Tuesday, January 14, 2014

Noah and the Flood in the Bible and the Quran

The Biblical and Quranic Stories of Noah and the Flood: A Comparative Analysis

View as PDF
Because of their sins they were drowned (in the flood), and were made to enter the Fire (of Punishment): and they found- in lieu of Allah- none to help them.”

-          The Holy Quran, Surah Nuh, 71:25

One of the most famous and enduring stories of the Bible is undoubtedly the story of Noah (Nuh in Arabic), the flood and the ark.  As with many other stories found in the Bible, this story is also found in the Quran, and as with the other stories, the Biblical and Quranic versions of Noah and the flood have some similarities as well as some major differences.  In this article, we will discuss these differences and why they are significant enough to put the Quran and the Bible at odds with each other.  After summarizing the Biblical story, we will analyze it to discuss the irreconcilable problems that plague it.  Next, we will summarize the Islamic version of Noah and the flood and compare it to the Biblical one.  This comparison will illustrate that the Biblical story cannot be accepted as the true version of the epic story of Noah and that the Quranic story, by lacking any of the difficulties found in the former, is clearly the version that is more deserving of acceptance and far more credible.

The Biblical Story

            In the Bible, the story of Noah is found in several chapters of the Book of Genesis.  For the purposes of this article, we will summarize the parts dealing with the events preceding the flood, the flood itself, and some elements of the post-flood story.  As such, we will deal specifically with Genesis 6-8, though in the analysis of the story, we will discuss other parts of Genesis as well.

As the story goes, it had been several centuries since Adam and Eve had fallen to earth and great wickedness had spread threrein.  In fact, humans had become so evil that God:

“…regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled.”[1]

It was for this reason that God decided to destroy the entire, sinful world.  The only exception made was regarding a righteous man named Noah, who had “…found favor with the Lord”, since he did not share in the sin that was prevalent in the world.[2] Thus, God commanded him to build an ark with exact specifications, and instructed him to take his family and two of every animal on board with him.[3] 

            Once the ark was built, the cataclysmic flood arrived and destroyed all who were not on the ark.  This occurred when Noah was 600 years old.[4]  By Noah’s 601st year, the waters had dried and he was instructed to come out of the ark, which had come to rest on the Ararat mountain range.[5]  The survivors, both human and animal, then repopulated the earth.  It was through Noah’s sons that the human race survived and spread throughout the earth once more.[6]
Analyzing the Story

            In the brief summary above, we can see that the whole world had become sinful and was beyond salvation.  In other words, God sent the flood upon an unsuspecting world without warning.  As we will see later, this element of the Biblical story differs greatly with the Quranic version.

            Upon scrutinizing the Biblical claims, it should become clear that there are certain irreconcilable problems that cannot be easily explained.  One of the biggest problems surfaces as a result of the chronology of the flood.  While Genesis does not provide a specific date for the flood, it is nevertheless possible to come to a reasonable estimate using the various genealogies that are found in the Bible.  Based on this, the “Young Earth” website “Answers In Genesis” states that:

“…the Flood began approximately 4,359 years ago in the year…2348 BC.”[7]

The skeptic C. Dennis McKinsey gives the same date:

“The flood allegedly occurred around 2348 B.C.”[8]

Finally, Muslim author Dr. Laurence Brown estimates, using the Biblical chronology, that the flood:

“…would have corresponded with the twenty-first to twenty-second centuries BC.”[9]

Hence, the Bible provides an approximate date of around 2100-2400 BC for the global deluge.  This being the case, any student of history should see an immediate conflict.  The Bible is obviously wrong about either the flood being global or the exact date of the flood or both.

If we assume that the Biblical chronology is correct, then the flood could not have covered the whole earth.  The reason for this is that if the flood occurred sometime between 2100-2300 BC, then there should be no records of surviving civilizations from that time.  Yet, this is exactly what we have in the historical record.  As McKinsey notes:

“Authentic Egyptian history does not mention a flood even though uninterrupted records were kept from the pharaoh Menes in 3400 B.C. to Darius Ochus in 340 B.C.  The flood allegedly occurred around 2348 B.C.”[10]

While there is a flood story in Egyptian mythology, it was not a flood of destruction, so McKinsey is correct.[11]  The point is that if a global flood had indeed occurred, then there would have been a gap in ancient Egyptian records.  Yet, this is not what historians have found.  Dr. Laurence Brown also notes this discrepancy in the Biblical story by rightfully point out that:

“…this flood failed to wash away both the Third Dynasty at Ur in Babylonia and the First Intermediate Period before the Eleventh Dynasty in Egypt – two civilizations that history testifies were uninterrupted.  So the period to which the biblical narratives attribute the global flood could stand revision.”[12]

Therefore, since there is indisputable archaeological evidence of thriving civilizations during the time the flood allegedly occurred, we either have to admit the flood was not global or that it occurred at another earlier time.  Since Egyptian records go back uninterrupted to 3,400 B.C., the flood would have had to have happened some time before that (assuming that it was global).  Hence, the Bible’s chronology is off by at least 1,100 years, and possibly even more. 

Both scenarios present a problem for the Biblical version.  Since a global flood would have surely destroyed the civilizations of Egypt and Ur at the time it occurred, the Biblical claim that the flood covered the entire world is impossible to defend.  On the other hand, if there was a global flood, then the Genesis account is chronologically flawed, since it places the flood in the wrong time period.

The Quranic Story

            The story of Nuh and the flood is mentioned throughout the Quran, sometimes as long, continuous narratives and sometimes as brief accounts just a few verses long.  Nuh (peace be upon him) was the first messenger sent by God.[13]  His people had strayed from the true faith of their father Adam (peace be upon him) and had begun worshiping various idols and despite Nuh’s repeated warnings and preaching, they refused to reject these false gods:

“And they have said (to each other), 'Abandon not your gods: Abandon neither Wadd nor Suwa', neither Yaguth nor Ya'uq, nor Nasr';-[14]

After spending most of his life preaching in vain to his people,[15] and when it became clear that his people would not believe in his message (besides those few who had already believed), Nuh (peace be upon him) was commanded by Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) to build an ark:

“It was revealed to Noah: "None of thy people will believe except those who have believed already! So grieve no longer over their (evil) deeds.  But construct an Ark under Our eyes and Our inspiration, and address Me no (further) on behalf of those who are in sin: for they are about to be overwhelmed (in the Flood)."”[16]

Once the ark was built and the flood was imminent, Nuh (peace be upon him) was told to bring the believers and two of every animal on board the ark.  While most of his family had believed, his wife and one of his unnamed sons had remained loyal to the pagan religion, and were thus among the condemned:

“Allah sets forth, for an example to the Unbelievers, the wife of Noah and the wife of Lut: they were (respectively) under two of our righteous servants, but they were false to their (husbands), and they profited nothing before Allah on their account, but were told: "Enter ye the Fire along with (others) that enter!"”[17]

“The son replied: "I will betake myself to some mountain: it will save me from the water." Noah said: "This day nothing can save, from the command of Allah, any but those on whom He hath mercy!"  And the waves came between them, and the son was among those overwhelmed in the Flood.[18]

The flood utterly destroyed the people of Nuh (peace be upon him), leaving only the blessed messenger, his remaining sons and some others who were on the ark.  Once the flood waters receded, the ark came to a rest on a mountain called “Judi” and the believers once again set foot on dry land:

“Then the word went forth: "O earth! Swallow up thy water, and O sky! Withhold (thy rain)!" and the water abated, and the matter was ended. The Ark rested on Mount Judi, and the word went forth: "Away with those who do wrong!"”[19]

            When reading the Quranic story of Nuh (peace be upon him), some major differences with the Biblical version are immediately apparent.  First, unlike the Biblical account which claims that God sent the flood on an unsuspecting, yet sinful world, the Quran states that the flood was sent upon Nuh’s people only after they had consistently rejected his warnings and refused to shun their idols.  It is a consistent message in the Quran that even if people are living in sin, God will not punish them until He has given them a chance to repent and sending a messenger to warn them.[20]  If they do not, then and only then, will He punish them. 

            Second, regarding the alleged global nature of the flood, the context of the Quranic story suggests that the flood was in fact a local one and affected only the people of Nuh (peace be upon him).  Some people have argued that the Quran states that the flood waters covered the earth, appealing to such verses as the following:

“And Noah, said: "O my Lord! Leave not of the Unbelievers, a single one on earth![21]

Yet this argument fails for a simple reason.  The Arabic word translated here as “earth” is “الْأَرْضِ” (al-ardi), which can mean either “earth”, “land” or “country”.[22]  Hence, Nuh (peace be upon him) could have prayed to God to destroy all the disbelievers in the land, meaning the area in which he lived.  In fact, the context of the verse shows that he was referring to his own people:

“Noah said: "O my Lord! They have disobeyed me, but they follow (men) whose wealth and children give them no increase but only Loss.”[23]

How could Nuh (peace be upon him) have been referring to people in other parts of the world whom he had never met and was never sent to?  How could they have “disobeyed” him if they had not even heard him preaching?  Clearly, his prayer to Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) was concerning his own people, and had nothing to do with the rest of the world. 

            Another objection raised to the local flood theory is that the early Quranic commentators tended to believe that the flood was indeed global.  Yet this argument is also weak since it was common for the Quranic commentators to rely on Jewish and Christian traditions to fill in the gaps of the stories of the prophets.  This was especially true when both the Quran and the authentic Hadiths were silent on an issue.  Since there is nothing concrete in the Quran or the Hadiths to suggest that the flood was global, the opinions of the exegetes cannot be considered authoritative.  This is the view of many modern Islamic scholars (though others also believe that the flood was global).  Here are some examples:

According to one scholarly opinion (fatwa):

“The divine instruction to Prophet Noah was to carry on the ark a pair of every species. Certainly the Prophet Noah complied with this order and put those creatures on the ark. This must be understood as relating to the area in which he was and the practical possibility of implementing Allah's instruction. We are not told that Noah traversed the whole globe collecting those animals who were not available in his area. Nowhere are we told that couples of species from different climates and faraway geographical areas were guided to go to Prophet Noah's place in order to be on the ark. Indeed, there is no clear indication that the flood covered the whole earth. It certainly covered the area where the people of Noah lived, so as to exterminate all creatures other than those who believed in Allah and followed Prophet Noah. We cannot tell how big the ark was, but it certainly was big enough to accommodate those believers and a pair of each type of species. May I remind you that in the Qur'an we are told that Noah's followers were few.”[24]

Another fatwa states:

“In fact, there is no indication or reference in the Qur'an suggesting that the floods overwhelmed the entire planet. The description given in the Qur'an of the flood makes clear that it was of overwhelming proportions, leaving none of the wrongdoers among Noah's people alive. It does not mention other communities. In fact there are several references that it engulfed Noah's own people in particular. Take for example the twice-repeated Qur'anic statement: "Do not appeal to Me on behalf of the wrongdoers. They shall be drowned." (11: 37 & 23: 27) "We saved him together with all those who stood by him, in the ark, and caused those who rejected Our revelations to drown. Surely they were blind people." (7: 64) The contexts in which all these statements occur are very clear in their references to Noah's own community to whom he was required to address his message. Hence we can say that the flood punishment was directed to his own people who rejected his faith, after clear evidence had been given to them, and after their long opposition to his efforts and their repeated hurling of abuse and ridicule on him.”[25]

Further below, the same fatwa also questions whether Nuh (peace be upon him) had exactly three surviving sons (as the Bible claims), which is a reasonable question to ask because there is nothing in the Quran or authentic ahadith to indicate how many sons he had or what their names were:

“Nor can we say that all people living today are descendents [sic] of Noah through his three sons. To start with, there were other people saved in the Ark. These could have had children of their own and they would have descendents [sic]. Moreover, we cannot establish with any degree of certainty that Noah had three sons.”

Despite this fact, some early Quranic commentators stated that Nuh (peace be upon him) had three sons and they even give their Biblical names!

According to Islamic scholar M.A.S. Abdel Haleem:

“…when one looks at the Qur'anic text itself (in this account and in those of suras 7, 11 and 23), it is only al-mala, the prominent people in the society, who kept demanding that he drive away the 'worst kind of people' amongst his followers, and those they have led astray (Q. 71:24-7), who will be punished, not everybody and everything.”[26]

Later, he states the following:

“It has already been observed that in the Qur'anic accounts only al-mala' and their followers were drowned. This view of the 'universal' flood, which is actually depicted in the Qur'an as being specific and localised, has no basis in the Qur'an and is clearly inspired by other versions of the Noah story, such as those related in the Bible and popular religious legend.”[27]

Finally, Islamic scholar Suzanne Haneef notes that there was a difference of opinion even among the early scholars about the nature of the flood:

“The Qur’an and ahadith are silent concerning the locus and extent of the Flood, and the early Islamic traditionists also differed concerning it.”[28]

Hence, there is no proof that the Quranic story tells of a global flood. In fact, the context strongly suggests a local flood.  Since there is far more evidence of a local flood and there is no indication as to when it occurred, the Quranic account does not suffer from the same inconsistencies and difficulties found in the Biblical story.  Therefore, the Quranic account is far more credible than the Biblical account.


In this article, we compared the Biblical and Quranic versions of the story of Noah and the flood.  While similar in some ways, the two stories are worlds apart in other ways.  While the Biblical account of God sending a global flood without warning contradicts archaeological and historical facts, the Quranic account suffers from no such difficulties.  This is because the latter does not clearly endorse the theory of a global flood, despite claims to the contrary, and instead only mentions the flood story in the context of Noah’s preaching to his own people.  Therefore, the claim of a global flood is not tenable and we must instead endorse the belief that the flood was probably local, affecting only the sinful people of Noah’s nation.

And Allah knows best!

[1] Genesis 6:6 (New International Version).

[2] Genesis 6:8.

[3] In Genesis 8, however, he is instructed to take seven pairs of “clean” animals and one pair of “unclean” animals.

[4] Genesis 7:6.

[5] Genesis 8:4, 13.

[6] See the “Table of Nations” (Genesis 10).

[8] C. Dennis McKinsey, The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy (New York: Prometheus Books, 1995), p. 220.

[9] Laurence B. Brown, God’ed?: The Case for Islam as the Completion of Revelation (Booksurge, 2008), p. 99. Kindle Edition.

[10] McKinsey, op. cit., p. 220.

[11] For a summary of several flood myths from various ancient civilizations, including Egypt, see the following: http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/12-10-17/#feature

[12] Brown, op. cit., p. 99.

[13] Sahih Bukhari, Book 55, Number 556.

[14] Surah Nuh, 71:23 (Yusuf Ali Translation).

[15] He preached to them for 950 years.  See Surah Al-Ankaboot, 29:14.

[16] Surah Hud, 11:36-37.

[17] Surah At-Tahrim, 66:10.

[18] Surah Hud, 11:43.

[19] Surah Hud, 11:44.

[20] For example, see Surah al-Isra, 17:15.

[21] Surah Nuh, 71:26.

[22] Suzanne Haneef, The History of the Prophets of Islam: Derived from the Quran, Ahadith and Commentaries (Chicago: Kazi Publications, Inc., 2002), Volume 1, p. 171.

John Penrice, A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran (New York: Dover Publications, 2011), p. 5.

[23] Surah Nuh, 71:21.

[26] M.A.S Abdel Haleem, “The Qur'anic Employment of the Story of Noah,” Journal Of Qur'anic Studies, 8, no. 1 (2006): 48.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Haneef, op. cit., p. 171.


  1. Great article, Faiz.

    You are very correct that there could not have been a global flood during the time period described in the Bible. There is no record of there ever being a global flood.

    You seem to use these facts to come to the conclusion that there was no global Flood, and I agree with you on this, although it took me a while to see this.

    Do you realize though, that by using these same criteria- an obvious lack of either historical or geological evidence that should have indicated that such an event happened- one could also dismiss the account of the moon being split in two, that allegedly happened when the pagans were testing Muhammad, according to the Quran?

    The Hour has come near, and the moon has split [in two].

    The story is explained in more detail in the Bukhari and Muslim hadith collections. This happened on the pagans' request, and allegedly they saw a half of the moon on one side of the mountain, and the other half on the other side.

    (4) Narrated Anas bin Malik: The people of Mecca asked Allah's Apostle to show them a miracle. So he showed them the moon split in two halves between which they saw the Hiram' mountain. (Book #58, Hadith #208)

    Peter C

  2. An event like this (the moon splitting into 2 parts) would surely be seen around the world, not only Arabia. We know that astronomy was around back then, and practiced by different civilizations at the time, including Ancient China.

    Unlike any other country, China is the only place where astronomical observations took place uninterrupted for 4000 years and this surveillance led to many important astronomical discoveries. Special care was taken in China to record the appearance of unexpected events in the sky, such as eclipses, comets or star explosions


    Astronomers in China have been recording eclipses, comets, star explosions for some 4 milennia, in a fashion that was "uninterrupted".

    Other civilizations that were involved in astronomy during the 7th century included the Indians and Japanese. We also know that the Mayas observed the sky and were involved in astronomy.

    Yet, we have total silence from all of these other civilizations. The splitting of the moon would have been something observed by everyone in the world, and it is implausible that the Chinese- who made it a point to record "unexpected events" in the sky, would have failed to mention this.

    Had the moon actually split into pieces as the Quran and hadiths claim it did, someone would have taken note of such an amazing event. There were people across India and China and Japan and other parts of the world at the time who were astronomers and made it their mission to observe and record what was happening in the sky, not to mention millions of others who would have noticed such an event. How is it possible that no one saw such a thing?

    Also, there is no evidence that NASA has seen that the moon at any other point was split.

    Just as one would expect that a global flood would have left us some geological evidence, it is also not unreasonable to expect that the splitting of a satellite the size of the moon would have also.

    Yet, commenting on the claims of some Muslims who claim that some photos of lines on the surface of the moon are "evidence" of it having split at some point in the past, NASA had this to say:

    "My recommendation is to not believe everything you read on the internet. Peer-reviewed papers are the only scientifically valid sources of information out there. No current scientific evidence reports that the Moon was split into two (or more) parts and then reassembled at any point in the past."

    Brad Bailey

    NLSI Staff Scientist

    June 21, 2010


    Take care,
    Peter C

  3. I need to take back my comments about China, since there is a 5 hour time difference. It is very likely that the Chinese would not have seen this event.

    However, there is no reason why the Sassanians or Byzantines in nearby Egypt and Syria would not have seen such a sight. We have no records from them about such an event. Even if at that time they weren't into astronomy, it is unlikely that such an event would have escaped everyone's notice,

    India is only three hours of time difference from Arabia, so it would be likely that this event would have been witnessed by Indian astronomers, who we know were engaged in the practice during the 7th century

    - Peter C.

  4. Another person who was an astronomer at the time was Stephanus of Alexandria. He was making observations from Constantinople, which would only have been a
    time difference of one hour from Arabia. He made observations of the position of the sun, moon, and other celestial bodies from AD 617 to 619.

    It is well known that Stephanus of Alexandria was the author of a commentary on Ptolemy’s Handy Tables, in which he gave his own examples for the calculation of the solar, lunar, and planetary positions, as well as solar and lunar eclipses calculated for the coordinates of Constantinople. As shown by Otto Neugebauer and H. B. Van Hoesen (1959), the dates of calculated examples in the commentary fall in the years 617 to 619. This suggests that during this period Stephanus was in Constantinople and consistently observed and calculated the position of the Sun, the Moon, and the other planets. Had he not been in Constantinople but Alexandria, he would have used the data of Ptolemy’s tables as they are given for the geographical coordinates of Alexandria without converting them into Constantinople’s coordinates. Consequently, the authorship of Stephanus for the alchemical work should be considered genuine.

    According to Maududi's tafsir, the event happened in AD 617.

    There is no record of this event in the works of Stephanus of Alexandria. It is true that, according to Maududi, the event took place very quickly so many people may have missed it. I find it though highly improbable that the entire population of the middle east and parts of the world which could see the moon, would have missed this event, except for Muhammad, his followers, and the pagans he was discussing with.

    According to the tafsir of Maududi, the split was witnessed by a king in Malabar, which we know is in India. His name is not mentioned in the tafsir, but if this event was allegedly seen in India (3 hours time difference), there is no reason it would not have been seen in Constantinople (1 hour time difference). I don't have the name of the king in Malabar who Maududi was referring to so I won't comment more, but if you have more info on that, I'd look forward to seeing it.

    Peter C

  5. Part 1. As always not everything we read from secular records can be trusted. You yourself would agree with, this yet when convenient for your argument you accept it. The biblical record is the far superior one for the following reasons. Egyptian history meshes with that of Israel at various points. The date 1728 B.C.E. for Israel’s entry into Egypt, and for the Exodus, 215 years later, 1513 B.C.E. Pharaoh Shishak’s attack on Jerusalem came during Rehoboam’s fifth year in 993 B.C.E.; King So of Egypt was contemporary with Hoshea’s reign (c. 758-740 B.C.E.); and Pharaoh Necho’s battle resulting in Josiah’s death likely came in 629 B.C.E. (1Ki 14:25; 2Ki 17:4; 2Ch 35:20-24) The difference between the above dates and those generally assigned by modern historians amounts to as much as a century or more for the Exodus and then narrows down to about 20 years by Pharaoh Necho’s time. The following information shows why the chronology based on the Biblical reckoning makes the best sense.
    Modern historians rely principally on certain documents in the form of Egyptian king lists or annals. Among these are: the fragmentary Palermo Stone, presenting what are considered to be the first five “dynasties” of Egyptian history; the Turin Papyrus, very fragmentary and giving a list of kings and their reigns from the “Old Kingdom” into the “New Kingdom”; and additional inscriptions in stone, likewise fragmentary. These separate lists and other independent inscriptions have been coordinated in chronological order by means of the writings of Manetho, an Egyptian priest of the third century B.C.E. His works, dealing with Egyptian history and religion, arrange the reigns of the Egyptian monarchs into 30 dynasties, an arrangement still used by modern Egyptologists. These sources, together with astronomical calculations, based on Egyptian texts dealing with lunar phases and the rising of the Dog Star (Sothis), have been used to produce a chronological table.

    1. Thank you for your comments. Unfortunately, they reflect your own bias and misunderstandings. For starters, the very fact that you simply plagiarized an article from the "Watchtower Library" in order to defend the Bible shows that you have not done any serious research.

      Second, even if we were to accept your claims about the unreliability of the Egyptian records, you have ignored the fact that Egypt is just one of many nations for which we have historical records from the time in which the alleged "global" flood would have occurred. You ignored what I showed regarding the Third Dynasty in Ur. Are all these records unreliable when we are questioning the Bible? Isn't that a little too convenient?

  6. Part 2. Problems of Egyptian chronology. Uncertainties are multiple. The works of Manetho, used to give order to the fragmentary lists and other inscriptions, are preserved only in the writings of later historians, such as Josephus (first century C.E.), Sextus Julius Africanus (third century C.E., hence over 500 years from Manetho’s time), Eusebius (fourth century C.E.), and Syncellus (late eighth or early ninth century C.E.). As stated by W. G. Waddell, their quotations of Manetho’s writings are fragmentary and often distorted and hence “it is extremely difficult to reach certainty in regard to what is authentic Manetho and what is spurious or corrupt.” After showing that Manetho’s source material included some unhistorical traditions and legends that “introduced kings as their heroes, without regard to chronological order,” he says: “There were many errors in Manetho’s work from the very beginning: all are not due to the perversions of scribes and revisers. Many of the lengths of reigns have been found impossible: in some cases the names and the sequence of kings as given by Manetho have proved untenable in the light of monumental evidence.”—Manetho, introduction, pp. vii, xvii, xx, xxi, xxv.
    The probability that concurrent reigns rather than successive reigns are responsible for many of Manetho’s excessively long periods is shown in the book Studies in Egyptian Chronology, by T. Nicklin (Blackburn, Eng., 1928, p. 39): “The Manethonian Dynasties . . . are not lists of rulers over all Egypt, but lists partly of more or less independent princes, partly . . . of princely lines from which later sprang rulers over all Egypt.” Professor Waddell (pp. 1-9) observes that “perhaps several Egyptian kings ruled at one and the same time; . . . thus it was not a succession of kings occupying the throne one after the other, but several kings reigning at the same time in different regions. Hence arose the great total number of years.”
    Since the Bible points to the year 2370 B.C.E. as the date of the global Flood, Egyptian history must have begun after that date. The problems in Egyptian chronology shown above are doubtless responsible for the figures advanced by modern historians who would run Egyptian history all the way back to the year 3000 B.C.E.
    Greater confidence is placed by Egyptologists in the ancient inscriptions themselves. Yet, the carefulness, truthfulness, and moral integrity of the Egyptian scribes are by no means above suspicion. As Professor J. A. Wilson states: “A warning should be issued about the precise historical value of Egyptian inscriptions. That was a world of . . . divine myths and miracles.” Then after suggesting that the scribes were not above juggling the chronology of events to add praise to the particular monarch in power, he says: “The historian will accept his data at face value, unless there is a clear reason for distrust; but he must be ready to modify his acceptance as soon as new materials put the previous interpretation in a new light.”—The World History of the Jewish People, 1964, Vol. 1, pp. 280, 281.
    Absence of information concerning Israel. This is not surprising, since the Egyptians not only refused to record matters uncomplimentary to themselves but also were not above effacing records of a previous monarch if the information in such records proved distasteful to the then reigning pharaoh. Thus, after the death of Queen Hatshepsut, Thutmose III had her name and representations chiseled out of the monumental reliefs. This practice doubtless explains why there is no known Egyptian record of the 215 years of Israelite residence in Egypt or of their Exodus.
    The pharaoh ruling at the time of the Exodus is not named in the Bible; hence, efforts to identify him are based on conjecture. This partly explains why modern historians’ calculations of the date of the Exodus vary from 1441 to 1225 B.C.E., a difference of over 200 years.

    1. The "Watchtower" has deceived you, friend. No serious scholar believes that Egyptian history started after 2370 BCE. Also, the issue of why Israel is not mentioned in the Egyptians sources is not the issue here. I have dealt with that elsewhere. See my articles on the Exodus for a discussion of that.

      You have not presented anything to refute what I have shown regarding the Biblical story of the flood. No evidence exists for a global flood because there was no global flood.

  7. Greetings Faiz S.

    Plagiarism: The practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own.

    Nowhere here did I claim that this work was my own, (Though I wholeheartedly agree with it), any more than you have with the information you have included in your article. The information I used is however, simply the the best researched information available.

    I have done lots of serious research over many years and looked at the, for and the against arguments on a wealth of scriptural interests, from the local library, the British museum, online sources, the same as most people. So far, the bible always proves to be right.

    For instance the so called "serious scholars", denied the existence of Pontius Pilate, until 1961 when the Pilate stone artifact was discovered. Bible proved true

    Belshazzar of the book of Daniel was dismissed by the so called "serious scholars" until the Nabonidus Cylinder was found. Bible proved true

    There is plenty of evidence to prove global flood. You don't accept that from your research source. That's fine. I do from my research source, which most definitely includes research other than from the Watchtower. But as I said at the top of the article, as always not everything we read from secular records or "serious scholars" can be trusted. You yourself I'm sure well know this and would agree with this, yet when convenient for your argument you accept it, which is clear from the stand you are taking.

    We will have to politely agree to disagree.

    If you are right, then things will carry on just the way they are and it won't matter one way or the other in the grand scheme of things. I'll die, you'll die, nothing we say will matter. Nobody will care what we say anyway. The world will continue to fumble from one disaster to the next as it has done for centuries. The way mankind is behaving he will eventually destroy himself.

    If on the other hand the Watchtower and the bible proves to be right, I know which side I prefer to be on.

    Very best wishes Alan

    1. Hello Alan!

      You said: Plagiarism: The practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own. Nowhere here did I claim that this work was my own, (Though I wholeheartedly agree with it), any more than you have with the information you have included in your article. The information I used is however, simply the the best researched information available.

      My response: My point was that you simply copied someone else's work and pasted it here as a response to my article. You provided no link or any other indication that you were quoting someone else. If you had done this on a college research paper, don't you think that you would have been accused of plagiarism? That was the only point I was making. Had you provided a link, I wouldn't have said anything.

      You said: I have done lots of serious research over many years and looked at the, for and the against arguments on a wealth of scriptural interests, from the local library, the British museum, online sources, the same as most people. So far, the bible always proves to be right.
      For instance the so called "serious scholars", denied the existence of Pontius Pilate, until 1961 when the Pilate stone artifact was discovered. Bible proved true
      Belshazzar of the book of Daniel was dismissed by the so called "serious scholars" until the Nabonidus Cylinder was found. Bible proved true

      My response: This is pretty specious reasoning. The Bible has been proven wrong on many more occasions than it has been proven right. Even if it has been proven "right" in some cases, how does that prove that we should just believe what is says in other cases? You are committing a logical fallacy. By that reasoning, I could argue that since the Quran has been proven right about the existence of the city of Iram (even though historians considered it a fable for a very long time), it means that the Quran is true and we (yourself included) should believe in it. You will have to excuse me, but I simply don't think that you would be so generous! Please correct me if I am wrong.

      You said: There is plenty of evidence to prove global flood. You don't accept that from your research source. That's fine. I do from my research source, which most definitely includes research other than from the Watchtower. But as I said at the top of the article, as always not everything we read from secular records or "serious scholars" can be trusted. You yourself I'm sure well know this and would agree with this, yet when convenient for your argument you accept it, which is clear from the stand you are taking.

      My response: Really? There is "plenty of evidence" for a global flood? Such as? There is plenty of evidence for several mass extinctions throughout the history of earth, like the Permian extinction, but nothing that points to a global flood that wiped out all life on earth.

      If you have some tantalizing evidence for a global flood, please present it by all means. Until then, I see no reason to accept the global flood theory. A regional flood makes far more sense to me.

      Your entire premise, thus far, has been to question the consensus by pointing to a few cases where "serious scholars" were proven wrong. That does not make your point stronger. You are just making a leap of faith.

      You said: We will have to politely agree to disagree.

      My response: Yes, that is usually how these conversations end. I welcome your comments, and am in no way hostile to them. But, I reserve the right to politely criticize you for your beliefs which I believe are wrong.

    2. You said: If you are right, then things will carry on just the way they are and it won't matter one way or the other in the grand scheme of things. I'll die, you'll die, nothing we say will matter. Nobody will care what we say anyway. The world will continue to fumble from one disaster to the next as it has done for centuries. The way mankind is behaving he will eventually destroy himself.
      If on the other hand the Watchtower and the bible proves to be right, I know which side I prefer to be on.

      My response: I am afraid I don't understand. If I am right, then it means the Bible is wrong and that you will regret your "preference".

      In case you haven't realized, I am not one of those people who believe that life ends when we die. I am a Muslim. I believe in God and the afterlife. I believe in the prophet Noah (peace be upon him) and the story of the ark. I just don't believe that the flood was global. As I explained in the article, it makes more sense that the flood affected Noah's people only and thus that it was a regional flood. There is evidence for such floods, but no evidence for a global deluge.

      So, if you are wrong, then the Bible is wrong and you will be on the wrong side. If I am wrong, then the Bible is right and I am on the wrong side. In order to determine which is the right side, we need to use our God-given reason, and think very carefully. This is more than a matter of life and death. This is a matter of the eternal destination of your soul and it cannot be taken lightly.

      Thanks you for your comments.

    3. Hi Faiz S.

      Your final comments there, we can definitely agree on. And I have never taken these matters lightly.

      I'm not sure though, how much I can defend my points if I'm not allowed to use the research material and copy it to this site. The trouble with me is I don't quite understand this technology, what I can copy, and what I can't. It honestly is an age thing. So I don't want to get into copyright trouble.

      The Watchtower allows us to use it's material, which is why they publish it for us to leave with people, by means of our magazines, books, tracts or to direct people online too jw.org

      I have many Muslim friends and, as you might imagine, we have lots of very lively debates. I would never criticize another persons beliefs or holy writings.

      I have thought very carefully about my beliefs, and have read lots of religious information from all denominations. I have read parts of the Quran and it contains information I can agree with. For instance the Oneness of God. The bible teaches One God. The bible does not teach the trinity. Christendom teaches the trinity. The Quran also contains things that I just can't believe. Hell fire as an example.

      The bible, does not teach immortality of the soul. Christendom does. So according to the bible, no immortal soul, no going to heaven or hell.

      Faiz S, You and I could have many long discussions. I very rarely get into discussions like this online. I came across your site whilst searching for something and I felt the urge to put a point across. So I'm very sorry I used the "We will have to agree to disagree" cliche. But I genuinely think that this is how our discussions would conclude. No matter how much we both think we can prove, there is also an element of faith involved. And my faith is firmly based on the bibles teachings.

      Jesus said in the gospel of John at chapter 13:34,35... From the bible in basic English : " I give you a new law: Have love one for another; even as I have had love for you, so are you to have love one for another.
      By this it will be clear to all men that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another".

      This scripture, in my opinion, points in the direction of those within the Watchtower organization. It certainly is not, nor claims to be a perfect organization. But if the day comes when another religious group is seen to be living up to this "new law" given by Jesus, I will take a very serious look into it.

      I must say though I have enjoyed our discussion.

      Very best wishes to you... Alan

    4. Alan, you claimed that "according to the bible, no immortal soul, no going to heaven or hell". I don't know how you can say that when references to an eternal afterlife are quite common in the Bible, especially the New Testament. The Gospel of Matthew contains numerous references to hell. It describes place where "there will be weeping and the gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 8:12, 13:42 etc.). That certainly sounds like hell to me.

      The Book of Daniel also describes an afterlife and it is described as being eternal:

      "Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt" (12:2).

      So, I can't understand where you got this idea.

      But let's say you are right, and that according to the Bible, there is no eternal soul or heaven or hell. If the Bible turns out to be right (which means that I am wrong), then I still have nothing to worry about. I have nothing to lose by not believing in the Bible. But, if the Bible is wrong (which means you are wrong as well), then you have much to worry about.

  8. Hi Faiz.

    OK, There is, everlasting life, but not an immortal soul... According to the bible.

    In a nutshell...

    According to the bible... when God instructed the man at Genesis 2:16,17 He said... And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die... Revised version.

    So if they eat from the tree they, DIE. They don't suffer eternal pain in hell, they don't go to heaven. They DIE

    They ate from the tree SO... They were judged...

    Gen 3:19 in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and UNTO DUST SHALT THOU RETURN... Revised version.

    Adam gave up the opportunity to live forever here on earth. Adam and Eve were told they would die, only, if they ate from the tree. They ate from the tree and they died. Had they obeyed God they would still be alive. There is NO MENTION OF DEATH for Adam and Eve anywhere, According to the bible, other than if they eat from the tree.

    Genesis 5:5  And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he DIED... King James

    Later in the Christian Greek scriptures (New Testament) at Romans 5:12 The apostle Paul reaffirmed mankind's position when he said... Therefore, just as sin came into the world, through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned... English standard version

    We inherited Adams sin..

    Then speaking about reconciliation with God, Paul says at Romans 5:18.19 So then, as the one sin (BY ADAM) condemned all people, in the same way the one righteous act (JESUS GIVING UP HIS LIFE) sets all people free and gives them life. 19 And just as all people were made sinners as the result of the disobedience of one man (ADAM), in the same way they will all be put right with God as the result of the obedience of the one man (JESUS)... According to the Good news bible.

    Jesus himself agrees with that statement because as he says in Matthew 20:28 even as the Son of Man came, not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a RANSOM for many." English Standard Version.

    Jesus speaks about life and death in the gospel of JOHN 5:25-30 I tell you for certain that the time will come, and it is already here, when all of the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God. And those who listen to it will live! 26 The Father has the power to give life, and he has given that same power to the Son. 27 And he has given his Son the right to judge everyone, because he is the Son of Man. 28 Don't be surprised! The time will come when all of the dead will hear the voice of the Son of Man, 29 and they will come out of their graves. Everyone who has done good things will rise to life, but everyone who has done evil things will rise and be condemned. 30 I cannot do anything on my own. The Father sent me, and he is the one who told me how to judge. I judge with fairness, because I obey him, and I don't just try to please myself... Contemporary English Bible

    What happens to the condemned... If at their resurrection they choose to continue in the way of sin... Paul at ROMANS 6:23 says... For the wages of sin is DEATH, (and what happens to those who chose to be obedient to God) but the gift of God is, EVERLASTING LIFE in Christ Jesus our Lord... Literal translation of the holy bible

    DEATH... No Hell fire... No heaven

    Where do the obedient ones live, According to the bible.

    Psalm 37:11 But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace. Psalm 37: 29 But the righteous shall inherit the earth, and dwell upon it for ever... Brenton's English Septuagint

    Just like Adam and Eve would have done had they not sinned.

    Obviously there is more, but that is a nutshell account of what the bible really teaches.

    ... Alan

    1. Alan, I am fully aware of the concept of "original sin". I have discussed that elsewhere.

      But even if "original sin" is the cause of all our troubles (which I don't believe), it does not refute the fact that the Bible refers in many places to heaven and hell and the eternal soul. I already presented some of these verses. How do you explain the verses which refer to a place where is "weeping and gnashing of teeth"? How do you explain the "lake of fire" mentioned in the Book of Revelation? Ironically, Revelation says that the "lake of fire" is the "second death":

      "Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire" (Revelation 20:14-15).

  9. Faiz

    Yes the bible certainly does refer to heaven. But nowhere does it say that Immortal souls go there.

    The bible refers to immortality, but not to immortal souls.

    According to the bible, Jesus was resurrected to heaven after being dead for parts of three days and then given immortality. What it doesn’t say is that his, immortal soul, was resurrected to heaven. If his soul was immortal it wouldn’t have died in the first place.

    Act 2:22-24… "My fellow Israelites, listen to these words: Jesus from Nazareth was a very special man. God clearly showed this to you. He proved it by the miracles, wonders, and miraculous signs he did through Jesus. You all saw these things, so you know this is true. 23 Jesus was handed over to you, and you killed him. With the help of evil men, you nailed him to a (cross). But God knew all this would happen. It was his plan--a plan he made long ago. 24 Jesus suffered the pain of death, but God made him free. HE RAISED HIM FROM DEATH. There was no way for death to hold him… Easy to read bible

    (Nothing here about an immortal soul. Nor will any reference, to Jesus resurrection, say anything about an immortal soul)

    The Prophet Ezekiel actually points out what happens to the soul at Ezekiel 18:4 For all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son, they are mine: the soul that sins, it shall DIE. 18:20 But the soul that sins shall DIE… Brenton’s English Septuagint.

    The Contemporary English bible describes heaven as where… The LORD has kept the heavens for himself, but he has given the earth to us humans. Psalm 115:16

    The same verse in the, Literal translation of the holy bible, says… The heavens; the heavens are Jehovah's, but He has given the earth to the sons of men. Psalm 115:16

    The bible speaks about the condition of the dead also at Ecclesiastes 9:5.. Yes, the living know they are going to die, but the dead know nothing. They have no further reward; they are completely forgotten… Good news bible

    So if the souls that sin die, and the dead know nothing, according to the bible, how can they suffer in an eternal inferno.

    At Revelation 20:14-15.. You rightly point out that it says… And Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death—the lake of fire. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire… Lexham English Bible.

    Think about those verses. They don’t say immortal souls are thrown into the lake of fire to be tortured forever.

    Those ones, not found written in the book of life, are ones who will die with no prospect of a resurrection ever again (the second death). Everlasting death, punishment enough.

    Here’s a problem though. In the King James bible it says… At Revelation 20:14-15… And death and HELL were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

    The bible in basic English says “death and HELL.”

    The bishops bible says “death and HELL”

    Many other bible versions say “death and HELL”


    However, many bibles say DEATH and Hades.

    Some bibles say DEATH and the GRAVE.

    Hades (Greek) and Sheol (Hebrew) according to the bible, refer to nothing more than a persons grave.

    The king James bible and other bible translators are using those words (Hades and Sheol), that mean the grave, and are translating them as HELL. I wonder why?

    Death is the opposite to life, and a grave is where the dead are buried. What kind of punishment would be achieved by throwing, Death (a condition) and the Hades ( the Grave) into a place of torment?

    The thought of it doesn’t make any sense. Death and Hades being thrown into the fire simply means, no more death, no more need for graves.


  10. Continuation...

    Interestingly another word has been translated into HELL is the word GEHENNA

    Gehenna is associated with a place called the Valley of Hinnom that was used for the disposal of waste matter from the city of Jerusalem. Apparently it was also used as a place for the disposal of the dead bodies of criminals. Gehenna was kept alight and was a place where things burned once and for all. Not a place of mass torture.

    Jesus made reference to Gehenna as a place symbolically as being a place where sinners could be permanently disposed of.

    Matthew 18:9 And if thine eye doth cause thee to stumble, pluck it out and cast from thee; it is good for thee one-eyed to enter into the life, rather than having two eyes to be cast to the gehenna of the fire... Youngs literal translation

    According to the bible, unlike the resurrection from Adamic death (first death) mentioned at (Romans 6:3 and John 5:25-30 referred to in the last reply) there is no mention of a resurrection from the “second death”. So the “second death” simply means, everlasting death, with no chance of life ever again.

    What about the, “Weeping and gnashing of teeth”. In the context of verses around the, weeping and gnashing of teeth, our understanding of this refers to a spiritually dark condition, rather than agonizing souls being tortured by fire.

    You think that “Weeping and gnashing of teeth” sounds like hell. I think if people were cast alive into fire and kept alive while they burned, eternally, you would hear sounds far worse than weeping and gnashing of teeth. I think screaming in absolute agony would be a better description. Really.

    Do you really believe God is capable of torture? I do not and never will. In fact I find it abhorrent in the extreme to attribute wicked torture to God. We find it abhorrent when we hear about temporary torture conducted by man. So does God (see Jeremiah below). So why then would God go on to do worse when someone dies?

    Faiz, you and I agree and the Bible and the Quran say that God is love, God is good, God is merciful, God is a lover of justice, God is wise, God is powerful. I have never read in the Quran or the Bible where it says that God is a torturer. We refer to God as our heavenly father. What loving, good, merciful, wise, just father would punish an erring child by torturing him or her forever? I’ve never yet met a LOVING father who has tortured his children, even temporarily. We would be outraged if we heard of one who did.


    1. Alan, I find your attempts at explaining the obvious references to Hell in the Bible to be quite disingenuous. You claim that Revelation 20 refers not to eternal torment in the "lake of fire" but an everlasting death, because even "death" and "Hades" are cast into it. But you forget that in the very next chapter, the context of the "lake of fire" is shown to be nothing else than a place of eternal torment:

      "But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death" (Revelation 21:8).

      Not only that, but if we go back to Chapter 20, we find even more clear evidence of eternal torment:

      "And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever" (Revelation 20:10).

      This is from your own Bible. I am sorry, but your Bible speaks of eternal torment. You may not like it, but there it is.

      By the way, the way I see it, if death was also thrown into the lake of fire, it means that death would cease to exist. In other words, the tormented souls (or bodies or whatever) would not DIE but would instead suffer for eternity.

      As for the "weeping and gnashing of teeth", your personal opinion aside, whatever "condition" it refers to (whether a "dark condition" - whatever that means - or a condition of agony), what is clear from the context is that it is a place of torment, whether mental or physical. In any case, the "context" shows that it is a place of fiery torment (hence, a physical torment):

      "They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 13:42).

      I don't know about you, but when I picture a "blazing furnace", I see a place of excruciating pain. Of course, I wish no one will go there, but it's not up to me.

      So again, let me say, that I am sorry to have to tell you, but the Bible (especially the NT) is very clear that many unfortunate people will go to a place of fiery torment that will never end.

      Your philosophical argument that a "loving God" would never punish anyone for eternity is just that, a philosophical argument. Who are you to question God? Who am I?

      God is love, but God is also just and a stern judge. It would be unjust to let murderers and child molesters escape punishment, wouldn't it?

  11. Continuation

    A couple of verses in the bible where God declares His view of unnecessary suffering with fire.

    Both are inspired verses from the biblical book of the prophet Jeremiah. The situation at the time was that the Israelites had stopped serving God and began adopting the practices of the nations around them. They were burning their children to death as sacrifices to false gods. Through the prophet Jeremiah, God told them…

    Jeremiah 7:31 They have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, in order to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, something that I had not commanded and that had never even come into my heart… Good news bible

    Jeremiah 7:31 from the Contemporary English bible… At Topheth in Hinnom Valley you have built altars where you kill your children and burn them as sacrifices to other gods. I would never think of telling you to do this.

    Jeremiah 19:5.. The people of Judah stopped worshiping me and made this valley into a place of worship for Baal and other gods that have never helped them or their ancestors or their kings. And they have committed murder here, burning their young, innocent children as sacrifices to Baal. I have never even thought of telling you to do that… Contemporary English bible

    Jeremiah 19:5.. For they have forsaken me and have treated this place as foreign. In it they have burned incense to other gods that neither they, their ancestors, nor the kings of Judah knew. They have also filled this place with the blood of innocent people. They built the high places for Baal to burn their children in the fire as a burnt offering to Baal—something I didn't command, didn't say, nor did it ever enter my mind!... International standard version.

    Another nutshell answer. As I said last time of course there is more.

    … Alan

    1. Alan, it seems pretty clear to me that what God was saying was that He would never have commanded the Israelites to sacrifice their children to Him, like pagans by killing their children to appease their so-called "gods". Alternatively, He could have been saying that He did not command the Israelites to worship other "gods", but that they did it themselves. The Quran says something similar in reference to the pagan Arabs and their idol worship:

      "These are nothing but names which ye have devised,- ye and your fathers,- for which Allah has sent down no authority (whatever). They follow nothing but conjecture and what their own souls desire!- Even though there has already come to them Guidance from their Lord" (Surah An-Najm, 53:23).

      How you can conflate this as some sort of proof against the torment of Hell is beyond me. I will say, though, that the Tanakh is conspicuously quiet on the issue of the afterlife altogether, let alone heaven and hell. But the New Testament clearly is not. This is one of the major contradictions between the two books, and it makes me wonder how Christians can regard both as "scripture" when they are so far apart on such an important issue (and there are other issues as well).

  12. Atheists make a lame excuse that the flood never happened based on the Christian claim that one pair of all species were on the Ark which they say is impossible. I searched Islamic sacred texts and I found this: According to Islamic sacred texts, there were eight animals on the Ark mentioned in Quran 7:143-144 which include goats, sheep, cows and camels. Moreover, Noah peace be upon him and all previous Prophets were local and national Prophets, so the flood was most probably not global, so Islamic narrative is more rational. و عنه: عن محمد بن أبي عبد الله، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن محمد بن سنان، عن إسماعيل الجعفي و عبد الكريم بن عمرو، و عبد الحميد بن أبي الديلم، عن أبي عبد الله (عليه السلام) قال: ” حمل نوح (عليه السلام) في السفينة الأزواج الثمانية التي قال الله عز و جل:
    { ثَمَٰنِيَةَ أَزْوَٰجٍ مِّنَ ٱلضَّأْنِ ٱثْنَيْنِ وَمِنَ ٱلْمَعْزِ ٱثْنَيْنِ….. وَمِنَ ٱلإِبْلِ ٱثْنَيْنِ وَمِنَ ٱلْبَقَرِ ٱثْنَيْنِ }
    [الأنعام: 143-144] فكان من الضأن اثنين: زوج داجنة تربيها الناس، و الزوج الآخر الضأن التي تكون في الجبال الوحشية، أحل لهم صيدها و من المعز اثنين: زوج داجنة يربيها الناس، و الزوج الآخر الظباء الوحشية التي تكون في المفاوز و من الإبل اثنين: البخاتي، و العراب و من البقر اثنين: زوج داجنة يربيها الناس ، و الزوج الآخر البقر الوحشية و كل طير طيب: وحشي أو إنسي، ثم غرقت الأرض ” http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=110&tSoraNo=11&tAyahNo=40&tDisplay=yes&Page=5&Size=1&LanguageId=1

  13. As salamu alaykum. I think this view raises as many questions as it solves. Fore instance, with a "global" Flood version you are able to backdate it to far prehistorical times, when the earth could be smaller and contain yet not very many people (http://www.answering-christianity.com/adam_90_feet_tall.htm) - carrying maybe only just Noahs folk on itself. Another advantage of this perspective is that it allows muslims who definetely don't wish to deal with the uncomfortable evolutionary account of history to neatly bypass the current vast archaeological evidence for the latest periods documented as when various hominids (half-people which couldn't live 950 years and be physically much bigger like Adam) lived there.

    The further problem - if it was not global and local, then how should we understand the passage about the flood-waters being reached the heights of mountains (as far as I remember there was something like that). The waters must have been anyways as heigh and quite wide to subsequently reach the remotely situated mount Judi.

    Thirdly, Christians have made a good proposition that the frequent presence of flood-narratives in multiple cultures could be well-explained by the awareness of their respective peoples about the disaster which had earlier befallen their ancestors. Thus the "global" version makes the Flood a culturally centered historical event, while a "local" one belittles its authority by making it more reasonable to put it in the common order among all others and assume it's plagiarism-based origins.

    1. Walaikum as-salaam.

      The idea that the flood could have occurred far back in human history when Noah's people were the only ones on earth actually supports the local flood theory. Think about it. If they were the only ones on earth and lived in a specific geographical area, then what would have been the point of a global flood?

      Regarding the mountains, you are assuming that when the Quran refers to the waters reaching up to the tops of mountains, these mountains were thousands of feet tall. But, there is no reason to have this assumption. A mountain can be just a couple of hundred feet in height. Also, just because the Quran mentions Mt. Judi, it doesn't mean that the ark necessarily came to rest at the very TOP of the mountain. It could have come to rest at some other height.

      As far as other flood stories are concerned, they vary vastly from culture to culture. For example, I discussed the Egyptian flood myth, which doesn't even mention a destructive flood. You would have to explain why there are such variations.

    2. As salamu alaykum again. I have decided to translate your post and publish it on a blog in Russian. The only thing lacking, which prevents me from starting my job, is your permission and dead links to fatwas. Looking forward to your response!

    3. And by the way, your comment on my contention several months ago was thoughtful.

    4. As salaam alaikum brother. You can certainly post the article on your blog. As far as the dead links, you can still use the quotes for now. When I have time, I will try to update the links InshaAllah.

    5. Thanks for your response. I have some questions:

      1. The quote you provide reads:

      "Nor can we say that all people living today are descendents [sic] of Noah through his three sons. To start with, there were other people saved in the Ark. These could have had children of their own and they would have descendents".

      It appears to be false, since his children were the only ones who survived: "And indeed Noah cried out to Us. How excellent are those who respond! We saved him and his people fro great distress, and We made his progeny endure (75-78). Even "The Study Qur'an" mentions this fact in the commentary to this verse: "As the only line of human beings to survive the flood, Noah's progeny endured".

      2. You didn't investigate into many commentaries, which were indeed given as authentic reports from the Prophets' companions, besides just the bible-relied opinions on the issue reflected by the Mufassir's "3-rd party", whose position you perhaps rightfully dismissed.

      Consider for example this piece from my conversation with a student of knowledge. I won't make out many related points which it contains, I suggest you to do it and leave your comment on it:

      Me: Was Nuh upon whom be peace sent to the whole world or only to his nation?
      He: To his nation. His nation was a whole world back then.
      Me: (I retell him the local view, that there was a need to the flood to seize only his sinful folk)
      He: Is there any (islamic) evidence for other folks? The first prophet was Nuh and Allah said "We sent to every nation a prophet" - if Nuh was the first of them, then there would be no peoples besides his one. Ibn Abbas and others said, that people lived in Islam from Adam up to Nuh.

  14. I have read many blogs in the net but have never come across such a well written blog. Good work keep it up
    Islamic Arts and Gifts

  15. Our Holy Islam demonstrate us lesson of worship and kind to each other. Quran is our glorious and last book of religious Islam. Quran indicate us to spend our life as indicated by Allah,s solicitations and Muhammad (PBUH), orders. I am doing my commitment to educate the Quran to my Islamic kin. We should must teach Islamic Courses and learn Quran to grasp the Islam and Allah and his Last prophet of Allah Muhammad (PBUH).