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. ...
Can he really be doing this?
Because some apologists like to claim that the Hebrew word 'aretz' in Genesis can just mean 'the local land we live in' not 'the earth' in the sense of 'the surface of the globe', bcspace thinks he has the liberty to suppose that when Parry says 'waters covered the entire earth', the English word 'earth' can be interpreted in the same way.
If he does not mean this (which is clearly off the wall, since in 20th century English usage 'the entire earth' can only mean 'the entire surface of the globe'), what the heck does he mean?
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
There was a General Authority named John Widstoe, who wrote, and this was published in the official Church magazine at the time, "The Improvement Era", that the Flood was "universal" in that it rained all over the Earthl not that the Earth was covered in 16,000 feet of water. And, in fact, there is evidence that is what happened: rained or snowed everywhere about 3400 B.C., when the comet hit the Indian Ocean. There is much evidence for this, including massive tsunami scars on Madagascar, so scientists even know the angle by which the comet hit.
However, thanks to Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie, and their followers such as Boyd K. Packer, the MORE popular teaching in the Church is that the flood "baptized the Earth by total immersion" and killed "all flesh" off the planet. But....
1. The massive evidence is AGAINST this. The biggest evidence is "The Australian Factor"; meaning, that there are thousands of totally unique types of plants and animals on Australia that cannot be found elsewhere anywhere. How did they get there? Joseph Fielding Smith taught that one of the sons of Canaan, took one of his sisters, built a HUGE raft, took the THOUSANDS of unique types of animals and plants, found nowhere else, floated down the Tigris river with them, and out to the Persian Gulf, then over into the Indian Ocean, and finally over to Australia, and that is why this continent has thousands of unique plant and animal species. PROBLEM: another "son" and "daughter" had to do the same thing for North and South America! Another son and daughter did the same thing for the Galapagos Islands off of Chile; which has unique plants and animals not found elsewhere. IMPOSSIBLE! ABSURD BEYOND ALL REASON!!!
2. By "earth" the ancient HEbrews meant "land" not "planet". They knew of no "Planet Earth". If by "Earth" they meant planet Earth, then Cain got aboard a space-ship and left the planet, because it says:
:13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear. 4:14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me. (Genesis chapter 4)
3. I have NO DOUBT that "all flesh" (humans and animals) on the "earth" (the flat fertile land in the valley of Armenia...the "land" that Noah lived upon) were killed when that valley flooded, because the Kor-E gorge was blocked by debris and mud. No doubt all died but Noah, his family, and the animals they took with them. They would have taken with them a few snakes, because Noah knew that rats would have hid on the Ark, and if he did not take snakes, the rats would have eaten all the crops within no time. The Ark did not float from North Carolina to the slopes of Mount Ararat. The Ark barely moved, because Noah wisely anchored it. The anchor stones are still around. Stone lasts for 5,400 years. Wood does not; especially since "wood" was used for housing, cooking, and heating.
4. You must also understand, that when ancient scriptures speak of "mankind" they are referring to Adamites, not pre-Adamites. Adamites referred to pre-Adamites as "beasts of the field".The word "beast" appears throughout English written scriptures and often appears translated as simple "Beast," or "Beast of the Field," or "Beast of the Earth." However, three different Hebrew words are incorrectly translated into the English word BEAST in many Bible Translations, one combined Hebrew word, and one Greek word.
1. The Hebrew word CHAY-AH, which means LIFE, LIVING CREATURE, EARTH LIFE-EARTH DWELLER;
2. The Hebrew word BEHEMA, which means quadrupeds (like cattle);
3. The Hebrew word BEIR which means a BRUTE BEAST.
4. The Hebrew phrase NEPHESH CHAY-AH, means LIVING BREATHERS, it is used, of animals, both aquatic and land, as well as hu-mans (see Gen 1:24; 2:7). The common English translation of "soul" is incorrect-except when taken in the restricted sense of "one being."
As you study the following scriptures and provide an honest answer to each question, perhaps the full implications of the incorrectly translated word "BEAST" will become very clear to you.
Was Joel speaking of a "beast" or field hand in Joel 2:22? What kind of a beast do you know that wears clothing (sack-cloth) as we read in Jonah 3:8? What kind of a beast has hands as reported in Exodus 19:13? What type of beast is capable of mixing or "sowing" his seed with the "seed of Adam" as described in Jeremiah 31:27? What kind of a male beast could a woman lust after and "lie down with" and cause YAHWEH to have them executed in righteous judgment? Leviticus 20:16 What kind of a female beast could a man lust after and cause a penalty of death to be decreed by YAHWEH? Leviticus 20:15 What kind of beast would have the ability to "keep the vineyard" as we find in the Song of Solomon, Chapter 1, who incidentally was Black? What kind of a beast "cries mightily unto YAHWEH" in Jonah 3:8-10? What kind of a beast would have "eyes full of adultery", as recorded in 2 Peter 2:12-14? What kind of beast loves to riot in the daytime? 2 Peter 2:12-14 What kind of a beast can talk or speak? 2 Peter 2:12
Animals don't have "hands" and cannot put sackcloth on to repent. The Hebrew word translated "beast" is simply "breathing thing". Pre-Adamites are "breathing things who are good for working in the field".
5. The Church teaching that all humans died in the flood but Noah and his family, and all races of mankind descended solely from the three sons of Noah, is NOT supported by DNA evidence, and the Church will eventually have to dismiss it, as the Church has dismissed other popular teachings it once had, such as the Earth having wings, the Lost Tribes live at the North Pole, Man will never land on the Moon, the Brethren have "the Spirit of Discernment" and they NEVER can be deceived, to "fool" them would be like "fooling God" (remember the Kinderhook Plates? or how about Mark Hofmann?), and so forth.
6. The Church was NOT always "Creationist". Brigham Young referred to the story of Adam and Eve as "a children's rhyme". Orson Pratt, in "The Key to Theology", called the belief that Eve was made from one of Adam's ribs "foolishness". Orson Hyde preached that the planet was peopled before Adam like it had been before Noah. Brigham Young remarked that if God made a wife from each of his ribs, he would have no ribs left long ago. Hyrum Smith once said:
"There were Prophets before Adam, and Joseph Smith has the Spirit of all the Prophets."
Joseph Fielding Smith had that "changed" to read:
"There were Prophets before, and Joseph Smith has the Spirit of all the Prophets."
You must understand, bcpace, that Joseph Fielding Smith was a VERY """"IGNORANT"""" man! He was an avid follower of George McReady Price, a Seventh-day Adventist, self-taught geologist, and the father of "Creationism". Price was also a racist. The SDA Church published all his books, because Ellen G. White, the "Prophetess" of the Seventh-day Adventists, had "visions" in which the LORD showed her that the Universe and Earth was made in six literaly 24 hour days, and that the Flood killed all living things except for Noah and his family and the animals on the Ark. Price needed to "defend" the visions of Ellen G. White!
As President of the Twelve Apostles, and later as President of the Church, Joseph Fielding Smith threatened BYU professors who taught evolution. He threatened with excommunication anyone who taught there were pre-Adamites. He ordered sections in Church History "re-written" to take out any reference to such things as Pre-Adamites or Baby Resurrection (reincarnation). HE REWROTE Mormon HISTORY to reflect NOT what really happened, but to reflect HIS OWN VIEWS of Mormon doctrine!
His son-in-law, and equally IGNORANT and self-righteous man, Bruce R. McConkie, did the same, and popularized Creationism in his book Mormon DOCTRINE which, just about all Mormons had on their shelves in the 1970s and 1980s.
So, bcspace, some advice: DO NOT TAKE what the Church teaches at any one given moment as "Eternal Truth"; because that "Eternal Truth" can CHANGE!!! The Church has changed and evolved, and will continue to do so, over time. Example: for 130 years, the Negroes were cursed, inferior, less valiant in the War in Heaven, and could not hold the Priesthood until AFTER the Millennium! Today: "What curse of Cain?" The Church now has "amnesia" and does not remember that it EVER taught the Curse of Cain Doctrine!
The Flood of Noah DID happen, but NOT as the Church is currently teaches it did. But that's ok. The Church has the capacity to not only "change" its doctrine, but to re-write its history to have it "appear" that it never changes its doctrines. That is the TRUTH whether or not you wish to accept it. And you probably don't. Thank you.
There was a General Authority named John Widstoe, who wrote, and this was published in the official Church magazine at the time, "The Improvement Era", that the Flood was "universal" in that it rained all over the Earthl not that the Earth was covered in 16,000 feet of water.
I agree. Official LDS doctrine is a global Flood. I personally don't accept that doctrine and I have noted that for years.
So, bcspace, some advice: DO NOT TAKE what the Church teaches at any one given moment as "Eternal Truth"; because that "Eternal Truth" can CHANGE!!!
I have never said doctrine can't or won't change. But other than doctrines being restored, there has not been much change at all, certainly not anything important.
The Flood of Noah DID happen, but NOT as the Church is currently teaches it did.
I agree. I just don't necessarily agree with your hypothesis.
BCSPACE: I agree. Official LDS doctrine is a global Flood. I personally don't accept that doctrine and I have noted that for years.
DARRICK: Great. But as a young Mormon I was TOLD that "i had to accept what the Living Prophet teaches, because everything he says or writes is the Word of the Lord". I was told that many, many, many, many, many times. Since you are still a faithful Mormon, I recommend you write a book, try to get it published and into LDS bookstores. But as long as Boyd K. Packer is in charge of the Correlation Committee, the Church will continue to insist on a global Flood that killed all save those on the Ark. Too bad really.
BCSPACE: I have never said doctrine can't or won't change. But other than doctrines being restored, there has not been much change at all, certainly not anything important.
DARRICK: As a young Mormon, I was told that the Endowment ceremony cannot be "changed" but in fact, it was changed several times BEFORE I ever joined the Church. ANYTHING in the Church can "change" as long as the leader of the Church wants it to change.
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.
They could have easily just got across the hill and labored to build a great barn for all that. Why float? Tell me about the doves Darrick.
Why does it take 9 months to produce a baby? Why not just kiss a girl and babies start popping out like popcorn? Why a floating box rather than one built on a hill? Have you SEEN the hills around there? Because of massive rainfall, there would be mud rivers flowing all down the hills around the valley, a huge wooden box would have acted as a mud damn on a hill, which the mud would eventually build up behind the box until it destroyed the box. But how about on a "level" location? Again, look at a detailed map of the hills around the Valley of Armenia, and see if you can see a place for a huge wooden box. Noah would have to hall up all the wood and animals on the top of some high hill. A lot easier to build a box at ground level, where the trees are, where the workers are, where the animals are, and let it float (with anchors). The anchors are still around. Google: "anchors of Noah's ark" to see them.
The global flood just does NOT work, on all levels. DNA...doesn't work. All races are NOT from three sons of Noah. The Australian Factor. The evidence from the ice cores in Greenland and Antartica; had these been covered with water 5,000 years, the evidence would show it. It doesn't. Again, there was massive rainfall at around 3400 B.C., but not enough to cover the Earth past Mount Everest. Also, the explanation of Joseph Fielding Smith, that there were no mountains 5,000 years ago, only small hills, is against all evidence as well. He relied on George McReady Price, who had no training in geology, and was about as good a geologist as Joseph Smith was an Egyptologist.
Folks....you need to remember something here! The ancient Hebrews did not know of a round ball called "Planet Earth". They had no concept of it. The Hebrew word translated "earth" in English Bible is "eretz" and means simply "land" and more specifically, the flat fertile tilled land. It means the land you can grow things on useful to you and your tribe. For example:
:13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear. 4:14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me. (Genesis chapter 4)
Was Cain driven off planet Earth? Did he get into a space ship? No. "Eretz" has no reference to the planet, but to the "land"; the land being discussed in context. "All flesh on earth" does not mean the planet, but the "land" which is being discussed in context.