The WT asks: Was the Flood of Noah's Day Really Global?

by undercover 23 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Mary

  jwfacts said: There is no reason that the WTS couldn't step into reality at least on this point and argue that the Bible supports a large local flood.

  Bingo. There seems to be a fair amount of geological evidence that there was indeed, a localized flood in the Mesopotamian region several thousand years ago. To the people living there, it would have seemed like the flood covered 'the entire globe' and hence the Flood story.

  However, under no circumstances can the Slobbering Body members challenge anything in the bible-----not that they really care if people believe in the scriptures themselves, but they can't take the chance and have the rank and file start to wake up from their slumber, and perhaps start to question the Organization itself.
• 

  WTWizard

  For those who believe the Bible is God's word, it is a fact that there was a global flood. But, I suppose for those who believe that the Bible lies, it is not? That hardly makes any sense--either it is a fact, independent of whether you believe in the Bible or not, or it is not (again, whether you believe in the Bible or not).
• 

  Robert7

  It is not possible to accept the fact that The flood of Noah was a rehash of the prehistoric oral flood stories. Why? Well, Jesus believed in a future day of global judgement, just as in the day of Noah. Knowledgeable people accept that the flood of Noah was not 40 days of rain that covered the highest mountain. The son of god should have known this, too. Losing respect for Jesus means losing repect for the authority of the Watchtower Org, too.

  Great point! It's another collapsing house of cards! You have to support other lies/myths to keep up your own lies.
• 

  Kudra

  Hah! Yes, Leolaia, having the presupposition of science is a major hinderance to the study of geology!!

  It is so bizzare that the JWs take that quote NOT to mean that having a religious slant to your expectations could make your conclusions bunk!

  -K
• 

  hamsterbait

  JESUS never said the flood was GLOBAL.

  All he said was the flood came and swept them all away. To drown less than 10 000 people did not require a GLOBAL inundation. 250 000 drowned in China after a dam burst.

  The Genesis account shows only that the people of the day thought it covered the earth.

  Even Paul thought the good news had been preached in all creation under heaven. (here the WT acknowledges it was only the then known world - why not the same for genesis)

  Frankly I cannot see how God's only true followers are undermining their VITAL life giving message by continuing to insist it was global, when not even Jesus did. But of course they are not witnesses of Jesus.

  HB
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  If a dub at the door gets asked even a basic question challenging the global flood, they need not reach for their Reasoning book. It makes no effort to defend or prove the story as troof. Other than speaking about the threat of future destruction, here's the only reference to the Noachian Flood under "Creation":

  *** rs p. 87 Creation ***Did God create all the millions of varieties of organisms that exist on earth today?Genesis chapter 1 says simply that God created each "according to its kind." (Gen. 1:12, 21, 24, 25) In preparation for the global Flood in Noah’s day, God directed that representative members of each "kind" of land animal and flying creature be taken into the ark. (Gen. 7:2, 3, 14) Each "kind" has the genetic potential for great variety. Thus there are reportedly more than 400 different breeds of dogs and upwards of 250 breeds and types of horses. All interfertile varieties of any animal are just one Genesis "kind." Similarly, all varieties of humans—Oriental, African, Caucasian, those as tall as the seven-foot Dinka in the Sudan and as short as the four-foot-four-inch Pygmies—stem from the one original pair, Adam and Eve.—Gen. 1:27, 28; 3:20.

  What about a basic animal such as the kangaroo? If there was a global flood, a pair of kangaroos had to be on the ark, of course. What happened after the flood so that kangaroos only exist in Australia? There is no evidence whatsoever that kangaroos were ever in any "Bible lands" at any time in history. How did they get to the ark, then back to Australia without any proof that they were ever in Asia, Europe, or Africa?

  Or is the right-hearted Bible reader supposed to believe that the kangaroo is just a different breed of dog or horse? Or maybe it was evolution after the flood?

  And that's just a very basic question that a dub needs to be able to answer. It gets much more complicated since Noah couldn't have taken just two bears aboard. The subspecies are so diverse, that genetic isolation for a few thousand years wouldn't produce the differences between the giant panda, Colombian spectacled, polar, grizzly, and brown bears. He would have had to float dozens of bears. And koalas would have been separate, too, unless they evolved from opossums, or something.

  There is one sentence in the Botchtower webpage that I can agree with:

  "If Noah was a mythical figure and a global flood a fable, the warnings of Peter and Jesus for those living in the last days would be meaningless."

  BINGO!

  B the X
• 

  Borgia

  Billy,

  Can I add the dodo, tasmanian devil to the list?

  On top: Horses and dogs are specimen of human induced evolution.

  Cheers

  Borgia
• 

  mkr32208

  This is just embarrassing. I can't believe that my parents still buy this nonsense... Like having a retarded streaker in the family!

  I would be willing to bet all those "scientist" work at the creation museum.
• 

  davegod

  "If Noah was a mythical figure and a global flood a fable, the warnings of Peter and Jesus for those living in the last days would be meaningless."

  Awesome!
• 

  VM44

  How could Paul teach followers of Jesus the doctrinal truth if God’s Word contains myths?

  No problem there. It's really very simple, Paul just went ahead and taught what he wanted to teach! Next question!