RayPublisher said:
The flood story was either a local phenon or was allegorical. Regardless, it does not diminish the lesson(s) that can be learned by sincere readers of the Bible IMO.
And what would that allegory be, and a metaphor of WHAT, exactly?
You're presumably a "sincere reader of the Bible", so lay your allegory on us, please.
Before that though, consider my reading of the account, and how it interacts with the creation account earlier in Genesis:
God makes man (AND plants AND animals) and declares all of it as "very good" in Genesis 1:29. Then in Genesis 6, God cannot ignore the rampant evil and mayhem any longer, so expresses regretting MAKING man (and plants and animals) and decides to wipe the slate clean. Not very prescient (ability to see the future), if God cannot even anticipate His OWN reactions to a decision He made BEFORE mankind was even around to pin the blame on?
After the Flood, God decides it MIGHT be a good idea to roll out His fix to the problem of 'evil in men's hearts', with the new "no manslaughter" rule (found in Genesis 9:5; note this was EVEN AFTER serving as Divine judge in the case of "YHWH vs Cain", seeing bloodshed first-hand). To enforce the new-fangled law, God delegates authority to Noah to rule over his fellow men by enforcing the first criminal justice system (Genesis 9:6), paralleling how God gave Adam dominion over the animals. God was giving Noah the authority to establish rule amongst men.
I wrote an article on the Noah's Flood account, and discuss how the WT abuses the story to justify their "no blood transfusion" policy, by scripture-twisting and misinterpreting Genesis 9:5-6, turning a BLESSING into an OBLIGATION.
Do yourself a favor and reflect on this stuff, as it's a waste of time to remain captive to a concept, whether it's a lie coming from the JWs or some other flavor of a same lie.
Adam