Points to Ponder in Genesis 6-11 and Moses 8

In addition to reading these chapters, you may want to

Read the Old Testament Study Helps at Genesis 6–11; Moses 8
Read the Joseph Smith Translation additions to Genesis 9 at https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/jst/jst-gen/9?lang=eng
See the following videos:

See the study aids from Book of Mormon Central at https://bookofmormoncentral.org/come-follow-me/old-testament/come-follow-me-2022-genesis-6-11-moses-8

Points to Ponder in Genesis 6-11 and Moses 8

1. We read in Genesis 6:2-4 that “the sons of God” married the “daughters of men.” Some Bible commentators have understood this to mean that angels from the spirit world cohabited with mortals. What reason do Latter-day Saints have to reject that interpretation?

2. Why was the Lord evidently displeased that the “sons of God” married the “daughters of men”? (Genesis 6:2-4.) Whom else could they have married?

3. What two major justifications for the Flood can you find in Genesis 6?

4. Genesis 6:6 makes it sound like the Lord was sorry he had made man. How do we know that wasn’t so?

5. What do you believe are the main points the Lord would want us to remember from the Flood story?

6. Can a Latter-day Saint be considered worthy of a temple recommend if he believes the Flood was merely a local phenomenon and that the entire earth was not all literally submerged at the same time?

7. What are some of the arguments those who doubt there was a universal flood could put forth to defend their point of view?

8. What arguments could believers in a universal flood put forth to defend their position?

9. How could a loving God not only allow but cause the wholesale misery and death of almost all of his mortal children, including innocent babies?

10. Joseph Smith–Matthew 1:41 tells us that “as it was in the days of Noah, so it shall be also at the coming of the Son of Man.” What parallels do you see between those times and ours? What is our modern equivalent of the ark?

11. How long were Noah and his family on the ark? What special challenges would this have posed to them?

12. In Genesis 5:32 and Moses 8:12, Noah is 500 years old. Moses 6:3 and Moses 8:17 seem to say man would have 120 years in which to repent, but the flood came when Noah was 600 (Gen. 7:6). Why would the Lord cut 20 years off the time He gave men to repent?

12a. Why is the reference in Genesis 6:16 to a “window” in the ark of special interest to Latter-say Saints?

13. Sometimes we hear a rumor that one of the predicted signs of the latter days is that the seasons will become indistinguishable. What do you see in Genesis 8 that would tend to support or refute that notion?

14. How could Noah be perfect? (8:27) Wasn’t Jesus the only perfect man?

15. What else do Latter-day Saints believe about Noah and other names or titles by which he has been known?

16. What is new about the instruction the Lord gives Noah’s family after they emerge from the ark?

17. What limitations did the Lord put on hunting?

18. Does Genesis 9:13 mean there were no rainbows before the Flood? What greater meaning should the rainbow have for Latter-day Saints than for Jews and Christians generally?

19. What sense can we make of the story of Noah’s garment in Genesis 9:21-27?

20. What was so wrong with the idea of a tower that would reach the heavens? Don’t we encourage our members today to prepare for natural disasters? And to get as close to heaven as we can? What else is worth remembering about the Tower of Babel story? (Genesis 11.)

21. What external evidence from archaeology, ancient traditions, or manuscripts is there for the Tower of Babel story?

Possible Answers to Points to Ponder in Genesis 6-11 and Moses 8

Moses 8:13 makes it clear that these “sons of God” were simply Noah’s mortal posterity, not supernatural beings.

2. Why was the Lord evidently displeased that the “sons of God” married the “daughters of men”? (Genesis 6:2-4.) Whom else could they have married?

This was evidently a case of God’s covenant people marrying outside of the faith. This is always a recipe for trouble. The “sons of God” should obviously have looked for some “daughters of God” to marry. In our day, prophets have consistently urged Latter-day Saints to marry within the faith, for two critical reasons:

Religious differences can cause serious marital disharmony here and now.
Even more importantly, only a marriage solemnized in a Latter-day Saint temple can endure beyond the few short years of “until death do you part.”

3. What two major justifications for the Flood can you find in Genesis 6?

6:5, 12: The wickedness of man was great in the earth, and … every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually,” and “all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.”
6:11: “The earth was filled with violence.” This was not just “peaceful” corruption, but the wicked were seeking the lives of the righteous, including Noah. (See Moses 8:18.)

4. Genesis 6:6 makes it sound like the Lord was sorry he had made man. How do we know that wasn’t so?

Moses 8:25 makes it clear that it was Noah, not the Lord, who was sorry God had created man. God knows all things from the beginning and is the same yesterday, today, and forever, so it would make no sense to suggest He had changed His mind on the subject.

5. What do you believe are the main points the Lord would want us to remember from the Flood story?

Probably that:

There are limits to God’s patience.
There are both temporal and eternal consequences for sin.
It is important to listen to God’s prophets.
The Lord will protect and preserve the righteous.

6. Can a Latter-day Saint be considered worthy of a temple recommend if he believes the Flood was merely a local phenomenon and that the entire earth was not all literally submerged at the same time?

Certainly. That is not one of the questions asked in the temple recommend interview. I was initially a bit bewildered decades ago to find that my geology professor at BYU was both a doubter of the idea of a universal flood and a member of our stake high council. But I came to understand that there are persuasive arguments on both sides of the question and that the Lord is much more concerned about our faith and obedience to Him and our love for our fellow men than in our beliefs on historical questions. Joseph Smith emphasized that it doesn’t prove that one is a bad man just because he errs in doctrine. It’s fine for us to have strong feelings about the correctness of our own interpretation of the scriptural record as long as we are willing to fellowship with those who may have a different point of view.

7. What are some of the arguments those who doubt there was a universal flood could put forth to defend their point of view?

There is simply no compelling geological evidence of such a catastrophe on a worldwide scale, though evidence can be found of more limited floods.

There is not enough water in the whole world to cover the entire earth, including Mt. Everest. Forty days and forty nights of rain wouldn’t begin to reach such a depth. In fact, if all the water in the atmosphere were to condense and fall as rain, it would amount to only two inches worldwide.

It stretches credulity beyond acceptable limits to think of eight people collecting two or seven of every species of animal, along with enough food for a year’s journey, and then feeding such an unwieldy assemblage and attending to matters of sanitation, etc., for the same year.

As great a problem as that of collecting the animals in the first place, from all parts of the world, would have been that of relocating them afterwards onto all continents, when those continents were separated by vast stretches of water.

To suppose that all current species of animals, in all their variety, could have descended from the relatively few that could have been accommodated on the ark, and to assume that all races of men could have descended from the same family of eight within the past five thousand years or less, requires too great a stretch of the imagination.

The words “all” and “every” in the Bible do not always have to be taken literally. For example, see Gen. 41:57; Deut. 2:25; 1 Kings 18:10; 10:23‑24; and Matt. 13:32 for examples of exaggeration for the sake of emphasis.

No conclusive evidence exists that the object claimed to have been sighted on Mt. Ararat is even related to the ark. Documentation is as good for flying saucers, a hollow earth, and other far‑fetched notions.

A worldwide mixing of fresh and salt water would have been disastrous for fish.

The legends found in Babylonia and other ancient literature, predating the flood story in Genesis, are so similar to the biblical version as to suggest that the Genesis story was borrowed from pagan sources because of its value as a kind of allegory rather than as actual history.

God normally works in more natural ways and with less spectacle than a literal reading of the flood story would permit.

There is no evidence that the earth is under the same obligation to be baptized by immersion that accountable human beings face. We don’t baptize young children, the mentally retarded, or animals, for example. Is the earth under a greater need for baptism than they?

Among those denying the universality of the flood are found prominent Latter-day Saint scientists, who see no conflict between their religious faith and their scientific conclusions in this area.

8. What arguments could believers in a universal flood put forth to defend their position?

The following points are more illustrative than comprehensive:

The biblical account is unequivocal. “All the high hills that were under the whole heaven, were covered.” (Gen. 7:19) “All flesh died that moved upon the earth…. And Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.” (Gen. 7:21, 23. See also Moses 7:43.)

Jesus referred to the flood as an actual historical event. (Matt. 24:39.) So did other biblical writers. (Is. 54:9; 1 Peter 3:20)

The scriptures indicate that from Noah descended all the families of the earth. (Moses 7:45.)

The Book of Mormon indicates that “after the waters had receded from off the face of this land it became a choice land of the Lord.” (Ether 13:2) The flood could hardly have been limited to Mesopotamia if the American continent was also covered. Ether 6:7 indicates that the very real Jaredite barges were similar in some respects to the equally real ark of Noah.

The Lord’s promise that “the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh” (Gen. 9:15) would have little meaning if only a local flood were involved, since many limited disastrous floods have occurred since that time.

An ark with two or more of each kind of animal would have been needless if only a limited flood were involved.

During the 100 years of preparation, it would have been much simpler for Noah’s family simply to have moved to higher ground.

The many ancient traditions concerning a flood are evidence of the reality of the event.

Evidence exists that the ark is still on Mt. Ararat, where it is claimed in scripture to have landed. (Elevation is 13,000 feet on one possible peak and 17,000 feet on another, suggesting more than a mere local flood!)

The fact that it was a year after the beginning of the flood before Noah could leave the ark again suggests more than a limited deluge.

A partial deluge would not satisfy the requirement that the earth, as a living organism, was to be baptized by water anciently, just as it will later be baptized by fire. Brigham Young declared, “The earth…has been baptized with water, and will, in the future be baptized with fire and the Holy Ghost, to be prepared to go back into the celestial presence of God.” (Discourses of Brigham Young, 603.)

The Tower of Babel story and the subsequent dispersion of the people is based on the idea that all living people were in one location‑‑an unlikely circumstance if the flood had not been universal. (See Josephus, Antiquities, book 1, chapter 4.)

Ether 2:1‑3 and 6:4 suggest it may have been necessary for Jaredites to bring animals back to the American continent, presumably because their predecessors had perished in the flood.

The scriptures never claim that only currently observable natural processes caused the flood. And if it was a miracle, it shouldn’t have been too hard for the Lord to find enough water for the task or to get rid of it afterwards. In addition to the 40 days of rain, the “fountains of the great deep were broken up,” evidently providing additional water for the event. And since the average depth of the oceans is 13,000 feet compared to a 2,300 foot average height for the land area of the earth, and since the oceans occupy 2 1/2 times as much area as does the land, simply raising up the ocean floor and/or lowering the mountains (which may not have been so high at the time anyway) would have easily submerged all the land area. Psalms 104:6‑9 and Moses 7:14 suggest just such a possibility.

It is possible that many of the animals hibernated during the flood, requiring little in the way of food. (Some ancient traditions speak of it being very cold during the time of the flood.) The animals’ coming into the ark was clearly a miraculous event, as they “came” to Noah, and were not simply hunted down and captured by him. Calculations show the dimensions of the ark to have been more than adequate to accommodate ancestors of all currently known animal species.

Uniformitarianism is not the only explanation for this earth’s geology. The Book of Mormon bears witness of cataclysmic changes at the time of the crucifixion of Christ, and the scriptures tell of further changes to precede and accompany the Second Coming. It is suggested in 2 Peter 3:3‑7 that misguided uniformitarianism would be one of the intellectual errors of the last days.

The Latter-day Saint teaching that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri suggests that the flood must have been widespread for the ark to have ended up in Mesopotamia—if, in fact, that is where it landed.

A universal flood could explain the sudden extermination of dinosaurs, mammoths, and many other forms of life. It could also explain fossil beds, observed stratification in the rocks, glaciation, formation of oil and coal deposits, and other geological phenomena traditionally associated with uniformitarianism. Local floods often have such devastating power as to suggest that a universal flood with accompanying tidal waves, hydraulic action, etc., would have had little trouble accomplishing in a year what would otherwise have taken millions of years. The definitive apologetic work on the subject is Andrew A. Snelling’s Earth’s Catastrophic Past, which in turn is an update of John C. Whitcomb’s and Henry M. Morris’ classic The Genesis Flood. Snelling’s two-volume set is available as an ebook for only $19.99 at https://www.masterbooks.com/. For a briefer, less technical, and no-cost review of some of the evidence on this point, see:

9. How could a loving God not only allow but cause the wholesale misery and death of almost all of his mortal children, including innocent babies?

It was a greater kindness to drown men, women, and children than to allow them to bring further distress upon themselves and their families.

It is obvious that in the world at large, sin, degradation, and violence are the rule, not the exception. And people today are generally as certain as they were in Noah’s day that God is not going to destroy their world. But for the same reasons He sent a flood in Noah’s day, the Lord in His own due time will destroy today’s world (wicked inhabitants). Our “ark” can include righteous homes, the temple, and being immersed in the gospel and Church activity. From a temporal standpoint, it is interesting that Ezra Taft Benson once said, “The revelation to store food may be as essential to our temporal salvation today as boarding the ark was to the people in the days of Noah.”

11. How long were Noah and his family on the ark? What special challenges would this have posed to them?

They were evidently on the ark for one year and ten days. During part of that time, they were sitting on the top of Mt. Ararat, waiting for the waters to subside enough for them to emerge. Challenges would have included:

Boredom
Fear, during the terrible storms accompanying the flood
Probably seasickness
Probably lots of work, tending to whatever needs their cargo of animals may have had, and foul smells as a result of the same
Lack of fresh vegetables and fruit to eat
Trial of their faith, as Satan no doubt tempted them to wonder if they really were ever going to walk on dry land again
Probable temptations to argue with each other, which is unfortunately all too normal when people are under stress
Darkness? Though legends have it that the ark was lighted by supernatural means, much as the Jaredite barges would be years later

There are two main schools of thought to this long-standing question:

The majority of commentators, including Latter-day Saints, understand the 120 years to be foretelling mankind’s imminent decreased longevity. That seems the most obvious reading of “his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.”
Others, who think the Lord is foretelling the time of the flood, suggest that possibly the 120-year count began before Noah turned 500. Nowhere do the scriptures say that Noah didn’t start preaching until he turned 500.

Someday we’ll know for sure and will find out that the Lord was extremely patient, whatever the answer to this particular question might be.

12a. Why is the reference in Genesis 6:16 to a “window” in the ark of special interest to Latter-say Saints?

Gemini AI explains:

In Genesis 6:16, God instructs Noah: “A window shalt thou make to the ark…” However, the original Hebrew word used here is Tzohar (צוהר), and it’s far more mysterious than a simple hole in the wall.

1. The Linguistic Mystery: What is a Tzohar?

While many modern Bibles translate tzohar as “window” or “opening,” scholars have long noted that the word is unique. Elsewhere in the Bible, the word for window is challon.

Etymology: The root of tzohar is related to tsohorayim, the Hebrew word for “midday” or “noon.”
Meaning: It literally implies something that “shines,” “glitters,” or “gives off light.”

2. Ancient Traditions: The “Luminous Stones”

According to Jewish oral traditions (found in the Talmud and Midrash), Noah didn’t just have a window; he had a bioluminescent or miraculous light source.

The Glowing Gem: One popular tradition says that Noah was instructed to gather precious stones and pearls from the Pishon River. When placed inside the Ark, these stones dimmed during the day and glowed brilliantly at night, allowing Noah to tell time and see his way through the dark, windowless decks.
The “Rough” Diamond: Some texts describe a single large diamond or crystal hung from the ceiling that diffused light throughout the entire structure.
The Purpose: Beyond just visibility, the Tzohar was said to change intensity to signal the passage of time, which was crucial since the sun and moon were obscured by the thick storm clouds for a year.

3. Could it have been the “Window”?

Technically, the Tzohar is the “window” mentioned in Genesis 6:16, but it is likely distinct from the “window” mentioned in Genesis 8:6.

Feature	The Tzohar (Gen 6:16)	The Challon (Gen 8:6)
Translation	Shining/Brilliant object	Aperture/Opening
Function	Interior illumination	Exterior observation
Action	“Make” a light source	“Opened” the window

The prevailing theory: The Tzohar was a skylight or a glowing stone used during the height of the flood, whereas the Challon was a literal hatch Noah opened later to release the raven and the dove once the rain had stopped.

4. Why a Glowing Stone?

Ancient commentators argued that a standard window would have been useless (and dangerous) during the storm.

Waterproofing: Huge waves would have crashed through a traditional opening.
The Environment: The sky was reportedly black with clouds; a window would have only let in darkness and rain.
The “High-Tech” Interpretation: Some alternative historians suggest the Tzohar represents an early understanding of phosphorus or even more advanced light-emitting technology that was lost to time.

Fun Fact: The Book of Ether in the Book of Mormon contains a very similar story, where a group of travelers (the Jaredites) use “molten stones” touched by God to light their lightless barges for a long sea voyage.

See Genesis 8:22, which assures us that as long as the earth lasts, there will be both summer and winter, cold and heat.

14. How could Noah be perfect? (8:27) Wasn’t Jesus the only perfect man?

Only Jesus was consistently morally perfect since birth, but others have, according to the scriptures, eventually attained a measure of perfection. An example is given in Alma 13:12, where Alma refers to righteous saints of antiquity who were “sanctified by the Holy Ghost,… being pure and spotless [and] could not look upon sin save it were with abhorrence” and accordingly “entered into the rest of the Lord their God.” It is worth noting, however, that the word in Genesis 8:27 translated as “perfect” doesn’t mean absolute moral perfection but “complete,” “whole,” or “having integrity.”

15. What else do Latter-day Saints believe about Noah and other names or titles by which he has been known?

Joseph Smith taught that Noah was the same as Gabriel and stands second only to Adam in priesthood authority. The New Testament tells us it was Gabriel who announced the upcoming birth of Jesus to Mary and of John the Baptist to Zacharias. D&C 27:7, however, indicates that the one who made that announcement to Zacharias is also known as Elias. Joseph Fielding Smith in his Answers to Gospel Questions, V. 3, viewed that as sufficient justification to declare that the Elias who appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in the Kirtland Temple and restored the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham was in fact, the same who was known in mortality as Noah. If so, it is not clear why in D&C 110 Joseph Smith would have identified him simply as Elias and never emphasized that he and Noah were one and the same. Significantly, while some calculate that Noah died two years before Abraham was born, others conclude that the two overlapped for 58 years. The scriptures are silent as to whether or not the two ever met in mortality.

16. What is new about the instruction the Lord gives Noah’s family after they emerge from the ark?

See Genesis 9:2-3. It appears that for the first time, men are authorized to eat meat, under certain conditions.

17. What limitations did the Lord put on hunting?

The Lord specified it should be for “only for meat to save your lives (JST, Gen. 9:11),” and not for sport. In our day, the Lord has reiterated “wo be unto man that sheddeth blood or that wasteth flesh and hath no need.” (D&C 49:21.)

18. Does Genesis 9:13 mean there were no rainbows before the Flood? What greater meaning should the rainbow have for Latter-day Saints than for Jews and Christians generally?

The passage does not necessarily mean there were no rainbows before the Flood. Some have suggested that a water vapor canopy may have covered the earth before that time, which not only provided some of the water for the Flood but also prevented rainbows from being seen and provided a more healthful environment, permitting men to live much longer than their post-diluvian descendants. Genesis 2:5-6 is quoted as further evidence that it didn’t rain in the early ages of the earth’s history.

But Genesis 1 indicates that the Lord put stars in the heavens to help give light to the earth, and a thick water vapor canopy would have kept anyone from seeing the stars for the first 1600 years of the earth’s history. And the absence of rain cited in Genesis 2:5-6 referred to a time even before the planting of the Garden of Eden. There is no necessary reason to believe that condition endured for centuries. It seems quite possible that rainbows always existed, but that the Lord designated them after the Flood to be a visual symbol of His covenant with Noah’s family—not simply that there would be no more universal floods, but that He would keep His promises if Noah’s descendants would keep theirs. See JST, Genesis 9:21-25 for additional latter-day insights into the rainbow’s intended symbolism.

19. What sense can we make of the story of Noah’s garment in Genesis 9:21-27?

Dr. Hugh Nibley wrote: “The Apocryphal writers, Jewish and Christian, have a good deal to say about this garment. To quote one of them: ‘The garments of skin which God made for Adam and his wife, when they went out of the garden, were given … after the death of Adam … to Enoch’; hence they passed to Methuselah, and then to Noah, from whom Ham stole them as the people were leaving the ark. … Thus, we are to understand that Ham took the garment of his father while he was sleeping and showed it to his brethren, Shem and Japheth, who took a pattern or copy of it (salmah) or else a woven garment like it (simlah) which they put upon their own shoulders, returning the skin garment to their father. Upon awaking, Noah recognized the priesthood of two sons but cursed the son who tried to rob him of his garment.”

There may have been more than one misguided purpose in their building the tower:

One may have been to be high enough to avoid the effects of another flood. Some sources suggest that they were trying to reach heaven, or Enoch’s city, which they knew had been taken up. This would have been trying to avoid the consequences of sin without having to avoid sin itself. It would also be a manifestation of a lack of faith in the Lord’s promise that He would not send a similar flood upon the earth again.
Other sources indicate that some of them wanted not to enter heaven but to get close enough that they could shoot their arrows at the heavenly beings who had been responsible for the flood!

The most important preparation we can make for latter-day calamities is to live righteously enough to merit divine aid. But yes, we are also urged to make temporal preparations so that we can survive the natural and man-made disasters that may come and have sufficient in store to share with others less fortunate.

21. What external evidence from archaeology, ancient traditions, or manuscripts is there for the Tower of Babel story?

Gemini AI tells us:

The story of the Tower of Babel is often viewed as a mythological explanation for why we don’t all speak the same language. However, when you look at archaeology and Mesopotamian records, there is a fascinating amount of “external” evidence that suggests the story is rooted in the very real building booms of ancient Babylon.

1. The Archaeological Smoking Gun: The Etemenanki

Archaeologists have identified a specific structure in Babylon that most likely served as the inspiration for the biblical Tower: the Etemenanki.

What it was: A massive Ziggurat (step-pyramid) dedicated to the god Marduk.
The Scale: Its name means “House of the Foundation of Heaven and Earth.” Excavations show the base was approximately 91 meters (300 feet) square, and it likely stood 91 meters tall.+1
The Construction: Just as Genesis describes people using “bricks for stone and bitumen for mortar,” the Etemenanki was built with millions of baked mud-bricks held together by bitumen (natural asphalt)—a high-tech waterproof adhesive of the time.

2. The “Tower of Babel” Stele

In 2011, a black stone slab (stele) from the Schøyen Collection was identified as belonging to King Nebuchadnezzar II. It provides some of the most direct visual evidence we have:

The Image: It features a clear carving of a massive stepped ziggurat and a standing figure of Nebuchadnezzar.
The Text: The inscription reads: “I built the front of the Ziggurat of Babylon… I made it the wonder of the people of the world, I raised its top to heaven.”
The Workforce: Crucially, the text mentions that Nebuchadnezzar mobilized workers from all over the known world to build it, mirroring the biblical theme of a “multitude of nations” gathered at one site.

3. Parallel Traditions: The Sumerian Account

Long before the Book of Genesis was compiled, the Sumerians had a strikingly similar story in an epic called “Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta.”

The “Incantation of Nudimmud”: This ancient poem describes a golden age where all people spoke one language. It then describes the god Enki “confusing” their tongues so they could no longer understand one another.
The Link: This suggests that the “confusion of tongues” wasn’t just a Hebrew story, but a widespread cultural memory in Mesopotamia regarding a shift from linguistic unity to diversity.

4. The “Birs Nimrud” Tradition

For centuries, travelers identified the ruins of Borsippa (modern Birs Nimrud, near Babylon) as the actual Tower.

The Evidence: The ruins there are vitrified—melted into glass—as if struck by massive heat or lightning.
The Legend: Local tradition held that God struck the tower with fire from heaven to stop the construction. While geologists usually attribute this to massive fires or lightning strikes hitting the bitumen-rich bricks, it kept the “divine intervention” aspect of the story alive for millennia.

5. Comparison: Genesis vs. History

Feature	Genesis Account	Archaeological Record (Etemenanki)
Material	Baked bricks and Bitumen	Baked bricks and Bitumen mortar
Location	Plain of Shinar	Babylon (central Mesopotamia)
Goal	“Reach unto heaven”	“House of the Foundation of Heaven/Earth”
Fate	Abandoned/Unfinished	Destroyed/rebuilt multiple times (Alexander the Great eventually leveled it)