In the earliest Sumerian account, dated circa 1600 B.C. the Flood hero stands near a sidewall and receives a warning. No mention is made of what material this wall is composed of, that is to say we are NOT informed as to whether the wall is of reeds or wood or brick. NO mention is made of tearing down a house to build a boat. The ONLY mention of the boat is that is is "huge," we are NOT told if it was built shortly before the storm at a god's command or if had been in existence long before the storm, NOR are we told that the craft is made of reeds or of wood (emphasis mine):

"in the ki-ur (?), the gods, a wall [...]
Ziusudra hea[rd], standing by its side,
He stood at the left of the side-wall [...]
'Side-wall, I want to talk to you, [hold on] to my word,
[Pay atten]tion to my instructions:
On all dwellings (?), over the capitals the storm will [sweep].
The destruction of the descent of mankind...
The storm swept over the capitals.
And the destructive wind had ROCKED THE HUGE BOAT in the high water..."

(pp.143, 145. M. Civil. "The Sumerian Flood Story." W. G. Lambert & A. R. Millard. Atra-khasis, the Babylonian Story of the Flood. Winona Lake, Indiana. Eisenbrauns. 1999 reprint of 1969 Oxford University Press edition)


Lambert and Millard:

"The Sumerian epic edited by M. Civil on pp. 138-45 comes closest to Atra-khasis. Although only about a third of the text remains, this is sufficient to show that it has roughly the same content...Despite the similarity in content, the size is quite different (some 300 Sumerian as opposed to 1,245 Akkadian lines) and the wording nowhere agrees. Furthermore, the relative dates of the composition cannot be fixed. In its present form the Sumerian text is hardly much older than the tablet on which it is written (ca. 1600 BC), and this in all probability is the time that the Akkadian Atra-khasis was first being written down. It is possible that the Akkadian author knew the Sumerian text..." (p. 14. "Introduction." W. G. Lambert & A. R. Millard. Atra-khasis, the Babylonian Story of the Flood. Winona Lake, Indiana. Eisenbrauns. 1999 reprint of 1969 Oxford University Press edition)

According to Lambert and Millard the oldest reference to "the storm which swept over the land" (bringing the Flood) is in a hymn of Ishme-Dagan ca. 1953-1935 B.C. and a text mentioning Ur-Ninurta ca. 1923-1896 B.C. (p. 139. "Sumerian Flood Story." Lambert & Millard). Thus almost 1,000 years _after_ the ca. 2900 B.C. Shuruppak Flood, the "earliest" reference to the event appears ca. 1953-1935 B.C.

Heidel on the Shuruppak boat in the Epic of Gilgamesh (emphasis mine):

"Their speech [the gods] he [Enki] repeated to a REED HUT:
REED HUT, REED HUT ! Wall, wall !
REED HUT, hearken ! Wall, consider !
Man of Shuruppak, son of Ubar-Tutu !
Tear down (thy) house, build a ship !
Abandon (thy) possessions, seek to save life !
[Cause to go] into the ship the seed of all living creatures."

(pp. 80-81. "The Gilgamesh Epic." Alexander Heidel. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Chicago. University of Chicago Press. 1946, 1949. reprint 1993)


Professors Lambert and Millard present several Atra-khasis recensions of the Shuruppak flood including stray fragments. They noted that the earliest Atra-khasis account appeared to be no earlier than ca. 1600 B.C. One such fragment portrays the boat being MADE OF REEDS and called "The Life Saver" (Note: The Atra-khasis myth explains why the gods made man -they made man to work in their earthly city gardens planted before man's creation- man will grow the gods' food and present it to them at temples and shrines, that is to say man's purpose in life to work in the gods' gardens and present the gods' this food relieving the gods of agricultural toil. This myth also explains why later the gods seek to destroy mankind in a universal flood, he disturbs their rest with his noise. On the sebittu-day, the "seventh-day" of the flood, all the gods rest, now that the flood has destroyed mankind ending his noise):

Lambert and Millard (emphasis mine):

"...] I will explain
...a flood] will seize [sabat] all the peoples together
...].before the flood sets out
...] build a big boat.
LET ITS STRUCTURE BE [....] ENTIRELY OF REEDS.
...]let it be a maqurqurrum-boat with the name, The Life Saver.
...] roof it over with a strong covering.
[Into the boat which] you will make
[Send...].wild creatures of the steppe [se-rim], birds of the heavens
...] heap up

(p. 127. "CBS 13532-J."  W. G. Lambert & A. R. Millard. Atra-Khasis, The Babylonian Story of the Flood. With the Sumerian Flood Story [by M. Civil]. Winona Lake, Indiana. 1999 reprint of 1969 Oxford University Press edition. ISBN 1-57506-039-6)

Another fragment found at Ras Shamras (ancient Ugarit) in northern coastal Syria, ca. the 14th century B.C., suggests that the Mesopotamian flood hero dwelt in the temple of his god Ea (Enki). Perhaps the "reed-hut" was a reed shrine or temple? If so, then Noah's Ark was constructed of reeds from Ea's temple/shrine? Ea is portrayed at times on cylinder seals sitting in a rectangular shrine in the depths of the apsu/abzu (a freshwater ocean the earth floats upon), might the Ark's rectangular or cubic dimensions be recalling Enki's abode? That is to say, perhaps the Mesopoamian Ark's cubic dimensions is to honor Ea/Enki and his rectangular/cubic shrine which he dwells in within the abyss? Some cylinder seals show a rectangular shrine which may be of reeds. Please click here for examples of Lower Mesopotamian reed-hut buildings and shrines from antiquity to modern times.

Lambert and Millard (emphasis mine):

"When the gods took counsel in the lands
and brought the flood in the regions of the world,
....[....]..Ea in his heart.
"I am Atra-hasis,
I LIVED IN THE TEMPLE OF EA, my lord,
.......[.]
I knew the counsel of the great gods,
I knew of their oath, though they did not reveal it to me.
He repeated their words to the wall,
Wall, hear [....

(p. 133. "The Flood Story From Ras Shamras." W. G. Lambert & A. R. Millard. Atra-Khasis, The Babylonian Story of the Flood. With the Sumerian Flood Story [by M. Civil]. Winona Lake, Indiana. 1999 reprint of 1969 Oxford University Press edition. ISBN 1-57506-039-6)

Gray's commentary identifies such a building with the Shuruppak Flood hero:

"Cane-plaited hall in the marshes of southern Mesopotamia. It is the kind of 'reed-hut' to which the god Ea divulged the secret of the flood."

(cf. p. 48. John Gray. Near Eastern Mythology. London. Hamlyn Publishing Group Ltd. 1969. Note: John Gray in 1952 was a Lecturer in Hebrew and Biblical Criticism at the University of Aberdeen, Scotland, and in 1962 was appointed Professor of Hebrew and Semitic Languages)

Cohn (Professor Emertius at the University of Sussex, Sussex, England):

"Finally Enlil decided to send a flood which would altogether annihilate mankind. This time the gods had to swear not to tell any mortal of the plan -but Enki found a way around that too: he passed the information not directly to Atrahasis but to the wall of the reed hut where he lived, and the wall -perhaps thanks to the wind whistling through it- transmitted the message.

Enki's advice was to build a huge boat and coat it with pitch; according to the Epic of Gilgamesh, he was to pull down his hut and build a boat from the reeds (reed boats were as common as reed huts). Atrahasis set about the task with a will." (p. 5. "Mesopotamian Origins." Norman Cohn. Noah's Flood, The Genesis Story in Western Thought. New Haven & London. Yale University Press. 1996. ISBN 0-300-06823-9)

Below is a photo of a limestone bas-relief _found _at_Shuruppak_ dated to circa 2600-2500 B.C., the Early Dynastic IIIa Period, some 300 years AFTER the circa 2900 B.C. Shuruppak Flood. However, it is almost _1000 years AFTER_ the 2900 B.C. Shuruppak Flood that the earliest Mesopotamian texts make reference of a "Great Flood". That is to say, _if_ the 2600 B.C. bas-relief _is_ Ziusudra's boat, some 1000 years _after_ this sculpture's creation (cf. the ca. 1600 B.C. and later Atra-Khasis Epic), "tall tales" arise in Mesopotamian texts of the boat being made of reeds from a reed hut and possessing the dimensions of a multi-storied gigantic cube. This bas-relief shows two bearded men seated in a shallow boat. Below the craft swim several fish. Could this "boating scene" recall the story of the Shuruppak Flood? Is this boat what was later to be embellished into the Bible's "Noah's Ark"? Could one of these bearded men be Ziusudra, the "Mesopotamian Noah" and "son"? The bas-relief  appears to resemble a boat of WOOD _not_ reeds. The earliest Flood account which is in Sumerian ca. 1600 B.C. does NOT have a god informing a man to tear down a reed hut and make a boat of it, NOR does this account state that the boat is made of reeds. All that is said is that the boat is "large." It is a _later_ Akkadian account  (Atra-khasis) which has the "Mesopotamian Noah" constructing his boat of reeds from a reed hut and _still later_ accounts (Gilgamesh) have the boat constructed of wood.

All this suggests for me that THE SHURUPPAK BOAT WAS _ORIGINALLY OF WOOD_ AND ALREADY BUILT AND AT HAND when the Flood hero allegedly heard through a sidewall that a Flood was on its way. That is to say, the below ca. 2600 B.C. bas-relief of a WOODEN BOAT reveals that this is what the "ORIGINAL" Noah's Ark looked like ! Later generations would transform this craft into reeds made of a torn down reed hut (Atra-khasis). Still later generations, probably _objecting_ to the "impossiblity" of a gigantic boat of seven stories in height being made of reeds, portrayed the craft as being of wood (Gilgamesh).

The flood sediment found at Shuruppak was only two feet deep. So a shallow craft as portrayed in the below bas-relief would be adequate to withstand the inundation caused by a locally flooding Euphrates river. Succeeding ages apparently embellished this 3rd millennium B.C. event to make it a flood which covered the whole world. Of peculiar interest here is that the man seated on the viewer's left appears to be steering the boat with an oar that is bent at almost a right-angle. Is this unusual oar a type of rudder? (For the below photo, cf. p. 41. Figure 14. "Early Cities." H. W. F. Saggs. Babylonians [Peoples of the Past Series]. Berkeley & Los Angeles. University of California Press. [The British Musem. London. 2000]. ISBN 0-520-20222-8).

Saggs' commentary accompanying the below bas-relief:

"Shuruppak was prominent in ancient Mesopotamian tradition as the city of the great Flood. This piece of relief from Shuruppak Early Dynastic IIIa period (2600-2500 B.C.) shows a boating scene." (p. 41. Saggs)



Below, an impression from an ancient cylinder seal showing Enki/Ea standing within his Apsu house, two Lahmu gods serving as door keepers. Note the wavy lines symbolizing the watery abyss surrounding his dwelling. Enki/Ea is shown with two streams of water pouring forth from his body. He symbolized freshwaters, and provided the water for the Tigris and Euphrates; he was also the god of wisdom. In one myth, he gave man in the form of Adapa, great wisdom but denied him immortality. Before going to heaven to face the supreme god, Anu, Adapa had ben warned by Enki not to consume any food or drink as it was the food of death. In reality it would have bestowed immortality on Adapa, making him LIKE A GOD, but obeying Enki's injunction he refused the proffered food and drink and thus lost out on immortality for himself and for all mankind. In another myth, Enki makes man of clay over the Apsu in Eridu, to work in his fruit-tree garden which he planted for himself next to his reed shrine. Enki made man to be his agricultural servant, to work in his irrigated garden to relieve the junior Igigi gods of their burdensome toil in his garden. The creation of man gave the junior gods (the Igigi) an eternal rest from toil. So, Enki not only was responsible for man's creation, he denied him immortality, allowed him to acquire forbidden wisdom (reserved for the gods). And later saved a remnant of man in the form of Ziusudra by having a craft built to withstand the flood sent to destroy mankind. That is to say, I understand Ea/Enki was later transformed by the Hebrews in Yahweh-Elohim in Genesis. (for the photo cf. p. 98. "Ea." Piotr Bienkowski & Alan Millard. Dictionary of the Ancient Near East. Philadelphia. University of Pennsylvania Press. 2000. ISBN 0-8122-3557-6)

Of interest here, is that the man in the rectangular box on below seal was identified in 1875 by George Smith as  "Haisadra or the Chaldean Noah," Haisadra is rendered today as Sumerian Ziusudra (cf. p. 283. George Smith. The Chaldean Account of Genesis. London. 1875. Reprinted 1977, 1994 by Wizard Bookshelf. San Diego, California), he erred, its not Ziusudra, its Enki (Ea) who told Ziusudra (Atrahasis) to build his boat and save self, family and animals. Smith was 'the discoverer' of the Chaldean account of the Flood while reviewing tablets in the British Museum, London. On 3 December 1872 he "read his paper" before  the Society of Biblical Archaeology in London announcing to an astonished world his discovery of the Chaldean equivalent of the Bible's Flood account. Said tablets were from the Assyrian King Ashurbanipal's library at Nineveh. The Chaldean Flood account was correctly identified by Smith as being a part of the Epic of Gilgamesh (Smith's Izdubar today being rendered Gilgamesh).

As noted earlier, above, I understand that Noah's Flood is a later Hebrew reinterpretation and transformation of various motifs appearing in Mesopotamian flood myths, the event being recalled is the Shuruppak flood of ca. 2900 BC. Of interest are some "more" Mesopotamian motifs which appear in the Genesis Flood account:

In the Bible, we are told that the Flood commenced in the 600th year of Noah, I note that the Atrahasis myth suggests that the Flood occured at the end of a 600 year interval too. It appears _to me_ that the Hebrews have preserved Atrahasis' 600 year interval of time elapsing before a Flood commences and reformatted this motif as occurring in Noah's 600th year. Perhaps the Flood's commencement in the 600th year of Noah's life is a reformatting of the "catchline" or "repeating refrain" of the Atrahasis Epic that implies for 600 years the gods have endured man's noise and now seek his demise? In the epic, every 600 years (at last 3 or 4 times) Atrahasis receives advisement about the god's efforts to decimate mankind.

Genesis 7:11-12 RSV

"In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened. And rain fell upon the earth forty days and forty nights."

Dalley:

"600 years, less than 600, passed and the country became too wide, the people too numerous. The country was as noisy as a bellowing bull. The god grew restless at their clamor, Ellil had to listen to their noise. He addressed the great gods, "The noise of mankind has become too much. I am losing sleep over their racket." (p. 18. "Atrahasis." pp.1-38. Stephanie Dalley. Myths From Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others. New York. Oxford University Press. 1989, 1991. ISBN 0-19-281789-2. paperback)

Disease decimates the populaton (p.18. Dalley)

(Catchline)
"600 years, less 600 passed  (p. 20. Dalley)

"Tablet II :
600 years, less than 600, passed and the country became too wide, the people too numerous. The country was as noisy as a bellowing bull. The god grew restless at their clamor, Ellil had to listen to their noise. He addressed the great gods, "The noise of mankind has become too much. I am losing sleep over their racket." (p.20. Dalley)

3 year famine attempted (pp.20-22. Dalley)

"[600 years, less than 600, passed and the country became too wide, the people too numerous...He grew restless at their noise. Sleep could not overtake him because of their racket." (p.23. Dalley)

Dalley on the repeating 600 year refrain:

"Six hundred years is a round number in the sexagesimal system used by the ancient Mesopotamians. as a numerical unit, 600 was the simple noun neru in Akkadian. Repetition of a number seems to occur as a literary device..(Note 22. p. 37. "Atrahasis Notes." Dalley)

"Note the literary strategem which defies literal chronology by featuring Atrahasis as the same mortal in recurrent crises 600 years apart." (note 32. p. 38. "Atrahasis Notes." Stephanie Dalley. Myths From Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others. New York. Oxford University Press. 1989, 1991. ISBN 0-19-281789-2. paperback)

Biography on Dalley :

"Stephanie Dalley has worked on various excavations in the Middle East and has published cuneiform tablets found there by the British Archaeological Expedition to Iraq as well as a book for the general reader about those discoveries. Mari and Karan (1984). She taught Akkadian at the Universities of Edinburgh and Oxford and is now Shillito Fellow in Assyriology at the Oriental Institute, Oxford, and a Senior Research Fellow of Somerville College. She is editor and main author of The Legacy of Mesopotamia (Oxford University Press). (cf. inner flyleaf of Myths from Mesopotamia)

The Sumerian Flood account has the rain-storm lasting 7 days and nights, the later Babylonian account has the rains ending on the 7th day as well. I wonder if perhaps these "motifs" have been preserved in the Genesis account as an "INVERSION"?  God is portrayed as announcing that in 7 days time the rains will begin and continue for 40 days. In other words, following a period of 7 days of NO RAIN, the Flood will begin. I would argue, then, that the 7 days of rain in the Sumerian and Babylonian accounts were INVERTED into 7 days of NO rain in the later Hebrew account; that is to say, the rains _ending_ on the 7th day have been transformed into rains _beginning_ on the 7th day. Also of interest is that both the Bible and Atrahasis have the Flood hero being given a SEVEN DAY advance warning of the coming flood.

Genesis 7:4 RSV

"For in SEVEN DAYS I will send rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights..."

Millard and Lambert noted that Atra-Khasis (alternately rendered Atra-Hasis) had 7 days notice for the Flood's commencement (emphasis mine, Update of 07 April 2005):

"...in Atra-khasis Enki gives the hero ONLY SEVEN DAYS in which to prepare for the onset of the flood..." (p. 12. "Introduction." W. G. Lambert & A. R.  Millard. Atra-Hasis, The Babylonian Story of the Flood. Oxford University Press. 1969. Reprint, 1999 by Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake. Indiana)

To date, archaeologists have failed to find evidence of world wide flood in the 5th-3rd millenniums B.C. in Mesopotamia, Syria or Canaan. They date some settlements in Sumer to the Ubaid period of circa 4900 B.C., specifically the ancient city of Eridu (modern Abu Shahrein near Ur of the Chaldees), which in Mesopotamian myths was the very first city built by the god Enki. This myth has the world covered in water, then a freshwater stream eurpts from the depths of the ocean, land forms about it and Enki builds the first city Eridu. Of course in the Bible the first city is built by Cain and called Enoch after his son (Ge 4:17). So, it is clear that Genesis' author understands at least _one city_ built by Cain sometime in the course of the 4th millennium was engulfed by Noah's 3rd millennium B.C. flood, but the archaeological evidence does not support this notion.

Millard and Lambert have noted that in antiquity plagiarism was common, texts were copied without acknowledgement and sometimes very freely recast or rewritten to tell a new story. I suspect just such happened with the biblical story of Noah's Flood, it too was plagiarized and recast from earlier Mesopotamian accounts:

"...the ancient world had no proper titles, no sense of literary rights, and no aversion to what we call plagiarism. Succeeding ages often rewrote old texts to suit new language forms and tastes."

(p. 5. "Introduction." W.G. Lambert & A.R. Millard. Atra-Hasis, the Babylonian Story of the Flood. Oxford University. 1969, reprinted 1999 by Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana)

An example of such a rewrite is the Sumerian version versus the Babylonian or Akkadian account:

"The Sumerian epic...comes closest to Atrahasis...Despite the similarity in content, the size is quite different (some 300 Sumerian as opposed to 1,245 Akkadian lines), and wording nowhere agrees."

(p. 14. W.G. Lambert & A.R. Millard. Atra-Hasis, the Babylonian Story of the Flood. Oxford University. 1969, reprinted 1999 by Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana)

Professor Bright (1942) on a world encompassing flood's absence in the 3rd millennium B.C.:

"Has Archaeology Found Traces of the Flood?"

"...For excavations in Palestine and Syria the answer is an unqualified "No." In these two countries some of the oldest towns in the world have been excavated. We know now that Jericho was founded near the beginning of the Late Stone Age. While we cannot be certain that the town was first settled in such an early period, we can be sure that the town was first settled between about 5000 and 4500 B.C. This city and others in Palestine established after it show no evidence whatever of a flood...

1. The evidence from Ur...At Ur Wooley found a continuous occupation from the Early Dynastic back to the Obeid Period. In the middle of the Obeid level he found a stratum of river mud or deposit some ten feet thick -conclusive proof that a deluge had interrupted the occupation of the place, at least temporarily, during the fourth millennium. Wooley is confident that he has here the evidence of Noah's flood (see, for example, his Ur of the Chaldees [1929] p. 29) and his assurance is enthusiastically shared by most popular handbooks which deal with the subject.

2. The evidence from Kish. The excavations conducted at this site between 1923 and 1932 also yielded evidence of inundation. But the flood level here lies well within the Early Dynastic Period l that is, considerably later than 3000 BC and many centuries after the Ur flood deposit, The two cannot refer, therefore, to the same catastrophe (see Watelin and Langdon, Excavations at Kish, Vol, IV, pp. 40 ff.).

3. The evidence from Fara [ancient Shuruppak]. During the excavations at this site in 1931 a sterile, alluvial layer some two feet thick was found between the Jemdet Nasr and Early Dynastic layers -thus indicating an inundation at the site which was earlier than the one at Kish and yet much later than the one at Ur (see Schmidt, Museum Journal, XXII, 193 ff.). (pp. 34-35. John Bright. "Has Archaeology Found Any Evidence of the Flood?" pp. 32-40. G. Ernest Wright & David Noel Freedman, editors. The Biblical Archaeologist Reader. Chicago. Quadrangle Books. 1961. Reprinted from The Biblical Archaeologist. Vol. 5. pp. 55-62. 1942)

"This concludes the actual archaeological evidence bearing on the flood...Archaeology has given us no trace of it..." (p. 37. John Bright. "Has Archaeology Found Any Evidence of the Flood?" pp. 32-40. G. Ernest Wright & David Noel Freedman, editors. The Biblical Archaeologist Reader. Chicago. Quadrangle Books. 1961)

Noah's Flood is a myth, as determined over the past 100 years by Geologists and Archaeologists and is most probably a later reworking of the Shuruppak flood occurring in the 3rd millennium B.C., the same millennium the Bible (Jewish Massoretic Text) dates the event too.

I have suggested that the local Shuruppak flood of ca. 2900 B.C. caused by a swollen Euphrates river was transformed into a flood covering the world's mountains due to an error, the word KUR, meaning land, underworld, country, (temples were called Kur too) and mountain, perhaps, is "the mechanism" by which a flooded KUR-land, or KUR-temple became a flooded KUR-mountain which would imply all the world's mountains were flooded.

"_If_" the above Shuruppak bas-relief is of Ziusudra's boat, it was most likely a small shallow craft of wood like present-day marsh boats. The SMALL REED BOATS shown in the Neo-Assyrian bas-reliefs of Sennacherib ARE PROBABLY what Ziusudra's REED BOAT WAS ENVISIONED AS IN THE ATRA-KHASIS and GILGAMESH EPICS, BECAUSE THEY ARE SMALL ENOUGH TO BE CRAFTED FROM A SMALL REED HUT.  It is of course preposterous that a gigantic seven story cube-like boat is constructed of a small reed hut, but this was probably a "signal" from the storyteller to his audience that this was a "fable or tall-tale" and NOT to be considered a real event. I seriously doubt anyone tore down their house or temple to build a huge "multiple-storied" boat, be it of marsh reeds from a reed hut, temple or a wooden house. No god warned a man 7 days in advance of a flood, this too is myth. Ergo, the more likely reality is that a small wooden craft as portrayed in the bas-relief was either already built and "at hand" for the family to board upon their realizing that the unusually prolonged heavy rains striking the area, were precipitating a swollen, flooding Euphrates river. At most, only "a few" domesticated animals, male and female to assure replenishment of breeding stock lost to the flood waters of the Euphrates got into the boat with Ziusudra's family.

The strange description of the Shuruppak craft as being "roofed over like the Apsu," and of the dimensions of a huge cube, suggest to me that either Enki/Ea's Apsu house in the midst of the abyss is being envisoned by the storyteller as a model for this unusual craft, or Enki's reed-built shrine at Shuruppak is the model for the "Mesopotamian Noah's" Ark.

Finally, I understand that Enki/Ea later was transformed by the Hebrews into Yahweh-Elohim of Genesis. Both gods share similar motifs: 1) Both are responsible for man's creation; 2) Both make man to work in their garden which possesses fruit trees; 3) Both Deny man immortality; 4) Both permit man to acquire wisdom like a god; 5) Both confound the one language of the world in a babel of tongues; 6) Both initially deny man the knowledge it is wrong to be naked. (7) Both warn a man of a flood intended to destroy all of mankind, telling him to build a craft to save himself, family and animals. I also understand that Enlil who is portrayed as the prime instigator of the Flood and who blesses the Flood survivor after the event, has been combined with Enki to become Yahweh-Elohim.

Contradicting Flood Chronologies from Contradicting Bible Recensions and Scholars:

Professor Steibing on three different and _CONTRADICTING_ dates for God's creation of the world found in the book of Genesis as calculated by Jewish, Catholic and Protestant scholars:

"Most scholars [prior to the 19th century AD] agreed that the world was only about six thousand years old, though there was considerable disagreement over the exact date of the creation. Jewish rabbinical calculations from the Hebrew Massoretic Text showed that the world began 3,740 years before the Christian Era. Roman Catholic tradition, based on the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible, placed the creation in 5199 B.C. And most English-speaking Protestants accepted the seventeenth-century Archbishop James Ussher's calculation of the time of creation, 4004 B.C. Ussher's dates were placed in the margins of early eighteenth-century editions of the King James version of the Bible, making them seem even more authoritive." (p. 32. "The Discovery of Prehistory." William H. Steibing Jr. Uncovering the Past. New York & Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1994 [1993 Prometheus Books])

A search of the internet using Google for various Creation and Flood Dates turned up a number of "surprises": there is NO consensus or agreement on when Creation occurred and therefore the date of the Flood varies with the various contradicting Creation dates. In addition, for any given manuscript, scholars disagree among themselves on the procedures to be employed in the counting of years to establish Creation and Flood dates.

One of the "problems" in an attempt to "fix a date" for the biblical Flood is that several different recensions exist of the Bible who's "ages" assigned to the Patriarchs (pre-flood and post-flood) in Genesis DISAGREE with each other, such as the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuaginta, the Latin Vulgate Bible, the King James Bible, and the Jewish Massoretic Text called the TANAKH.

For an example of the "wildly differing ages" of Genesis' pre and post-flood patriarchs between the Septuaginta, the Bible of the early Christians and the modern Revised Standard Edition (Oxford University Press. 1977) please click here. For tables showing different Flood dates abstracted from various Bibles like the Septuaginta (Alexandrian and Vaticanus), Samaritan Pentateuch, Massoretic Text please click here.

Circa 3402 BC.............Date of the Flood from the Alexandrian Septuaginta. (Chart C).

Circa 3350 BC             The "earliest date" for the beginning of the Jemdat Nasr Period/Era
                                     according to Maisels (cf. below)

Circa 3342 BC.............Date of the Flood from the Alexandrian Septuaginta. (Chart B).

Circa 3302 BC.............Date of the Flood from the Vaticanus Septuaginta. (Chart C).

Circa 3242 BC.............Date of the Flood from the Alexandrian Septuaginta. (Chart B).

Circa 3213 BC.............Date of the Flood acording to Flavius Josephus, Jewish Historian.
                                           1st century AD. (Chart C).   

Circa 3171 BC.............Date of the Flood from the Samaritan Pentateuch. (Chart C).

Circa 3112 BC.............Date of the Flood from Samaritan Pentateuch. (Chart B).

Circa 3000 BC............Date of the Flood (David Livingston PhD, of Associates for Biblical Reseach).

Circa 2960 BC............Maisels'  "end" of Jemdat Nasr period (The Shuruppak Flood occuring in this Era).

Circa 2958 BC............Date of the Flood according to Eusebius' calculation (4th century AD)
                                     noted by in the 5th century AD Jerome (Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate                                                                   Bible).
                                       
Circa 2900 BC............A flooding Canal off the Euphrates near Shuruppak (Tell Fara) leaves                                                                       a two foot alluvial deposit in the area according to Saggs (cf. also Wm. H. Shea PhD.)

Circa 2800 BC............The "latest date" for the "end" of the Jemdat Nasr Period or Era.

Circa 2750 BC           The Shuruppak Flood is dated ca. 2750 BC _in_ the Early Dynastic I Period
                                       by Trevor Palmer, Nottingham Trent University, United Kingdom (cf. below)
                                                              
Circa 2700 BC............Gilgamesh believed to have been a king of Uruk. In the Gilgamesh Epic
                                     he seeks out the Flood's survivor, Utnapishtim (the Mesopotamian Noah),
                                     formerly a king at Shuruppak where he was warned by his god to build a
                                     boat to save self, family and animals against a flood to be sent by the gods
                                     to destroy all mankind.

Circa 2648 BC.............Dean Coombs (Bible Prophecy website) notes _8_ "possible" dates for the Flood.

Circa 2600 BC.............Shuruppak limestone bas-relief showing men paddling a boat which might be the
                                      "original" boat behind the later "embellished" myths of reed-boats, reed-chests
                                         and the biblical Noah's "Ark."

Circa 2588 BC.............Dean Coombs.

Circa 2522 BC.............Flood Date Massoretic Text (Jewish). (Chart C).

Circa 2518 BC.............Dean Coombs.

Circa 2462 BC.............Flood Date Massoretic Text (Chart B).

Circa 2458 BC.............Dean Coombs.

Circa 2433 BC.............Dean Coombs.

Circa 2373 BC.............Dean Coombs.

Circa 2348 BC............Noah's Flood occurs according to Archbishop James Ussher (17th century AD)
                                        in  margins of many 18-19th century AD King James Version Bibles.
                                 
Circa 2345 BC.............Charles E. Sellier and David W. Balsinger (1995. cf. below)

Circa 2304 (+/- 11 yrs)...Date of the Flood according to J. Osgood PhD.

Circa 2303 BC.............Dean Coombs.

Circa 2243 BC.............Dean Combs.

Circa 2105 BC ...........Date of the Flood according to the Jewish Medieval sage Rashi's
                                      calculation from the Jewish Bible.

Circa 2100 BC............3rd Dynasty of Ur (of the Chaldees) kings claim descent from
                                       Gilgamesh, idolizing him in poems.
                                     
Circa 2100 BC............Abraham and Terah at Ur of the Chaldees (Ussher), and later migrate to
                                      Haran in northern Mesopotamia.

Circa 2100 BC............Earliest "adventures" of Gilgamesh appear in Sumerian (p. xii. Foster)

Circa 1700 BC............Earliest Akkadian/Babylonian versions of Epic of Gilgamesh appear,
                                      reworking "adventures" (p. xiii. Foster)

Circa 1600 BC............Sumerian Atrahasis Flood account from Nippur, Flood hero is Ziusudra,
                                       a large boat is mentioned but nothing is said of how, when it was constructed
                                        or whether it was made of reeds or wood (p. 14.Lambert & Millard. 1969, 1999).

Circa 1500-1000 BC...."Middle Babylonian" versions of Epic of Gilgamesh. Shuruppak boat made of reed-hut.

Circa 1446-1406 BC....Moses writes the "Flood account" according to some Conservative
                                      Scholars.

Circa 669-626 BC.......Epic of Gilgamesh version found in Assyrian king Asshurbanipal's library
                                      at Nineveh.

Circa 560 BC..............Genesis-Kings is composed in the Exile by one author according to
                                       some scholars (cf. Whybray).

Circa 275 BC..............Berossos' Flood account in a History of Chaldea written in Greek.
                                      Xisuthros is Flood hero.


Professor Finegan has extracted from Jerome, Biblical Chronologies compiled from Eusebius:

From Adam to the flood the number of years is 2,242 (cf. p. 191. "Cumulative Summary Figures in the Introduction of the Chronicle of Eusebius. Table 98. Early Chroniclers and Chronographers." Jack Finegan. Handbook of Biblical Chronology, Principles of Time Reckoning in the Ancient World and Problems of Chronology in the Bible. Revised Edition. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers. 1964, 1998. ISBN 1-56563-143-9).

Adam's creation  is given as 5200 B.C. (p. 190. "Summary of the Chronicle of Eusebius in the Latin Version of Jerome. Table 97. Early Chroniclers and Chronographers." Jack Finegan. Handbook of Biblical Chronology, Principles of Time Reckoning in the Ancient World and Problems of Chronology in the Bible. Revised Edition. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers. 1964, 1998. ISBN 1-56563-143-9).

My note: subtract 2,242 years from 5200 B.C. and the Flood is dated according to Jerome (using Eusebius) to circa 2958 B.C.

Of interest here is that the excavator of Shuruppak (Tell el Fara), Schmidt, in 1931, dated the alluvial flood deposit to circa 2900 B.C., almost the same date as Eusebius' flood date of 2958 B.C.!

However, some scholars have dated the Shuruppak flood deposit to as late as 2750 B.C. and the Early Dynastic Period:

"On the other hand, at the nearby city of Shuruppak (the modern Fara), there was evidence of a flood during
the Early Dynastic Period, around 2750 B.C., and an alluvial deposit dating from around the same time was found at another Sumerian site, the city of Kish."

(Trevor Palmer, Nottingham Trent University, UK. Catastrophes: The Diluvial Evidence. Paper presented at the SIS Silver Jubilee conference at Easthamstead Park, 19 September 1999)
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/ccc/ce102899.html


For many Conservative scholars (Protestants), Arch-Bishop Ussher's 17th century A.D. chronology of the Bible gives Adam's creation as 4004 B.C. and the Flood as circa 2345 B.C. Apparently Eusebius and Jerome came up with different sums from Ussher. Why? The Catholic Bible is in part a recension of the 3rd century BC Septuaginta which preserves _different ages_ for the pre-flood patriarchs, giving a Creation date of ca. 5200 B.C. and Flood of 2958 B.C.

The Jewish TANAKH 1985 (Philadelphia, PA. The Jewish Publication Society) or Anno Mundi 5758, suggests creation was circa 3763 B.C. If 1656 years are subtracted from Adam to the Flood, it occured ca. 2107 B.C.

Professor Bailey noted that the Greek text (the Septuaginta) differed from the Hebrew text (the Massoretic text) on the years elpasing bewteen Creation and Noah's Flood:

"Whereas the traditional Hebrew Text (Massoretic Text) of Genesis 5 reports a total of 1656 years from the creation of the first human being to the coming of the great flood in Noah's time, the traditional Greek text (Septuaginta) gives a total of 2242 years..." (p. 186. "Elapsed Time from Adam to the Flood According to the Greek Bible (LXX)." Lloyd R. Bailey. Genesis, Creation and Creationism. New York & Mahwah, New Jersey. Paulist Press. 1993. ISBN 0-8091-3255-9. paperback)

The Religious Tolerance Website ( http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_date1.htm ) gives "numerous" Creation Dates, of which only "a few" are shown below:

5586 BC........The Septuaginta (a 3rd century BC bible written in Greek for Jews at Alexandria,
                       Egypt, used by early Christians and quoted from in the New Testament.
5555 BC........Flavius Josephus, a Jewish Historian of the 1st century AD who wrote a history of
                       the Jews, paraphrasing the Bible.
5508 BC........ Eastern Orthodox Church
5493 BC.........Ethiopian Church
5490 BC.........Syrian Christians
5481 BC.........Flavius Josephus' 2nd date for creation
5199 BC.........Pope Gregory XIII (1580)
4004 BC.........Arch-bishop James Ussher of Armagh, Ireland (17th century AD) appears in King
                       James Version of the Bible.
3761 BC.......Creation date from the Massoretic Text found in the Jewish Seder Olam Rabbah.

I note that this year, 2006 A.D. (or C.E., "Common Era") is rendered by some Jewish authorities as 5766 from the Creation. For some Protestants, using Ussher's calculations this year would be 6010 from the Creation. For Catholics, using Eusebius' calculations, this year would be 7206 since the Creation.

One Jewish site, using the Medieval Jewish Sage Rashi's calculations, understood the Flood was ca. 2105 B.C.
(cf. "Chabad. Org. Calendar."   http://www.chabad.org/calendar/view/day.asp?tDate=11/19/2005&show=8 )

Professor Skinner on the elapsed years between the Creation and Flood noted for the Flood 1656 years in the Massoretic Text, 1307 years in the Samaritan Text, and 2242 years in the Septuaginta (cf. "Chronology Table," on p. 134. John Skinner. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis. Edinburgh, Scotland. T & T Clark. 1910, 1930 revised edition, reprinted 1994).

Of all the above "many" proposals for the Creation of the World and the Flood, the one which most closely "aligns" with the Shuruppak Flood of circa 2900 B.C. _which I understand is the event being recalled in Noah's Flood_ is the "Roman Catholic" Flood date of circa 2958 B.C., as worked out by the 4th century A.D. Christian scholar Eusebius and preserved by Jerome in the 5th century A.D. All this is to say, that the chronological schema for a Flood is BEST PRESERVED by the Roman Catholic Bible ! In other words the Chronological schemas preserved by the other Bibles, including the Jewish Massoretic text or TANAKH are NOT VINDICATED by the archaeological evidence found at Shuruppak.

Below is what I regard as a "typical" Christian Apologist refutation that the Bible has "borrowed" from Mesopotamian Flood myths Noah's Flood:

"A popular theory, proposed by liberal "scholars," said that the Hebrews "borrowed" from the Babylonians, but no conclusive proof has ever been offered. The differences, including religious, ethical, and sheer quantity of details, make it unlikely that the Biblical account was dependent on any extant source from the Sumerian traditions. This still does not stop these liberal and secular scholars from advocating such a theory. The most accepted theory among evangelicals is that both have one common source, predating all the Sumerian forms. The divine inspiration of the Bible would demand that the Genesis account is the correct version. Indeed the Hebrews were known for handing down their records and tradition. The Book of Genesis is viewed for the most part as an historical work, even by many liberal scholars, while the Epic of Gilgamesh is viewed as mythological. The One-source Theory must, therefore, lead back to the historical event of the Flood and Noah's Ark. To those who believe in the inspiration and infallibility of the Bible, it should not be a surprise that God would preserve the true account of the Flood in the traditions of His people. The Genesis account was kept pure and accurate throughout the centuries by the providence of God until it was finally compiled, edited, and written down by Moses. The Epic of Gilgamesh, then, contains the corrupted account as preserved and embellished by peoples who did not follow the God of the Hebrews." (Frank Lorey, M.A. "The Flood of Noah and the Flood of Gilgamesh." Please click on the following url for Lorey's article in its entirety http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=414 )

The problem in the above assertions? The biblical account does not tell us "where" Noah was at when God allegedly warned him to build the Ark. The Mesopotamian account furnishes the missing information, the Flood hero is residing at Shuruppak in Lower Mesopotamia. Shuruppak has been identified and excavated (1931) and it had only _one_ flood layer, dated to circa 2900 B.C. The Roman Catholic BIble lead the Catholic scholar Eusebius to date the Flood to 2958 B.C. The Shuruppak Flood did not extend over all of Lower Mesopotamia, it was very local, of a flooding Euphrates and its canal serving Shuruppak. It would appear that the Mesopotamian account has been VINDICATED by archaeological findings at Tell Fara (ancient Shuruppak) and the Bible's flood account is "somewhat" VINDICATED to the degree that the Roman Catholic Bible preserves a Flood date of 2958 B.C. a scant 58 years off the mark for the 2900 B.C. Shuruppak Flood. As noted earlier, archaeology has documented villages back to the 12th millennium B.C. in the Ancient near East, and no-where does there exist the evidence of a universal Flood sediment. Quite simply the Bible is wrong. It is not the word of God.

As noted above by Lorey, at least "some" Evangelical Scholars are willing to accept the notion that the Mesopotamian and Biblical accounts are recalling THE SAME EVENT, when differences arise in details the Bible "must always" trump the Pagan account. The COMMON EVENT IS THE SHURUPPAK FLOOD of 2900 B.C.

Lorey's Chrisitian Apologetic _assumes_ that a Holy Spirit really exists and that it is responsible for the Bible's creation. The claim is made that this Holy Spirit is still alive and well today, guiding the pious and preserving God's Holy Word from the machinations of Satan. The Holy Spirit is also envisoned as guiding the pious in correct doctrines and dogmas. All of these assertions are of course nonsense. What is the proof they are nonsense ?

The proofs there is no HOLY SPIRIT:

1. As noted by Professor Steibing we have three Bibles, Jewish, Catholic and Protestant, each _contradicting_ the other on when the world was created and consequently when the Flood occurred. If there was a "real" Holy Spirit, it would be able to keep God's Holy Word from being corrupted into contradicting chronologies with different ages for the Pre and Post Flood patriarchs. The faithful's response is that ONLY the original writings were without error, they are now lost and consequent copies introduced man-made errors. This "favorite" excuse or "Apologetic" though _really is AN AFFRONT to the Holy Spirit_ because it implies the Holy Spirit is impotent and unable to preserve God's Holy Word from man-made errors. Satan has then TRIUMPHED over God and the Holy Spirit by corrupting with man-made errors ALL the Holy Texts ("Recensions"). Consequently the churches founded on these error-riddled texts are possibly erecting their dogmas and doctrines on error. No one today can say which Bible is the real "error-free" text. We are asked to believe that the error-riddled texts should be accepted as evidence of God's "inerrant" Holy Word and that a Holy Spirit is alive and well today and unconcerned about the errors.

Please click here for my article on "Is the Bible Errant or Inerrant?"

2. If the Holy Spirit was real and still alive today, it would NOT permit the various Christian faiths to contradict each other as to what constitutes correct doctrines. Christianity has fragmented into hundreds of denominations, each accusing the other as being under Satan's power and embracing false dogmas. In past ages Christians slaughtered each other over doctrinal differences, claiming others were under Satan's power, teaching the doctrines of men for God's Holy Word (The 16th century A.D. Protestant vs. Catholic wars of the Reformation which decimated hundreds of thousands of men, women and children). In this age Christians tortured Christians to confess to heresy, then they were burned alive at the stake in public spectacles called Auto-da-fe's. Supposedly the Holy Spirit had told Christians to "turn the other cheek and pray for their abusers," NOT torture and burn alive their enemies. I have no doubts or illusions that these "pious" Christians believed that the Holy Spirit was directing them to treat their Christan opponents in such a barbaric manner.

3. As noted elsewhere on this website, the Bible contains numerous failed prophecies. God allegedly warned his people NOT TO BELIEVE a prophet UNTIL the prophecy was fufilled (De 18:20-22). CONTRA God's instructions, ALL of the above faiths, Christian and Jewish, tell their congregations to IGNORE GOD, the "failed prophecies" will be fufilled in some future age. If there was a real Holy Spirit, it would not tolerate this nonsense being preached. The Holy Spirit was quite adamant that the only way to know if a prophet was false or not was to WAIT for the prophecy to be fulfilled, which NULLIFES Christianity's and Judaism's claims the prophecies are for a future age. All (Christian and Jew) are guilty of teaching that the prophets should be believed despite the failure of _ALL_ the prophecies to materialize. Please click here for my article on "Christianity's Flawed Methodologies Regarding Claims to Fulfilled Prophecies."

4. Had the Holy Spirit been "real", Geologists and Archaeologists would have found the remains of Noah's world-wide Flood in the context of a 3rd millennium B.C. world as Genesis' chronology suggests a 3rd millennium B.C. Flood. They did not. What they found was the evidence of the Shuruppak Flood of circa 2900 B.C., which was a flooding Euphrates river and canal. Some 17 paralllels exist between the Bible's Flood and the Shuruppak Flood, leading some scholars to concede both accounts, pagan and biblical are recalling the same historical event. The Mesopotamian myths state that Shuruppak was destroyed by the flood, and a two foot alluvial clay deposit exits at Shuruppak (Tell Fara) dating circa 2900 B.C. Archaeology has vindicated the Shuruppak flood tradition, the last of the Antediuvian cities in Mesopotamian tradition. For an in depth article on the non-existence of a Holy Spirit please click here for my article titled "The Reception of God's Holy Spirit: How the Hebrew Prophets _contradict_ Christianity's Teachings."

Because Christians believe in a Holy Spirit, and its Bible, some fundamentalists reject the findings of Archaeology and Geology and make "silly claims" that the world of the Dinosaurs is Noah's Flood because the Bible dates the creation of the earth and universe to 4004 B.C. in some King James Version Bibles.

Two Christian scholars Sellier and Balsinger understand Noah's Flood destroyed the dinosaurs ca. 2345 B.C:

"Imagine a world of huge dinosaurs, gigantic flying birds, and enormous plants and you probably have a good picture of what the earth was like in Noah's time." (p. 58. Charles E. Sellier & David W. Balsinger. The Incredible Discovery of Noah's Ark. New York. Dell Books. 1995)

"...based on Noah's records found in the Genesis account, and astronomical computer analysis, we determined that he began building the ark in 2465 B.C., with the first rains falling in 2345 B.C..."
(p. 14. Charles E. Sellier & David W. Balsinger. The Incredible Discovery of Noah's Ark. New York. Dell Books. 1995)

Walton identifies himself as a bible-believing evangelical scholar:

"I believe in the authority of the Old Testament as the Word of God and would categorize myself as an evangelical." (p. 16. "Introduction." John H. Walton. Ancient Israelite Literature In Its Cultural Context. A Survey of Parallels Between Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Texts. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Zondervan Publishing House.1989, 1990 Revised edition)

Walton on the biblical Flood account noting some Conservative bible-believing scholars will not accept the notion it is borrowed from Mesopotamian myths (Emphasis mine):

"While most scholars are content to assume that the Mesopotamian account is the ultimate source of flood traditions which are reflected in the Genesis account (readily acknowledging the complexity of attempting to reconstruct the exact path of transfer) there is a minority of scholars who finds this assumption unacceptable. FOR THEOLOGICALLY CONSERVATIVE SCHOLARS, IT IS UNACCEPTABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE GENESIS ACCOUNTS AS VARIATIONS OF BABYLONIAN MYTHS. THE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE IS A PRESUPPOSITION THAT NEEDS TO BE DEFENDED AND IS THREATENED BY THEORIES THAT SUGGEST THAT THE NARRATIVES OF GENESIS ARE DEMYTHOLOGIZATIONS RATHER THAN REVEALED TRUTH. THERE IS THEN A VESTED INTEREST OF FAITH that must be considered when examining the relationship of the respective literatures of Israel and Babylon." (p. 39. "Cosmology." John H. Walton. Ancient Israelite Literature In Its Cultural Context. A Survey of Parallels Between Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Texts. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Zondervan Publishing House.1989, 1990 Revised edition)

Professor Millard (being quoted by Professor Walton, Emphasis mine):

"The two accounts [Babylonian and Hebrew] UNDOUBTEDLY DESCRIBE THE SAME FLOOD, the two schemes relate the same sequence of events." (p. 40. "Cosmology." John H. Walton. Ancient Israelite Literature In Its Cultural Context. A Survey of Parallels Between Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Texts. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Zondervan Publishing House.1989, 1990 Revised edition).

For my part, I have NEVER encountered an Apologist who "connected the dots" for his readership showing that the Shuruppak flood dated to the 3rd millennium B.C., is the very SAME MILLENNIUM the Bible dates the Flood to. Nor do these Apologists bother noting for their readership that there is geologically NO EVIDENCE of a 3rd millennium B.C. Flood anywhere in the Ancient near East. How do they handle this information which has been around since 1931? Easy, they just turn a blind eye to it and ignore it (what their congregations don't know won't hurt them)!

Professor William H. Shea, a devout 7th Day Adventist scholar, has written an article challenging the notion that Noah's Flood is recalling a "local" flood in Mesopotamia. The problem? I find his "methodologies" and "arguments" seriously flawed. His conclusion is that this notion is preposterous because the Bible says Noah's flood covered the whole world. In other words, because of his "faith committment" he cannot accept archaeological and geological findings that there was never a universal flood. Let us look at Shea's arguments and take them apart and show why they are flawed.

Shea:

"The local flood theory raises many problems, which may be examined from three different perspectives: archaeology, linguistics, and literary traditions. Such an examination will determine whether the biblical flood story ultimately goes back to the story of a local river flood in Mesopotamia or to the Bible as a historical record of a universal deluge."

Shea notes that under "Archaeology" Lower Mesopotamia was subjected to repeated floods in antiquity and archaeologists have dated them to different eras at different sites. There is no era where all the sites were engulfed simultaneously.

Shea notes under "Linguistics" that the Akkadian word for the flood is abubu and suggests Hebrew mabbul is related and describing the same flood event.

Shea notes under "Literary Traditions" that both the Mesopotamian and biblical accounts suggest a unversal flood occurred wiping out _all_ of mankind except those on the boat.

Shea's conclusion on the above "three tests: Archaeology, Linguistics and Literary Comparsion":

"The biblical flood story comes close to that but makes a moral distinction that the Mesopotamian version does not. God was disgusted with the wickedness of humankind, but he decided to rescue the few righteous in the world through the use of Noah's ark (Genesis 6:4-8). One cannot do this on either the biblical or the Babylonian scale with only a local river valley flood. A universal deluge that virtually wipes out humankind is required."

Shea then follows up noting the universality of flood traditions in cultures from all over the world as support for the universal flood. He also notes fossils in mountains suggesting the flood covered them.

The problems?

Archaeology: While Shea does note that Shuruppak was excavated in 1931 and found to have flood sediment from a flooding Euphrates canal circa 2900 B.C. and that the Mesopotamian flood hero was from this city HE NEGLECTS TO MENTION that the Roman Catholic Bible dates Noah's Flood to 2958 B.C., a scant 58 years from the 2900 B.C. Shuruppak flood. He also NEGLECTS TO MENTION that Geologists and Archaeologists have found no evidence of a universal flood ANYWHERE in the ancient Near East (Egypt, Sinai, Canaan, Phoenicia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Turkey, Iran) for the 3rd millennium B.C. when the Bible dates this event (Protestant Bibles dating Noah's flood ca 2348 B.C.). He also NEGLECTS TO MENTION that archaeologists have dated villages in Turkey, Syria and Iraq to as early as the 12th millennium B.C. and that they have found no evidence of a universal flood sediment from that time frame up to the modern day.

He also NEGLECTS TO MENTION that when the flood traditions from all over the world were compared with the findings of trained Anthroplogists, Archaeologists and Geologists that they were found not to be all from the same moment in time, nor alike in details, nor were they in the 3rd millennium B.C. when Genesis dates the flood.

He NEGLECTS TO MENTION under his "geological flood proofs" of fossils that Geologists date these fossil-bearing strata which appear all over the world to different eras MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO _NOT_ THE 3rd MILLENNIUM B.C.

The "best" he can come up with from his Christian point of view is that a local flooding canal of the Euphrates at Shuruppak is impossible as being behind Noah's flood because this disagrees with the Mesopotamian and Biblical accounts of a universal flood destroying all of mankind except those on the boat. In other words, for Shea, two "literary compositions" mentioning a universal flood, Mesopotamian and Biblical, "trump" the findings of Archaeology, Anthropology and Geology. Please click here to read Shea's article. He therefore rejects Secular Humanists' and Liberal scholars' declaration that the Shuruppak flood of ca. 2900 B.C. is what is behind the Mesopotamian and Biblical traditions.

My personal investigations into the "pre-biblical origins" of the Sabbath have identified the Mesopotamian Flood myth found in the Epic of Gilgamesh and Atrahasis as THE SOURCE of the Bible's Sabbath (Hebrew Shabbat). The methodology employed was quite simple, I asked myself, "Does there exist in _any_ Mesopotamian myth, a statement about gods resting on a seventh day?" The answer was yes,  ALL THE GODS RESTED ON THE SEVENTH DAY after destroying mankind who's noise prevented them from resting by day and sleeping by night. I understand that the six days and nights that the gods destroyed the earth and all that dwelt on it with their flood, was transformed by the Hebrews via a reversal/inversion into a God creating the earth and populating it, then setting aside the seventh day for his rest. Please click here