Why Would Noah's Flood Have Been the Best Way for God to Cleanse the Earth?

[F1fan]

But from what I understand, it did work as far as getting rid of the super strong and violent hybrid offspring of rebellious angels and beautiful earth women.

Why can't believers just acknowledge it is likely an embellished fictional story based on a real, local flood, that aims to tell believers: God is in charge, do what the middlemen to God says, or else?

I see these elaborate and absurd interpretations and it becomes even less plausible.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Everyone who actually believes that God flooded the whole earth so He could start over please raise their hand.

Is it He (God) of we (humanity) could start over or have a fresh start ______
Who knows, those nephilim could have also been having relations with animal life.
Who knows, diseases could have been rapidly spreading.
No wonder today we are told to wash our hands.

 

[rational experiences]

If a scientist did a human conscious thesis study of his own behaviour doesn't he believe he owns personal superior rights. As a human to judge created creation as compared to the everyday equal human?

And it be bodily substance owned in form as a self entity as sciences deity as created forms many spirits many Rocks dusts?

And didn't you theory in human only nuclear machine status that you had to manipulate water to cool cleanse the nuclear reactions of dusts and burning gases? Yourself... yet water is clean naturally in life support!

Yes said men of science superior inferred designers. Then builders. Then reactors.

More powerful by terms a human self than created creation.

So of course you gave yourself deity position also.

Now first atmospheric water nuclear fallout rain exists a long time after you polluted our life heavens?

Yes.

So you would resonate water in the church and baptised bathe as you had conjured devil men demon men out of God earths dusts burning gases as anti cause? Visions as gases left burning.

Yes of course I knew I saw it.

Okay.

So humans with animals sheltering in mountains said mountains were kept safe as clouds covered the mountain face. Yet too bad for ground irradiated flooded life?

Yes says Noah's Ark writers. We survived as we were already living in the mountains. Less oxygen. Where ark hit temple mount temples.

So as scientists were burning out the water bio life had been using as we walked on water by ground cooling. It's spirit arose alight in spirit light gases burning. Scientific Satanism....the humans witnessed cloud images then emerge of two of every kind life attacked.

On the ground as phenomena still seen today sporadic. But in the past it was everyone.

All images direct acute seen in clouds today as life had boarded Noah's Ark itself? Yes.

Everywhere in every nation same outcome of life's water mass oxygenation taken leaving by grounds burning gas then left above us?

Yes.

Okay. So you knew why only a small human race in every nation was still living after. As the mountain body had kept them safe.

Exactly what it described. Those with the mountain lived saved after.

Why animal life was also a small population. Animals unlike humans would have gone up themselves.

Might be why movie themes depict humans climb up into the mountains when earth naturally flooded.

Ground mass re evaporating then is used to cleanse the nuclear attack. And I saw visions of it entering the opened earth.

So displaced water mass gets reused. And refills the sea mass that scientists said had sheet lifted up in nuclear creation.

As themes step by step nature owned all earth reactions was first position in nuclear science. Not the machine ignored.

 

[stanberger]

I was doing some research on another topic that I had been thinking about, however, I read this quote in one of the articles that I was reading:

Even after the Fall, it makes sense that these weather variations were minimally different. But with the global Flood that destroyed the earth and rearranged continents and so on, the extremes become pronounced — we now have ice caps and extremely high mountains that were pushed up from the Flood (Psalm 104:8). We now have deserts that have extreme heat and cold and little water.​

click here: State of the Water Vapor Canopy Model | Answers in Genesis

Therefore, after reading that, what I would like to ask those who believe in the Genesis account about the flood: Why would the flood have been the best and the most efficient way for God to have cleansed the earth of the saturated evil that existed at that time? Considering all the extreme changes and consequences that are supposed to have occurred as a result of the flood.

it would not have been ....flooding the world for the sins of the people of noah a small community in mideast would not be from a loving god and the excuse [nephilim] is science fiction fairy tales noah floods in quran is regional. affected only people of noah science agrees

 

[Audie]

First of all, I find Revelation 11:18 B says God will bring to ruin those ruining the Earth.
So, Man, Not God, is the one polluting the Earth ( includes highway litter bugs ).
Not another Flood, but the 'words from Jesus' mouth' will rid the Earth of the wicked - Isaiah 11:3-4; Rev. 19:14-15
Jesus will regulate weather phenomenon as he did at Mark 6:51; Mark 4:39
The deserts will blossom as described in Isaiah 35th chapter.
So, what we see today is temporary just until calendar Day One of Jesus' coming 1,000 year reign over Earth.

Cant be " another flood" coz there wasnt a first one.

How can that possibly be hard to understand

 

[Audie]

it would not have been ....flooding the world for the sins of the people of noah a small community in mideast would not be from a loving god and the excuse [nephilim] is science fiction fairy tales noah floods in quran is regional. affected only people of noah science agrees

" science agrees" does it?
Agrees with what, exactly?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

So says the story. It was kinda hard for me to view a baby as something wicked though. How about you?
Perfect deities get jealous? That's weird....................

They type of jealousy is Not the green-eyed monster type and No envy involved.

Who ever told you that in the Bible that babies as something wicked is: wrong.
However, parents are responsible for 'minor' children - 1 Corinthians 7:14
Those pre-flood parents had reached the point of No repenting.
Who knows what kind of abusive parents they were.
Those ' babies ' apparently were going to grow up to be ' violent ' just like the parents - see Genesis 6:11

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Cant be " another flood" coz there wasnt a first one.
How can that possibly be hard to understand

Eyewitness account _______

 

[Audie]

Eyewitness account _______

Terrif.
So you accept that the people who swore before
God and signed their names really did
see the gold books of J Smith, the book of
Mormon! Testimony of Eight Witnesses

Those are real people with identifiable
living relatives.
All you have is a story of completely
unknown origin ( witnesses, ha).

There were no witnesses to an event
that did not happen.

How do you manage to pretend it did, when
there is such abundant proof that it did not?

 

[rational experiences]

The did not prove idea.

No AH breaths did not create life with god. No proof was ever human owned that it had. However humans identified nuclear science nearly destroyed all life.

It destroyed life said man of science.

Science the only dust practice not yet removed. Prediction yet to remove more dust mass.

So science as men predict the nuclear dust reaction.

However they don't predict by the time how mass nuclear removal converted earths mass as mass removed what a future will bring as reactive earth heavens earth mass as a cause effect.

So as you personally had caused Noah's Ark. When you attacked life again by nuclear philosophers stone you said I predict earths futures inheritance so you liars can not argue in the gained future.

Humans knowing human self destructive behaviours. Humans who kept 1000 year ago life attack as same type Jesus attack. Shroud evidence. Science had theoried science itself as falling asteroid sun star. By human theists.

Who still use the same thesis how stone mass from stars get earth inherited in the name of science.

As your behaviour know it all destroyer is that you argued about Moses then rebuilt the temple science and life was attacked again as Jesus.

Not the same results as attack yet science as arrogant as it's human designer kills of life anyway. Whether it's the same advice or not.

So as Jesus didn't produce the flood outcome he thinks the type of suffering life's became enduring inherited from Jesus event forward is okay by him.

As we're still alive is his mentality. But maybe not for long.

As they stopped only because a ground temple was attacked. Before it was a mountain temple. So they realised it had changed.

Now if they kept rebuilding reapplying nuclear like you do now maybe the much worse than Moses event would have recurred.

You ignore the human fact they stopped dismantled that science practice by human choice.

What's your modern day excuse,? Oh that's right human greed rules the earth.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

...............There were no witnesses to an event that did not happen. How do you manage to pretend it did, when there is such abundant proof that it did not?

Earth wide there are similar flood stories about a flood with only a few survivors.
True, today there are No eye witnesses to the flood.

 

[David Davidovich]

First of all, I find Revelation 11:18 B says God will bring to ruin those ruining the Earth.
So, Man, Not God, is the one polluting the Earth ( includes highway litter bugs ).
Not another Flood, but the 'words from Jesus' mouth' will rid the Earth of the wicked - Isaiah 11:3-4; Rev. 19:14-15
Jesus will regulate weather phenomenon as he did at Mark 6:51; Mark 4:39
The deserts will blossom as described in Isaiah 35th chapter.
So, what we see today is temporary just until calendar Day One of Jesus' coming 1,000 year reign over Earth.

Um, okay, but none of that addressed what I said in the part of my quote that you responded to:

That's all that I could think of without becoming repetitive, but by doing something other than a flood, then that would have prevented the horrible weather that we often have on this planet and the extreme cold at the poles and the extreme heat and the lack water in the deserts. ​

 

[Audie]

Earth wide there are similar flood stories about a flood with only a few survivors.
True, today there are No eye witnesses to the flood.

World wide there are mermaid stories.
So we should believe mermaids?
There were no witnesses to a flood that
never happened.

In court, you know, they listen politely while
both sides tell their stories-knowing that one
side or the other is not telling the truth.

Think now- how do they figure out who is
telling the truth, and who is not?

 

[rational experiences]

In Australia I got brain prickled burnt. Saw the AI nature visionary effect on ground substance the place machines begin..... which never existed until machine controlled science by humans mind controlling all choices caused it.

As I was born by human sex I wasn't human invented by a God earth humans science plus machine used thesis.

Seeing they use machines to implement human belief.

Was my human proof scientists are just humans but consummate liars.

A liar gets life destroyed.

Pretty basic human advice.

Truth means in science not to use machines of any type.

As science is first a natural human owning natural human observations.

So since your experiments Australia has had multi unnatural floods. Is my proof human liars just because you claim it science you are first still just a human first...liars.

 

[David Davidovich]

Why can't believers just acknowledge it is likely an embellished fictional story based on a real, local flood, that aims to tell believers: God is in charge, do what the middlemen to God says, or else?

I really don't know... Ask one of them.

I see these elaborate and absurd interpretations and it becomes even less plausible.

Well, I was just responding to a question that was asked of me. Because the conclusion that the person made (it may have been you because I didn't go back and look at the question that I was responding to) wasn't the conclusion that many believers have. Plus, anyone could just say that 'this or that' belief is stupid or doesn't make sense along with not having an understanding of why believers believe that way. However, that's not the information that I'm inquiring about in this topic.

 

[David Davidovich]

it would not have been ....flooding the world for the sins of the people of noah a small community in mideast would not be from a loving god and the excuse [nephilim] is science fiction fairy tales noah floods in quran is regional. affected only people of noah science agrees

I'm not sure I understood everything that you said, however, it appears that you believe that the Quran's take on the Noah's flood story is more truthful and more accurate than the Bible's take on it. However, I really don't know why you believe that other than the fact that you are adhering to your own religion's beliefs.

 

[David Davidovich]

They type of jealousy is Not the green-eyed monster type and No envy involved.

Who ever told you that in the Bible that babies as something wicked is: wrong.
However, parents are responsible for 'minor' children - 1 Corinthians 7:14
Those pre-flood parents had reached the point of No repenting.
Who knows what kind of abusive parents they were.
Those ' babies ' apparently were going to grow up to be ' violent ' just like the parents - see Genesis 6:11

But your explanation is the same thing as saying that those flood babies were wicked primarily because of the guilt by: Association fallacy - Wikipedia:

An association fallacy is an informal inductive fallacy of the hasty-generalization or red-herring type and which asserts, by irrelevant association and often by appeal to emotion, that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another. Two types of association fallacies are sometimes referred to as guilt by association and honor by association.​

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Um, okay, but none of that addressed what I said in the part of my quote that you responded to:

That's all that I could think of without becoming repetitive, but by doing something other than a flood, then that would have prevented the horrible weather that we often have on this planet and the extreme cold at the poles and the extreme heat and the lack water in the deserts.​

I think that MAN has dominated MAN to MAN's hurt, MAN's injury.
Pollution by MAN has affected the weather.
True, we don't have even heat earth wide but if something is Not profitable to the business man then he ignores the consequences that things can get worse. They often think 'Not in their lifetime', or the problems they create is the next generations problem to solve.​

 

[URAVIP2ME]

But your explanation is the same thing as saying that those flood babies were wicked primarily because of the guilt by: Association fallacy - Wikipedia:

An association fallacy is an informal inductive fallacy of the hasty-generalization or red-herring type and which asserts, by irrelevant association and often by appeal to emotion, that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another. Two types of association fallacies are sometimes referred to as guilt by association and honor by association.​

Violence, violence, violence ( <- see Genesis 6:11 )
How violent were the parents to their own babies ?
Violent parents could be abusive to their children including babies.
For all we know those violent parents could have been raping or molesting their own offspring.
If those babies who grew up became violent as their parents ..........
Those babies were Not born wicked but were turning out to be wicked or violent like the parents.
They were treating others as they were treated - with violence.
Without divine involvement, before long Noah and family would have been killed off by violent people.​

 

[David Davidovich]

Earth wide there are similar flood stories about a flood with only a few survivors.
True, today there are No eye witnesses to the flood.

Other than your preference for the Bible, how do you know whether or not any of those similar flood stories came before the Bible flood story?

In November 1872, a self-taught historian named George Smith toiled away in the archives of the British Museum sorting through fragments of clay tablets recovered from ancient Mesopotamian archeological sites in modern-day Iraq. The tablets were written in cuneiform — a language that had only recently been recovered and translated after 1,000 years of obscurity — and most of the fragments contained humdrum accounting records or opaque prophecies from palace priests.

But then Smith found something remarkable. As he translated the cuneiform word by word, a familiar story unfolded. There was a god punishing humanity with a catastrophic flood, one man who was chosen to survive using a specially constructed boat filled with animals and seeds, and after the flood, birds being released to find dry land.

This wasn't the story of Noah and the ark, though, and this wasn't the book of Genesis in the Hebrew Bible (known to Christians as the Old Testament). What Smith had discovered was only one chapter in a sprawling Mesopotamian tale now known as the Epic of Gilgamesh, first written in 1,800 B.C.E., around 1,000 years before the Hebrew Bible.​

click here: Did the Bible 'Borrow' the Noah's Ark Story From the Epic of Gilgamesh? | HowStuffWorks