More like the story of Gilgamesh is a modified copy of the story of Noah. The so-called experts, athiests who also admit their main reason for distorting the evidence they find is to prove Christians wrong, all believe that Gilgamesh is older but there is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.
31 comments
"their main reason for distorting the evidence they find is to prove Christians wrong"
I hate to break it to you, but we have not been exploring the history of our planet just to prove the Bible wrong. Evidence may come out of it which does so, but so too does evidence which Christians twist around to claim that the Bible is true.
"More like the story of Gilgamesh is a modified copy of the story of Noah "What ?
The Epic of Gilgamesh is about an invincible hero-king, part God, his epic battle and subsequent kinship with the wildman Enkindu, their battle with a giant boar and Enkindu's inevitable death.
Noah's Ark is about... well, Noah's Ark.
HOW THE FUCK ARE THOSE TWO STORIES ANYTHING ALIKE
"More like the story of Gilgamesh is a modified copy of the story of Noah. The so-called experts, athiests who also admit their main reason for distorting the evidence they find is to prove Christians wrong, all believe that Gilgamesh is older but there is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise."Just because you find the facts uncomfortable, does not mean they are not the facts.
Just because those who do the research do not come to a conclusion you like does not mean they are in error. While it is common in creationist/Bible literalist circles to lie and distort the facts, most scholars try to avoid such behaviors.
Just because you say there is evidence showing that the Noah story is older than the Gilgamesh story does not mean you're correct.
Well, except for the fact that Gilgamesh is a hell of a lot cooler than Noah, and there are no direct correlations that I can think of. Except for them both being fictional. Maybe people should actually try reading things before they start trying to shoehorn them into their favorite bedtime story.
There is no evidence to "suggest" that the story if Noah is older than Gilgamesh. There is, however, quite a lot of evidence to support the reverse.
"there is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise"
The so-called experts, athiests who also admit their main reason for distorting the evidence they find is to prove Christians wrong, all believe that Gilgamesh is older but there is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.
They are not atheist. They are just common sense and put two and two together. If you discover clay tablets, which are(by exact thermolumminiscent proofs)5000 years old and you find the Bible, who reliable both Christian and secular scholars say it was written down in 700 BC after being told and retold from the second millenium BC in a place close to the bone to Palestine(and it doesn´t matter. Versions flood have been detected in India or in Greece, to name a few places), well, only an Alternative Bizarro Universe candidate like you can say such a nonsense. And I propose this one, because he denies data he´s handling, against all evidence.
Nothing surprising here...historically, religionists are famous for rejecting evidence to the contrary, and for good reason: their dogma depends upon it.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
