"Look it wasn't a global flood.."

by Qcmbr 118 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Qcmbr

  I've heard the statement from bible apologists so many times that the global flood story of Genesis was not a global flood but was probably a local flood. This seems problematic.

  • This directly disagrees with the bible. Everywhere the bible internally references a global flood of worldwide scale (I'll throw in Matthew 24:39 as a NT example and Genesis 6:17 as a OT example.)
  • If it was just a local flood then God could not then say: "And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh." Since we have terrible local floods every year (e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-12263166 Brazil flood deaths top 800 with 400 still missing) so then God must be a liar or it was indeed a global flood.

  We are then left with the obvious conclusion:

  • Since there was no global flood recorded in the geological evidence as read and understood by the overwhelming majority of geologists this means the bible story is just that - a made up myth.
  • Since that myth contains the words of Jehovah we have cast iron proof that the words of Jehovah as recorded in scripture are - at least in this instance - made up completely by men.
  • Since no prophet - including Jesus - pointed this out then they either did not care about the lies or did not in actual reality have any spiritual gift of discernment and they were just making things up (hence why they happily included the myth in their 'revelations.' There is no evidence that Jesus was indifferent to scriptural interpretations; the recorded Jesus was always arguing about the fine details - even at 12.
  • Anyone who believes in a literal global flood is deluded and their judgement regarding anything found in the bible is equally suspect.
  • Anyone who believes in the bible doctrinally but not historically is making the impossible assumption that the doctrine is correct while the history is a lie. They cannot be trusted either as they have used their own understanding to judge the supposed 'word of god'.
  • Anyone who believes in most of the bible but is willing to accept scientific / rational / logical re-interpretations of key scriptures over and above the actual words of the bible are not actually bible believers at all, they are believers in their own made up philosophy that is merely an eclectic series of borrowings probably ranging from the sermon on the Mount to the Tao of Pooh with a few pithy sayings derived from fridge magnets thrown in.

  The flood myth destroys utterly the Christian, Jewish and Muslim myths.
• 

  The Finger

  Man has been known to be wrong
• 

  cofty

  Man has been known to be wrong

  Yep maybe the earth is flat after all, who knows?
• 

  brotherdan

  It was indeed a global flood. There are many evidences of a young earth including fish fossils on top of high mountains. People that argue a local flood are denying the Bible's account. According to the Bible, it HAD to have been a global flood. But of course there are people that scoff at this too without looking at all the inner and extra biblical evidences.

  Well the Bible prophesied that there would be scoffers...

  2Peter 3:3:

  3 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
• 

  just n from bethel

  Rule # 1 for prophets: Include a prophecy that people won't believe what you say.
• 

  cofty

  That's disingenuous Bro Dan. The evidence against a global flood is incontravertible but with google and morons like Ken Ham at the click of a mouse everybody can be a history denier and proud of it.
• 

  just n from bethel

  Rule # 2 - make sure you throw in a fear-based emotional plea that if people don't believe, despite no evidence, they'll be doomed.
• 

  Qcmbr

  BrotherDan

  The point is of course illogical:

  33 He called me by a name, and said unto me that he was a b messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for c good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.

  This was what an 'angel' said to Joseph Smith. Now think carefully about whether you will make a 'prophet' out of him by choosing to have ANY opinion on his so called prophetic calling.

  I call your bet and raise you 500 crazy points.
• 

  tec

  The flood myth destroys utterly the Christian, Jewish and Muslim myths.

  And yet there are a couple/few billion Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Hmm...

  Your conclusions are possible - obvious to you and others who believe as you do - but certainly not absolute, and so not as obvious to others who have drawn other conclusions.

  Point 1) The overwhelming majority of geologists are not absolutely correct, as science is not absolute - but always learning, adapting where previously wrong, etc. And just because a global flood is not evidenced 4-6000 years ago (I don't remember what it is supposed to be), doesn't mean that there wasn't one much much earlier. Which could just mean that the timing (genealogies) is wrong. Or that this was the best way to convey a truth to the people at the time, in terms of what they could understand... etc. etc...

  All of your other points seem dependent upon point one, so... *shrugs*

  Tammy
• 

  brotherdan

  That's disingenuous Bro Dan.

  A natural atheist response. Oh wait...plus there is "the burden of proof is on you, not me". I've said it before, but it is so interesting to me how exJWs tend to throw the Bible away after they find out that there is not a Faithful Slave class.

  I was looking back on some of the prominent atheist posters on this site, and it is interesting to see the digression of their faith. I must admit that I have had issues with faith myself. But atheism just does not make any sense to me whatsoever. Atheist arguments, IMO, are disingenuous, no matter how eloquently put.