Were the pre-flood people that wicked?

by indoubt 20 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  indoubt

  I have to say upfront that I am not sure about anything at this point of my life (i.e.: Evolution/Creation, etc)...

  But I am trying to believe that there is a god, and that he is loving and cares about us...

  I saw horrific pictures the other day about the floods that just occurred in Dominican Republic.

  One of the dilemmas I am facing is regarding how god took care of the people during Noah's days. Let me explain:

  We all know what the bible says about the flood: Noah had to build an ark and warn people about the upcoming flood.

  The estimated population of the earth at this time is ranging between 25,000,000 and 9,000,000,000. According to experts, 3 billions is a safe number (see http://www.ldolphin.org/popul.html ). Obviously, Noah was unable to reach every single person. According to the bible, only 8 persons survived.

  So if there is a god, and if he is loving and just, this would mean that only 8 persons out of about 3,000,000,000 were worth saving! What about all those poor kids that had to die drowning?

  Does anyone have a theory or an explanation on this?

  Thanks!

  indoubt
• 

  funkyderek

  According to experts, 3 billions is a safe number (see http://www.ldolphin.org/popul.html )

  These people are not experts. They are merely performing run-of-the-mill statistical analysis, but using their mythology as a base, rather than any real data. The numbers they arrive at may be interesting but are not in any way related to real-world history.

  And yes, a god who creates only to destroy is clearly evil and/or incompetent.

  Welcome to the board
• 

  Leolaia

  Explanation: It's an ancient Sumerian myth, and thus is not supposed to make perfect sense but only to explain why occasionally during times of storm, the Tigris and Euphrates would flood the entire flat country. It was the Hebrews who put a moral spin on the story; in the original version, the gods were simply annoyed and brought the flood because people were too "noisy". And the god responsible for the flood had a nasty personality anyway unlike the more purely benevolent gods, so it made more sense that way as well in its polytheistic context. Finally, the Yahweh of Genesis needed a lot of convincing to not unleash destruction. Look at how Abraham had to intercede with Yahweh regarding the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, pleading with him to not destroy the city if ten righteous people lived there. And yet Yahweh went ahead with the destruction, and even Lot and his family (who were later saved) were destined for destruction. That's right, even Lot was going to be destroyed. The angels didn't come to save him, but to destroy to city (Genesis 19:13). Rather Lot SAVED HIMSELF by showing them his hospitality (Genesis 19:12, 19). And because of his one life, God actually spared a whole city (Genesis 19:21). Despite the attempt by Hebrews and 1 Peter making Lot a "righteous" person after the fact, there is not a word about him being righteous at all up until his actions in ch. 19 and Jewish tradition similarly concluded that he had been wicked. So going back to the Flood story, and taking it not on its own terms but interpreting it in light of the Sodom tradition, it is interesting that if it was anything like Sodom, there may well have been people who could have demonstrated themselves as righteous in ways that Lot redemmed himself had they been given the chance. After all, if it weren't for that chance encounter with the angels in the city square, Lot and his family would have been DEAD.
• 

  robhic

  So if there is a god, and if he is loving and just, this would mean that only 8 persons out of about 3,000,000,000 were worth saving! What about all those poor kids that had to die drowning?

  Does anyone have a theory or an explanation on this?

  First, I am no expert on religion, dogma or theology. I am not even a JW! But from what I've read on or about the subject of the flood I'd have to comment that 3 billion people is a very large number and quite incorrect (my opinion) for that point in time.

  Next, the flood was more like a localized flood (per historical/archeological proofs). One theory is that the Black Sea used to be more like the Black Lake and glacial thawing caused the water level to rise in the Mediterranean Sea, backed up thru the Bosphorus Strait and PRESTO! you now have a flood which made the lake into a sea. And there's some tangible evidence to back up this particular theory.

  Add in the fact that at this time people thought the world was not only flat but consisted of little more area than they were exposed to. Their sense of "the world" was quite small. Also, other cultures have their own flood stories so if everyone was killed, how did the Sumerians, Chinese and others survive to write about their floods?

  It all makes a good story to "keep the troops in line" and give some control but as far as reality, I really don't think so. And how unimaginably large would that ark have had to have been and how could some old dude build it by hand? Who went to Australia to get and save the kangaroos? What kept the termites that had been saved from eating through the ark?

  Read "Before the Flood" by Ian Wilson for some interesting historical and archealogical evidence and theory on this. Good luck.

  Robert
• 

  grows1

  Indoubt You have read one of my favorite astrophysicists articles. I truly enjoy his articles. Now to the destruction of people, animals etc during the flood. Nachmanides alludes to a state of PHYSICAL corruption in his readings of Genesis. Genesis states that Noah was perfect in his day and a man that followed God. My thoughts- Could this mean more than just moral corruption- maybe a physical corruption of the genetics in the living beings in that day? Meaning that maybe Noah and his bloodline were in some way the only pure genetically pure beings left at the time of the flood? Corruption is not just a psychological events- it could also denote physical attributes. When thinking along those terms, cell cultures are referred to as corrupted when contaminated by particles or cells from a different group, thereby rendering them impure and useless for reasons of research or identification. We tend to think in human terms because we are human. Maybe there is more to the story of Genesis than just the obvious- a deeper meaning that we, as humans, are unable to comprehend, at this time or at any time. Nachmanides is an interesting 13th century Jewish sage who wrote about the 10 dimensions of our universe 700 yrs ago. Now physicists are confirming his writings. If you can, buy or borrow his commentary on the Torah. You will be amazed by that 13th century mind.
• 

  Morgan

  Finally, the Yahweh of Genesis needed a lot of convincing to not unleash destruction. Look at how Abraham had to intercede with Yahweh regarding the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, pleading with him to not destroy the city if ten righteous people lived there. And yet Yahweh went ahead with the destruction, and even Lot and his family (who were later saved) were destined for destruction. That's right, even Lot was going to be destroyed. The angels didn't come to save him, but to destroy to city (Genesis 19:13). Rather Lot SAVED HIMSELF by showing them his hospitality (Genesis 19:12, 19). And because of his one life, God actually spared a whole city (Genesis 19:21). Despite the attempt by Hebrews and 1 Peter making Lot a "righteous" person after the fact, there is not a word about him being righteous at all up until his actions in ch. 19 and Jewish tradition similarly concluded that he had been wicked.

  I agree with this, Leolaia. Good point, and good reasoning.

  Morgan
• 

  Undaunted Danny

  O kay,here is my two cents.Being raised a severely traumatized "born in the troof"dubbie.Traumatized to the extent of crying myself to sleep at night,because my school mates would all soon be dead at the hands of the "Jehover".[Big "J" just can't seem to get enough bloodletting] I literally cut my baby teeth on the bookbind of the "paradise lost to paradise regained" book.http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/2919/night.html I can stiil remember the ( peppermint) smell of the bookbinding glue. Here it is, :what i was raised to believe,as to the reason why the pre-flood inhabitants deserved no mercy. Because:they had the two angels guarding the entrance to eden, with the flaming sword as their "witness" Make any sense??More cool stuff: http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=Noah%27s+flood+pre+flood+inhabitants+&ei=UTF-8&fr=fp-tab-web-t&n=20&fl=0&x=wr
• 

  BluesBrother

  O K , so what is wicked anyway? are we talking of someone in the Saddam Hussain league, or someone who simply denies the W T Society? They both come to the same end at Armageddon according to the Gov. Body

  I was thinking the same thoughts about the flood recently. If, for the sake of argument we take it literally then you are right about a lot of people making up the Pre Flood generation. Noah had no printing press, no internet , no sound amplification. The eight people had to build the ark and in their spare time do the preaching . it is evident that only the immediate neighborhood could have been reached with first hand witness. Word of mouth would have taken the news but that is hardly an effective witness. Gen. 6.7 seems to say that God had made up his mind before the time even began .

  Can we really match this up with the loving God that is depicted elsewhere? Does it even measure up to basic humanity that mankind shows to one another? Can we feel love for a God who would act in this way?

  These questions used to bother me a lot when I taught the W T doctrines . Now I just shelve them. I personally see no need to take the Genesis accounts as being literal history in the way that the WT does . Perhaps they were meant to be like a parable with a message but not being based on a real account.

  I am not as clever as some on here, I only know what I learned doing The old Public Talk "The Flood of Noahs day Has Meaning For You", and I have just applied some logic to it all.

  I believe it is one missing piece of a jigsaw that is never going to fit
• 

  seattleniceguy

  Indoubt,

  Nice to have you here. The other thing about the Flood that just seems really strange for an omnipotent being is that it was massive destruction that didn't really accomplish anything. Sure, God could have just corrected the situation by wiping out the people who were evil beyond redemption, and then helped the others to better their lives. Instead, he decides the best way to get rid of evil will be to murder every breating thing on the planet except the few lucky travelers that make it onto Noah's boat. This is the kind of plan a four-year-old -- indeed, a very evil four-year-old -- would come up with.

  And how does this brilliant plan work? Within a couple generations, we've got bad people again, building towers out of dried mud and just generally being Nimrods. All in all, the plan completely fails. The only thing we get out of the deal is a new weather phenomenon, the rainbow. Which, of course, eventually goes on to signify rights for gay people, which is good, but the destruction of billions of innocents just for a colorful symbol and maybe some leprachauns is kind of a high price to pay.

  But seriously. Do some research on why a global flood could never have occurred. I thought I had come up with compelling evidence, but it was nothing when I saw this:
  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

  Welcome to the real world.

  SNG
• 

  rocketman

  And how does this brilliant plan work? Within a couple generations, we've got bad people again, building towers out of dried mud and just generally being Nimrods. All in all, the plan completely fails. The only thing we get out of the deal is a new weather phenomenon, the rainbow. Which, of course, eventually goes on to signify rights for gay people, which is good, but the destruction of billions of innocents just for a colorful symbol and maybe some leprachauns is kind of a high price to pay

  This is something similar to what a coworker and I were discussiong just last week, only I failed to make the point so colorfully, But ultimately, the purpose of the Flood would certainly appear to have failed.