Page 7 - BV10

The exact description of the great storm argues for this assumption. Utnapishtim [the hero of the flood
portion of the epic] expressly mentions a southern gale, which corresponds closely with the geographical
situation. The Persian Gulf, whose waters were fleeing over the flat country by the gale, lies south of the
estuary of the Tigris and Euphrates. To the last detail the weather conditions which he describes are char-
acteristic of an unusual atmospheric disturbance. The appearance of black clouds and a roaring noise --
sudden darkness in broad daylight -- the howling of the southern gale as it drives the water in front of it
(ibid., p. 54).

The whole narrative of the Epic of Gilgamesh -- and the various versions and independent
accounts of the Assyrian, Babylonian and Sumerian writers -- indicate a LOCAL or REGIONAL
flood condition, which is exactly what Woolley discovered at the bottom of his shafts.

The Tip of the Iceberg

The basic story of the Flood and a number of survivors in an ark is known by billions of
people -- including Christians, Jews and Muslims. The mythology of many different races around
the world also includes this cataclysmic event. Without questioning it, most of us took for granted
that this flood was universal in nature -- covering the highest mountains on earth and killing all the
land inhabitants therein. We also took for granted that the only survivors of the onslaught were
Noah, his family, and a host of animals, birds, bees and reptiles! Nonetheless, what has been gen-
erally believed about the Flood story may not be what REALLY happened!

Was the Flood universal, covering the entire world, including the highest mountains? Or
was it REGIONAL, involving human and animal life in one or more specific lands? There are, of
course, dedicated Christians on both sides of this question -- and each side has its able defenders,
arguments, strengths and weaknesses. But, when all the evidence is in, the bulk of the material
shows Noah's flood was regional in that all the land masses of the earth were not completely cov-
ered by water.

If the Flood was indeed universal, and all animal life perished, then every animal in exis-
tence today would have descended from those in the ark. Similarly, if the flood was universal and
all human life perished from the earth, all human life here today would have descended from Noah
and his family in the ark. This raises difficult questions, of course. How many animals would be
able to fit into the ark, how were they able to cross vast land masses to get to the ark, and how did
they manage, after the flood, to get back home? Were creatures such as snails able to travel all the
way from the mountains of Ararat to North America? Were they able to cross oceans, ford rivers,
bypass Arctic zones, survive deserts, pass through jungles, climb mountains, and finally end up
here?

If the Flood reduced the entire world population down to eight people, how do we explain
the existence of large population centers within the short space of three generations. The book of
Genesis clearly states that Noah's son Ham became the father of Cush -- "And Cush begat Nimrod;
he began to be a mighty one...and the beginning of his KINGDOM was Babel, and Erech, and Ac-
cad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. HE WENT OUT INTO ASSYRIA and builded Nineveh,
and the city Rehoboth, and Calah: the same is a great city" (Genesis 10:8-12).

7