Localized Flood

[IsaiahX]

I believe they are multiple reasons to believe in a localized flood, including:

• The seaworthiness of Noah's ark (Noah’s Ark and Naval Architecture — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY). There are not many feasible ways that Moses (the supposed author of Genesis) was an expert when it comes to seaworthy vessels.
• An imprint, roughly the size of Noah's ark, found on Mount Ararat, Turkey. (Evidence ‘one step closer’ to Noah’s Ark final resting place | SUGA Magazine Online).
• Flood myths from many different cultures (Flood myth | mythology).

A localized flood would also mean that the ark would have to carry significantly less species of animals, predators from the ark would be able to eat animals from other regions, and the inhabitants of the ark would not have to survive entirely by themselves after landing.

Random Viewer: But IsaiahX, the bible says that the waters covered the whole earth!

Me: The Hebrew word translated world (אֶרֶץ) means land or country (Strong's Hebrew: 776. אָ֫רֶץ (erets) -- earth, land) If someone says that one farmed the land, for instance, they usually don't mean that they planted on every location around the globe, including Antartica and separate continents. They just mean the immediate area, at least most of the time.

 

[Father Heathen]

What would it mean if the myth was merely an exaggeration/embellishment of a real-world event rather than a complete fabrication? Scripture would still need to be taken with a handful of salt at best either way.

 

[IsaiahX]

What would it mean if the myth was merely an exaggeration/embellishment of a real-world event rather than a complete fabrication? Scripture would still need to be taken with a handful of salt at best either way.

Since the descriptor for the size of the flood is not as ambitious as most think, it is not even that much of an exaggeration. The bible is basically saying this:

1. Dude builds a big boat
2. Fills it with animals from his region
3. A particularly large flood occured that brought his vessel to a mountain.

We also need to consider that Moses provides seaworthy dimensions. This would mean that, even if the bible should be taken with a grain of salt, it is more sensible than other ancient accounts. As far as I know, their accounts of vessel shape are far less sensible.

 

[Polymath257]

Since the descriptor for the size of the flood is not as ambitious as most think, it is not even that much of an exaggeration. The bible is basically saying this:

1. Dude builds a big boat
2. Fills it with animals from his region
3. A particularly large flood occured that brought his vessel to a mountain.

We also need to consider that Moses provides seaworthy dimensions. This would mean that, even if the bible should be taken with a grain of salt, it is more sensible than other ancient accounts. As far as I know, their accounts of vessel shape are far less sensible.

And given the previous story of Utnapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh and the fact that the size and shape of the boat have changed as the story was retold, the original event need not have been that large. How about a guy that saved some of his animals when the local area flooded?

 

[IsaiahX]

And given the previous story of Utnapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh and the fact that the size and shape of the boat have changed as the story was retold, the original event need not have been that large. How about a guy that saved some of his animals when the local area flooded?

The wording in your post confuses me somewhat. What is your point?

 

[Polymath257]

The wording in your post confuses me somewhat. What is your point?

That it need not have been that large of a local flood. it could easily have been a local flood where a farmer saved some of his animals by building a smallish raft. The boat of Utnapishtim was circular and shallow.

 

[IsaiahX]

That it need not have been that large of a local flood. it could easily have been a local flood where a farmer saved some of his animals by building a smallish raft. The boat of Utnapishtim was circular and shallow.

A small flood is just that: small. It would be too insignificant for cultures around the globe to tell of its cataclysmic nature. It would also be far to shallow to raise any structure to mount Ararat and require the saving of various species in that region from doom.

Also, a small raft would leave exposure to the elements an issue, especially in harsh rain.

 

[shunyadragon]

The origin of the Genesis flood myth based on archaeological evidence and original descriptions from Sumarian texts describing a catastrophic flood event in the Tigris Euphrates valleys do point to localize/regional origin.

The natural geologic formation on Mount Ararate has nothing to with Noah's Ark.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

The mountain of Ararat, where the boat is said to have touched down, were too tall to have been covered by a local flood, not by miles of land. And if they weren't covered, why did the birds return?
How much of the story is allegorical and how much literal in your estimation?

 

[IsaiahX]

The mountain of Ararat, where the boat is said to have touched down, were too tall to have been covered by a local flood, not by miles of land. And if they weren't covered, why did the birds return?
How much of the story is allegorical and how much literal in your estimation?

Perhaps the dove simply wasn't able to reach the edge of the flood waters in time, therefore necessitating its return. Perhaps Mount Ararat was simply the edge of the flood's area, and therefore wasn't completely covered. The mountains covered could simply be the hills covered in the local region (The word in Hebrew translated mountain can mean hill Strong's Hebrew: 2022. הָר (har) -- mountain, hill, hill country)

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Perhaps the dove simply wasn't able to reach the edge of the flood waters in time, therefore necessitating its return. Perhaps Mount Ararat was simply the edge of the flood's area, and therefore wasn't completely covered. The mountains covered could simply be the hills covered in the local region (The word in Hebrew translated mountain can mean hill Strong's Hebrew: 2022. הָר (har) -- mountain, hill, hill country)

It's mostly flat valley leading up to the mountains. And the story describes the boat hitting bottom long before any land was visible. But Noah should have been able to see them long before then. As would the birds.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

We also need to consider that Moses provides seaworthy dimensions. This would mean that, even if the bible should be taken with a grain of salt, it is more sensible than other ancient accounts. As far as I know, their accounts of vessel shape are far less sensible.

How long did it take Noah to build it? Everyone including snails could've walked slowly out of the flood area by the time it showed up.

1. Dude builds a big boat
2. Fills it with animals from his region
3. A particularly large flood occured that brought his vessel to a mountain.

1. Dude builds a big boat.
2. After sealing the door, everyone around him starts making rain noises and pounding and shaking the boat and trying hard not to giggle.
3. People tow his boat to a mountain and evacuate the area because who wants to live near such a guy?
4. Noah comes out and sees nobody and praises the Lord for his salvation.



Oh, and 5: Noah realizes he was punked and got God-awful drunk to make himself feel better.

 

[IsaiahX]

The natural geologic formation on Mount Ararate has nothing to with Noah's Ark.

While I am not nearly as sure about the indent being Noah's Ark as the people in the article are, I still believe there is a chance. It being the same length as the ark and carbon dating showing it to be approximately the same age as we would predict the ark to be are valuable points.

 

[IsaiahX]

It's mostly flat valley leading up to the mountains. And the story describes the boat hitting bottom long before any land was visible. But Noah should have been able to see them long before then. As would the birds.

You could just assume that the Bible exaggerates the flood's intensity at this point.

However, I do believe there is a way to get past this problem.

Put yourself in Noah's shoes. Your entire valley was just flooded. Everything from the lowest point to the highest hill. However, you can still see huge, snowcapped mountains on the horizon. You just float around in your watery pen, the borders closed in by hulking peaks.

One day, one of your eight sons runs up to you and yells, "Dad, you can see the hills again!" Do you think he means the mountains on the horizon that you could see all along? No. He means the hills of your home land are finally uncovered.

The same could be said for the dove and raven. Noah sent birds out to fly around the flood land to see if their home had finally received relief from the waters. He already knew about the visible peaks.

We also have a hint regarding what the dove brought to tell that the land was safe: plant matter. The large mountains surrounding the plains were snowcapped and inhospitable. Even if plants could grow, which I sincerely doubt they could, the land would be inhospitable for the dove.

 

[shunyadragon]

While I am not nearly as sure about the indent being Noah's Ark as the people in the article are, I still believe there is a chance. It being the same length as the ark and carbon dating showing it to be approximately the same age as we would predict the ark to be are valuable points.

I am a geologist and fully understand the research on the 'natural geologic formation,' which is a weathered formation called double plunging syncline making what appears too be a boat like shape in reality is naturally stratified Durupınar andesite/limestone.

There are no scientifically verified carbon dating of materials at this site by an independent scientific investigation, and it is a rock formation and not wood. A scientific expedition to the site accurately evaluated the site as follows:

From: Collins, Lorence D.; Fasold, David (1996). "Bogus 'Noah's Ark' from Turkey Exposed as a Common Geologic Structure". Journal of Geoscience Education. 44: 439–44. hdl:10211.2/3026

"Fasold asserted in his 1988 book that locals call one of the peaks near to the Durupinar site al Cudi (Turkish Cudi Dagi, Kurdish Çîyaye Cûdî) and linked this to the Mount Judinamed in the Quran as the final resting place of Noah's Ark.[4] The assertion is controversial and not well supported by local toponymy.

After a few expeditions to the Durupınar site that included drilling and excavation in the 1990s, Fasold began to have doubts that the Durupınar formation was Noah's ark. He visited the site in September 1994 with Australian geologist Ian Plimer and concluded that the structure was not a boat.[15] He surmised that ancient peoples had erroneously believed the site was the ark.[15][17] In 1996, Fasold co-wrote a paper with geologist Lorence Collins titled "Bogus 'Noah's Ark' from Turkey Exposed as a Common Geologic Structure", which concluded that the boat-shaped formation was a natural stone formation that merely resembled a boat. The same paper pointed out that the "anchors" were local volcanic stone.[17]The abstract reads:

A natural rock structure near Dogubayazit, Turkey, has been misidentified as Noah's Ark. Microscopic studies of a supposed iron bracket show that it is derived from weathered volcanic minerals. Supposed metal-braced walls are natural concentrations of limonite and magnetite in steeply inclined sedimentary layers in the limbs of a doubly plunging syncline. Supposed fossilized gopherwood bark is crinkled metamorphosed peridotite. Fossiliferous limestone, interpreted as cross cutting the syncline, preclude the structure from being Noah's Ark because these supposed "Flood" deposits are younger than the "Ark." Anchor stones at Kazan (Arzap) are derived from local andesite and not from Mesopotamia."

 

[IsaiahX]

How long did it take Noah to build it? Everyone including snails could've walked slowly out of the flood area by the time it showed up.

Because most of the land was surrounded by tall mountains, the animals would not have very much to run to, especially insects. It is also possible that the ark's wooden structure was used for shelter after Noah's whole tribe was destroyed. I also beleive there is a reason God commanded Noah to take seven of every clean animal onto the ark (Genesis 7:2): food.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

You could just assume that the Bible exaggerates the flood's intensity at this point.

However, I do believe there is a way to get past this problem.

Put yourself in Noah's shoes. Your entire valley was just flooded. Everything from the lowest point to the highest hill. However, you can still see huge, snowcapped mountains on the horizon. You just float around in your watery pen, the borders closed in by hulking peaks.

One day, one of your eight sons runs up to you and yells, "Dad, you can see the hills again!" Do you think he means the mountains on the horizon that you could see all along? No. He means the hills of your home land are finally uncovered.

The same could be said for the dove and raven. Noah sent birds out to fly around the flood land to see if their home had finally received relief from the waters. He already knew about the visible peaks.

We also have a hint regarding what the dove brought to tell that the land was safe: plant matter. The large mountains surrounding the plains were snowcapped and inhospitable. Even if plants could grow, which I sincerely doubt they could, the land would be inhospitable for the dove.

I dont think it was just exaggerated, I dont think it happened. Rather was added as a post hoc moral tale, it's so full of holes.
The valley wasn't surrounded by mountains, they were just on the East side. The snow caps, which aren't all season, start high so high up the water would have not come anywhere near it in a flood. Lots of easy accessible and forested and shrub land.

More likely this wasn't a tale about any specific flood at all, but a tale built on flood stories such as the Sumerian flood stories. Since human civilizations were built on fertile flood plains, it's an easily relatable subject matter.

 

[1213]

...

Me: The Hebrew word translated world (אֶרֶץ) means land or country (Strong's Hebrew: 776. אָ֫רֶץ (erets) -- earth, land) If someone says that one farmed the land, for instance, they usually don't mean that they planted on every location around the globe, including Antartica and separate continents. They just mean the immediate area, at least most of the time.

I believe the flood covered whole earth. Also because many nations all over the world have similar ideas of great flood. And as Bible tells, earth means dry land.

God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters he called Seas. God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:10

In the beginning there was just one continent, as that Genesis 1:10 points out. When the flood came, the “fountains of great deep” were bust open. The great deep was under that one continent. And so, when the fountains of great deep burst open, it seems to mean the original continent was broken and sunk.


In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep were burst open, and the sky's windows were opened. The rain was on the earth forty days and forty nights.
Genesis 7:11-12

I think the animals are not a problem. Nowadays species are counted differently. For example, it could have been that there was just on kind of bears and all other “species” of bears are offspring of those original bears. Similarly, as humans are offspring of the 8, but still we have more than 8 different looking people today. It is possible that certain variation happens in within species.

I estimate ark was like in these plans:
http://www.kolumbus.fi/r.berg/Noahs_Ark.html

And there was about 4200 animals in the ark, which are the ancestors of all modern land animals. And when they went into the ark, they could have been not yet fully grown, which would have made it easier.

 

[shunyadragon]

I believe the flood covered whole earth.

There is aboslutely no evidence of this.

Also because many nations all over the world have similar ideas of great flood.

False, the stories in the rest of the world have distinctly different types of floods and narratives except for the Summarian records that Genesis stories came from, which describe catastrophic floods of the Tigris/Euphrates Valleys

And as Bible tells, earth means dry land.

God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters he called Seas. God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:10

In the beginning there was just one continent, as that Genesis 1:10 points out. When the flood came, the “fountains of great deep” were bust open. The great deep was under that one continent. And so, when the fountains of great deep burst open, it seems to mean the original continent was broken and sunk.


In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep were burst open, and the sky's windows were opened. The rain was on the earth forty days and forty nights.
Genesis 7:11-12

I think the animals are not a problem. Nowadays species are counted differently. For example, it could have been that there was just on kind of bears and all other “species” of bears are offspring of those original bears. Similarly, as humans are offspring of the 8, but still we have more than 8 different looking people today. It is possible that certain variation happens in within species.

I estimate ark was like in these plans:
http://www.kolumbus.fi/r.berg/Noahs_Ark.html

And there was about 4200 animals in the ark, which are the ancestors of all modern land animals. And when they went into the ark, they could have been not yet fully grown, which would have made it easier.

OK, but in historical records this is not reliable.

 

[ChristineM]

Since the descriptor for the size of the flood is not as ambitious as most think, it is not even that much of an exaggeration. The bible is basically saying this:

1. Dude builds a big boat
2. Fills it with animals from his region
3. A particularly large flood occured that brought his vessel to a mountain.

We also need to consider that Moses provides seaworthy dimensions. This would mean that, even if the bible should be taken with a grain of salt, it is more sensible than other ancient accounts. As far as I know, their accounts of vessel shape are far less sensible.

1 dude builds a big boat that cannot be built even today unless specialised materials (steel etc) are used. To do this he used only a wood that doesnt exist with no evidence it ever existed and bronze age tools.

2 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive

3 A particularly large flood occured that covered the highest mountain under 15 cubits of water

Do you know anything about, shipbuilding, the bible or fluid dynamics?