Why Would Noah's Flood Have Been the Best Way for God to Cleanse the Earth?

[nPeace]

I was doing some research on another topic that I had been thinking about, however, I read this quote in one of the articles that I was reading:

Even after the Fall, it makes sense that these weather variations were minimally different. But with the global Flood that destroyed the earth and rearranged continents and so on, the extremes become pronounced — we now have ice caps and extremely high mountains that were pushed up from the Flood (Psalm 104:8). We now have deserts that have extreme heat and cold and little water.​

click here: State of the Water Vapor Canopy Model | Answers in Genesis

Therefore, after reading that, what I would like to ask those who believe in the Genesis account about the flood: Why would the flood have been the best and the most efficient way for God to have cleansed the earth of the saturated evil that existed at that time? Considering all the extreme changes and consequences that are supposed to have occurred as a result of the flood.

I don't think it's possible for anyone to accurately answer that question, since the Bible is silent on that.

However, one can guess.
While God could have used a "Sodom and Gomorrah special" throughout the earth, that would not have 1) required a "signal post", 2) been thorough enough.

We have to remember that 1) the beings of higher intelligence were among men. 2) Men were more intelligent, since they were closer to perfection.

So taking those facts into consideration, we can think about this.
Imagine that Bin Laden knew that his compound would be attacked, by a barrage of hellfire missiles, so that not even an ant a few feet below the surface would survive.

What would the smart person do?

Meanwhile... Deep below the surface...

A flood would wipe out every crevice. Not even an ant would survive... literally.

I would guess another possible reason for using the flood, was to have a "signal post". People would see the big structure Noah was building, which took years to complete. So they were given the opportunity - a long time, for some to pay attention.
Noah's kin had opportunity to take Note. Everyone did.

That's my guess, but I don't know.

 

[nPeace]

If he magically poofed man, the Earth, and everything into existence, he should be able to poof a troublesome mistake out of existence just as easily.
Apparently he enjoyed dramatic spectacles, though.

What I wonder is, after ridding the world of a faulty model, why did he repopulate it with the same, unaltered model?
You know what they say about people who repeat acts hoping for different results...

Are you asking a sincere question, or just mocking?
The 'unaltered model' was what was present. The apointed time for the 'new model. could not just appear... like magic.

If one takes time to read the Bible in a sincere way, they would know why Noah and family could not produce offspring that would be 'perfect'.

I really don't understand why Atheists think that God poofed anything.
It really boggles my mind how people can believe undirected processes acting on their own can assemble matter in a purposeful way, and not think that an almighty intelligent creator can directly assemble matter in a purposeful way.

 

[nPeace]

...As if the story isn't bad enough one might ask why God drown all the humans but kept the Satan creature alive to continue the corruption???

Simply put. Satan raised an issue. The issue needed to be settled. Destroying Satan would not have settled the issue, but rather, left it opened, and unsettled.

 

[nPeace]

Good point.



From what I understand about some interpretations of Genesis 6 is that there was a unique situation going on where rebellious angels from heaven looked down on earth and became sexually attracted to the women on earth and violated God's will and came down and married these women and produced hybrid offspring through those unions and the earth became filled with violence from the super strong hybrids. Therefore, from what I understand, the model was supposed to have been altered from that situation.

I don't see how that altered the model. Noah and family were not hybrids.

 

[nPeace]

The flood, as conceived by the Abrahamics, as a worldwide flood, never occurred. It was an impossible phenomenon.

Impossible for whom? Man? That's obvious.

 

[nPeace]

Faith is unjustified belief; belief without sufficient evidence.

Faith is based on evidence. It not unjustified belief.
That's an unjustified Atheistic belief.
Religious people often think of faith as confidence based on a perceived degree of warrant, while others who are more skeptical of religion tend to think of faith as simply belief without evidence.

 

[nPeace]

So, was that the best and most efficient way for God to suppress the excessive evils around at that time, considering that God's actions caused the earth to have excessive 'evil' weather, extremes at the north and south poles, and deserts that have extreme heat and cold and little water? And not to mention the supposed rearranged continents.

I see no problem for the Flash or Superman dismantling the Brooklyn bridge. Putting it back together is a breeze for them.
Fixing the earth and making it far better than it currently is, is not a problem for the creator of the universe.

 

[nPeace]

From what I understand, it was because God felt like he had to settle the questions raised about His rightful authority and sovereignty over the earth because of Satan's rebellion against God.

You know what JWs teach quite well. Is that because you were a JW?

 

[Truth in love]

Simply put. Satan raised an issue. The issue needed to be settled. Destroying Satan would not have settled the issue, but rather, left it opened, and unsettled.

I think one must conclude that either God can’t or God won’t destroy Satan. God knows best, so I would conclude that despite being evil he serves a function.

 

[nPeace]

Well if there’s a perfect God that made a perfect creation that went off the rails to a degree that God decided to flood the planet, something bad happened. And it indicates things aren’t perfect as claimed.

Adam was perfect.
There is a word called relative. It means not absolute, but "considered in relation or in proportion to something else".

Adam was perfect in the way that God made him - that is, Just right as a human, capable of doing what a human is made for.
After God made Adam and Eve, he said of his work, everything was very good.

We can think of it, this way.
The baker makes a bread, and goes, "Perfect!"

It's perfect for the purpose the baker made it - to be edible, delicious, and aromatic.
The fact that the ingredients the bread is made from will spoil after some time, does not make the bread less perfect.

Similarly, the fact that Adam could make a decision that would be disastrous, does not mean he was not made perfect.

@Fallen Prophet God said his creation was very good. In his view it was perfect, in that it was to his satisfaction. Perfect in a relative sense.
The only one absolutely perfect is Jehovah.
Everything else is perfect only relative to the standard of perfection set for it.

perfect :-

1. having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be.
2. absolute; complete (used for emphasis).

 

[nPeace]

I think one must conclude that either God can’t or God won’t destroy Satan. God knows best, so I would conclude that despite being evil he serves a function.

I have found that knowing the answer helps greatly.
God will destroy Satan as promised in scripture... after the issue is settled, and everyone is given opportunity to choose which side of the issue they are on..
From experience, telling people God knows best does not give them a basis for accepting that statement. Showing them that God knows best, and why goes a long way.

For example, when a child's life is snatched away, and the parents has questions, the pastor telling them God knows best, only leaves a big question mark on their mind.
Showing them and explaining that God is not responsible for that child's death, and why he has allowed suffering, answers their questions.

 

[nPeace]

Why can't believers just acknowledge it is likely an embellished fictional story based on a real, local flood, that aims to tell believers: God is in charge, do what the middlemen to God says, or else?

I see these elaborate and absurd interpretations and it becomes even less plausible.

I don't know why a person would want someone to acknowledge something that's not true, just because that person believes it.
I don't have to wonder how that person would respond to... "I don't know why evolution believers don't acknowledge it's likely, the so called transitional fossils are not telling the story they believe.
I see these elaborate and absurd interpretations and it becomes even less plausible."

 

[Colt]

Simply put. Satan raised an issue. The issue needed to be settled. Destroying Satan would not have settled the issue, but rather, left it opened, and unsettled.

The flood is a genealogical devise invented by the Israelite priesthood.

 

[nPeace]

Um, okay, but none of that addressed what I said in the part of my quote that you responded to:

That's all that I could think of without becoming repetitive, but by doing something other than a flood, then that would have prevented the horrible weather that we often have on this planet and the extreme cold at the poles and the extreme heat and the lack water in the deserts. ​

(Romans 8:20) For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but through the one who subjected it, on the basis of hope
...but you already know this, don't you.

 

[nPeace]

The flood is a genealogical devise invented by the Israelite priesthood.

The flood is a historical account which God had recorded, in his word... and preserved.

 

[nPeace]

Other than your preference for the Bible, how do you know whether or not any of those similar flood stories came before the Bible flood story?

In November 1872, a self-taught historian named George Smith toiled away in the archives of the British Museum sorting through fragments of clay tablets recovered from ancient Mesopotamian archeological sites in modern-day Iraq. The tablets were written in cuneiform — a language that had only recently been recovered and translated after 1,000 years of obscurity — and most of the fragments contained humdrum accounting records or opaque prophecies from palace priests.

But then Smith found something remarkable. As he translated the cuneiform word by word, a familiar story unfolded. There was a god punishing humanity with a catastrophic flood, one man who was chosen to survive using a specially constructed boat filled with animals and seeds, and after the flood, birds being released to find dry land.

This wasn't the story of Noah and the ark, though, and this wasn't the book of Genesis in the Hebrew Bible (known to Christians as the Old Testament). What Smith had discovered was only one chapter in a sprawling Mesopotamian tale now known as the Epic of Gilgamesh, first written in 1,800 B.C.E., around 1,000 years before the Hebrew Bible.​

click here: Did the Bible 'Borrow' the Noah's Ark Story From the Epic of Gilgamesh? | HowStuffWorks

Because the Biblical account was recorded later, doesn't make it any less valid.
The event was told by various peoples.
The Biblical account was told by a Hebrew, and evidently is a reliable account, which later Jews refered to, including Jesus Christ.

 

[Truth in love]

Adam was perfect.
There is a word called relative. It means not absolute, but "considered in relation or in proportion to something else".

Adam was perfect in the way that God made him - that is, Just right as a human, capable of doing what a human is made for.
After God made Adam and Eve, he said of his work, everything was very good.

We can think of it, this way.
The baker makes a bread, and goes, "Perfect!"

It's perfect for the purpose the baker made it - to be edible, delicious, and aromatic.
The fact that the ingredients the bread is made from will spoil after some time, does not make the bread less perfect.

Similarly, the fact that Adam could make a decision that would be disastrous, does not mean he was not made perfect.

@Fallen Prophet God said his creation was very good. In his view it was perfect, in that it was to his satisfaction. Perfect in a relative sense.
The only one absolutely perfect is Jehovah.
Everything else is perfect only relative to the standard of perfection set for it.

perfect :-

1. having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be.
2. absolute; complete (used for emphasis).

I have found that knowing the answer helps greatly.
God will destroy Satan as promised in scripture... after the issue is settled, and everyone is given opportunity to choose which side of the issue they are on..
From experience, telling people God knows best does not give them a basis for accepting that statement. Showing them that God knows best, and why goes a long way.

For example, when a child's life is snatched away, and the parents has questions, the pastor telling them God knows best, only leaves a big question mark on their mind.
Showing them and explaining that God is not responsible for that child's death, and why he has allowed suffering, answers their questions.

yes our limited mortal perspective make it hard to see the big picture.

 

[nPeace]

And don't forget talking donkeys.

Teacher to little child: Do donkeys talk?
Child: No-haha. Donkeys don't talk. Don't be silly-haha.
Teacher: So how is it the donkey is talking to Balaam?
Child: It's the angel that is speaking - giving the donkey a voice.
Teacher: Give me five. You are one smart kid.

Can you explain this?
Child: Yes.

Teacher:

Very good.

God is quite creative isn't he.
In Genesis, he refers to the serpent, whom he does not identify, until later.
He also withholds revealing the voice of the "voiceless beast of burden".
He doesn't reveal everything, and why?
(Revelation 13:9) . . .If anyone has an ear, let him hear.

 

[F1fan]

Adam was perfect.

False. A truly perfect Adam would have been created capable of being obedient to the rules God set. Instead God created Adam easily duped by the Serpent.

If God really wanted Adam to be obedient, you'd better believe God would have made sure Adam was a being capable of obedience. He wasn't.

Adam was perfect in the way that God made him - that is, Just right as a human, capable of doing what a human is made for.
After God made Adam and Eve, he said of his work, everything was very good.

OK, fine, Adam was perfectly incapable of obedience, exactly as God created him. That Means God caused the Fall per the design. So man's sin as a result of the Fall is not man's, but God's cause.

We can think of it, this way.
The baker makes a bread, and goes, "Perfect!"

It's perfect for the purpose the baker made it - to be edible, delicious, and aromatic.
The fact that the ingredients the bread is made from will spoil after some time, does not make the bread less perfect.

Similarly, the fact that Adam could make a decision that would be disastrous, does not mean he was not made perfect.

This is not a sound analogy. But that's OK because the A&E story is a myth and there are no Gods known to exist, so you are arguing for what? That your religious beliefs make sense? No they don't. Even if we assume a God exists and the A&E story is true, none of it makes any sense as I outlined above.

 

[F1fan]

I don't know why a person would want someone to acknowledge something that's not true, just because that person believes it.

Yet you do because you are a creationist. Creationism isn't science, it offers no correct explanations about the world. It is fabricated fraud that only certain types of guile Christians believe.

I don't have to wonder how that person would respond to... "I don't know why evolution believers don't acknowledge it's likely, the so called transitional fossils are not telling the story they believe.
I see these elaborate and absurd interpretations and it becomes even less plausible."

You are a set of Christians who have been fooled, and you don't seem to care about this fraud you've accepted. Experts in science are the only authorities on explaining what is true about how the universe works. You have decided to reject experts in science because you like Christian fraud better.