Question About the Flood

I was thinking about the flood, and I came to wonder whether or not it was plausible for only eight people in the world to be innocent enough to be worth saving. Surely even the wicked had children? Unborns, newborns, toddlers? Did God kill these people, too?

Tedderz said:

I was thinking about the flood, and I came to wonder whether or not it was plausible for only eight people in the world to be innocent enough to be worth saving. Surely even the wicked had children? Unborns, newborns, toddlers? Did God kill these people, too?

Click to expand...

Some see Noah's flood as worldwide and others as a regional flood. Everyone was killed where the flood was except for Noah, his family and two, a male and female, of all races.

There was a world-wide flood before that. That was the flood that ended the first world age. Everything was destroyed then and it's cause was Satan's rebellion.

I was thinking about the flood, and I came to wonder whether or not it was plausible for only eight people in the world to be innocent enough to be worth saving. Surely even the wicked had children? Unborns, newborns, toddlers? Did God kill these people, too?

Click to expand...

There are many little eccentricities in the story of Noah's flood that have changed my whole perception of what went down.

In The bible, humans are referred to as the sons or daughters of man. When God came in Human form as Christ, he called himself, the son of man.

Genesis 6

When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."

4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. 5 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. 6 The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. 7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them." 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.

So we see a few things in Noah's flood. The first is that there was some sort of species of Non-human that the bible referred to as the sons of God. This species also seemed to be capable of reproducing with humans to have giant children.

It also seems that God found this practice completely abhorrent and sinful. It seems there was a lot more going on in the days of Noah then what we initially read. This passage also opens the door to a lot of questions. Are there aliens? Are the sons of God aliens?

"As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the days of the Son of man, They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all (Luke 17:26-27)."

Some see Noah's flood as worldwide and others as a regional flood. Everyone was killed where the flood was except for Noah, his family and two, a male and female, of all races.

Click to expand...

^

There was a world-wide flood before that. That was the flood that ended the first world age. Everything was destroyed then and it's cause was Satan's rebellion.

Click to expand...

You should probably back up this claim.

What we do know though, is that all the first civilized human nations (Babylon, Sumer, etc.) had stories about a great flood that wiped out humanity. So I dunno... if many ancient cultures can recall this story, I would assume it's because the people of these civlizations may have been Noah's grandchildren spread out to different areas.

SimplyNothing said:

There are many little eccentricities in the story of Noah's flood that have changed my whole perception of what went down.

In The bible, humans are referred to as the sons or daughters of man. When God came in Human form as Christ, he called himself, the son of man.

Genesis 6

When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."

4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. 5 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. 6 The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. 7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them." 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.

So we see a few things in Noah's flood. The first is that there was some sort of species of Non-human that the bible referred to as the sons of God. This species also seemed to be capable of reproducing with humans to have giant children.

It also seems that God found this practice completely abhorrent and sinful. It seems there was a lot more going on in the days of Noah then what we initially read. This passage also opens the door to a lot of questions. Are there aliens? Are the sons of God aliens?

"As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the days of the Son of man, They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all (Luke 17:26-27)."

Click to expand...

The sons of God are the fallen angels. Angelic beings that mated with Adamic women and the results...giants. God destroyed them. Noah and his family were "perfect in their generations," meaning...their bloodline was genetically pure.

^



You should probably back up this claim.

What we do know though, is that all the first civilized human nations (Babylon, Sumer, etc.) had stories about a great flood that wiped out humanity. So I dunno... if many ancient cultures can recall this story, I would assume it's because the people of these civlizations may have been Noah's grandchildren spread out to different areas.

Click to expand...

Which claim/claims do you want "backed up?"

Tedderz said:

I was thinking about the flood, and I came to wonder whether or not it was plausible for only eight people in the world to be innocent enough to be worth saving. Surely even the wicked had children? Unborns, newborns, toddlers? Did God kill these people, too?

Click to expand...

In the story, yes.

But, IMO, that's not what the story is about. One needs to consider where it sits within Genesis and the bible.

Genesis 1 and 2 describe a world created very good. Genesis 3 describes how human behaviour messed up and messes up that world. Chapters 4-5 lay out the consequences for that.

Then we have the story of Noah, which does not end with the rainbow as the children's versions of it do, but with everything going wrong all over again.

Then (after some linking material) we have the call of Abraham.

IMO, then, the story of Noah is the explanation of why God cannot just wipe out evil - because it runs down the middle of each one of us, including Noah. We need to know that before we begin the story of how God will sort out the world through the long, messy business of working through Abraham and his descendents climaxing in Jesus and continuing in the church.

In other words, the story of Noah is the biblical answer to the commonly asked question "If God is all powerful, why doesn't he wipe out evil?".

ebia said:

In the story, yes.

But, IMO, that's not what the story is about. One needs to consider where it sits within Genesis and the bible.

Genesis 1 and 2 describe a world created very good. Genesis 3 describes how human behaviour messed up and messes up that world. Chapters 4-5 lay out the consequences for that.

Then we have the story of Noah, which does not end with the rainbow as the children's versions of it do, but with everything going wrong all over again.

Then (after some linking material) we have the call of Abraham.

IMO, then, the story of Noah is the explanation of why God cannot just wipe out evil - because it runs down the middle of each one of us, including Noah. We need to know that before we begin the story of how God will sort out the world through the long, messy business of working through Abraham and his descendents climaxing in Jesus and continuing in the church.

In other words, the story of Noah is the biblical answer to the commonly asked question "If God is all powerful, why doesn't he wipe out evil?".

Click to expand...

So, if God did indeed wipe out the unborn, the newborn, young children, etc., then it raises a couple of questions for me, especially in light of your point that the flood demonstrates how futile it is for God to attempt to wipe evil out.

1. Where does innocence end and begin? Are we born innocent? Is good something that we lack when we are born, and must acquire/choose by moving closer to God? Is this what places Noah worthy of saving over people that never had a chance to choose at all?

2. How do we define good and evil? Are good and evil absolutes that can not possibly change, and God is merely a representation of that pure, absolute, good? Or, is good simply God and whatever he deems it to be? If God commits an act that by common human standards would be immoral, is it still good simply because he is the one doing it?

Tedderz said:

So, if God did indeed wipe out the unborn, the newborn, young children, etc., then it raises a couple of questions for me, especially in light of your point that the flood demonstrates how futile it is for God to attempt to wipe evil out.

1. Where does innocence end and begin? Are we born innocent? Is good something that we lack when we are born, and must acquire/choose by moving closer to God?

Click to expand...

What does one mean by 'innocence'?

I would rather say 'we are born in need of healing'. Our propensity to evil needs to be dealt from the outset and whether or not we have actually committed any evil is, to a fair extent, a purely academic exercise.

Is this what places Noah worthy of saving over people that never had a chance to choose at all?

Click to expand...

You seem to be trying to ask questions the story isn't written to try to answer. The story isn't really about punishment, but about the problem of getting rid of evil.

2. How do we define good and evil? Are good and evil absolutes that can not possibly change, and God is merely a representation of that pure, absolute, good? Or, is good simply God and whatever he deems it to be? If God commits an act that by common human standards would be immoral, is it still good simply because he is the one doing it?

Click to expand...

Again, that isn't a question the Noah story is designed to answer.

So, the account of the flood is not a description of something that actually happened, but merely a story fabricated to demonstrate that particular point?

Tedderz said:

So, the account of the flood is not a description of something that actually happened, but merely a story fabricated to demonstrate that particular point?

Click to expand...

Well, I dare say it's based on a real flood - either in Mesopotamia or the Black Sea - but its a myth, not a piece of history.

Okay.

How about the tale of Sodom and Gomorrah? Fairly similar story, with, I think, similar implications. Is this just another myth as well?

Tedderz said:

Okay.

How about the tale of Sodom and Gomorrah? Fairly similar story, with, I think, similar implications. Is this just another story as well?

Click to expand...

What do you mean "just"?

Myth is not a secondary form, less powerful and important than historical chronology.

If there were two cities, Sodom and Gomorrah, and they were destroyed, was it due to divine intervention from God to punish their wickedness? Or was it more likely caused by a natural disaster or even other people, and the account was greatly exaggerated?

Maybe I should just be asking where the truth ends and begins in general, in Biblical accounts.

Tedderz said:

If there were two cities, Sodom and Gomorrah, and they were destroyed, was it due to divine intervention from God to punish their wickedness? Or was it more likely caused by a natural disaster or even other people, and the account was greatly exaggerated?

Click to expand...

I'm agnostic as to whether there really ever were two such cities - the names themselves look mythical. But if there was, divine judgement and natural or man-made causes are not an either/or. If the story has a basis in history it has certainly been mythologised.

Maybe I should just be asking where the truth ends and begins in general, in Biblical accounts.

Click to expand...

Myths are true. But they aren't history. It's also a false dichotomy to think that's a clear-cut either/or when the boundaries are blurred. The bible starts to become rooted in history with the call of Abraham, but one cannot draw a sharp line.

Hi Tedderz,

Is it plausible for only eight people to be "innocent" enough to be worth saving? No, not a chance. We do not deserve salvation, not Noah, and not the Christians living today.

Did God kill the "innocent" babies, infants, toddlers, and others unable to choose to do what they should see as wrong? Yes.

So the real question, it seems to me, is does the potter have the right over the clay to make something and then mush it? And the Biblical answer is yes. God has mercy upon whom God has mercy, and condemns whom He condemns. He is God, He gives life and takes it away.

Where does innocence end and begin? We are conceived separated from God, hence in a sinful state, and we are corrupted spiritually because of the fall of Adam. However, I believe we do not pile up wrath - punishment for OUR misdeeds - until we willfully choose to do what is wrong. Thus someone who was born and lived in an area where they never were exposed to God's law would still be punished for say a lack of integrity, treating others differently than he or she treated themselves.

How do we define "good" and "evil." "Good" has a variety of meanings, but two are important for this discussion, (1) good in a moral sense, hence only God is good, and (2) good in a general sense - something suitable for a purpose. Creation was very good, meaning Creation was suitable for God's purpose. To say there was no death, pain, or suffering in God's creation is an argument from silence.

Evil can be defined as something contrary to our expectations and desires. And so "evil" depends on a point of view. Say two soldiers meet on a battlefield and one shoots the other. The one shot would consider the act evil, the one doing the shooting would consider the act good, for it served the purpose of protecting himself and his comrades.

In the world we typically have two kinds of "evil," (1) the calamity God's creation causes - the earthquake that kills schoolchildren, and (2) the "evil" that results from mankind sinning on purpose or in ignorance. Hence from God's perspective, the earthquake was not evil, but from the perspective of those stricken, it was evil.

Is God governed by the same rules as those He has given mankind to live by, what we consider morality? No, but we can certainly understand God's perspective. Say you build a house in Tucson. You have a toddler in a bedroom. You walk in and a scorpion, one of those white glow in the dark ones, is crawling up your toddler's arm.
You think you have the "right" to remove that "innocent" and either throw it far from the house or kill it, because it suits your purpose and your desires for the future.
The only difference is God is the giver of life, and we are the clay.

Tedderz said:

I was thinking about the flood, and I came to wonder whether or not it was plausible for only eight people in the world to be innocent enough to be worth saving. Surely even the wicked had children? Unborns, newborns, toddlers? Did God kill these people, too?

Click to expand...

apparently God thought so

Tedderz said:

I was thinking about the flood, and I came to wonder whether or not it was plausible for only eight people in the world to be innocent enough to be worth saving. Surely even the wicked had children? Unborns, newborns, toddlers? Did God kill these people, too?

Click to expand...

God created everyone and everyone dies... it scares people in the flesh, but not God who is God of the resurrection.

As for "what is plausible", secular people think their existence is quite "plausible", that their consciousness is effectively a notch above animals of the field... in reality, your existence itself is an inconceivable miracle, as is creation. But even by terms of a "big bang" or evolution... you are by no means plausible.

We are made in the Image of God. This is evident with sinner and saint alike. We long to be not as mere beasts but to be as God.

The whole concept of "plausibility" and "probability" is itself, therefore, an illusion, a backdrop for a story we are written into. Arbitrary rules created for our form.