Human Free Will Responsible For Drowned Children In The Genesis Flood.

[JAG ..]

Many atheists unjustly accuse the God of the Bible of drowning children in the
Genesis Flood. They are wrong. The Flood was not God's fault, it was the fault
of fallen evil human beings. The likes of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel
Dennett, the late Christopher Hitchens, Matt Dillahunty all accuse the God of the
Bible of drowning children during the Genesis Flood.

God was right and just in drowning every living being during The Great Flood.
Why?

Because a vital part of the narrative of The Great Flood was the total wickedness
and murderous violence of the people living at the time of The Great Flood.

If we take any part of the Genesis narrative seriously, we have to take all of it
seriously.

The Genesis narrative says that God did drown all living beings at the time of The
Great Flood.

The Genesis narrative ALSO explains WHY God made the decision to drown them.

Here is why:

"The Lord saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become and that every
inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time." Genesis 6:5

"Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence . . .for all the people
of earth had corrupted their ways" Genesis 6:11

We take the narrative that God drowned them seriously and as being historically true.

We then ALSO have to take Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 6:11 seriously and as being
historically true.

If we do not take the Genesis narrative that God drowned them as historically true,
then you have no moral problem with God.

If we also take Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 6:11 as historically true then you should have
no moral problem with God.

Note that the wickedness of man was great and that "every inclination of the thoughts
of his heart was only evil all the time, and that the earth "was corrupt and full of violence."

These people were not salvageable.

Total wickedness. Murderous violence.

And both of those all the time, not just some of the time.

_______________

Free Will.

The institution of Free Will.

Parents are morally responsible for what happens to their children when it is the parents that make Free Will decisions to choose to do evil.

It was wholly the moral fault of the parents living at the time of The Great Flood because it was THEY that made the decision to plunge into total wickedness and murderous violence.

And to do that all the time . . . ALL the time.

Here is the principle:

The reality and presence of innocent children cannot void and nullify the institution of Free Will.

Therefore what parents choose to do, will determine what happens to their children.

For example, mothers who use their Free Will to choose to take harmful illegal drugs during their pregnancies can expect their innocent babies to be born with serious health problems.

These mothers cannot say to God, "Please void out and nullify my Free Will because I am carrying an innocent helpless human baby."

No, the mother is the one morally responsible for her Free Will decision to consume harmful illegal drugs during her pregnancy.

Humans cannot point to their innocent children and say to God, "Do not punish me for my total plunge into wickedness and murderous violence because if you punish me, you will also harm my innocent children.

_______________


Classic Historical Example Of This Free Will Principle:

Germany During World War ll

When Germany's parents made the social and political decision to follow Adolph Hitler and embrace Nazism, they also made the decision to put their innocent children at risk of serious harm. The parents of Germany could not say to The Allies (or to God) do not try to put a stop to our Nazism because if you do that, you will harm our innocent children.

So?

So the drowning of the children at the time of The Great Flood was wholly the immoral fault of the parents who lived at that time, and made the Free Will decision to plunge into total wickedness and murderous violence.

And to do that ALL the time . . not just occasionally, but ALL the time.

 

[JAG ..]

Speculation:

Regarding The Children Drowned in The Genesis Flood:

What follows in this post is pure 100% speculation and is NOT presented as an
argument or as being factually true.

What follows is nothing more than me speculating on what might have happened. What follows carries no weight whatsoever.

Here we go:

We know that God is merciful and that He loves the human race and sent His Son the Lord Jesus to die on a cruel cross to pay for the sins of the human race so they could be redeemed.

1 John 4:16 "God is love."

John 3:16 "for God so loved the world"

So on Christian doctrine God loves the world. And therefore it is reasonable to speculate on what this God who loves the world, might have done
for those children during The Great Flood.

We do not know what God does in the unseen world. Maybe God took the souls of the children out of their bodies before they drowned in The Great Flood, so they did not have to endure the agony of being drowned.

If God did not do that, then maybe He gave the children special grace to bear the drowning so that it was not a horrifying experience for them

If neither of the above is true, then the children experienced about 8 to 12 minutes of drowning agony, after which they found themselves in the eternal happiness of Heaven. On Christian doctrine God saves the souls of all children who have not reached the age of moral accountability (whatever age that is).

Psalm 116:15 "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints."

Why so? Because He takes them into Heaven to be with Him for all eternity.

God Bless.

 

[Randy]

Their souls were Redeemed by Christ.
For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits— to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.

For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to human standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.

 

[Truthfrees]

Many atheists unjustly accuse the God of the Bible of drowning children in the
Genesis Flood. They are wrong. The Flood was not God's fault, it was the fault
of fallen evil human beings. The likes of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel
Dennett, the late Christopher Hitchens, Matt Dillahunty all accuse the God of the
Bible of drowning children during the Genesis Flood.

God was right and just in drowning every living being during The Great Flood.
Why?

Because a vital part of the narrative of The Great Flood was the total wickedness
and murderous violence of the people living at the time of The Great Flood.

If we take any part of the Genesis narrative seriously, we have to take all of it
seriously.

The Genesis narrative says that God did drown all living beings at the time of The
Great Flood.

The Genesis narrative ALSO explains WHY God made the decision to drown them.

Here is why:

"The Lord saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become and that every
inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time." Genesis 6:5

"Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence . . .for all the people
of earth had corrupted their ways" Genesis 6:11

We take the narrative that God drowned them seriously and as being historically true.

We then ALSO have to take Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 6:11 seriously and as being
historically true.

If we do not take the Genesis narrative that God drowned them as historically true,
then you have no moral problem with God.

If we also take Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 6:11 as historically true then you should have
no moral problem with God.

Note that the wickedness of man was great and that "every inclination of the thoughts
of his heart was only evil all the time, and that the earth "was corrupt and full of violence."

These people were not salvageable.

Total wickedness. Murderous violence.

And both of those all the time, not just some of the time.

_______________

Free Will.

The institution of Free Will.

Parents are morally responsible for what happens to their children when it is the parents that make Free Will decisions to choose to do evil.

It was wholly the moral fault of the parents living at the time of The Great Flood because it was THEY that made the decision to plunge into total wickedness and murderous violence.

And to do that all the time . . . ALL the time.

Here is the principle:

The reality and presence of innocent children cannot void and nullify the institution of Free Will.

Therefore what parents choose to do, will determine what happens to their children.

For example, mothers who use their Free Will to choose to take harmful illegal drugs during their pregnancies can expect their innocent babies to be born with serious health problems.

These mothers cannot say to God, "Please void out and nullify my Free Will because I am carrying an innocent helpless human baby."

No, the mother is the one morally responsible for her Free Will decision to consume harmful illegal drugs during her pregnancy.

Humans cannot point to their innocent children and say to God, "Do not punish me for my total plunge into wickedness and murderous violence because if you punish me, you will also harm my innocent children.

_______________


Classic Historical Example Of This Free Will Principle:

Germany During World War ll

When Germany's parents made the social and political decision to follow Adolph Hitler and embrace Nazism, they also made the decision to put their innocent children at risk of serious harm. The parents of Germany could not say to The Allies (or to God) do not try to put a stop to our Nazism because if you do that, you will harm our innocent children.

So?

So the drowning of the children at the time of The Great Flood was wholly the immoral fault of the parents who lived at that time, and made the Free Will decision to plunge into total wickedness and murderous violence.

And to do that ALL the time . . not just occasionally, but ALL the time.

is there a scripture that says children were drowned?

 

[JAG ..]

is there a scripture that says children were drowned?

before the flood people lived hundreds of years - methusala 969 - enoch 300

if the bible does not state there were children then it is conceivable that God caused the flood to happen in a time when there were no children - only adults who willfully chose to ignore God

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogies_of_Genesis - lists the ages of the patriarchs before the flood - most around 800 yrs

"is there a scripture that says children were drowned?"__Truthfrees

Truthfrees,

Good question. I do not think there is a Bible verse that says children were drowned. However, it is reasonable to believe that at the time of the Genesis Flood there were people living at all ages of life from babies to full grown adults. To suggest there were no children in that society seems to be highly odd and most unusual.

Anyway, the reason I wrote the Opening Post was stated in my opening paragraph which said this:

JAG Previously Wrote:
Many atheists unjustly accuse the God of the Bible of drowning children in the
Genesis Flood. They are wrong. The Flood was not God's fault, it was the fault
of fallen evil human beings. The likes of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel
Dennett, the late Christopher Hitchens, and Matt Dillahunty all accuse the God
of the Bible of drowning children during the Genesis Flood ___JAG

In Thread World on the Internet At Large we Christians are constantly faced with having to deal with accusations from activist atheists in threads who accuse the God of the Bible of being immoral because He drowned babies and children. Thus my Opening Post.

Nonetheless. I'm on your side. If you think you can make a clear and certain case that there were no babies and children alive during the Genesis Flood --- then I will be very happy to hear that.

God Bless.

 

[Truthfrees]

Good question. I do not think there is a Bible verse that says children were drowned. However, it is reasonable to believe that at the time of the Genesis Flood there were people living at all ages of life from babies to full grown adults. To suggest there were no children in that society seems to be highly odd and most unusual.

did you check the link i gave?

 

[JAG ..]

did you check the link i gave?

most people would say it is highly unusual that people lived 700-900 years but they did

most people would think it would be strange to have your first child when you were 130 years old - but pre-flood people did

so "usual" is not a factor if people want to talk against God or the bible

if we stand by God and the bible we need to use it as our foundation for truth - not "usual" or "unusual"
if people want to claim that God killed babies and children in the flood they will have to prove it - there is no proof - so the claim is unfounded

if God could keep jonah alive inside a whale for 3 days then it is pretty easy for God to make sure people did not have children for a few years as He was planning the flood

do we have a "usual" God or an Almighty God? - can He do anything or is He bound by "usual"? - when we allow unbelievers to bring God down to the image of man we no longer have an Almighty God - perhaps the reason we don't see more of God's power among us is because we allow too many people to diminish God rather than magnify Him to His full glory - He is the Creator and Sustainer of everything visible and invisible - we need to expand our thinking to reflect our Awesome God accurately

Truthfrees,

Thank you for your comments.

The issue is not what God could have done. God can do anything that is not inconsistent with His nature. There is absolutely zero doubt in my mind that God could have done what you suggested He did with regard to the Genesis Flood. But so far, I have not seen any clear and certain proof (solid evidence) that demonstrates with certainty that God DID IN FACT do what you suggested He did.

I hope you are correct.

Do you really believe that you know for certain that there were no babies and children present during the Genesis Flood?

Atheists like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Matt Dillahunty, and the late Christopher Hitchens have filled the Internet At Large with accusations against God, the Bible, and Christianity and have said that the God of the Bible is immoral because He drowned babies and children in the Genesis Flood. Christian Apologists have presented arguments AGAINST these vicious attacks made by these atheists and their fellow-atheists who read their books and watch their videos on You Tube.

As I previously said:

I'm on your side. If you think you can make a clear and certain case that there were no babies and children alive during the Genesis Flood --- then I will be very happy to hear that.

I really and truly hope that you can provide clear and certain evidence that there was no babies and children present during the Genesis Flood. That would forever shut the mouths of anti-God atheists who constantly bring up the Genesis Flood as a moral argument against Christianity and the Bible and charge God with being immoral.

 

[Randy]

is there a scripture that says children were drowned?

before the flood people lived hundreds of years - methusala 969 - enoch 300

if the bible does not state there were children then it is conceivable that God caused the flood to happen in a time when there were no children - only adults who willfully chose to ignore God

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogies_of_Genesis - lists the ages of the patriarchs before the flood - most around 800 yrs

Everyone, (humans), drowned except those on the ark. Long age doesn't mean they didn't have children. It would be very unreasonable to believe there were no children on the earth at that time. Other than Adam and Eve all others listed in the genealogies were born.

 

[Truthfrees]

Do you really believe that you know for certain that there were no babies and children present during the Genesis Flood?

no one knows for certain either way

 

[JAG ..]

no one knows for certain either way

are you saying you are certain babies and children perished even though scripture says nothing either way?

i don't have a problem with your assumption - i just believe mine makes more sense considering God's nature

"no one knows for certain either way"__Truthfrees

Agreed.

"are you saying you are certain babies and children perished even though scripture says nothing either way?__Truthfrees

No. My view is that it is impossible to know for certain, if by certain we mean having evidence that rises to the certainty-level of 2 + 2 = 4

"i don't have a problem with your assumption - i just believe mine makes more sense considering God's nature'__Truthfrees.

Thanks, Truthfrees,

Again, I am on your side by which I mean I am with you in the spirit of the conclusion you wish to reach, namely that God did not drown babies and children. However, it does strike my mind as being reasonable to assume that the pre-Flood society had people in it of all ages. I have never heard of a human society that did not have people of all ages from babies to children to teenagers to middle age to older ages.

I argue with Atheists on the Internet all the time and they are vicious in their attacks on the God of the Bible where they charge Him with being immoral because He drowned babies and children in the Genesis Flood. I defend the God of the Bible from their attacks, but if I were to suggest that there were no babies and children in the Genesis pre-Flood society --- they would mock and ridicule that suggestion as being absolutely absurd nonsense. They would demand some hard evidence to support my claim. And of course I have no evidence to give them, so they would accuse me of presenting a claim without any evidence to back it up. They would ask me if I had ever heard of a society that did not have people in it of all ages from babies to children to teenagers to middle age to older ages? And of course the answer is that there has NEVER been a society like that in human history that we know about.

PS
I very much appreciate your position on this issue and I understand it.


.

 

[Truthfrees]

I argue with Atheists on the Internet all the time and they are vicious in their attacks on the God of the Bible where they charge Him with being immoral because He drowned babies and children in the Genesis Flood. I defend the God of the Bible from their attacks, but if I were to suggest that there were no babies and children in the Genesis pre-Flood society --- they would mock and ridicule that suggestion as being absolutely absurd nonsense. They would demand some hard evidence to support my claim. And of course I have no evidence to give them, so they would accuse me of presenting a claim without any evidence to back it up. They would ask me if I had ever heard of a society that did not have people in it of all ages from babies to children to teenagers to middle age to older ages? And of course the answer is that there has NEVER been a society like that in human history that we know about.

ok - good point - praying in support of your presentation of God to atheists

Genesis 6:5-7 says is was because their hearts intent and thoughts were ONLY evil all the time

5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”

 

[JAG ..]

ok - good point - praying in support of your presentation of God to atheists

"ok - good point - praying in support of your presentation of God to atheists"__Truthfrees

Thanks Truthfrees, thanks for your encouragement -- much appreciated.

Truthfrees,

What are your views on the following issue?

A large number of Atheists out there in Thread World on the Internet At Large are angry vicious people that genuinely HATE the God of the Bible. And they will grab on to anything no matter how absurd to attack, mock, and ridicule the Bible and the God of the Bible. This raises an interesting question and presents a choice:

Which one of these is God's will with regard to angry vicious atheists inside Thread World?

(1) Continue to preach the gospel to them AND continue to share with them the arguments found in the great works on Christian Apologetics that defend the Christian faith and defend the God of the Bible. {The Bible the word of God teaches that we should preach the gospel to everybody that will listen to it, doesn't it?}

OR . . .

(2) Apply Matthew 7:6 to them
"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces."__The Lord Jesus

The above (1) or (2) is a reasonable question. I am not sure I have the answer to that question. I tend towards number (1) up there. I think its a better thing to try to help them see the truth.

PS
I will be glad to read any comments you have on any of that up there.

PSS
Atheists inside Thread World can trample your pearls under their feet, but they cannot actually "turn and tear you to pieces" --- unless one calls posting insults the same as "tearing you to pieces." I am pretty much immune to insults. I just smile and keep on preaching to them. I never return the insult.


`

 

[Who Me]

argue with Atheists on the Internet all the time and they are vicious in their attacks on the God of the Bible where they charge Him with being immoral

Well done for engaging atheists in dispute.
May I suggest that you don't argue about the flood etc, which I accept there is ample evidence for, but as even Christians dispute whether there was a global flood, it is an area difficult to prove.

But a far better area of dispute is the atheist accusation that God is immoral for killing woman and children in the flood.

What do they base there claim that God is immoral?
How do they demonstrate that the killing of women and children is wrong?
Morality is either based on something greater than us.
God, society, culture etc or it is based on might.
How does the atheist accuse God of being immoral while simultaneously approving of abortion and euthanasia!

 

[Truthfrees]

"ok - good point - praying in support of your presentation of God to atheists"__Truthfrees

Thanks Truthfrees, thanks for your encouragement -- much appreciated.

Truthfrees,

What are your views on the following issue?

A large number of Atheists out there in Thread World on the Internet At Large are angry vicious people that genuinely HATE the God of the Bible. And they will grab on to anything no matter how absurd to attack, mock, and ridicule the Bible and the God of the Bible. This raises an interesting question and presents a choice:

Which one of these is God's will with regard to angry vicious atheists inside Thread World?

(1) Continue to preach the gospel to them AND continue to share with them the arguments found in the great works on Christian Apologetics that defend the Christian faith and defend the God of the Bible. {The Bible the word of God teaches that we should preach the gospel to everybody that will listen to it, doesn't it?}

OR . . .

(2) Apply Matthew 7:6 to them
"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces."__The Lord Jesus

The above (1) or (2) is a reasonable question. I am not sure I have the answer to that question. I tend towards number (1) up there. I think its a better thing to try to help them see the truth.

PS
I will be glad to read any comments you have on any of that up there.

PSS
Atheists inside Thread World can trample your pearls under their feet, but they cannot actually "turn and tear you to pieces" --- unless one calls posting insults the same as "tearing you to pieces." I am pretty much immune to insults. I just smile and keep on preaching to them. I never return the insult.

i said something about God to one guy one time - he immediately said there is no God - i was led by God to say "that's ok - God is not for everyone" - well the guy immediately started telling me all the times the "Guy upstairs" saved his life - well so much for being an atheist - when i gave the guy a way out he wanted back in - people are funny

 

[JAG ..]

the gospel is the power of God to the salvation of men - Romans 1:16

i find that until a person has been saved everything we have to say is foolishness to them - and yes many people who claim to be atheists love to take their anger toward God out on us

i usually only share the gospel with people who say they don't believe in God - and of course cover them in prayer so they can see the truth - 2 Corinthians 4:4

i said something about God to one guy one time - he immediately said there is no God - i was led by God to say "that's ok - God is not for everyone" - well the guy immediately started telling me all the times the "Guy upstairs" saved his life - well so much for being an atheist - when i gave the guy a way out he wanted back in - people are funny

so i learned that day that some people are angry at God and at us for promoting God - but really they know there is a God - otherwise why are they so angry at a God they claim does not exist? -

i guess i have met a few true atheists but they were not angry - they did not think about God or care about God - they were fine with me believing in God - it didn't matter to them one way or another

imo the angry "atheists" aren't really atheists - they deep down believe in God but are angry at God about something

Truthfrees,

I read all that very carefully. Thank you for taking the time to write that. I enjoyed reading your thoughts.

By the way, while I was writing my previous post to you, I got the idea to start a thread here titled "Hostile Atheists And "Shake Dust" And "Casting Pearls." Here is the link:

Hostile Atheists And "Shake Dust" And "Casting Pearls."

Question: Under what circumstances is it Biblically warranted for Christians to apply the New Testament concepts of "shake dust" and "casting pearls" to atheists and other unbelievers who are hostile to the gospel message and hostile to the arguments of Christian Apologists who defend the Bible...

christianforums.net

 

[JAG ..]

atheists - they deep down believe in God

"atheists - they deep down believe in God"__Truthfrees

Agreed.

With regard to atheists who say they claim they do not believe that God exists, I see the following Bible verses posted frequently in atheists vs. Christian threads inside Thread World on the Internet.

"since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." ___Romans 1:19-20

Romans 1:19-20 presents the Teleological Argument for the existence of God -- the argument from Intelligent Design --- at least in a very brief statement.

Romans 1:19-20 was not addressed specifically to atheists, but to people "who suppress the truth by their wickedness" {Romans 1:18} --- but that would certainly include atheists.

 

[JAG ..]

Well done for engaging atheists in dispute.
May I suggest that you don't argue about the flood etc, which I accept there is ample evidence for, but as even Christians dispute whether there was a global flood, it is an area difficult to prove.

But a far better area of dispute is the atheist accusation that God is immoral for killing woman and children in the flood.

What do they base there claim that God is immoral?
How do they demonstrate that the killing of women and children is wrong?
Morality is either based on something greater than us.
God, society, culture etc or it is based on might.
How does the atheist accuse God of being immoral while simultaneously approving of abortion and euthanasia!

"Well done for engaging atheists in dispute"___Who Me

Thank you.

"But a far better area of dispute is the atheist accusation that God is immoral for killing woman and children in the flood."___Who Me

Yeah, that's the "hot topic" for many activist-thread-atheists today. It was made popular by the likes of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Matt Dillahunty, and the late Christopher Hitchens.

"What do they base there claim that God is immoral?
How do they demonstrate that the killing of women and children is wrong?
Morality is either based on something greater than us.
God, society, culture etc or it is based on might.
How does the atheist accuse God of being immoral while simultaneously approving of abortion and euthanasia!"__Who Me

Very good points, all.
Thanks for taking the time to list them.


`

 

[Who Me]

when i gave the guy a way out he wanted back in - people are funny

Not always funny, often they have been hurt by Christians and are still reacting to that hurt.
Being sensitive and giving them the chance to vent can open a door for one to say something for them to think on.

 

[Truthfrees]

Not always funny, often they have been hurt by Christians and are still reacting to that hurt.
Being sensitive and giving them the chance to vent can open a door for one to say something for them to think on.

good point - thanks

 

[JAG ..]

A friend of mine recently wrote to me "
"I assert that there were no children drowned in the Flood."

I replied as follows:

Miscellaneous Points:

{1} I have heard that argued before.

{2} I am on your side, which means I hope you can and will
present evidence to support your assertion, that rises to the
certainty-level of 2 + 2 = 4

{3} Or at least evidence that has a clear and obvious high
Probability of being true.

{4} I have yet to see any evidence that convinced me that it
was highly Probable that there were no children living at the
time of the Genesis Flood.

{5} Of course you may have some evidence that I have never
seen. I hope you do.

{6} It is highly reasonable and highly Probable and highly Plausible
to believe that the people living during the Genesis Flood were a
regular normal society of people like all other societies of people
that have new born babies and children of all ages, and teens,
and young adults to the very old.

{7} My view is that, to defeat {6} up there will require some solid
evidence that rises way above mere speculation or inference.

{8} There is a passage in the New Testament that strongly suggests
that there were children present during the Genesis Flood.

"As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son
of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and
drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah
entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen
until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be
at the coming of the Son of Man."___Matthew 24:37-39
{a similar passage appears in Luke 17:26-27}

Note the particulars In {8}
{A} "As it was in the days of Noah"
{B} "For in the days before the flood"
{C} "people were . . . marrying and giving in marriage"
{D} "up to the day Noah entered the ark"

{9} A crucial question is this: Since they were marrying and giving
in marriage right up to the day that Noah entered the ark, why does
anyone think they were NOT having children?

{10} My view is -- it will be very difficult to defeat {6} and {8}
and {9} with speculation or inference.

{11} True, the Bible does NOT say there were children
present during the Genesis Flood.
Neither does the Bible say there were NOT children present.
during the Genesis Flood. But {6} and {8} and {9} seem to
enjoy a high level of Probability.

But like I said, I am on your side. I hope you can eliminate the
idea that there was children drowned in the Genesis Flood.___JAG

_________

I added the above to the thread just as a point of possible interest and
information. I had previously not considered Matthew 24:37-39
{or the Luke 17:26-27 passage) as having a bearing on this issue.


`