The Flood & Geologic Giants

[Ron Beron]

Who even says that Moses adhered to any ancient Hebrew concept of cosmology? It seems very apparent that Moses saw things from the perspective of the Gods. The verses say that he discerened the entire earth through the eyes of the spirit. He didn't nor possibly couldn't have seen a flat earth.

Are you just making stuff up?

Why would he have seen a spherical earth? Did he say that? It said earth. In Hebrew cosmological thought earth means an expanse of land not a spheroid. God gives to man a knowledge based on his understanding hence the Hebrew cosmology. Since he did discern the heavens through the spirit, as most prophets did, then why would it have been necessary for God to give him a geography lesson? That wasn't the purpose of his vision.

[Ron Beron]

Well I have to agree with you Rob. Moses must have known the earth is a sphere.

Why?

[Rob Osborn]

Why would he have seen a spherical earth? Did he say that? It said earth. In Hebrew cosmological thought earth means an expanse of land not a spheroid. God gives to man a knowledge based on his understanding hence the Hebrew cosmology. Since he did discern the heavens through the spirit, as most prophets did, then why would it have been necessary for God to give him a geography lesson? That wasn't the purpose of his vision.

Unbelievable! Are you serious? God gives unto man the truth. He isn't going to change the earth into something it is not. Your entire argument here is very weak and based completely off of your own opinion in disregard for the scripture.

The scriptures tell us that Moses saw the entire earth. He saw thew heavens. He saw other worlds- he saw it all. He probably saw more than our modern telescopes see today such as the Hubble.

For your argument to have any credibility you would have to prove that Moses only understood a flat earth. How you going to do that when the scriptures say otherwise?

[zelder]

Why would he have seen a spherical earth? Did he say that? It said earth. In Hebrew cosmological thought earth means an expanse of land not a spheroid. God gives to man a knowledge based on his understanding hence the Hebrew cosmology. Since he did discern the heavens through the spirit, as most prophets did, then why would it have been necessary for God to give him a geography lesson? That wasn't the purpose of his vision.

I don't think it matters what Hebrew's thought. Even IF Moses had told them the earth is a sphere, its likely that they would have scoffed at such an idea because, you know....everyone can see that the eath is flat right? Was it important for the ancient Hebrews to know that the earth is a sphere? Their salvation really was not hanging on that truth. From Moses's veiwpoint it probably didn't matter what th people believed about earths' shape. I'm sure he had his hands full trying to get them to keep the basic commandments. Are things really any different today?

It probably does not matter if we believe that life has been evolving for billions of years. The prophets have made it pretty clear what the doctrine is regarding the global flood 4,000 years ago and a literal Adam and Eve 6,000 years ago. Despite this, "learned" people don't believe it. Its obvious to them that the prophets are simply wrong, every half brain idiot with even a little bit of knowledge knows that such stories must be myth. There is no point in pushing an issue that the poeple will not believe. It is indeed like a sparrow in a hurricane. However, I'm confident that the hurricane will not last and the sparrow will fly freely again. Now is the great day of satans power but a "day" is all he's got, it won't last much longer.

[Senator]

Its obvious to them that the prophets are simply wrong, every half brain idiot with even a little bit of knowledge knows that such stories must be myth.

That is pretty provocative language!

Might I suggest reconsidering a less offensive defense.

[Ron Beron]

[quote name='Rob Osborn' comments,

Unbelievable! Are you serious? God gives unto man the truth. He isn't going to change the earth into something it is not. Your entire argument here is very weak and based completely off of your own opinion in disregard for the scripture.

You really do not read much beyond the scriptures do you? Even within the scriptures it tells of guardians at the four corners of the earth. Four corners?! Corners are not present in spheres only four sided angles. Truth be told we do not know exactly what Moses did see except it was necessary for him to realize that God created everything and that he is just a small part of that creation. Moses tells us he was shown the world not the Earth. That is a difference.

8And it came to pass that Moses looked, and beheld the ^aworld upon which he was created; and Moses ^bbeheld the world and the ends thereof, and all the children of men which are, and which were created; of the same he greatly ^cmarveled and wondered.

The ends? Are there ends to a sphere? Or was simply a expose of the peoples of the world and all the living organisms?

The scriptures tell us that Moses saw the entire earth. He saw thew heavens. He saw other worlds- he saw it all. He probably saw more than our modern telescopes see today such as the Hubble.

See above

For your argument to have any credibility you would have to prove that Moses only understood a flat earth. How you going to do that when the scriptures say otherwise?

The scriptures say nothing about the constitution of the earth. Moses, however, was a child of the Egyptians and was taught as such. God showed him the world to upset that difference. Both the Sumerian myths, on which the flood stories were based, and the ancient Egyptians believed in a Earth with four corners not spheroid.

[Ron Beron]

'zelder' writes,

I don't think it matters what Hebrew's thought. Even IF Moses had told them the earth is a sphere, its likely that they would have scoffed at such an idea because, you know....everyone can see that the eath is flat right? Was it important for the ancient Hebrews to know that the earth is a sphere? Their salvation really was not hanging on that truth. From Moses's veiwpoint it probably didn't matter what th people believed about earths' shape. I'm sure he had his hands full trying to get them to keep the basic commandments. Are things really any different today?

Hmmmm.... First of all there really wasn't a Hebrew people at this point only a remnant of Semitic immigrants who were leaving Egypt. Secondly, they would have been trained in Egyptian science and mythology which advocates a flat earth belief. Third, and most important, the arguments presented in this thread really have little to do with Moses or the early cosmology of the Hebrews or any other people.

It probably does not matter if we believe that life has been evolving for billions of years. The prophets have made it pretty clear what the doctrine is regarding the global flood 4,000 years ago and a literal Adam and Eve 6,000 years ago. Despite this, "learned" people don't believe it. Its obvious to them that the prophets are simply wrong, every half brain idiot with even a little bit of knowledge knows that such stories must be myth. There is no point in pushing an issue that the poeple will not believe. It is indeed like a sparrow in a hurricane. However, I'm confident that the hurricane will not last and the sparrow will fly freely again. Now is the great day of satans power but a "day" is all he's got, it won't last much longer.

Well, it is good to know that zeal without knowledge is alive and well, but the same God who created the prophets also created us "half-brain idiots" who do think outside the box occasionally and find that taking the stories of the OT literally is 1. not what the redactors originally intended nor 2. to be taken literally. Instead, they were written to show God's power over man in much the same way Jesus used parables to teach. God gave us brains to think not to aimlessly wander the world like little birds in a maelstrom. The birds will lose their way and be confused, but the rest of us will have survived, well intact.

[David T]

Unbelievable! Are you serious? God gives unto man the truth. He isn't going to change the earth into something it is not. Your entire argument here is very weak and based completely off of your own opinion in disregard for the scripture.

The scriptures tell us that Moses saw the entire earth. He saw thew heavens. He saw other worlds- he saw it all. He probably saw more than our modern telescopes see today such as the Hubble.

For your argument to have any credibility you would have to prove that Moses only understood a flat earth. How you going to do that when the scriptures say otherwise?

This is all moot if Moses 1 was a modern inspired pseudepigraphon wherein Joseph wrote of his visionary experiences and revealed principles in the framework of a Mosaic revelation, to give renewed and greater authority to the Biblical text.

Thomas Paine wrote, in "The Age of Reason", in criticism to the lack of authority Genesis itself claimed, that the Book of Genesis account of Creation "begins abruptly. It is nobody that speaks. It is nobody that hears. It is addressed to nobody. It has neither first, second, nor third person. It has every criterion of being a tradition. It has no voucher. Moses does not take it upon himself by introducing it with the formality that he uses on other occasions, such as that of saying, "The Lord spake unto Moses, saying."

Now compare with how Moses 2 begins: "And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto Moses, saying: Behold, I reveal unto you concerning this heaven , and this earth;writethe words which I speak. I am the Beginning and the End, the Almighty God; by mine Only Begotten I created these things; yea, in the beginning I created the heaven, and the earth upon which thou standest." - it's a direct answer to a very well known and familiar attack on the authority to the Bible as Scripture.

Before you object this as being out of hand and cry the very idea of Joseph properly writing himself in the form of a historical biblical prophet as absurd for any believing member, take in consideration that Joseph plainly did the exact same thing very shortly thereafter, except using Enoch instead of Moses. This occured in more than one revelation, most clearly in what is now Section 78, and 82. It wasn't just code words that were substituted, the entire context of the document was presented to be a historic enochic-era revelation.

Here's one example from the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants, section LXXV:

Compare with current D&C 78. - where it was (mostly) returned to an 1832 United States context. The names were changed back, but some of the other contextual elements were not.

Inspired Pseudepigrapha was a genre Joseph approved of and is known to have worked with. It's perfectly fine to understand certain scriptural texts this way, and still consider it to be sacred and valuable scripture, and that Joseph Smith was inspired, and a prophet.

I know that, because I understand it this way, I consider it to be sacred and valuable scripture, and I believe that Joseph was an inspired prophet of God. In fact, to me, it places Joseph even more strongly in the tradition of the ancient biblical writers - many of whom did the same exact thing!

I know some individuals can't grasp the idea that intelligent members can indeed understand scriptural history in a very different way than they do and still be worthy, faithful members whose studies aren't the results of trying to get glory from the world. But it's a fact.

[David T]

And with that, it looks like I killed the thread.

[Ron Beron]

And with that, it looks like I killed the thread.

You can't kill that which is already dead. Besides, this subject will come up ad nauseum. BTW, interesting post.

[SkepticTheist]

I would agree that something has to go. Either give up on a literal view of the scriptures or give up on old earth views. Did pangea split 250 million years ago or did it split 4,000 years ago? Was there really a continuation of civilation during Noah's day or are the dating methods completely whack? Could there be a beast/church of the devil/secret combination controlled by mondern day Korihor's or are scientific views developed and propagated purely through honest investigation? As soon as you give up on one side of your opposing views the cognitive dissonance goes away.

I don't think that it is necessary to give up on literal interpretation of scriptures, or to give up on old earth views. I think it is clear that harmonization can be found that can implement elements of both.

I don't believe that this is a binary this or that. The cognitive dissonance is what gives me the drive to figure out what is true. The scriptures to me are a mix of figurative and literal, and that is what "rightly dividing the word of truth" is about, is to parse them correctly with the Holy Ghost. That means that you don't take hook, line and sinker as fact anything that either side of the debate has put forth, and that you carefully ponder and pray until you come to a good understanding. More often, the truth lies in an and/also type of logic, rather than either/or.

Ed Goble

[Rob Osborn]

You really do not read much beyond the scriptures do you? Even within the scriptures it tells of guardians at the four corners of the earth. Four corners?! Corners are not present in spheres only four sided angles. Truth be told we do not know exactly what Moses did see except it was necessary for him to realize that God created everything and that he is just a small part of that creation. Moses tells us he was shown the world not the Earth. That is a difference.

The ends? Are there ends to a sphere? Or was simply a expose of the peoples of the world and all the living organisms?

See above

The scriptures say nothing about the constitution of the earth. Moses, however, was a child of the Egyptians and was taught as such. God showed him the world to upset that difference. Both the Sumerian myths, on which the flood stories were based, and the ancient Egyptians believed in a Earth with four corners not spheroid.

Hum....Does this mean that Joseph Smith and company also believed in a flat four cornered earth and not one of sphereoid?--

3 This proclamation shall be made to all the kings of the world, to the four corners thereof, to the honorable president

[thesometimesaint]

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_science/Global_or_local_Flood

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].

[Rob Osborn]

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_science/Global_or_local_Flood

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].

[thesometimesaint]

Rob Osborn:

Neither is your fundamentalism. If Hugh Nibley can believe in a local albeit massive flood, and still be a valued member of the Church. I'm in pretty good company.

The earth is Billions of years old, and I have the rocks to prove it. All you have is an idiosyncratic narrow interpretation of a pre-science peoples recollection of campfire stories.

[Rob Osborn]

Rob Osborn:

Neither is your fundamentalism. If Hugh Nibley can believe in a local albeit massive flood, and still be a valued member of the Church. I'm in pretty good company.

The earth is Billions of years old, and I have the rocks to prove it. All you have is an idiosyncratic narrow interpretation of a pre-science peoples recollection of campfire stories.

And yet, my seemingly campfire stories are the exact ones the church has made as their official doctrine on the matter. The church does teach a global flood not a localized event.

Oh, and your rocks, they don't prove the age of anything. After all, according to our doctrine matter has always existed in one form or another of physical mass. Your rocks merely show the relationship of one element with another within itself and really tell us nothing of the age when it was made.

[thesometimesaint]

Rob Osborn:

There is no Official Doctrine of the Church on a Global Flood. We are entitled to believe anything we want on it.

The Matter of this universe has NOT always existed. It is about 14 billions of years old. This planet of ours is 4.5 Billions of years old. The earliest life on this planet is about 3.5 Billions of years old. Dinosaurs died out about 56 Millions of years ago. Our species of animal is only about 200,000 years old. Noah lived about 4000 years ago.

[Ron Beron]

Hum....Does this mean that Joseph Smith and company also believed in a flat four cornered earth and not one of sphereoid?--

3 This proclamation shall be made to all the kings of the world, to the four corners thereof, to the honorable president

[Ron Beron]

Rob Osborn:

There is no Official Doctrine of the Church on a Global Flood. We are entitled to believe anything we want on it.

The Matter of this universe has NOT always existed. It is about 14 billions of years old. This planet of ours is 4.5 Billions of years old. The earliest life on this planet is about 3.5 Billions of years old. Dinosaurs died out about 56 Millions of years ago. Our species of animal is only about 200,000 years old. Noah lived about 4000 years ago.

Sometimes is correct...there isn't a unique doctrine on the flood, just opinions.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Rob Osborn:

There is no Official Doctrine of the Church on a Global Flood. We are entitled to believe anything we want on it.

The Matter of this universe has NOT always existed. It is about 14 billions of years old. This planet of ours is 4.5 Billions of years old. The earliest life on this planet is about 3.5 Billions of years old. Dinosaurs died out about 56 Millions of years ago. Our species of animal is only about 200,000 years old. Noah lived about 4000 years ago.

The flood isn't a doctrine its recorded history, how does one have a doctrine about recorded events in the past?

The Flood is an official teaching of the Church and a very important one, if you do not accept that the flood happened then how does one explain how the people got from North America to the Middle East?

Without the Flood there is no travel from present day Jackson County Missouri (where the Genesis story took place according to LDS theology until the flood) to Middle East.

So LDS have to believe in the flood otherwise our revelations about the location of the Garden of Eden (Independence Missouri) and of the land the Adam and Eve were sent to after being forced from the Garden (Adam Ondi Ahman, which is in Daviess County Missouri) cannot work since they rely on the Flood to work.

You are right though, everyone is entitled to believe anything they want, and refusing to beleive the flood took place will not stop your eternal progression.

This belief though does destroy a essential foundation of the LDS faith and theology though, so one is walking dangerous ground when they reject such things, IMO.

[cinepro]

I know some individuals can't grasp the idea that intelligent members can indeed understand scriptural history in a very different way than they do and still be worthy, faithful members whose studies aren't the results of trying to get glory from the world. But it's a fact.

I'm fascinated by the idea that there are some doctrines an LDS must believe (or "understand" according to the pronouncements of Church leaders) to avoid being branded as "unworthy" and "unfaithful" members.

Which doctrines must be so believed?

[Rob Osborn]

Rob Osborn:

There is no Official Doctrine of the Church on a Global Flood. We are entitled to believe anything we want on it.

The Matter of this universe has NOT always existed. It is about 14 billions of years old. This planet of ours is 4.5 Billions of years old. The earliest life on this planet is about 3.5 Billions of years old. Dinosaurs died out about 56 Millions of years ago. Our species of animal is only about 200,000 years old. Noah lived about 4000 years ago.

The matter of our universe has always existed. You cannot just make matter appear out of thin air. The creation speaks of the Gods taking the already existing matter and then forming it into the parts of the universe we now see. It looks like you are well schooled in the philosophies of men.

[Rob Osborn]

You are arguing a supposition I never made. JS certainly believed in a round earth, but was using a literary metaphor to describe the extensiveness of his message. While your point is well made it still not negate the scientific understandings at the time of their (OT) writings. An understanding of a round earth was not understood when the flood stories were first laid down, but certainly it was well taught in the 1800's. Therefore, while JS was using a metaphor it was probably declared to be a real understanding in the millenia before Jesus.

How can you be sure what the prophets did or did not know of the earth concerning whether it was flat or round? We know from observable latter day times that the prophets understanding of things is drastically different than the learned of the general masses. We know that Abraham went and taught hte egyptians the true form of the plantes and univers ein their proper order. Here is the very case of a prophet correcting the general populations beliefs.

Prove to me that Moses understood the earth to be flat and I will be content, otherwise I shall remain in the faithful belief as the scriptures state that he literally saw the entire earth in it's sphere form.

[Senator]

This belief though does destroy a essential foundation of the LDS faith and theology though, so one is walking dangerous ground when they reject such things, IMO.

Absolutely bogus!

[Ron Beron]

How can you be sure what the prophets did or did not know of the earth concerning whether it was flat or round? We know from observable latter day times that the prophets understanding of things is drastically different than the learned of the general masses. We know that Abraham went and taught hte egyptians the true form of the plantes and univers ein their proper order. Here is the very case of a prophet correcting the general populations beliefs.

Prove to me that Moses understood the earth to be flat and I will be content, otherwise I shall remain in the faithful belief as the scriptures state that he literally saw the entire earth in it's sphere form.

I guess I will have to leave you discontented then because it would be impossible to teach you that which is unteachable. Moses may or may not understood the Earth to be round or flat. We simply do not know. We do know that the best observable knowledge of Egypt at this time taught a flat earth theory i.e., the "earth as a flat expanse of land, personified by the god Geb, over which arched the sky goddess Nut. The two were separated by Shu, the god of air. Beneath the earth lay a parallel underworld and undersky, and beyond the skies lay the infinite expanse of Nu, the chaos that had existed before creation.^[22] The Egyptians also believed in a place called the Duat, a mysterious region associated with death and rebirth, that may have lain in the underworld or in the sky. Each day, Ra traveled over the earth across the underside of the sky, and at night he passed through the Duat to be reborn at dawn.^[23]" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_religion#cite_note-21)

Admittedly there is some new material on this I have yet to peruse, such as "Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham", but the prevailing attitude is as I stated.

Aside from that we are discussing Noah and not Moses.