Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Epic of Gilgamesh and the Bible. Which came first?
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 16 of 90 (265554)
12-04-2005 8:57 PM


which is correct, the bible or some akkadian myth?
here's some comparable passages (which i stole from an earlier post of mine that faith never answered)
quote:
Gilgamesh
"For one day and then a second day, Mount Nisir held the ship fast.
A third day and a fourth -- still the ship couldn't move.
A fifth day and a sixth passed by with no motion.
Genesis
And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat. And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth [month], on the first [day] of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.
quote:
Gilgamesh
"On the seventh day I set a dove free in the air.
The dove flew away but then came back.
She couldn't see a perch, so she turned around.
Genesis
And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made: And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.
quote:
Gilgamesh
Then I set a swallow free in the air.
The swallow flew away but then came back.
She couldn't see a perch, so she turned around
Genesis
Also he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground; But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters [were] on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.
quote:
Gilgamesh
Next I set a raven free in the air.
The raven flew away and saw that the waters were going down.
He ate, he circled, he cawed, but he never returned to me.
Genesis
And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark; And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth [was] an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.
And he stayed yet other seven days; and sent forth the dove; which returned not again unto him any more.
now, put aside religious belief for a second here, and tell me: what makes genesis history, but gilgamesh myth? if one is the 100% inerrant word of god, shouldn't it stand out a little better? the only differences i see are in lengths of time, and the kinds of birds. and one is told secondhand in first person, where as the other is told third person.

אָרַח

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 17 of 90 (265566)
12-04-2005 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by arachnophilia
12-04-2005 8:34 PM


Re: some more analysis
Hey, Arach, you spoiled the fun. I wanted to see the mental gymnastics, e.g. the pre-Flooders knew the area by that name and when Noah`s family headed back to the old neighbourhood, natch they used the same name. Or under the thousands of feet of sediment (the Flood wasn`t really that deep---Faith), things looked the same. Or------(insert any wild thing that comes to mind)----:-p

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by arachnophilia, posted 12-04-2005 8:34 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by arachnophilia, posted 12-04-2005 11:35 PM Nighttrain has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 18 of 90 (265587)
12-04-2005 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Lysimachus
12-03-2005 1:41 PM


even more analysis
quote:
The ancient city of Nineveh, was mentioned in the biblical Book of Jonah ( ca. 843 B.C. ),5 but was unknown in modern times, until 1839
ref for jonah, not for the history. please note, that references that "nineveh" appears in jonah, not why the book of jonah is dated to 843 bc. general knowledge, referenced. actual scholarly subjects, not referenced. fastest way to get accused of plagairism.
it's disappointing, too. i'd actually be interested in something on why jonah is dated a certain date. but then again, i also wouldn't call 1839 "modern times." just shows the timeframe this guy's living in.
quote:
Among the tablets, which proved to be the cuneiform clay tablet library of King Asshurbanipal, was one with the name “Sargon.” This ancient king had also been previously mentioned in the Bible, but nowhere else in history.
this is of course wrong, not mention spelled incorrectly.
wikipedia writes:
The Greeks knew him as Sardanapal; Latin and other medieval texts refer to him as Sardanapalus. In the Bible he is called As(e)nappar or Osnapper (Ezra 4:10).
Ashurbanipal - Wikipedia
quote:
Archaeology had actually begun proving the Bible true.
huge logical fallacy here. the movie "jurassic park" features a dinosaur it calls "velociraptor." but it's more than twice a velociraptor's size, and has entirely the wrong skull. sometime after the movie was made, paleontologists dug up a dinosaur that exactly fit that description. had paleontology prooved "jurassic park" true?
no, it's still fiction. a fiction can easily include real places and people -- the existance of those people and places does not the proove a text to be accurate.
quote:
The question of the antiquity of Gilgamesh over the writings of Moses and the prophets of Israel, is largely nullified, by the simple, and elegant fact, that Asshurbanipal’s personal royal library in Nineveh, at least the city itself, in which the Epic was later unearthed, had been noted in the Bible and nowhere else, long before its discovery in modern times.
two problems. first the logically fallacy.
i put together a library this summer in my local university's math department. one of the books there is was published in 1898. now, the math dept library hasn't existed that long. i haven't been alive that long. the math dept. itself hasn't existed that long. the UNIVERSITY wasn't here in 1898. it's entirely possible for a book to be older than the collection it's in.
if you really think about for a second, the library had to exist before it could be written about. so the fact that it's in the bible puts that part of the bible AFTER the library's construction. (duh)
second, we know where utnapsihtim's story came from. the book i have on gilgamesh indicates that utnapishtim's story is taken from another akkadian myth.
wikipedia writes:
Akkadian (Atrahasis Epic)
The Babylonian Atrahasis Epic (written no later than 1700 BC), gives human overpopulation as the cause for the great flood.
Flood myth - Wikipedia
quote:
Nowadays, there is a new revisionist movement, trying hard again to discredit the Bible, based on modern archaeology, typified by Israel Finkelstein ( I almost wrote Frankenstein ).
wow. just wow. how could you say this was elegantly written?
quote:
So, form an honest secular view, the Bible should be running along quite nicely with the Epic of Gilgamesh insofar as authority is concerned. Then we come to Gilgamesh, to “scorpion men,”
"from" not "form." so, yes, then we come to a talking snake.
quote:
“the Bull of Heaven,” “Sin the moon goddess,” “Ishtar the love Goddess” the “Queen of Heaven” of Ancient Babylon,6 “garden of jeweled trees,” etc., and other myths which are represented in the Epic, however, discerning readers will recognize the myth when they see it and discriminate.
so the fact that it talks about gods and goddesses makes it a myth? ok. how about "the sons of god," "satan," "lucifer," "azazel (scapegoat)," "ba'al," "beezelbub" and various spellings, "leviathan," "behemoth," "gog and magog," "the great red dragon," etc?
sadly, he missed ANOTHER references. in ugaritic myth, el (as in elohym, god of the hebrews) is commonly typified by a bull. the association with the hebrew god and cows is well understood. when they make an idol of him, what is it? a golden calf. think about it.
quote:
The serpent that steals the plant that gives eternal life, near the end of the story, is another biblical similitude, as well, and without any external evidence, a casual reader would not be able to discern which came first, the Genesis account or the Gilgamesh one.
i don't what i can say to that. i guess he thinks mythological snakes are ok in gilgamesh, because they're ok in genesis. but scorpion men, no.
quote:
Other factors will be needed to sort this out. Logic implies that the pre-flood story of creation in the Bible, predates the flood myth of Babylonian Gilgamesh. Even, so-called “Gilgamesh” himself, obviously, followed the flood by some years.
what kind of logic is this guy using? what is he using to date these stories? they're BOTH recounted stories, not written during the event itself. common sense tells us that. like i said above, i know of other stories that go back even further.
keeping on the utahraptor theme i started above, i have a book by dr. robert bakker called "raptop red" that takes place ~100 million years ago. that kind of beats the bible for timeframe of events.
you can't use the chronology of a story to date it. period. you have to use the anachronisms, comparing to historical fact and archaeology. a story can talk about times and places long ago and in galaxies far far away, but that doesn't mean that's when and where it was written.
quote:
What is of immediate concern to us, is the man “Utnapishtim,” as an historical figure. How does he compare to Noah, what little there is to be known of Noach, Yahweh’s single, righteous man in the entire world. To begin, let us look at the name of this hero of the flood story in the Epic, “Utnapishtim.” In Shemitic languages it becomes clear, but not everyone understands Shemitic speech. This perhaps odd name, to English speaking people, means: nephish tam in Hebrew, “a living being” ( nephish ) “that is upright” ( “righteous - tam ). The Hebrew word uth7 means “beacon, monument, prodigy or sign,” so then, ut nephish tam in Hebrew carries the meaning of: a “a living beacon of righteousness,” and thus, is a description exactly comparable to the biblical concept of Noah and his righteousness before Yahweh, a state of being that saved him ( and us, his descendants), from world wide watery destruction.
for godssake, it's spelled semitic. he's just using that because it comes from "shem," the name of noah's son. but let's get this straight, for a second, from a strictly biblical perspective.
Genesis 10:6-10 writes:
And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan. And the sons of Cush; Seba, and Havilah, and Sabtah, and Raamah, and Sabtecha: and the sons of Raamah; Sheba, and Dedan. And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.
Babylon, Uruk, and Akkad, according to the bible, are from HAM, not Shem. so akkadian would not be a "shem"itic language. and you can't just take a name from one language and transliterate into another language like that. i mean, look at how "yehoshua" becomes "iesous" in greek and then "jesus" in english, and "joshua" in english the other way. similar letters don't make similar sounds. for instance, king xerxes shows up in the bible as "ahasuerus"
anyways. on to the hebrew, because that's wrong too. נפש does indeed mean "person" or "living being." but it's pronounced "nePHesh." he likes to add h's in english, but he forgot one. in every native hebrew word (excluding ones from other languages i mean), a FEH only has the hard "P" sound at the beginning of a word. you tack something on the beginning, it makes an "F" sound.
but the word for righteous is צדיק (tsadiq). i don't know where this "tam" business comes from. the actual phrase used to describe noah is אִישׁ צַדִּיק, 'iSH TSaDYQ. righteous man.
since he gave a reference for "uth" i could check it. here is the reference he gave. notice something? wrong word. the one he wants is the next one, "oth."
so, "oth b'nephesh tsadiq." doesn't sound like "utnapishtim" to mean at all.
quote:
Utnapishtim was the biblical Noah, and there is no reason to doubt it, therefore, what he uttered to Gilgamesh about immortality or lack of it, should comport with the Bible’s statements on the subject, because no prophet contradicts the other prophets, as they all have the same spirit of prophecy, and Noah (Utnapishtim) was certainly a prophet of Yahweh.
utnapishtim was immortal. noah died. sorry, but immortality was the whole reason gilgamesh sought him out.
quote:
Gilgamesh made a long, difficult trek to “Utnapishtim the faraway,” his forefather, seeking the secret of immortality, because he, and nearly everyone else in Mesopotamia, it seems, believed that Utnapishtim, living in the mythical land of “Dilmun,” was an immortal, that he had “joined the assembly of the gods.” He ( Noah ) indeed, did live 350 years after the flood, so for anyone not possessing such a long lifespan the antediluvian could easily have been considered an immortal god, hence the myth.
why do i have to keep trotting this dead horse out for fundamentalists? shem lived 500 years after the flood. (600 total) his son lived about 500, too, as did his grandson and great grandson. you can find this all in genesis 11. if we are to believe the bible, this sort of age-limit was COMMON after the flood.
quote:
When asked about death and immortality, “Utnapishtim the faraway” ( Noah ) stated “ There is no permanence.” Unbeknownst to Gilgamesh, Noah, his famous forefather, was including himself. All of his progenitors had died from Adam to Methuselah. Noah finally did die in his appropriate time, because he was also a mortal being, a long-lived one, but a mortal nephish indeed.
the whole point of the story is immortality. you can't compare gilgamesh's plant at the bottom of sea with the tree of life (as he did above) and ignore the obvious meaning of the word "immortal."
quote:
Academic translators of Gilgamesh texts indicate that the story claims Utnapishtim was an “immortal,” so they take at face value the plaintext version with little in-depth biblical analysis.
what does biblical analysis have to do with gilgamesh? it's not the bible. we shouldn't have to check everything against the bible, either. and not everything requires a sense of apologistic interpretation -- gilgamesh says immortality. it's about the quest for immortality, not just long life.
quote:
The Babylonians, indeed, believed him to be an immortal, although he clearly disclaimed that idea in the story. They fail to see the parabolic textual meaning.
?
quote:
The Babylonian myth has Enlil , after finding out that they ( Utnapishtim and his wife ) survived the flood, telling them at the ark landing site - after directing them back into the ark, that they would now possess immortality, but just as Satan deceived Eve about her own impending mortality, Enlil was the deceiver after all ( remember he is the opposing force to Enki the “good god” ), so his words carry little weight. Noah knew this, and he clearly told Nimsun ( Gilgamesh ) “There is no permanence.” No immortality for either of them, but there follows a hopeful allegorical promise, “a secret of the gods.”
ea overruled enlil, and enlil blessed them with immortality as a form of apology, i think. utnapishtim indicated that there was no real way to be immortal, save it be granted by the gods -- and then tells his story of how he was granted immortality by the gods.
quote:
Here, in the story Utnapishtim advises Gilgamesh he must remain awake for seven days and nights in order to learn this secret. Gilgamesh, exhausted from his journey of many days, immediately
falls asleep, just as Noah is about to reveal this secret to him regarding his quest, which one must constantly remember is the quest for immortality. Noah then prophetically says to his wife, “The sleeping and the dead, how alike they are. They are like a painted ( picture of ) death.” The connection begins, between death and sleep. One awakens from sleep does he not? It is important to remember, that the subject the story and of Gilgamesh’s quest was immortality. Since all men die, the hidden “secret of the gods” now is revealed by the prophet, as a promise of future resurrection ( awakening from the sheol death sleep), still hidden, as it had not yet been promised to Abraham.
that's reading a lot into it, and drawing connections where there are none. the secret is that just as everyone must sleep, everyone must die too. utnapishtim is trying to tell gilgamesh that he cannot give him immortality.
quote:
Then as Gilgamesh, who is tired beyond human endurance, nods off and sleeps for seven days. Noah’s wife makes a mark on the wall and a loaf of bread a day to count the passage of sleeptime - actually a prophetic deathtime because the Shemitic word yom meaning “day” also means “a thousand years” just as it did when Adam was told he would die in the same day he ate of the forbidden fruit - yet he lived for hundreds of years afterward, finally dying at 930 years - well within the yom (day) of Yahweh.
יום means "day." period. it does not mean a thousand years. this is nothing but pure apologistic interpretation that thinks it can squirrel out of what the text actually means by redefining words. this particular bit of dishonesty or ignorance annoys me to no end.
then he goes into a long bit of prophetic interpretation from something that's NOT prophecy. he regards the model for the hebrew week to be indicative of when the apocalypse is coming. he even gives an estimated timeframe: the year 6000.
quote:
It so happens that 2005 is the 5,982nd year since Adam’s creation, using the Masoretic text of the Bible and correcting for the Jared anomaly. This figure should give a close, if not precise, idea of the overall timing involved.
since i actually LIKE the bible, i've read it before, and it has something to say about this:
Matthew 24:36-39, 42 writes:
But of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe [were], so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. [...] Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
also, my hebrew calendar says it's 5766.
quote:
On the way home, while resting at a pool, a serpent steals it and Gilgamesh goes home empty-handed. Different, but similar to the Adam, Eve & serpent story of Genesis including the plant that gives life. The life and death thread is there in the text. The lack of immortality is the main theme, yet a hidden promise of awakening some quite distinct time in the future is evident, if one reads between the lines.
again, how can adam and eve be about a loss of immortality, but the comparable story in gilgamesh NOT be? don't forget, i'm not making this comparison, he is.
quote:
Back to the Genesis account, it is at this point in the Bible where death is promised to Adam and Eve ( and us, their descendants ).8 The promise of a messiah follows ( the seed of the woman ).
i've seen this interpretation a thousand times, but it's still wrong. adam and eve were created mortal, from the simple fact that they needed a tree of life to stay alive. god's intention for them was clearly immortality, and they failed him, yes. but they were not created immortal is denying them the tree of life sentances them to death. so the story is not about a loss of immortality in that sense.
"seed of the woman" is us. all of us. it explains the animosity between us and snakes -- why they get under our skin and creep us out. why we like to kill them. it's part of the curse on the snake.
the other part of the curse on the snake explains why the snake is a snake, with no legs. why it licks the ground. it is impossible that the story is referring to anything else, other than strictly allegorically. imo, the messianic context is not there, even if people choose to read it that way.
quote:
Earlier in the Epic, when Gilgamesh is mourning for his dead friend Enkidu, he “mourns for six days and seven nights.” Here we find an interesting suggestion of a parallel to the six days of
work and the seventh day of rest prophesying the ( seventh )millennial kingdom to be ruled by Yahweh where the mourning would cease allegorically “on the seventh rest day.”
six days and seven night ≠ six days and night, and one day and night.
one is seven days, the other is 6 and a half.
quote:
Generations upon generations have failed to see the hope of resurrection that this Epic story hints at and allegorizes, but does not plainly state, because it still was a “secret of the elohym,”
so to speak.
"gods" in gilgamesh is plural. there are a bunch of them, all immortal. "elohym" in hebrew is singular, and there is only ONE god, yahweh. that's a rather important distinction. and most people don't see the "hope of immortality" because it isn't there. gilgamesh LOSES it.
quote:
Utnapishtim’s gish magur is Noah’s Ark:
The great ship itself is a prophecy of the future Messiah. It was a man-made, wooden mechanical saviour of mankind
haha jesus was a wooden robot! (seriously, badly written) i'll avoid the crackpot noah's-ark-ararat stuff for now.
quote:
The great ship- Noah’s Ark, in the Epic of Gilgamesh has six decks and the Bible has three. Babylonians were prone to exaggeration. They multiplied the reigns of their past kings, as an example, by a factor of 60, so that a king who ruled for 20 years, was claimed to have ruled for 1,200 years. This is an obvious myth, yet consistent with their entire list of kings.
clearly, the bible NEVER exagerates numbers.
Genesis 9:29 writes:
And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.
quote:
It only took a week for the completion of the ark in the Babylonian story, the “gish-magur” a ship (elippu) the size of one “field” or “iku” ( iku =means one acre in area ) and seven levels ( separated by six decks ) built in a week. That is to say a vessel the size of a U.S. Marine amphibious assault ship such as the Tarawa, or a WWII Jeep Carrier, ( 550 feet in length ) hand made from massive wooden timbers and covered with thick wood planks and sealed with bitumen. Finished and seaworthy and loaded with animals in a week. Impossible.
so, incredulity towards gilgamesh is ok, but not towards the bible? now, the bible never specifically says how long it took noah to build the ark, but we can infer that it was less than 100 years.
also, the ark in genesis was 300x50x30 cubits. the one in gilgamesh was 120 cubits, cubed. (because it was a cube...)
quote:
The Bible, on the other hand, conversely and more reasonably, states that Noah had 120 years to complete the task, that is, “man shall only live for 120 years.”12 By that time, Yahweh intended to end all life on the planet except Noah and his family, and the animals of course.
ok, i just said above it took noah less than a hundred years. that's because shem was born before god told noah to build the boat. shem was 98 (or so) when he got off the boat. so a good estimate is that noah had 98 years to build the boat.
quote:
According to the Epic, “It is impossible to cross the waters of death without the stone things.” Inconveniently, Gilgamesh destroys them, in the story, and “punting poles” become the only method left to accomplish this voyage. The “stone things” were discovered by the late Ron Wyatt, one of his only actual discoveries, near a small village called “Kazan” nowadays, but on old (1941) army maps called “Arzap.”
yup. ron wyatt with better pictures.
quote:
Therefore, it was impossible to pass over the waters of
death ( the flood ), without the stone anchors.
usually ships have anchors, as well as ballasts, yes.
quote:
The Bible points out that the Ark was made of wood covered by bitumen ( kopher ). An early 17th-century mistranslation ( King James Version ) of a Hebrew (K) to (G) has caused the popular misunderstanding of nonexistent “gopher wood” instead of proper Hebrew “kopher wood” that is, wood covered by tar, any wood. There has never existed a class of tree called “gopherwood.” But that’s how the world works.
may or may not be right. i'm unable to determine at this point. most of the rest of this has little to do with gilgamesh, and mostly about the ark. surprise, suprise.
quote:
Hebrew words Noach-tsywn, meaning “Noah’s capital.” The Greeks had no equivalent for the strange conjunction created by the Hebrew “kh” ( keth ) and the “ts” ( tsade ) since they together formed a sound akin to an ( X ) they concocted “Noa-X-ywn” or “Naxuan.”
that's a CHET at the end of noah, and it's called a TSADI. definitally doesn't know hebrew.
quote:
Noah did not name his city “Naxuan,” after himself, instead he called it “Mesha,” as previously noted. In Shemitic languages, “Mesha” means, to be “drawn out of, and saved from water” and is spelled msa. Moses was called by a name msh, nearly identical however it is pronounced “Moshe” in his case. (Don’t worry too much about vowels in Hebrew, since they are not written in all early forms of the language it also could be pronounced Meshah ).
mesha just means "drawn" as in from a well. the water bit may or may not be implied. and, yes, worry too much about the vowels in hebrew. although they're STILL not commonly written (except in published books), they do dictate parts of speech. "mosheh" does come from "mashah" as does "meshah," and they all have similar meanings -- but they're not all THE SAME.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Lysimachus, posted 12-03-2005 1:41 PM Lysimachus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-08-2005 11:02 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 19 of 90 (265589)
12-04-2005 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Nighttrain
12-04-2005 9:34 PM


Re: some more analysis
Hey, Arach, you spoiled the fun. I wanted to see the mental gymnastics
no no, my common sense doesn't spoil the mental gymnastics at all. just watch and wait until one responds.
they don't like the idea that the bible was written by someone later on, it had to have been written by adam, and noah, and abraham, and isaac, and jacob... who all of course sound exactly the same and wrote so very little about themselves because they were "inspired."
clearly anachronisms don't mean anything, because an omniscient god would have known they'd be called by those names later on, even though they're not now.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Nighttrain, posted 12-04-2005 9:34 PM Nighttrain has not replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 20 of 90 (265903)
12-05-2005 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Lysimachus
12-03-2005 1:41 PM


It is ignorant error to assume older = falsifier of younger.
We know there are older ancient texts than Mosaic Torah. The Torah CLAIMS to be the protected version of "genesis" events - protected by God. All others are not and subject to unprotected errors and embellishments.
Similarities in varying ancient texts is corroboration that the event DID happen. The accurate version is in the Torah because its content was jealously controlled by God.
Gilgamesh confirms there was a Flood. The Torah supplies the protected version of what really happened.
All ancient peoples and sources traced back prior to the introduction of idol worship show a world worshipping one known universal Deity. That Deity was the God of the Bible who decided to write the official version of Earth's genesis events starting in the 15 century BC. Older texts and sources corroborate Torah facts and the universal Deity who is known by many other names in these older texts.
Ray Martinez

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Lysimachus, posted 12-03-2005 1:41 PM Lysimachus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Brian, posted 12-06-2005 4:35 AM Cold Foreign Object has replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 21 of 90 (265990)
12-06-2005 3:11 AM


Plagiarism
I guess if you`re going to raid one myth to set up your own, you would pick the eyes out of the original. Hence, if Gilga followed the Pentateuch, you would expect the Akkadian/Sumerians to include such delicacies as the blights on their rivals, the Egyptians, and the biggie, the parting of a large body of water. Even written communications from their god might be a winner. But, whoever composed the Epic ignored all these selling points and pushed the immortality line. Maybe the market studies convinced him to vary the details. Sort of a home-grown myth without foreign references. Maybe a few. Just the scary bits.
Off-topic, but we should explore the goddess Ishtar, Astarte, as a correlation with Yahweh`s consort, Asteroth, some time as she persisted for a while in early Hebrew history.
Page not found - MatriFocus

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4960 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 22 of 90 (266000)
12-06-2005 4:35 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Cold Foreign Object
12-05-2005 9:58 PM


You need to be more critical Ray.
It is ignorant error to assume older = falsifier of younger.
Indeed it is, a point that the author of the article seems unaware of.
We know there are older ancient texts than Mosaic Torah.
We also know that there are older texts than the Epic of Gilgamesh, another fact that the author errs over.
The Torah CLAIMS to be the protected version of "genesis" events - protected by God.
Does it really claim this Ray? Are there even any suggestions in the Hebrew Bible that Moses wrote the Pentateuch as so many fundies claim?
All others are not and subject to unprotected errors and embellishments.
Well, perhaps they are protected by their gods, after all, there is as much evidence for the existence of Yahweh as there is for the existence of any other god.
Similarities in varying ancient texts is corroboration that the event DID happen.
This is an error. Similarities in varying ancient texts do not confirm any external event. These similarities only confirm that texts were either copied and edited, or became corrupt in some way, they do not confirm anything external. To confirm the Flood as an historical reality takes a lot more than a mention in various ancient texts, it requires external evidence to corroborate the textual claims. When considering external evidence and the Flood of Genesis, I doubt that any event in the entire Bible has been as decimated by concrete external evidence. The Flood is a myth, no big deal, we both know that myths are powerful stories and were used to explain ideas in a way that the audience could understand.
The accurate version is in the Torah because its content was jealously controlled by God.
So jealously controlled that no original texts exist, many variant conflicting copies are in circulation, and external evidence negates (or does not support) almost the entire Torah.
Gilgamesh confirms there was a Flood.
How so?
Are you saying that if two stories exist about an event then that event MUST have happened?
The Torah supplies the protected version of what really happened.
The protected version is wrong then, there was no Flood.
All ancient peoples and sources traced back prior to the introduction of idol worship show a world worshipping one known universal Deity.
Can you elaborate a little?
That Deity was the God of the Bible who decided to write the official version of Earth's genesis events starting in the 15 century BC.
What does this mean? That God decided to start writing the Bible in the 15th century BCE?
Older texts and sources corroborate Torah facts
Pretty much a bare assertion here Ray, I could equally say that older texts and sources support the fact that the Israelite authors copied older ANE myths, which is more likely.
and the universal Deity who is known by many other names in these older texts.
So, the Egyptians were monotheists were they?
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 12-05-2005 9:58 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by ringo, posted 12-06-2005 1:39 PM Brian has replied
 Message 28 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 12-06-2005 8:12 PM Brian has not replied
 Message 40 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-08-2005 10:57 AM Brian has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 23 of 90 (266090)
12-06-2005 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Brian
12-06-2005 4:35 AM


Re: You need to be more critical Ray.
Brian writes:
So jealously controlled that no original texts exist....
Ya know, if we had a copy of the Torah in Moses' own handwriting and if we could get DNA from it - a skin cell or two, perhaps a stray eyelash, maybe Moses even got a parchment-cut and left us some blood evidence....
Then we could compare it with the Cohen DNA (Moses being Aaron's brother and all)....

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Brian, posted 12-06-2005 4:35 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by jaywill, posted 12-06-2005 4:12 PM ringo has replied
 Message 54 by Brian, posted 12-12-2005 1:18 PM ringo has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 24 of 90 (266130)
12-06-2005 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by ringo
12-06-2005 1:39 PM


The Resurrection of Christ Foreshadowed
Genesis 8:4 says that Noah's ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat on the 17th day of the 7th month. Exodus 12:2 indicates that the 7th month was changed to the 1rst month at Yahweh's command. The month in which the ark rested on land by the civil calender was the 7th month. But by the new sacred calender commenced from the Exodus 12 it was the 1rst month.
The civil calender was the old one and the sacred calender was the new one. The Passover was to be celebrated in the 1rst month of Abid (Exo. 13:4). Abid means sprouting, budding, fresh ears of corn. This signified that the Passover in the first month of the new sacred calender was counted in God's eyes as a new beginning of life.
Jesus Christ was crucified on the day of the Passover, on the 14th day of the month (Exo.12:6; John 18:28). According to the sacred calender, He was crucified in the first month, and according to the civil calender , He was crucified in the seventh month.
Christ crucified - in the 1rst month (sacred calender)
Christ crucified - in the 7th month (civil calender)
Christ was crucified on the 14th day of the month and resurrected 3 days latter of the sacred calender. That means that three days latter would have been on the 17th day of the 7th month according to the civil calender. The ark of Noah with its saved inhabitants came to rest on the land on the 17th day of the 7th month. This was the same day in which Jesus Christ resurrected according to the sacred calender.
So, in Genesis the resting of the ark upon the mountains of Ararat foretold the exact date of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.
Was this coincidence? I believe it was divine typology. The Apostle Peter connects the resurrection of Christ to the ark in 1 Peter 3:20-21 saying:
"eight souls, were brought safely through water: which figure also now saves you, baptism ... through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
The saving ark of Noah resting upon the mountaintop signified Christ's resurrection out from the death waters. The month and day of both were exactly the same.
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-06-2005 04:16 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by ringo, posted 12-06-2005 1:39 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by ringo, posted 12-06-2005 4:53 PM jaywill has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 25 of 90 (266136)
12-06-2005 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by jaywill
12-06-2005 4:12 PM


Re: The Resurrection of Christ Foreshadowed
jaywill writes:
The saving ark of Noah resting upon the mountaintop signified Christ's resurrection out from the death waters.
So you do recognize that the Flood story is a story about salvation, not a story about a flood. Good.
As for the numerology, I don't have much use for that, but I'll leave it to somebody else to check your figures. (It's also off topic.)

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by jaywill, posted 12-06-2005 4:12 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by jaywill, posted 12-06-2005 5:56 PM ringo has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 26 of 90 (266144)
12-06-2005 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by ringo
12-06-2005 4:53 PM


Re: The Resurrection of Christ Foreshadowed
========================
So you do recognize that the Flood story is a story about salvation, not a story about a flood. Good.
As for the numerology, I don't have much use for that, but I'll leave it to somebody else to check your figures. (It's also off topic.)
=======================================
I think that Christ is the centrality of the entire Bible. If you mean that it is a story about salvation verses actual history, I don't agree with that.
I believe that the flood is something that happened and in God's sovereignty it has a significance in New Testament salvation.
That other cultures wrote of such an event embellished to meet local needs would not surprise me in the least. As the account was handed down from generation to generation after the flood I would expect that embellishments would be added.
I also would not be surprised if some of these version of the biblical flood showed up in ancient writings pre-dating the writing of Genesis. My faith enfluences me to regard the Genesis account as the genuine story, though it may have been written down after embellished versions appeared elsewhere.
I'm rather new here and will learn to stay on topic soon if I have introduced something off the topic. Bear with me for a little bit at least.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by ringo, posted 12-06-2005 4:53 PM ringo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by AdminNWR, posted 12-06-2005 7:13 PM jaywill has not replied

  
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 90 (266183)
12-06-2005 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by jaywill
12-06-2005 5:56 PM


Re: The Resurrection of Christ Foreshadowed
Hi jaywill, welcome to EvCforum.
Here is a hint on how to quote text in your messages, so that they are a little easier to read.
You can simply use
[qs]text to be quoted[/qs]
which will appear in your messages as
text to be quoted
By the way, "qs" stands for "quote shaded".
Other hints: Use the "peek" button near the bottom right of a message, to see how another poster did it. When you are editing, there is a "Peek mode" you can select to allow you to see the original source of the message to which you are responding. To the left of the editor window, there is a link for "dBCodes On(help)" that you can select to see the various options available.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by jaywill, posted 12-06-2005 5:56 PM jaywill has not replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 28 of 90 (266201)
12-06-2005 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Brian
12-06-2005 4:35 AM


Re: You need to be more critical Ray.
RAY: It is ignorant error to assume older = falsifier of younger.
BRIAN: Indeed it is, a point that the author of the article seems unaware of.
RAY: I am glad we have agreement.
Ray writes:
The Torah CLAIMS to be the protected version of "genesis" events - protected by God.
Brian responding writes:
Does it really claim this Ray? Are there even any suggestions in the Hebrew Bible that Moses wrote the Pentateuch as so many fundies claim?
First, by equating anyone who believes the evidence of the Bible as a "fundie" you are relying on a modern negative cultural stereotype/ad hom argument. A fundy is the bad element in any given good (religion); like Darwinists, who are the bad element/Fundies of Science.
Second, yes we know Moses wrote major portions of the Torah, however. Would it please you if I concede Deuteronomy was written, probably by Jeremiah ?
Ray writes:
All others are not and subject to unprotected errors and embellishments.
Brian responding writes:
Well, perhaps they are protected by their gods, after all, there is as much evidence for the existence of Yahweh as there is for the existence of any other god.
Really ?
Where are the disciples of these gods today and do they engage in proselytization ?
Ray writes:
Similarities in varying ancient texts is corroboration that the event DID happen.
Brian responding writes:
This is an error. Similarities in varying ancient texts do not confirm any external event. These similarities only confirm that texts were either copied and edited, or became corrupt in some way, they do not confirm anything external.
You have made an error by saying I have made an error when in reality we just disagree.
My point is correct because, as we know, there were no modern communication abilities in antiquity, no newspapers, radio, television, etc. etc. The scribes of any given kingdom did not know what the scribes of other civilizations were writing or did write. Common denominators found in ancient sources, logically corroborate any event as a historical fact. Common denominators are spectacular evidence of corroboration. Theists claim the correct version of facts is found in the Holy Bible. [source: Dr. Scott]
Brian writes:
To confirm the Flood as an historical reality takes a lot more than a mention in various ancient texts, it requires external evidence to corroborate the textual claims.
The worldwide Flood accounts are impossible to have been manipulated as a conspiracy. They voluminously prove: 1) Flood did happen. 2) A handful were saved on a boat. Because communication was impossible, it is irrational to believe that antiquity, from all over the world somehow invented THE SAME myth simultaneously.
You are **special pleading**, saying the evidence does not mean what it evokes at face value.
The true version of events are recorded in Genesis. That is why the Bible was written - to preserve facts that the ravages of time and environment will destroy.
Human evolution and their paucity of hominid scraps can certainly relate
Do you know where the tradition of bobbing for apples comes from ?
The Ark bobbing in the stormy sea. [source: C.W. Ceram "God, Graves, and Scholars"]
Brian writes:
So jealously controlled that no original texts exist, many variant conflicting copies are in circulation, and external evidence negates (or does not support) almost the entire Torah.
We theists obviously disagree.
Ray writes:
All ancient peoples and sources traced back prior to the introduction of idol worship show a world worshipping one known universal Deity.
Brian responding writes:
Can you elaborate a little?
Dr. Scott says (paraphrase):
"Social Evolutionists predicted modern Biblical monotheism would be found to have an origin in ancient idol worship. In fact they did evidence this claim via archaeology. Theist archaeologists became enraged and predicted they would find evidence proving all idol worship to have monotheist origins, that is prior to idol worship the world worshipped one universal Deity. They in fact proved their claim and prediction via archaeology."
Dr. Scott made this point while reading theist archaeologist Don Richardson's book "With Eternity in their Hearts". A archaeological and anthropological report proving the theist prediction.
Amazon.com
What does this mean? That God decided to start writing the Bible in the 15th century BCE?
Thats when the Exodus happened - remember ?
After the event Moses BEGAN writing the Torah in the Wilderness.
Exodus 24:4
"And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD"
Numbers 33:2
"And Moses WROTE their goings out according to their journeys by the commandment of the LORD"
Notice he did it because God said to do it.
How was your laser surgery ?
Ray

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Brian, posted 12-06-2005 4:35 AM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by ramoss, posted 12-06-2005 9:37 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 30 by arachnophilia, posted 12-06-2005 9:38 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 35 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 12-07-2005 5:21 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 613 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 29 of 90 (266223)
12-06-2005 9:37 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Cold Foreign Object
12-06-2005 8:12 PM


Re: You need to be more critical Ray.
Well, for one thing, we don't know that Moses wrote ANY of the Torah. That is the tradition. There is a difference between a tradition, and actuality.
Interinal evidence for Genesis shows there were 4 different authors. Much of the Torah was in fact translated and modifed from the ugartic texts, which are far older.
As for the 'world wide flood' accounts.. there is no evidence of any single world wide flood occurance. Yes, many civilazations have flood stories. They do not match in time.
Of course, those civilzations developed at the mouths of rivers, and in deltas where there were fertile lands. River flood. That is a fact of life. So, of course, there will be flood stories.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 12-06-2005 8:12 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by arachnophilia, posted 12-06-2005 9:45 PM ramoss has replied
 Message 34 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 12-07-2005 5:16 PM ramoss has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 30 of 90 (266224)
12-06-2005 9:38 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Cold Foreign Object
12-06-2005 8:12 PM


Re: You need to be more critical Ray.
First, by equating anyone who believes the evidence of the Bible as a "fundie" you are relying on a modern negative cultural stereotype/ad hom argument.
now, maybe the "fundie" label is a tad derogattory, but thatis the definition of fundamentalism, ray.
Dr. Scott says (paraphrase):
"Social Evolutionists predicted modern Biblical monotheism would be found to have an origin in ancient idol worship. In fact they did evidence this claim via archaeology. Theist archaeologists became enraged and predicted they would find evidence proving all idol worship to have monotheist origins, that is prior to idol worship the world worshipped one universal Deity. They in fact proved their claim and prediction via archaeology."
well, now we know where you get the whole "enraged" bit. no suprise here, i guess.
but i would like to point out the obvious fact (you know, via archaeology). the oldest monotheistic religion was "idolatrous." they worshipped the sun god, amun (ra), in egypt. even taking the biblical account literally, the birth of the hebrew faith was a cohesive religion has sometime later, leaving egypt. compare the dates for akhenaten's religion, and the construction of the city of raamses, which the bible reports was constructed by hebrew slaves. gene scott's a pyramidologist, right? surely he knows all about amenhotep iv, and his son tutankhamen.
Second, yes we know Moses wrote major portions of the Torah, however.
how?
Would it please you if I concede Deuteronomy was written, probably by Jeremiah ?
jeremiah? does that mean you agree that it was written during the reign of josiah? what signs point to authorship by jeremiah?
i'm legitimately curious about those last two points, btw. i'm not being a smartass here. i suspect you're not going to offer real answers, but i'd like to see some references anyways (non-gene-scott references that is).
My point is correct because, as we know, there were no modern communication abilities in antiquity, no newspapers, radio, television, etc. etc.
kind of an assumption, really. just because they didn't have tv doesn't mean that they lacked the ability to send messages on a large scale. it's been suggested, for instance, that the pyramids were painted in bright colors like egyptian sculpture.
it's also clear that leaders did have the power to unify and control large expanses of territory. how do you suppose they did that without the internet?
The scribes of any given kingdom did not know what the scribes of other civilizations were writing or did write.
that's not true, at all. the evidence seems to point the other way. besides, one kingdom often oppressed others. do you think that the hebrews lived in egypt for a few hundred years without hearing about egyptian culture? or lived in babylon for 50 or so without picking up some of the legends?
the big mistake here is that these texts exist only as text. this is almost certainly not the case. when something is arranged in poetic form, it's usually meant to be spoken, sung, or as my learned professor argued, rapped. this was the primary mode of communication, not the written word. only a few educated people could write, but it seems very unlikely that this would render the entire population clueless to their own traditions.
it's sort of like contending that shakespeare couldn't possibly have read the greek's pyramis and thisbe. in reality, the play went through several italian and english intermediaries -- the names "romeus" and "giulletta" included quite early on, a hundred years before shakespeare was even born. and that line, btw, is strictly literature until we get to shakespeare, whose manuscripts we do not have.
is it impossible that a travellor carried the story? or that it was heard spoken of in the streets of babylon during captivity?
Common denominators found in ancient sources, logically corroborate any event as a historical fact. Common denominators are spectacular evidence of corroboration.
doesn't follow. if it does, i'll insist that you quoting my words in your next confirms my point. look, there it is again. corroboration, and fact.
what dr. scott doesn't seem to understand about the bible is that it often directly mocks other mythology. it's not "borrowing" or "plagairizing" or "confirming." it's satirizing. do you honestly think that the story of babel was not meant to make fun of uncompleted towel in babylon, and their legend regarding why their gods stopped it?
Theists claim the correct version of facts is found in the Holy Bible.
that should "christians" not "theists." theists are people who believe in ANY god.
The worldwide Flood accounts are impossible to have been manipulated as a conspiracy. They voluminously prove: 1) Flood did happen. 2) A handful were saved on a boat.
how big was the flood and the boat?
Because communication was impossible, it is irrational to believe that antiquity, from all over the world somehow invented THE SAME myth simultaneously.
but see, that's the thing. they're not all invented simultaneously. babylon's came before israel's. and it's not exactly the same, is it?
and since early civilizations tended to grow up around water supplies like rivers, is it impossible that many different flood myths come from many exagerated flood events?
Do you know where the tradition of bobbing for apples comes from ?
The Ark bobbing in the stormy sea. [source: C.W. Ceram "God, Graves, and Scholars"]
what? what does that have to do with anything?
After the event Moses BEGAN writing the Torah in the Wilderness.
Exodus 24:4
"And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD"
Numbers 33:2
"And Moses WROTE their goings out according to their journeys by the commandment of the LORD"
Notice he did it because God said to do it.
i see moses taking down laws, and keeping records. do you think the book is claiming mosaic authorship, or that moses wrote the source for the book? or something else? what parts did moses write, and what parts were later additions?

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 12-06-2005 8:12 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024