• 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.

The Sumerian Flood Narrative

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I'll take someone's valid questions to a point; but when they show absolutely no desire to assimilate what I'm saying, and when every point I make brings up another question or two ... it's time to quit.

Please explain how I was doing this. I did "assimilate" what you had posted earlier, and my questions were all sincere. You claimed Satan had "taken over" the serpent, and all I asked for was some scriptural support for this claim, and if you considered it Basic Doctrine or not. I have seen both claims that the serpent was Satan and claims that he had used the serpent here in this forum. Neither claim makes any sense to me, since A. The serpent was the one punished by God and B. If the serpent was Satan, he should still be crawling on his belly eating dirt.
 
Upvote 0

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single

Please make your posts longer, they are too short.
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,550
28,531
74
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,300.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Upvote 0

Jamin4422

Member
Jul 5, 2012
2,957
17
✟3,349.00
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
In Relationship
1. No experts believe that.
Don't act like you never heard of The Tablet Theory[FONT=arial,sans-serif] or the Wiseman Hypothesis. Just because you happen to believe the [/FONT]Documentary Hypothesis. There are people that believe Genesis was Originally on Clay Tablets. Even if you lean toward revisionism.

3. What was his father-in-law's name?
Jethro, wow that is unusual, we are having a graduate level discussion about the scriptures and then you ask me a grade school level question?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,452
805
73
Chicago
✟138,626.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married

This is the first time I read this translated version of the Sumerian flood description. I would have to say that it is VERY DIFFERENT from the description of the Biblical Flood.

Among many, two things are VERY IMPORTANT:

1. The source of water and the way water drowned the land.
2. The way that the flood water receded.

The Sumerian flood description is much more like a flood caused by a super storm. Such a flood is not able to drown the earth. The Biblical Flood is an entirely different one.
 
Upvote 0

Doveaman

Re-Created, Not Evolved.
Mar 4, 2009
8,464
597
✟87,895.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Scholars agree
No, they don't.
(and it should be clear to anyone who has read both stories)
Except that it isn't.
that the Noachian deluge of the Bible is derived from the flood tale in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Correction:

1) We have two different versions of the same event.

2) Although the versions differ, they both acknowledge there was an event.

3) One version is the human inspired version, and the other version is the God inspired version.

4) The God inspired version reprimands and corrects the human inspired version: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction...." - (2 Tim 3:16).

Case Closed.
 
Upvote 0

Doveaman

Re-Created, Not Evolved.
Mar 4, 2009
8,464
597
✟87,895.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Site Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,070
16,820
Dallas
✟918,891.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Jethro the Midianite was the father of Zipporah, the first wife of Moses. Exodus 3.
Jethro, wow that is unusual, we are having a graduate level discussion about the scriptures and then you ask me a grade school level question?

I misread Jamin's run-on sentence as if he were suggesting Moses had an Egyptian priest as a father-in-law, and that was from whom he had learned.

My mistake.

Don't act like you never heard of The Tablet Theory or the Wiseman Hypothesis. Just because you happen to believe the Documentary Hypothesis. There are people that believe Genesis was Originally on Clay Tablets. Even if you lean toward revisionism.

No, I hadn't heard of the Tablet Theory. And having just read up on it, I can see why. No one takes it seriously.
 
Upvote 0

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
It contradicts the God inspired version.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction.." - (2 Tim 3:16).

Or does it just contradict your fallible interpretation of "the God inspired version?"
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,790
52,555
Guam
✟5,135,623.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Or does it just contradict your fallible interpretation of "the God inspired version?"
Whose fallible interpretation should he use? yours? someone who says we should be hunting witches?

How many fallible interpretations does the moon have?
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,550
28,531
74
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,300.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Originally Posted by Doveaman
It contradicts the God inspired version.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction.." - (2 Tim 3:16).
Or does it just contradict your fallible interpretation of "the God inspired version?"
My bro, the Apostle Paul, was quite good a creating dissensions among various Jews in his days. This particular event especially comes to mind when Paul brought up about the "resurrection" of the dead.

Luke 2:34 Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary His mother, "Behold! this One is destined for the falling and resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be spoken against

Search for 'Genesis 1:1' in the version

Acts 23:6 and Paul having known that the one part are Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, cried out in the sanhedrim, "Men, brethren, I am a Pharisee--son of a Pharisee--concerning hope and resurrection of dead men I am judged."
7 And he having spoken this, there came a dissension of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees, and the crowd was divided,
8 for Sadducees indeed say there is no resurrection, nor messenger, nor spirit, but Pharisees confess both.
9 And there came a great cry, and the scribes of the Pharisees' part having arisen, were striving, saying, "No evil do we find in this man; and if a spirit spake to him, or a messenger, we may not fight against God;'

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G386&t=KJV
Strong's Number G386 matches the Greek ἀνάστασις (anastasis), which occurs 42 times in 40 verses in the Greek concordance

...
 
Upvote 0

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Whose fallible interpretation should he use? yours? someone who says we should be hunting witches?

You know AVET, all I ask is that you guys acknowledge that your interpretation of scripture, whatever conclusions you come up with, is fallible and not "The Inerrant Word of God." So, as to your question, you can use whichever one you want, as long as you don't make excessive claims about it. Problem is, you guys don't want to do that, because then you lose the weapon of "Biblical Infallibility."
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,790
52,555
Guam
✟5,135,623.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You know AVET, all I ask is that you guys acknowledge that your interpretation of scripture, whatever conclusions you come up with, is fallible...
Why should we do that?

You guys do it enough for us.
... and not "The Inerrant Word of God."
God's Word is inerrant ... errant interpretations aren't.
So, as to your question, you can use whichever one you want, as long as you don't make excessive claims about it.
I don't bow to your rules.

Jesus walking on water constitutes an 'excessive claim' to you guys; does it not?

Jesus walking on water constitutes an 'errant interpretation' to you guys; does it not?
Problem is, you guys don't want to do that, because then you lose the weapon of "Biblical Infallibility."
I disagree ... Biblical infallibility stands on its own.

God tells us how the Bible can be falsified; and as yet, It hasn't been.

I'll ask you again though, because this is a good point that I think makes you uneasy:

Of the six natural explanations as to how we got our moon, which one do you subscribe to, and is it 'infallible' as well?

If you say it is infallible, then your point about infallibility can take a hike.

Look in the mirror.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,790
52,555
Guam
✟5,135,623.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Here's a second point I'd like to make:

Why is it that those who interpret the Scriptures allegorically don't seem to bother you at all?

Those who interpret Genesis 1, for example, to fit the Big Bang paradigm nary get a hoot out of you guys, does it?

That's because ... in my opinion ... the only thing that really bothers you guys is the literal interpretation of the Bible.

That's what brings you guys out of the woodwork, demanding we admit 'our interpretation could be infallible' ... isn't it?
 
Upvote 0

Mr Strawberry

Newbie
Jan 20, 2012
4,180
81
Great Britain
✟27,542.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
God's Word is inerrant
Words are just labels, or approximations if you like. By definition it is impossible for them to be entirely inerrant. So your statement that God's word is inerrant is silly. If He is using words then he has already conceded inerrancy.
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,550
28,531
74
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,300.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
These characters Jesus spoke to weren't very inerrant in their interpretations of the Scriptures

KJV) Matthew 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God"

Mark 12:27 "He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err".

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary
Jesus vs the Pharisees
Words are just labels, or approximations if you like. By definition it is impossible for them to be entirely inerrant. So your statement that God's word is inerrant is silly. If He is using words then he has already conceded inerrancy.
Uh oh....

.....
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Just another example of you refusing point blank to face the truth when you don't like it.

That's the point of religious insecurity -- it's all about redefining reality to one's personal comfort rather than accept it for what it is.
 
Upvote 0