responding to common objections to bible part 7

[Brenus]

"Certainly, a competing Sumerian account in no way disproves the authenticity of the Jewish account." Nope, but it proves the Bible is not written by the Jewish acceptation of God. Which is the aim of my comment. I do not deny the fact of flooding. It happened all the time (Nile flooding arriving at the hottest moment were for the Egyptians the PROOF that Gods were existing), nor I doubt that unusual (one per century as we say now) flooding were the end of the world for civilisations near big rivers, literally.
So, now, believers in the Bible as literal have to explain why, when the Jewish were not on Earth, the Sumerians had a knowledge of this flooding before the Bible was written, if given by God. The Bible doesn't mention God (under few several split identities) going to warn the Sumerians, who built an Arch, loaded animals, send 3 birds etc... The fact is the Jewish at one moment incorporate this story in their own (plus few others). Nothing wrong with that, but if, as TR, you believe the the Bible is the Word of Good, it can't match. So, as I said, he just ignores the fact. Denial of reality is frequent, not only in Religious faith, as a defense system to notion that could put our belief system, or our emotions and so on..

[Rhyfelwyr]

So, now, believers in the Bible as literal have to explain why, when the Jewish were not on Earth, the Sumerians had a knowledge of this flooding before the Bible was written, if given by God.

The obvious answer to that would be that the Sumerians had a knowledge of the flood because they had experienced it themselves. Their ancestors would have passed knowledge of it down through the generations by oral traditions etc.

The flood happened before Jacob/Israel even existed, so of course the Israelite people were not the first to record it in their own histories.