The debate of the extent and authenticity of the Genesis flood is by no means close to a conclusion. Theories and assumptions of every kind from all directions of biased beliefs have been analyzed, supported and negated. Reviewing publicized scientific and literary texts of the last decade have, however, shined a bit more light on the issue of Moses’ account in the Pentateuch. Whether biblical or scientific, scholars do not argue the fact that a tremendous natural force of water did splurge into the lands of ancient Mesopotamia. Contrast between these analysis’ begin when measurements are attempted to be placed onto this vast natural disaster. Measuring where the shores of this flood began and ended or even if it had an ending are quite broad, it is debated using terminology of either local or universal ( Wolf 101).
To support the universal flood assumption requires extensive analysis of the book of Genesis. For instance, chapter 7:19-20 says “ all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered to a depth of at least twenty feet.” How could water cover every high mountain without covering all the land? (Wolf 102).
Also in Genesis, God commands Noah to take with him every single living creature. This preparation task would only be necessary if a world wide flood were to occur. Otherwise, the animals of the surrounding lands would survive and prosper. Other literary evidence enlightens an entire Earthly flood considering the size of the ark, which by Genesis’ calculations reaches its maximum of four-hundred and fifty feet long, seventy-five wide, and forty-five feet high. Such a massive ship, according to Wolf, could house thousands of animals and would be excessive if only a local flood were in order. Scriptural and archeological accounts also coincide when God clearly states that the purpose of the flood was to wipe out all of mankind. Looking at the duration of the existence of humans, and archeological dating of remains, man was quite noticeable spread out over a vast continent. A thorough investigation into Biblical data can lead to the conclusion of a global flood.
The Essay on Times 12 Cubits Flood Genesis Gods
Looking over the two accounts of the Flood narrative form The Epic of Gilgamesh and Genesis one would think that they were both similar. The Flood has the same origin in both accounts, the Mesopotamian region. They both have a main person that is warned of the Flood. They both release birds to determine if the water level has receded. They both come to rest on a mountain, when the waters subside. ...
A paradox exists between the universal flood theory and the local flood, since the book of Genesis simultaneously supports both (Wolf 102).
For example, after spending three-hundred and seventy one days aboard the ark, Genesis accounts the ships land on the mountains of Ararat, which is only hundreds miles from Noah’s alleged construction point. If the flood’s dimensions reached farther than the Middle East, then the ark must have drifted much farther away (Wolf 103).
Again, in Genesis 7:19, when the Bible says that the waters covered all the Earth under the heavens it might be referring to those features only familiar with Noah. Since the Hebrew word used for Earth, ‘eres, relates to the English words “country” or “land.” The Hebrew word meaning world, tebel, does not occur in any of the flood analysis (Wolf 103).
In addition, the Bible speaks of nothing about preserving the fish habitat. Yet, one would be required in a global flood since the combination of fresh and salt water would most likely lead to the extinction of all sea creatures (Wolf 103).
The Essay on Purification Of Sea Water
Purification of Sea Water In the late 20th century, more than 8,000,000 cubic m (2,112,000,000 gallons) of fresh water were produced each day by several thousand desalination plants throughout the world. Distillation processes are used in about half of all the plants and account for roughly three-quarters of the worlds desalted water. Most of the other plants employ membrane processes. The worlds ...
Not only that, but the astonishing amount of species across the Earth which would be required of Noah to care for, if a universal flood threatened their survival, seems like a ridiculously impossible task. If only a smaller flood was to threaten the well-being of the region’s habitat would it seem sufficient for Noah to accomplish such a responsibility ( Wolf 104).
Herbert Wolf also points to Genesis 8:11 where a dove brings back “ a freshly plucked olive leaf.” The logical assumption to make after reading such a passage would be the thought that that particular olive tree had not been destroyed by the fiery waters and that in essence provides evidence for dry land ( Wolf 104).
Although the flood accounts in Scripture point to both a global and restricted water devastation, there are recent scientific texts which allow debate for a more specific destruction. Geoscientists William Ryan and Walter Pitman of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in New York were the latest to try to support such an argument (Gieriowski-Kordesch 2).
The first step in their discoveries began when the two were observing the sediment of the Black Sea. From their fist analysis they found distinguishing outer portions of the sea bottom could have only come from that of an enormous flood, one that increased the sea’s size by two-thirds. This initial observation was not sufficient. The distinguishing sediments could have come over a long period of time rather than instantaneous. To prove this, they analyzed the mussels that dwelled on the sea bottom. Here, they discovered something rather astonishing. The mussel shells had a strange resemblance to those of the Mediterranean, which caused Ryan and Pitman’s first inclination of where the flood water’s source resided. The overwhelming evidence which supported Ryan and Pitman’s flood theory was the Carbon dating of mussel samples from the Mediterranean to those of the Black Sea. They matched at approximately seven thousand- six hundred years ago. From their carbon dating data, the two scientists began to postulate.
The scientists account of the flood story begins at the end of the last ice age when the melting of the glaciers began to raise the water level of the ocean. In the Middle Eastern region, the constantly rising Mediterranean Sea still had no effect on the relatively low water level of the Black Sea because of the Bosporus Strait acting as a natural dam. Their synopsis was that eventually this natural dam gave way and thus in 5600 B.C. a tremendous amount of salt water collided with the small, fresh water lake adding an area the size of Florida. This dating coincides with the dramatic appearance of farmers in Europe whom may have excavated from the shores of the Black Sea. The excavations of the sea sediment ultimately proves the occurrence of a large flood, but by no means does it provide for a global one.
The Research paper on Black Sea Flood Earth Water
... Ryan and Walter Pitman, two geologists at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, have taken samples of sediments from the present-day Black Sea. ... After 150 days, a wind was sent across the waters, and the flood began to recede. About ten and a half months ... after the flood began, the water had almost dried up. Two more months went by ...
After reviewing the Biblical accounts in Genesis and the recent scientific discoveries, the authenticity of Noah’s flood can be stated with casual confidence. The difficulty begins with the Scriptural references in support of a global or local catastrophe, and whether or not the publication of William Ryan and Walter Pitman’s Black Sea discoveries reflect a limited flood. One truth is evident, and that is that divine intervention is required to some degree for each theory to occur.
