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

[YoursTrue]

But there's lots of proof that it isn't. However, it appears that religious people believe what gives them more hope, comfort, and certainty, even though it may not be true.



Actually, there's plenty to worry about. Also, as far 2 Peter 3:2-4 is concerned:

Verse 2 refers to OT prophets (1:16-21) not Christian prophets. Peter emphasizes that the teachings of the apostles came directly from Jesus (the Lord and Savior). The phrase “your apostles” refers to the apostles who evangelized and taught the churches addressed. “The call to remember presupposes that these believers have received the fundamentals of Christian teaching on the same level with the OT prophetic testimony” (G. Green 313).

3:3 Above all, understand this: In the last days blatant scoffers will come, being propelled by their own evil urges 3:4 and saying, “Where is his promised return? For ever since our ancestors died, all things have continued as they were from the beginning of creation.”

The NT writers emphasized that the “last days” had arrived with the death and resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:17; Gal 4:4; Heb 1:2). The opponents are the “blatant scoffers” who indulge in evil (ch. 2) and deny the second coming. The prophecy concerning such scoffers was already fulfilled in the days of Peter. The opponents reasoned that since God has not intervened since the age of the patriarchs or from creation then he will not intervene in eschatological judgment. There is no “our” in the Greek text behind “our ancestors” so it is better translated “the ancestors.” The term translated “ancestors” (pateres) always refers to the OT patriarchs and not to first generation of Christians (Mt 23:30, 32; Lk 1:55, 72; 6:23, 26; 11:47; Jn 4:20; 6:31, 49, 58; 7:22; Acts 3:13, 25; 5:30; 7:2, 11-12, 15, 19, 32, 38-39, 44-45, 51-52; 13:17, 32, 36; 15:10; 22:1, 14; 26:6; 28:25; Rom 9:5; 11:28; 15:8; 1 Cor 10:1; Heb 1:1; 3:9; 8:9; Barn 5:7; 14:1; Apoc Pet E 16; Ep Apost [Coptic] 28) in the first two Christian centuries (Bauckham 292). In other words, the scoffers are not denying the second coming because the first generation of Christians had died. “For it is not said that things continue as they done since the coming of Christ, but since the beginning of the creation. The mockers were twisting the Old Testament Scriptures; it is, appropriately, out of the Old Testament that Peter confounds them” (M. Green 140).​

click here: Commentary on 2 Peter 3 – Biblical Scholarship (wordpress.com)

As scientists may say, proof is in the pudding. To keep this brief, yes, I have hope that there is a good future for mankind. That hope does come from my studies of the Bible. I have read different Bible commentaries. Some ring a chord that is concordant with my thinking, others do not.

 

[YoursTrue]

The point is that it makes not one iota of sense to take Job at the literal level, nor must we.

Insofar as literal is concerned, even if it's an embellished folktale, transmitted throughout the centuries to the primary Bible transcribers, it is likely based on more than someone's pure and utter imagination. (But that's my take on it, because I believe a deep basis of it is true. But then -- that's how I would look at it.)
P.S. years ago I (we) lived near a theological seminary, rather famous, and I guess the students bought and discarded books, so I enjoyed looking through used bookstores. I came across a pamphlet (sad to say I no longer have it) outlining a village place in Israel where the prophets were inclined to live at. I'm sorry I didn't keep it, but I can't keep everything. There is not much to find about this place in current literature, offhand I can't remember the name of the town in Israel, but it was historically known as a living quarter for prophets. Why am I saying this? Because -- the prophets received visions. Some are recorded for us, others are not, as far as I am concerned. Remember -- Saul went a bit nuts and was said to have acted like one of the prophets) The upshot is that since it sounds unrealistic that Job had his children killed and then had 10 more -- (who knows?), that doesn't mean it's not true. Yup. That's how I think now. Also the vision or meaning of it as transmitted to someone's head. Doesn't mean it's not true. But that's how I see, think about, perceive it now.)

 

[YoursTrue]

Wow, yes, how or why would someone with a perfect start go so far south ( to his coming destruction )
Satan not only had love for God, but God also had GREAT love for Satan - please see Ezekiel 28:13-15
Cherubic angelic Satan would have always had the special distinction (among all the other angels) of having the Honor to watch over human creation, instead Satan decided he wanted humans to worship him.

Thanks for mentioning that. It must hurt God to bring his creation to an end when He must.

 

[YoursTrue]

But there's lots of proof that it isn't. However, it appears that religious people believe what gives them more hope, comfort, and certainty, even though it may not be true.



Actually, there's plenty to worry about. Also, as far 2 Peter 3:2-4 is concerned:

Verse 2 refers to OT prophets (1:16-21) not Christian prophets. Peter emphasizes that the teachings of the apostles came directly from Jesus (the Lord and Savior). The phrase “your apostles” refers to the apostles who evangelized and taught the churches addressed. “The call to remember presupposes that these believers have received the fundamentals of Christian teaching on the same level with the OT prophetic testimony” (G. Green 313).

3:3 Above all, understand this: In the last days blatant scoffers will come, being propelled by their own evil urges 3:4 and saying, “Where is his promised return? For ever since our ancestors died, all things have continued as they were from the beginning of creation.”

The NT writers emphasized that the “last days” had arrived with the death and resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:17; Gal 4:4; Heb 1:2). The opponents are the “blatant scoffers” who indulge in evil (ch. 2) and deny the second coming. The prophecy concerning such scoffers was already fulfilled in the days of Peter. The opponents reasoned that since God has not intervened since the age of the patriarchs or from creation then he will not intervene in eschatological judgment. There is no “our” in the Greek text behind “our ancestors” so it is better translated “the ancestors.” The term translated “ancestors” (pateres) always refers to the OT patriarchs and not to first generation of Christians (Mt 23:30, 32; Lk 1:55, 72; 6:23, 26; 11:47; Jn 4:20; 6:31, 49, 58; 7:22; Acts 3:13, 25; 5:30; 7:2, 11-12, 15, 19, 32, 38-39, 44-45, 51-52; 13:17, 32, 36; 15:10; 22:1, 14; 26:6; 28:25; Rom 9:5; 11:28; 15:8; 1 Cor 10:1; Heb 1:1; 3:9; 8:9; Barn 5:7; 14:1; Apoc Pet E 16; Ep Apost [Coptic] 28) in the first two Christian centuries (Bauckham 292). In other words, the scoffers are not denying the second coming because the first generation of Christians had died. “For it is not said that things continue as they done since the coming of Christ, but since the beginning of the creation. The mockers were twisting the Old Testament Scriptures; it is, appropriately, out of the Old Testament that Peter confounds them” (M. Green 140).​

click here: Commentary on 2 Peter 3 – Biblical Scholarship (wordpress.com)

Again, I mean if a person doesn't wonder about his relationship with God -- and life -- but rather believes in evolution or -- is an atheist -- yes, the question still is: why worry? One might reason, if this life is all there is, why wonder or worry about what happens in the future? Again, one could reason it's going to be over anyhow probably somehow. But then, why care if "this life is all there is"? And let's say if our brains are bigger, more delicate in the conscience area than fish and gorillas, again -- so what? why worry if this life is all there is?
AS AN EXAMPLE -- watching discussion about world climate and pollution and the nations trying to maybe get involved with dampening pollution by the oil industry several decades ago -- lies were told -- coverups were made -- governments backed out -- and guess who 'won'? Obviously big business and "economics." See? They conclude that people have to make a living, EVEN IF THIS WORLD IS BEING DESTROYED BY POLLUTION OF THEIR OWN DOING.
So -- why worry? If this life short as it is, is all there is, why worry? (Either God exists or He does not exist. Either we believe in God or we do not.)

 

[wellwisher]

Flood symbolism is part of collective human symbolism; connected to human nature. The great flood therefore reflects something that was common to all humans. This is why flood stories are all over the world. It was connected to a major update in the operating system of the human brain. After the flood, empires like Egypt and Persia appear. Humans were upgraded and civilization advances, quickly.

When we install the latest versions of a Windows or an Apple Operating System, the old version is uninstalled. The old must die to allow the new to succeed. This is needed to create a clean slate for the new install. What is often retained are our personal settings; who we are in essence.

If there was a flood, we would try to survive by first seeking higher ground. But if the waters kept rising, eventually you are treading water and then if you tire, you will drown.

The flood was symbolic of the human unconscious mind; inner self, becoming veery active due to all the repressions caused by the ego and its choices of unnatural behavior; psychosis. Those who sensed the gods being angry; uninstall being active, would try to fight the overwhelming feelings by suddenly finding God; higher ground. But the dynamics of the flood; inner self, do not stop, and as the water continue to rise, you soon get over you head and then drown; ego is dissolved or loss of soul. This was the uninstall aspect of the upgrade. The inner self then takes over to prepare the install. The ego needs to lose will and choice, or it would make bugs.

Noah and his family and the two of each animal are analogous to the only personal settings that were retained from that earlier time. The two of each animal reflected natural male and female instinct as part of the retained personal settings. As the new operating system was installed, these useful positive settings from the past were added, helping with the start-up of the ego, so the ego could come out running.

After the flood, larger organized civilizations appear. This reflected a major upgrade.The Pharaoh was considered an inner self; god. with the gods; unconscious, leading the ego. This allowed the innate 3-D brain processing of the inner self, needed for their very complex construction projects, that would use only hand tools and slaves. This was beyond the ego and required the inner self being placed in the front of the mind.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Again, I mean if a person doesn't wonder about his relationship with God -- and life -- but rather believes in evolution or -- is an atheist -- yes, the question still is: why worry? One might reason, if this life is all there is, why wonder or worry about what happens in the future? Again, one could reason it's going to be over anyhow probably somehow. But then, why care if "this life is all there is"? And let's say if our brains are bigger, more delicate in the conscience area than fish and gorillas, again -- so what? why worry if this life is all there is?
AS AN EXAMPLE -- watching discussion about world climate and pollution and the nations trying to maybe get involved with dampening pollution by the oil industry several decades ago -- lies were told -- coverups were made -- governments backed out -- and guess who 'won'? Obviously big business and "economics." See? They conclude that people have to make a living, EVEN IF THIS WORLD IS BEING DESTROYED BY POLLUTION OF THEIR OWN DOING.
So -- why worry? If this life short as it is, is all there is, why worry? (Either God exists or He does not exist. Either we believe in God or we do not.)

What's the point in enjoying this life if there is no afterlife? Seriously? I always find this question somewhat bizarre and not very well thought out.

Well, if this is the only life we get, then it becomes infinitely more precious and worth living than if we go live on in some eternity of afterlife somewhere, doesn't it? Like, if we just get the one shot at it, we better make it count, right?

 

[YoursTrue]

But didn't Jesus not like what he was going through in Mark 14:36 and Luke 22:42? Therefore, why did Jesus' love cause him not to betray God, but Adam's didn't? Or did he even have love for God?

That's an interesting question. First of all, Adam understood his relationship with God, his maker. The "law" was set before him. Either listen to God and live, or defy Him and die. And, there was only one commandment like that. He accepted it, and, in fact, told Eve also not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, otherwise she would die. I will leave it there for the moment.

 

[YoursTrue]

Also, I wanted to mention that one of the problems with the book of Job is that believers are willing to go through anything that their religious denomination tells them to go through, regardless of the danger that it poses to them mentally, physically, or emotionally, or to their children or family.

I'm certainly not sure about that.

 

[David Davidovich]

As scientists may say, proof is in the pudding. To keep this brief, yes, I have hope that there is a good future for mankind. That hope does come from my studies of the Bible. I have read different Bible commentaries. Some ring a chord that is concordant with my thinking, others do not.

And that's why this whole thing about religion is about individuality. Because it's really easy for one religious person to say that another religious person who believes differently is mistaken or perhaps doesn't have the right heart condition in order to 'see' the 'truth' that the one religious person has. Also, I've heard it from all sides when it comes to Christianity where people have went to this church or that church or a Kingdom Hall, etc., and will say that those experiences just didn't ring a chord with them or that they just couldn't relate with the experiences that they had with those other faiths, and settled on a different faith that was right for them or that made more sense to them.

 

[David Davidovich]

Again, I mean if a person doesn't wonder about his relationship with God -- and life -- but rather believes in evolution or -- is an atheist -- yes, the question still is: why worry? One might reason, if this life is all there is, why wonder or worry about what happens in the future? Again, one could reason it's going to be over anyhow probably somehow. But then, why care if "this life is all there is"?

But that's how you look at things and that's what rings a chord that is concordant with your thinking. However, everyone doesn't think like that.

 

[David Davidovich]

David Davidovich said: ↑
But didn't Jesus not like what he was going through in Mark 14:36 and Luke 22:42? Therefore, why did Jesus' love cause him not to betray God, but Adam's didn't? Or did he even have love for God?

That's an interesting question. First of all, Adam understood his relationship with God, his maker. The "law" was set before him. Either listen to God and live, or defy Him and die. And, there was only one commandment like that. He accepted it, and, in fact, told Eve also not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, otherwise she would die. I will leave it there for the moment.

But that doesn't even remotely answer my question... But only dances around it.

 

[David Davidovich]

David Davidovich said: ↑
Also, I wanted to mention that one of the problems with the book of Job is that believers are willing to go through anything that their religious denomination tells them to go through, regardless of the danger that it poses to them mentally, physically, or emotionally, or to their children or family.

I'm certainly not sure about that.

But your answer doesn't make sense because that is what the book of Job is all about. Also, people say that they read the Bible and get insight and instructions from the Bible, however, what I have observed is that everyone's viewpoint of faith and the Bible comes from the Biblical interpretation of one's denomination or the type of faith that they espouse to.

 

[rational experiences]

Just a human only a human as a human once a baby human says let me apply my egotism.

And egotists all agree as civilisation implements positions suited for man's ego expressions.

Says I promise be my thesis is correct when I apply science by alchemical conditions myself.

Human scientific thesis proven.

As any type of living natural form is with you right in the moment living it's species life span. You seem to forget it dies.

So your thesis about its presence is moot. As only sex allowed it to remain living with you. As species also becomes extinct mainly by humans interference with nature.

Your egotism allows you to go blah blah.

As every human today wasn't living biologically 120 years ago. So talking beyond your own biological existence is human egotism only.

We were taught. A spiritual human uses a balanced mind natural and doesn't lie. Which egotism does expressively use.

The I know tactic.

As your human science didn't alchemic create any body you study you outright lie.

And it's about time your society gets put in its place before you allow hu man theoreticals to destroy us. Stating by experimentation with a claim as I'm proven a know it all.

 

[NArdas]

do what I say or die doesn't seem like a very Human Animal friendly religion

 

[URAVIP2ME]

What's the point in enjoying this life if there is no afterlife? Seriously? I always find this question somewhat bizarre and not very well thought out.
Well, if this is the only life we get, then it becomes infinitely more precious and worth living than if we go live on in some eternity of afterlife somewhere, doesn't it? Like, if we just get the one shot at it, we better make it count, right?

According to the Bible I find Adam and Eve were created healthy with the opportunity to live forever on Earth.
Many today Not in good health. Some so ill they take their own life. Many have died in war or by violence.
How do those people make it count when there is No cure for them ___________
Unlike man's short life span, the Resurrection Hope for some to go to Heaven, whereas the majority are offered everlasting life on Earth. A coming perfectly healthy Earth because there will be ' healing ' for earth's nations.
'Healing' as described at Revelation 22:2; Isaiah 33:24; Isaiah 35th chapter.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Sorry, but your answer sounded like one of those distracting off-the-wall answers and it's been a long time since I read 1 Peter 3:18-21 NIV - Bible Gateway. However, it would have been more helpful if you had made a reference to that scripture instead of trying to play who's-on-first.

Sorry, but I don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Well, actually there are verses in the Bible that believers view as conveying the idea that God is perfect and so are all his ways.

click here: 41 Bible verses about God, Perfection Of (knowing-jesus.com)

God is perfect - of this there is no doubt - and "His ways" are not "His creations".

The idea that all of God's creations were perfect would negate the concept of free will - thus making the Fall an impossibility.

If God's creations were "perfect" - they never would have partaken of the Fruit and entered into mortality.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

But why would it need to be proved to all angelic life? Why would creatures with intelligent minds and hearts have doubts about God? Also, how exactly is this being proved to all on earth?
But what about people who have never even thought about that?
The present is always "now"... depending on your viewpoint of physics.
But for most religious people, doesn't "righteous people" mean people who believe the same way as they do? Also, if someone is good, decent, caring, kind, generous, and loving, then that person would be disqualified because they didn't have the same religious belief as you (or depending on one's denomination) do?
So, is that what God has been worried about all this time?
I'm glad that you brought up that scripture. It would be nice to have a discussion on that.

Is it so much about having doubts or about showing that God is Not some sort of Bully.
God does Not bully anyone into worshipping Him.
Many have lived and died without hearing about Jesus, so in the Resurrection they will have that opportunity.
Anyone ( religious or not ) can be a good Samaritan, but only followers of Jesus proclaim the good news of God's kingdom as Jesus instructed to do at Matthew 24:14; Acts 1:8.
We fret not, because we don't know who Jesus will judge as a righteous 'sheep' or a haughty 'goat'- Matthew 25:31-33
God is Not worried and He does Not want us to worry because as Revelation 11:18 B says it is God who will bring to ruin those ruining the Earth ( literal and moral ruin )
Yes, 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 is very interesting and informative.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I don't think that any sound person or even animals want to die. It's a natural instinct that living creatures want to live and try to stay alive. Plus, for intelligent creatures, there's the issue of being concerned about the loved ones that you don't want to leave behind. However, death is a natural part of life, and it doesn't scare me like it does some people. Also, I think that the younger a person is, the more that they fear death.
A lot of religious people mock and criticize the theory of evolution, even though they really have no idea what it is other than saying that humans came from monkeys: ......

Yes, eternity is in our hearts ( for each day we can think of we can think of a next day )
So, more than instinct, a well person does Not want to choose the day they want to die.
In the Bible ' death ' is Not a natural part of life, rather death is our enemy - 1 Corinthians 15:26.
Death does Not scare Christians because Christians believe in the coming Resurrection - Acts of the Apostles 24:15. 'Sleep' until Resurrection Day (Jesus' thousand-year Day) - John 11:11-14; Psalms 115:17; Isaiah 38:18; Ecclesiastes 9:5
No evolution used where human life is concerned:
God formed or fashioned man from the already existing dust of the Earth - Genesis 2:7
P.S. don't know why this printed in dark lettering.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I know a way that a God could "answer to Satan's challenge." Don't accept the challenge. You're God, after all. Why the obligation to accept a challenge from one of your evil minions? It doesn't make sense for a supposedly loving God to do.

If you were on trial in a court of law wouldn't you want your name cleared of any charges ______
Satan tried to sully God's name, His way of governing.
Satan charges all of us in that we won't serve God under adverse conditions - Job 2:4-5.
Touch our ' flesh....' (loose physical health) and under adverse conditions we would Not serve or be faithful to God.
This issue will be settled because like Job and Jesus under adverse conditions we too can prove Satan is a Liar.