Noah’s Global Flood

[FunOnlineMan]

For the earth to have been properly baptized, the flood in the account of Noah would have to be global. Such a flood would also be necessary to transport the biblical narrative from Missouri to Mt. Ararat, etc.

This incredible account would also necessitate an explanation for the accounts of the Native American prophet Noah and his gopherwood ark rescuing all terrestrial life, and floating along for a year before landing finally disembarking on another hemisphere and completely repopulating the globe approximately 4,000 years ago. Let’s call this account and it’s accompanying flood the global flood model and move on.

How does one reconcile a global flood model with the consensus of current evidence from every field of science to the contrary?

Or, in case I’m accused of pigeonholing anyone (I’m coining the term “doveholing” here to keep with the biblical symbology), how does one reconcile a non-literal reading of the Noah myths—a non-global flood model—with a consensus of M-word doctrines reinforced by scripture and modern prophecy to the contrary?

I would hate to inadvertently dovehole anyone—wait, now I’m also coining ”ravenholing” to delineate between being forced into a global flood position (being doveholed) and being forced into a non-global flood model (being ravenholed). So, anyway, I’m also welcoming non-global and non-non-global models, if any of you are feeling sneaky. I could use a complicated read. 

[Calm]

Someone just came across this interesting (interesting because of who said it) quote a day or two ago in another discussion I was reading that might be relevant:

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/selected-articles/second-coming-christ-questions-and-answers

Quote

President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: “Somebody said, ‘Brother Smith, do you mean to say that it is going to be literal fire?’ I said, ‘Oh, no, it will not be literal fire any more than it was literal water that covered the earth in the flood.’” [11]

Quote

[10] Joseph Fielding Smith, The Signs of the Times (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1942), 42.

[11] Smith, The Signs of the Times, 41.

 

Edited January 2, 2019 by Calm

[clarkgoble]

Yup the main argument is the baptism argument but the symbolism would work if it were just one land that was submerged IMO.

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, FunOnlineMan said:

For the earth to have been properly baptized, the flood in the account of Noah would have to be global. 

Why does the earth need baptism? Does any other religion teach this? It never made any sense to me. 

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, FunOnlineMan said:

For the earth to have been properly baptized, the flood in the account of Noah would have to be global. Such a flood would also be necessary to transport the biblical narrative from Missouri to Mt. Ararat, etc.

Two issues right off the bat. 

1.  It is said that Adam was in Missouri.  That does not mean Noah was.  It is said that Joseph Smith held a position that Noah lived in the Carolina area.

2.  Baptism does require something being submerged by water but it does not say how deep it has to be.  The earth did not need to be dunk in a large pool of water.  All it had to be was raining everywhere and if every square inch of a mountain was wet, it was covered by water.  One does not need a global flood to accomplish this but simply a global rainstorm that would not leave any long term geological evidence behind to see.

[clarkgoble]

15 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Why does the earth need baptism? Does any other religion teach this? It never made any sense to me. 

The earth doesn't. I take it as purely symbolic. However for a certain brand of Mormon "literalists" it's important. I'd note that many of these people also take the animism of the earth in Moses 7 literally as well. So it's not "as if" the earth were speaking to Enoch but literally the earth has a spirit, is conscious and aware, and is able to speak. Several people have noted that poetic animism of the earth was common in the poetry of the day. So for instance Shelly gets quoted a fair bit.

Quote

“I am the Earth,

Thy mother; she within whose stony veins,

To the last fibre of the loftiest tree

Whose thin leaves trembled in the frozen air,

Joy ran, as blood within a living frame,

When thou didst from her bosom, like a cloud

Of glory, arise, a spirit of keen joy!”

(Prometheus Unbound, act 1, lines 152–58)

A good overview of the history of the development of the idea, particularly Phelp's influence, can be found in "Was Noah’s Flood the Baptism of the Earth?" 

There's really no scriptural basis for the idea beyond appealing to an expansive reading of 1 Peter 3:18–21 and taking literally the animism of Moses 7:48–49. Orson Pratt adopts this in the early Utah period and like so much of his theology it became deeply influential. McConkie largely followed Pratt when he wrote in Mormon Doctrine, "The earth itself is subject to certain laws of progression and salvation because of which it eventually will become a fit abode for exalted beings. This earth was created as a living thing, and the Lord ordained that it should live a celestial law. It was baptized in water and will receive the baptism of fire; it will die, be resurrected and attain unto a state of celestial exaltation." There's really no scriptural basis for this IMO though.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, FunOnlineMan said:

For the earth to have been properly baptized, the flood in the account of Noah would have to be global. Such a flood would also be necessary to transport the biblical narrative from Missouri to Mt. Ararat, etc.

This incredible account would also necessitate an explanation for the accounts of the Native American prophet Noah and his gopherwood ark rescuing all terrestrial life, and floating along for a year before landing finally disembarking on another hemisphere and completely repopulating the globe approximately 4,000 years ago. Let’s call this account and it’s accompanying flood the global flood model and move on.

How does one reconcile a global flood model with the consensus of current evidence from every field of science to the contrary?

Or, in case I’m accused of pigeonholing anyone (I’m coining the term “doveholing” here to keep with the biblical symbology), how does one reconcile a non-literal reading of the Noah myths—a non-global flood model—with a consensus of M-word doctrines reinforced by scripture and modern prophecy to the contrary?

I would hate to inadvertently dovehole anyone—wait, now I’m also coining ”ravenholing” to delineate between being forced into a global flood position (being doveholed) and being forced into a non-global flood model (being ravenholed). So, anyway, I’m also welcoming non-global and non-non-global models, if any of you are feeling sneaky. I could use a complicated read. 

Make sure to copy in plain text so your copy and pasting is less obvious.

And I do not reconcile it because I do not accept the premises. Even if you take the story as written Noah clearly did not know if there was land still out there or he would not have tried releasing birds.

[SouthernMo]

1 minute ago, carbon dioxide said:

1.  It is said that Adam was in Missouri.  That does not mean Noah was.  It is said that Joseph Smith held a position that Noah lived in the Carolina area.

So if Noah lived on the American continent, when did his descendants cross the ocean to the Middle East?

Or, was there only one continent then (3,000BC)?

Or, is it your position that your version of the flood carried him to Mesopotamia?  Only 40 days of natural currents to transverse the Atlantic?  Did the currents and winds thread him through the Strait of Gibraltar to Israel?  Or, did they take his ark south around the Horn of Africa, and north to the Arabian Peninsula?

The idea that The man Adam (or Noah) lived in Missouri or anywhere on the American continent is full of holes both historical and scriptural.

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

Only 40 days of natural currents to transverse the Atlantic?

I'm not commenting on any other content in your post, but do you remember what is meant in Hebrew by the phrase 'forty days'?

Edited January 2, 2019 by Hamba Tuhan

[longview]

45 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Why does the earth need baptism? Does any other religion teach this? It never made any sense to me. 

The Earth is a sentient being with both spirit and physical components.  It is self-aware.  It cried over the wickedness of its "children" who would be destroyed in the world wide flood.  D&C 88:25 And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law—  26 Wherefore, it shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it.

[SouthernMo]

17 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm not commenting on any other content in your post, but do you remember what is meant in Hebrew by the phrase 'forty days'?

Ok - let’s call 40 days a symbol of as many days as you want. Still highly, highly unlikely that a large vessel with such a tiny crew that may or may not have been much more than a rudderless barge in crosses the Atlantic and threaded such tight navigational routes 3,000 BC.

Much more likely that Adam, Noah, and everyone in between was born and raised in Mesopotamia/Middle East.

[SouthernMo]

17 minutes ago, longview said:

The Earth is a sentient being with both spirit and physical components.  It is self-aware.  It cried over the wickedness of its "children" who would be destroyed in the world wide flood.  D&C 88:25 And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law—  26 Wherefore, it shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it.

Teach me more about this. Who is the earth’s mother and father?

Why would god destroy the earth as a result of the choices of the people who live on it?

Does the earth make choices?  Does it need to repent from time to time?

[Hamba Tuhan]

Just now, SouthernMo said:

Much more likely that Adam, Noah, and everyone in between was born and raised in Mesopotamia/Middle East.

Much more likely that Adam, Noah, and everyone in between never actually existed. If we're genuinely interested in likelihoods ...

[Calm]

Isn’t the story it rained 40 days and nights, not that he was on the ark for just that amount?

add-on:  150 days is the second account  for when the waters subsided. 

“

11In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month, all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12And the rain fell upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

13On that very day Noah entered the ark, along with his sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and his wife, and the three wives of his sons— 14they and every kind of wild animal, livestock, crawling creature, bird, and winged creature.15They came to Noah to enter the ark, two by two of every creature with the breath of life. 16And they entered, the male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then the LORD shut him in.

The Duration of the Flood

17For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and the waters rose and lifted the ark high above the earth. 18So the waters continued to surge and rise greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the waters. 19Finally, the waters completely inundated the earth, so that all the high mountains under all the heavens were covered.

20The waters rose and covered the mountaintops to a depth of fifteen cubits.b21And every creature that had moved upon the earth perished—birds, livestock, animals, every creature that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind. 22Of all that had been on dry land, everything that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23And every living thing on the face of the earth was destroyed—man and livestock, crawling creatures and birds of the air; they were blotted out from the earth, and only Noah remained, and those with him in the ark.

24And the waters prevailed upon the earth for 150 days.”

Edited January 2, 2019 by Calm

[katherine the great]

3 hours ago, FunOnlineMan said:

How does one reconcile a global flood model with the consensus of current evidence from every field of science to the contrary?

One can’t. It’s impossible. 

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, longview said:

The Earth is a sentient being with both spirit and physical components.  It is self-aware.  It cried over the wickedness of its "children" who would be destroyed in the world wide flood.  D&C 88:25 And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law—  26 Wherefore, it shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it.

I prefer a more metaphorical interpretation of these scriptures (as Clark pointed out a bit earlier in the thread.)

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

The idea that The man Adam (or Noah) lived in Missouri or anywhere on the American continent is full of holes both historical and scriptural.

Earnest question but what holes are there? I can understand not believing it without stronger evidence but I don’t see conflicts - especially if it were a local flood. Joseph thought Missouri was where Adam was cast out of Eden but according to at least one account thought Noah lived on the Carolina coast. Both the trade winds and gulf current would have pushed him towards Spain I believe. Now one might see a problem navigating into the Mediterranean, but it’s certainly not implausible.

Edited January 2, 2019 by clarkgoble

[longview]

34 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

Teach me more about this. Who is the earth’s mother and father?

Why would god destroy the earth as a result of the choices of the people who live on it?

Does the earth make choices?  Does it need to repent from time to time?

1- Heavenly Father and His Son created (organized) all things including worlds, animals, etc.  We are unique in the sense of having been invited by Heavenly Father to come out of the Intelligences and become His direct spirit children (in His Image both spiritually and physically).

2- The Earth was NOT destroyed.  It was merely cleansed of the pollution that resided on its surface.

3- I believe all entities previously made covenants to take on a specific role before entering into it.  God said Earth will fulfill the "measure of its creation."  I do not know what other "measures" there would be or if any planet failed in its role.

[SouthernMo]

2 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Earnest question but what holes are there? I can understand not believing it without stronger evidence but I don’t see conflicts - especially if it were a local flood. Joseph thought Missouri was where Adam was cast out of Eden but according to at least one account thought Noah lived on the Carolina coast.

Sure - let’s talk about holes.  All of the theories I have heard about Noah are extremely problematic.  Let’s explore your theory:

What is your supposed idea of how Noah and his family and a big ole ark of animals got from Charlotte to Chaldea?  It’s import to start with a theory to point out holes.

[longview]

3 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

Sure - let’s talk about holes.  All of the theories I have heard about Noah are extremely problematic.  Let’s explore your theory:

What is your supposed idea of how Noah and his family and a big ole ark of animals got from Charlotte to Chaldea?  It’s import to start with a theory to point out holes.

If the Lord caused the wind to blow vigorously on the Jaredite barges toward the Promised Land, why would anything be TOO HARD for the Lord?

[SouthernMo]

8 minutes ago, longview said:

2- The Earth was NOT destroyed.  It was merely cleansed of the pollution that resided on its surface.

I meant that it will happen:

3 Nephi 26:3

Mormon 5:23

Mormon 9:2

10 minutes ago, longview said:

3- I believe all entities previously made covenants to take on a specific role before entering into it.  God said Earth will fulfill the "measure of its creation."  I do not know what other "measures" there would be or if any planet failed in its role.

You said the earth is a sentient (feeling) being. So do you include all life as sentient and covenant-making?  Have ants made covenants?  Grass?  How would either of these entities hypothetically not live up to the measure of their creation and break these covenants?

Is there teaching somewhere about these supposed covenants, or are they your personal beliefs?

[clarkgoble]

23 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

Sure - let’s talk about holes.  All of the theories I have heard about Noah are extremely problematic.  Let’s explore your theory:

What is your supposed idea of how Noah and his family and a big ole ark of animals got from Charlotte to Chaldea?  It’s import to start with a theory to point out holes.

I’m not convinced he originally landed in Chaldea. I’d note from the beginning that the version we have in Genesis is corrupt. It was redacted and edited by late, likely Ptolemaic scribes from the Priestly tradition. Even the earlier J source is typically dated to 9th century at the earliest. We don’t know how corrupt that text is since it may well have faced corruption from intertextuality from narratives like Gilgamesh. So put an other way I don’t trust the Genesis account too much given the warnings Nephi gave.

So I’d say that while he brought some animals, it clearly wasn’t all animals. It’s also not which, if any, survived versus being eaten. We also aren’t sure how big his party was. Typical 16th century crossings took six weeks. However if the flood was a large hurricane hitting the Carolinas then that time might be reduced. If we dismiss the sizes in Genesis we have some unknown ship possibly with a sail or paddles. Six weeks for human powered modern rowing vessels isn’t at all uncommon. A primitive vessel likely would be slower but 2-3 months is plausible. The time in the Genesis account is somewhat inconsistent - possibly reflecting the competing traditions finally combined. The 150 day time seems completely reasonable though.

As I said once they reach the Straits of Gibraltar I don’t know what happened. For all I know they landed in North Africa and walked east. But if they had a sail or rowboat they may have crossed the Mediterranean and landed near Syria.

The main issue would be the construction of the vessel.

Edited January 2, 2019 by clarkgoble

[SouthernMo]

2 minutes ago, longview said:

If the Lord caused the wind to blow vigorously on the Jaredite barges toward the Promised Land, why would anything be TOO HARD for the Lord?

You’re right. It could happen.  But the probability is very slim.  I have doubts about the Jaredite story, but that’s another thread topic.

But I think that it’s more likely that Joseph Smith was wrong. It was highly ‘serendipitous’ that the location of Adam-ondi-Ahman was revealed shortly after Joseph Smith fled Kirtland. He received the “revelation” about Adam-ondi-Ahman in section 116 - seven years after he declared the area to be where the new Zion would be built.

It is FAR less of a stretch for the Adam/Noah story to be true if a man in Mesopotamia built a barge that floated on a local flood, and drifted randomly about until the waters receded.

Why is it that embracing the most complex, implausible explanation for something is sometimes viewed as the most ‘faithful’ perspective?

[Calm]

16 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

I meant that it will happen:

3 Nephi 26:3

Mormon 5:23

Mormon 9:2

You said the earth is a sentient (feeling) being. So do you include all life as sentient and covenant-making?  Have ants made covenants?  Grass?  How would either of these entities hypothetically not live up to the measure of their creation and break these covenants?

Is there teaching somewhere about these supposed covenants, or are they your personal beliefs?

I have heard the theory that lower animals are part of the earth's soul ( think trees like hair, rivers like blood vessels, and lower animals like bacteria in the gut or fish like white blood cells perhaps); more intelligent animals have their own spirit.  So the earth has a spirit perhaps like a bubble surrounding and through it to include all life up into the atmosphere with spirits independent of it such as men and primates move around inside it.

[SouthernMo]

6 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I’m not convinced he originally landed in Chaldea. I’d note from the beginning that the version we have in Genesis is corrupt. It was redacted and edited by late, likely Ptolemaic scribes from the Priestly tradition. Even the earlier J source is typically dated to 9th century at the earliest. We don’t know how corrupt that text is since it may well have faced corruption from intertextuality from narratives like Gilgamesh. So put an other way I don’t trust the Genesis account too much given the warnings Nephi gave.

So I’d say that while he brought some animals, it clearly wasn’t all animals. It’s also not which, if any, survived versus being eaten. We also aren’t sure how big his party was. Typical 16th century crossings took six weeks. However if the flood was a large hurricane hitting the Carolinas then that time might be reduced. If we dismiss the sizes in Genesis we have some unknown ship possibly with a sail or paddles. Six weeks for human powered modern rowing vessels isn’t at all uncommon. A primitive vessel likely would be slower but 2-3 months is plausible.

As I said once they reach the Straits of Gibraltar I don’t know what happened. For all I know they landed in North Africa and walked east. But if they had a sail or rowboat they may have crossed the Mediterranean and landed near Syria.

The main issue would be the construction of the vessel.

There are so many things that have to have gone right in your narrative - Chaldea or not. Noah landing anywhere in the Middle East after a trans-Atlantic voyage is highly problematic!

Sure - the version we have in Genesis is corrupt. Compare it to an older version in the Quran.

How would a hurricane speed up a ship?  I’m not a meteorologist, but to have a storm of hurricane magnitude that causes globally or even regionally catastrophic flooding is very, very unlikely to ‘push’ an ark. More likely, a storm would wreak havoc on such a massive vessel. Also, how could such a storm push the ark east - especially when hurricanes in the Carolinas are coming from the east and pushing west...

As for getting off the ark in North Africa and walking west - this is all possible, but there is no record or hint of this in the Old Testament.

It’s a difficult subject to debate when you and I both agree that the Genesis account is surely corrupt. We’d both be making up plausible versions of some semblance of an ark account.  Poking holes in historical fiction is easy!