The Time of Noah
From the Genesis narrations it might be inferred that the Flood took place some four or so thousand years ago and that, accordingly, Noah must have lived some four or so thousand years ago. K.T. Rajasingham wrote, “According to Bible’s detailed chronology, the indications are that the Great Flood occurred in the year 2370 BC.”
But the truth is that the Bible did not categorically fix a date for the Flood. Accordingly, nobody knows when the Flood actually took place.
Obviously the Flood took place a very long time ago and not just a couple of millennia ago as Biblical scholars are telling us today. The Flood took place several thousands, if not a million or so, years ago. The Flood took place in a time so far away from us that virtually everything we may know about the Flood may not be exactly the way we interpret it today.
The story of Noah and the Flood took place at a time that is so far away from our modern times, so far away that the dispensation in which Noah lived and in which the Flood took place is completely different from our sociological dispensation of our modern times. The things that happened during the time of Noah are totally and completely different from the way things are in our modern times.
The nature of human sociology in the days of Noah is totally different from the sociology of humanity in modern times.
Noah must have lived several hundreds of thousands of, if not millions of, years ago. In that case Noah lived in a society that was completely and totally different from our modern society. Everything we see in the society, and the entire story of Noah for that matter, is completely different from the way things are in our modern times.
All the things that the scriptures were telling us about in the story of Noah are totally different from the things we know today and the way things happen today in our modern society.
A Change of World Order
One other thing here is that the story of the Flood told us the change of an ancient world order. Initially there was a world dispensation that dominated the entire world and it was a very advanced one. In the story of Atlantis we learnt that pre-Diluvian humanity actually lived in a paradisiacal society. It was a superior and advanced world order which came to an end in a cataclysmic Flood. The whole of the paradisiacal world order was destroyed by a world Flood that entirely overwhelmed and overhauled that dispensation. Afterwards a new world order begun all over again.
So, the Flood came and put an end to a very advanced civilisation which flourished at the very beginning of annals of humanity.
Contrary to our conventional portrayal of the pre-diluvian people of Noah as a primitive or backward people, the fact is that the people of Noah were a very civilized people with a culture and a civilisation that were far advanced above our modern Western civilisation. The people of the time of Noah were in possession of superior spiritual and scientific technologies that were far more advanced than anything modern mankind can ever imagine.
It was the Flood, however, that brought an end to this superior world order of the Noachide era.
Noah was not Primitive
The conventional picture we have of Noah and his life and times is that of a rather primitive society, a backward civilisation in which Noah lived. We generally assume that the civilisation of Noah was not as developed and advanced as that of our modern times. We usually assume that the culture and civilisation of Noah is backward and underdeveloped compared to our modern culture and civilisation.
And this general assumption we have of a primitive Noah living in a backward society is actually promoted by the manner in which the story is narrated in the scriptures particularly the Bible. When we read the story of Noah as related in the Bible what we see is the picture of a Noah who was living in a society that was rather backward compared to our modern society. The science and technology of the people of Noah all seem to be lower than our modern science and technology. That is the picture we get from the Bible if we read the story of Noah from the Bible in a conventional manner.
The point here, however, is that the Bible was actually compiled in the period of Antiquity, just at the beginning of the modern Historical era. Those who compiled the Bible, the Jewish Chroniclers, were actually penning down oral versions of the Helio Biblica traditions that have been narrated from one generation to another for millions of years in Black Negro Africa.
In the process of transforming an oral tradition into writing the Jewish Chroniclers reinterpreted the stories of the million year old Helio Biblica in their own, modern mankind, worldview. The Jewish Chroniclers in essence retold the oral stories that have been around for millions of years in the context of an Antiquity worldview. And, to be fair, there is no way the Jewish Chroniclers of Antiquity could have penned down the stories of the Helio Biblica in a form not that of a worldview rampant in the days of Antiquity.
The Jewish Chroniclers of Antiquity ended up telling the story of Noah through their own, Antiquity, eyes. Thus the story of Noah was narrated as if it took place during the period of Antiquity. The Jewish Chroniclers who penned down the Bible retold the story of Noah through their own worldview which was circumscribed by the period of Antiquity. What we eventually ended up with is a story of Noah in such a guise that portrays a Noah who could have as well lived in the period of Antiquity.
The Noah of the Bible is therefore a Noah of Antiquity and not the Noah who truly lived a million or so years ago. This is because the story of the Noah as narrated in the Bible was retold by the Jewish Chroniclers who lived in the era of Antiquity. These Jewish Chroniclers retold the story of Noah with a worldview of Antiquity.
But the point we are trying to make here is that Noah lived millions of years ago before the era of Antiquity. Since the Jewish Chroniclers, who lived during the period of Antiquity millions of years after the days of Noah, retold the story of Noah in an Antiquity guise, they in effect distorted the million year-old story into an Antiquity guise.
The story of Noah, as it was penned down by the Jewish Chroniclers of Antiquity, is nothing but an Antiquity reconstruction of what happened millions of years before the period of Antiquity. And it is this Antiquity story of Noah, or the Noah of Antiquity, that has come down to us as the story of Noah in the Bible. It is the story of Noah casted in an Antiquity worldview that has come down to modern mankind as the codified or written form of the Bible.
It is not the picture of the true Noah, who lived millions years ago, that got down to modern mankind, it is the picture of the Noah of Antiquity, reconstructed some two thousand years ago, that got down to modern mankind. In essence modern mankind has received a skewed or wrong picture of Noah.
It is this picture of Noah, casted with a worldview of Antiquity, that portrays Noah as living in a society that was rather primitive in contrast to our modern society. What we get from a conventional reading of the Bible is the picture of a Noah whose culture and civilisation that were not as scientifically and technologically developed or advanced as our modern culture and civilisation. The Jewish Chroniclers of Antiquity have casted Noah in an Antiquity society that is rather backward in contrast to our modern society. We now have a Biblical Noah who lived in a society that is not as sociologically developed as our modern society because, and of course, the society, culture and civilisation of Antiquity were not as developed as that of our modern society.
After all is said and done the fact still remains that the picture of Noah that came down to modern mankind is totally and completely different from the true picture of the real Noah who lived millions of years ago.
The truth of the matter is that the society in which the real Noah lived, millions of years ago, was not a backward one. Noah lived in a society with highly advanced culture and civilisation. The science and technology of the people of Noah were far more advanced than those of modern Western civilisation.
Noah was not a primitive patriarch who lived in a backward society. That picture of a primitive Noah in a backward society that we are so used to is wrong – it is the picture of a wrong Noah casted in the period of Antiquity by the Jewish Chroniclers who penned down the Bible. The true Noah lived millions of years before Antiquity and the Jewish Chroniclers. He lived in a society that was far more advanced – scientifically, technologically, spiritually, and otherwise – than our modern society.
Noah was a highly civilised person who lived in a scientifically and technologically advanced civilisation, far more advanced than our modern Western civilisation.
Noah was a Black African Negro
Noah was evidently a Black African Negro. Documentary evidences abound in confirmation of this undeniable fact.
The first such documentary evidence is the fact that the entire story of Noah and the Flood originated from Egypt or Black Negro Africa. All the peoples and cultures of the world got their story of Noah from the ancient Egyptians, from the ancient North Africans, from the ancient West Africans and from the ancient Black African Negroes in general. Black Negro Africa is the origin of the story of Noah and the Flood.
Then there is also the fact that the setting of the story of Noah and the Flood is during the eon of the Black World Order. And, as we all know, the Black World Order was an eon of world dominion by Black African Negroes. That the story of Noah and the Flood took place during the era of the Black World Order simply means that, come what may, this must have been a Black African Negro story; Noah and the Flood were Black, African and Negroid.
The story of Noah and the Flood took place millions of years ago; and that actually takes us right back into the era of the Black World Order. It was in the days of the Black World Order, when the world was dominated by Black African Negros, that the story of Noah and the Flood took place. In this Black World Order it is evident that Noah must have been a Black African Negro.
A meticulous and contextual look at the scriptures also confirms the fact that Noah was a Black African Negro. There are, for instance, enough Biblical evidences in support of the fact that Noah was a Black African Negro. We should note, parenthetically, that the Bible is itself of Black African Negro origins. The Bible was written by Black African Negroes. So, the Bible tells the stories of Black African Negroes.
It should parenthetically be stated here that all the peoples and individual characters mentioned by both the Bible and the Qur’an were Black African Negroes through and through. The Bible and the Qur’an are the chronicles of Black African Negroes, period!
Dr. Etiese Abasika wrote: “Throughout the entire Bible, the history of the Black race has featured most prominently. We may as well claim that the Bible is the documentary history of the Black race. Even though the Caucasians have done everything in their power to change most of the facts in the Bible, through different translations, so as to alter the facts of the history of the black race, as the originator of this precious universal document, we still have most pertinent proofs that the Bible is a document that contains the history of the Black Race.”
When the scriptures told us about Noah constructing an Ark, we will be very mistaken if we assume that the Ark that was built in the days of Noah is the type of Ark that is known to modern mankind. This is the same mistake that our scholars and religious authorities make, they conjure up all manners of pictures regarding how the Ark of Noah may have looked. They didn’t know that the time and dispensation in which Noah lived are so far away from historical, and even prehistorical, times that there is no way prehistoric and historic humanity would have known how the Ark of Noah looked like or what it was even made of.
This is the central problem at the heart of the story of Noah, his Ark and the Flood. The problem is that we reinterpret the story of Noah in our own modern worldview. We are not aware of the fact that the story of Noah took place in an era that is so different from ours that it will be plain impossible to interpret or reconstruct the story of Noah in our own modern worldviews.
We wrongly reinterpret or reconstruct the story of the scriptures in our own modern worldview. When the scriptures talk about the Ark of Noah we generally assume that the Ark that was constructed by Noah was an ancient or Medieval type of Ark that was constructed by using logs and planks of wood. But that is totally wrong.
And compounding this problem is the fact that the Jewish Chroniclers who compiled that Bible described the Ark in a rather Antiquity or Dark Ages form that is well known to modern mankind. These Jewish Chroniclers used the worldview of modern mankind to describe the Ark. They went into details in their description of what was used to construct the Ark and the way the Ark eventually looked like. This description is so detailed that even modern scientists and research workers were able to sit down and reconstruct the Ark exactly the way it was described in the Bible.
But the problem here is that even the detailed description of the ark given in the Bible does not actually portray a true picture of the Ark that was built by Noah a million or so years ago. The story of Noah took place in such a remote era ago that whatever he might have constructed as the Ark must have been completely different from anything whatsoever that modern mankind can ever imagine, conceive or visualise as Noah’s Ark.
In other words, the Ark that was constructed by Noah was completely different from any idea of an Ark that is known to modern mankind. The simple reason here is that the time in which Noah lived is so far away from our times and the sociology of that time is so different from the sociology of our modern times that the way things were done in the days of Noah is so different from the way we do things today that definitely the Ark that was constructed by Noah cannot be the same with any type of ark that is known to modern mankind or that is even conceivable to modern mankind.
The truth of the matter here is that the Ark that was constructed by Noah must have been something that was peculiar to the time of Noah and is, therefore, unknown to modern mankind. It must have been a contraption, a devise or even an organism that might have been able to float on water and that might have been able to accommodate plants and animals, or their genetic DNAs and not necessarily the living animals and plants themselves.
The truth is that the nature or type of Ark that was constructed by Noah is completely unknown to modern mankind. The true knowledge of Noah’s Ark is completely lost to modern mankind. We will just be beating around the bush or be committing outright blunders if we, modern humanity, try to describe Noah’s Ark.
Even the Jewish Chroniclers who compiled the Bible into a book did not know for real how Noah’s Ark truly looked like and the description given in the Book of Genesis is therefore merely a metaphorical or allegorical description – and not the true description of the true Noah’s Ark which is unknown to even the Jewish Chroniclers themselves.
The Jewish Chroniclers lived in relatively modern times, in the era of Antiquity at the tail end of Prehistory and on the eve of this Historical era. The Jewish Chroniclers who compiled the Bible therefore lived during a time when the knowledge of Noah’s Ark was completely and long lost to modern mankind. Noah’s Ark was built a million or so years ago before the time of the Jewish Chroniclers.
Noah’s Ark was completely different from anything that modern mankind can ever imagine. It was not an ark, it was not a ship and it was not a boat in any sense that modern mankind know these things.
As a matter of fact if we are to admit the fact that Noah actually lived in a society and civilisation that was far more advanced than modern Western civilisation then we will see that Noah’s Ark, whatever it might have been, must have been a spiritual and scientific contraption that was technologically far more advanced than whatever modern mankind can ever imagine.
Noah’s Ark must have been a contraption that must have been constructed with a very high spiritual and scientific technology far more technologically advanced than anything modern mankind has ever invented or constructed technologically.
Noah’s Ark may also have been a wholly spiritual entity. This is because Noah lived in the Spiritual Age which was totally different from the Material Age that modern mankind lives in today.
Whether spiritually or scientifically advanced, this contraption that was constructed by Noah was evidently a technologically advanced entity. And it is totally and absolutely different from anything that modern mankind can ever imagine or even conceive. So, modern mankind may never ever know the true nature of the Ark that was constructed Noah.
One thing we can be sure of with regard to the so-called ‘Noah’s Ark’ is the fact that it was definitely not an ark in the conventional sense that modern mankind may understand the word. The only thing we can say about this thing is that it was a contraption constructed by Noah to protect him against the Flood and to carry the genetic or otherwise parts of zoological species with him. These are the only things that modern mankind can say with any measure of certainty with regard to the so-called Noah’s Ark.
Otherwise modern mankind knows nothing about the contraption constructed by Noah. It may have been a small contraption; it may have been a moderate-sized contraption; and it may have been a large contraption.
But Noah’s ‘Ark’ may not necessarily have been a gigantic vessel as we are used to assuming today. We used to think that Noah’s Ark must have been a very large vessel simply because we imagine a gigantic vessel that should have been able to carry all the animals and plants in the world.
Noah’s ‘Ark’ may have been a small contraption – only large enough to contain Noah’s family and a box containing the genetic DNA of the species of all the animals and plants in the world. Because of the advanced scientific and spiritual technologies that were obtainable in the days of Noah, Noah may have actually carried just the DNA of all the plants and animals in the world with him into the Ark which in that case may have been a small vessel.
Noah may not necessarily have carried a pair each of all the animals and plants in the world into the Ark.
Noah’s Animals and Plants
Another very dramatic twist to the Noah story is that of how Noah collected a pair of all the animals and plants in the world and carried them into the Ark. Modern mankind’s religious authorities, story tellers, painters and film makers have all, alike, exhausted their imaginations in trying to portray the picture of a gigantic Noah’s Ark lying on top of a mountain with a door opened as a pair off all the animals of the world stroll or trot into the Ark while Noah and his family members carry baskets of lush plants into the Ark. This is a very dramatic picture that is usually popular with the story of Noah.
The usual story is that Noah actually gathered a pair of all the animals and all the plants in the world and got them into the Ark. But a careful analysis of this story will show that there are a lot of anomalies and outright impossibilities associated with the story.
For a start it is not possible, no matter how we imagine it, for Noah to have been able to construct a vessel that can physically contain a pair of all the animals and all the plants in the world. The number of animal and plant species in the world is just too much that it evidently impossible to have a pair of all the animals and all the plants in the world contained in a single vessel – unless we want to believe that the Ark constructed was such a gigantic vessel that is hundreds of thousands of meters in breadth and length. That is the Ark will have been several thousands of times larger than the one described in the Bible. That, of course, is beyond the imagination of modern mankind and is well nigh impossible.
The problem that modern mankind faces with the story of Noah is that we use our modern worldview to reinterpret the story of Noah and that is why we see al lot of impossibilities associated with the story. There is no way, as we have said over and over again, that Noah could have physically carried a pair of all the animals and all the plants in the world into any contraption he may have constructed in the form of an ark.
Noah may have carried all the animals and plants of the world into the Ark in any other manner unknown to modern mankind but it is definitely not in the form of physically carrying a pair of all the animals and all the plants into an ark constructed with logs of woods on top of a mountain. That is evidently impossible.
A more feasible variant of this story is for modern mankind to simply assume that Noah, considering the very advanced civilisation in which he lived and because he had access to an advanced form of spiritual and scientific technology far superior to that of our modern Western civilisation, may have collected just the genetic DNA of the animals and plants of the world. In other words it may have been that it was only the DNA of the animals and plants that Noah collected and took with him into the Ark.
If it was just the DNA of animals and plants that Noah carried with him into the Ark then the Ark could have as well been a very small vessel probably the size of a small boat in our modern worldview. This is because the DNA of all the animal and plant species of the world can easily be contained in a small box that Noah could have conveniently carried under his armpit into the Ark.
But the assumption that Noah may have carried just the DNA of the animals and plants of the world into the ark is just another modern reinterpretation of an event that took place during an era that modern mankind knows nothing about. Those days are so far away from our modern times, millions of years ago, that nobody in these Modern Ages knows what really happened in the days of Noah.
Noah may not have carried the DNA of all the animal and plant species of the world into the Ark. The truth is that modern mankind knows nothing for real about how Noah carried the animals and plants into the Ark. All modern mankind can do is to keep on assuming and presuming all manners and sorts of possibilities of what may have actually happened in the form of the story of Noah that the scriptures allegorically narrated to us.
Nobody in this present world dispensation knows for real what actually happened in the days of Noah. And we compound the problem when we use our modern worldview to interpret or reconstruct the events that happened in the days of Noah millions of years of ago. Modern mankind does not really know what the scriptures were saying when they told us that Noah carried a pair of all animals and all plant in the world into the Ark. And we don’t really have any good idea about what the scriptures actually meant by this obviously allegorical story.
The only thing we can be sure of is that Noah was able to carry aspects of the animal and plant species of the world into a contraption he constructed. But this doesn’t necessarily means that he, and it is actually impossible for him to have, carried a pair of all living animals and plants into an ark he constructed with woods on top of a mountain. It would have been totally impossible for Noah to have been able to do that.
The popular picture that we usually see, of all species of animals gradually moving into Noah’s Ark, may actually exist only in the imagination of the painters and artists who conjure up such graphic pictures. This is because the truth of the matter is that that is not the manner in which Noah really carried the animals and plants into the Ark. The way we assume today is not the way in which things actually happened or took place in the days of Noah.
Modern mankind is obviously not equipped or endowed enough to know exactly what happened with regard to the scriptural story of how Noah carried the plants and animals into the Ark. If the scriptures tell us that Noah carried all the animals and plants in the world into the Ark we don’t have to reinterpret the story literally and view it with our own modern worldview. We don’t have to start portraying this event the way our religious authorities and artists have been doing by imagining that Noah literally carried a pair of every living animal in the world and put them into the Ark.
The bottom line is that the scriptures were describing an even that took place several thousands of years or millions of years ago. And the world dispensation in those far away days are so different from that of our modern times that we can never know for sure how Noah truly carried the animals and plants into the Ark. But it is definitely not the way modern mankind imagines it today, namely, that Noah must have constructed some medieval ark into which he literally carried species of all the animals and plants of the world.
L. Savage wrote that “It is fairly well established there was a great flood in our past. The Gilgamesh and Noah epics are more or less verified by archeologists as a real event, however the time of this catastrophe is any given date plus or minus thousands of years. Velikovsky supports in his books a worldwide flood, which were caused by planetary causes, rather than by god(s). There are archeological proponents of there being more than one flood that caused extensive damage, perhaps the Noahidic flood being the greatest.”
The Universal Story
The most striking thing about the story of the Flood is that it is ubiquitously found in all the folklores, traditions, mythologies, and scriptures of all the peoples and religions in this world. K.T. Rajasingham wrote that “the origin of mankind and the universal flood are not only recorded in Genesis, but also in almost all the sacred books of the prehistoric world.”
K.T. Rajasingham wrote, “Uta-nipishtim tells the story of how King Gilgamesh survived the Great Flood – a first story of this kind about flood.” He then added “Most striking part of the epic is the coming of a great flood which obliterated mankind, except for a favored family, who survive by building an ark; from them spring a new race, to people the world, after the flood has subsided.”
The Microsoft Encarta Encyclopaedia continua` “In the Gilgamesh Epic, a Babylonian heroic narrative ultimately of Sumerian origin, the high god Enlil sends a deluge to destroy mankind; one man, Utnapishtim, survives in a cube-shaped ark he has been instructed to build and to stock with the seed of all living creatures, and the description of his preparation and voyage closely anticipate the biblical story of Noah.
“The motif of the Flood also occurs in the mythology of India and Greece. In Chinese myth a hero named Yu is charged by the Emperor Shun pk bring floodwater under control; this task takes him 13 years of punishing toil, but he at last solves the problem by constructing canals. He is rewarded by the emperor’s abdication in his favour. The Aboriginal Australian myth of the Great Flood, which both destroyed a previously existing world and initiated a new social order, , may have a historical basis in the effects of rising sea-levels as temperatures rose after the last Ice Age.”
The Qur’an told the same story of Noah and the Ark in a form essentially the same as that of the Bible in a number of Chapters including Suratul Haqqa, Suratul, Suratul Qamar, Suratul Hudd, etc, etc.
K.T. Rajasingham wrote, “The oldest theory of the creation of man and the subsequent flood that submerged the world is also found in the Hinduttuva books. According to Hind beliefs, ‘Creation has no beginning – anadi, and it is eternal.’ Brahma is the Creator of the universe in the Hindu Trinity.
“At the end of each Kalpa – a unit of time equal to a day of Brahma, amounting to 4,320 earth or world years, each time a new universe is recreated. At the end of the last age, there was a great deluge or destruction, which destroyed the universe. The present Age is the eight kalpa called Swetavarah.”
K.T. Rajasingham also wrote, “American Indians possesses numerous legends concerning this prehistoric calamity. The Paraguayan and Brazilian Guaranys posses’ cycle of legends concerning their national hero Tamanduare, who with his family were the few survivors spared by the catastrophe, that destroyed the ‘City of the Shining Roofs.’ Almost all the ancient tribes possess reasonably similar traditions concerning the Great Flood. The ancient Greek legend tells us about the terrible inundation that occurred during the reign of Phoroneus, the King Pelasgi of Argos, and about Daqcalion and his Pyrrha. The ancient Egyptians had their own legend concerning the Great Flood. According to the Egyptian legend, the God Tem (otherwise Temou, Atem or Armou) drawn waters out of the abyss and inundated the earth to destroy the humanity, ultimately everybody perished, save those on the boat of God Tem.”
K.T. Rajasingham, in his ‘The Beginning: Created or Originated?, wrote, “It is a remarkable fact to note that, almost all the ancient tribes in the world possessed approximately similar versions, regarding the origin of the man and that of the great flood. Such parallelisms in the versions of such widely separated nations concerning the same calamity, lead us to deduce a common denominator source for all these legends.”
That we see the story of Noah and the Flood today among all the peoples and cultures of the world shouldn’t, however, blindfold us to the fact that this story of Noah and the Flood originated from the heart of Black Negro Africa. The point is that all the cultures and civilisations of the world are by and large derivatives of the original civilisations of Black Negro Africa. The story of Noah and the Flood originated from West Africa millions of years ago.
The Flood resulted in the submarine and subterranean residence and domicile of mankind. The Flood caused the submerging of Ur-Land, the Primordial Land variously referred to today as Atlantis.”
A Global Flood?
The story of the Flood is a universal one. We find the story of the Flood among all the peoples and cultures of the world. But this may not necessarily mean that the Flood was a global or universal one. It may have been a local one because the story of the Flood originated from a locality in Black Negro Africa in ancient times.
It was from the ancient Egyptians and other North Africans that the story of the Flood spread to all other parts of the world. This means that the Flood really took place in Africa. Even if the Flood was a global one the incidents in the story of Noah and the Flood must have taken place in the heart of Black Negro Africa.
It was centuries, or even millennia, after the Flood had taken place in Africa that its story eventually spread to other parts of the world. Even though today we can see that the Flood is a universal one the fact still remains that, once upon a time, the story of the Flood was known only among the Africans and was restricted only to Black Negro Africa. It was only afterwards that the story of the Flood spread to all other parts of the world. So, initially the story of the Flood was an African story.
From all these we can see that the Flood was most probably a local event that took place in a part of Africa. Of course the Flood could have overwhelmed an entire sub-continental part of the African continent or it may have overwhelmed the whole of Africa.
Since the Flood took place millions of years ago it is very probable that in the days of the Flood there was not a separate African continent. In the days of Noah there was most probably Gondwanaland whereby all the southern continents of the world were fused to Africa which was located in the centre of the super continent.
In this case the Flood may not have been an Africa affair alone. But it was still centred in Africa which was located in the centre of Gwondwanaland.
And then there is also the possibility that the Flood may have been a global event. The Flood may have after all been just one of the countless glaciations that accompanied any of the many Ice Ages in the geological history of the world. If the Flood was a glaciations, or even an entire Ice Age, then it might as well be seen as a global event.
At this distance from the Flood, several millions of years later, however, we cannot tell for sure whether the Flood was a local, regional or global event.
The Flood may, after all, have not been a worldwide affair. This is most probably the case, that is, considering the fact that the story of Noah and the Flood originated from Black Negro Africa and was initially known only to the people of Black Negro Africa. It was only in latter times that the story spread to other parts of the world.
The Flood is most probably not a worldwide affair. But even if it was a worldwide affair then it actually took place, still, with the heart of Black Negro Africa as the geographical setting for the centerpiece of the story.
Atlantis and the Flood
The story of the destruction and submergence of Atlantis has striking parallels to the story of Noah and the Flood that there cannot be denying the fact that they are one and the same story. The story of Atlantis is nothing but the Greek version of the story of the Flood.
The Greeks actually told the story of the Flood in their story of the submergence of Atlantis.
As a matter of fact Ignatius Donnelly, after studying the story of the Flood in several cultures and traditions around the world, wrote that, “And here we find that the Flood that destroyed this land of the gods was the Flood of Deucalion, and the Flood of Deucalion was the Flood of the Bible, and this, as we have shown, was ‘the last great Deluge of all,’ according to the Egyptians, which destroyed Atlantis.”
The Greeks got their story of the Flood from the ancient Egyptians.
The White man and Noah’s Flood
Some said the white man’s first appearance was immediately after the Noachic Deluge; that he was a mutant resulting from the cataclysmic events of the Deluge.
It should be parenthetically delineated here that the Deluge engendered the extinction of majority of the animal and plant species of the pre-diluvian era. For instance, the Deluge put the final extinction touch to the giant reptiles known to us today as the dinosaurs. Also the Deluge initiated the gradual extinction of the giant races of mankind that have once populated this planet earth in teeming numbers.
However, and in return, the Deluge brought into existence a whole lot of new zoological and botanical species to populate the animal and plant kingdoms. The Whites of mankind might have, as well, been one of those new zoological additions.
The point, however, is that the claim that the white man first appeared after the Noachic Deluge remains as much a conjectural matter as is the equally audacious claim that the white man appeared much later after the fall of Babel, or Babylon the Great, of the Iba major civilisation of the New Ethiopia era.
The search for the Lost Ark of Noah may actually be a fruitless one for modern mankind due to the simple fact that the story of Noah and the Flood took place a very long time ago, several millions of years ago. Whatever may have been the Ark of Noah should have become totally extinct by now, that is, after several millions of years.
Whatever may have been used for the construction of Noah’s Ark might not have survived this long period, several millions of years, of time. After all Noah’s Ark might have been made of wood as the Jewish Chroniclers of Antiquity may be telling us today.
Noah’s Ark was not just some primitive boat constructed by a carpenter Noah using wood and timber from a nearby forest on the top of a mountain. The entity we refer to today as Noah’s Ark may have been a technologically advanced contraption which may not have been made of wood or any other thing that we may know of today. It may have been made of something far more technologically superior to anything modern mankind may be aware of today. Noah’s Ark may therefore be totally different from anything that modern mankind can imagine or conceive.
The probability is very high that Noah’s Ark must have ceased existing by now considering the fact that it was constructed several millions, if not a billion, years ago.
More befuddling to modern mankind with regard to the topic of Noah’s Ark is the question of the location of the Mountain on which the Ark was said to have finally come to rest. Biblical scholars will say it eventually came to rest on Mount Ararat. The Qur’an said Noah’s Ark came to rest on Mount Judi. There is no problem with this apparent contradiction between the Bible and the Qur’an. This is because Mount Ararat and Mount Judi may simply be different scriptural names for the same ancient mountain. That is if it were a mountain at all.
According to Reverend Thomas Hughes the Qur’anic Judi and the Biblical Ararat are different names for the same mountain on which Noah’s Ark rested.
The probability also exist that Ararat or Judi, or whatever, may not have been a mountain after all. Even modern scholarship is aware of the fact that the Ararat was originally not the name of a mountain, it was the name of a province.
Many scholars are of the view that Ararat was not the name of a mountain but was, in fact, the name of a province or a civilisation. Whiston, in his book, History of Armenia, wrote that Araratia was a province and not a mountain. In Persian mythology Ararat is, as a matter of fact, a Civilisation. The Persians refer to Ararat as the Cradle of Civilisation. Genesis 8:4 stated that Noah’s Ark rested on Mount Ararat. The traditional interpretation of this verse is that Mount Ararat is located in present day Turkey. Today’s Agri Mount is conventionally taken to be the biblical Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey.
But, this traditional interpretation is coming under serious attack as more and more research data are accumulating in refutation of the traditional claim that the biblical Mount Ararat is the so-called Mount Ararat (Agri Mountain) in eastern Turkey.
Mawlana Yusuf Ali wrote that “The Biblical legend of Mount Ararat being the resting place of Noah’s Ark is hardly plausible.”
Flavius Josephus, the renowned Jewish historian, similarly believed that the Mount Ararat in today’s Turkey is not the one on which Noah’s Ark rested.
Many other peoples in the past and up to date have believed that the Turkish Mount Ararat is not the Biblical Mount Ararat. These various peoples include the Babylonians; the Jews; the Orthodox Christians; the Nestorian Christians – the so-called Chaldeans or Christians of St. Thomas; etc, etc.
All these totally rule out any possibility whatsoever that the so-called Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey is not the Ararat mentioned in the Bible as the resting place of Noah’s Ark. Before the present mountain in eastern Turkey came to be known as Ararat, there used to be an entire province that was known as Ararat in Asia Minor.
But then, and as we go back in time, we see that even the province that was known as Ararat in Asia Minor was actually named after an Original Ararat nation that was, once upon a time, located right in the heart of Black Negro Africa.
The point here is that Ararat is a very ancient name that originated from Africa. Ararat is a very ancient word tracing back to Black Negro Africa millions of years ago. In the beginning Ararat was an entire nation located in the heart of Black Negro Africa. It was this Original Ararat, located in the heart of Black Negro Africa, that the Bible referred as the final resting place of Noah’s Ark.
Dr. Etiese Abasika, for instance wrote that “It could have been possible to believe that Noah’s Ark rested on Mt. Kilimanjaro based on the historical facts that life first started in Africa, probably, after the great flood.”
So, Noah’s Ark could not and cannot have been resting on top of the present Mount Ararat of eastern Turkey. All the scientific and otherwise expeditions that have been organized in search of the Lost Ark of Noah on top of the Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey are certainly misguided and will definitely be fruitless. There is no any remnant of the Lost Ark of Noah that can be found on top of the present Mount Ararat located in eastern Turkey. This is simply because the Noah’s Ark did not come to rest on the present Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey.
The truth of the matter is that several millions of years ago when the Flood did took place in the days of Noah there was not the present Mount Ararat of eastern Turkey. The geophysical topography of the world millions of years ago was so different from that of modern times. The present Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey did not exist several millions of years ago in the days of Noah and the Flood so there was not a Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey for Noah’s Ark to rest on in the first place.
Since the true and Original Ararat was located right in heart of Black Negro Africa it will be more advisable for those looking for the Lost Ark of Noah to focus their attention on continental Africa instead of wasting their time and energies in eastern Turkey or some other parts of Asia Minor. Scientists or university chairs will have to start organizing their expeditions in search of the Lost Ark of Noah in West Africa, Central Africa, East Africa and other parts of Middle Africa.
But then we should also mark the fact that even if modern mankind is eventually able to locate Original Ararat, the final resting place of the Lost Ark of Noah, here in Middle Africa the problem still exist to the effect that no remnants of the Ark may exist to this day considering the fact that the Flood took place several millions, if not a billion, years ago.
There may not be any remnant, at all, left of the Lost Ark of Noah for the simple reason that the Flood took place so many millions of years ago. It will be well nigh impossible to locate remnants of Noah’s Ark today. Even if we are able to identify Original Ararat in any part of Middle Africa, the probability is very high that the Lost Ark of Noah became extinct long ago due to the fact that it is several millions of years old.
Then there is also the very strong probability that ancient civilisations, whether higher or lower than us in terms of scientific development, might have, in prehistoric times, located and removed the Lost Ark of Noah from its initial resting place in Original Ararat.
The Qur’an stated, in the 44th Verse of Suratul Hudd, that Noah’s Ark rested on Judi. Wherever and whatever was Judi nobody knows for sure.
Islamic scholars, following Biblical traditions, have, however, alleged that Judi was a mountain. Islamic scholars, and the Muslim world in general, have not, however, embarked on any expedition in search of the Lost Ark of Noah on any Mount Judi. This is mainly because in the entire world there is no any mountain named ‘Judi’ today. That is why it has become very difficult for Islamic scholars or anybody else to try to locate Mount Judi in any part of the world.
But then, and as we discussed in the chapter on Ararat, Judi may after all not have been a mountain in the traditional sense of the word. Judi may have been the name of a province or a nation of an ancient people. A nation that, of course, must have ceased existing by now. Whatever the case might be, it is most likely that Judi was a geographical entity that was located right here in the heart of Africa.
The name Judi is nothing but a dialectal form of Juda, Judah or Yudah. This takes us back to the ancient Black African Negro nation of Judah or Yudah that once flourished in the heart of Black Negro Africa. The fact is that Black Negro Africa used to be known in very ancient times as Ada, Yudah or, as we Latinise it today, Judah.
Since Judi, Judah or Yudah was located in Black Negro Africa then it is here in the heart of Black Negro Africa that Noah’s Ark eventually came to rest.
The claim that the Mount Judi of the Qur’an and the Mount Ararat of the Bible must both be references to the same ancient mountain located here in the heart of Africa is informed by the fact that both the Bible and the Qur’an are scriptures whose themes are completely centred on the annals of Black African Negroes during the eons of the Black World Order.
Whether we call it Ararat, Judi, Judah or whatever, it is a province or ancient nation of Black African Negroes located somewhere in West Africa, Central Africa, East Africa or any other part of Middle Africa.
The story of the Flood took place in Black Negro Africa. And that is why the story of the Flood originated from Black Negro Africa. That is why for millennia the story of the Flood remained an African story until it eventually spread to all other parts of the world.
Noah in World Mythology
Noah in Babylonian Mythology
The story of Noah and the Flood was well known among the ancient Babylonians long before the rise of the Semitic races and the several millennia before the Bible was written. Drusilla Dunjee Houston wrote that, “The Babylonian account of the deluge is older than the Biblical spkry.”
Noah in Greek Mythology
The story of the Flood is, of course, well known among the ancient Greeks amongst whom Noah was known as the god Deucalion.
The Microsoft Encarta encyclopaedia wrote that, according to Greek Mythology, Deucalion “son of the Titan Prometheus. Deucalion was king of Phthia in Thessaly (Thessalia) when the god Zeus, because of the wicked ways of the human race, destroyed them by flood. For nine days and nights Zeus sent torrents of rain. Only Deucalion and his wife, Pyrrha, surrired drowning. They were saved because they were the only people who had led good lives and remained faithful to the laws of the gods. Having been warned by his father, Prometheus, of the approaching disaster, Deucalion built a boat, which carried him and Pyrrha safely to rest atop Mount Parnassus.”
A peculiar type of climate lingered in the aftermath of the Flood. It was a ‘Diluvian Climate’ whereby the weather in Africa and Gondwanaland was always saturated with dense humidity. L. Savage discussed “the concept that the earth was once covered by a water canopy, which would have increased the lifespan of humans hundred folds, protecting us from the life decaying x-rays from the sun. Ancient drawings in Africa and mythologies tell of an ocean type sky, where even fish were seen in the sky.”
The sudden end of the Diluvian Climate consequently wrought extensive and deleterious changes on mankind – precipitating a sharp difference between pre-Diluvian and post-Diluvian mankind.
The pre-Diluvian human race was rather different anthropologically from the post-Diluvian human race. The difference covered both the physical and the metaphysical (psychological, spiritual and otherwise) aspects.
The difference between the pre-Diluvian and post-Diluvian humanity is strikingly exhibited in a general diminution in every aspect of human anthropology.
Physically, the physiognomy of post-Diluvian mankind became smaller and shorter with a general decrease in both anatomical strength and extent. This led to diminution in the perceptive faculties of cognition including the sensory organs. This in turn led to a decrease in intellectual, and consequently, emotional capabilities of mankind.
The overall result of all these, of course, expressed itself in a woeful spiritual fall of the human race in the wake of the Noachide Deluge.
Post-Diluvian mankind also witnessed a sudden drop in the length of the average life-span of an individual human being. Whereas pre-Diluvian human beings used to live for centuries, atimes even for a millennium or so, before death; post-Diluvian human beings could hardly live for half a century before death.
Genesis 9:29 resoundingly stated that Noah himself lived for 950 years – that is roughly a millennium.
The Prehistoric Egyptians mentioned by the Bible were the Black African Negroes who lived here in West Africa, in the very heart of Africa, during the era of the Black World Order. The Egyptians of the Nile were not the Egyptians referred to by the Bible.
It was the Biblical Egyptians who lived here in the heart of Africa millions of years ago that were endowed with the life-spans of several centuries or even a millennium.
The sudden disappearance of pre-Diluvian climate after the Deluge contributed in no small measure to the gradual extinction of the West African Egyptian who was the theme of the Biblical narrations.
L. Savage explained the situation in some details as follows: “The Egyptians suddenly, went from average lifespans of hundreds, even thousands of years to having an average lifespan of thirty to forty years. According to an Egyptologist in Dallas, this was the major fear of the Egyptians had against the Hebrew race. The average lifespan was 100 to 120 years for a Hebrew compared to the 30 or 40 for an Egyptian. The ancient Egyptians evidently could not physically cope with the earth or atmospheric changes that occurred suddenly and rapidly. The Egyptologist claims the Egyptians of antiquity died out, became extinct, with only traces of that lineage appearing now in India. He says it is obvious the modern Egyptians are not of the same stock due to physical and body structure differences.”
The Children of Noah
The three children of Noah, namely, Shem, Ham and Japheth, are all Black African Negroes.
There are scriptural evidences in support of this fact. A contextual rendering of the story of Noah as narrated in the Book of Genesis will show us the fact that the three children of Noah were actually Black African Negroes.
The story of the partitioning of the world between the three sons of Noah, namely Shem, Ham and Japheth is clearly narrated in the Greek Mythology in the form of the partition of the world between Jupiter, Neptune and Pluto.
Dr. Rees wrote that “The most judicious among our mythologists such as Gerard Vossius, Marsham, Bochart, and Father Thomassin–are of opinion that the partition of the world among the sons of Noah-Shem, Ham, and Japheth–was the original of the tradition of the same partition among Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto.”
Ham was a Black African Negro. There is no any doubt about this. Even Western scholarship is resolutely of the view that Ham was a Black African Negro.
Then we used to be told that Japheth was a White man, that he was not a Black African Negro. But the truth of the matter is that Japheth was a Black African Negroes.
The name Japheth is a Latinisation of the original Yafas or Yafa which is a dialectal variant of the national name of the ancient Black African Negro people of Afra, Afa who followed the religion of Fara or Bara. The whole of Black Negro Africa used to be known in ancient times as Faraka or the ‘Land of Fara’.
The Prophets or high priests of the religion of Fara were known as the Barama, Brahma, Abram, Abraham or Ibrahim. They were Black African Negroes. And they were the descendants of Yafa or Japheth, one of the three sons of Noah. From all these we can see that Japheth or Yafas was a Black African Negro.
Afra, Fara or Bara used to be a very mighty nation located right here in the heart of Black Negro Africa. The Bible telling us that Japheth or Yafa was one of the children of Noah is another way of informing us that the nation that produced Abraham or Ibrahim originated from Noah. This is because Brahma, Abram, Abraham, Ibrahim, or whatever we call him, is a member of this Afra, Fara or Bara civilisation of that traces back to Yafa or Japheth.
Between Noah and Abraham was Japheth or Yafa. But both Noah and Abraham were Black African Negroes so how could Japheth not have been a Black African Negro when his ancestors, in the form of Noah, and his descendants, in the form of Abraham, were both Black African Negroes?
Japheth was not an European, a White skinned person or a Caucasian as we are used to being told. The truth is that if we look at the temporal setting of the story of Noah and the Flood we will readily see the fact that in the days of Noah the White people have not yet appeared on the face of this planet. There were no White people in the world in those days so there is no way Japheth could have been a White man or a Caucasian. In the days of Noah and the Flood everybody was Black, African and Negroid.
Then we are also told that Shem was also not a Black African Negro. The conventional knowledge today is that Shem is the progenitor of the Asiatic races. Shem is therefore generally regarded to have been more or less an Asian.
But if Shem is the progenitor of the Asiatic peoples then Shem could not have been a White or fair skinned person because, until very recent times, the Asians were Black and Negroid in complexion. The Asiatic races were originally not fair-skin, they were initially a Black skin people. Just a few millennia back and we will see that the Asiatic races were as Black and Negroid as the West African Negro of today.
So, claiming that Shem is the progenitor of the Asiatic races doesn’t make Shem a white or fair skin person; in fact it actually substantiates the fact that Shem was a Black African Negro. It was only in recent times that the Asians begun to change from being a Black African Negro people into a white skin or fair skin people. It was in recent times that the Asians turned White. In the beginning the Asians were Black African Negroes too.