The Great Flood — Myth, Memory, or Something In Between?

[FlyersFan]

My dear old dad gave me two pieces of advice 
every dollar you save is a dollar you don’t have to pay anymore taxes on
and,
never listen to a woman

  which is why you are willfully ignorant.

[andy06shake]

There are very ancient Egyptian heiroglyphs found carved in stone in many South Pacific countries.

Thor Heyerdal travelled 8,000 km over 101 days in a mainly balsa wood raft for the Kon-Tiki expedition. he was trying to prove how Polynesians may have migrated from the Americas.

The Polynesians themselves have clearly been able to build ocean vessels of many kinds with primitive technologies and to have stayed at sea for significant lengths of time.

But, none the less, something like Noah's ark is clearly singular and exceptional in conception, execution and purpose.

Can you provide a link to these Egyptian hieroglyphs found in the South Pacific? 

Because if it's the "Gosford Glyphs" or "Kariong Hieroglyphs" they are widely considered a modern hoax. 

Thor Heyerdahl proved only that such a voyage was possible.

Not that Polynesians came from the Americas.

Which genetics and linguistics clearly show is not the case.

Polynesian seafaring was advanced, but Noah’s Ark, as described in the story, would have been physically impossible for a small group using ancient tools.

It's a mythic narrative about divine judgment and renewal.

Not an account of an actual global flood or vessel.

[andy06shake]

My dear old dad gave me two pieces of advice 
every dollar you save is a dollar you don’t have to pay anymore taxes on
and,
never listen to a woman

My father taught me somewhat differently.

You should always listen to the woman.

You don't need to agree, or do as they say.

But 9 times out of 10.

They tend to make a modicum of sense.

It's prudent, you see, and also somewhat chivalrous. 

[FlyersFan]

Polynesian seafaring was advanced, but Noah’s Ark, as described in the story, would have been physically impossible for a small group using ancient tools.

The knowledge to know how to build a boat that size, and how to sail it, didn't exist.
The building materials to build a boat that size didn't exist in the Levant.
The 4 men building the boat would have seen the boat rot
before it was finished, that's how long it would have taken.

The Impossible Voyage of Noahs Ark

Before he could even contemplate such a project, Noah would have needed a thorough education in naval architecture and in fields that would not arise for thousands of years such as physics, calculus, mechanics, and structural analysis. There was no shipbuilding tradition behind him, no experienced craftspeople to offer advice. Where did he learn the framing procedure for such a Brobdingnagian structure? How could he anticipate the effects of roll, pitch, yaw, and slamming in a rough sea? How did he solve the differential equations for bending moment, torque, and shear stress?

And the length was impossible for that time period

Finally, our farmer-turned-architect had to confront the gravest difficulty of all: in the words of A. M. Robb, there was an "upper limit, in the region of 300 feet, on the length of the wooden ship; beyond such a length the deformation due to the differing distributions of weight and buoyancy became excessive, with consequent difficulty in maintaining the hull watertight" (p. 355). Pollard and Robertson concur, emphasizing that "a wooden ship had great stresses as a structure. The absolute limit of its length was 300 feet, and it was liable to `hogging' and `sagging' " (pp. 13-14). This is the major reason why the naval industry turned to iron and steel in the 1850s. The largest wooden ships ever built were the six-masted schooners, nine of which were launched between 1900 and 1909. These ships were so long that they required diagonal iron strapping for support; they "snaked," or visibly undulated, as they passed through the waves, they leaked so badly that they had to be pumped constantly, and they were only used on short coastal hauls because they were unsafe in deep water.

 
John J. Rockwell, the designer of the first of this class, confessed that "six masters were not practical. They were too long for wood construction" (Laing, pp. 393, 403-409). Yet the ark was over 100 feet longer than the longest six-master, the 329 foot U.S.S. Wyoming, and it had to endure the most severe conditions ever encountered while transporting the most critically important cargo ever hauled. Clearly, God had to imbue this amateurishly assembled gopherwood with some very special properties to fit it for the voyage.

More at the link including the problems with building the animal cages and getting the building materials (pitch for an ark that size didn't exist in the Levant) and knowing what to do with them etc etc ....

[Bootless]

I don’t agree that things have to be written prior to Christian contact to be verified as older than Christian contact. These people were around before Christianity, therefore their their language and creation stories, myths and legends are older.

Quite right to disagree with the Christian contact. For Alexander the Great was great at conquest and spreading of Hellenism throughout the known World. Even before Alexander, people were trading goods and stories. The Greek philosopher Socrates got his idea of transmigration of the soul from the Pythagoreans, who in turn claimed to have received it from the far East; probably India, 'cuz they were into that sort of thing.

The Greeks got stories from Asia Minor, aka Anatolia, aka Turkey. The Anatolians got their stories from Mesopotamia, aka Sumerian, Akkadian, and Babylon. It was  Enheduanna, daughter of Sargon the Great of Akkadian empire who invented poetry about 2300 B.C. Poetry was the arranging of numbers of syllables to match up line by line. It took until the 800s B.C. for the Greeks to catch on with their hexameter and pentameter.  Poetry, properly done, was considered more sacred.

As far as I can tell, the Vedic story of Matsya and the Great Flood was not put into writing until 300s B.C.-A.D.500s, plenty of time for it to seem very much like a mixture of Mesopotamian and Greek Deucalion flood stories; more like Deucalion, in fact. 

Your written description of your mother’s incorrect re-telling of the genesis story just proves written accounts are also corrupted if the oral accounts are also falsified. 

I've written what I remember clearly. The rest of what I heard is somewhat muddled by what I have read in the intervening decades.

Before the flood, humans lived to be 800 or 900 years, because the large water barrier above the sky blocked much more of the cosmic rays than what is blocked now that that water (known to the Mesopotamians as the Abzu) is gone. First the Abzu fell to Earth as the flood. Then God blew it away in a great wind, thus removing the flood water. Nobody knows where God blew it to. Some people on Youtube say that there is a sphere of ice particles way out in space surrounding the Solar System. Maybe that was once the Abzu. 

Anyway, when God saw the evil in the World he decided to limit the human lifespan to 120 years max, (Gen 6:3). So the flood removed the protection of the Abzu, wiped out the life on Earth, and did not get restored. So our lives will never exceed 120 years because of cosmic ray degradation over the centuries. It took about ten generations or so, but now it is fixed at the max of 120.

[3rdrockfrmsun]

Good to be back after stepping away for a few days — looks like this thread took on a life of its own while I was gone. I’ve been reading through the pages I missed, and it’s clear everyone here’s got some real passion and depth on this topic.

What I keep coming back to is this: maybe the flood stories weren’t meant to be a simple “did it or didn’t it happen” kind of thing. Maybe what we’re looking at is a cultural memory — the way ancient people tried to make sense of something world-ending in their eyes. Whether that was a literal flood, a plague, a climate event, or even a moral collapse, the story itself carried the meaning of renewal after destruction.

When you think about how the early world was shaped, “the world” to them was the land between rivers, the cities they knew, and the horizon they could see. If that world drowned, to them it was the whole earth. That doesn’t make the story false — it makes it true within the frame of their experience.

And the fact that so many ancient civilizations, spread across time and distance, carried versions of the same flood story says something. Maybe it wasn’t one single global event, but a shared understanding that humanity has a pattern — we fall apart, we start over, and we call that process divine.

So instead of staying stuck on “did the Ark exist,” I think the more interesting question is why this story refuses to die. What about it speaks so deeply to the human condition that every culture kept retelling it in their own way?

[FlyersFan]

What I keep coming back to is this: maybe the flood stories weren’t meant to be a simple “did it or didn’t it happen” kind of thing. 

With the Noahs Flood story you have to go with the 'did it or didn't it happen'.   You have to because the story makes claims about God Himself and intervention in human affairs.  And people claim it's the inerrant literal Word of God.  It affects faith and belief.   It's important to understand if it's literal or if it's allegory or if it's something else altogether and so not worthy of belief that God saved 8 people while wiping out the rest and all the innocent animals etc etc.

[Roma]

With the Noahs Flood story you have to go with the 'did it or didn't it happen'.   You have to because the story makes claims about God Himself and intervention in human affairs.  And people claim it's the inerrant literal Word of God.  It affects faith and belief.   It's important to understand if it's literal or if it's allegory or if it's something else altogether and so not worthy of belief that God saved 8 people while wiping out the rest and all the innocent animals etc etc.

 
Matthew 24:37-39
King James Version 

[sup]37 [/sup]But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
[sup]38 [/sup]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,
[sup]39 [/sup]And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.


It's also important if you believe in the predictions of Revelations.

Unless you want to debunk that also.  

[FlyersFan]

 
Matthew 24:37-39
King James Version 

The Noahs flood -
DID
NOT
HAPPEN

That quote is problematic for Christianity.   Jesus talking about how things will be like in Noahs time and the flood.   Since the flood didn't happen, then we have a few choices ....

- Jesus didn't actually say this and someone just claimed that he did.
- Jesus said it and was wrong meaning that He really isn't God incarnate.
- Jesus said it but He was just using a reference that the people could understand to make a point and He wasn't confirming the flood.

Take your pick.   Which ever you want.   
Still doesn't change that the flood, as described by the bible, did not happen.

[3rdrockfrmsun]

With the Noahs Flood story you have to go with the 'did it or didn't it happen'.   You have to because the story makes claims about God Himself and intervention in human affairs.  And people claim it's the inerrant literal Word of God.  It affects faith and belief.   It's important to understand if it's literal or if it's allegory or if it's something else altogether and so not worthy of belief that God saved 8 people while wiping out the rest and all the innocent animals etc etc.

I get what you’re saying, but I think that’s an oversimplified take. It doesn’t have to be a strict “did it or didn’t it” scenario — that binary is exactly what’s kept people from actually digging into the evidence and context.

We know ancient civilizations across the world — Mesopotamian, Chinese, Indian, even Mesoamerican — all preserved flood narratives. That’s not coincidence. Something major clearly happened that left a deep, cross-cultural imprint. To those people, the “world” didn’t mean a globe on a map; it meant the entire horizon of their known existence. If that whole world was underwater, then yes — it was a “global” flood in their eyes.

Whether or not it was the literal Noah’s Flood isn’t even the most interesting part. The fact that the story survived across languages and continents tells us it came from a shared human experience, probably a massive regional event that our ancestors remembered as total devastation.

So yeah — it matters whether it’s literal, allegory, or something in between. But pretending it’s a simple yes-or-no question misses the entire point of why the story exists in the first place.
At some point, the obsession with proving or disproving it stops being about history and starts being about ego. The story isn’t trying to prove a point — it’s trying to remind us that humanity has already been humbled once before.