I've always suspected that the inundation of the black sea basin by the
rising seas at the end of the last ice age would have been enough to create
stories that would have resonated as myths across centuries.
Ether 6:7And it came to pass that when they were buried in the deep there
was no water that could hurt them, their vessels being tight like unto a dish,
and also they were tight like unto the ark of Noah; therefore when they were
encompassed about by many waters they did cry unto the Lord, and he did bring
them forth again upon the top of the waters.
A much better question - was Noah's ark?
Matthew 24:37-39"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming
of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were
eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe
entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away;
so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."Jesus testified
that there was a flood, an ark, and a prophet named Noe (Noah). I trust He knew
what he was talking about. I doubt He got His information from another religion
I love how the atheists think that a Mesopotamian story about the Flood somehow
disproves the biblical account. If you ask me, it corroborates it.
Clearly all these cultures knew about the flood because it was a true event that
actually happened and the account was handed down through generations in
different forms. In fact, every civilization on earth has a flood
"myth." That is clear evidence that it actually happened and the story
has been passed down throughout pre-history and history. I agree
with fastestfalcon that this is further proof that corroborates the story of
Noah in the Bible. The account in the Bible was given to Moses by god that it
might be written and passed down to the Isrealites.
What's really cool is that the human genome project, along with DNA studies
on literally every living species show that all living animals came from singles
parents about 4,000, essentially proving Noah's flood happened.
Polynesians have flood legends. There is a story from Rapa Iti which says the
warriors climbed up into the sky and captured the rainbow god. When the rainbow
god got away he broke open the sky and that caused a flood. The Tongans have an
idiom that says, "Don't point at the rainbow." Presumably, the
rainbow will think that someone intends to capture him again.
@Ernest T. Bass:"What's really cool is that the human genome
project, along with DNA studies on literally every living species show that all
living animals came from singles parents about 4,000, essentially proving
Noah's flood happened.:I think that you should go check your
sources on that. I think you are off by 50,000 years or so.
The Tarahamara Indians in N. Mexico have similar creation and flood stories that
shocked the early Catholic Priests when they heard them.
If the engineers find this round ark concept works, then how 'bout Princess
or Norwegian build a cruise ship that is also that shape, has zoo animals, and
sails to cool biblical sites? Just a thought.
The flood legend is an archetype which can be found in cultures throughout the
world. If one studies mythology, it is fascinating to see many common themes
appear in the myths and religions of cultures from virtually every corner of the
globe, i.e. first man, first woman, expulsion from paradise, war in heaven,
virgin birth, good son overcoming evil son and saving mankind, evil son being
cast out of heaven, etc. etc. etc. Read Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a
Just goes to show how mythology persists from one generation to the next. An
interesting story, but still a myth.
Fossil marine life is found on the African continent and the American continent
and throughout the world's land masses. It used to be a basic of Geology
that there was a great universal flood. Since then the Theory of Gradualism
insisted that things occurred gradually and not cataclysmically; if anyone
suggested cataclysms thereafter it was rejected as not fitting in with this key
article of faith of geological academia. The movie Noah,
according to the Imdb site, will be released on March 28 of this year. Looking
forward to seeing how the subject is handled.
The safest conclusion an unbeliever can ever make about the Book of Mormon is
that it's simply possible.* To suggest it's a myth because
the same story exists in one land and another is unfounded. As the account was
of a planet-wide event, the myth conclusion is based on prejudice instead of
reason.* To suggest it's a myth because of geological
observations is also unfounded. Drawing conclusions about what you haven't
observed based on what you have is also based on prejudice instead of reason.
(See "What is Truth?, by Dieter F. Uchtdorf)1) It stands
as evidence which corroborates the records we now call scripture.2) Even
more significantly... it corroborates the divinity of the Book of Mormon.The Book of Mormon was more than a compiled record. It is a unique
record because of it's divine delivery by an angel of God. Surely when
ancient records corroborate it's contents, the suggestion of a
"myth" is absurd. Disbelieve all you want, but those who are wise will
admit the possibility. Those who thirst for truth will surely find it. How? By
reading it! Pretty radical, this "reading" concept. ;)
Of course it was round.The must efficient use of space and materials
has always based on spheres and circles.From an engineering stand
point, It should really have been called Noah's "Arc".
@Cats"Clearly all these cultures knew about the flood because it was a
true event that actually happened"Not if it were as described in
the Bible, a global flood that wiped everything out except for the people in the
Ark. You can't document an event if you're dead.@Ernest T.
Bass"What's really cool is that the human genome project, along
with DNA studies on literally every living species show that all living animals
came from singles parents about 4,000"That's not true at
all.@Gildas" if anyone suggested cataclysms thereafter it
was rejected as not fitting in with this key article of faith of geological
academia."Because a global flood is meteorologically impossible.
Ranchhand, There are two ways to look at archetypes in literature --
through a believing or an unbelieving lens. For me, these recurring themes
confirm my inner conviction that there are central universal truths that are
present in all cultures.
I know it. I Live it. I Love it wrote:"The Book of Mormon was
more than a compiled record. It is a unique record because of it's divine
delivery by an angel of God. Surely when ancient records corroborate it's
contents, the suggestion of a 'myth' is absurd. Disbelieve all you
want, but those who are wise will admit the possibility. Those who thirst for
truth will surely find it. How? By reading it! Pretty radical, this
'reading' concept."My disbelief regarding the Book of
Mormon is not based on geology or the like. My disbelief is based directly on
Moroni's Promise: I followed the instructions for several decades and the
book failed the test. The Book of Mormon is not true.
atl134,Meteorological possibility isn't determined by what we
learn about science, but what defines science in the first place. If it is by
God, you're wrong. If it is by something else, then you're still
wrong. It isn't possible to qualify what you don't know. Not being
omniscient means not knowing all meteorological possibilities. As the saying
goes, "knowing is knowing that you know nothing".Acknowledging this principle isn't just a matter of humility, it's
the most fundamental ground we stand on as we exercise our faith in the
potential of ourselves to learn what is learn-able.The Scientist,Interesting. But as your own experiences don't invalidate what
others have learned and experienced for themselves... to what end do you oppose
the church? I might say that you'd be happier returning, and you may reject
that. But happiness surely isn't found in fighting God, the church, or
those of us who remain faithful to it. At the risk of causing offense and
injustice in fighting God and being wrong... what are you convinced you will
gain by doing so?
as in the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man
be.” Matthew 24:37-39. When the Son of Man comes in his glory,
and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. ‘ All the
Nations’ will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one
from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. MT 25:31-32.as there was a Universal flood there will be a universal judgment.“in the days of Noah,”1 Peter 3:19 By which also he went and
preached unto the *Spirits in prison; 1 Pet 3:20 Which sometime were
disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited “in the days of
Noah,”Spirits is only used of human beings when qualifying
terms are added, otherwise the term is restricted to supernatural beings.
…the unclean *spirits(demonic), and they come out(Luke 4;36)
One thing we all can agree upon: Scientist and the believers can't both be
right! I find that fact very challenging in my own search for truth and it is an
absolute bedrock principle with me. Both can't be right!
@The ScientistYou belief is not based on the promise. It is based on
what you put your faith in. You have not followed the whole promise
as written, You must have a belief and faith in Christ and in God.And you
must have the faith they will answer your prayer.Until then you are
right, it is no better than praying to a wall.And the only answer
you get is whatever your mind and heart dictates.Until you let go of
the belief that science is only source of truth and light, and exercise faith in
Christ, you have not followed the promise in total, and the promise can not be
The entire "Noah's Ark" thing should have happened less than 7000
years ago according to Church Doctrine. The earth could not have populated in
this short of time along with literally millions of other "facts". It
didn't happen. It's a story.
I'm with Scientist on this one. I prayed about the truth of Mormonism in
desperation for truth-- but I actually received an answer from God-- and it was
no, Mormonism is not true. I've also read the Book of Mormon. Perhaps the
greatest argument against the book's authenticity is the book itself. I in
fact recommend that people read it for this reason.Flood stories
abound among ancient cultures that are geographically distributed over a wide
area, in both hemispheres. Most of these stories share many core details. This
suggests that there was indeed some kind of epic flood that happened, because it
is reflected in ancient humanity's collective memory.Whether
that flood was truly global and whether there were a pair of every animal
species brought into a lifeboat can be debated. But a regional flood caused by a
large meteor hitting the ocean, or other scenarios that have been suggested by
scientists, are supremely plausible, and the consistent presence of an ark in
these stories suggests that the existence of an ark is not off-base, either.
This is irrelevant if what's extant of Noah's ark has actually been
found, even again and again. Search for it. The site "viewzone," among
others, has one such article on this.
I wonder why this tablet hasn't been taken up to heaven now that it has
been translated - like the golden plates were. Just a thought.
@DennisActually it is quite possible.Consider if you
five couples and they each have 10 children (to make the math easier).We now have population of 60, now the children couple and each have 10
children,Pop: 310 repeat 125 couples 1250 children,Pop 1560
625 couple 6250 children.Now population grows exponentially fast.3125 couples 31250 children.15625 couples 156350 children78175 couples 781950 children 380,975 couples 3,809,950 children1,900,575 couples 19,005,750 children9,502,875 couples 95,028,750
childrenIn only 10 generations, about 200 years, you have a living
population of well over 100 million.And in 12 generation, about 250
years, the population could be well over 1 billion!Yes it is quite
I should add,Even if you increase the length of a generation from
20 years to nearly 40 years, and decrease the number children from 10 to about
5-8 childrenIn 1000 years and about 22 generations you would have a
population between 2 and 11 billion.A population far greater than
what is believed to existed at the time Jesus (about 300 to 400 million and
nearly 2000 years after the flood)Again it is quite possible. And
well within any conservative mathematical calculation.
@thetruth...look around your neighborhood. How many families have 10 kids
each?Mortality rates alone would rationally average about 2 children per
family surviving to adulthood. It's hard to predict or educate when you
use "fantasy" math. It doesn't work.
@the truth. Your formula for knowing the unknowable is the same that makes
for successful fanatics of all kinds: Muslima. Scientologists, JW, etc, etc and
it is the self righteous extreme that drive seekers out of the pews.
From the Book of Mormon we learn about a Jaredite civilization that had
it's origin in the Mesopotamian area around 4,000BC.They were
familiar with building BARGES. So, when they were told to build
watercraft to cross the great deep to reach North America, the barges were used
as prototypes. Except that, by divine design, they had a peak at each end. The fact that I had a canoe that had peaked ends that always kept it upright
and buoyant because of the trapped air or floatation material in these raised
ends, gives function to this form. This design of the canoe worked well.
It survived Boy Scouts using each peaked end to teeter-totter against each other
until one of the scouts lost their balance.
@DennisThe math proves the possibilities. and how quickly population
grows (it grow exponentially)And as I pointed out in the my last
comment, even by the most conservative math ( and remember we are talking about
ancient agrarian societies, not modern urban families) the estimat3ed
populations of 4000 thousands years ago (and subsequently today) fall well
within the most conservative calculations.It proves it is not only
possible, it is plausible, and probable.--@skepticPersonal attacks do not change mathematical truths.
Dennis,The math is sound.Not only that, take away birth
control and abortion and a society that cares more about careers than
families... yeah, it's very possible. Considering the average family size
in the 1800's compared to today, you're basing your entire point
strictly on "modern day thinking" and applying to to a day and age where
no one thought that way.I would accept you not believing, but
fighting logic simply because it has LDS authors doesn't do you any good.
There is a reason I'm LDS, and it isn't because I imagined up what I
wanted the truth to be. If you want to know, you kneel. If you don't get an
answer, you gain nothing by fighting those who say they do. If you do, then
enjoy it. But there is no amount of arguments or reason that can negate what I
know to be true. I know it. I live it. I love it. Surely, why must you fight it?
the truth:Basically, you're saying that if you convince
yourself hard enough that you'll have faith in Christ, you'll have
faith in Christ. Sounds like self-fulfilling prophecy to me. The nice thing
about science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.I know it. I Live It. I Love It.:No one is "fighting"
you. They've simply looked at the same information and reached a different
conclusion. I've read the Book of Mormon more than once, along the D &
C and Pearl of Great Price. Do I think they contain some good stories? Yes.
Do I think they're the "word of God"? No more than any other book.
KJB1,I never expressed that different opinions automatically meant
people were picking a fight.But taking an objective mathematical
fact and arguing against it isn't reason, it's hostility.Taking
separate accounts of a subjective experience (something impossible to rationally
argue against), isn't reason, it's hostility.I express the
following:I dream last night about eating a sandwich in a white building
with a purple water fountain. Argue all you like, the truth is out of your
hands. Now... 5 other unrelated people around the world write different
accounts, but of the same dream. Argue all you like, the truth is out of your
hands. The correspondence is significant and there is no escaping it. Their
existence is a fact. The dream's existence isn't proven, but is
corroborated.Then others express this:You didn't dream
it.It's not possible anyway.To argue arbitrarily is to
argue for the sake of hostility. In English: it's called harassment.All I'm asking is that people leave us believers alone. That's
not unfair or unreasonable.