Flood of Gilgamesh written long before Noahs flood. Look at how simular!!

by Lady Liberty 59 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  wherehasmyhairgone

  Both of the above presumes there was ice at the poles before the Flood which is contradictory of the Bible's account which says there was no rain before the flood and thus no means of great ice forming from any snows. Instead, under the ICE canopy, there was a greenhouse effect world wide. Thus you find animals like the mammoth and tropical vegetation underneath all these ice cores. Plus, they are making the assumption that each layer amounts to a year, but are they sure? How do they know what was going on earlier or just after the Flood when these ice cores formed? Things may have been the same then as now. But the strongest testament is the vegetation layer under all this ice.

  Presume is the wrong word here, we have a accurate record of the ice cores, and your reference to they interpret a layer for a year, shows how far off the mark you are, There are a number of techniques used to dated ice layers, as more than one layer a year can be laid down. ALL the evidence point away from a global flood, weather people choose to accept that or not. But you insist to place your reasoning sole and only on the bible baffles me, when science or history agree with the bible you take the point, when it disagrees you dismiss and claims the bible to be infallible. The only way you can test something to see if it real is to subject its claims to testing , the flood it fails on, big time. Their is NO evidence that a an ice canopy ever or could even have exisited. NO evidence for a global flood, in fact the only reason we even have this discussion is that a flood is mentioned in the bible , without the bible this would never be even a talking point.

  Apologists fall over themselves trying to justify the embarrassingly ignorant claims made in the bible, now to believe in the in face of evidence and claims that is the evidence is that strong God put it their to fool us....Oh my science!

  I guess we should be thankful that it is belief system that fly so far in the face of reason logic and evidence which makes the idea of the bible being infallible more and more difficult to swallow to anyone that bother to look outside the box.

  Except if the Oronteus Finaeus or Piri Reis maps of the Antarctic are true then we have a problem, as these maps show rivers and mountains within the interior that no longer exist (under ice). So if the ice formed after approx 4000 bc or melted and refroze (occurence linked to polar shifting?) then ice cores may not be accurate. Also, if these maps are in fact of the Antarctic, then within 500 years things changed drastically (ice migrating). If that is the case then how can the ice cores be over 40K years old?

  The first then to do is to subject these map to an examination ( which has been done) Its accuracy has been shown to lacking in major areas along with contracdictory claims itself.

  I hate having to point to this site again, but it is one of the most concise site around

  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/oronteus.html

  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/atlantis.html about half way down is the relevant part.

  I do have a question for those here that belive a global flood took place. What was the purpose of it?
• 

  sinis

  Presume is the wrong word here, we have a accurate record of the ice cores, and your reference to they interpret a layer for a year, shows how far off the mark you are, There are a number of techniques used to dated ice layers, as more than one layer a year can be laid down. ALL the evidence point away from a global flood, weather people choose to accept that or not. But you iinsist to place your reasoning sole and only on the bible baffles me, when science or history agree with the bible you take the point, when it disagrees you dismiss and claims the bible to be infallible. The only way you can test something to see if it real is to subject its claims to testing , the flood it fails on, big time. Their is NO evidence that a an ice canopy ever or could even have exisited. NO evidence for a global flood, in fact the only reason we even have this discussion is that a flood is mentioned in the bible , without the bible this would never be even a talking point.

  Apologists fall over themselves trying to justify the embrassingly ignorant claims made in the bible, now to believe in the in face of evidence and claims that is the evidence is that strong God put it their to fool us....Oh my science!

  I guess we should be thankful that it is belief system that fly so far in the face of reason logic and evidence which makes the idea of the bible being infallible more and more difficult to swallow to anyone that bother to look outside the box.

  Excuse me! What are you talking about? I'm not an apologist! I am simply offering another side of your story. For every article you show, I can show another that indicates that SOMETHING happens EVERY 3600 years! There is conjecture that FLOODING occured around 4000 bc due to polar shifting and that it may have had some credence in the total earth flooding stories, which I have said was false! It does not escape that fact that there more than likely was a series of events that took place around that time, that were all regional in nature, yet because different socities said they experienced it, it became a "global" concept. Oh, and perhaps looking at the verbage used in Genesis and how modern English translates the word "earth", would be helpfull also.

  I also simply offered ancient maps to indicate that the poles were partially frozen as recently as up to 500 years ago! I've read the good doctors explanation, but there are several others who discount his works, or at least say that the maps display regions that were not even discovered until 1820 and for which the good doctor has no explanation. Here's some excerpts from others within the scientific community:

  Hapgood (1958) and Hancock’s (1995) evidence bears further scrutiny before it is accepted as fact. Since the publication of Hancock’s (1995) book, numerous well-documented criticisms have appeared on the Internet, many of them originating in news- and talkgroups. Just as Hancock’s evidence deals with three main topics, so do the criticisms. In particular, Hapgood’s interpretations of the maps he used is suspect; most accepted evidence with respect to Antarctica contradicts Hancock and Hapgood; and Hancock’s claims about the northern hemisphere and the last ice age tend to be incorrect.
• 

  JCanon

  JCanon,

  Do you actually believe the things you write? I find that your reasoning is so bogged down in the idea that there is no other way but yours, that I constantly dismiss what you have to say as coming from an unreasonable and unrealistic source. Your mind is so clouded with the judgement that you and you alone are correct that you "trip over dollars to pick up pennies". If someday you were to open your mind to the very slight possibility that someone else may have a point, you wouldn't worry so much and be so critical of those that disagree with your OPINION. Yes, J, it is called an opinion. Just because you say it, does not make it so.

  CCS

  I completely understand your position, and it's valid. But unavaoidable. However, on one single issue all things don't revolve. I accept that some things will appear to contradict the scriptures totally, but even the WTS is good at getting around a lot of it, amazingly good. But to be honest, for all the questions the Bible can't answer for the scientists, they avoid questions the Creationists ask as well, i.e. such as evolutionists on the abiogenesis issue. But in the overall analysis, it still boils down to the fact that for all I have to believe myself, it is not to be given to outsiders or even insiders who are not part of what I call the "banquet" class. Those on the inside of God's activities right now. There is a chasm between us and the world as far as what is really happening: " 26 And besides all these things, a great chasm has been fixed between us and YOU people, so that those wanting to go over from here to YOU people cannot, neither may people cross over from there to us.’ See? That means some will have more evidence than others and while we might want to share that, we are not permitted. It's like me. I claim I spoke with God. Good for me. But what does that do for you? If God appeared to you then you might take a second look at the Bible and what it says. Certainly. But if God is not planning to appear to you, and only to certain select ones, then of course, we can't blame them for being influenced by what might turn out to be later a false presumption. So as I was saying in another post, ultimately those who expect to get into the kingdom have to believe the Bible first, regardless; even if it seems to contradict something scientific. But it's not quite "blind faith" anymore, because God is more directly active and holy spirit is active as well, so that gives us on the inside that extra little confidence to doubt that the scientists really have anything or ever will, that actually will disprove the Bible as God's inspired. Now while that's a lot to bite off for someone who doesn't believe, those who do have trust to believe first, are given "more" in the way of miracles and holy spirit so as not to be distracted by all this Satanic propaganda. But ultimately, if the river of propaganda disgorged by Satan even threatens to drown the chosen ones, certainly, it would be quite effective at drowning those with less or little faith. Even the Bible says to build your house on the rock mass (the Bible) rather than the sand (The Watchtower) since when the storm comes, that house will collapse if it is not built on a firm foundation. But again, I can't blame anybody at one point of maximal saturation by this propaganda to buy into some of it and as well to be confused, since God himself is causing some of this confusion and blindness. So, of course, I have a "closed mind" to certain things, a valid observation. But I'm also not in the same position to be subjective as you are since I have more objective and direct proof that God is real. So the scientific questions Satan has drummed up is not going to change that, so it's of no interest. But that brings us to the true issue, does it not? A lot of this scentific stuff is really aimed at just bashing the Bible's history in the first place. That's where all these findings and debates end up. Reassuring people who don't want to believe the Bible in the first place that they have valid, scientific reasons not to. Not that 99% of all that is said by the scientists have some element of speculation to deal with. But it's all MOOT if you have a direct answer. I mean these are challenges to the Bible, to establish if say, there's a living God or not. If the Bible is true, maybe we'd have faith there is a God and what the Bible says, right? If science tends to challenge that, then our faith in God is shaken a bit. BUT... if you just saw God and finished talking to him, then that all changes! You may have a different set of questions at this point, but you're not looking to science to confirm there's really a god any more. You have direct evidence for the questions everybody else is asking about. So, in summary, the Day of the Lord is going to be a day of darkness and thick gloom. 16 Give to Jehovah YOUR God glory, before he causes darkness and before YOUR feet strike up against each other on the mountains at dusk. And YOU will certainly hope for the light, and he will actually make it deep shadow; he will turn [it] into thick gloom. Remember, the Flood came 7 days after Noah entered the Ark. The water canopy was actually solid ice. Over those seven days the ice was superheated and converted to water vapor. But the clouds would have been so dense and thick absolutely no sunlight would have reached the surface of the earth. So when it began to rain it was totally and completely dark. Same today, before that fear-inspiring day, the earth will be enveloped in darkness, meaning the minds of people will be dark. They won't be able to see before it strikes. So that is what we are seeing today. Lots and lots and lots of propaganda attacking the Bible and lots and lots of LOGICAL and SCIENTIFIC reasons not to believe the Bible. But it is a deception. So in effect, what God and Christ are dowing just before the destruction, is pushing everybody away from the fence and away from the middle ground. The forces at work will either push one totally against God and the Bible or will convert them totally to put full faith in the Bible, even if it means ignoring the science and research that would seem to contradict the Bible. It's a difficult choice, but we all know what the right choice is. So I validate your position. If God truly wanted everybody in the kingdom at this point, he would need only appear to them, right? Right. Well, since he is appearing to some than others, that sort of speaks for itself. Everyone is not invited. Just a select few. The rest are left with plenty of rope to hang themselves with as elaborate of a knot they need to make. JCanon
• 

  JCanon

  Hi Steve:

  Another big issue with the flood is the ark itself. According to the bibles own details, a structure of this size made in the way it is described would have collapsed under its own weight, excluding the inhabitants, and not including either the flood water raises and the movement that would have taken place. Most respected biblical scolars now state that the Flood is just a myth.

  Steve

  First, I'm likely the formost Biblical scholar in the world at this point. But besides that, your presumptions are based upon some details that you may not be aware of or that have not been stated. And ultimately who knows the special strength of what was used by them? Or ultimately God's own personal protection to fortify the ark. The ark was a symbol of salvation but never apart from God's own hand involved. So for the believer, there is no way out. I mean, you can't have a MIRACLE like the Flood occur, which is behind the MIRACLE of the ice canopy in the first place! So if the ark that God commanded Moses to build didn't happen to have been damaged in the flood then so be it. Maybe God made sure the waters around the ark were perfectly still. I mean, when you think about it. Maybe those 40 days of rain was a constant, even flow of water, which after you got afloat just meant higher and higher waters? Maybe it was a very controlled thing?

  Frankly, it's like evolution. They can't explain "abiogenesis" and don't want to. They think they don't have to explain how life first got started in the first place. They only want to deal with how it evolved. But once they introduce God into the picture, how God could have started it, then there's no discussion any more as to whether there is a god or not, which is the whole question all are asking.

  Likewise, if God can cause the miracle fo the Flood in the first place, then I think he can manage to make sure the ark he built withstood the flood experience he was about to bring about. Sure maybe the ark wouldn't have withstood a tidal wave that slamed it against a moutain! But maybe God didn't plan on having that as part of Noah's experience in the ark either. Noah and the animals needed to be in a clean, dry place. That was it. IF the ark had special protection during the flood, and why not? then so be it. So your assertions don't address the power of God.

  I understand you argument. But it's mute when you consider divine intervention, right?

  JCanon
• 

  JCanon

  Anyway, this professor first discussed Gilgamesh and then moved on to the Bible. It's her opinion that we can't be sure which came first. She says that the oldest written Gilgamesh texts are older than the Hebrew writings but that the oral tradition may have started with the Hebrews first, and that the Sumerians were just the first to put it in writing. She made it clear, though, that she's just speculating on that idea.

  She maybe can't be sure. But I'm sure.

  JCanon
• 

  wherehasmyhairgone

  Sinis,

  CALM DOWN!

  i wasn't even refering to you. My comment was aimed at JCanon, and other, your posted clearly wasn't making any apologist claims from what i can see.

  However claims of something happening every 3600 years, what has that got to do with anything? that would at best take us back to the susposed exodus?, so i am not quite aure what your on about there.

  Local flooding on a large scale i agree with you 100% is it possible that a previous much larger local flood build the myth...quite possible. So it seesm we agree pretty much, so i dont see why you took i was having a go a you.

  Also i am aware of how earth was tranlated in genises,erets (eh'-rets) - common, country, earth, field, ground, land, X natins, way, + wilderness, world.

  SO may be things are cleared up a little now
• 

  JCanon

  JCanon,

  Every time you push the submit button, you prove my point.

  CCS

  I know. I'm like a stumbling block. But I'm dealing directly with the inside reality, you are dealing with the smoke and mirrors. The things that the spiritual man sees and understands are like nonsense to the physical man. And if ever there was a counterpart to the "physical" man it would be the physical scientist, would it not? They are looking at physical things to understand the universe which has a spiritual component, thus some things will be left unanswered and will baffle him. Yet because they have no physical objective relaity for him, he will consider it to be "nonsense": Now don't get me wrong, yes, we have this "trump card" we pull on the scientists all the time: 14 But a physical man does not receive the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot get to know [them], because they are examined spiritually. 15 However, the spiritual man examines indeed all things, but he himself is not examined by any man But the fact remains, if science that truly an absolute and clear-cut evidence of something, instead of it buried behind some sophisticated testing method or complex theorum, then people would have abandoned the Bible and God long time ago. Face it. To believe the scientists you have to have a measure of faith that they actually are honest and more importantly actually know what they are doing! So far, they haven't inspired much confidence on either issue. In the meantime, when something scientific does seem to support the Bible, like the RC14 dating for the fall of Rehov by Shishak c. 871BCE, they ignore it! So again, the JW-anointed perspective, is that this wave of false propaganda by Satan was prophesied that was designed to drown the woman, representing Christ's true followers. The only way she can't be drowned is by the earth which swallows up the waters. That is, her faith that the Bible is true is all the contradiction she needs to dismiss what is wrong and what is right. The details of what scientists will find out next week about what they are doing wrong today is not an issue for us. And since most of this is pursued to decide whether to believe if there is a God or not and we know frist hand there is one because we've either seen or talked with him or seen some modern miracle he has done via hol spirit, that's not our issue. It's the world's issue. But not hours. We have the direct confirmation of that. But we know others don't, not yet, so obviously we have to take the flak for being closed minded and having blind faith. Only it's not quite "blind" faith anymore, because we have evidence of God beyond the scriptures now. As a result, it just soaks up those waters completely. Those issues are of no concern for us. JCanon
• 

  JCanon

  Frankiespeakin:

  Yes haveing "Absolute Faith" in the bible even in the face of reason, and well founded scientific evidence, is the same as believing in a lie reguardless of the facts just believe and everything will be alright.

  Keep in mind too, that Jehovah likes playing games with the wise of the earth.

  This is a laughable conclusion that many of the hard core fundamentalist reach when they can't prove thier point "God put the dinosaur bones there and made them appear million of years old just to fool the wise scientist" and former beleivers too,, total bull shit.

  Two points:

  1) For the anointed "scientific" investigation includes what you learn by direct observation. So if you've seen and spoken with God personally, or seen some miracle directly, then that trumps out any scientific theory. So it's not simply faith in the Bible any more we have to deal with. But the evidence we see that we attribute to God.

  2) At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to babes. 26 Yes, O Father, because to do thus came to be the way approved by you.

  19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God; for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own cunning.”

  Which is another way to say, when applicable, God gives them enough rope to hang themselves with!

  So the idea that God "plays games" or likes tripping up the wise or those who think they are so wise, is quite how God is and it is stated so in the Bible. Then if that is "laughable" that's fine, but it's not because I made it up or because its not in the Bible.

  So in reality, those of us who have seen God personally or an angel, have direct proof of the truth. If scientists saw God or had other direct proof of God, then all their theories probably would simply be edited and adapted to the reality of God being part of all of this. But right now, not having seen God, they are working in a vaccuum and so their theories have no parameters and often don't include God. So even though we can see some of this stuff is the scientists interpretation of these issues which seem to contradict God, we believe ultimately there is an explanation of this evidence that is perfectly in harmony with this God; including the fact that we know scientists change their minds on their pet theories every 15 minutes. They are always learning something new and revising themselves. So...

  So, what Jehovah has done for the anointed today, to combat all this propaganda is simply shown more of himself, confirmed the reality of his existence in line with his plan, before he shows himself to the world at Armageddon. So this gives us the assurance to relax and not worry about the chatter of scientists, fortunately. We have more than simply faith in the Bible now. We have direct observation that God is real and alive. This puts us in a better position to dismiss these scientific claims, even if we have no other explanation than it contradicts our beliefs and personal experience. But FUNNY, we can do this by dismissing only pseudo-facts and presumptions. It's consistent with what we can actually truly verify and in harmony with reality.

  I don't want to get off topic here, but it deals with the nature of evolution and science in terms of believing and dismissing. The only example I can come up with (and I apologize) is the OJ Simpson frame-up by the Illuminati. Yes, OJ was set up and professionals carried out the killings and set up the fake evidence against OJ. But we would think, noting the ultimate goal was to have him executed for a crime he didn't commit that the easiest way to demonstrate that coup would be a videotape of the actual murders. Now lots of people are 100% convinced OJ did this, but not because of direct evidence but lack of evidence for any other suspects. That's the same thing with evolution and all this scientific stuff. It's in a vaccuum. Thus at one point if a tape actually surfaced showing who actually killed Ron and Nicole, then suddenly people would be force to change their minds about the evidence against OJ. Which, of course, would evaporate into thin air. But it only does that because it wasn't hard core evidence anyway. It was all quite "circumstantial" and quite fabricatable! If there really was absolute proof, then it would contradict the video tape and we'd call the tape a fake. But it wouldn't happen that way.

  So likewise, while the evidence for evolution and science is quite convincing and emotional, if God just showed up and revealed himself to everybody, what would happen with that evidence? It would evaporate. We'd presume there was some explanation for everything that is simply hidden from the scientists right now, whom can't look past a certain theory anyway. Who knows what the atmosphere was like 80,000 years ago? Who knows what trace elements and gases were prevalent then than now? Suddenly, if God appeared to them, would come up with all kinds of excuses, scientific excuses to explain their findings. So don't have to dismiss or explain back to scientists in scientific terms we can't understand anyway, that whatever they are finding or doing has a scenario consistent with the Bible and the reality of God. And we can do that, right in front of them, and they can do nothing about it but say we're just closed-minded for not accepting their research presumptions for face value. Thus nothing really out there is that convincing to contradict anything the Bible says. You have to take the scentists' word and interpretation for everything. You can't really check it out for yourself very easily. That's why their arguments fail, except for those looking for as many excuses to deny God and the Bible as they can find.

  JCanon
• 

  Cold Creek Swimmer

  JCanon Wrote

  Only it's not quite "blind" faith anymore, because we have evidence of God beyond the scriptures now.

  Oh, please...do tell. I can hardly wait to hear this. Or should I say "see" this. Or is this one of those deals where you say the "Chasm is too great for YOU to cross"? I believe that in the real world where I live, that is called a "copout". Please "Foremost Bible Scholar in the World", expound on your vast knowledge of biblical truths and share with one and all of us this exciting proof of God.

  CCS
• 

  stillajwexelder

  I got a copy of the Gilgamesh Epic on Amazon.com - a great read - nice and short too. It only took me 1 evening to read it all