If there was no global flood - does this mean that the Bible is not inspired?

by Olin Moyles Ghost 36 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Olin Moyles Ghost

  Do you agree that if there was no global flood, then the Bible is not inspired? Here are my thoughts.

  It is pretty obvious that there was no global flood 4,000 years ago. But it's possible (likely?) that there were one or more large local floods in Mesopotamia around the time of Noah. Thus, many Christians consider the possibility that the flood of Genesis was a large, local flood. When I was a believing Witness, this was my position--I did not believe in a global flood but I believed the Bible was inspired by God.

  But when you read Genesis chapters 6 and 7, it seems pretty clear that the flood it's describing is global. For example, Genesis 7:19-20 reads " And the waters overwhelmed the earth so greatly that all the tall mountains that were under the whole heavens came to be covered . Up to fifteen cubits the waters overwhelmed them and the mountains became covered." (NWT)

  The plain language does not seem to allow for a local flood--rather, all the mountains (including 5 mile high Mount Everest) were covered by 15 cubits of water. This is impossible. There is nowhere near that amount of water on the earth. This is but one reason that a global flood did not happen.

  But does this just invalidate Genesis? Or just the Old Testament? I say no. New Testament writers, such as Peter and the gospel writers mention "Noah's day" and talk about Noah entering the ark. If the global flood of Genesis is not true, then would God have inspired his servants to write about it as if it were true? Of course not. Thus, the New Testament seems to be tainted by this false tale.

  Anyway, this is just a summary of my thoughts on the matter. I would like to hear perspectives of others.
• 

  ldrnomo

  Who knows whether or not the Bible was inspired. The Bible is the only reference to the Bible being inspired.

  LD
• 

  frankiespeakin

  I tend to think that the flood story in not about a global deluge, and the entire Genesis account is about the earth as a not as a sphere but dry land(earth=dry land & seas watery deeps, and the the writers could not be thinking of the earth as we think about it today with an earth with all the continents and oceans.
• 

  Doug Mason

  Each Bible writer was addressing their own direct audience, using their own understandings, their own culture, their own personal background, and they wrote with a deliberate objective in mind. A story about a flood could be a vehicle for conveying a message, much like Jesus used parables to convey an underlying truth.

  Likewise with the creation stories, which were vehicles to convey a message at that time. Those who worshiped the sun, or stones, or whatever, were perhaps being told that these items were actually created by a True God named El.

  Jewish history, like the historical record of any person or group, was written with their own immediate purpose in mind. Although we might recognise that Israel, for example, was destroyed because Assyria was enormously more powerful, the priests (who wrote only their own side of the story) used these events to further their claims by saying that Israel was destroyed because of the people's immorality and their disobedience to the prophets (the people who were writing these works).

  These writings were edited several times, where each editor looked at the text through their own understandings. Consequently, it is no longer possible to know exactly and precisely what was originally written. I am not a radical, this is the comon view of scholars (of which I am NOT one).

  We need to get away from worshiping the Book and instead we must form a living personal relationship with God. Place bibliolatry where it belongs and become personally and intimately involved with God, through the personal holy spirit. Use the Scriptures to allow the holy spirit develop that relationship with God.

  Those who rely especially on the ancient Hebrew Scriptures are not on the firmest of foundations.

  God did not write the Bible. Men did. It is a human book, containing human frailties, even mistakes and exaggerations. Do not worship it. Worship God. Because it is a human book, we may employ exegesis to understand the intent of people who might have been living close to the Iron Age.
• 

  oompa

  lol.......olin.......why are you thinkin bout this???...........oompa

  and as to the subject line...........YES!
• 

  WTWizard

  I agree that the Bible is one of the biggest scams in history (the Quran is the other). The Bible lies, portraying God as all-righteous even though He murders people for the heinous crimes of wanting to mind their own business throughout the whole Old Testament. It claims that God is impartial, yet right in the New Testament it denounces homosexuals (some of whom cannot help it, because they were genetically like that or because of early damage to their endocrine system from toxins in their food--like the phthalates we are now hearing about). The Bible implores that all homosexuals should "cure" themselves, even though it is none of anyone else's business outside those engaging in that particular act.

  Even worse, the Bible portrays mankind as falling into sin at the outset. Human nature is to learn about the environment, to learn how things work, and then to manipulate things for the advantage of society (themselves included). The Bible portrays this (a form of which is learning good from bad) as sin. Notably, because it is what separates us from animals, that gives the illusion that mankind cannot not sin--and is therefore damned. And God is the one that created man to learn what is good and bad--the same God that declared that this is a sin! Further, this same God claims to have the solution (that is put together after the fact)--Jesus dying for us to clear those sins. But, to benefit from this, we need to obey this same God. The very God that created a problem where none existed, and then creates a self-serving "solution". Notably, no one is ever going to be "saved".

  The Bible even has the nerve to lie about Jesus. It twists what Jesus said, using Paul who took it the wrong way, using 40+ years of time to corrupt many of the details, and using out of context quotes from the Old Testament to back up the corrupted version. We go from one that is trying to liberate mankind so they can learn about the environment (including what is good and bad) to one that demands that everyone do as he tells them to.

  Thus, it surprises me not that, even though there was no global Flood, the Bible (which lies) tells of one as reality.
• 

  BluesBrother

  I sometimes wonder if the action of quoting or even referring to a character as an example, should always be seen as an acknowledgement that the person actually existed. For example, I might say :

  "Even Shakespeare's Hamlet saw the dilemma that we face in life sometimes, when he pondered "Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
  The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,And by opposing end them? "

  I am not saying that Hamlet really existed, just repeating the truism that Shakespeare wrote for the character.

  Or perhaps I might say that "we remember from Macbeth that unbridled ambition can lead to ruin and the corruption of a formerly decent man."

  Just because I use that illustration, I know full well that Macbeth was fiction, but his story is based on the observation of life, which is why audiences have related to Shakespeare's work.

  So....Perhaps just because Christian Scriptures refer to Noah, It may not mean that the Genesis account has to be read as literally true ???
• 

  Humanist

  One of the reasons my husband and I left the JWs was because we investigated the Global Flood!

  We explained our findings to some elders who came to see why we'd stopped attending the meetings and they actually looked quite perturbed about it.

  We talked about all the scientific evidence, geology, icecaps, tree rings etc. Both elders were listening intently and could not refute any of it. They said they'd do some research and come back with some answers.

  They did a few weeks later. Their 'answer' to our flood problem was one sentence in a brochure which said that we know the Flood really happened because Jesus talked about it! "There's our proof!" beamed one elder, while the other stood there nodding and grinning.

  They stood at the door looking really pleased with themselves, relieved that they were able to find proof of the Flood for us.
• 

  Caedes

  Humanist hit the nail on the head, the global flood story in the bible is not factual, there is not one shred of empirical evidence to support the flood story in the bible. Unfortunately Jesus does mention it (Luke 17:27) so if the flood is not real and Jesus didn't realise that the flood story was not accurate then Jesus isn't who he claimed to be.

  After all the son of god (or god himself if you prefer) should know that the bible story wasn't accurate.
• 

  passwordprotected

  Straw man. The flood being global or is not is not the means to discredit the whole Bible. Eg. should the fact that some of Dawkins research and hypothesis into and of genes is being shown to be outdated discredit all of his research?

  Is there empirical evidence that a flood of the Mesopotamian basin did not take place?

  Blues Brother makes some very valid points.