Evidence of the Flood and Noah's Ark

Most academics and even many theologians dismiss the biblical account of Noah and the catastrophic global flood as a myth. But is this so? If you are interested in investigating the past, let's take a look at a number of different historical accounts to determine whether or not there is historical evidence for the flood and Noah's ark.

Writing in the first century AD, Flavius Josephus was a Romano-Jewish historian. His book the 'Antiquities of the Jews' aligns itself with the Bible but in doing so it also relies upon numerous secular sources, some of which are no longer available to us today. His writings were intended for a predominantly Greek and Roman audience and provides a valuable source of historical records for us today. In Book 1 and chapter 3 he wrote the following:

"Hereby Noah learned, that the earth was become clear of the flood. So after he had stayed seven more days, he sent the living creatures out of the Ark; and both he and his family went out, when he also sacrificed to God, and feasted with his companions. However, the Armenians call this place, Apobaterio, The place of descent: for the Ark being saved in that place, its remains are shewed there by the inhabitants to this day."

Josephus was a credible historian of his time, he was very close to Emperor Vespasian and his family, hence adopting the name Flavius. His reputation would have been greatly diminished or even ruined, if his claim that the remains of the ark were still visible was a fallacy. He doesn't stop there, however, if we read on he states:

"Now all the writers of Barbarian Histories make mention of this flood, and of this Ark: among whom is Berosus the Chaldean. For when he is describing the circumstances of the flood, he goes on thus: "It is said there is still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the mountain of the Cordyæans; and that some people carry off pieces of the bitumen: which they take away, and use chiefly as amulets, for the averting of mischiefs."

These are intriguing claims and lead us to the next historian who Josephus mentions: Berosus the Chaldean.

The Chaldean historian was a third century BC historian and Babylonian priest for Bel-Marduk (you can watch our Viewpoint titled From Babylon to A United Europe for more information on this subject) and unfortunately only fragments and references to his manuscripts have survived. However, what can be asserted is that he was considered an historian by later uses of his work although undoubtedly his manuscript Babyloniaca or History of Babylonia contains a significant degree of hyperbole and distortion of actual events. This is clear when we consider the Epic of Gilgamesh, which I will get to in a minute. However, the quote I want to bring to your attention, which Josephus referenced, is not a historical claim. Berosus was writing about the Ark, which he said was found in the land of the Cordeans at the time of his writing. If this was simply false, his audience would know this! We have two historians, with Josephus writing almost four hundred years later, and Berosus making the same claim that the remains of the ark can be found in this region. Note, it is not near what we call today Mt. Ararat but as the Bible states,

"…the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat."

The region has been identified by scholars and historians as being in southeastern Turkey. Dutch historian, Jona Lendering more recently wrote:

"…Flavius Josephus, the Babylonian writers, and the Quran have retained an older tradition, which puts the Ark's landing site between Lake Van and the Tigris."

As I previously mentioned, Berosus wrote his account of Babylonian history and included many fantastical tales much like the Epic of Gilgamesh. This cuneiform tablet story is used by some to dismiss the Biblical account as myth because it predates the Old Testament writings. However, just because the story predates the Bible, this does not render corroborating events as a myth; we should never throw the baby out with the bathwater, even in the case of a deluge. Besides, there are many striking similarities to the Flood found in Genesis. Mankind was to be wiped out due to the sin and corruption that had spread throughout civilisation, all except one man and his family; the construction of a huge wooden boat covered in pitch; the sending out of birds to see if the waters had receded. The similarities go on, rather than talk of another mythical flood event, the Epic of Gilgamesh serves more to support the story of the flood occurring than to tear it down, albeit an account that may otherwise tell a fictional story. 

All these accounts sit as secular records which support an event of "biblical proportions" having taken place. A catastrophic global flood that wiped out almost all of mankind has undoubtedly left its mark on written accounts down through history. The known existence of the ark, even as late as 100 AD, supports the so-called 'myth' of the flood as having actually taken place. Rather than dismiss something out-of-hand, we should be more willing to investigate the evidence that is found in these records and many others that time does not permit us to consider.

If God destroyed mankind for its egregious conduct, and evidence exists to support this event occuring, then we should now be considering how our behaviour might result in other prophetic events, found in the Bible, soon occurring.