...just look to all the past cultures. Every. Single. One. Of. Them. They all have a global flood story. Many of these are even separated by an ocean, yet their story is eerily similar. Just a coincendence? What if multiple cultures separated by an ocean had the same story?

Most opponents of a Global flood will just say the stories are there to explain the flooding in the regions as early civilization did settle near abundant water sources. But this is a lack-luster attempt to deny the apparent similarities between all the stories.

This is not typical evidence people expect. They often expect some sort of geological or archaeological evidence to prove anything in the past, but the greatest evidence is in the cultures of the past! If you don't believe me, take a look at these two links.

The similarities between the flood stories (http://www.icr.org/article/why-does-nearly-every-culture-have-tradition-globa/)

Summary of all Flood stories in the world (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Hebrew) (never thought I would ever use Talk origins for a reference.)

This is, I think, a weak argument for a global flood. What I mean by global is a flood that covered every inch of the earth. It is, however, a pretty good argument for a universal flood. A flood that did indeed kill every human save the ones on the Ark. And starting from here the story of the flood starts to get distorted and this accounts for the dissimilarities.

...just look to all the past cultures. Every. Single. One. Of. Them. They all have a global flood story. Many of these are even separated by an ocean, yet their story is eerily similar. Just a coincendence? What if multiple cultures separated by an ocean had the same story?

Most opponents of a Global flood will just say the stories are there to explain the flooding in the regions as early civilization did settle near abundant water sources. But this is a lack-luster attempt to deny the apparent similarities between all the stories.


If the Genesis account of a global flood is 100% correct then all those stories are wrong right? There are any number of explanations that are consistent with observable evidence such as geology. Should we then conclude that werewolfves are real because of the plethora of cultural traditions in which humans transform into animals? Does African animism's remarkably similar traditions lend it credibility as well?

The publication of The First Fossil Hunters by Adrienne Mayor, followed by Fossil Legends of the First Americans, have caused the hypothesis that flood stories have been inspired by ancient observations of fossil seashells and fish inland and on mountains to gain ground. Though the Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, and Chinese all commented in ancient writings about seashells and/or impressions of fish that they found inland and/or in the mountains, it was no less than Leonardo da Vinci who postulated that an immediate deluge could not have caused the layered and neatly ordered strata he found in the Italian Apennines. The Greeks hypothesized that the earth had been covered by water several times, and noted the seashells and fish fossils that they found on mountain tops as the evidence for this belief. Native Americans also expressed this belief to early Europeans, though they had not written these ideas down previously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_(mythology)#Hypotheses_of_origin_of_flood_m yths (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_%28mythology%29#Hypotheses_of_origin_of_flo od_myths)



This is not typical evidence people expect. They often expect some sort of geological or archaeological evidence to prove anything in the past, but the greatest evidence is in the cultures of the past! If you don't believe me, take a look at these two links.
People often expect some sort of geological or archaeological evidence because that's solid evidence. And global flood proponents have to resort to these kinds of evidence because there geological and archaeological evidence point in the opposite direction.

I see the usual suspects are back at it! :lol:

This is, I think, a weak argument for a global flood. What I mean by global is a flood that covered every inch of the earth. It is, however, a pretty good argument for a universal flood. A flood that did indeed kill every human save the ones on the Ark. And starting from here the story of the flood starts to get distorted and this accounts for the dissimilarities.

How do you come to the conclusion that it is a weak argument for global flood, but not a universal one. Remember a global flood would inherently mean it is universal.


If the Genesis account of a global flood is 100% correct then all those stories are wrong right? There are any number of explanations that are consistent with observable evidence such as geology.

This is simple. As both of us accept the Bible as absolute truth, then all the other stories are a distortion of what originally happened. This is pretty good evidence of what happens when a story is passed down through history. However, even though each story has it's own polytheistic pagan beliefs thrown in, it has the same core story.

"Once there was a worldwide flood, sent by God to judge the wickedness of man. But there was one righteous family which was forewarned of the coming flood. They built a boat on which they survived the flood along with the animals. As the flood ended, their boat landed on a high mountain from which they descended and repopulated the whole earth."


Should we then conclude that werewolfves are real because of the plethora of cultural traditions in which humans transform into animals? Does African animism's remarkably similar traditions lend it credibility as well?

You make a good point here. I think this alone would debunk my whole argument if I wasn't using the bible, an absolute truth, to begin my investigation. I am sure the many stories out there on human transformation have very different stories within them, and no singular similarity would be present. Human transformation is not mentioned in the bible (and I'm pretty sure it would be a sin for something), so we must rely on our observations. We have never seen a human change into something else. We can sufficiently say these stories are not correct just because there are multiple, different myths on the same subject.


And global flood proponents have to resort to these kinds of evidence because there geological and archaeological evidence point in the opposite direction.

I didn't have to 'resort' to this as evidence because I am desperate to prove my point. It is actually quite the contrary. I posted this because I think it is unique evidence of a global flood and wanted to discuss it-not because I have no other facet of proof

I see the usual suspects are back at it! :lol:

Oh come on Gulah :D It is interesting topic at least, you have to admit.

How do you come to the conclusion that it is a weak argument for global flood, but not a universal one. Remember a global flood would inherently mean it is universal.

What I mean is that it only gives good evidence for a universal flood. It can't be used to prove that the entire earth was covered with water.

Oh come on Gulah :D It is interesting topic at least, you have to admit.

Hey, I didn't say i wouldn't be watching the thread.;)

Unstoppable Force(Rombar) vs. The Unmovable Objects(IL & BB)...what's not to like?:bounce:

BTW, I'm with you on this one as well. It's along the same lines as a thread I started last week about almost all ancient cultures all having the same zodialogical signs for the same constellations...

Anyway...:OFFT:

You make a good point here. I think this alone would debunk my whole argument if I wasn't using the bible, an absolute truth, to begin my investigation.


It's an interesting possibility, but with no accompanying evidence in geology or the fossil record it remains a conjecture with it's only real strength being that you already believe in it.



I didn't have to 'resort' to this as evidence because I am desperate to prove my point. It is actually quite the contrary. I posted this because I think it is unique evidence of a global flood and wanted to discuss it-not because I have no other facet of proof

Floods are not a limited phenomena, just about all geographic locales that lend themselves to giving rise to agricultural societies which lead to advanced civilizations experience and, indeed, depend on regular periods of flooding. It is then, not terribly surprising to find all these cultures with stories about floods. Additionally, the noted findings of fossilized marine creatures inland by ancient peoples could have contributed to this and encouraged flood myths.

The way I see it at best you've got an interesting coincidence. If this coincidence was supported by physical evidence you'd have something. Unfortunately that's not the case. Cultural stories will not wish away the geological column or the fossil record, no matter how intriguing their similarities.

Should we then conclude that werewolfves are real because of the plethora of cultural traditions in which humans transform into animals? Does African animism's remarkably similar traditions lend it credibility as well?We have a similar myth being taught in our schools right now. Only they say it's the animals that got transformed into humans. It's called evolution

What I mean is that it only gives good evidence for a universal flood. It can't be used to prove that the entire earth was covered with water.

Where are you taking the evidence from though? Is it from the similarities of the stories?


Unstoppable Force(Rombar) vs. The Unmovable Objects(IL & BB)...what's not to like?

Hey, that's a match I wouldn't dare to miss! :P


Floods are not a limited phenomena,

But global floods are. In fact the global flood is a unique event in history.


Cultural stories will not wish away the geological column or the fossil record, no matter how intriguing their similarities.

The stories are passed down eye-witness accounts. They were there. They saw the flood happen. They know exactly how everything happened. Scientists now do not have such opportunities. It's not only one written account, it is many. In fact over 200. Combine this with an evolutionary bias and you begin to see how the evidence is being filtered through the bias to produce answers science 'must' see.


We have a similar myth being taught in our schools right now. Only they say it's the animals that got transformed into humans. It's called evolution

Haha, very good point!

The stories are passed down eye-witness accounts. They were there. They saw the flood happen. They know exactly how everything happened. Scientists now do not have such opportunities. It's not only one written account, it is many. In fact over 200. Combine this with an evolutionary bias and you begin to see how the evidence is being filtered through the bias to produce answers science 'must' see.


The evidence is not being filtered, at least not on the scale you imply. Stories do pass down from eye-witness accounts, but I don't think you can make this one pseudo-tradition is directly descended from a biblical global deluge. Like I said it's interesting, but I think it has much more plausible explanations that are consistent with scientific understanding about the history of the world.

Finally, while this is a possible argument between old and young earth Christians it becomes entirely moot if it is used as an example of biblical reliability to non-Christians because it is circular. The Bible is reliable because many cultural traditions retell the flood story, the flood stories of many cultural traditions are reliable because they are based on the Bible. You can see how this would be a problematic argument to make.

Either way, to me it's a non-starter. If this is the best evidence for a global flood then you've got serious problems with a global flood theory. Even if multiple cultures had word for word traditions of a single event, if geology and paleontology didn't agree it would be called into question, and rightly so.

Finally, while this is a possible argument between old and young earth Christians it becomes entirely moot if it is used as an example of biblical reliability to non-Christians because it is circular. The Bible is reliable because many cultural traditions retell the flood story, the flood stories of many cultural traditions are reliable because they are based on the Bible. You can see how this would be a problematic argument to make.

How can anyone ever prove to anything without a little circular reasoning? If the bible is our ultimate authority, then nothing can supersede it. You cannot hope to prove anything in the bible without a bit of circular reasoning.


Either way, to me it's a non-starter. If this is the best evidence for a global flood then you've got serious problems with a global flood theory. Even if multiple cultures had word for word traditions of a single event, if geology and paleontology didn't agree it would be called into question, and rightly so.

It's not the best, don't worry ;) Just the most interesting.

I would agree that the plethora of accounts is evidence of a major flood at a significant point in human history, and a man who survived it. I wouldn't say it had to be a global flood; the perspective of the people of the time would have been much smaller, and "the entire earth" could have indicated only those parts of the world familiar to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gulah Papyrus
Unstoppable Force(Rombar) vs. The Unmovable Objects(IL & BB)...what's not to like?

Hey, that's a match I wouldn't dare to miss! :P


Can I sell the tickets?:D


Pulling out my trusty dusty Strong's concordance. The Hebrew word for land used in the Noah narrative is 'erets which can mean the whole earth or a local area. The word 'erets is used for both throughout the OT.

A flood story is not unusual or rare. Floods are a relatively common natural event. This past week there were floods in Washington state and in Fiji. For those people their whole world was flooded.

Since 'erets means both local and whole earth, we must go by the context of each time the word is used to get a meaning.

Since 'erets means both local and whole earth, we must go by the context of each time the word is used to get a meaning.

Good point. How do we establish context within the Noah story?

By what the bible says: "The mountains were covered..."

By what the bible says: "The mountains were covered..."

Maybe just the mountains in the local 'erets

I thought according to literalist/young earther views that there were no mountains. Just maybe low hills because there is not enough water to cover the whole earth. I thought the mountains and canyons were created in all the "fountains of the deep were broken up."?

Maybe just the mountains in the local 'erets

But this is impossible. Water does not exhibit any properties that will let it rise in level in a particular area. It will spread out until the container (earth) is filled, then it will rise to the height taller than mountains


I thought according to literalist/young earther views that there were no mountains. Just maybe low hills because there is not enough water to cover the whole earth. I thought the mountains and canyons were created in all the "fountains of the deep were broken up."?

Yes, that is true. The earth before the flood was much like the equator (in temperature and climate) and relatively level land. Of course there were hills and such, but nothing quite like what we see today.

But to the question, it doesn't change anything. The mountains arose during the flood, but the waters still had to cover them. So maybe at first there was way more water than what was needed to cover the mountains, but then when the mountains came forth, the water was adequately high enough to cover them. Or the mountains and basins occurred right away because the "fountains of the deep opened up" and eventually the flood waters covered them.

Either way, it doesn't change anything. The mountains were covered by water completely.

...just look to all the past cultures. Every. Single. One. Of. Them. They all have a global flood story.


No actually, they don't. Most cultures situated near bodies of water should probably have traditions of stories of floods yet even in these cases not all that many have GLOBAL flood traditions. Additionally, there are large swaths of various continents which do not have flood legends.

Once again I'll come back to Africa, talkorigins lists 16 tribes with flood legends (I don't count the pymies - they are not a distinct "tribe" and, since they have lost their original language during the bantu migrations of the last few thousand years it stands to reason that they adopted mythologies from their neighbors just as they have adopted their local dialects.) Africa has over 2000 spoken languages which fall (generally) into four large language families.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/African_language_families_en.svg/553px-African_language_families_en.svg.png

Within these language groups there are thousands of distinct tribes with their own legends and traditions. Pulling 16 flood stories out of this enormous collection of cultures is just not that impressive, nor does it support the claim of "universal" flood myths.



Most opponents of a Global flood will just say the stories are there to explain the flooding in the regions as early civilization did settle near abundant water sources. But this is a lack-luster attempt to deny the apparent similarities between all the stories.


And this is a "lack-luster" attempt why? What exactly is wrong with it? Should we not expect people who live in regions prone to flooding to have flood stories? The only apparent similarity between the stories is that they involve enough water to drown people & animals who can't escape - that is not a characteristic of floods reserved for the global variety as any number of people around the world who live in flood zones can attest to.

Within these language groups there are thousands of distinct tribes with their own legends and traditions. Pulling 16 flood stories out of this enormous collection of cultures is just not that impressive, nor does it support the claim of "universal" flood myths.

What is impressive is the similarity between each story between each culture. Sure, not every tribe will have a flood story. Maybe they didn't feel they should write it down. Maybe we haven't found it yet. Maybe the tribe that doesn't was part of another larger tribe that did have the story, but broke off from that tribe and didn't make their own story. We don't know. This point


And this is a "lack-luster" attempt why? What exactly is wrong with it? Should we not expect people who live in regions prone to flooding to have flood stories? The only apparent similarity between the stories is that they involve enough water to drown people & animals who can't escape - that is not a characteristic of floods reserved for the global variety as any number of people around the world who live in flood zones can attest to.

Not when nearly every story in the world involves global flood (95%). We can debate for hours if they meant in their region, but then you forget the absolute truth said the flood was global and it is likely the story has been corrupted through time but still retains the main idea; the world perished except for 8 humans.

What is impressive is the similarity between each story between each culture. Sure, not every tribe will have a flood story. Maybe they didn't feel they should write it down. Maybe we haven't found it yet. Maybe the tribe that doesn't was part of another larger tribe that did have the story, but broke off from that tribe and didn't make their own story. We don't know. This point


The only similarity is, as stated previously, that the various flood accounts involve water that rises high enough to kill people and animals. These are not characteristics reserved only for global flood events. Additionally, many "tribal" flood stories have been influenced by missionaries and thus can't really be viewed as "original" accounts.



Not when nearly every story in the world involves global flood (95%). We can debate for hours if they meant in their region, but then you forget the absolute truth said the flood was global and it is likely the story has been corrupted through time but still retains the main idea; the world perished except for 8 humans.

No, 95% of stories in the world do not involve a global flood. Nor is it "absolute truth" that there was a global flood.

The only similarity is, as stated previously, that the various flood accounts involve water that rises high enough to kill people and animals. These are not characteristics reserved only for global flood events. Additionally, many "tribal" flood stories have been influenced by missionaries and thus can't really be viewed as "original" accounts.

Here (http://www.icr.org/article/why-does-nearly-every-culture-have-tradition-globa/#5)

Regardless if it is original or not (and I highly doubt many, if any stories are not original) they all have a eerie similarity to what happened in the Noahican Flood.

Yes, that is true. The earth before the flood was much like the equator (in temperature and climate) and relatively level land. Of course there were hills and such, but nothing quite like what we see today.

But to the question, it doesn't change anything. The mountains arose during the flood, but the waters still had to cover them. So maybe at first there was way more water than what was needed to cover the mountains, but then when the mountains came forth, the water was adequately high enough to cover them. Or the mountains and basins occurred right away because the "fountains of the deep opened up" and eventually the flood waters covered them.

Either way, it doesn't change anything. The mountains were covered by water completely.

Romber I respect your view but this is not in the Bible. The Bible does not mention anything about the temperature, climate, and topography of the whole earth. To me this is always a major flaw in the young earth/literalist view. In order to make creationist science work, literalism has to be abandoned and biblical canon has to be hypothesized. Global equatorial climates, global plains, vapor canopies are not in the Bible and are scientifically untenable. Not to mention the problem with all the heat generated during this process.

Here (http://www.icr.org/article/why-does-nearly-every-culture-have-tradition-globa/#5)

Regardless if it is original or not (and I highly doubt many, if any stories are not original) they all have a eerie similarity to what happened in the Noahican Flood.

I doubt the veracity of your doubt as early researchers had a lot of difficulty locating flood myths in Africa,

It is curious, that while legends of a universal flood are widely spread over many parts of the world, they are hardly to be found at all in Africa. Indeed, it may be doubted whether throughout that vast continent a single genuinely native tradition of a great flood has been recorded. Even traces of such traditions are rare.
http://englishatheist.org/folklore/four5.shtml

Also noted are instances in which local stories have been heavily influenced by Christian missionaries so that they artificially resemble biblical accounts.

The experienced missionary Dr. Robert Moffat made fruitless inquiries concerning legends of a deluge among the natives of South Africa ; one native who professed to have received such a legend from his forefathers was discovered to have learned it from a missionary named Schmelen. " Stories of a similar kind," adds Dr. Moffat, " originally obtained at a missionary station, or from some godly traveller, get, in course of time, so mixed up and metamorphosed by heathen ideas, that they look exceedingly like native traditions."

Traditions of a great flood have, however, been discovered by German writers among the natives of East Africa, but the stories are plainly mere variations of the Biblical narrative, which has penetrated to these savages through Christian or possibly Mohammedan influence.
http://englishatheist.org/folklore/four5.shtml


Finally, I think Morris' assertions about the percentages of common story elements is simply dead wrong. Let's take a look at the most important commonality for our present interest: "was the flood global?" Morris answers that yes, 95% of the time, it was global. Lets take a look at the known African myths that reference floods to see if that's true. Out of the sixteen stories which contain floods only two and possibly three refer to a global flood. Of those the two more distinct accounts of the Masai and stories from Southern Tanzania bear all the indications of having been adapted from stories of Christian missionaries.

Traditions of a great flood have, however, been discovered by German writers among the natives of East Africa, but the stories are plainly mere variations of the Biblical narrative, which has penetrated to these savages through Christian or possibly Mohammedan influence.
http://englishatheist.org/folklore/four5.shtml

So out of a continent of unprecedented diversity which is larger than the U.S., China, Western Europe, Argentina, and India combined we've got two, possibly three, stories of a global flood which were more than likely influenced by early Christian missionaries.

http://www.doobybrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/africa-in-perspective.jpg

That is somewhat less than overwhelming evidence.

Traditions of a great flood have, however, been discovered by German writers among the natives of East Africa, but the stories are plainly mere variations of the Biblical narrative, which has penetrated to these savages through Christian or possibly Mohammedan influence.

Of course! The original story and eye witness account of the flood came from Noah and his sons, and the stories found in Africa came specifically from Ham and his decedents. If they weren't variations of the biblical account, then all the similar stories from around the world would not prove anything of a Noahician Flood.


Out of the sixteen stories which contain floods only two and possibly three refer to a global flood. Of those the two more distinct accounts of the Masai and stories from Southern Tanzania bear all the indications of having been adapted from stories of Christian missionaries.

Out of the 17 stories from Africa, all 17 involve floods. Africa Stories (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Africa)

Romber I respect your view but this is not in the Bible. The Bible does not mention anything about the temperature, climate, and topography of the whole earth. To me this is always a major flaw in the young earth/literalist view. In order to make creationist science work, literalism has to be abandoned and biblical canon has to be hypothesized. Global equatorial climates, global plains, vapor canopies are not in the Bible and are scientifically untenable. Not to mention the problem with all the heat generated during this process.

No, it does not list specific facts about the environment. But it does give clues. The water was divided above and below a firmament suggesting a invisible "water canopy". This would provide for a very tropical like environment world wide. Also, if we look at fossils through Creationism glasses, we find tropical creatures in other wise frigid locations suggesting the world was nearly one climate type throughout the World.

Literalism is the key to understanding the world we live in. God quite plainly put down exactly what happened and how it happened. He does not give us the exact intricate equation for Thermodynamics, as people living in 0 A.D. didn't have calculus yet, but he gives us a general idea to start with. From here we work up. Of course if a YEC wants to make any scientific progress they must make assumptions and explore hypothesis that aren't specifically listed in the bible, which could be taken as delineating from a literal point of view, but the assumptions made do not violate any part of scripture and explain the model of Creationism with the evidence we find.

Of course! The original story and eye witness account of the flood came from Noah and his sons, and the stories found in Africa came specifically from Ham and his decedents. If they weren't variations of the biblical account, then all the similar stories from around the world would not prove anything of a Noahician Flood.


You are missing the obvious context, they are variations of accounts related by Christian and Islamic missionaries not variations based on indigenous cultural traditions.



Out of the 17 stories from Africa, all 17 involve floods. Africa Stories (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Africa)

Yes, 17 flood stories from Africa involve floods. . .that's why we call them flood stories. Only two really talk about a global flood, there is a difference.

You are missing the obvious context, they are variations of accounts related by Christian and Islamic missionaries not variations based on indigenous cultural traditions.

I am sure some missionaries may make the regions revive their stories, but I definitely do not believe they would take the story and corrupt it. Of all stories, why the Flood. And if that is the case, why did they add their pagan twist right after being evangelized by Christian missionaries. It doesn't add up.


Yes, 17 flood stories from Africa involve floods. . .that's why we call them flood stories. Only two really talk about a global flood, there is a difference.

Most the stories imply a Global flood. But this is going to come down to a "no they don't", "yes they do" argument.

I am sure some missionaries may make the regions revive their stories, but I definitely do not believe they would take the story and corrupt it. Of all stories, why the Flood. And if that is the case, why did they add their pagan twist right after being evangelized by Christian missionaries. It doesn't add up.


You would need to understand how information traveled in colonial Africa and how it continues to travel today. Many biblical stories are incorporated into native beliefs and resurface all over the place. Having spent over a decade in Africa I've witnessed this first hand in several countries, most notably Burkina Faso. In a small village in the south I heard the story of one of the communities first Christians who had, as a young man, gone to a missionary clinic for some malady. While there he had heard various stories from the Bible and became a Christian. Not being able to read or write he returned to his village and retold the stories as best he could remember. Even only a few decades removed from the original events I heard some pretty interesting variations on some of the more common biblical stories. Now extrapolate that out on a grander scale and it's not at all difficult to see how this could happen.




Most the stories imply a Global flood. But this is going to come down to a "no they don't", "yes they do" argument.

That's because they don't. Many stories directly state or imply that it wasn't global because either not everyone dies, or people survive simply by leaving the local village or valley. There's even a flood story in which people drown in a flood of beer. . .which isn't a bad way to go in my opinion. Bottom line is you've still got a handful of flood related stories from the most diverse continent on the planet and only a handful of that handful remotely indicate a "global" flood. Thus the claim that "every" culture contains universal flood myths is, itself, a myth.

You would need to understand how information traveled in colonial Africa and how it continues to travel today. Many biblical stories are incorporated into native beliefs and resurface all over the place. Having spent over a decade in Africa I've witnessed this first hand in several countries, most notably Burkina Faso. In a small village in the south I heard the story of one of the communities first Christians who had, as a young man, gone to a missionary clinic for some malady. While there he had heard various stories from the Bible and became a Christian. Not being able to read or write he returned to his village and retold the stories as best he could remember. Even only a few decades removed from the original events I heard some pretty interesting variations on some of the more common biblical stories. Now extrapolate that out on a grander scale and it's not at all difficult to see how this could happen.

Ok, I can understand this. I am sure some cultures do not have completely their own version of the flood. To be honest we never will know if some of the stories were lost through the ages. If you look at a summary of many of the stories, a few are quite short and would be quite reasonable if they were forgotten.





That's because they don't. Many stories directly state or imply that it wasn't global because either not everyone dies, or people survive simply by leaving the local village or valley. There's even a flood story in which people drown in a flood of beer. . .which isn't a bad way to go in my opinion. Bottom line is you've still got a handful of flood related stories from the most diverse continent on the planet and only a handful of that handful remotely indicate a "global" flood. Thus the claim that "every" culture contains universal flood myths is, itself, a myth.

12 out of the 17 mention a world wide flood that killed everyone. The other ones are probable that they killed everyone, but to be conservative I left them out. If this is coming from the most diverse continent, then 70% of them meaning world wide death is pretty good (remember, this is a conservative account). You have only mentioned one continent too-and perhaps the easiest one to debunk from how you speak. You still have over 180 more stories to challenge, and then the underlying theme of why does every culture have one and why are they so similar, even though oceans separate many of these people-groups.

12 out of the 17 mention a world wide flood that killed everyone. The other ones are probable that they killed everyone, but to be conservative I left them out. If this is coming from the most diverse continent, then 70% of them meaning world wide death is pretty good (remember, this is a conservative account).


Cameroon: As a girl was grinding flour, a goat came to lick it. She first drove it away, but when it came back, she allowed it to lick as much as it could. In return for the kindness, the goat told her there will be a flood that day and advised her and her brother to run elsewhere immediately. They escaped with a few belongings and looked back to see water covering their village. After the flood, they lived on their own for many years, unable to find mates. The goat reappeared and said they could marry themselves, but they would have to put a hoe-handle and a clay pot with a broken bottom on their roof to signify that they are relatives. [Kahler-Meyer (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kahler), pp. 251-252]

Not Global - girl and her brother escape a flood that destroys their village. They have a hard time finding other people. . .but that's not incredibly difficult to foresee in Cameroon of a distant past.


Masai (East Africa): Tumbainot, a righteous man, had a wife named Naipande and three sons, Oshomo, Bartimaro, and Barmao. When his brother Lengerni died, Tumbainot, according to custom, married the widow Nahaba-logunja, who bore him three more sons, but they argued about her refusal to give him a drink of milk in the evening, and she set up her own homestead. The world was heavily populated in those days, but the people were sinful and not mindful of God. However, they refrained from murder, until at last a man named Nambija hit another named Suage on the head. At this, God resolved to destroy mankind, except Tumbainot found grace in His eyes. God commanded Tumbainot to build an ark of wood and enter it with his two wives, six sons and their wives, and some of animals of every sort. When they were all aboard and provisioned, God caused a great long rain which caused a flood, and all other men and beasts drowned. The ark drifted for a long time, and provisions began to run low. The rain finally stopped, and Tumbainot let loose a dove to ascertain the state of the flood. The dove returned tired, so Tumbainot knew it had found no place to rest. Several days later, he loosed a vulture, but first he attached an arrow to one of its tail feathers so that, if the bird landed, the arrow would hook on something and be lost. The vulture returned that evening without the arrow, so Tumbainot reasoned that it must have landed on carrion, and that the flood was receding. When the water ran away, the ark grounded on the steppe, and its occupants disembarked. Tumbainot saw four rainbows, one in each quarter of the sky, signifying that God's wrath was over. [Frazer (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Frazer), pp. 330-331]

Global Flood


Komililo Nandi: Ilet, the spirit of lightning, came to live, in human form, in a cave high on the mountain named Tinderet. When he did so, it rained incessantly and killed most of the hunters living in the forest below. Some hunters, searching for the cause of the rain, found him and wounded him with poison arrows. Ilet fled and died in a neighboring country. When he died, the rain stopped. [Kelsen (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kelsen), p. 137]

Not Global - a valley forest get's flooded. . .not that exciting.


Kwaya (Lake Victoria): The ocean was once enclosed in a small pot kept by a man and his wife under the roof of their hut to fill their larger pots. The man told his daughter-in-law never to touch it because it contained their sacred ancestors. But she grew curious and touched it. It shattered, and the resulting flood drowned everything. [Kahler-Meyer (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kahler), pp. 253-254]

Not Global - ocean rushes out from a magical pot and drowns "everything" but the implication is that it refers to "everything" in the local area.


Southwest Tanzania (Rukwa Region): The rivers began flooding. God told two men to go into a ship, taking with them all sorts of seed and animals. The flood rose, covering the mountains. Later, to check whether the waters had dried up, the man sent out a dove, and it came back to the ship. He waited and sent out a hawk, which did not return because the waters had dried. The men then disembarked with the animals and seeds. [Gaster (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Gaster), pp. 120-121]

Possibly Global - the mountains are covered in this clear result of missionary influences. . .but it doesn't spell out if mountains all over the world were also covered.


Pygmy: Chameleon heard a strange noise, like water running, in a tree, but at that time there was no water in the world. He cut open the trunk, and water came out in a great flood that spread all over the earth. The first human couple emerged with the water. [Parrinder (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Parrinder), pp. 46-47]

As before stated, the pygmies lost their own language a long time ago and instead speak whatever dialect the neighboring Bantu tribes speak. Thus it is unreasonable to view their oral traditions as "original". It is telling that no truly global flood traditions surface prior to missionary contact.

Ababua (northern Congo): An old woman hoarded water and killed men who sought it. The hero Mba succeeded in killing the woman. Upon her death, the water flowed in such quantities that it flooded everything. Mba was washed away and landed in the top of a tree. [Kelsen (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kelsen), p. 136]

Not Global - flood washes guy into a tree. . .not exactly overwhelmingly impressive.


Kikuyu (Kenya): A beautiful but mysterious woman agreed to marry a man on the condition that he never ask about her family. He agreed, and they lived happily together until it was time for their oldest son's circumcision, and the man asked his wife why her family couldn't attend the ceremony. With that, the wife bounced into the air and made a hole seven miles deep when she landed. She called upon her ancestors, who came as spirits from Mt. Kenya. The spirits raised a thunder and hailstorm as they came. They brought food, goats, cattle, and beer with them and, while the people took shelter in caves, flooded the countryside with beer, turning it into a lake. When the spirits left, they took the couple and their children with them into Mt. Kenya. [Abrahams (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Abrahams), pp. 336-338]

Not Global - For one thing, the climax centers around a circumcision ceremony so it's obvious from the start that this story has been heavily influenced from non-original sources. And while a lake of beer is pretty much the most awesome natural disaster ever. . .it's still not a global flood.


Bakongo (west Zaire): An old lady, weary and covered with sores, arrived in a town called Sonanzenzi and sought hospitality, which was denied her at all homes but the last she came to. When she was well and ready to depart, she told her friends to pack up and leave with her, as the place was accursed and would be destroyed by Nzambi. The night after they had left, heavy rains came and turned the valley into a lake, drowning all the inhabitants of the town. The sticks of the houses can still be seen deep in the lake. [Feldmann (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Feldmann), p. 50; Kelsen (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kelsen), p. 137]

Not Global - a valley gets flooded.


Bachokwe? (southern Zaire): A chieftainess named Moena Monenga sought food and shelter in a village. She was refused, and when she reproached the villagers for their selfishness, they said, in effect, "What can you do about it"? So she began a slow incantation, and on the last long note, the whole village sank into the ground, and water flowed into the depression, forming what is now Lake Dilolo. When the village's chieftain returned from the hunt and saw what had happened to his family, he drowned himself in the lake. [Vitaliano (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Vitaliano), pp. 164-165; Kelsen (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kelsen), p. 136]

Not Global - village sinks (key word: VILLAGE) and gets flooded

Lower Congo: The sun once met the moon and threw mud at it, making it dimmer. There was a flood when this happened. Men put their milk stick behind them and were turned into monkeys. The present race of men is a recent creation. [Fauconnet (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Fauconnet), p. 481; Kelsen (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kelsen), p. 136]

Not Global - Here's a question, what's a milk stick? Seeing as the only indigenous domesticatable animal in all of sub-equatorial Africa is the Guinea Fowl I'm real interested to know what the ancient Congolese were milking.


Basonge: Several animals wooed Ngolle Kakesse, granddaughter of God, but only Zebra was accepted. But Zebra broke his promise not to allow her to work. From her stretched-out legs ran water which flooded the land, and Ngolle herself drowned. [Kelsen (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kelsen), p. 135]
Not Global - Operative word "land"


Bena-Lulua (Congo River, southeast Zaire): The old water woman only gave water to him who sucks her sores. One man did so, and water flowed and drowned almost everybody. He continued his disgusting task, and the water stopped flowing. [Kelsen (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kelsen), p. 136]

Not Global - flood drowns a lot of people, lots of locale floods do that. . .especially in the flood plains of one of the largest rivers in the world.


Yoruba (southwest Nigeria): A god, Ifa, tired of living on earth and went to dwell in the firmament with Obatala. Without his assistance, mankind couldn't interpret the desires of the gods, and one god, Olokun, in a fit of rage, destroyed nearly everybody in a great flood. [Kelsen (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kelsen), p. 135]

Not Global - big flood, lot's of people die. . .again, not global.


Efik-Ibibio (Nigeria): The sun and moon are man and wife, and their best friend was flood, whom they often visited. They often invited flood to visit them, but he demurred, saying their house was too small. Sun and moon built a much larger house, and flood could no longer refuse their invitation. He arrived and asked, "Shall I come in?" and was invited in. When flood was knee-deep in the house, he asked if he should continue coming and was again invited to do so. The flood brought many relatives, including fish and sea beasts. Soon he rose to the ceiling of the house, and the sun and moon went onto the roof. The flood kept rising, submerging the house entirely, and the sun and moon made a new home in the sky. [Eliot (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Eliot), pp. 47-48]

Not Global - flood fills up a house, not the world.


Ekoi (Nigeria): The first people Etim 'Ne (Old Person) and his wife Ejaw came to earth from the sky. At first, there was no water on earth, so Etim 'Ne asked the god Obassi Osaw for water, and he was given a calabash with seven clear stones. When Etim 'Ne put a stone in a small hole in the ground, water welled out and became a broad lake. Later, seven sons and seven daughters were born to the couple. After the sons and daughters married and had children of their own, Etim 'Ne gave each household a river or lake of its own. He took away the rivers of three sons who were poor hunters and didn't share their meat, but he restored them when the sons begged him to. When the grandchildren had grown and established new homes, Etim 'Ne sent for all the children and told them each to take seven stones from the streams of their parents, and to plant them at intervals to create new streams. All did so except one son who collected a basketful and emptied all his stones in one place. Waters came, covered his farm, and threatened to cover the whole earth. Everyone ran to Etim 'Ne, fleeing the flood. Etim 'Ne prayed to Obassi, who stopped the flood but let a lake remain covering the farm of the bad son. Etim 'Ne told the others the names of the rivers and streams which remained and told them to remember him as the bringer of water to the world. Two days later he died. [Courlander (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Courlander), pp. 267-269]

Possibly Global


Mandingo (Ivory Coast): A charitable man gave away everything he had to the animals. His family deserted him, but when he gave his last meal to the (unrecognized) god Ouende, Ouende rewarded him with three handfuls of flour which renewed itself and produced even greater riches. Then Ouende advised him to leave the area, and sent six months of rain to destroy his selfish neighbors. The descendants of the rich man became the present human race. [Kelsen (http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Kelsen), pp. 135-136]

Not Global


I'm still coming up with three at best.




You have only mentioned one continent too-and perhaps the easiest one to debunk from how you speak. You still have over 180 more stories to challenge, and then the underlying theme of why does every culture have one and why are they so similar, even though oceans separate many of these people-groups.I still have stuff to challenge? What about the thousands of tribal traditions with no global flood traditions? Doesn't that kind of blow the whole "universal" theory out of the figurative and literal water?

Every culture does not have a global flood myth. Does not, as in none. Unless you're using an incredibly general definition of culture I don't see how you can keep claiming this when it's obviously false.

the implication is that it refers to "everything" in the local area.

This is the problem. How do you think it means in locality everything. When I read everything, I think quite literally everything-just as the biblical account tells of.


I still have stuff to challenge? What about the thousands of tribal traditions with no global flood traditions? Doesn't that kind of blow the whole "universal" theory out of the figurative and literal water?

Every culture does not have a global flood myth. Does not, as in none. Unless you're using an incredibly general definition of culture I don't see how you can keep claiming this when it's obviously false.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because other cultures don't have a global flood story doesn't mean that a global flood didn't occur-as you are implying. In fact the more interesting question is why do some many different cultures have vastly similar stories pertaining to the global flood. You have yet to answer this question in itself.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because other cultures don't have a global flood story doesn't mean that a global flood didn't occur-as you are implying. In fact the more interesting question is why do some many different cultures have vastly similar stories pertaining to the global flood. You have yet to answer this question in itself.

I have yet to answer the question because you have yet to establish that your premise is actually true. All cultures do not have similar global flood stories, and those that do are more than likely influenced by missionaries. The facts of the matter is that few cultures actually have global flood stories and in most cases it's impossible to decipher whether or not those stories are "original" or if they are the result of early Christian or Islamic missionaries.

Cultures are not static and Africa is a perfect example of this. There we have the collision of two of the largest population movements in history; the Austronesian expansion which reached it's westernmost point at Madagascar and the Bantu migrations south from Angola & Cameroon. We also have the influx of western peoples all across the coasts and penetrating into the interior in South Africa where the Afrikaaner trekkers would eventually meet the southermost tip of the Bantu expansion when they halted the Xosa advance at the Fish River in 1775. If any continent should have a collection of global flood traditions it should be Africa according to the theory of universal cultural stories. Instead we find a handful of non-global missionary influenced stories.

Quick question: How do you think the relevantly recent tsunami would have been recorded and passed down if it had happened two thousand years ago?

And how often do you think a tsunami that causes even local devastation and heavy loss of life occurs?

I'm an interested observer of the thread up to now, so I'm not trying to make any points for one side or the other.

Quick question: How do you think the relevantly recent tsunami would have been recorded and passed down if it had happened two thousand years ago?

And how often do you think a tsunami that causes even local devastation and heavy loss of life occurs?

I'm an interested observer of the thread up to now, so I'm not trying to make any points for one side or the other.

Good question. Imagine your own state of mind if you just narrowly escaped something at that scale of devastation. With that uniquely frightful perspective, it would be impossible to describe it in a matter-of-fact manner. Add to that the alterations caused by oral transmission and what will you end up with?

By the way, where is Egypt in all this? I'm looking through that list and all the African peoples with a flood myth seem to be away from the Nile. The Nile is unique in that its flooding is much more predictably timed with the seasons (or so I've read). The Egyptians were therefore able to harness this as an advantage through their irrigation system. Hence, no flood myth? Not only that, did the pride from this achievement inspire their optimistic religious beliefs? Hopefully someone with knowledge of Egyptian mythology and religion will help me here.

Plato referred to an Egyptian flood legend in Timaeus. He wrote that the gods purified the earth by a great flood and only a few shepherds escaped by climbing a mountain. The account in the Egyptian documents says Ra exterminated almost all of mankind by a deluge of blood because of their rebellion but afterward swore never to do it again. (Source - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia). Josephus also mentioned the Egyptian flood account:

"Now all the writers of barbarian histories make mention of this flood, and of this ark; among whom is Berosus the Chaldean. For when he is describing the circumstances of the flood, he goes on thus: "It is said there is still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the mountain of the Cordyaeans; and that some people carry off pieces of the bitumen, which they take away, and use chiefly as amulets for the averting of mischiefs." Hieronymus the Egyptian also, who wrote the Phoenician Antiquities, and Mnaseas, and a great many more, make mention of the same."
(Antiquities of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 3, section 6)

I posted a lot of evidence for a global flood on the Christian Answers board - http://tinyurl.com/bygu4k
Start at post 50; the second post on that page.

Plato's account of Solon's visit to Egypt actually reveals that many river dwelling communities have their own local flood and therefore have a flood myth of their own. The Nile is different from other rivers to the Egyptians as it is their "never-failing saviour" and "delivers and preserves [them]." The Egyptian priest wasn't describing a global flood or their own flood of the Nile.

I'll look into the Ra myth though. And the Josephus quote looks like it describes an Egyptian writing a Phoenician account, but I'll take a look at my copy. Thanks!

Plato referred to an Egyptian flood legend in Timaeus. He wrote that the gods purified the earth by a great flood and only a few shepherds escaped by climbing a mountain. The account in the Egyptian documents says Ra exterminated almost all of mankind by a deluge of blood because of their rebellion but afterward swore never to do it again. (Source - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia). Josephus also mentioned the Egyptian flood account:

"Now all the writers of barbarian histories make mention of this flood, and of this ark; among whom is Berosus the Chaldean. For when he is describing the circumstances of the flood, he goes on thus: "It is said there is still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the mountain of the Cordyaeans; and that some people carry off pieces of the bitumen, which they take away, and use chiefly as amulets for the averting of mischiefs." Hieronymus the Egyptian also, who wrote the Phoenician Antiquities, and Mnaseas, and a great many more, make mention of the same."
(Antiquities of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 3, section 6)

I posted a lot of evidence for a global flood on the Christian Answers board - http://tinyurl.com/bygu4k
Start at post 50; the second post on that page.

Wow, a nation built around an annually flooding major river with a flood legend? It's inconceivable that this would be based on anything other than a global deluge.

In the light of mainstream Geology and Paleontology, how should the earth look like if there was a global flood?

Wow, a nation built around an annually flooding major river with a flood legend? It's inconceivable that this would be based on anything other than a global deluge.I was responding to Biasti who said "By the way, where is Egypt in all this? I'm looking through that list and all the African peoples with a flood myth seem to be away from the Nile."

One page on talkorigins is often quoted when the flood is discussed:

"Why is there no mention of the Flood in the records of Egyptian or Mesopotamian civilizations which existed at the time?"

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

Yet on another page on talkorigins, which is also archived and linked on the first post, it describes one of the Egyptian flood stories.

http://www.toarchive.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Egypt

Mark Isaak is the author of both those articles and apparently the flood stories of ancient Egypt didn't fall into the right timeline for him. He also doesn't take into account the fact that many ancient records and artifacts have been lost because of wars, disasters and the ravages of time. Yet, he noted on the latter page "Unfortunately, the version of the papyrus with the flood story is damaged and unclear." :rolleyes: