Mythology is the definition of undocumented history, or unbelievable stories that are beyond common sense. In fact, some people regard myths as pure chaotic gods, while others believe that the records of myths are true and that the ancients had no motive to deceive future generations. What they recorded was what they really saw.
The reason why later generations cannot understand it is because the scientific level of later generations is far from reaching the level of science and technology in mythological records. As a result, it is implausible to believe what is written in mythology, or it is considered impossible for science to prove. I am noncommittal on either view. Because both of these possibilities exist, both views are theoretically true, and there is no absolute correctness.
But around the myth, there is still a problem. That is, is the older the myth, the more true and reliable it is? The reason why there is such a problem is because although each region has its own mythology. But to sum it up, it's all the same story. For example, the creation of man by God and the Great Flood exist in the myths of almost all peoples.
Is it possible, then, that all myths originate from the same myth? If this assumption is true, it means that the oldest myths are probably the most true and reliable myths. Because history is constantly being revised, to paraphrase President Hu, history is like a little girl who can be dressed up. So the earlier the age, the less likely it is to be corrected.
The same applies to historical records, such as the records of the Bamboo Book before they were unearthed, and everyone believed in them. Because the historical records are not only the official history, but also the earliest historical books. However, after the Takeshu Chronicle was unearthed, even though it was considered by some people to be a wild history, it has no credibility. However, there are still many people who believe that the records of the Bamboo Book Chronicle are true.
The reason is naturally that the time of the bamboo book is earlier, and the reasons such as spring and autumn penmanship are not very important. So, the earlier a myth is, the more credible it is. I think this is true in theory, but whether it is credible or not depends on whether the record is logical. Comparing Sumerian mythology with the storyline in the Bible, it is clear that earlier Sumerian mythology is more logical.
For example, both mention that God created man, and the Bible does not give a reason why God created man, only that God created man. Sumerian mythology, on the other hand, mentions that the reason why God created man was because God needed man to extract resources instead of himself. If we look at the gods from the moral high ground, the gods of Sumerian mythology seem too utilitarian.
But if divinity and humanity are the same, the Sumerian mythological record is more in line with the logic of reality. The second example is the Great Flood, the cause of the Great Flood, where the Bible records that human beings sinned and angered God, so God destroyed mankind. According to Sumerian mythology, the rate of human reproduction was too fast, and the gods could not control the number of humans, so they wanted to destroy humans.
As for the surviving Noah, the reason for his survival, the Bible is that Noah was faithful to God. Sumer, on the other hand, was the god who created man behind his back and destroyed his creation. Later, the God who created man learned that he could not save all the people, but only those closest to him. After reading these two accounts, it is clear that the Sumerian account is closer to science than the Bible.
As for who is more reliable, it is up to the wise to see what is wise. What do netizens think about this? Everyone is welcome to leave a message in the comment area and communicate with me.