouble is, pretty much all of those flood stories originate after contact with Christianity or Islam. There's also a large number of "flood stories" that have no resemblance to the biblical flood story, aside from there being lots of water.

For instance, the Twa pygmy "flood myth" involves some forest god cutting into a tree. The tree cracks open and floodwaters rush out all over the earth - when they recede, the world is populated by all the animals. The Twa are a forest-dwelling people; to them, the tree is the mother of all things. The story thus is an allegory for birth - the opening of the tree is the dialation of the birth canal, the flood waters are allegory for the breaking of water during labor, and the arrival of all the animals in the world through the tree's water is obviously symbolic of birth.

The only instances that are not either due to contact with Abrahamic religions or wholly unrelated myths, are actually those stories that the biblical flood is derived from - Sumerian myths, and a dash of Egyptian (the "vengeful god" thing comes from Egypt)

It's sort of like saying that because Bollywood often repackages old Hollywood films, that those films' stories MUST be true, because two different cultures tell 'em.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by Logarock

 

Trouble is, pretty much all of those flood stories originate after contact with Christianity or Islam. There's also a large number of "flood stories" that have no resemblance to the biblical flood story, aside from there being lots of water.

"those" flood stories? You are right on the second part here the primary being that many many flood stories say they were able to get to high ground and the bible account says the hills were covered. But we do have flood stories....and the originated after contact with Christianity idea is really not very solid. The truth is folks were at first shocked at flood stories because they thought that the bible was the only account.

The only instances that are not either due to contact with Abrahamic religions or wholly unrelated myths, are actually those stories that the biblical flood is derived from - Sumerian myths, and a dash of Egyptian (the "vengeful god" thing comes from Egypt)

No not really. If anything it was Sumerians considering that the Hebrews early family lived in Ur. Not a real reach there. They were Sumerians by citizenship. What is interesting is that being from Ur thier account is diffrent on some key points that point to two schools of thought rather than a divergence form an original...on the part of the Hebrews anyway. I suspect that if the Sumerian record had never been found the bible account would be called a total fabrication by many. As it is then their prejudice is not abel to show its full measure without appering unsympathetic to the other Sumerian version and that culture. I mean heck there isnt a good college in the west that dosent fully indulge itself in the greek myths. And now days the common mantra is contact with Abrahamic religions to beat down the flood story and even by people that otherwise protest if any other sort of similarities are said to be proof of early contact.

It's sort of like saying that because Bollywood often repackages old Hollywood films, that those films' stories MUST be true, because two different cultures tell 'em.

ok I have not said they were true anywhere....and no this is not a very good analogy of what we are talking about. First you would have to establish that these other cultures were really telling a repackaged version of the original or their original version of the event. Most of the scattered flood stories take after the Sumerian version not the Hebrew version.

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Oh I see what going on here anything anywhere that looks like it might have something in common with the bible version has just got to be crap. Well you better find another issue becouse this is the prime area where the bible does relate to the same historical events recorded by cultures worldwide. And if you are ever going to study this topic you will have to be inclusive here even if you believe it all to be a big story. Why? Well for one even if it is a big story it shows contact, a mutual point in time and this raises other questions.

The bible makes no claims regarding cultures worldwide. Aztecs...not mentioned. Mayans...not mentioned. Native Americans...not mentioned. Aborigines...not mentioned. Asians...not mentioned.

We are talking about cultures that spoke of a flood not each other. Otherwise you are just talking like a nut.

They spoke about floods...plural...not one giant global flood!!

reply to post by MrXYZ



You dont even know what your are talking about.

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

You dont even know what your are talking about.

Pot meets kettle...you're invited to tell me where I'm wrong. There's no way all those cultures on earth were all talking about the same flood...or even incidents happening at the same time!!

reply to post by MrXYZ



Oh sure they could have been talking about the same flood.

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Oh sure they could have been talking about the same flood.

No, that would require all those different cultures to mention that flood happening at the same time...and historic texts don't suggest they did.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by Logarock

 

Well...how is it surprising that people talk about floods when local floods happen all the time?? The Egyptians wrote about floods in Egypt...the Aztecs did the same and wrote about their floods.

Actually, there is no "great flood" myth in Egypt. There's a story they flooded some of the fields to the height of a man's knee with red-dyed beer to calm down Hathor. They recorded the height of the (real) floods every year that covered some of the farmland around the river.

but no Great Flood.

Many other cultures have no great flood (or floods) legends.

reply to post by Byrd


And (if the flood story in the Bible is true) this is surprising, considering the Egyptian's cultural, trade, and geographic proximity to the ancient Hebrews is considerable.



I'd like to actually see some of these non-Biblical flood myths, possibly with some background on their origin (time period developed, etc).

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Byrd

 

 

I'd like to actually see some of these non-Biblical flood myths, possibly with some background on their origin (time period developed, etc).

We are just not going to get that kind of time line info from the more primitive cultures. But we can get and do get info that is consistant amoung those cultures in say Indonesia, Borneo, Micronnesia,Australia, Polynesia.

Now if you happen to have a copy of "Forests Of Kings" about Palenque (Shell and Fash). They do a reading on the inside of the temple there, has dates, say their line escaped after the last great destruction. I will dig it up around here its been years. If you compare this section of temple reading with other maya works they are certainly talking about the last destruction of the earth, which was by flood. And like I said there is amazingly a date.

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by Logarock

 

Well...how is it surprising that people talk about floods when local floods happen all the time?? The Egyptians wrote about floods in Egypt...the Aztecs did the same and wrote about their floods.

Actually, there is no "great flood" myth in Egypt. There's a story they flooded some of the fields to the height of a man's knee with red-dyed beer to calm down Hathor. They recorded the height of the (real) floods every year that covered some of the farmland around the river.

but no Great Flood.

Many other cultures have no great flood (or floods) legends.

Thier flood myth is tied up in "Nun" and the several cosmogony, the Hereopolitan Ogdoad ect.

They saw the Nile and its movements in terms of the waters of Nun from where the earth rose out and may someday retake the earth. The big deal with the nile wasnt just a local or on hand sort of thing. They bulit temples near the waters to represent The Mountain that rose up out of the watery waste of Nun or was the saver of man durring the inundation and saw the yearly rise of the Nile as a symbol for this larger idea.

Originally posted by Logarock
Thier flood myth is tied up in "Nun" and the several cosmogony, the Hereopolitan Ogdoad ect.

Nun was the god of the "waters of the abyss" from which the Earth arose. But that's not a flood:
en.wikipedia.org...

They saw the Nile and its movements in terms of the waters of Nun from where the earth rose out and may someday retake the earth.

Can you cite a source for this statement? Because it doesn't match with any of the material I've read.
www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk...

The big deal with the nile wasnt just a local or on hand sort of thing. They bulit temples near the waters to represent The Mountain that rose up out of the watery waste of Nun or was the saver of man durring the inundation and saw the yearly rise of the Nile as a symbol for this larger idea.

I find that hard to believe, given that there are no temples to Nun/Nu anywhere in Egypt. Nor did the mountain (actually, it's a mound (hill) and it's called the "ben ben" ) rise up out of the Nile to save humans... the mound appeared and then (depending on which era you're looking at) Atum the self-created god appeared. He creates other gods.
www.ancientegypt.co.uk...

The god of the Nile (depending on where and when in time you are looking) was Hapi:
www.egyptianmyths.net...

www.touregypt.net...

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Byrd

 

And (if the flood story in the Bible is true) this is surprising, considering the Egyptian's cultural, trade, and geographic proximity to the ancient Hebrews is considerable.

In addition to Egypt, regular trade went on throughout the Middle East an on into India. Phoenecians, Minoans, etc. The Hindu one is "sorta" close to the Biblical one:
en.wikipedia.org...

Talkorigins.org has a lot of the tales and you can do a little hunting for the cultural background. Frequently they're "and that's how we got oceans" type stories, as with the Norse and the story of Marduk:
www.talkorigins.org...

I think the Turkish one about Alexander the Great is pretty amusing.
www.talkorigins.org...