The FLOOD, God's Great Failure?

[Robert Landbeck]

I only post the following in light of the contention that god is infallible and can do no wrong.

Genesis 6:5-7 (NKJV)
5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have
created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”

Now if anyone sees the flood as a success please point it out.

.

If any 'religious' truth is self-evident it must be this: as in the beginning, it is not God who failed man; it is man who failed God, himself, and his fellow man. That is the way of the world. And nothing has yet been revealed to change that analysis.

 

[Muffled]

I only post the following in light of the contention that god is infallible and can do no wrong.

Genesis 6:5-7 (NKJV)
5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have
created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”

Now if anyone sees the flood as a success please point it out.

.

I believe a success is when the intended result is reached. God intended for most of those people to die and they did. God decided to start over by preserving a holy man and He did.

 

[Muffled]

It was a success in making us all the result of extreme inbreeding.

I believe you can speak for yourself. I am not Jewish and even the Jews have been mixed in with other races.

 

[Muffled]

It created the Grand Canyon

I believe the flood was local to Mesopotamia.

 

[shmogie]

This is nonsense. "Please read my holy book and only think about my holy book the way I think about it so you don't accidentally figure out it is all basically nonsense".

Anyway, to the original topic:

This is one of those things that make it so obvious that the god of the Old Testament and the god of the New Testament are two completely different characters. The OT god is a petty, spiteful and vengeful being. The NT god is, while not the exact opposite, of a totally different temper. This makes sense when you realize that the OT god was taken and given a new set of characteristics in order to "fit" into the new narrative of a new created religion. Build on the older stories to create your own.

Remember, too, that the OT freely acknowledges the existence of other gods in the ancient world in several passages (Deut. 10:17, Exodus 12:12 as examples), and that it simply makes the claim that the Jewish god is the superior one.

Christianity abhors the idea of any other deity ever having existed and so disavows it and pretends that passages like that don't mean what they very plainly mean.

The flood story is the penultimate example of the fallibility of the Abrahamic god (the ultimate being the creation story itself, in which this god creates a species, man, that he knows will defy him because he has not taught man not to do that and then gets mad at them for doing the thing he knew they were going to do). It's a kid flooding his ant farm because they do something he doesn't like. If all the stories of the Abrahamic god are to be believed, then he is essentially a child that will throw a tantrum at the drop of a pin. I am reminded of the Twilight Zone episode "It's a Good Life", where a child banished people to "the cornfield" for thinking thoughts he doesn't like.

Some rather erroneous conclusions here. There are no acknowledged "other gods" in the OT, only acknowledged people who believe in them, Genesis makes it abundantly clear that God created ALL things, he didn't create another god. God did not "know" that humanity would rebel, that would totally negate free will, which is an issue constantly addressed in both the OT and NT. The flood story is a perfect example of the precious gift of free will, God does not program us like robots, but ultimately we must experience the results of our choices. virtually all people then were consumed with greed, violence, sadism, murder and all manner of perversions. They used their right to choose poorly. God, being the creator of all, eliminated the people who had become anethema to him. The God of the OT is the exact same God of the NT. He is represented in the two when pursuing different goals with different concentration on those goals, The NT makes it clear that the dispensation of the OT ended, and another dispensation had begun with different goals and methods to achieve the ultimate goal that runs through both OT and NT like a red thread, the salvation of mankind and the vindication of God.

 

[Reggie Miller II]

I only post the following in light of the contention that god is infallible and can do no wrong.

Genesis 6:5-7 (NKJV)
5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have
created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”

Now if anyone sees the flood as a success please point it out.

.

Hello Skwim.
If you don't believe in God or the global flood then why are you even addressing it?

 

[Skwim]

Sorry, but neither of your responses came through.

.

 

[Skwim]

If any 'religious' truth is self-evident it must be this: as in the beginning, it is not God who failed man; it is man who failed God, himself, and his fellow man. That is the way of the world. And nothing has yet been revealed to change that analysis.

Thank you for the non sequitur.

.

 

[Skwim]

I believe a success is when the intended result is reached. God intended for most of those people to die and they did. God decided to start over by preserving a holy man and He did.

So it makes no difference that the status quo returned after the flood. Kind of short sighted don't you think.

.

 

[Skwim]

Hello Skwim.
If you don't believe in God or the global flood then why are you even addressing it?

Because people go around trying to convince others that their god, the god of Abraham, knows what he's doing and should be trusted, worshiped and is worthy of their hard earned coin every Sunday. And I'm just pointing out the other side of the story, that their god is capable of failure, and that perhaps a hard look at him may save them the time, effort, and money. If nothing else, think of it as a public service. But what's refreshing is to see that the Christians here don't consider his flood to be a success either. It helps renew my faith in their impartiality when it comes to the obvious.

.

 

[viole]

Who knows, maybe it's for those in heaven. Maybe God uses us to show them in heaven the nature of sin. Perhaps for us too, looking back someday on the whole deal after the resurrection.

So, you are a child playing with your little sister, and dog, and...WHAM! A wall of water drowns you and your sister and your dog. You gasp for air, but you will die in one of the worst ways.

And that to show an example to people in heaven. A show to the already saved. Divine waterboarding if you sin.

And this is your ultimate source of objective moral values, right?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Shifa Shahab]

I feel God created humans some were good others were bad - so the one's after many years of being patient were given Salvation on the Ark the ones that did not take heed were drowned... An example for future nation's that God created us with free will to test us. Man is weak and the devil temp his inner self - so humans do go back to their own inner vain desires - but we all have a chance until we are breathing to rectify our ways. To get to know our creator to love him and his creations and understand our purpose is ultimately to praise him in all forms and moments of our lives.

 

[Kemosloby]

So, you are a child playing with your little sister and...WHAM! A wall of water drowns you and your sister. You try to grasp for air, but you will die in the most horrible way.

And that to show an example to people in heaven. Divine waterboarding if you sin.

And this is your ultimate source of objective moral values, right?

Ciao

- viole

Waterboarding is slow torture, a wall of water smashing little children is a quick death. For all we know the two kiddo's were playing skin the doggie alive when the water hit them.

 

[viole]

Waterboarding is slow torture, a wall of water smashing little children is a quick death. For all we know the two kiddo's were playing skin the doggie alive when the water hit them.

Oh, how magnanimous of God. Baby killer, isn't He? Well, fast killer, at least.

Do you realize what you are saying?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kemosloby]

Oh, how magnanimous of God. Baby killer, isn't He? Well, fast killer, at least.

Do you realize what you are saying?

Ciao

- viole

I have no problem with God killing anyone. Life is his to give and take.

 

[viole]

I have no problem with God killing anyone. Life is his to give and take.

So, do you think that if someone gives life, he is also morally justified to take it?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Skwim]

It is metaphor @Skwim.
You must know this by now.
But of course, looking at it as if it is a metaphor does not always make for an interesting thread.

While you say it's a metaphor others are selling it as truth---reality.

.

 

[neologist]

Umm... I think your assessment of the pictures was EXACTLY the point. That God failed in creating man the first time, and that things didn't go any better the second time around. Way to underscore the point made in the OP. You're a champ.

Are you saying that we should have been created as obedient puppets? One consequence of our free will is the possibility of rebellion.

Perhaps God's bold strokes: the flood, the confusion of language, etc. are acts designed to advance the outworking of his purpose, the promise he made to Adam and Eve before they sinned and which he reaffirmed at Genesis 3:15.

That purpose, restated often throughout the Bible is for humans to live forever on this earth free from war and crime and sickness and death. Even those who have lived and died will receive their opportunity. See John 5: 28,29.

So, was the flood failure? It certainly was a consequence of man's failure to set his own standards.

 

[viole]

Are you saying that we should have been created as obedient puppets? One consequence of our free will is the possibility of rebellion.

Perhaps God's bold strokes: the flood, the confusion of language, etc. are acts designed to advance the outworking of his purpose, the promise he made to Adam and Eve before they sinned and which he reaffirmed at Genesis 3:15.

That purpose, restated often throughout the Bible is for humans to live forever on this earth free from war and crime and sickness and death. Even those who have lived and died will receive their opportunity. See John 5: 28,29.

So, was the flood failure? It certainly was a consequence of man's failure to set his own standards.

So, we have the freedom to rebel, with the caveat that we will die horribly if we do?

Ciao

- viole

 

[neologist]

So, we have the freedom to rebel, with the caveat that we will die horribly if we do?

Ciao

- viole

We now live with the consequences of 6000+/- years of rebellion. . .

How are we doing?