Is the Noachian Flood story plausible?

[_Fortigurn]

Sethbag, I have to say it really looks like the LDS church has nailed its colours to the mast on the issue of a global flood. From the link you provided:

Bible DICTIONARY
Noah
Rest.

The patriarch; son of Lamech (Gen. 5: 29-32). When he was 10 years old, Noah was ordained to the priesthood by Methuselah (D&C 107: 52). He became a preacher of righteousness and declared the gospel of Jesus Christ, even as Enoch, teaching faith, repentance, baptism, and the reception of the Holy Ghost (2 Pet. 2: 5; Moses 8: 19, 23-24). His life was sought by unbelievers, but he was preserved by the power of God (Moses 8: 18, 26). He and his sons Japheth, Shem, and Ham, and their wives, making eight in all, were saved from the flood by the ark they had built at the command of God (Gen. 6 - 8; Heb. 11: 7; 1 Pet. 3: 20). We learn from latter-day revelation that Noah is also the angel Gabriel (HC 3: 386).

The Lord’s covenant with Noah affirmed that the earth would never be covered with a flood again (Gen. 9: 1-17; cf. Moses 7: 49-52). Noah, a righteous man, holds the keys of a dispensation and stands next to Adam in authority (HC 3: 386). Other references to Noah are Isa. 54: 9; Ezek. 14: 14, 20; Matt. 24: 37-38; Luke 3: 36; Luke 17: 26-27.

The tradition of a great flood is found in nearly every ancient culture. A Babylonian account closely resembles the record in the Bible, but the biblical account differs from all others in its religious value and the purpose of it. The scriptural account teaches that the flood was sent to cleanse the earth because of the wickedness of the people. Noah and his family were saved because they were righteous (Gen. 6: 9; Moses 8: 27). The authenticity of the Genesis account of the flood is confirmed by latter-day revelation as recorded in Moses 7: 34, 42-43; Moses 8: 8-30. Cf. Ether 13: 2.

[_truth dancer]

Here are the scriptures I think make the global interpretation a necessity... unless of course one is going with the idea it is all metaphorical or symbolic or something.... ;-)

But... it is really not about how I interpret this but how the prophets have believed and taught throughout the ages.

and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.

19 And the awaters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and aevery man:
22 All in whose nostrils was the abreath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

Again, it is not about what I believe but what the prophets have taught.

~dancer~

[_Fortigurn]

Here are the scriptures I think make the global interpretation a necessity... unless of course one is going with the idea it is all metaphorical or symbolic or something.... ;-)

LD, I answered this in a previous post. The culture and language of the Ancient Near East isn't the same as yours. The Sumerians referred to the Sumerian kingdom as 'the universe', despite being fully aware that there were territories outside the Sumerian kingdom. We wouldn't refer to our nation as 'the universe', because our culture and language is different. The Biblical flood story similarly uses language which to us sounds universal, but is not necessarily universal in application.

The following is a list of phrases used in the description of the flood, together with examples of them used elsewhere in a non-global sense:

• 'all flesh: Psalm 145:21, Isaiah 40:5; 66:23, Jeremiah 45:5, Ezekiel 20:48; 21:4, Joel 2:28
• 'under heaven': Mark 16:15, Colossians 1:23
• 'the face of the earth': Genesis 4:14; 41:56, Exodus 10:5, Numbers 11:31; 22:5, 11, Isaiah 23:17, Jeremiah 25:26, Ezekiel 34:5; 38:20
• 'The fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the wild beasts, all the things that creep on the ground', Ezekiel 38:20

Equivalent phrases also used in a non-literal sense include:

• Deuteronomy 2:25, 'all people under heaven'
• 1 Kings 18:20, 'every nation and kingdom'
• Ezekiel 38:20, 'The fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the wild beasts, all the things that creep on the ground, and all people who live on the face of the earth'
• Daniel 4:1; 5:19; 6:24, 'all peoples, nations, and language groups'
• Mark 16:15, Colossians 1:23, 'all creation'

But... it is really not about how I interpret this but how the prophets have believed and taught throughout the ages.

Which prophets?

[_Ray A]

Add to that the fact that there are peoples in this world, like the Australian aborigines, who existed separately from all other human populations for tens of thousands of years until the Europeans rediscovered them 400ish years ago, and that also is proof that the Flood didn't happen, because this population of humans existed, unbroken, through a time period which goes back in time far further than the Biblical time frame of the Flood.

Australia was settled by the white man in 1788. Prior to this Aboriginal occupation goes back at least 40,000 years. There's also the problem of species unique to Australia, and pre-dating the flood.

Koalas

They live only in Australia. Their diet is so restricted--to a few subspecies of eucalyptus--that they're threatened now by destruction of the only kinds of trees they will eat. It's also hard to imagine them migrating. Over many generations they might slowly spread through an area--but travelers, they ain't.

And when they did migrate over 9,000 miles, in a tiny herd from Ararat to New South Wales, eating a convenient trail of long-disappeared eucalyptus (which took how many years after the Flood to grow?), they left no trail of koala fossils behind.

A suggestion for creation "researchers": instead of wasting endless hours combing through the writings of real scientists to find phrases to yank out of context that make them seem to doubt evolution--instead of that, put together a real research expedition! Find us that bee-line trail from northern Turkey to Australia. Find us those fossilized eucalyptus leaves, koala footprints, and koala bones. While you're at it, it would be lovely if you turned up a few kangaroos, giant moas, marsupial lions, Tasmanian wolves, and platypuses along that superhighway to the South Pacific.

http://www.skepticreport.com/creationism/sillyflood.htm

The koala existed long before the supposed worldwide flood which "killed every living flesh":

Koala fossils are quite rare, but some have been found in northern Australia dating to 20 million years ago. During this time, the northern half of Australia was rainforest. The Koala did not specialise in a diet of eucalyptus until the climate cooled and eucalyptus forests grew in the place of rainforests. The fossil record indicates that before 50,000 years ago, Giant Koalas inhabited the southern regions of Australia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koala

I am under no illusion that this will deter the literalists. Sigh.

[_Cooper]

Hi,

I am new here. Just as a brief introduction I am an atheist who left the church four years ago. Many topics surrounding religion in general and religion in particular still intrigue me. This is quite an impressive board with some very interesting threads.

One of the best analyses of the problems with a global flood can be found here.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noa ... tml#caring

[_moksha]

The koala existed long before the supposed worldwide flood which "killed every living flesh":

Giant Koalas inhabited the southern regions of Australia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koala

I am under no illusion that this will deter the literalists. Sigh.

While not deterring the literalist, these normally docile and lovable creatures, when in their giant 30 foot state would have made short work of both Steve Irwin and any literalists who got between them and their beloved eucalyptus trees.

[_Sethbag]

Cooper, that's a great reference. This talk.origins faq site has been up for many years. I recall spending quite a few hours there probably 10 years ago or so, spending many, many hours reading up on all of the Creationism vs. evolution and Flood of Noah crap. Creation, the Flood, and other such topics were what softened up my mind over a period of many years to the point where I acknowedged that the church was simply dead wrong on at least some things, and thus ready to finally flip that switch in my mind and realize that it was in fact possible that the church was wrong in a lot of other things too. Despite having believed in evolution since I was a teenager, and doubting the whole Flood story (more than just doubting it - outright disbelieving it completely), and having a lot of problems with the Garden of Eden story as it relates to death entering the world and dealing with pre-Adamic men, all of which was pretty solid in my mind at least 10-20 years ago, it actually took until a couple of years ago for the full magnitude of the Book of Abraham fiasco to hit home and force me to stop excusing the church and realize that it might just be plain wrong, and then accept that it was.

[_Ray A]

While not deterring the literalist, these normally docile and lovable creatures, when in their giant 30 foot state would have made short work of both Steve Irwin and any literalists who got between them and their beloved eucalyptus trees.

I think Steve would have loved such a challenge!! LOL.

[_grampa75]

On another thread, Fortigurn wrote,

Of all the flood stories of the Ancient Near East, the Biblical flood account is superior because it is scientifically credible and plausible, whereas the others are not:

I would like to discuss the idea that the Noah global flood story is scientifically credible, plausible, or factual.

I'm not interested (for this thread anyway), which ancient flood story is superior, just if the Noachian flood story is possible based on scientific knowledge.

I do not think there is any remote possibility that there was a global food a few thousand years ago. in my opinion, there is not only NO evidence for such an event but there is an overwhelming amount of evidence that this is NOT the case.

If someone wants to go with the idea that there was indeed a flood, I would think they would hold to that belief based on faith not scientific understanding. I suppose one could go with the idea that Satan has provided evidence to trick us, or science has yet to discover something that would change the way we measure time, or something like this but I don't see how one can use science to prove (even the possibility) there was a global flood story a couple of millennia ago.

So, what are you thoughts?

:-)

~dancer~

I believe that if anyone were to study the propect of there really being a global flood at 2600 BC most science bots could not accept it. However, perhaps they or we are not reading the story of the flood with a believing heart in scripture.
On the 2nd day of creation God said, "Let there be a FIRMAMENT in the midst of the waters and let it divide the water from the water.
So God created the FIRMAMENT and divided the water which was above the FIRMAMENT from the waters which were under the firmament. And it was so. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

The firmament is the atmosphere that God created over the earth which naturally extends upward until it reaches a place in the heavens where even the atmosphere freezes.

Absolute zero is minus 460 degrees and if there was water above the atmosphere what condition would you say the water would have to be in?

Naturally it would have to be ice. If we read the 7th chapter of Genesis carefully you should discover that the canopy of ice that was above the atmosphere was broken open because of the planet venus, because of its high eccentricity comes within 30000 miles of earth every 18000 years. That would be the cause of the canopy of ice breaking open and the cause of the ice flood.
In studying the facts stated about the flood in the Bible you should notice that Noah saw the tops of the mountains after 10 months. That should have divided the earth into separate continents at that time. The earth before that time could not have been divided because there was only one body of water on the earth. But the earth was divided into continents some 400 years after Noah in the days of Peleg. It is written in the 10 chapter of Genesis: "In the days of Peleg was the earth divided." The ice woulde have slowly melted and slowly ran down to the lower parts of the earth until some 400 years after Noah had entered the ark the earth was divided into continents.
It might also be helpful to know that most of earth's mountain ranges were created by orogeny, or by gravity puling the mountains out of the earth.

There is a mountain near Oakland, CA called Mount Diablo, rightfully named Devils mountain because of the fact that the mountain is sitting upside down. You can find the older rocks on the bottom and the newer ones on top. Just the oposite of what it should be.

There are several good books on the subject of the flood by some scientists who believe the flood came about just as I have explained it. One book that I personally like in called "The Ice Epoch and the Flood" By Donald W. Patton.

Like I have said before; I never doubt the authenticy of any of our scriptures but I do doubt in some people's interpretation of those scriptures.

Believe it or not by;

grampa75

[_Bond...James Bond]

I believe that if anyone were to study the propect of there really being a global flood at 2600 BC most science bots could not accept it. However, perhaps they or we are not reading the story of the flood with a believing heart in scripture.
On the 2nd day of creation God said, "Let there be a FIRMAMENT in the midst of the waters and let it divide the water from the water.
So God created the FIRMAMENT and divided the water which was above the FIRMAMENT from the waters which were under the firmament. And it was so. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

The firmament is the atmosphere that God created over the earth which naturally extends upward until it reaches a place in the heavens where even the atmosphere freezes.

Absolute zero is minus 460 degrees and if there was water above the atmosphere what condition would you say the water would have to be in?

Naturally it would have to be ice. If we read the 7th chapter of Genesis carefully you should discover that the canopy of ice that was above the atmosphere was broken open because of the planet venus, because of its high eccentricity comes within 30000 miles of earth every 18000 years. That would be the cause of the canopy of ice breaking open and the cause of the ice flood.
In studying the facts stated about the flood in the Bible you should notice that Noah saw the tops of the mountains after 10 months. That should have divided the earth into separate continents at that time. The earth before that time could not have been divided because there was only one body of water on the earth. But the earth was divided into continents some 400 years after Noah in the days of Peleg. It is written in the 10 chapter of Genesis: "In the days of Peleg was the earth divided." The ice woulde have slowly melted and slowly ran down to the lower parts of the earth until some 400 years after Noah had entered the ark the earth was divided into continents.
It might also be helpful to know that most of earth's mountain ranges were created by orogeny, or by gravity puling the mountains out of the earth.

There is a mountain near Oakland, CA called Mount Diablo, rightfully named Devils mountain because of the fact that the mountain is sitting upside down. You can find the older rocks on the bottom and the newer ones on top. Just the oposite of what it should be.

There are several good books on the subject of the flood by some scientists who believe the flood came about just as I have explained it. One book that I personally like in called "The Ice Epoch and the Flood" By Donald W. Patton.

Like I have said before; I never doubt the authenticy of any of our scriptures but I do doubt in some people's interpretation of those scriptures.

Believe it or not by;

grampa75

I think I'll leave this post for the more scientific people on the board. Scientists?

I'm still waiting for responses to the posts I made on your other threads though grampa75. The usual order on these message boards is to answer questions asked by other people.