What was the point of the flood?

[Grazer]

According to the NIV version;

"So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them" - Genesis 6:7

If he regretted making them, why save Noah when God knew it would all go wrong again? Did he know it would all go wrong again? If the story is metaphorical, what do people take from it?

 

[mdougie]

Absolutely metaphorical. Not believed by rationally looking at the world around us.

If it is true God murdered millions of people including babies. That isn't rational, and is psychotic. So since God isn't an evil psychotic that drowns babies it is a metaphor.


As for the point of the story I don't really know.

 

[Grazer]

Absolutely metaphorical. Not believed by rationally looking at the world around us.

If it is true God murdered millions of people including babies. That isn't rational, and is psychotic. So since God isn't an evil psychotic that drowns babies it is a metaphor.


As for the point of the story I don't really know.

The stories where God is carrying mass genocide has always caused me problems but that's another post for another time (think I did a thread a while ago actually)

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[Grazer]

If it is indeed metaphorical, then surely there is a message behind it. You seem very adamant that it is untrue as a literal event, yet offer no alternative reasoning or interpretation. You admit that you do not know what the point is, yet you can call it irrational? How can you do that? Art thou wiser than God? We are not to look around us and make conclusions. That would be leaning upon our own understanding where we are instructed to look to God for truth. If we do not understand something, we should be humble and not draw our own conclusions, but seek illumination from God. Your response seems to be a knee-jerk response.

You can be unsure what something is whilst knowing what it isn't. My day job is essentially to troubleshoot problems and sometimes I may not know what the problem is but I know what it isn't.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[mdougie]

If it is indeed metaphorical, then surely there is a message behind it. You seem very adamant that it is untrue as a literal event, yet offer no alternative reasoning or interpretation. You admit that you do not know what the point is, yet you can call it irrational? How can you do that? Art thou wiser than God? We are not to look around us and make conclusions. That would be leaning upon our own understanding where we are instructed to look to God for truth. If we do not understand something, we should be humble and not draw our own conclusions, but seek illumination from God. Your response seems to be a knee-jerk response.

It is irrational. God isn't a psychotic that drowns babies. That is rational.

We know that 4,000 years ago there was not a world wide flood. Geology, history, and all science agree.

What the moral of the story is? Perhaps do what God says?

I have been illuminated by God. God has told me not to fall for manipulation. This story is not literal. Believing and teaching this story is true does far more harm than good.

 

[Grazer]

Re: Re: What was the point of the flood?

Understanding Gods ways troubles me at times also. But remember that death is not final for Gods power. We may not understand his motives for all the things that he does, but I think that in instances such you speak of, it is reasonable to assume that God does not allow the babies to suffer, he simply takes them. We belong to God and he will do what he will, regardless of if we understand why. One day all will be revealed and we will be allowed to understand it all.

But the passages raise some difficult and legitimate questions and "one day I'll know" position only gets you so far then you start having problems. I don't need the full answer but I need something that makes sense.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[mdougie]

Really. I would ask you to back that up. My understanding is that history, geology and science have not disproved the flood but have affirmed it.

Your understanding of geology, history, and science is incorrect. Flood geology is not taught by any reputable educational institution. I took geology in college, and it firmly is at odds with any notion that there was a world wide flood 4,000 years ago. There are ample places for you to find out what geology says online and at your local university and or high schools.

The University of Houston has a great Geology department and the graduate are very sought after by the energy industry in the city and around the world. Call the HR department of Exxon, WNT offshore drilling, BP, Shell, and ask them if they hire someone with a young earth geology degree vs normal one from an accredited university.

http://www.geosc.uh.edu/

There are professors and grad students who will be able to answer any question you may have regarding the hard science of geology.

 

[Grazer]

So do you reject the idea of corrupted bloodlines?

At this moment in time, given that I can't find anything in the genesis account that what Adam and Eve did would be passed to all of humanity, yes I do.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[mdougie]

Ok, well it seems as if the scientist may not agree then, big surprise there. lol. I did a cursory search and found a lot of scientist and yes, even geologist do support the claim of a global flood in our history. I offer a few links which support the thory, which in and of itself seems to discredit your claim that it is somehow an established fact that id did not occur.

http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYoung/scientific_evidence_for_a_worldwide_flood.htm

http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/flood.html

http://www.allaboutcreation.org/global-flood-faq.htm

There's more, but this should suffice for now.

I'd like to read your evidence that refutes it.

Here is one for Hawaii. It took millions and millions of years to form.

http://www.hawaii.edu/environment/ainakumuwai/html/ainakumuwaiislandformation.htm

These islands and submerged seamounts were formed when the Pacific Plate of the Earth's crust moved over a hot spot below it. About 40 million years ago, the Pacific Plate changed direction from north to northwest.

 

[Grazer]

Allaboutcreation seem to assume a flood because of the bible then interpret the data to fit the conclusion they've already come to.

Articles concerning evidence against a world wide flood;

http://news.nationalgeographic.co.uk/news/2009/02/090206-smaller-noah-flood.html

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm

Many geologists seem to have concluded that the flood was more local

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[Grazer]

Fair enough. So in keeping the scriptures in context and starting with the beginning of Genesis chapter 6 before it mentions the flood, could you offer a contextual possibility of what in the world the first part could mean where it speaks of all that stuff about the sons of God taking Wives of the earth women and what relevance it could possibly have to the flood?

No idea, still working on that though there are many similarities between the genesis account and other flood stories that existed before the old testament. There are also differences aswell, both of which raise questions.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[mdougie]

Ok, I like to learn brother. Enlighten me. I'm having trouble locating your truth.

My second link is to the University of Carolina??

The second link is to a home page hosted at the University. It isn't a university web page.

Edited for rudeness
http://geology.com/colleges.htm

 

[Grazer]

Ok, can I ask we get back on topic please? I love discussing evidence but this is about the purpose of the flood and what we are to take from the story.

Cheers

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[mdougie]

Ok, can I ask we get back on topic please? I love discussing evidence but this is about the purpose of the flood and what we are to take from the story.

Cheers

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

Perhaps the purpose was to scare people.

 

[gr8grace]

I am with Edward on this one. the Flood and the arc pointed to the Cross. the wood represented the Humanity of Christ, And like Edward said in His post, Satan knew that humanity was to bring The Savoir and crush his head(satans). So satan was trying to corrupt the blood line of humanity so Christ could not be born.(satan is no idiot). Satan tried murder first with Abel, and knew he was not going to get it done that way.

The one door in the Arc represented the ONE way to salvation(Christ)

And the one window is analogous to ONE point of view(God and true bible doctrine.)

And again, the wood in the arc represented the humanity of Christ(the part that satan was trying to corrupt at that point in time.)

In the bible everything points to Christ and that is what the flood and the arc's main purpose was in the Bible. And I have no reason to believe that it was not global. Because Christ is Global is His affect.

I know its a old point but, if it was a local flood God lied to us then because He told us that he would never flood the earth again. And there are thousands of local floods every year.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

I know its a old point but, if it was a local flood God lied to us then because He told us that he would never flood the earth again. And there are thousands of local floods every year.

This appears to be a rock-solid point, in my opinion. Good one.

 

[WIP]

Reminder:
From the ToS
2.1: This is a Christian site, therefore, any attempt to put down Christianity and the basic tenets of our Faith will be considered a hostile act. Please read: Statement of Faith

From the SoF
The bible is the inspired, infallible and authoritative Word of God.
and
We believe that the Bible is inspired by God in its entirety, and is without error in the original autographs, a complete and final written revelation from God.

 

[Sinthesis]

I know its a old point but, if it was a local flood God lied to us then because He told us that he would never flood the earth again. And there are thousands of local floods every year.

None of these local floods remove all of God's corrupted people from the earth. The point of the flood was not to kill everyone globally, but to remove everyone who had corrupted knowledge of the one true God with pagan beliefs and yet prospered as a result. To this end the flood does not have to be global as we would define the earth today. Their are other hints at this viewpoint throughout the bible.

Further, it is not anti-scripture to challenge others' interpretations of scripture. Waving the ToS around because someone holds to another interpretation of the exact same scripture is unproductive when dealing with non-salvational issues.

 

[cct]

Floods have come and gone and will continue to throughout the entire history of the earth!

We encounter floods in our own spiritual lives, don`t we?

This recorded flood in Noah`s time is not meant to be analysed so deeply guys, just accept that in God`s word it happened and we read it today and allow the spirit to use the example for what is pertinent for our own situation.

 

[Vanguard]

Allow me to step in here and throw my 2 cents around...

Historically, there are varied accounts of massive floods throughout the world. However, they are not all at the same time. A flood could simply be caused by a tsunami, an earthquake, heavy rainfall, a natural levy breaking, volcanic explosion, etc. We still have those to this day.

When the writers of the Bible speak of "the world' we can only safely assume they are referring to "their world as they knew it," or the area of Northern Africa, Southern Europe and Western Asia. They knew nothing of Australia, the Americas, Antarctica, Pacific islands, Greenland, etc. If you take it literally as "the whole world," then you have to ask yourself how was it possible for people from say Peru to travel to the Middle East, in a time when intercontinental travel was extremely limited. You also have to keep in mind that the Bible is written from a Hebrew perspective, and that other cultures throughout the world disagree with their accounts. Some of those civilizations predate any Hebrew writings.

To answer the question of mass genocide, you have to step out of a modern mindset. Back then, it was survival of the fittest. You did not leave anyone alive who could grow up and seek revenge. If you want to take the 10 Commandment route about not killing, or loving your neighbor, you have to remember that the Big 10 only applied to the Hebrews. Everyone else was a Gentile, and not subject to Hebrew law.

God never said he made humans "perfect." He saw the creation and said it was "good." However, the implied principle is that humans were given free will, turned to "the dark side" (insert my best Darth Vadar voice here) and it is for that reason that humans were killed by God by way of disasters.

Ironically, there is an older Egyptian story about the flooding of the Nile. A man build a boat/ark, put his family, livestock and possessions on it, and when the Nile flooded, he rode it down stream. We know for a fact that stories were passed down and grew through cultural exchanges. The Romans were notorious for "borrowing" from their conquered.

I am not saying that the Noah story did not happen, but I highly doubt it was a world wide event. There's too much historical counter-evidence. I am firmly comfortable accepting the idea of "the world as they knew it."