FatherOfJesus:
Nope, I don’t believe that rather I understand that the earth is not younger than 4.5billion years old.

I can tell you how

Ok 4.5 billion years old aiit. So when was the first proof of life on earth?

Adjovi:


Ok 4.5 billion years old aiit. So when was the first proof of life on earth?

Do you want to know about the age of earth or the first evidence of life on earth?
Because you seem confuse now

FatherOfJesus:
Do you want to know about the age of earth or the first evidence of life on earth?
Because you seem confuse now

The earth has to be formed first before it can abhor life isn't? So now you said the earth must have been formed some billions of years ago. So now I'm asking when was the first evidence of life after the earth was formed?

Adjovi:



The earth has to be formed first before it can abhor life isn't? So now you said the earth must have been formed some billions of years ago. So now I'm asking when was the first evidence of life after the earth was formed?

One would think that the next reasonable question Would be “how did you know that the earth is not younger than 4.5billion years old?”.

And then you jumped from that to another topic entirely.

FatherOfJesus:
One would think that the next reasonable question Would be “how did you know that the earth is not younger than 4.5billion years old?”.

And then you jumped from that to another topic entirely.

You have answered that of the age of the world and I'm asking another question but you seem not to have an answer to that hence trying to evade? Just answer my question I'm trying to point something out to you of which you are blind to see.

Adjovi:



You have answered that of the age of the world and I'm asking another question but you seem not to have an answer to that hence trying to evade? Just answer my question I'm trying to point something out to you of which you are blind to see.

Why should I answer a question that has nothing to do with the topic?

Am I here to always take questions you can easily check up by browsing google and Wikipedia?

FatherOfJesus:
Why should I answer a question that has nothing to do with the topic?

Am I here to always take questions you can easily check up by browsing google and Wikipedia?

Aiit then. Here's a link to another topic if you care to engage

https://www.nairaland.com/6436635/bible-inspired-book-god

Adjovi:





Aiit then. Here's a link to another topic if you care to engage

https://www.nairaland.com/6436635/bible-inspired-book-god

i just read it and I don’t see it as an interesting thread.

I see someone who already reached a conclusion before even carrying out any experiment and then cherry picking scenarios to justify his conclusions while deliberately ignoring all contradictory facts.

LordReed:


He was claiming shared heritage with respect to flood stories from various regions of the world. I introduced the Osiris myth as a way to underscore the fact that similarities in religious tales does not indicate a shared heritage. If you believe the flood stories are all linked then be necessity you have to accept that dying and rising gods are all linked. Disavowing one disavows the other likewise. The article makes it abundantly clear that you cannot assume links because of similarities, you have to prove they are linked.

Okay i see.

FatherOfJesus:
i just read it and I don’t see it as an interesting thread.

I see someone who already reached a conclusion before even carrying out any experiment and then cherry picking scenarios to justify his conclusions while deliberately ignoring all contradictory facts.

Lmao just admit your L and move on. You can come back when you have answers to prove all I've written wrong. All atheists have been avoiding this thread as usual cos y'all got nothing to say. You can go to another thread and show yourself bye bye

LordReed:


That is irrelevant. Tales tales are tall tales whether it's of your favorite god character or otherwise.

Ask her. It's a world apart.

Adjovi:




Lmao just admit your L and move on. You can come back when you have answers to prove all I've written wrong. All atheists have been avoiding this thread as usual cos y'all got nothing to say. You can go to another thread and show yourself bye bye

Maybe they are avoiding it because the logic behind your reasoning is wack.

Atheist usually do not shy away from such arguments

FatherOfJesus:
Maybe they are avoiding it because the logic behind your reasoning is wack.

Atheist usually do not shy away from such arguments

Or maybe they have no answer to my questions because it's the truth

Image123:



Ask her. It's a world apart.

Don't need to, she's not going to say anything different from you. You both are emotionally invested in the Jesus stories, it soothes you.

LordReed:


Don't need to, she's not going to say anything different from you. You both are emotionally invested in the Jesus stories, it soothes you.

Exactly. It is impossible to be emotionally invested in Bunyan in the same way. They are worlds apart.

Image123:


Exactly. It is impossible to be emotionally invested in Bunyan in the same way. They are worlds apart.

Emotional investment doesn't make a tall tale true.

LordReed:


Emotional investment doesn't make a tall tale true.

i refer to the difference, not the validity.

Image123:


i refer to the difference, not the validity.

I am not concerned with the difference.

LordReed:


I am not concerned with the difference.

Lol, but there's a world of difference between Jesus and Bunyan.

Image123:


Lol, but there's a world of difference between Jesus and Bunyan.

Doesn't matter to me since they are both tall tales.

LordReed:


LoL! Your argument was wrecked by the very same article you referenced and all you can say is fallacy this and fallacy that. Bwahahahahahaha!

Notice how you skipped answering my question: Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

BTW Jewish monotheism came from monolatry and before that polytheism, get your facts straight.

LoL! Your argument was wrecked by the very same article you referenced and all you can say is fallacy this and fallacy that. Bwahahahahahaha!

Let's see if that's true.
The article says' "Religions, by nature will have some general things in common…" then you claim that flood stories should have some general things in common. I agree with you on that. But the we should be able to know what this two things should have in common, especially, religion which have a way from BRANCHING OFF from one source. If I may ask, what should flood stories have in common (we can compare your answer with flood from news and weather reports)

Notice how you skipped answering my question: Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

Secondly, I maintained that the alleged parallels didn't happen in the original text. Let's see if these events are true parallels
1. Christ is the son of God the Father (and the Bible says him being the word was the agent of creation). Osiris on the other hand is among the many children of Geb who is a descendant of many ancestors leading to Ra the creator. A PARALLEL? No!
But a parallel was formed such that Jesus is the son of the creator and Osiris is the son of the creator
2. Jesus came primarily to die for the sins of the world and reconcile the world to the Father. He knew about his death and that it was perpetrated by the Jews. Osiris died by the hand of Set his brother (some version claimed that it was for him to take over the throne, some claimed that he had intimacy with another who was supposed to be Set's wife).
But a parallel was formed such that they both died by the hands of their enemy (though many people die by the hands of their enemies )
3. Jesus had a bodily resurrection on this earth and appeared to his disciples, giving them instructions and having communion. Osiris dead body pieces was put together to copulate with Isis (according to some tradition) while his semen was drawn from his penis alone (according to other tradition) to copulate with Isis. The most striking part of them all is that he lived in the underworld. The question was that if he did not live on the earth, where did he copulate with Isis?
But the word resurrection is now used to describe Osiris, which was never part of the myth in the first place

BTW Jewish monotheism came from monolatry and before that polytheism, get your facts straight.
Practiced monolatory? The Bible recorded one God in the beginning and later began to warn the Hebrews that there is no other deity except him. This and other evidence suggest that people along the way chose gods for themselves, hence, monolatrism and polytheism that you alluded to. The rightful thing for the Hebrews then was monotheism, hence the Shema given to them before their nation was settled.
What facts should I get straight, Prof? To accept anti-God hypothesis or what the Bible and other scholars agree with?

LordReed:


He was claiming shared heritage with respect to flood stories from various regions of the world. I introduced the Osiris myth as a way to underscore the fact that similarities in religious tales does not indicate a shared heritage. If you believe the flood stories are all linked then be necessity you have to accept that dying and rising gods are all linked. Disavowing one disavows the other likewise. The article makes it abundantly clear that you cannot assume links because of similarities, you have to prove they are linked.

Though I already ask you to give the type of similarities we should expect from different flood stories (a type which we should expect in different armed robbery stories), I just want to respond to the bolded, that I did that already in this thread. Starting with the Bible, the surviving families would pass the stories on to their descendants and the dispersal at Babel where every language group went their way would definitely go with such stories and continue to pass it down; though oral tradition corrupts with time, hence the differences in the stories, but accounts for the similarities that one should not expect in a typical flood story.

You on the other hand compared apples with orange and my last response showed what I have maintained all along. The alleged parallels which are not are forced so as to discredit the gospels

keppler:

Though I already ask you to give the type of similarities we should expect from different flood stories (a type which we should expect in different armed robbery stories), I just want to respond to the bolded, that I did that already in this thread. Starting with the Bible, the surviving families would pass the stories on to their descendants and the dispersal at Babel where every language group went their way would definitely go with such stories and continue to pass it down; though oral tradition corrupts with time, hence the differences in the stories, but accounts for the similarities that one should not expect in a typical flood story.

You on the other hand compared apples with orange and my last response showed what I have maintained all along. The alleged parallels which are not are forced so as to discredit the gospels

If merely saying "Starting with the Bible, the surviving families would pass the stories on to their descendants and the dispersal at Babel where every language group went their way would definitely go with such stories and continue to pass it down; though oral tradition corrupts with time" is proof, then merely saying Israelites took the dying and rising god myth from Egypt is proof.

LMFAO!

LordReed:


If merely saying "Starting with the Bible, the surviving families would pass the stories on to their descendants and the dispersal at Babel where every language group went their way would definitely go with such stories and continue to pass it down; though oral tradition corrupts with time" is proof, then merely saying Israelites took the dying and rising god myth from Egypt is proof.

LMFAO!

First, this is still comparing apples and orange as I showed a methodical approach how it came from one source and others having a variant of it, with the recorded history in the Bible. While you just compared it with merely asserting that the Isrealites took the a myth (which has also been shown to not be similar in the way it was claimed). That is comparing apples and orange.
Funny enough, there are no parallels which can be compared to detailed similarities found in the flood stories which should naturally not be found. I already asked you to show us the type of similarities that should be found in different flood account of different geographical places (such which should be found in different armed robbery events)

You obviously skipped that part of my response

keppler:

First, this is still comparing apples and orange as I showed a methodical approach how it came from one source and others having a variant of it, with the recorded history in the Bible. While you just compared it with merely asserting that the Isrealites took the a myth (which has also been shown to not be similar in the way it was claimed). That is comparing apples and orange.
Funny enough, there are no parallels which can be compared to detailed similarities found in the flood stories which should naturally not be found. I already asked you to show us the type of similarities that should be found in different flood account of different geographical places (such which should be found in different armed robbery events)

You obviously skipped that part of my response

keppler:

LoL! Your argument was wrecked by the very same article you referenced and all you can say is fallacy this and fallacy that. Bwahahahahahaha!

Let's see if that's true.
The article says' "Religions, by nature will have some general things in common…" then you claim that flood stories should have some general things in common. I agree with you on that. But the we should be able to know what this two things should have in common, especially, religion which have a way from BRANCHING OFF from one source. If I may ask, what should flood stories have in common (we can compare your answer with flood from news and weather reports)

Let's take a look at flood myths from around the world and let's see how similar they are to the Noah story.

Yoruba:

In the beginning, there was only the sky above, water and marshland below.

The chief god Olorun ruled the sky, and the goddess Olokun ruled what was below.

Obatala, another god, reflected upon this situation, then went to Olorun for permission to create dry land for all kinds of living creatures to inhabit.

He was given permission, so he sought advice from Orunmila, oldest son of Olorun and the god of prophecy.

He was told he would need a gold chain long enough to reach below, a snail's shell filled with sand, a white hen, a black cat, and a palm nut, all of which he was to carry in a bag.

All the gods contributed what gold they had, and Orunmila supplied the articles for the bag.

When all was ready, Obatala hung the chain from a corner of the sky, placed the bag over his shoulder, and started the downward climb. When he reached the end of the chain he saw he still had some distance to go.

From above, he heard Orunmila instruct him to pour the sand from the snail's shell, and also immediately release the white hen.

He did as he was told, whereupon the hen landing on the sand began scratching and scattering it about.

Wherever the sand landed it formed dry land, the bigger piles becoming hills and the smaller piles valleys. Obatala jumped to a hill and named the place Ife.

The dry land now extended as far as he could see.

He dug a hole, planted the palm nut, and saw it grow to maturity in a flash. The mature palm tree dropped more palm nuts on the ground, each of which grew immediately to maturity and repeated the process. Obatala settled down with the cat for company.

Many months passed, and he grew bored with his routine.

He decided to create beings like himself to keep him company.

He dug into the sand and soon found clay with which to mould figures like himself and started on his task, but he soon grew tired and decided to take a break.

He made wine from a nearby palm tree, and drank bowl after bowl. Not realizing he was drunk, Obatala returned to his task of fashioning the new beings; because of his condition he fashioned many imperfect figures.

Without realizing this, he called out to Olorun to breathe life into his creatures.

The next day he realized what he had done, and swore never to drink again, and to take care of those who were deformed, thus becoming Protector of the Deformed.

The new people built huts as Obatala had done, and soon Ife prospered and became a city.

All the other gods were happy with what Obatala had done, and visited the land often, except for Olokun, the ruler of all below the sky.

She had not been consulted by Obatala, and grew angry that he had usurped so much of her kingdom.

When Obatala returned to his home in the sky for a visit, Olokun summoned the great waves of her vast oceans and sent them surging across the land.

Wave after wave she unleashed, until much of the land was underwater and many of the people were drowned.

Those that had fled to the highest land beseeched the god Eshu who had been visiting, to return to the sky and report what was happening to them.

Eshu demanded sacrifice be made to Obatala and himself before he would deliver the message.

The people sacrificed some goats, and Eshu returned to the sky.

When Orunmila heard the news he climbed down the golden chain to the earth, and cast many spells which caused the flood waters to retreat and the dry African land reappear.

So ended the great flood.

North American Choctow:

Our people have always had a tradition of the Deluge, which happened in this way: There was total darkness for a great time over the whole of the earth; the Choctaw doctors or mystery-men looked out for daylight for a long time, until at last they despaired of ever seeing it, and the whole nation was very unhappy. At last a light was discovered in the North, and there was great rejoicing, until it was found to be great mountains of water rolling on, which destroyed them all, except a few families who had expected it and built a great raft, on which they were saved.

Greek:

This one has the same basic story line. According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Dardanus left Pheneus in Arcadia to colonize a land in the North-East Aegean Sea. When Dardanus' deluge occurred, the land was flooded and the mountain where he and his family survived formed the island of Samothrace. He left Samothrace on an inflated skin to the opposite shores of Asia Minor and settled on Mount Ida. Due to the fear of another flood, they refrained from building a city and lived in the open for fifty years. His grandson Tros eventually moved from the highlands down to a large plain, on a hill that had many rivers flowing down from Ida above. There he built a city, which was named Troy after him.

Chinese:

The Huainanzi tells an ancient story about how the four pillars that support the sky crumbled inexplicably. Other sources have tried to explain the cause, i.e. the battle between Gong Gong and Zhuanxu or Zhu Rong. Unable to accept his defeat, Gong Gong deliberately banged his head onto Mount Buzhou (不周山) which was one of the four pillars. Half of the sky fell which created a gaping hole and the earth itself was cracked; the earth's axis mundi was tilted into the southeast while the sky rose into the northwest. This is said to be the reason why the western region of China is higher than the eastern and that most of its rivers flow towards the southeast. This same explanation is applied to the sun, moon, and stars which moved into the northwest. A wildfire burnt the forests and led the wild animals to run amok and attack the innocent peoples, while the water which was coming out from the earth's crack didn't seem to be slowing down.

Nüwa pitied the humans she had made and attempted to repair the sky. She gathered five colored-stones (red, yellow, blue, black, and white) from the riverbed, melted them and used them to patch up the sky: since then the sky (clouds) have been colorful. She then killed a giant turtle (or tortoise), some version named the tortoise as Ao, cut off the four legs of the creature to use as new pillars to support the sky. But Nüwa didn't do it perfectly because the unequal length of the legs made the sky tilt. After the job was done, drove away the wild animals, extinguished the fire, and controlled the flood with a huge amount of ashes from the burning reeds. The world became as peaceful as it was before

As we can see your claim of detailed similarity is lacking in any actual evidence. So no you did not prove that the flood myths all emanated from 1 event, you merely stated it, making a statement is not proof.

Notice how you skipped answering my question: Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

Secondly, I maintained that the alleged parallels didn't happen in the original text. Let's see if these events are true parallels
1. Christ is the son of God the Father (and the Bible says him being the word was the agent of creation). Osiris on the other hand is among the many children of Geb who is a descendant of many ancestors leading to Ra the creator. A PARALLEL? No!
But a parallel was formed such that Jesus is the son of the creator and Osiris is the son of the creator
2. Jesus came primarily to die for the sins of the world and reconcile the world to the Father. He knew about his death and that it was perpetrated by the Jews. Osiris died by the hand of Set his brother (some version claimed that it was for him to take over the throne, some claimed that he had intimacy with another who was supposed to be Set's wife).
But a parallel was formed such that they both died by the hands of their enemy (though many people die by the hands of their enemies )
3. Jesus had a bodily resurrection on this earth and appeared to his disciples, giving them instructions and having communion. Osiris dead body pieces was put together to copulate with Isis (according to some tradition) while his semen was drawn from his penis alone (according to other tradition) to copulate with Isis. The most striking part of them all is that he lived in the underworld. The question was that if he did not live on the earth, where did he copulate with Isis?
But the word resurrection is now used to describe Osiris, which was never part of the myth in the first place

1. I did not call Osiris "the son of Ra", I wrote descendant of Ra. Even if you are disputing that particular phrasing, is it not said in your bible that Adam was a son of god? What does that make Jesus if not a descendant of god on his mother's side?

2. The reason for his death is irrelevant to the parallel in this case. They were killed by their enemies period.

3. Osiris resurrection was bodily as well except he was missing the phallus which was the reason he could not continue to rule in the land of the living.

You really didn't answer the question but instead went nitpicking. Can you prove that any part of the Osiris myth was written after Jesus, no you can't because it is simply not the case. It would be really funny to see you attempt to nitpick your way through the various flood myths I posted above. LoL

BTW Jewish monotheism came from monolatry and before that polytheism, get your facts straight.
Practiced monolatory? The Bible recorded one God in the beginning and later began to warn the Hebrews that there is no other deity except him. This and other evidence suggest that people along the way chose gods for themselves, hence, monolatrism and polytheism that you alluded to. The rightful thing for the Hebrews then was monotheism, hence the Shema given to them before their nation was settled.
What facts should I get straight, Prof? To accept anti-God hypothesis or what the Bible and other scholars agree with?

So the Bible says so is your proof? LMAO! I dunno where to even start with this one. I am sure anything I point at will receive the a hand wave and claim of being anti-god. Anything that does not show the things you claim from your Bible are simply labelled anti-god even though your Bible stories have little to no support. The real things we can see are not enough, we have to accept some fanciful tales of a god doing fantastical things which when we tell you to reproduce, you start another song and dance. Bwahahahahaha!

LordReed:


Let's take a look at flood myths from around the world and let's see how similar they are to the Noah story.

Yoruba:



North American Choctow:



Greek:



Chinese:



As we can see your claim of detailed similarity is lacking in any actual evidence. So no you did not prove that the flood myths all emanated from 1 event, you merely stated it, making a statement is not proof.



1. I did not call Osiris "the son of Ra", I wrote descendant of Ra. Even if you are disputing that particular phrasing, is it not said in your bible that Adam was a son of god? What does that make Jesus if not a descendant of god on his mother's side?

2. The reason for his death is irrelevant to the parallel in this case. They were killed by their enemies period.

3. Osiris resurrection was bodily as well except he was missing the phallus which was the reason he could not continue to rule in the land of the living.

You really didn't answer the question but instead went nitpicking. Can you prove that any part of the Osiris myth was written after Jesus, no you can't because it is simply not the case. It would be really funny to see you attempt to nitpick your way through the various flood myths I posted above. LoL



So the Bible says so is your proof? LMAO! I dunno where to even start with this one. I am sure anything I point at will receive the a hand wave and claim of being anti-god. Anything that does not show the things you claim from your Bible are simply labelled anti-god even though your Bible stories have little to no support. The real things we can see are not enough, we have to accept some fanciful tales of a god doing fantastical things which when we tell you to reproduce, you start another song and dance. Bwahahahahaha!

Let me start with reminding you about the crux of our debate. I’ll paraphrase it as “the best explanation for the similarities found in different flood accounts of different world cultures”.
Again, let me remind you of the part you seem to have refused to respond to (for the third time). What type of similarities should be found in flood account of different events (and locations); the type that we should see in armed robbery events of different locations?

When the question above is answered (faithfully), then I will go ahead to address your claims point by point.

I have been busy, hence have not got time to visit NL. I trust you are doing great and safe in the chaotic country (if you are in Nigeria o)

keppler:


Let me start with reminding you about the crux of our debate. I’ll paraphrase it as “the best explanation for the similarities found in different flood accounts of different world cultures”.
Again, let me remind you of the part you seem to have refused to respond to (for the third time). What type of similarities should be found in flood account of different events (and locations); the type that we should see in armed robbery events of different locations?

When the question above is answered (faithfully), then I will go ahead to address your claims point by point.

You were adamant that there were details in the flood myths that could only be explained by them being offshoots of the Noah story while I maintained that similarities will be found across all cultures that have encounters with large bodies of water. That is the crux of the debate.

I thought it was already made clear when I said that similarities are due to similarities in their environment and cultures. Vengeful gods, an unrelenting flood, a boat, sacrifice, etc are some of the similarities we would expect and indeed we see repeated across these flood myths. However what we do not see is any sort of detail that is constant aside from a flood and gods, every other thing varies. Some don't have boats, some do for instance.

I have been busy, hence have not got time to visit NL. I trust you are doing great and safe in the chaotic country (if you are in Nigeria o)

I am well thanks for asking, hope you are too.

LordReed:


You were adamant that there were details in the flood myths that could only be explained by them being offshoots of the Noah story while I maintained that similarities will be found across all cultures that have encounters with large bodies of water. That is the crux of the debate.

I thought it was already made clear when I said that similarities are due to similarities in their environment and cultures. Vengeful gods, an unrelenting flood, a boat, sacrifice, etc are some of the similarities we would expect and indeed we see repeated across these flood myths. However what we do not see is any sort of detail that is constant aside from a flood and gods, every other thing varies. Some don't have boats, some do for instance.



I am well thanks for asking, hope you are too.

Thanks
But my question would be; why should we have the bolded words in a flood story? Not that those are the only anomalies in many flood stories anyway.
Also, since we don't have a volcanic event across the world; what similarities should we expect from volcanic activities of different areas? Or similarities that we should expect from tsunami event?

keppler:

Thanks
But my question would be; why should we have the bolded words in a flood story? Not that those are the only anomalies in many flood stories anyway.
Also, since we don't have a volcanic event across the world; what similarities should we expect from volcanic activities of different areas? Or similarities that we should expect from tsunami event?

LordReed:



I thought it was already made clear when I said that similarities are due to similarities in their environment and cultures.

These are people whose worldview constantly revolved around the antics of gods as an explanation for natural phenomenon. It's no surprise they would include such things in their stories. Even our Nigerian cultures always mention gods and sacrifice whenever there is some calamity.

I don't know about volcanic events or tsunamis since the cultures that encounter them are not as many as those that encounter flooding.

LordReed:




These are people whose worldview constantly revolved around the antics of gods as an explanation for natural phenomenon. It's no surprise they would include such things in their stories. Even our Nigerian cultures always mention gods and sacrifice whenever there is some calamity.

I don't know about volcanic events or tsunamis since the cultures that encounter them are not as many as those that encounter flooding.

These are people whose worldview constantly revolved around the antics of gods as an explanation for natural phenomenon. It's no surprise they would include such things in their stories. Even our Nigerian cultures always mention gods and sacrifice whenever there is some calamity
Fair enough. Your argument for inclusion of gods and sacrifice is plausible for all cultures which are surrounded with large bodies of water and have boat building skills.
I'll get back to that later

I don't know about volcanic events or tsunamis since the cultures that encounter them are not as many as those that encounter flooding.
Yes, I know. But what are the similarities that you would expect to see in such events, knowing the nature of such activities?
It is important that an answer should be given, as it would give a prediction that one could test with later discovery. (does the prediction of the theory match the evidence and can it be used for other similar phenomena? The type used in scientific method)

keppler:


These are people whose worldview constantly revolved around the antics of gods as an explanation for natural phenomenon. It's no surprise they would include such things in their stories. Even our Nigerian cultures always mention gods and sacrifice whenever there is some calamity
Fair enough. Your argument for inclusion of gods and sacrifice is plausible for all cultures which are surrounded with large bodies of water and have boat building skills.
I'll get back to that later

I don't know about volcanic events or tsunamis since the cultures that encounter them are not as many as those that encounter flooding.
Yes, I know. But what are the similarities that you would expect to see in such events, knowing the nature of such activities?
It is important that an answer should be given, as it would give a prediction that one could test with later discovery. (does the prediction of the theory match the evidence and can it be used for other similar phenomena? The type used in scientific method)

I would have to know what kind of cultures develop around volcanoes to be able to make an extensive prediction. With the little I know the stories would also involve vengeful gods and sacrifice, probably even self sacrifice. Beyond these I can't make any more predictions.

Archaeologists and anthropologists would have a better grasp of what to expect. I am neither.

LordReed:


I would have to know what kind of cultures develop around volcanoes to be able to make an extensive prediction. With the little I know the stories would also involve vengeful gods and sacrifice, probably even self sacrifice. Beyond these I can't make any more predictions.

Archaeologists and anthropologists would have a better grasp of what to expect. I am neither.

Great!
Just that the various volcanic legends doesn't have such similarities. Some have it being born as result of gods while there are many that didn't even include god, not to talk of sacrifices. This make sense since the eruptions were independent of themselves even when as you said, virtually all the cultures have gods in their world view.
Now, comparing and contrasting,
1. All these volcano myths have similar environment
2. Majority have worship of gods
3. It would follow that worship of gods would entail sacrifice.
Yet, we don't have such similarities in those stories. That is, what is common to them was not found in such legends, rather, though some few mention the eruption as the acts of gods, the differences are so wide that one can never link them at all. This is because they are local events which are independent of each other