Allegory

[bytor2112]

We have had many discussions regarding whether the Noah and the flood story was allegory or there was in fact a global flood that destroyed all life save Noah and his family and the animals.

If the story is allegory....what of the end of times prohecy's? More allegory? Or will all of these catastrophic events occur and will the Lord actually cleanse the earth with fire? It would seem that if allegory and symbolism were used in the flood story that the same might apply here. We are told that no one except the Father knows when Christ shall return, yet we are also told we can know HE is close because of the signs. Seems like it might be difficult to come as a thief in the night if we recognize the signs....so maybe some of the signs are symbolic and allegorical as opposed to.......

Edited November 8, 2010 by bytor2112

[rameumptom]

Most LDS scholars do not think it is allegory. We do, however, believe it is myth. Myth is a story that is based upon an actual event. So, we believe that Noah was a historical being. We just do not necessarily believe that the Flood covered all the earth. As far as Noah could see, it would seem to be all the earth, but how else could he tell? There are small scriptural evidences that suggest otherwise. And there are large geologic evidences suggesting otherwise.

We do not know how extensive the destructions in the last days will be. We can only surmise it from John and a few others, who may have only seen great destructions in large areas, but not necessarily global.

Does a baptism by fire necessarily mean the entire earth is consumed by flames? Who knows?

When Brigham Young and Bruce R. McConkie concur that portions of the story of Adam are symbolic but not historical (such as Eve from Adam's rib), then perhaps we should be a little more open to other possible interpretations of scripture.

[Justice]

The destructions that happened in the Book of Mormon were not allegory.

It may be they are a symbol, but they most certainly were real.

[Traveler]

We have had many discussions regarding whether the Noah and the flood story was allegory or there was in fact a global flood that destroyed all life save Noah and his family and the animals.

If the story is allegory....what of the end of times prohecy's? More allegory? Or will all of these catastrophic events occur and will the Lord actually cleanse the earth with fire? It would seem that if allegory and symbolism were used in the flood story that the same might apply here. We are told that no one except the Father knows when Christ shall return, yet we are also told we can know HE is close because of the signs. Seems like it might be difficult to come as a thief in the night if we recognize the signs....so maybe some of the signs are symbolic and allegorical as opposed to.......

There are many things about the Book of Genesis that has convinced me that the ancients did not leave us an accurate record of Noah and the flood. The best rational conclusion is that information is missing on a grand scale. For example the ark was not large enough to even hold a sample of all the known species of worms. Following the flood there is no indication of creation of creatures that we have earlier in Genesis and for those that do not accept evolution as a possible answer are left with a problem and a paradox.

The term “ship” is used in other books of Moses as well as in Genesis but no one explains in terms of doctrine the difference between a ship and an ark. Plus the term ark is used elsewhere in scripture to designate something very unlike a ship.

The end of times is also problematic. The ancient term concerning “No man knows the day or the hour” may be a misconception that is lost in translation. Let’s say some English speaking basket ball players were going to play some French speaking basketball players. The English speaking players tell their French speaking opponents that they will “whip their buts”. How will that be translated into French? A direct translation would be completely wrong and various other attempts could be rather misleading. There are ancient Hebrew documents that would indicate that “No man knows the hour or the day” does not mean what many think it to mean. I am quite sure I will have a good idea about 10 years before Jesus returns. Three years before – I will have gotten it down to within a couple of weeks and 2 and ½ days (3 days in biblical terms) I will be able to provide the day and the hour.

There are other things about the end of times. Matt 24 speaks concern the “sign” of his coming. That is an interesting scripture being that “The Sign” of his coming 2000 years ago was a star so bright it could be seen during the day and gave off light similar to our sun.

Another thing. What wickedness can be done to cause an entire city, nation or civilization to be destroyed? There are a number of times G-d destroyed cities and civilizations but there is not enough common thread from things destroyed and not destroyed in scripture to make any kind of an accurate determination.

Therefore I suggest that the answer to such questions are not found in scripture but from the prophets – servant vassals of G-d. Such servants may not provide the answers in suitable format to most. History would indicate that seldom do answers come in what the world would designate as a suitable format. So it is that I believe:

1. We study scriptures do understand ancient types and shadows.

2. We seek out prophets anointed and sent forth to the world (not just our particular religious faith) - Example the Proclamation to the World

3. We purify and sanctify our lives through covenant and discipline.

4. As we purify ourselves suitable to the holy spirit that we seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost.

The Traveler

[Doctrine_Guy]

Articles of Faith 8

"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly, we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God".

Gen. 6:17

17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

Gen. 7:19

19 And the awaters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

Gen. 7: 23.

23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

Moses 8:30

30 And God said unto Noah: The end of all flesh is come before me, for the earth is filled with violence, and behold I will destroy all flesh from off the earth.

There are numerous other scriptures, but this should suffice. The flood was over all the earth. Granted there may have been a few high spots here and there where in nothing lived, and therefore didn't have to be covered (although, I still believe they were all covered completely). But it is sufficient to know that ALL breathing animals were destroyed from off the whole earth. It is not allegorical.

If some still think that it can all be attributed to mistranslation or misunderstanding, I suggest you research some conference talks because there have been several in which a general authority as described the whole earth being covered.

As to the argument that the ark wasn't big enough for all animals. It's called "parent species". Of course not every single breed of every single animal would fit, however every breed of a species of animals can trace parentage to one particular animal. For example, every member of the pigeon/dove family (and there are hundreds of species) all descended from the Rock Dove, which is the dove that Noah had on the ark.

Deer, Elk, Moose, Caribou, Red Stags, etc. are all descended from one variety of deer.

Every species of canine (dog, wolf, coyote, etc) are descended from one type of dog.

Every species of Feline (lion, tiger, housecat, bobcat, cheetah, ocelot, etc.) And so on.

In this way, Noah had a male and female of every parent species of animal. (plus the 7 pairs of edible animals that they survived on). After the flood was over and the animals left the ark, they multiplied. As their posterity spread throughout the earth to different locations and habitats, they all adapted to their different surroundings and developed into new breeds (of the same species). And that is how we have so many varieties today. But this is adaptation, NOT evolution (in the sense the world knows it).

As for the worms and insects (ground dwellers), It is possible that they were directed by God to go deeper into the earth, or into a non-permeable soil layer, where the flood waters wouldn't destroy them. And of course the sea creatures didn't need saving. Why do you think the oldest known creatures on Earth (sharks and crocodiles) are sea creatures? They were not reduced to one parent species, like all land-dwelling animals, and so their natural adaptive lives continued on unbroken.

The end time prophecies are not allegorical either. The whole earth will be burned with fire to purify it, but the righteous will be saved the same that Noah and his family were saved.

[MarginOfError]

Articles of Faith 8

"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly, we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God".

Gen. 6:17

17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

Gen. 7:19

19 And the awaters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

Gen. 7: 23.

23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

Moses 8:30

30 And God said unto Noah: The end of all flesh is come before me, for the earth is filled with violence, and behold I will destroy all flesh from off the earth.

There are numerous other scriptures, but this should suffice. The flood was over all the earth. Granted there may have been a few high spots here and there where in nothing lived, and therefore didn't have to be covered (although, I still believe they were all covered completely). But it is sufficient to know that ALL breathing animals were destroyed from off the whole earth. It is not allegorical.

If some still think that it can all be attributed to mistranslation or misunderstanding, I suggest you research some conference talks because there have been several in which a general authority as described the whole earth being covered.

As to the argument that the ark wasn't big enough for all animals. It's called "parent species". Of course not every single breed of every single animal would fit, however every breed of a species of animals can trace parentage to one particular animal. For example, every member of the pigeon/dove family (and there are hundreds of species) all descended from the Rock Dove, which is the dove that Noah had on the ark.

Deer, Elk, Moose, Caribou, Red Stags, etc. are all descended from one variety of deer.

Every species of canine (dog, wolf, coyote, etc) are descended from one type of dog.

Every species of Feline (lion, tiger, housecat, bobcat, cheetah, ocelot, etc.) And so on.

In this way, Noah had a male and female of every parent species of animal. (plus the 7 pairs of edible animals that they survived on). After the flood was over and the animals left the ark, they multiplied. As their posterity spread throughout the earth to different locations and habitats, they all adapted to their different surroundings and developed into new breeds (of the same species). And that is how we have so many varieties today. But this is adaptation, NOT evolution (in the sense the world knows it).

As for the worms and insects (ground dwellers), It is possible that they were directed by God to go deeper into the earth, or into a non-permeable soil layer, where the flood waters wouldn't destroy them. And of course the sea creatures didn't need saving. Why do you think the oldest known creatures on Earth (sharks and crocodiles) are sea creatures? They were not reduced to one parent species, like all land-dwelling animals, and so their natural adaptive lives continued on unbroken.

The end time prophecies are not allegorical either. The whole earth will be burned with fire to purify it, but the righteous will be saved the same that Noah and his family were saved.

I'd like to see the replicable research that supports your claims.

[hordak]

I have never understood the emphasis on a literal reading of the cleaning fire, while the 10 horned 7 headed beast, or the 4 horsemen are not assumed to be actual animals?

[Just_A_Guy]

Hi Doctrine_Guy -

For what it's worth, I get a little leery of scriptural absolutes like "all" and "every". If we take them at face value then we must somehow account for the presence of Nephites in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost.

[Doctrine_Guy]

Hi Doctrine_Guy -

For what it's worth, I get a little leery of scriptural absolutes like "all" and "every". If we take them at face value then we must somehow account for the presence of Nephites in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost.

See, now that depends on your definition of "nation". The Nephites belong to the tribes (or nations) of Ephraim and Manasseh. So as long as any Ephraimites or Manassehites were in Jerusalem, the scripture is correct.

Marginoferror, why don't you look up Charles Darwin. His Galapagos research pretty much says the same thing. I've seen the research, but if you want to see it, you'll have to look it up yourself. I'm simply explaining doctrine and giving a bit of scientific explanation on the side.

Hordak, because the beast and the horsemen are being described in a revelatory vision that is by nature symbolic. Although, I do admit that the "fire" might not be actual fire like I have in my wood stove, but it will destroy and cleanse the earth the same way that the flood did.

Do any of you seriously believe that not all people were destroyed from the earth during the flood?

[Wingnut]

See, now that depends on your definition of "nation". The Nephites belong to the tribes (or nations) of Ephraim and Manasseh. So as long as any Ephraimites or Manassehites were in Jerusalem, the scripture is correct.

All Nephites came from the Tribe of Joseph, but not everyone of the Tribe of Joseph was a Nephite.

[MarginOfError]

Marginoferror, why don't you look up Charles Darwin. His Galapagos research pretty much says the same thing. I've seen the research, but if you want to see it, you'll have to look it up yourself. I'm simply explaining doctrine and giving a bit of scientific explanation on the side.

Never heard of the guy. But regardless, what about the mountain of geological evidence that discounts the global flood theory?

[Just_A_Guy]

See, now that depends on your definition of "nation". The Nephites belong to the tribes (or nations) of Ephraim and Manasseh. So as long as any Ephraimites or Manassehites were in Jerusalem, the scripture is correct.

That would work if a) the authors of the New Testament spoke English, and b) we didn't actually know the context of this particular verse. Neither is true.

The Greek word for "nation" as used in Acts 2:5 is "ethnos". The Greek word for "tribe" (as in "tribe of Israel") as used in Acts 13:21, Romans 11:1, Philippians 3:5, and Revelations 7:8 is "phyle".

And if you actually read the rest of Acts 2, we read what these "nations" were--and they had nothing to do with any of the tribes of Israel.

[Doctrine_Guy]

That would work if a) the authors of the New Testament spoke English, and b) we didn't actually know the context of this particular verse. Neither is true.

The Greek word for "nation" as used in Acts 2:5 is "ethnos". The Greek word for "tribe" (as in "tribe of Israel") as used in Acts 13:21, Romans 11:1, Philippians 3:5, and Revelations 7:8 is "phyle".

And if you actually read the rest of Acts 2, we read what these "nations" were--and they had nothing to do with any of the tribes of Israel.

Then if that's the case, the Nephite Civilization didn't constitute a "nation" and the scripture is still correct.

[MarginOfError]

Then if that's the case, the Nephite Civilization didn't constitute a "nation" and the scripture is still correct.

That's about as sensible a response as

[Just_A_Guy]

Hey, I'll go you one better. The Peace of Westphalia and the birth of the modern nation-state wasn't until A.D. 1648. So, really, there weren't people of any nation present at the day of Pentecost.

There, now I feel better!

[FunkyTown]

Hey, I'll go you one better. The Peace of Westphalia and the birth of the modern nation-state wasn't until A.D. 1648. So, really, there weren't people of any nation present at the day of Pentecost.

There, now I feel better!

This is because I was jealous of the cleverness of your monkey picture.

[Just_A_Guy]

That was MOE's, Funky. Cute, though, wasn't it?

[Wingnut]

This is because I was jealous of the cleverness of your monkey picture.

[FunkyTown]

That was MOE's, Funky. Cute, though, wasn't it?

Then I am jealous of MOE's monkey picture! *shakes fist* Curse you, MOE!

[Traveler]

Articles of Faith 8

"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly, we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God".

Gen. 6:17

17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

Gen. 7:19

19 And the awaters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

Gen. 7: 23.

23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

Moses 8:30

30 And God said unto Noah: The end of all flesh is come before me, for the earth is filled with violence, and behold I will destroy all flesh from off the earth.

There are numerous other scriptures, but this should suffice. The flood was over all the earth. Granted there may have been a few high spots here and there where in nothing lived, and therefore didn't have to be covered (although, I still believe they were all covered completely). But it is sufficient to know that ALL breathing animals were destroyed from off the whole earth. It is not allegorical.

If some still think that it can all be attributed to mistranslation or misunderstanding, I suggest you research some conference talks because there have been several in which a general authority as described the whole earth being covered.

As to the argument that the ark wasn't big enough for all animals. It's called "parent species". Of course not every single breed of every single animal would fit, however every breed of a species of animals can trace parentage to one particular animal. For example, every member of the pigeon/dove family (and there are hundreds of species) all descended from the Rock Dove, which is the dove that Noah had on the ark.

Deer, Elk, Moose, Caribou, Red Stags, etc. are all descended from one variety of deer.

Every species of canine (dog, wolf, coyote, etc) are descended from one type of dog.

Every species of Feline (lion, tiger, housecat, bobcat, cheetah, ocelot, etc.) And so on.

In this way, Noah had a male and female of every parent species of animal. (plus the 7 pairs of edible animals that they survived on). After the flood was over and the animals left the ark, they multiplied. As their posterity spread throughout the earth to different locations and habitats, they all adapted to their different surroundings and developed into new breeds (of the same species). And that is how we have so many varieties today. But this is adaptation, NOT evolution (in the sense the world knows it).

As for the worms and insects (ground dwellers), It is possible that they were directed by God to go deeper into the earth, or into a non-permeable soil layer, where the flood waters wouldn't destroy them. And of course the sea creatures didn't need saving. Why do you think the oldest known creatures on Earth (sharks and crocodiles) are sea creatures? They were not reduced to one parent species, like all land-dwelling animals, and so their natural adaptive lives continued on unbroken.

The end time prophecies are not allegorical either. The whole earth will be burned with fire to purify it, but the righteous will be saved the same that Noah and his family were saved.

Just wondering if you have recieved your "baptism" of "fire" and the Holy Ghost yet? (See Matt 3:11, Luke 3:16, 3Nephi 9:20, D&C 19:31)

The Traveler

[Doctrine_Guy]

Just wondering if you have recieved your "baptism" of "fire" and the Holy Ghost yet? (See Matt 3:11, Luke 3:16, 3Nephi 9:20, D&C 19:31)

The Traveler

You really want to get deeper into this nit-picking? Because we could go to the original Greek and Hebrew texts to show that the word "fire" in the scriptures has been translated from at least 4 different ancient words, each with slightly different meanings. Working from any translation without a complete and working understanding of all original languages and nuances of ancient speech is obviously going to lead to this kind of thing, so I suggest we stop being ridiculous about it.

I have already admitted that I probably jumped the gun about the "fire" bit. It may not be the same kind of fire I have in my wood stove, but the relevant point is that it will again eliminate all wickedness from the earth, the same way the flood did.

I do still adamantly oppose the idea that the flood was not a worldwide occurrance. Sure, there might not be complete geological evidence (at least not that our brilliant modern scientists can understand), but neither is there a complete understanding of how Dinosaurs and fossil records can be reconciled with the fact that the Earth is not millions of years old.

Therefore, in matters like these I yield to the highest authority, and take it on faith until such time as I have the ability to comprehend them.

The relevant point here is that the flood did cover the whole earth and that every human and land animal except those in the ark were destroyed. There is ample reference to the fact in the scriptures and in modern day revelation. I'm not going to debate it further from a scientific standpoint.

The Flood and the Tower of Babel

Noah, the Great Preacher of Righteousness

The Gospel and the Scientific View

Edited November 10, 2010 by Doctrine_Guy

[MarginOfError]

Can we unban Snow? PLEASE!? PLEASE!? PLEASE!? PLEASE!? PLEASE!? PLEASE!? PLEASE!?

Just for a day?

It'd be so much fun to watch.

[Soulsearcher]

I think my favorite explanation about the dinosaurs is the fact they were never on earth, they were fossilized in pieces of old dead planets and then those pieces of other worlds were used to make the earth and that's where our fossils come from. So all the bones come from many different planets and not one of the creatures ever lived on earth and that's the truth cause someone from church told me they had revelations about it :)

Edited November 10, 2010 by Soulsearcher

[Doctrine_Guy]

I think my favorite explanation about the dinosaurs is the fact they were never on earth, they were fossilized in pieces of old dead planets and then those pieces of other worlds were used to make the earth and that's where our fossils come from. So all the bones come from many different planets and not one of the creatures ever lived on earth and that's the truth cause someone from church told me they had revelations about it :)

I actually had a friend (scientific type) who struggled for years with the apparent conflict. He almost left the church over it. But he actually had a special fast to be able to reconcile it. He got an answer late that night that made the whole thing completely clear. The next morning he couldn't remember it. All he remembered was that he did get an answer that completely reconciled the whole thing.

At least that's what he claimed. It's possible he just got sick of fighting it and come up with a good "faith promoting rumor". Who knows, who cares.

[MarginOfError]

I actually had a friend (scientific type) who struggled for years with the apparent conflict. He almost left the church over it. But he actually had a special fast to be able to reconcile it. He got an answer late that night that made the whole thing completely clear. The next morning he couldn't remember it. All he remembered was that he did get an answer that completely reconciled the whole thing.

At least that's what he claimed. It's possible he just got sick of fighting it and come up with a good "faith promoting rumor". Who knows, who cares.

I find this part extremely amusing from someone who is adamant that there can be no other interpretation of Noah's flood other than it was a complete and total world flood.