"Look it wasn't a global flood.." (page 8)

Lore

The case about a global flood is this: Jesus believed in it and spoke of it. If I reject the flood, then I reject Jesus.

Well, ignoring the fact that this is a horrible reason to believe the flood. It's not necessarily true, even if you believe that what the bible quotes Jesus as saying is somehow reliable.

You are, probably, referring to Matthew 24:36-40

36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[a] but only the Father. 37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 40 Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left.

First of all, I make references to movies pretty often. For example I might say to my family: "I set my phone up so I can track it online, just like Sherlock did with that murder victims phone."

I can safely use that example with my family because I know they saw that episode. And I don't have to point out that I don't believe it actually happened.

Jesus could easily have used the Noah story as an example because he knew his audience would be familiar with it. That doesn't have to mean that he believed it actually happened. He also doesn't mention anything about it being global.

simon17

First of all, I make references to movies pretty often. For example I might say to my family: "I set my phone up so I can track it online, just like Sherlock did with that murder victims phone."

I can safely use that example with my family because I know they saw that episode. And I don't have to point out that I don't believe it actually happened.

Jesus could easily have used the Noah story as an example because he knew his audience would be familiar with it. That doesn't have to mean that he believed it actually happened. He also doesn't mention anything about it being global.

No. In your example you can use the allusion becuase you AND YOUR AUDIENCE don't actually believe it. Every Bible believer up until modern geology believed that the Flood account was accurate as stated. So it would be misleading for Jesus to allude to a story HE knew was false but which he knew his audience believed as true. It would also call into question the entire inspiration of Genesis which would have further ramifications.

DagothUr

There are several myths that can be identified in many ancient cultures and still exist today in some form: eternal youthness, the idea of sacrifice in order to achieve something extraordinary, the existence and the immortality of the soul, the birth of man from the earth, the deluge, the Armaggeddon, etc. Some cannot be verified, some have been proven to be fairytales. The fact that an idea is present in more than one culture does not prove the truthfulness of that idea. People have worshipped and gave offerings to the dead all around the globe and during all historical periods, but has anyone saw any dead man rising from his grave? The evidence is a wall for even the most beloved biblical myths. People rely their hope in eternal life on stories about a certain individual who raised the dead. Well, did he? Can anyone testify? Is that fact possible today? Is it verifiable? If not, that that story has the same value as any fairytale. It's beautiful, entertaining, but it's just a dream.

God, Adam, the deluge, the prophets, Jesus, all are just myths. Mankind's opium, as Marx once said.

PSacramento

Those are some weak arguments PSac.

I shall strive to do better.

The wording of the Genesis account CLEARLY indicates that all humans and animals and the entire world was destroyed by the flood.

And? that is farily typical of ancient writting as a matter of fact, itis typical of most writing when trying to describe a horrific event.

I was read a letter describing what a German soldier saw when his tank battalion invaded Russia and I am parapharsing:

"All the land and animals were destroyed by the Russians so we could not live off the land".

Jesus talks about how "everybody" and "all" the people were swept away in a flood. And he is referring to an account in which the WHOLE WORLD was flooded.

Actually, Luke 17:27 says: They were eating and they were drinking and they were marrying, but it does end in destroyed them all.

It is very clear what he is speaking about and referring to by these statements.

Yes.

What you are suggesting is that the Genesis account is inaccurate (although inspired?), that Jesus came and invoked this inaccurate account to describe a future event giving most people a misimpression, but while technically not saying something to contradict the actual true version of the Genesis account (a local flood) that only he and heavenly entities know about (and which a few geologists would eventually figure out 2000 years later).

Context, read all of that chapter of Luke and you can see WHO Jesus was talking about.

Seriously, who is putting words in someone's mouth here???

Indeed.

PSacramento

Luke 17:22-30

22 Then he said to the disciples, “The days are coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. 23 They will say to you, ‘Look there!’ or ‘Look here!’ Do not go, do not set off in pursuit. 24 For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day. i 25 But first he must endure much suffering and be rejected by this generation. 26 Just as it was in the days of Noah, so too it will be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 They were eating and drinking, and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed all of them. 28 Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot: they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, 29 but on the day that Lot left Sodom, it rained fire and sulfur from heaven and destroyed all of them 30 —it will be like that on the day that the Son of Man is revealed.

Note that Jesus is reffering to not only the days of Noah BUT the destruction of Soddom as well.

simon17

Well Psac, I like reading your analysis in general: Agree to disagree I suppose.

PSacramento

Every Bible believer up until modern geology believed that the Flood account was accurate as stated.

Augustin argued against taking Genesis accounts as literal 1700 years ago.

There is no evidence that EVERY BELIEVER thought the flood account was a global disaster.

We can assume they did, sure, but there is no evidence of that and one would think that as Christianity spread out through Asia that people would bring up the fact that their history had no "great flood that covered the whole world".

Unless of course people began to associate the story of a "great flood" ( and almost every culture probably had one) with THIER great flood.

WTWizard

First, I will say "Where did all the water go?" In a local flood, it could in fact create additional weight in a local area, pushing the rock mass down slightly. (Glaciers are much more effective at doing this, however, because they actually push the rock mass out of the way.) But not so with a global flood.

In a global flood, the weight of the water would have to push up 2 1/2 times its weight in order to push the ocean basins out of the way. Since this is not a local situation, this would be going on everywhere in the world instead of just adding a few tons to a few million tons of rock. And, the rock mass would push back because it is being pushed equally everywhere. The water would simply float on the top until it evaporated. The water would have had nowhere to go.

Also, can anyone prove that we are all descendents of Noah? Fact is, I don't think there is any valid scientific proof or evidence indicating a global near-extinction of the human race around the time of the flood. And, I don't think there is any valid scientific evidence that mankind once lived on the order of 900 years, either.

simon17

This is just so far fetched. If Jesus was just using the story as a well-known, uninspired story that people could relate to, then would you at least agree that it has caused a tremendous amount of confusion for millenia about the history of the earth? I mean, I'm sure you can find an example or two of people who argued against a literal Genesis but I'm sure you would also agree that the VAAAAAAAAST MAJORITY of people took it as inspired (and many did so BECAUSE OF Jesus' words).

Even today people believe the worldwide flood (mistakenly so according to you) because of Jesus' words. BrotherDan is an example in this very thread. So basically if your speculation is correct, than at the very least, Jesus' words were incredibly (and unnecessarily) misleading.

brotherdan

We find something we agree on simon17!!! Celebrate!

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

Share this