Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Church Essay Contradicts The Global Flood Theory


Recommended Posts

Noah is not a new Gospel Topic essay,  so we don't if it is approved by the first presidency? Where is the "Thank you" sentence?

All already proved the "whole Earth" in the Book of Mormon means all the land, not the entire planet.

 

 

 

The church probably does not have an official position, but when has the church published a lie without saying that it is "false" or  "a theory of men" or "it's not true"

The Gospel Topic article is open to the theory that people came to the continent before the Jaradites

"The Global Flood is established, published and official LDS doctrine"

Official statement please

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

Remember the Book of Mormon intruduction? "Principle ancestors" If that was not a mistake, why did they change it?

The article does not open any possibilities. the article mentions that scientists have theories and thats it. It then goes on to state that there is no proof on DNA and genetics to either prove nor disprove the Book of Mormon. Nothing in the article says that the Church acknowledges nor endorses a theory that man l other than Noah and sons lived through the flood.

Edited by Rob Osborn
Link to comment

The article does not open any possibilities. the article mentions that scientists have theories and thats it. It then goes on to state that there is no proof on DNA and genetics to either prove nor disprove the Book of Mormon. Nothing in the article says that the Church acknowledges nor endorses a theory that man l other than Noah and sons lived through the flood.

 

"article mentions that scientists have theories and thats it."

But why didn't the article clarify? Why didn't it say "Its just a theory" or "its an unproven theory" or "a lie"

When has the church published a false theory without condemning it? 

 

What about Elder Anthony W. Ivins? HE said, "does not tell us that there was no one here before"

By the way, Ugo Perego believes in a local flood. 

 

"the CFR"

What is that? 

Link to comment

Sorenson presents a convincing argument, from a population growth perspective , that there likely were "others" in the area when the Jaredites arrived. There likely were immigrations from many places over the ages.

The Bering Strait theory may be correct but it has problems with the ice age covering. Nomads need a reason to wander from their traditional lands. They also need a way to feed and clothe themselves and pasture their herds. People just don't walk for thousands of miles over rugged mostly ice covered lands just for fun and adventure.

By the way , there are currently "Indians " in the far North , and Inuit(Eskimo) in the far North. Does one group look more Asian than the other? The Inuit have survived for millennia in in the North. I wonder why they never got a hankerin' to travel South where it is a smidgin warmer? According to the theory, there seemed to be a constant pressure on all groups to keep moving South , all the way to Tierra del Fuego.

Link to comment

"article mentions that scientists have theories and thats it."

But why didn't the article clarify? Why didn't it say "Its just a theory" or "its an unproven theory" or "a lie"

When has the church published a false theory without condemning it? 

 

What about Elder Anthony W. Ivins? HE said, "does not tell us that there was no one here before"

By the way, Ugo Perego believes in a local flood. 

 

"the CFR"

What is that? 

CFR-call for reference

 

to avoid endless arguments based on opinion and baseless claims or at least to limit them to a reasonable amount as well as to add to the educational value of the board, the board's mods have declared that if you get a CFR that baseless claim needs to be based…documentation, preferable with a link so that people can read it for themselves, if not online than with a citation so it can be found by those interested.

Link to comment

"article mentions that scientists have theories and thats it."

But why didn't the article clarify? Why didn't it say "Its just a theory" or "its an unproven theory" or "a lie"

When has the church published a false theory without condemning it? 

 

What about Elder Anthony W. Ivins? HE said, "does not tell us that there was no one here before"

By the way, Ugo Perego believes in a local flood. 

 

"the CFR"

What is that?

Does it need to? The church just states it how it is- a theory by scientists and that there is no prooof by science to prove the BoM either right nor wrong.

Link to comment

.

"the CFR"

What is that?

Cal's already explained the acronym better than I could. I'm asking for a reference/evidence that the DNA article is approved by the first presidency and the Noah one is not.

Edit: Cal, not Carl!

Edited by canard78
Link to comment

Carl's already explained the acronym better than I could. I'm asking for a reference/evidence that the DNA article is approved by the first presidency and the Noah one is not.

 

We do not know if the Noah article was approved.

Look for the video "What about historical questions" 

https://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng

Elder Snow said the essays were written by scholars, and they were approved by the First Presidency. 

The Noah essay was probably not written by a scholar because it does not have this sentence 

"The Church acknowledges the contribution of scholars to the scientific content presented in this article; their work is used with permission." 

 

and the Noah article does not endorse a Global Flood anyways. It does not talk about the Global and Local flood debate. It does not say "Global Flood" or "the Local flood theory is false." More importantly, it doesn't talk about the issues, it doesn't talk about the science. All we can say is that the article only responds to some questions that have nothing to do with science. 

 

Here two articles that really endorse a Global Flood, see the difference?

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng

http://www.ldsmag.com/article/1/14059

 

The Noah article says, 

"only people on the whole earth saved from the flood"

 

On the whole earth that was affected by the flood. I already proved that "whole Earth" in the Book of Mormon means entire region or entire land, not the entire planet. 

Edited by MormonFreeThinker
Link to comment

Do you know what happens if someone who is getting baptized does not get fully emerged in The Church of Jesus Christ? They do it again until they are fully immersed! This world was fully Baptized by water so it could be celestialized and fulfill the plan of our Father in heaven just as it will be baptized by fire and wrapped as a scroll in the second coming...

 

Anybody that does not understand this basic principle can't see the forest from the trees.

Link to comment

Do you know what happens if someone who is getting baptized does not get fully emerged in The Church of Jesus Christ? They do it again until they are fully immersed! This world was fully Baptized by water so it could be celestialized and fulfill the plan of our Father in heaven just as it will be baptized by fire and wrapped as a scroll in the second coming...

 

Anybody that does not understand this basic principle can't see the forest from the trees.

 

Non sequitur. We don't baptize everything. Most things have no need for baptism.

Link to comment

Global flood=everybody before Jaredites has been wiped out. Not so global, global flood=lots of pockets of people left,, including any peoples who came across the Bering Strait before it was a strait.....such as last ice age..

False premise. The Jaredites weren't the only survivors of the flood. The Jaredites were among the many involved in building the tower of Babel to try to avoid being killed in a big flood again, and from there everyone went in different directions and spoke their own languages.
Link to comment

False premise. The Jaredites weren't the only survivors of the flood. The Jaredites were among the many involved in building the tower of Babel to try to avoid being killed in a big flood again, and from there everyone went in different directions and spoke their own languages.

There's a lot more than the supposition about the Jaredites being first to the Americas. The idea of a global flood presupposes that all we know about pre-historic Egypt and the Old Kingdom of Egypt did not happen. The great pyramids of Giza, requiring tens of thousands of workers, and many tens of thousands of service workers to keep them supplied with food and beer, would only have been staffed by a few hundred people (no way a population could be a million strong after being totally wiped out a few years earlier).

Link to comment

There's a lot more than the supposition about the Jaredites being first to the Americas. The idea of a global flood presupposes that all we know about pre-historic Egypt and the Old Kingdom of Egypt did not happen. The great pyramids of Giza, requiring tens of thousands of workers, and many tens of thousands of service workers to keep them supplied with food and beer, would only have been staffed by a few hundred people (no way a population could be a million strong after being totally wiped out a few years earlier).

 

I thought the Hebrews built the pyramids..?

Link to comment

The Land of Egypt was under water when it was discovered: Abraham 1:22

The Land of Promise had been under water: Ether 13:2

The Jaredites were led by the Lord to the Land of Promise through a quarter of land in The Old World "where there never had man been." Ether 2:5

So we have in the scriptures water having covering lands on both sides of the world. Sounds like a universal flood to me.

And we have the theory that the Jaredites may not have been the first group on the Land of Promise despite being led there by the Lord by way of a "quarter" of the Old World not yet ever set foot on by man. Sounds like a far-fetched theory to me.

I also disagree with the premise that Noah may have only written based on his personal observations-thus Noah could not have known if the entire Earth was flooded.

This ignores the fact that these same Prophets were shown in vision the history of the world and have recorded similar if not the same visions: John The Revelator, Nephi, Moses, Enoch, Abraham, the Brother of Jared, so why not Noah, Mormon, Moroni- who wrote having seen our day or Joseph Smith? This seems to be the reason why they are Prophets, Seers and Revelators, because they know.

Link to comment

 

So we have in the scriptures water having covering lands on both sides of the world. Sounds like a universal flood to me.

 

 

Sounds like global warming to me.

 

Hey, just because we haven't discovered ancient SUVs yet, doesn't mean it isn't true!

Link to comment

The Land of Egypt was under water when it was discovered: Abraham 1:22

 

Then one would expect evidence in Egypt to back up such a statement. There is none. Egypt existed before and after the so-called timeline for Noah's flood, without the slightest evidence of having ever disappeared  under water. You need more than a one liner from scripture to prove your statement.

Link to comment

The Land of Egypt was under water when it was discovered: Abraham 1:22

What does that actually mean? How can a land be discovered if it was underwater?

Now discovered as a time it was going through its yearly flooding of the Nile makes more sense to me than some woman walking around in a couple of feet of water and proclaiming this her new home.

Link to comment

Then one would expect evidence in Egypt to back up such a statement. There is none. Egypt existed before and after the so-called timeline for Noah's flood, without the slightest evidence of having ever disappeared under water. You need more than a one liner from scripture to prove your statement.

Don't confuse him with facts.

Next you'll be saying we shouldn't take a biblical talking Donkey literally either.

Edited by canard78
Link to comment

Don't confuse him with facts.

Next you'll be saying we shouldn't take a biblical talking Donkey literally either.

I have less problem with a talking donkey, that can neither be proved or disproved.....although I question why anyone would want to admit talking to a donkey.....than I do with a claim that can be falsified, that Egypt was buried under a worldwide flood.

Yes, the valley of the Nile had a yearly inundation that would give the appearance of the valley being flooded, but the Egyptians made no secret of the fact. Temples had a "Nilometer" built beside them to track the rise and fall of the inundation. They were dependent upon the flooding, the wealth they enjoyed was because of the yearly flooding. But Egypt was not flooded. It was merely the yearly overflowing of the Nile's banks.

Link to comment

I have less problem with a talking donkey, that can neither be proved or disproved.....although I question why anyone would want to admit talking to a donkey.....than I do with a claim that can be falsified, that Egypt was buried under a worldwide flood.

Yes, the valley of the Nile had a yearly inundation that would give the appearance of the valley being flooded, but the Egyptians made no secret of the fact. Temples had a "Nilometer" built beside them to track the rise and fall of the inundation. They were dependent upon the flooding, the wealth they enjoyed was because of the yearly flooding. But Egypt was not flooded. It was merely the yearly overflowing of the Nile's banks.

 

I've known more than one A$$ that talks.

Link to comment

What does that actually mean? How can a land be discovered if it was underwater?

Now discovered as a time it was going through its yearly flooding of the Nile makes more sense to me than some woman walking around in a couple of feet of water and proclaiming this her new home.

 

It means they couldn't make their mortgage payments :D

Link to comment

We do not know if the Noah article was approved.

Look for the video "What about historical questions" 

https://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng

Elder Snow said the essays were written by scholars, and they were approved by the First Presidency. 

The Noah essay was probably not written by a scholar because it does not have this sentence 

"The Church acknowledges the contribution of scholars to the scientific content presented in this article; their work is used with permission." 

 

and the Noah article does not endorse a Global Flood anyways. It does not talk about the Global and Local flood debate. It does not say "Global Flood" or "the Local flood theory is false." More importantly, it doesn't talk about the issues, it doesn't talk about the science. All we can say is that the article only responds to some questions that have nothing to do with science. 

 

Here two articles that really endorse a Global Flood, see the difference?

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng

http://www.ldsmag.com/article/1/14059

 

The Noah article says, 

"only people on the whole earth saved from the flood"

 

On the whole earth that was affected by the flood. I already proved that "whole Earth" in the Book of Mormon means entire region or entire land, not the entire planet. 

 

Thanks for the reference. 

 

For full 'quote' here it is:

How does the Church provide answers to historical questions?”

 

Most who study our history well understand the context of these matters as far as time and place. But some members of the Church — many, really — are surprised by some of the things they learn in our history. And we want them to be able to go to a place where they can read accurate information and be able to seek to understand those historical chapters in the context of time and place. And understand that those answers have been approved by the presiding brethren of the Church. I think that will give many of our members confidence that they can rely on these answers.

 

We have actually retained outside the Church History Department — we have retained scholars, for the most part outside the Church History Department — known LDS scholars to do some very extensive research. And this has been groundbreaking in a way. These issues have not always had academic attention. They haven’t really been researched carefully. So we are very pleased that these scholars would agree to do this research. They then submitted a draft of their paper to a committee of historians here in the Church History Department as well as General Authorities who have reviewed their work and adjusted some edits. Those edits are made with the permission of the original writer. And that’s then submitted to the presiding Quorums of the Church, the Twelve and the First Presidency for approval. And then it’s published in Gospel Topics under LDS.org.

 

Much of what’s written now, these arguments and these issues, have been around for decades — 150 years. And it’s the same material repackaged. And we understandably have not spent a lot of time in the past worrying about these issues because our mission is to promote faith and belief in the Lord Jesus Christ. But as the information age is now upon us? We feel with all of this information out there, we owe it — particularly to the rising generation — to provide good, reliable information about these matters.

 

(Emphasis added)

 

Elder Steven E. Snow

Church Historian and Recorder and the Executive Director of the Church History Department.

https://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng#media=11373505780672488714-eng

Link to comment

Evidences against a Global Flood 

 

Scientific Evidence

Tree ring records go back more than 10,000 years, with no evidence of a catastrophe during that time

Why are geological eras consistent worldwide? How do you explain worldwide agreement between "apparent" geological eras and several different (independent) radiometric and nonradiometric dating methods?

and many other scientific evidences. 

 

Historical Evidence 

We can construct reliable chronologies for near Eastern history, particularly for Egypt, from many kinds of records from the literate cultures in the near East. These records are independent of, but supported by, dating methods such as dendrochronology and carbon-14. The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 B.C. +/- some small delta, placing the Flood around 2250 B.C. Unfortunately, the Egyptians (among others) have written records dating well back before 2250 B.C. (

 

Archaeological evidence

The Göbekli Tepe was built about 11,000 years ago 

 

Mathematical evidence

How did all the animals fit? If there were only about 2,000 kinds of animals (like AnswersinGenesis claims), why is there is no evidence that Super fast evolution happened after the flood. Super fast Evolution has never been observed or documented, there is no scientific evidence for that. 

 

A local flood is much better, and "Earth" in the scriptures means land or region  

 

The scriptures 

 

3 Nephi 9:11 And it came to pass that there was a voice heard among all the inhabitants of the earth, upon all the face of this land, crying:

Helaman 14:27 "that darkness should cover the face of the whole earth for the space of three days"

Alma 36:7 "whole earth did tremble beneath our fee" 

3 Nephi 1:17 "all the people upon the face of the whole earth from the west to the east, both in the land north and in the land south, were so exceedingly astonished" 

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...