68
violence as one of major sins of the people. Undoubtedly, many years prior to the flood,
the wicked were killing good and bad people alike. Regardless of who the wicked kill, in
the eyes of God, murder is one of the most abominable sins man can commit.
4
As a result
of the great wickedness on the earth, God moved in judgment sending the flood, and “all
flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of
every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man . . . and every living
substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground” (Genesis 7:21, 23).
5
The only exceptions, of course, were the eight people, and the animals on the ark.
There happens to be some non-biblical accounts of a flood that are strikingly
similar to the account in Genesis. However, many of these accounts are missing a strong
moral motivation that is prevalent in the story of Noah. For example, the Gilgamesh Epic,
“fails to suggest a plausible cause; one might ascribe the awesome interlude to mere
whims of heaven.”
6
In this story, man’s noise and commotion become so loud that the
gods cannot sleep. Therefore, they send in a flood, which one man survives by building a
boat. “It really should not surprise us that in a system of thought where the gods are not
necessarily morally superior to human beings, and where the line between good and evil
4
McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 520.
5
Scholarly opinion varies on the number of people destroyed in the flood. Several have theorized
that the statements in Genesis of killing all flesh and covering the whole earth, “refers only to his own
locality.” Also that, “the evidence of geology requires us to adopt the hypothesis of a partial deluge”
[William Smith, A Dictionary of the Bible, revised and edited by Reverend F. N. and M. A. Peloubet,
revised edition (Philadelphia: The John C. Winston Company, 1948), 453]. Another Bible dictionary
agrees, “That everything . . . was to be blotted out by the Flood is clearly stated, but it can be argued that
these categories are qualified by the statements of locality . . . The statement that all high mountains (har)
under the whole heaven were covered . . . and that near the end of the Flood they began to be seen . . . is
interpreted in this scheme as a phenomenon due to a cloud and mist that must have accompanied the
cataclysm. This interpretation favours [sic] a limited Flood” [J. D. Douglas, organizing editor, The New
Bible Dictionary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962), 1341].
Perhaps in an attempt to
diminish the harshness of the flood, many have followed this interpretation. This surely portrays a less
harsh God than a universal flood. However, many scholars including Latter-day Saint scholars and teachers
disagree with the limited flood theory. Many others also believe in a universal flood.
6
Speiser, Genesis, 55.