Refutation of religions, part four. The Flood

The flood story has for long been the most controversial aspect of religious study. Today there is not a single serious scholar, either Historian or Theologian who assert that it came from the Israelites.

The evidence is just insurmountable, the same exact story has been found, written down 3000 years before the Israelites wrote down anything, and some of today’s manufacturers of delusions would have it that the Sumerians were influenced by a tale which came 3000 years later? When your religion is based on faith, clinging to straws may be better than admitting a fallacy because a fallacy it is.

The Original tale was Sumerian, it was the God of heaven, Enlil, who had decided humans were too noisy so he would do away with them. The God of wisdom Enki (Later Ea) spoke to the Sumerian Noah, Ziusudra, through the wall of his hut and told him to build an ark to save him and his family. The later Acadian’s who entered the scene before the Babylonians named him Utnapistim and later the Babylonians called him Noah.

To say this tale is an actual event having to do with the Hebrew deity is another example of what length the church will go to in order to have it their way.

Scholars ceased to debate the origin of the story more than a hundred years ago, that is how obvious it is. There is no excuse for anyone to preach the debunked tale from the pulpit unless of course as an example of how Sumerian tales found their way into the Bible.

So the difference in the tale is the names of the people and gods. There is also a difference in how the god got the message to the person who built the boat. The other difference was that the Sumerian hero along with his wife was granted eternal life. Ziusudra was the person visited by Gilgamesh in the previous article when Gilgamesh was in search of eternal life. Other than that, if you desire to read the 5000+ year old Sumerian epic read the 2300 year old tale from the Bible, they are virtually identical.

Scientifically there are also problems so one should not take the Sumerian flood to have encompassed the entire planet. For one thing there would not have been enough time since the flood for nature to have evolved all the species which could not possibly have fit on the ark. Not even today’s supertankers could have held two of each of the species on earth which exist today and would have been wiped out in such a flood.
The other scientific problem is water; there just is not enough of it to completely cover the earth. Saying that there was more water on the planet back then would be absurd.

When evidence takes second place to “Faith