My Face when the Bible ripped off The Epic of Gilgamesh

[Anonymous No.10431462]

>Almost everything in Noah's arc is plagiarized word by word
>Adam and Eve are Enkidu
Is there anything original in this book?

[Anonymous No.10431474]

>>10431462
No.
Once you start reading older legends you start to pick up on bunch of similarities like crazy.
>Inb4 mad Christfags

[Anonymous No.10431478]

>>10431462
Who's this guy with the blonde hair?

[Anonymous No.10431485]

>>10431462
>Adam and Eve are Enkidu
I'm sorry what? The flood was a common piece of ancient folklore, but how does this one line up in any way?

[Anonymous No.10431488]

>>10431462
>>10431474

[Anonymous No.10431489]

>>10431462
Uuuuuhhhhhhhh Christkeks?
Explain this.

[Anonymous No.10431492]

>>10431478
Gilgamesh from Fate/Stay Night.

[Anonymous No.10431514]

>>10431485
>Molded in clay by Gods
Shouldn't be that hard to understand.

[Anonymous No.10431522]

>>10431488
>Anything in the Bible
>Original
Post arguments and not wojak.

[Anonymous No.10431537]

>>10431462
Pretty much, the Bible is a narrative and philosophical Frankenstein.

[Anonymous No.10431544]

>>10431462
Nothing shows that you're a complete pseud better than hating on Christianity, especially having no logically structured arguments and even more NOT HAVING READ THE BOOK.

[Anonymous No.10431563]

>>10431544
>Hating on the bible
Simply stating that it borrows heavily from other myths and legends.
There's no need to get this upset.

[Anonymous No.10431575]

>>10431563
>on a literature board
>has not read the most important book
Reddit was a mistake

[Anonymous No.10431590]

>>10431575
>The most important book
Hahahahahahahahaha.
Not OP but do seriously believe this?

[Anonymous No.10431611]

>>10431590

[Anonymous No.10431613]

Nobody denies that the Epic of Gilgamesh influenced the Bible. Christianity and Judaism don't worship the Bible, it's not part of God, and before the OT was written there was oral tradition. But it doesn't mean the Bible isn't true or worth less.

[Anonymous No.10431623]

>>10431590
Yes I believe that, hahaha. Two thousand years weigh in a bit as well.

[Anonymous No.10431628]

>>10431590
it's not the most "important" book, however it's the one and only work of literature that is culturally pervasive (includes poorfags and children) and therefore the most influential

[Anonymous No.10431629]

>>10431611
>Wojak
Fuck off retard

[Anonymous No.10431630]

>more than one civilization had the same myths
Adds credence more than disbelief imo

[Anonymous No.10431642]

>>10431611
that limit is incorrect; if x is going to infinity, the limit is 0.

It should be the limit of -1/(x^2) as x approaches 0

[Anonymous No.10431648]

>>10431628
>lay the groundwork for everything
>still relevant, difficult and beautiful and always will be
>not the most important
There should be literature capthacs so illiterates like you don't post.

[Anonymous No.10431654]

>>10431623
>Age means weight
There's older stuff obviously
>>10431628
>culturally pervasive
So are tons of religious text.
Plus appealing to popularity isn't that reliable.

[Anonymous No.10431661]

>>10431613
There are still big differences between the epic of Gilgamesh.
And I mean, there lies an amount of truth in paganism; it's only that Christianity is entirely true.

[Anonymous No.10431664]

>>10431654
>Age means weight
>There's older stuff obviously
You also have atrocious reading comprehension and lack simple knowledge of history. Why do retards have to yell the loudest.

[Anonymous No.10431668]

>>10431544
>bible
>logically structured argument

[Anonymous No.10431670]

>>10431462
>Noah's Ark
Read Girard's The Scapegoat.
>Adam and Eve
Enkidu's transformation occurs on different grounds (compare savagery to civilization in the Epic and naivety to awareness in the Bible), for different reasons and is portrayed as positive in one and negative in other. Effectively the basic framework is shared, however it's such a simple framework that claiming copy is just stupid.

[Anonymous No.10431671]

>>10431630
>>10431648
>A bunch of Hebrews plagiarize older myths and add other shit
>Lay the groundwork
And your personal opinion and popularity mean nothing

[Anonymous No.10431673]

>>10431630
Yeah, but to what pantheon?

[Anonymous No.10431677]

>>10431648
get over yourself kid. many people will disagree with you in this life and many of them will be smarter and better-read than you

[Anonymous No.10431697]

>>10431668
It takes a lot to get to the leap of faith part, you have not even read the book, nor have even basic theology understanding.
>>10431671
>And your personal opinion and popularity mean nothing
That's why I said that you're a complete illiterate that doesn't know basic western history. Its embarrassing that I have to reply to people like you.
>>10431677
>he is still talking out of his ass
Sure showed me there, maybe you should read the book?

[Anonymous No.10431704]

>>10431664
>Muh 2 thousand years
>Not age
Why resort to ad hominems?

[Anonymous No.10431715]

>>10431704
>can't recognize adhom
dummy

[Anonymous No.10431729]

>>10431697
>The bible is perfect and special guys!!!!
No one is saying it didn't influence western civilization.
Why are you taking it so personally?

[Anonymous No.10431749]

>Someone questions the credibility of the bible
>Chirstfag spergs out
Always happens in these threads

[Anonymous No.10431751]

>>10431462
There is nothing new under the sun.

[Anonymous No.10431778]

>>10431749
>It's sacred so you can't criticize it!!!
You can't have a logical discussion with people who are so deeply emotionally attached to something.

[Anonymous No.10431803]

>>10431648
>still relevant, difficult and beautiful and always will be
>He thinks his religion will last forever
Stop being such a biased christcuck

[Anonymous No.10431848]

>>10431697
Do you expect people here to read the Canon? Just look at the threads.

[Anonymous No.10431938]

>>10431848
>The canon
What a joke

[Anonymous No.10431984]

>>10431462
>practically every ancient culture had a Flood myth
>proof that the Flood, as recorded in the Bible, never happened.
whatever you say

[Anonymous No.10432039]

>>10431984
>The flood never happened
No one said this.

[Anonymous No.10432046]

Wouldn't similar myths that tell the exact same thing corroborate the Bible instead of devalue it? I mean, even if the exact details are unknown, the two ancient writings suggest that things like the Great Flood really did happen in the history of the planet.

[Anonymous No.10432158]

>>10432039
then why does OP care whether the Bible talks about the Flood?
If the Flood is a historical fact, then why accuse the Bible of "ripping off Epic of Gilgamesh" for also talking about the Flood?

[Anonymous No.10432163]

>>10431462
You should read the Sumerian flood story as well.

>>10431544
>noticed similarity between two geographically-close ancient mythologies
>YOU'RE HATING ON JESUS READ THE BIBLE

[Anonymous No.10432181]

>>10432046
Except there's no geological evidence of a global flood in the entire time humans have existed on Earth. The stories are not about local floods either, as they have the boats landing on top of mountains (Noah lands on Ararat which is 5,137m high).

So it actually suggests they are related mythological stories.

[Anonymous No.10432194]

>>10432181
>Except there's no geological evidence of a global flood
what is the Grand Canyon

[Anonymous No.10432224]

>>10432194
Have you been reading Ken Ham or something? The Grand Canyon was made a river about 5,000,000 years ago. It wasn't caused by a global flood and was formed before humans even existed.

[Anonymous No.10432395]

>>10431661
Not entirely, but it's our best idea of God that we currently have. Much like the pagans back then.

[Anonymous No.10432429]

What, do you think Christians don't realize that or something? Or that there is a significant population of fundies on /lit/ to troll or something? There is plenty in the Bible beyond the mythological accounts in Genesis.

[Anonymous No.10432531]

>>10432046
What makes the bible special then?
Maybe the other myths gods are real
Stop trying to rationlize plagerizism

[Anonymous No.10432537]

>>10431673
kek

[Anonymous No.10432549]

>>10432046
No. If a civilization copies the myths of another civilization how the fuck does that make said myths more likely to be true?

[Anonymous No.10432558]

>>10432046
>Uuhhhhh we copied a bunch of myths so that means ours is real!!!
Sure bud

[Anonymous No.10432566]

>>10432558
I agree.

>scientist """""proves""""" the laws of physics
>other scientist """""agrees""""" with him and cites his work
>gotcha faker ;)

[Anonymous No.10432569]

Why does comparing the bible and mythology trigger people?

[Anonymous No.10432578]

>>10432566
What's that have do with anything?
False equivalence man.

[Anonymous No.10432584]

>>10431544
>Muh book
Nice argument. Your Jewish faith is retarded btw.

[Anonymous No.10432592]

>>10432566
>tries to equate science which is based on facts to the fairy tale that is religion

[Anonymous No.10432607]

>>10432584
AKSHUALLY ITS A MIXTURE OF JUDAISM, CHALDEAN RELIGION, EGYPTIAN AND GREEK RELIGIONS

[Anonymous No.10432677]

>>10432607
you forgot the Zoroastrians

[Anonymous No.10432770]

>>10431462
yes, ive read the norton edition english bible too. dont you feel ashamed reciting other peoples observations as your own?

[Anonymous No.10434286]

>>10431488
Nice refutation

[Anonymous No.10434291]

>>10431462
>plagiarized

Sure, if you have chosen to accept and believe in the unjustified moral concept embedded in capitalism called "art belongs to someone, you need a permission to imitate it, permission usually requires compensation"

Plagiarism is just modern disease. In an ideal world not dominated by economic market, art and information would be free.

[Anonymous No.10434311]

>>10431462
We're talking about jews here, no shit it was stolen and reshaped for goyim agitprop.

[Anonymous No.10434318]

>>10431590

[Anonymous No.10434324]

>ai em a khristun, do not insult my book

[Anonymous No.10434454]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was all stolen from old sumerian writings. Jews stealing from Sumerians, Christians stealing from Jews, Muslims stealing from Christians. It's like poetry.

[Anonymous No.10435182]

>>10431462
I hate to break it to you, but everyone ripped off everyone else. There's not alot of originality in this, which may lend it more credit, actually.

[Anonymous No.10435192]

>>10434454
Judaism comes from Chaldean and ancient Caanite beliefs, mixed with babylonian, proto-Iranic and Sumerian as well as Vedic beliefs. Christianity is Greek-Jewish, Egyptian, Chaldean, Banylonian religion syncretized

[Anonymous No.10435356]

>>10434454
>>10435192
All judaism really is is a reflection of other peoples and cultures they as a tribe subverted and oftentimes destroyed by cryptically pretending to be those people. Just as jews today wear suits and pretend to be white while speaking our languages and mimicking our cultural behavior while parasitically imploding our societies from within, so did they engage in such actions in ancient times, infiltrating via crypsis, absorbing and integrating their hosts' cultural ideas and spiritual concepts, destroying the host from within, then moving on to the next host pretending, and likely believing, that those features they obtained were their own. This is how the jew operates.

[Anonymous No.10435837]

>>10431462
>Adam and Eve are Enkidu
what? how?

[Anonymous No.10435860]

>>10431462
It was the philosophical tradition of the time. It didn't "rip off" elements, it carried them over, maintaining some of them, and adapted them in new ways or shaped them within a new context of thought. All traditions do this.

[Anonymous No.10435880]

>>10435356
>it's adaptation, expansion, improvement, etc. unless the Jews do it, then it's subversion of a tradition
Your post is subversive too.

[Anonymous No.10435919]

>>10431590
Do you seriously not believe that? What book could you possibly think is more important?

[Anonymous No.10436112]

>>10435919
my diary desu

[Anonymous No.10436140]

What is it with sneks in these myths? Why are they always being humanity?

Should i fear the snake?

[Anonymous No.10436162]

>>10431537
Frankenstein is the name of the man who created the monster, not the monster himself.

[Anonymous No.10436167]

>>10436140
Even newborn babies fear snakes, of course you should be wary of those sneaky fuckers.

[Anonymous No.10436190]

It's intentional. The flood narrative in Genesis borrowed from the Epic of Gilgamesh to show how the God of the Israelites was superior to pagan deities. For example, in the Epic of Gilgamesh the gods are afraid of the flood and flee to higher ground, but in Genesis God is in complete control of the disaster and is unaffected by it.

[Anonymous No.10436202]

>>10431984

Wouldn't similar accounts of a massive flood in the Ancient Near East serve to corroborate the Genesis account instead of contradict it?

[Anonymous No.10436206]

>>10432181

Geologists have discovered that melting glaciers near the black sea could have caused the collapse of giant ice dams about seven thousand years ago. Such an event would have triggered sudden, massive flooding across a wide area, which would have served as the basis for all the flood accounts in the region.

[Anonymous No.10436293]

>>10432181
>Except there's no geological evidence of a global flood in the entire time humans have existed on Earth

There is definitely a lot of physical evidence of events taking place that would reasonably be described by ancient peoples as global floods. For example, look into Brian Fagan's research on the history of the Persian Gulf.

[Anonymous No.10437145]

>>10431611
>>10431642
I just read the Wikipedia article for the limit of a function out of curiosity after seeing your post. I don't know if this is correct but here is how I understand it:

lim f(x) = L,
x -> p

f(x) approaches L as x approaches p.

lim f(x) = 0 = -1 / x^2,
x -> infinity

-1 / x^2 approaches 0 as x approaches infinity.

[Anonymous No.10437162]

>>10431489
Is they’re true you’d expect them to crop up a lot.

[Anonymous No.10437181]

>>10437145
yeah the limit is wrong.

the meme should be the limit of -1/(x^2) as x approaches 0, which is neg. inf.

[Anonymous No.10437188]

>the bible is proved wrong
Urrr ists the aligory!

[Anonymous No.10437206]

>>10436140
Never trust the serpent of chaos!
It leads to incoherent value structures!

[Anonymous No.10437291]

>>10431462
also that flood myth in metamorphoses

pyrrha and the guy i think it was?

[Anonymous No.10437304]

>mfw 9/11 ripped off The Towering Inferno

It's so good to know that that news footage was all made up because a work of fiction starring OJ Simpson with vague similarities to 9/11 was released before the attacks by several years. Look at me. I'm so rational and everyone else is dumb.

[Anonymous No.10437307]

>>10437304
2/10

[Anonymous No.10437333]

>>10437181
so:

lim f(x) = negative infinity = -1 / x^2,
x -> 0

-1 / x^2 approaches negative infinity as x approaches 0.

So when a function includes a division by x, the limit is either positive or negative infinity as x approaches a value that will result in a division by 0.

example:

lim f(x) = infinity = 2 / (x - 3),
x -> 3

[Anonymous No.10437363]

>>10437307
Paganism anticipated and prefigured both Hebraism and Christianity, and Hebraism and Christianity drew from paganism. That does nothing to discredit Hebraism or Christianity in any way, and even of it did, paganism would also be discredited, as various forms of paganism drew from older forms of paganism back into prehistory, and the post-Christian ideologies are all just rip offs of various aspects of Christianity cut off from Christianity and swollen to madness in isolation. Your argument is shit because it's a form of genetic fallacy and even if it was logical it would refute your own worldview much moreso that it would Christianity. So please explain to me how one story having vague parallels to another story means the second story by necessity came from the other story simply because it is newer without demonstrating any actual provenance, or that a fictional story cannot anticipate later actual historical events without rendering those events equally fictional, because it seems that there's a logical disconnect there that you're just glossing over because it suits your agenda.

[Anonymous No.10437457]

>>10432770
>haha you fucking faggot, you think you're smart but I know you just learned that from a book
Once again, what did he mean by this?

[Anonymous No.10437466]

>>10437333
>So when a function includes a division by x, the limit is either positive or negative infinity as x approaches a value that will result in a division by 0.
>example:
>lim f(x) = infinity = 2 / (x - 3),
>x -> 3
No, your example has no limit at 3. It approaches negative infinity from the one side and positive infinity from the other.

[Anonymous No.10437472]

Holy shit is this what Eurotime /lit/ always looks like?

[Anonymous No.10437501]

>>10437472
It's Americans getting sleepy. Eurofags don't care that much about the Bible. Not anymore anyway.

[Anonymous No.10437525]

>>10437501
Yeah Euros are all about the Quran now.

[Anonymous No.10437532]

>>10437333
>>10437466
You're right I messed up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limit_of_a_function#Limits_at_infinity_for_rational_functions

>f(x) = p(x)/q(x)
>If the degree of p is less than the degree of q, the limit is 0.


f(x) = -1 / x^2

p(x) = -1 is a 0 degree (constant) polynomial
q(x) = x^2 is a 2 degree (quadratic) polynomial

The degree of p is less than the degree of q so the limit is 0 as x approaches positive or negative infinity.

f(x) = -1 / x^2
lim f(x) = 0
x -> +-infinity


f(x) = 2 / (x - 3)

p(x) = 2 is a 0 degree (constant) polynomial
q(x) = x - 3 is a 1 degree (linear) polynomial

The degree of p is less than the degree of q so the limit is 0 as x approaches positive or negative infinity.

f(x) = 2 / (x - 3)
lim f(x) = 0
x -> +-infinity


I think the meme was right after all.

[Anonymous No.10437533]

>>10437466
yeah this anon is correct

[Anonymous No.10437540]

hey guys. why are you worshiping babylon's neptune?
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotan

[Anonymous No.10437541]

>>10437532
bro the meme isn't right

for a limit to be correct, the left hand limit and the right hand limit must equal each other.
>RH Limit approaches L as the x approaches the x value from the righthand side
>LH Limit approaches L as the x approaches the x value from the lefthand side


for f(x)=-1/(x^2)

the right hand limit of f(x) as x approaches 0 is neg. inf.

>it would look like
>lim f(x)
>x -> 0^(+)
>see image

The left hand limit of f(x) as x approaches 0 is neg. inf.

>it would look like
>lim f(x)
>x -> 0^(-)
>see image

RH Limit of f(x) and LH limit of f(x) equal neg. inf.
so the limit of -1/(x^2) as x approaches 0 is neg. inf.

[Anonymous No.10437703]

>>10437541
http://www.mathcentre.ac.uk/resources/uploaded/mc-ty-limits-2009-1.pdf
https://www.mathsisfun.com/calculus/limits.html

These sources list the limit of f(x) = 1 / x for the horizontal asymptote (y = 0):

f(x) = 1 / x

lim f(x) = 0
x -> infinity


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_limits#Simple_functions

But this source lists the left and right limits for the vertical asymptote (y = infinity) instead:

f(x) = 1 / x^r (assume r = 1)

lim f(x) = +infinity
x -> +0

lim f(x) = -infinity (r is odd)
x -> -0


There is both a horizontal and vertical asymptote in f(x) = -1 / x^2, so why would one take precedence over the other? Are there not two legitimate limits to the function?


f(x) = -1 / x^2

lim f(x) = 0
x -> infinity

for the horizontal asymptote (y = 0) and


f(x) = -1 / x^2

lim f(x) = -infinity
x -> 0

for the vertical asymptote (y = -infinity).

[Anonymous No.10437780]

>>10437466
>>10437541
Ugh. I think I get it now. The reason the image is wrong is because it lists a one sided limit as if it was a regular limit where a regular limit does not exist.

f(x) = -1 / x^2

right-most limit:
lim f(x) = 0
x -> +infinity

left-most limit:
lim f(x) = 0
x -> -infinity

Anon, you are right the image should read:

lim f(x) = -infinity
x -> 0

because that limit can be approached from either direction.

Please ignore >>10437703; This whole time I thought you thought the image was incorrect due to the axis the limit was on; if I had read your posts more carefully I would have understood sooner.

[Anonymous No.10437787]

>>10436162
t. brainlet
Dr. Frankenstein IS the monster, Anon.
Not only that, but seeing as how, for all intents and purposes, the monster is Dr. Frankenstein's son, and how children inherit their fathers' names, it stands to reason that the monster would take the name Frankenstein.

[Anonymous No.10437798]

>>10437145
>>10437333
>>10437532
>>10437703
>>10437780
God this is embarrassing; I wish I had learned this in school. I would delete these posts but what's the point.

[Anonymous No.10437806]

>>10437206
Certainly the worst post ITT, and quite possibly the worst post on /lit/

[Anonymous No.10437838]

>>10431544
MAD CHRISTKEK DETECTED

[Anonymous No.10437839]

bro every story ever is a retelling of the bible we already know this

[Anonymous No.10437845]

>>10437780
>>10437798
Good news! You're both wrong and right. Mostly right, though, don't worry. You can write the limit of this function as EITHER
lim x->0 -1/(x^2) = -infinity
OR
lim x->infinity -1/(x^2) = 0
OR
lim x->-infinity -1(x^2) = 0
Because it's basically got three limits. For one, the function f(x) will never equal 0, for obvious reasons (there's a 1 in the numerator, so it will always be one of SOMETHING, and no dividing by 0). So 0 is the limit of the function as x goes to infinity or -infinity.
And since the function is also decreasing rapidly without bound as x gets closer to 0 (the smaller the denominator of a fraction is, the greater the magnitude of said fraction -- 1/7 is greater than 1/15, which is greater than 1/1000 -- but since this is a negative fraction no matter what, that tremendous magnitude will actually be directed in the negative direction and the quantity will actually DECREASE as the magnitude increases), you could also say: as x goes to 0, the function has no lower bound as it decreases. Think of it like an intense, raging alcoholic who just continues on an endless downward spiral with no limit whatsoever, no end in sight, no support system to help him get out of it, until it all just abruptly stops (does he shoot himself? die from alcohol poisoning? You be the judge). So, as x goes to 0, the limit is -infinity.
So, the meme is correct, you guys are correct, everyone is correct! Woo hoo!
I highly suggest Wolfram Alpha for further adventures into the world of mathematics. This invaluable tool can basically do anything you ask it.
Happy trails!
t. /sci/

[Anonymous No.10437856]

>>10436162
>>10437787
Stop calling the creature a monster

[Anonymous No.10437861]

>>10431729

[Anonymous No.10437879]

>>10434454
Christianity and Islam are both Abrahamic, so they are basically "judaism meets X". Christianity was made to subvert the Romans, and you can see it worked quite well. There weren't even any jews in Europe before, but then Christian Romans allow rabbis to set foot and before you know they are handed finance in Europe. It turns out something of the sort had not yet taken place in Asia, so here comes Islam. It's pretty evident when the Quran considers Jesus a prophet, albeit earlier than Muhammad

[Anonymous No.10437913]

>>10437845
Thank you /sci/ I feel a lot better now. Wolfram Alpha is really cool.

[Anonymous No.10437927]

>>10437879
"Judaism" (misnomer) didn't even exist until hundreds of years after the Crucifixion when some Babylonians in Babylon converted to Pharisaism and started LARPing as ancient Hebrews and fabricated the Talmud, then centuries later reworked pagan occultism into Kabbalism. The Pharisees didn't create Islam, either. Thing is, both Islam, and Judaism, neopaganism, and atheism are all created by the same person: Satan.

[Anonymous No.10437942]

>>10431462
who this semen demon?

[Anonymous No.10437967]

>>10437927
>all created by the same person: Satan
Why are christcucks such insufferable brainlets, oh why? Really, you somehow manage to say even more stupid shit every single time
>it's not bullshit, read the bible!
Sigh, go back to posting crusader memes on facebook.

[Anonymous No.10437994]

>>10437913
Ah. So one-sided limits only occur when the split runs vertically. I suppose the limits at x = positive and negative infinity are also "one-sided" but only in the sense that they are at the theoretical ends of the graph. It's interesting that not all non-continuous functions have one-sided limits, as with f(x) = -1/x^2, x = 0 is technically undefined, leaving a hole in the curve, yet it still converges on the same point when approached from both sides.

[Anonymous No.10437996]

>>10431488
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.10437998]

>>10437967
Instead of reacting with rage and snide condescension and petty insults, you reacted calmly and fairly and actually engaged in the pursuit of knowledge. That is not how I would expect someone who serves Satan would react. I'm surprised. I'm shaken.

[Anonymous No.10438193]

>>10436140
Instinctual fear from when we were apes. Large snakes were probably our primary predators for a long time.

[Anonymous No.10438305]

>>10431462
>implying the Sumerian flood myth was confined to the Gilgamesh Epic
>implying other cultures didn't have their own flood myths too

Hello, brainlet

[Anonymous No.10438312]

>>10437845
tee hee.

[Anonymous No.10438765]

>>10437994
>when the split runs vertically
Basically, yes! That's called a hyperbola, and that split is its asymptote -- for 1/x, the asymptote is x=0, for example.
I'd be careful with that exact definition, though. The Riemann zeta function, which is the infinite sequence of 1/(1^x) + 1/(2^x) + 1/(3^x) + 1/(4^x) + ..., has one-sided limits even though it's TECHNICALLY actually continuous with no split (at x=1 there's a pole because it's infinity, specifically 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 which strangely enough does not converge; funnily enough, you'd expect x=-1 to also have a pole because it'd be 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + ... and you would understandably expect that to be infinity, but due to mathematical fuckery, 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + ... = -1/12).

[Anonymous No.10438776]

>>10431462
>Almost everything in Noah's arc is plagiarized word by word
People who take the Bible literally will tell you that multiple accounts of an event means it's more likely that it actually happened.

People who don't take it literally will tell you that it doesn't matter that the flood story isn't originally Christian/Jewish. What matters is the meaning behind the tales, and how the story is supposed to be interpreted.

[Anonymous No.10439197]

Is the Aeneid a plagiarism of the Iliad?
Is the Metamorphosis a plagiarism of Roman/Greek tales and folklore?
Is the Nibelungenlied a plagrism if the story of Sigurd?
Is almost every romantic novel after Young Werther, a plagrism of Werther?
Is Nietzsche a plagerism of Schopenhauer?
Is Faulkner a plagiarism of Joyce?
Everything is inspired by something, these stories do not come from thin air, whether true or not.

To follow up my argument >>10438776 , also read Blake. Every art is reflection on the world and nature, and this reflects God, the Bible simply compiles these reflections to create an image of God - while adding its own reflections.

[Anonymous No.10439256]

>>10439197
>Is Nietzsche a plagerism of Schopenhauer?
Yes, I haven't even looked into but from my own reading I've found sentences in Thus Spoke Zarathursta plagarized from Schopenhauer's Genius and Virtue, Mainlander's Redemption and Lucian's Kataplous

[Anonymous No.10439587]

>>10439197
>Is Faulkner a plagiarism of Joyce?
Did Faulkner ever write exactly the same story as Joyce and claim credit?

[Anonymous No.10439639]

Time to read Egyptian myth, Greek myth, Zoroastrianism, and, as you've noticed, Sumerian/Akkadian myth.

[Anonymous No.10439643]

>>10431590
>>10431623
>>10431628
>all generations and cultures know about it after 1800 years
>christianity and judaism determined the literal basis of time that every single person uses today.
>most read book in history
>is the centerpiece for fueling most major conflicts past the year it was written

look, just because you dont like it, doesnt mean its not the most influencial and important book mankind has ever produced.

[Anonymous No.10440421]

>>10439197
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

[Anonymous No.10440652]

>And then he
>And then she
>And then they
>And the Lord said
>And there was
>And all of

wow great fucking prose I'm really impressed desu