DiscussMormonism.com

The story fo Noah comes from Armenia, or ancient Urartu. The ancient Hebrew had no vowels, so that land is callred RRT. When Hebrew got vowels, about 600 A.D., the scribes had to "en-vowel" every word in the Hebrew text. But, they did not know what "RRT" meant or where it was. So, they simply used an "A"......."A"R"A"R"A"T. At the time, there was no mountain named "Ararat". The Mountain now named "Ararat" was not named that until the 9th century, by Christians living there. It was called by the Turks Agra Dag (Angry Mountain) and by the Armenians "Masis". The Kurds called it something else, but never in its history until then was it ever called "Ararat".

Bible scholars today are sure that "RRT" does not refer to "Mount Ararat" but in fact to "uRaRTu"; the ancient land of Armenia. It means in Akkadian "lava flows". Indeed, Armenia has a LOT of dead volcanoes is was known as the Land of Lava Flows. So, "RRT" refers to ancient Armenia, long before it was called "Armenia".

The ancient people of Urartu spoke Urartian, a language very similar to Sumerian. Some scholars think the Sumerians were in fact "colonists" from Urartu. According to local Armenian legend, Noah was named Nokhcht (nawghkkhhchtd), and, indeed, the southern plain of the Valley of Armenia is called by this name, and the capital is "Nokhcht-evan" (Place of Nokhcht). According to legend, "Nokhct" means "He came down" or "He descended [from heaven]". Again, the ancient language of Urartu is not spoken anywhere today, and Armenian is not that language. Armenians is related to ancient Persian and also Greek. There are some similarities between Urartian and the language spoken by the Dagistanis; a people just east of Chechnya.

The Valley of the Aras River, also called the Valley or Ararat, is closed on all sides by high mountains. Upon these mountains are UNfertile lava flows. Nothing but some grass grows on these lava flows that only the most hearty of goats have much trouble digesting it. There are no trees at all on the lava flows. They are barren except for some inedible crab-grass. The only fertile part of the Valley of Armenia is the valley floor, which is extremely fertile, and great for growing grapes. Noah is called a "husbandman" (grape-grower). That means, if the Valley is flooded, people and animals could not live on the surrounding hills, because even their sheep could not survive in the hills.


Very little rain or moisture in the Valley of the Aras (Armenia). However, in 3400 B.C. a comet hit the Indian ocean about 400 miles southeast of Madagascar. Much proof for this. The comet hit the ocean, and set trillions of tons of water vapor into the stratosphere, which came down, all over the earth, as rain in the warmer climates and snow in the colder ones. This is what "froze" the mammaths of Siberia. This is what "froze" the "Ice Man" who was discovered only in recent years in the Alps. He was "froze" about 3400 B.C. He was an unlucky guy to be up in the Alps when the comet hit.

Now, did the water vapor "cover" the entire earth 15 feet above Mount Everest, and most Fundies believe? No! Certainly, there was "flooding" all over the Earth, and many lowlands were flooded, rain and snow just about everywhere, but, again, the Earth was not "baptized" by total immersion ion as the Church used to teach.

But, the Valley of Armenia was flooded. Why? Because the Aras River must pass through a gorge called the Kor-E Gorge, which is over 50 miles. Very narrow! Alot narrower I'm sure in 3400 B.C. On each side of the gorge are high cliffs. Excessive rain (which Armenia rarely gets) would have caused many mud-slides, and debris, blocking and clogging the Kor-E gorge. This would be like plugging the drain in a bath tub. The water had no place to go but up.

Noah had to have "anchors" so his Ark would not travel out the gorge once it became unblocked, and so the Ark would not crash to pieces on the sides of the Valley; which has many hills. These Anchor stones can still be found near Nakhchtevan (the Place of Noah); which is the southern half of the Valley of Armenia.

If the rains lasted for "40 days" (meaning many days and nights), the people would not be saved by climbing up on the nearby hills or mountains. There would be nothing to eat. The animals would not be able to eat the kind of grass that grows there still today. The people would have slaughtered the animals for food, but all food would be gone in about a week or two, and the people could have survived maybe a week without food then they would be dead.

The Hebrew does NOT say that the Ark "rested on mount Ararat" and so many stupid Fundies think. The Hebrews says that the Ark rested "on the high places of Urartu". That means on the lava slow hills surrounding the valley floor. The word used in Hebrew is "Hariym" (hills, mountains). The name Har Megiddo is used for "Mount Megiddo" which is only about three stories high, so "high mountains" is a mistranslation. "Hariym" simply mean "high places" and can mean a small hill or a great mountain.

The Ark of Noah did not float from Sea-Level in North Carolina and land up resting on top of Mount Ararat, a mountain 14,000 feet high! Such is nonsense in the extreme. The Ark was anchored, and probably did not move much; no more than a fat kid in an inner-tube resting in a pool. There was no reason to "sail" or move around. The Ark was square, not pointed like a ship. The last thing Noah wanted was to move around and dash the Ark to pieces on the hills or the sides of the gorge. That's why he anchored it. Google: "anchor stones of Noah" to see photos of the anchor stones which still survive.

The wood of Noah's ship would not survive today until it was buried within a few years after the flood. The floor of the valley of Armenia was covered in forest, and probably had a lot of forest left in Noah's day, but today there are few trees, because the land must be farmed, and also because people have used wood for building and fuel for cooking and heat for thousands of years there. Over thousands of years, people cut down the trees, and then they even dig up the stumps, for fuel for heating and cokking. Rapa Nui (Easter Island) was once covered in trees. Now it is barren; because of people use wood for heat and cooking. Noah and his family would be INSANE to "NOT" use the wood of the Ark for building and for fuel, for generations after that. Otherwise, the wood would have rotted away and been useless to them after the Flood. So, don't except to find Noah's Ark somewhere in Armenia today. Just over about 100 years, the descendants of Noah would have used all the wood for fuel for cooking and heating and for beams for their houses. And the beams would have rotted away long ago.

The Hebrew does NOT say that the flood covered the entire planet Earth. The ancient Hebrews had no concept of a ball floating in space called "Earth". The Hebrew says that the flood covered the entire "eretz" (land) by 35 cubits (the cubit is the space between the elbow and the end of the thumb). It is absolutely possible for the Valley of Armenia to have been flooded in this manner! The "land" (eretz) was the plain, the level ground, the fertile level ground upon which animals ate and things could be grown. A perfect description of the valley floor of the valley of Armenia.

Type in "Map of Armenia" and you'll see how the Valley of the Aras can fill up like a bowel, and how narrow the gorge is that drains the Aras river! Also Google "Comet his the Indian ocean in 3400 B.C." and you'll read more about the comet that send so much water vapor into orbit around the planet, that came down as rain and snow. It really happened.

There is a "mound" in central Nokhchtevan, which locals say is the burial place of Noah. Google it, and you'll see it.

So in all the time it took Noah to build a massive ark just to go up an down in safely he could not have rather migrated the heck out of that stupid valley? And if he knew that he was anchored and would descend as soon as the water abated, why send forth a dove or two looking for evidence of dry land? Why would animals migrate into harms way instinctively to come to Noah from outside that valley and into the basin where the plughole was about to get stopped up?

So they found some nice anchor stones. Okay.

The LDS Church merely adopted traditional Christian doctrine as there is no modern revelation on the subject. Scripture like the Book of Mormon merely transmit the Flood story. I don't see how this could be unreasonable even though I personally accept a local Flood.

I also prefer the flooding of the Black Sea to the comet hypothesis.

the Earth was not "baptized" by total immersionion as the Church used to teach

Still does.

Flood at Noah’s Time
See also Ark; Noah, Bible Patriarch; Rainbow.

During Noah’s time the earth was completely covered with water. This was the baptism of the earth and symbolized a cleansing (1 Pet. 3:20–21).

GS-Flood

bcspace wrote:The LDS Church merely adopted traditional Christian doctrine as there is no modern revelation on the subject. Scripture like the Book of Mormon merely transmit the Flood story. I don't see how this could be unreasonable even though I personally accept a local Flood.

According to officially published Church content, bcspace is apostate on this.

Still other people accept parts of the Flood story, acknowledging that there may have been a local, charismatic preacher, such as Noah, and a localized flood that covered only a specific area of the world, such as the region of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers or perhaps even the whole of Mesopotamia. Yet these people do not believe in a worldwide or global flood. Both of these groups—those who totally deny the historicity of Noah and the Flood and those who accept parts of the story—are persuaded in their disbelief by the way they interpret modern science. They rely upon geological considerations and theories that postulate it would be impossible for a flood to cover earth’s highest mountains, that the geologic evidence (primarily in the fields of stratigraphy and sedimentation) does not indicate a worldwide flood occurred any time during the earth’s existence.

There is a third group of people—those who accept the literal message of the Bible regarding Noah, the ark, and the Deluge. Latter-day Saints belong to this group. In spite of the world’s arguments against the historicity of the Flood, and despite the supposed lack of geologic evidence, we Latter-day Saints believe that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the entire earth. We are assured that these events actually occurred by the multiple testimonies of God’s prophets.

January 1998 Ensign, The Flood and the Tower of Babel, Donald W. Parry

Here you go bcspace, some more official stuff...

"There was the great Flood, when waters covered the earth and when, as Peter says, only 'eight souls were saved'" - Gordon B. Hinckley, If We Are Prepared Ye Shall Not Fear, 175th Semi-Annual General Priesthood Meeting http://LDS.org/conference/talk/display/ ... 20,00.html

FROM THE LDS WEBSITE: "During Noah's time the earth was completely covered with water. This was the baptism of the earth and symbolized a cleansing (1 Pet. 3: 20-21)." http://scriptures.LDS.org/gs/f/21

Thus, modern revelation teaches that God indeed suffered great sorrow over the Flood, which served as the baptism of the earth.
—Joseph B. Romney, “Noah, The Great Preacher of Righteousness,” Ensign, Feb 1998

"In the days of Noah the Lord sent a universal flood which completely immersed the whole earth and destroyed all flesh except that preserved on the ark. (Gen. 6; 7; 8; 9; Moses 7:38-45; 8; Ether 13.2.) "Noah was born to save seed of everything, when the earth was washed of its wickedness by the flood." (Teachings, p. 12) This flood was the baptism of the earth; before it occurred the land was all in one place, a condition that will again prevail during the millennial era. (D&C 133:23-24)". (Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R. McConkie, p. 289)

"The Garden of Eden was in Missouri. Noah was taken to the Old World by the Flood. This teaching was given by Joseph Smith and is still accepted as true doctrine. Given this teaching, Mormons have to accept the flood as a global phenomenon." (Mormon Doctrine, Bruce McConkie, "Adam-Ondi-Ahman" p. 19-20)

FLOOD WAS BAPTISM OF EARTH. Now a word as to the reason for the flood. It was the baptism of the earth, and that had to be by immersion. If the water did not cover the entire earth, then it was not baptized, for the baptism of the Lord is not pouring or sprinkling. (Smith, Joseph Fielding, Jr., Doctrines of Salvation (Salt Lake City: BookCraft, 1955), Vol.2, p.320)

THE GREAT FLOOD. The Old Testament records a flood that was just over fifteen cubits (sometimes assumed to be about twenty-six feet) deep and covered the entire landscape: "And all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered" (Gen. 7:19). Scientifically this account leaves many questions unanswered, especially how a measurable depth could cover mountains. Elder John A. Widtsoe, writing in 1943, offered this perspective: The fact remains that the exact nature of the flood is not known. We set up assumptions, based upon our best knowledge, but can go no further. We should remember that when inspired writers deal with historical incidents they relate that which they have seen or that which may have been told them, unless indeed the past is opened to them by revelation. The details in the story of the flood are undoubtedly drawn from the experiences of the writer. Under a downpour of rain, likened to the opening of the heavens, a destructive torrent twenty-six feet deep or deeper would easily be formed. The writer of Genesis made a faithful report of the facts known to him concerning the flood. In other localities the depth of the water might have been more or less. In fact, the details of the flood are not known to us [Widtsoe, p. 127].
—Encyclopedia of Mormonism, "Earth"

These people were so wicked that they were no longer allowed to pollute the earth by their presence on it or to bring innocent spirits into its decadent environment. The Lord decreed that all living things would be destroyed by flood, with the exception of a faithful few who would be spared so that God could begin anew his creative work and reestablish his covenant among men.
—Kent P. Jackson, “An Age of Contrasts: From Adam to Abraham,” Ensign, Feb 1986, 28

The worldwide flood of Noah’s time has been accepted as a benchmark historical event by Jews and Christians for thousands of years...the worldwide flood of Noah’s time, so upsetting to a restricted secular view, fits easily into place. It is the earth’s baptism.
—F. Kent Nielsen, “The Gospel and the Scientific View: How Earth Came to Be,” Ensign, Sep 1980, 67

Is not today much like Noah’s day when the population of the earth was wiped out in the flood and but eight righteous souls were spared? Some doubt that there was a flood, but by modern revelation we know that it did take place. By modern revelation we know that for more than a century, Noah pleaded with the people to repent, but in their willful stubbornness they would not listen.
—Mark E. Petersen, “Follow the Prophets,” Ensign, Nov 1981, 64

The Lord further indicated that all flesh was corrupt in those days, and so he brought forth the flood and destroyed all flesh except Noah and his family. Therefore, we are all descendants of righteous Noah. But the family concept is under very serious attack today all over the world.
—Hartman Rector Jr., “Turning the Hearts,” Ensign, May 1981, 73

Two generations later the Lord was so pained by that generation “without affection” (Moses 7:33) that he opened the windows of heaven and cleansed the entire earth with water. Thus, the “everlasting decree” (Ether 2:10) was first taught that he who will not obey the Lord in righteousness will be swept from his sacred land. The lesson would be tragically retaught in dispensations yet to come.
—Jeffrey R. Holland, “A Promised Land,” Ensign, Jun 1976, 23

From the scriptures we can identify some of these chosen individuals, starting with Michael who was referred to as the Archangel, one of high rank in the spirit world. He was chosen to be Adam, the first man, to stand forever under the Father and the Son at the head of the human family. Others of the chosen were Seth, the most faithful of Adam’s sons after the death of the righteous Abel, and Enoch, through whose lineage the Lord promised would come Noah and the Messiah, and that his posterity should remain while the earth should stand. Another one was Noah, who was chosen to be the second father of the human race here on earth, after the flood. Another was Shem, the chosen son of Noah; and also Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
—William H. Bennett, “Covenants and Blessings,” Ensign, Nov 1975, 45

The history of the peopling of the earth is really a history of the scattering of the descendants of Noah, who is sometimes referred to as the “second father of mankind.” This general scattering began soon after the Flood when the sons of Noah and their children began to spread forth “in their lands, … after their nations” (see Gen. 10:5, 20, 31)
—Lane Johnson, “Who and Where Are the Lamanites?,” Ensign, Dec 1975, 15

Thanks for copying and pasting this onto my blog.

akdjsalkdjlfj

bcspace wrote:The LDS Church merely adopted traditional Christian doctrine as there is no modern revelation on the subject. Scripture like the Book of Mormon merely transmit the Flood story. I don't see how this could be unreasonable even though I personally accept a local Flood.

I also prefer the flooding of the Black Sea to the comet hypothesis.

Incorrect.

http://www.LDS.org/scriptures/pgp/moses/8?lang=eng

27 And thus Noah found agrace in the eyes of the Lord; for Noah was a just man, and bperfect in his generation; and he cwalked with God, as did also his three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

28 The aearth was bcorrupt before God, and it was filled with violence.

29 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted its away upon the earth.

30 And God said unto Noah: The end of all flesh is come before me, for the earth is filled with violence, and behold I will adestroy all flesh from off the earth.


Not only is a global flood official doctrine, it was received by direct revelation. :)

According to officially published Church content, bcspace is apostate on this.

Yes. I have always said I'm about 95% TBM.

we Latter-day Saints believe that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the entire earth. We are assured that these events actually occurred by the multiple testimonies of God’s prophets.
January 1998 Ensign, The Flood and the Tower of Babel, Donald W. Parry

Inadvertently or not, looks like he left room for a local Flood as such does not have to deny any of this. I believe every word.

Incorrect.

No, quite correct. There is no concordance/lexicon for the Book of Moses, so all we have to go on is the Old Testament. In there, the region flooded could be a variety of things such as a small locality to the entire earth.

did you READ my post?

Massive rain/flooding everywhere! Massive die offs of animals everywhere. The family of Noah could have gone to another place, where they would have had to buy or capture domesticated animals, which, again, would be in short supply. Much easier just to stay there, and keep their animals and grains and food dry in a huge wooden box.

Nightlion wrote:So in all the time it took Noah to build a massive ark just to go up an down in safely he could not have rather migrated the heck out of that stupid valley? And if he knew that he was anchored and would descend as soon as the water abated, why send forth a dove or two looking for evidence of dry land? Why would animals migrate into harms way instinctively to come to Noah from outside that valley and into the basin where the plughole was about to get stopped up?

So they found some nice anchor stones. Okay.

bcspace wrote:

Incorrect.

No, quite correct. There is no concordance/lexicon for the Book of Moses, so all we have to go on is the Old Testament. In there, the region flooded could be a variety of things such as a small locality to the entire earth.

The Book of Moses, canonized scripture, explicitly said the flood would destroy all flesh. No room whatsoever for a local flood. You lose.