• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is there an earlier ark epic?

ShamashUruk

Hello
Jul 19, 2017
563
71
44
California
✟32,490.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
I generally will not post youtube videos, however I also have Irving Finkel's book "The Ark before Noah", which can be found here:

https://www.amazon.com/Ark-Before-N...385537115/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

Definitely an interesting lecture, for those christian types who like to debate here is a little trivia for you. The Bible uses the word Tevah to define Gopher Wood in the building of Noah's ark. Only to the failure of the Bible, the word Tevah doesn't mean or equate Gopher Wood at all. Anyways enjoy the video and comment if you'd like.

 

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The Bible uses the word Tevah to define Gopher Wood in the building of Noah's ark. Only to the failure of the Bible, the word Tevah doesn't mean or equate Gopher Wood at all.

You should look up the meaning then:

Tevah is a post-biblical word, close to the Aramaic tivah. It is derived from the verb tava, which means sink, impress, coin, stamp and formulate.

As a noun, tevah has several meanings. Tevah is an all-inclusive term for everything created. Trees, animals, seas, land, sky and luminaries, are all part of the tevah.

Tevah also means element or substance. It is used in reference to the prime elements: water, fire, earth and air, known as the t’vaim (plural of tevah), formerly believed to constitute all physical matter from which God created the world and all in it (Bamidbar Raba 14).

And yet another meaning for the word tevah is characteristic or character of a living being or a substance (Megilah 14; Yerushlmi, Brakhot 9:2).

The multiple meanings to the word tevah give rise to many interesting phrases in Hebrew.

For example, tevah haadam, literally the nature of a human being, is a term that comes to us from the literature of the Middle Ages, pointing to all kinds of behavioral patterns typical of human beings.

Tevah sheni, on the other hand, translated as second nature, refers to a learned behavior, which has become a part of one’s nature.

Tevah, nature
 
Upvote 0

ShamashUruk

Hello
Jul 19, 2017
563
71
44
California
✟32,490.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private



Already looked up the word numerous times, Tevah in the Strong's is to mean startled or alarmed.

Genesis 6:14–16
Make yourself an ark (tēvāh) of gopher wood [came the instruction]; make rooms
(qinnīm) in the ark, and cover it (kāpar) inside and out with pitch (kopher). This is how you are to make it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. Make a roof for the ark, and finish it to a cubit above; and put the door of the ark in its side; make it with lower, second, and third decks.


Ark: tēvāh (unknown word for rectangular boat)
Material: gopher-wood (unknown species)
Rooms: qinnīm (cells; the basic word means ‘bird’s nest’)
Waterproofing: pitch or bitumen (kopher), smeared on (kāphar), inside and out
Length: 300 cubits (ammah) = 450 ft = 137.2 m
Width: 50 cubits = 75 ft = 22.8 m
Height: 30 cubits = 45 ft = 13.7 m
Roof: 1 cubit high(?)
Door: 1
Decks: 3


Compare the sparser data for Moses’ ‘arklet’ in Exodus 2:2–6:

Ark: tēvāh (unknown word for rectangular boat)
Material: gomeh, bulrushes; rush/reed/papyrus; wicker
Waterproofing: hamār, slime; bitumen/asphalt; bitumen; zefeth, pitch.


The biblical word tēvāh, which is used for the arks of Noah and Moses, occurs nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible. The flood and baby episodes are thus deliberately associated and linked in Hebrew just as the Atrahasis and Sargon Arks are linked associatively in Babylonia.

Now for something extraordinary: no one knows what language tēvāh is or what it means. The word for the wood, gopher, is likewise used nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible and no one knows what language or what kind of wood it is. This is a peculiar state of affairs for one of the most famous and influential paragraphs in all of the world’s writing.

The associated words kopher, ‘bitumen’, and kāphar, ‘to smear on’, are also to be found nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible, but, significantly, they came from Babylonia with the narrative itself, deriving from Akkadian kupru, ‘bitumen’, and kapāru, ‘to smear on’. In view of this it is logical to expect that tēvāh and gopher are similarly loanwords from Babylonian Akkadian into Hebrew, but there has been no convincing candidate for either word. Suggestions have been made for gopher-wood, but the identification, or the non-Hebrew word that lies behind it, remains open.

Ideas have also been put forward over the centuries concerning the word tēvāh, some linking it – because Moses was in Egypt – with the ancient Egyptian word thebet, meaning ‘box’ or ‘coffin’, but these have ended nowhere. The most likely explanation is that tēvāh, like other ark words, reflects a Babylonian word.

A cuneiform tablet dealing with boats from around 500 BC, now in the British Museum, mentions a kind of boat called a ṭubbû which is found at a river crossing, apparently as part of a vessel swap among boatmen:

BM 32873: 2
… a boat (eleppu) which is six cubits wide at the beam, a ṭubbû which is at the crossing, and a boat (eleppu) five and a half (cubits) wide at the beam which is at the bridge, they exchanged for (?) one boat which is five cubits wide at the beam.


The consonants t (in tēvāh) and ṭ (in ṭubbû) are distinct from one another, so it is impossible that ṭubbû, a masculine noun of unknown etymology, and tēvāh, a feminine noun of unknown etymology, represent the same word etymologically. I think that the Judaeans encountered the Akkadian boat word ṭubbû used for the Ark in the story along with the other Akkadian ark words and Hebraised it as tēvāh. In this case the original consonants are less important; the idea was to render the foreign word, for it was only to be used twice in the whole Bible, once for Noah, once for Moses. The relationship between the words is thus that they are neither cognate nor loaned: the Babylonian was given a Hebrew ‘shape’. It is much the same as the way in which Nebuchadnezzar’s eunuch Nabu-sharrussu-ukin became Nebusarsekim in the Book of Jeremiah. This would perforce mean that the word ṭubbû must have occurred in place of eleppu, ‘boat’, for Utnapishti’s Ark, in some first millennium BC Babylonian source for the Flood Story that we do not have now.

An alternative possibility is that the Hebrew word tēvāh is a so-called Wanderwort, one of those basic words that spread across numerous languages and cultures, sometimes as a consequence of trade, whose original etymology or language becomes obscured (a good example is chai and tea), lasting for ever. We would have then an old, non-Semitic word for a very simple kind of river boat – conceivably even ultimately ancestral to the English tub – which appears as ṭubbû in Babylonian, tēvāh in Hebrew. One could imagine readily enough that such a simple word for a simple boat might survive along the waterways of the world for endless centuries.

Turned upside down these boats produce a dull ‘dub’ sort of thumpy thud. It is curious that tub, like ark, can mean box, chest and boat. Ironically this Babylonian word ṭubbû, like tēvāh, is rare too: it occurs twice in the tablet just quoted and nowhere else.

Either proposal would account for the biblical name for the Ark:

either the Judaeans encountered the ark word ṭubbû and Hebraised it to tēvāh, or they called the Ark tēvāh because it corresponded to the shape characteristic of that kind of old boat which was known to them as a tēvāh and to the Babylonians as a ṭubbû.

Either way the epic of Ziusudra will predate the younger Noah flood epic, and of course we still have an issue of Tevah, though I'm not totally sure it would relate to the Aramaic Tivah in its entirety. Tevah is still not Gopher Wood related to a very specific instruction.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This is a peculiar state of affairs for one of the most famous and influential paragraphs in all of the world’s writing.

Everything important in Christianity is covered by multiple authors in different books spread over time.
 
Upvote 0

ShamashUruk

Hello
Jul 19, 2017
563
71
44
California
✟32,490.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
Everything important in Christianity is covered by multiple authors in different books spread over time.

This is or concerns the ark epic, not other books of the Bible.

Hence, we don't see another flood epic in the New Testament.

However, to your assertion of translation. We aren't talking about later translations of Biblical mythologies only those pertaining to the original epics of Antrahasis or Ziusdra and much later Noah.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others

OK.
My mistake and off topic.
 
Reactions: ShamashUruk
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Interesting because we don't see other flood epics, only the one, however there are over 300 flood epics depending on which culture is involved.

God exists outside of time. So just as Adam was
an "echo" that came before Jesus, there may be
similar floods in different times, even before.
 
Upvote 0

ShamashUruk

Hello
Jul 19, 2017
563
71
44
California
✟32,490.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
God exists outside of time. So just as Adam was
an "echo" that came before Jesus, there may be
similar floods in different times, even before.

The epic of Adam and the Garden of Eden aren't written until about 1700 BC by Moses.

Also, other Epics date at differing times.

I am unaware of the epic of Noah dating beyond the writings of Moses as well.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The epic of Adam and the Garden of Eden aren't written until about 1700 BC by Moses.

Also, other Epics date at differing times.

I am unaware of the epic of Noah dating beyond the writings of Moses as well.
God exists outside of time.
Timing
is of no consequence to God.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Nice video, highly entertaining. Though one can tell that Finkel does not believe the Noah's Ark myth, he merely recognized a forerunner to the Epic of Gilgamesh, and it was probably the ultimate source of the tale.

On a related note here is an article about the flood that probably inspired the story:

Yes, Noah's Flood May Have Happened, But Not Over the Whole Earth | NCSE
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
The epic of Adam and the Garden of Eden aren't written until about 1700 BC by Moses.

Also, other Epics date at differing times.

I am unaware of the epic of Noah dating beyond the writings of Moses as well.

No, Moses appears to be a fictional character of the Bible. Historians have known for quite some time there was no Exodus as portrayed in the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

ShamashUruk

Hello
Jul 19, 2017
563
71
44
California
✟32,490.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
No, Moses appears to be a fictional character of the Bible. Historians have known for quite some time there was no Exodus as portrayed in the Bible.

I agree with Professor Finkel.

The Pentateuch was most likely written by Yahwehistic cultist, but for purposes of Christian theology we can call it Moses (only for the sake of keeping traditions in each culture) though the realization is that each culture adopted and borrowed from each culture.

For example the God Iskur in Sumer is a storm God, later on we see the same traits with the God Ba'al in Canaan and later on the same storm God traits with Yahweh, and even Jesus the myth hero of the Bible is seen in Luke 8:25 as having powers over storms.

It is improper to state that each culture "stole" an epic, as each culture in their own belief would agree among themselves that their epic is not "stolen", but we can definitely see adaptations from culture to culture. It's like having a one country with a president and another country with a president, the presidential functions in each country may not be the same, but we see characteristics from country to country.

Same as the 10 commandments written on Cuneiform are shortened laws and adopted by the Israelite's from the code of Hammurabi.

Same as Abraham or Abram, who comes out of Ur, that is a common stock west Semitic name, yet Abraham is a Sumerian as Ur is a Sumerian city, located now Tell el-Muqayyar, Dhi Qar Province, Iraq.
 
Upvote 0

ShamashUruk

Hello
Jul 19, 2017
563
71
44
California
✟32,490.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
God exists outside of time.
Timing
is of no consequence to God.

Monotheism develops from Polytheism, so the idea of a singular God is a much later invention. Therefore the adopted idea of God comes with inventions when the God idea is adopted into specific cultures.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
So not Moses. By the way when and where did he mention Moses? I must have missed that.


Why the red herring? Did I say "stolen"? I did not even imply it. The ancient Hebrews got their myths from an earlier source. Those people still had their myths. At worst they were adopted.


And it is rather difficult with the Bible to say when the myths end and when the narrative becomes more historical. I have no problem with the fact that part of the Bible is correct.
 
Upvote 0

ShamashUruk

Hello
Jul 19, 2017
563
71
44
California
✟32,490.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private

You stated that Moses is a fictional character, it was you who mentioned it. I was responding to it, hence I don't disagree that Moses was a fictional character, but I add that Yahwehistic Cultist penned the Pentateuch.

Where did you get "red herring" from?

The Ancient Israelite's adopted earlier myths, but stole them can be inferred by a more general audience (keep in mind I am not solely addressing you, in case there are more people viewing this posting), though in understanding how these ancient cultures operated it is less likely there is anything but adopted belief systems.

I disagree with "difficult with the Bible to say when the myths end and when the narrative becomes more historical" in fact that statement is ill stated.
This is generally traced by linguistics, archaeology, and other means related to studying Ancient Near East.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
You stated that Moses is a fictional character, it was you who mentioned it. I was responding to it, hence I don't disagree that Moses was a fictional character, but I add that Yahwehistic Cultist penned the Pentateuch.

No one is disputing the latter. You can't seem to follow a conversation. Moses is fictional. You in an off handed way tried to claim that he wasn't. You made a claim, I asked for support. If you can't support your claims when challenged in a debate you lose

Where did you get "red herring" from?

You brought up the phrase "stolen". No one had made that claim. That is a red herring:

Red Herring


Did I say "stolen"?


Then you know far less about the Bible than you pretend to. There are mythic elements to even tales that are supported by archaeology. Where one draws the line is difficult.
 
Upvote 0

ShamashUruk

Hello
Jul 19, 2017
563
71
44
California
✟32,490.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private

Moses is not fictional to the ancient Israelite's, just as Ba'al is not fictional to the Canaanite's, just as Jesus is not fictional to Christians and I'm not one to take that away from them, but I am one to state that those character's aformentioned are seen from culture to culture.

Yes I brought up the phrase "stolen", due to the fact that you are incompetent. Just was hoping you'd learn a lesson.

No, if you don't read up on archaeology then your blanket statement is just a guess. Check the Cuneiform discovered by Leonard Woolley, MJ Geller, and other researchers in ANE. You will see that timelines can be placed, even up to Biblical writings.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single


Sorry, but their personal beliefs does not alter the fact that they were both fictional. Do you not understand that meaning of the word? Even if someone really really believes in Spiderman that does not mean that he is not a fictional character.

And please you are merely projecting.

Try again.
 
Upvote 0

ShamashUruk

Hello
Jul 19, 2017
563
71
44
California
✟32,490.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private

The person who wears the spiderman costume however is a real person, bad analogy.

I don't see any reason to tell a Christian that Jesus was a fictional character, I don't see any reason to tell a Muslim that Allah is a fictional character, even if they are.

I do however approach those fictional characters as borrowed from culture to culture, hence, my goal is not to destroy someone's faith. Actually the opposite, my goal is to hopefully have the person leave a conversation with a hope that they will conduct proper research.

If you want to approach people in their faith that way, that is up to you.

I don't want to bash atheism, I'd rather bash you, you are an example of negativity and lunacy coupled. Negative because you want to destroy people's beliefs and lunacy because people don't generally turn from their beliefs easily, especially when attacked in such a way. You aren't exposing anything as false, you just make pointless inflammatory statements.
 
Upvote 0