The bible is not what it claims to be, instead its a biblography, a compilation of various stories and typologies from accross the globe, the contents of which have been re-packaged, sexed-up or outrightly fabricated. i.e plagerization of Greek mythology

Now I proceed to the culmination of my arguments about which I noted that I will adduce the historical perspective as well as the scientific investigations
--- from archaeology, geology, and oceanography --- that have been launched, over the years, into the story of Noah Flood.


All historical and scientific inquiries launched into investigating the historicity of the story of Noah Flood begin (for obvious reasons) with an examination of the parallel Flood myths.

This has been seen already in my allusion to Professor Dorothy B. Vitaliano's "Legends of the Earth" as well as to Professor François Lenormant's "The Beginnings of History".

I like to also follow this scholarly path by reiterating, reinforcing, and elaborating on my earlier conclusions from the mythology argument, thereby putting the story of Noah Flood in an appropriate perspective.


The two alternative logical hypotheses which result (from the fact that the 21st century BCE clay tablet of the Utnapishtim Flood myth is strikingly parallel thematically to the 9th century BCE Yahvist source document of the Biblical story of Noah Flood ) are as follows:

(i) The Biblical story of Noah Flood simply copied from the 21st century BCE Flood myth of Utnapishtim.

(ii) The Biblical story of Noah Flood relates to a real historical event that predates even the Utnapishtim Flood myth, and to which the Utnapishtim Flood myth itself also relates.

I have demonstrated with valid ratiocination that the second hypothesis proves to have a greater explanatory scope and explanatory power than the first --- the first which, in fact, breaks down in the course of a careful and rigorous analysis and scrutiny.

The chief reason being that the Biblical materials (even as we have it today) makes it quite clear that its story of Noah dates back to the 22nd century BCE (if not centuries earlier).

And the second primary reason being that the first hypothesis fails to provide a realistic and practical answer to the question (which it begs) of where the Utnapishtim Flood myth itself came from --- a question which the second hypothesis answers very beautifully without a hitch.


Having demonstrated the validity of the second hypothesis over and above the first, it is important then that I make the following observation:

The Biblical account of the story of Noah Flood (at least as it is seen in the Biblical materials with us today) portrays the Flood as a universal cataclysm which covered all of the Earth's surface.


Also, all the known Flood myths from the different cultures and civilzations of the ancient world (such as: the Sumerian, the Akkadian, the Chinese, the Indian, the Tibetan, the Aztec, the Incan, the Mayan, the Ifè and the Bini, among countless others) had presented the same imagery.


However, historical and scientific evidence establish, very clearly and loudly, that it is absurd to even conceive the idea that a universal deluge or cataclysm (in the 22nd century BCE or at anytime in the past) had once destroyed virtually all human life on the Earth's surface.

In light of the foregoing historical and scientific fact, I therefore submit that:

If the "real historical event" of the second hypothesis is indeed real (which it most certainly logically is), then it could not have been a universal cataclysm, but rather a local deluge in some region of the ancient world.

In light of the adduced historical and scientific fact, the valid hypothesis then becomes modified into:

H_o: The Biblical story of Noah Flood came from a real pre-21st century BCE local deluge from which the 21st century BCE Utnapishtim Flood myth also came .

The implication, of the foregoing modified form of the valid hypothesis, on the Biblical description of the story of Noah Flood as a universal cataclysm, is that:

The Biblical account of a universal Noah Flood (with all its fanciful and unrealistic details) is the result of an over the centuries gradual evolution --- from the real ancient local deluge --- into the exaggerated, distorted, and unrealistic story that it has become today as contained in the Judeo-Christian scriptures.


In a similar way, the 21st century BCE Flood myth of Utnapishtim also must have naturally or strategically evolved over the years (or perhaps centuries) --- from the same real ancient local deluge --- into the exaggerated universal cataclysm and mythical fantacy it became in the 21st century BCE.


Having established the modified form of the valid hypothesis, and how it has inspired a more realistic and practical perspective of the Biblical account of the story of Noah; I turn now to the scientific investigations that have been launched into the Noah Flood story.


One of the latest (if not the latest) 21st century investigation launched into the story of Noah Flood was done by the University of Washington professor of Earth and Space Sciences, David R. Montgomery.

The result of David Montgomery's award winning and groundbreaking research of a number of painstaking years is published in his 2012 book viz. "The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood"

Like other scientists in modern times, his conclusion is unmistakably that the story of Noah Flood is an ancient historical event in the Middle East.

I should now point out here very quickly, before going into details, that many lay persons (who for strange reasons cling to the idea that the Noah Flood never happened) also strangely claim that David Montgomery agrees with them.

One of such persons whom I have once engaged insisted passionately that David Montgomery agrees with him, until it became clear to him (after I pointed it out in black and white) that David Montgomery doesn't.

To be fair, their confusion stems obviously from the fact that David Montgomery's submission (just as every other scientific submission on the subject) dismisses the idea of a universal flood (at some point in human history) as false and absurd.

Like other scientists who had undertaken a similar task before him, David Montgomery begins his investigation with a consideration of the parallel Flood myths.

In the "American Scientist", David Schoonmaker undertook a review of David R. Montgomery's "The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood" wherein he cited David Montgomery in the following words:

"Geomorphologist David R. Montgomery casts a critical yet sympathetic eye on flood myths, finding substance for them in Tibet, the Philippines and elsewhere, while systematically disassembling the universality of Noah’s Flood.”

In other words, David Montgomery did not simply dismiss the hundreds of ancient Flood myths, and brush them aside as worthless like the average lay person is tempted to want to do.

He knew better. He knew that (given how ubiquitous and deeply rooted the parallel Flood myths are in the world's ancient cultures) they must be pointers to an actual well-known ancient historical event. Hence, he came to find "substance for them in Tibet, the Philippines and elsewhere”.


The excessive preponderance of Flood myths (which are parallel to the 'Noah account') accross the cultures of the ancient world and their deep rootedness in those cultures, is actually not without any significance.


In fact, it is a clear indication of attempt by each of those ancient cultures and civilizations (viz. the Sumerian, the Akkadian, the Chinese, the Indian, the Tibetan, the Aztec, the Incan, the Mayan, the Ifè, the Bini, and so on) to identify with, claim, or monopolize a well-known ancient local historical event, by giving the event unique embellishments, colorations, modifications, distortions, and exaggerations which were influenced by the peculiar conditions of their native land, such as language, religion, climate, etc.


Furthermore, it becomes also clear from the same review in the "American Scientist" that what David Montgomery (like others) have dismissed is the popular idea of the "universality" of Noah Flood.

And it would be seen shortly that he indeed (like others) affirms the historicity of the Noah Flood, but as a local event in a specific region of the ancient world.

In his "The Rocks Don't Lie", David Montogomery makes an important submission in some of the clearest and most emphatic terms.

He notes that although he HAD seen the story of Noah Flood as a fairy tale, he HAS now come to see it as ROOTED IN TRUTH.

In other words, there is a true historical event to which the story relates. The following are his precise words:


“Like most geologists, I HAD come to see Noah’s Flood as a FAIRY TALE … NOW I’VE come to see the story of Noah’s Flood, like so many other flood stories — AS ROOTED IN TRUTH. But was it the flooding of the Black Sea, or a great Mesopotamian flood that ravaged the ancestral homeland of Semitic peoples? Who knows?"

---- David R. Montgomery, "The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood", (2012), p. 253.


In other words, according to the eminent geologist David R. Montgomery, Noah’s Flood (although not a universal cataclysm) is an ancient local historical event rooted in truth.

However, he was honest enough to quickly admit (and spell out) his own limitation and the delimitation of his investigation, by making it clear that (although Noah's Flood relates to an actual ancient local historical event) he is quite uncertain as to which of the different specific local deluges of ancient times to identify it with.


He had also confirmed the same point elsewhere in the book when he wrote:

“By the end of the nineteenth century, mainstream geologists had lost interest in the Deluge. It was a settled matter. Noah’s Flood was widely seen as a local historical event in the Middle East, even if its precise nature remained debatable.”

---- David R. Montgomery, "The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood", (2012), p. 194.


In other words, mainstream geologists have long settled the question of the historicity of Noah’s Flood --- It is a HISTORICAL event, in the MIDDLE EAST


Having established the historicity of the story of Noah Flood, one may really want to ponder the fascinating question of which of the identified local deluges of ancient times (e.g. the Black Sea flooding, etc.) to identify the Noah Flood with.

In relation to this question, David R. Montgomery although admitted the limitation of his investigation, nonetheless pointed out the result of a scientific investigation, by other prominent scientists in other fields of science, which have been submitted on this specific question.


Daniel Jack Chasan an environmental scientist who undertook a review of David R. Montgomery's "The Rocks Don't Lie" in "Crosscut" quoted David Montgomery to have pointed out "two prominent oceanographer's", namely: Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman, who have jointly submitted the result of their years of scientific investigation on this specific question.

David R. Montgomery was cited by Daniel Jack Chasan to have said that Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman had noted that the catastrophic spilling of the Mediterranean Sea into a low-lying lake valley to create the Black sea “WAS, IN FACT, NOAH’S FLOOD”.

The precise words of David Montgomery as cited in "Crosscut" are shown within quotation marks below:

“When they (i.e. Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman) proposed that this was, in fact, Noah's Flood, many Christians were intrigued by scientific support for the biblical story.”

But then he added that “creationists were outraged”

“Why were creationists angry" he asked "when scientists claimed to find support for the biblical flood?"

In reply to this, he answered that they were angry because the scientists' findings, to them, “was not the flood that they thought the Bible described."

He noted that the creationists saw the scientific claim that "Noah's Flood WAS A REGIONAL DISASTER, and NOT A GLOBAL EVENT, as an attack on Christianity."


For further readings on this, you may also, for instance, refer to the classic work of the English Egyptologist and archaeologist, David Rohl, viz. “A Test of Time” where he not only established --- on the basis of archaeological finds --- that the Noah story is a regional (rather than a global) historical event in human history; but also submitted that the Ark (which featured in the story) eventually rested on "Mount Judi", and not on the "Ararat Mountains" as the Biblical account claims.


In summation:

In the light of the foregoing scientific submissions from geological, archaeological and oceanographic investigations; it becomes clear that the first hypothesis (which states that the Biblical story of Noah Flood simply copied from the 21st century BCE Flood myth of Utnapishtim) is not only dead, but also buried.

The modified form of the valid hypothesis, i.e., H_o (which, on the other hand, states that the Biblical story of Noah Flood came from a real pre-21st century BCE local deluge, from which the 21st century BCE Utnapishtim Flood myth also came) therefore becomes definitively established.

cc:
musicwriter
Amujale
gensteejay
visita

Trash.

gensteejay:
Trash.

You're right!

Just as is the case inside of religion & faith, zombieism is indeed a real phenomenon even outside of religion & faith

[My statement here obviously assumes that you hold a non-theistic worldview.]

The inauthentic nature of the content the Romans used whilst authoring the Christian bible is further visible in Genesis.

Similar to the Noah flood story, the "Adam and Eve" story is also fake.

Historians have been able to trace the Adam and Eve story to an adaptation of the Sumerian (Sumer is in modern day Iraq) tale of Ninti and Enki.

To make a long story short, Enki out of curiosity eats 8 plants in the paradise[size]sic[/size] of Dilmun (cf. Eve eating the forbidden fruit),

Ninhursag considers that a mortal sin, so she causes 8 of Enki's body parts (including his rib) to suffer, and he is on the brink. Enlil takes up Enki's cause and persuades Ninhursag to relent, and so various deities then come to heal each of Enki's body parts.

The one who heals his rib is the goddess Ninti, whose name means both lady of the rib, and lady who makes live, which in itself serves as a pun.

That stands as further proof that the Romans copied and plagerised from various older religious concepts from all around the globe. And euhemerized their characters (stories was created that placed their characters interacting with historical figures i.e Emperors, Kings/Queens, Pharaohs e.t.c) so as to seem genuine to the reader.

TAO11:


You're right!

Just as is the case inside of religion & faith, zombieism is indeed a real phenomenon even outside of religion & faith

[My statement here obviously assumes that you hold a non-theism worldview.]

Don't quote me to spew your tripe. I don't have time to waste discussing this sort of issues with confused slaves of Yahweh.

gensteejay:

Don't quote me to spew your tripe. I don't have time to waste discussing this sort of issues with confused slaves of Yahweh.

When you hear your name, i.e. "Zombie", just reply by saying: "ajooro-jaara-joro".

One, two, go:

Zombie!
...

I'm not by any means surprised that a lame and barren argument like this can stir up social media. I will just give whoever will call himself/herself an atheist one reference, go can read the History of Lee Strobel. He was a strong, educated and eloquent atheist more than any of you can ever be. He saw the brainless edges of atheism and turned to Christianity without any preaching to him. Read up his history for more details.

The christian narrative has no relevance to real history.
A better way of putting it is that all Abrahamic religious text peddle false history.

Assuming you want to learn about history, then its either you major in courses relating to history or read books written by genuine historians.

Amujale:
The christian narrative has no relevance to real history.
A better way of putting it is that all Abrahamic religious text peddle false history.

Assuming you want to learn about history, then its either you major in courses relating to history or read books written by genuine historians.

I actually overrated your level of understanding. Even a Basic 8 student will know what I meant was to go, browse through his life story and read up. Simple!

Bluebrain101:
.....

The christian narrative has no relevance to real history.
A better way of putting it is that all Abrahamic religious text peddle false history.

Assuming you want to learn about history, then its either you major in courses relating to history or read books written by genuine historians.

Amujale:


The christian narrative has no relevance to real history.
A better way of putting it is that all Abrahamic religious text peddle false history.

Assuming you want to learn about history, then its either you major in courses relating to history or read books written by genuine historians.

seriously??

Its unavoidable, continentals will take back control of everything and show true love to all our brothers and sisters around the globe.

Take back control of our languages, narrative and education, then, experience the great things that will bring.

The philosophical revolution that turbo xharged the Chinese economy in those days had them breaking all the modern records on the global economy.

Similarly, thats what will happen with our economy.

Once upon a time, there was these friends named "lie" and "exactly how things are"; they both went for a swim.

Without saying anything, "lie" jumped out of the stream, snatched the clothes of "exactly how things are" to put on.

People that came accross the "lie" began to say, hey look at "lie" he's wearing the clothes of "exactly how things are".

Exactly how things are" came out of the stream and found clothes had gone. Moments later people saw "lie" been chased by the naked "exactly how things are".

Then they said, look at the unclad "exactly how things are" chasing the "lie" in the clothes of "exactly how things are".

Exactly how things are" eventually caught up with the 'lie' and took back control.

Similarly, All the Abrahamic religions peddles a false narrative whilst pretending to be genuine.

All Abrahamic religious text wear the stolen clothes of "exactly how things are".

Amujale:
Once upon a time, there was these friends named "lie" and "exactly how things are"; they both went for a swim.

Without saying anything, "lie" jumped out of the stream, snatched the clothes of "exactly how things are" to put on.

People that came accross the "lie" began to say, hey look at "lie" he's wearing the clothes of "exactly how things are's".

Exactly how things are" came out of the stream and found clothes had gone. Moments later people saw "lie" been chased by the naked "exactly how things are".

Then they said, look at the unclad "exactly how things are" chasing the "lie" in the clothes of "exactly how things are".

Exactly how things are" eventually caught up with the 'lie' and took back control.

Similarly, All the Abrahamic religions. peddles a false narrative whilst pretending to be genuine.

All Abrahamic religious text wear the stolen clothes of "exactly how things are".

Bros in conclusion you are confused. You may likely end up like Friedrich Nietzsche.

Bluebrain101:
....

Bros you are a faker, now jog along.