Evidences that support the reliability of the Bible
- Thread starter studentofthemarkets
- Start date
- Status
There is an MA Thesis on this topic, by Nozomi Osanai, A comparitive study of the flood accounts in the Gilgamesh Epic and Genesis, Wesley Bible Seminary, USA, 2004. https://creation.com/comparative-study-of-gilgamesh-and-genesis-introduction.
In the introduction there is an acknowledgement of your view, and that of most scholars.
"Comparing the flood stories in the Gilgamesh Epic and Genesis, one is impressed with the numerous similarities between the two accounts. The common elements between the two have been perplexing for some scholars. Alexander Heidel shows the three main possibilities about the relationship between the two accounts: “first, the Babylonians borrowed from the Hebrew account; second, the Hebrew account is dependent on the Babylonian; third, both are descended from a common original.” The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels, "Because the Epic written in Akkadian predates the Old Testament written in Hebrew, “The most widely accepted explanation today is the second, namely, that the biblical account is based on Babylonian material. This theory poses an awkward problem for Christians. While the fact that there are flood legends like the Genesis Flood account in most cultures around the world is used to testify to the reliability of the Bible, the Gilgamesh Epic is used to deny the authority of the Bible because of its predating."
There are 7 chapters between the introduction and the conclusion.
The conclusion made some excellent points. I haven't posted all of them, but here are the concluding remarks, I added the bold letter for emphasis:
"This writer believes the third theory—that both accounts descended from a common origin—is the most plausible one. As noted in chapter one, the Epic was likely derived from the Sumerian story which was probably based on an historical event, though distorted. On the other hand, according to the specifics, scientific reliability, internal consistency, the correspondence to the secular records, and the existence of common elements among the flood traditions around the world, the Genesis account seems to be more acceptable as an accurate historical record. If all human races are descendents of Noah’s three sons, the survivors from the universal Flood, and the two accounts had derived from the same historical event,2 the reason the accounts have many similarities is explicable. As K. A. Kitchen states, it is likely that “The Hebrew and Babylonian accounts may go back to a common ancient tradition, but are not borrowed directly from each other.”3 Even though the Genesis account was written in Hebrew which was used later than Akkadian in which the Epic was written, the historical event of the Flood was much earlier than the publication of the Epic. Henry Thiessen writes
First, it is known generally that a considerable portion of the people could read and write as far back as the time of Hammurabi; that genealogical tablets and lists were known in Babylonia centuries before Abraham; that it is possible that Abraham carried cuneiform tablets containing such records with him from Haran to Canaan; and that in this manner Moses may have come into possession of them. Whether because he had access to such records, or because he had only oral tradition, or because he had only a direct revelation from God, or because of a combination of these, conservative scholarship has always held that Moses wrote Genesis.4
Even if Moses had used some source materials which are not extant today, the process of his gathering and compiling them to write Genesis would have been guided correctly by God.5 Thus, after investigating the differences between the Gilgamesh Epic and Genesis, it seems reasonable for this writer to conclude that the flood account in the Epic is the story which lost historical accuracy and was distorted, whereas the Genesis Flood account is the accurate historical record of the Flood event." https://creation.com/conclusion-of-nozomi-osanais-thesis-gilgamesh-epic-v-genesisThe Bible says that God spoke to Moses many times, even as one speaks to a friend. I agree with the conclusion that Nozomi Osanai stated. Even if oral tradition and written records were sources for Genesis, God ultimately "guided" Moses.
Exodus 34:29-35
"29 When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands, he was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the Lord. 30 When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, his face was radiant, and they were afraid to come near him. 31 But Moses called to them; so Aaron and all the leaders of the community came back to him, and he spoke to them. 32 Afterward all the Israelites came near him, and he gave them all the commands the Lord had given him on Mount Sinai.
33 When Moses finished speaking to them, he put a veil over his face. 34 But whenever he entered the Lord’s presence to speak with him, he removed the veil until he came out. And when he came out and told the Israelites what he had been commanded, 35 they saw that his face was radiant. Then Moses would put the veil back over his face until he went in to speak with the Lord."
Exodus 33:11 "The Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend."
https://creation.com/media-center/youtube/marine-fossils-on-mount-everest
"What do marine fossils on the top of Mount Everest tell us about the Biblical Flood? Well, we find fossils of marine creatures in limestone near the summit, which means that this area must have been under the sea in the past."
Take a look at the video at 6 seconds. It shows the image of the fossils in limestone from Mt. Everest. They don't look to me like they were "left at various times on the mountains" as described in wikipedia. What was Leonardo da Vinci thinking? Kids were playing with fossils and brought them on a hike up Mt. Everest?
What do you think?
Last edited:
https://weather.com/en-IN/india/news/news/2018-06-29-fish-fossil-himalayas
Weather.com doesn't give Noah's flood as an explanation of the fish fossils on Mt. Everest, but it does confirm that Mt. Everest was at one time underwater.
Weather.com doesn't give Noah's flood as an explanation of the fish fossils on Mt. Everest, but it does confirm that Mt. Everest was at one time underwater.
Flood myth
A flood myth or deluge myth is a myth in which a great flood, usually sent by a deity or deities, destroys civilization, often in an act of divine retribution. Parallels are often drawn between the flood waters of these myths and the primeval waters which appear in certain creation myths, as the flood waters are described as a measure for the cleansing of humanity, in preparation for rebirth. Most flood myths also contain a culture hero, who "represents the human craving for life".
WikipediaA flood myth or deluge myth is a myth in which a great flood, usually sent by a deity or deities, destroys civilization, often in an act of divine retribution. Parallels are often drawn between the flood waters of these myths and the primeval waters which appear in certain creation myths, as the flood waters are described as a measure for the cleansing of humanity, in preparation for rebirth. Most flood myths also contain a culture hero, who "represents the human craving for life".
There is of course, no evidence whatsoever for Noah, Moses or Jonah (most ridiculous of all) that meets with basic common sense, never mind archeological standards, nor is there for any of the allegorical tales associated with them.
Does it really need stating how these fables meet only the criteria of entirely fictional characters in the entirely fictional Bible, like Thor and Loki do in the entirely fictional Marvel.
Surely it's possible for one to believe, find comfort or meaning in and enjoy myths and fairy tales, without trying to pretend or dishonestly claim (like an idiot), that they actually happened.
"..time to put away those childish things".
It is the 21st century for fooks sake!
The explanation that the fish and fossils were there before the mountains rose makes sense without any supernatural explanation.
https://weather.com/en-IN/india/news/news/2018-06-29-fish-fossil-himalayas
The book of Jonah shows God directly intervening from the beginning to the end of the story. Jonah 1:1 "The word of the LORD came to Jonah son of Amittai: 'Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me.'" Verse 4 says, "Then the LORD sent a great wind on the sea, and such a violent storm arose that the ship threatened to break up." Verse 17 says, "Now the LORD provided a huge fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights."That's a lot of Divine intervention in just the first chapter. If it is impossible for a human to live in a fish for 3 days and 3 nights under normal conditions, then God must have Divinely intervened here as well.
I'm responding to your question on the other thread (about creation vs evolution) over here because it has to do with the nature and attributes of God.
Maxinger wrote, "When God created this world, did God consider the maximum number of human creatures this world can support?"
Isaiah 46:10 NIV says, "I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, 'My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.'"
God is omniscient which means he knows all things.
Here's a short video I found that discusses His omniscience:
Dr. Kurt Wise holds a B.A. with honors in geophysical sciences from the University of Chicago and an M.A. and Ph.D. in geology from Harvard University. He is a member of the Geological Society of America.
I came across the following article today and it gives an introduction to some of the ideas I've been wanting to share on here from watching videos of Dr. Kurt Wise.
https://truthsnitch.com/tag/dr-kurt-wise/#sthash.qZ1uUbz2.Jytvi5bZ.dpbs
Creationist Theory on Ascending Complexity of Life Ordered in Precambrian/lower Cambrian Sediments
I added the bold lettering for emphasis.
First quote:
"Wise admits that “Creationist palaeontology is an immature field” and that their “resources… are severely limited.” However, Wise believes his theory is the one aligning most closely with the evidence."
Second quote:
"Interestingly, this alternative interpretation of the data wasn’t arrived at by a group of YEC scientists. Instead, the theory that follows was developed during the course of a Harvard University graduate class under renowned paleontologist and evolutionary biologist Stephen Gould, studying the Cambrian explosion. Although Wise doesn’t reveal if any of the other class participants besides himself were YEC’s, he does note that the conclusions being drawn were (understandably) disconcerting to the evolutionists working on the project.
It all began when the group made an interesting observation: within the stratomorphic series,
each type of fauna is specific to a particular type of rock. For example: the Ediacaran Fauna is almost always found in sand; the Tommotian Fauna is always in carbonates; and the Atdabanian Fauna is always in shale. Therefore, the faunal sequence is dependent on the type of rock (facies dependant)."
The group recognized this phenomenon to be in keeping with “Walther’s Law” which Wise summarizes as, “a principle in geology stating that if you have a series of lithosomes (types of rock) stacked vertically in a particular order, it could be that the order is due to a transgression event or a regression event, where the first thing is formed in shallow water, the next thing is formed in deeper water, and the next thing is formed in even deeper water. It could be that what you see vertically, is what the world was like horizontally at the time of deposition… So, you’re not actually looking at three different aged things. You’re looking at three different things at different positions.”
Third quote:
"Wise continues by explaining that this finding is magnified when one realizes that whatever process has buried these fauna in this same pattern, it is represented identically in 12 different geographical locations all over the earth! So, the next step becomes figuring out how closely the age of these 12 different deposits can be determined. Wise says, “Again, we concluded that we cannot discern differences in their age at the level of the radiometric pixel. So, they could all be at exactly the same moment in time, and that the same event, a global event, buried them in the same sequence for that reason.” Therefore, the data contained in the Precambrian and lower Cambrian layers can very well be interpreted in support of the Genesis global flood event, documenting life existing simultaneously, and ordered in horizontal proximity to one another."
I came across the following article today and it gives an introduction to some of the ideas I've been wanting to share on here from watching videos of Dr. Kurt Wise.
https://truthsnitch.com/tag/dr-kurt-wise/#sthash.qZ1uUbz2.Jytvi5bZ.dpbs
Creationist Theory on Ascending Complexity of Life Ordered in Precambrian/lower Cambrian Sediments
I added the bold lettering for emphasis.
First quote:
"Wise admits that “Creationist palaeontology is an immature field” and that their “resources… are severely limited.” However, Wise believes his theory is the one aligning most closely with the evidence."
Second quote:
"Interestingly, this alternative interpretation of the data wasn’t arrived at by a group of YEC scientists. Instead, the theory that follows was developed during the course of a Harvard University graduate class under renowned paleontologist and evolutionary biologist Stephen Gould, studying the Cambrian explosion. Although Wise doesn’t reveal if any of the other class participants besides himself were YEC’s, he does note that the conclusions being drawn were (understandably) disconcerting to the evolutionists working on the project.
It all began when the group made an interesting observation: within the stratomorphic series,
each type of fauna is specific to a particular type of rock. For example: the Ediacaran Fauna is almost always found in sand; the Tommotian Fauna is always in carbonates; and the Atdabanian Fauna is always in shale. Therefore, the faunal sequence is dependent on the type of rock (facies dependant)."
The group recognized this phenomenon to be in keeping with “Walther’s Law” which Wise summarizes as, “a principle in geology stating that if you have a series of lithosomes (types of rock) stacked vertically in a particular order, it could be that the order is due to a transgression event or a regression event, where the first thing is formed in shallow water, the next thing is formed in deeper water, and the next thing is formed in even deeper water. It could be that what you see vertically, is what the world was like horizontally at the time of deposition… So, you’re not actually looking at three different aged things. You’re looking at three different things at different positions.”
Third quote:
"Wise continues by explaining that this finding is magnified when one realizes that whatever process has buried these fauna in this same pattern, it is represented identically in 12 different geographical locations all over the earth! So, the next step becomes figuring out how closely the age of these 12 different deposits can be determined. Wise says, “Again, we concluded that we cannot discern differences in their age at the level of the radiometric pixel. So, they could all be at exactly the same moment in time, and that the same event, a global event, buried them in the same sequence for that reason.” Therefore, the data contained in the Precambrian and lower Cambrian layers can very well be interpreted in support of the Genesis global flood event, documenting life existing simultaneously, and ordered in horizontal proximity to one another."
As a young earth creationist, Wise is not doing science, he is doing theology.
YEC's start out with an unshakeable conclusion, and then go out to bend or even break any evidence they can to fit that religious belief.
You should know that is not how science works.
"Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand." [Kurt Wise]
You have to give credit for his honesty but it is horribly depressing to see how religious brainwashing can mess up the human psyche that way .
Just think of it. A scientist who is saying of evolution that, no evidence whatsoever no matter how overwhelmingly clear and confirmable, observable, testable and provable it is, will ever make any difference if it is contrary to what he wants to believe.
Last edited:
He did say, however, "Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture." So, there are scientific reasons that he believe validate his beliefs.
I watched a video where Dr. Wise explains why he is a creationist. I was expecting a lot of scientific evidences. I was surprised at what he shared.
Dr. Wise began his love for science while a child. He accepted Christ when he was nine years old. He believed in both evolution and God for a while. While in high school he came to the realization that evolution and the Bible contradict each other and he believed both couldn’t be true. I have quoted his words directly from the video, though I skipped over some parts, so that the rest of the story comes across in his own words.
Beginning at the timestamp 17:08 until the end of the video:
(While in high school he went through a crisis deciding whether to believe evolution or the Bible.)
“It’s either evolution, which I equated with science, or it’s the Bible. It can’t be both. And I thought back to the age 9 when my sunday school teacher took his Bible….”
“and introduced me to Jesus Christ”
“....my salvation was, came a few days after I decided to commit suicide. My salvation saved me spiritual and physically. “
“...Jesus had become a friend. I couldn’t give up the Bible. So I gave up everything I loved, gave up science, and I cried for 3 days….”
“And on a Friday I got into the bus with the rest of the youth group…”
“...got into a gymnasium..”
“A person stood up on a, in a podium, and introduced himself and said, ‘Hi, I’m a scientist. I’m a creationist. I don’t believe in evolution.’ And I don’t remember a thing he said after that because the thing was like WHAT, you mean, you mean you can do science and reject evolution? That evolution isn’t science? You can tease that out?
“It’s as if God said…..”
“God gave me back science because He said, ‘now I know you love Me more than the science.’ That is why I am a creationist…..”
“I believe the truth of the Bible. Therefore I believe that God created only thousands of years ago. That’s why I am a young earth creationist and there I must stand.”
- Status