mattfeld at mail.pjsnet.com
Mon Sep 25 01:49:42 EDT 2000
I am not aware of this latest information. I am aware that a book was
recently released claiming that the basis of Noah's Flood was a change in
water levels of the Black Sea. But this is not in the area of Shuruppak in
Lower Mesopotamia, where the earliest Fllod story is situated in the
Sumerian account of the Flood and its later Babylonian spin-offs, including
the biblical. Because Humanist scholars understand the biblical account to
derive from the Sumerian and Babylonian accounts, most Humanist scholars *do
not take seriously* the claims of a change in water levels of the Black Sea
being behind the biblical account.
All the best,
Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld
Walldorf by Heidelberg
----- Original Message -----
From: Christine Bass <christinebass at home.com>
To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 2:44 AM
Subject: Re: The Flood
> Dear Dave and Walter,
> Neither of you have addressed archeological discoveries made public within
> two weeks supporting evidence of a major flood by the same same man who
> Titanic...he was sponsored by the National Geographic Society. This is
> find of major proportions.
> Unfortunately I did not save the information....perhaps others can fill
you in. I
> think it is pertinent to your discussion.
> Christine Bass
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [mattfeld at mail.pjsnet.com]
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.
More information about the b-hebrew