Is the story of Noah inappropriate for young children (violent genocide)?

[beaglelady]

If Grandmother Fish is inappropriate for tiny children, what about the Noah’s Ark story, with its worldwide genocide? btw, don’t even take a peek at “Icarus at the Edge of Time” by physicist Brian Greene.

[gbrooks9 (George Brooks)]

@Eddie

I get the impression, from a number of your posts, especially in recent months, that you think large parts of the Bible teach things that are not only untrue, but even morally bad.

I think there are many Christians who share this view, @Eddie.

The Bible is a book (or many books) from (a) specific time(s) . . . - - and not every Christian agrees to all the details from 2000+ years ago.

We certainly think some things are untrue.
There are many who don’t think eating shell fish is wicked… or working on the Sabbath … or that adulterers should be stoned.

You seem so stunned by this realization …

George

[Patrick]

@Eddie

In the Noah story, there is a moral justification for the killing.

Eddie,
What possibly was the moral justification for killing off the human race and all animals except those on the ark?

This is just an awful story to tell children. Plain and simple.

[Patrick]

@gbrooks9

or that adulterers should be stoned.

The Bible says to beat children and to stone sons who do adhere to their parents wishes. That is NOT appropriate to tell children in 2015 America. It is psychological abuse, plain and simple.

Same goes for the Abraham/Issac Story.

[Christy (Christy Hemphill)]

@beaglelady

If Grandmother Fish is inappropriate for tiny children, what about the Noah’s Ark story, with its worldwide genocide?

You all love your Noah tangents, don’t you?

I don’t think Grandmother Fish is inappropriate for children. I am skeptical that it actually accomplishes what people are claiming it accomplishes, Does it lay an important foundation for scientific understanding of the world? I would have the same skepticism for someone who claimed that the typical preschool rendition of Noah’s ark (showcasing a parade of animals and refrains like “and the penguins got on Noah’s boat two-by-two”) is laying an important theological foundation for understanding a the concepts of a covenanting God and the necessity of divine judgment for sin. It’s not.

[gbrooks9 (George Brooks)]

@Eddie

In any case, the question was asked to beaglelady, not to you, and only she can answer it. I would like to hear her answer before hearing anyone else’s.

Well, then I should make note of one thing before she answers. You write:

“Last I noticed, the term “genocide” is used to indicate the destruction of all members of a particular ethnic group, purely because they are of that ethnic group. In the Noah story, the human race is slated for destruction, but not because it is human; it is slated for destruction because every member of the race (except Noah) is guilty of individual evil offenses warranting death.”

Eddie, you have to admit this is a gross exaggeration. Unless you insist that there were no infants anywhere on the rest Earth … are you saying that infants were “guilty of individual evil offenses warranting death”? Are we to believe that 2 years olds were as well? I won’t attempt to draw the line.

The term “genocide”, even as you define it, seems to apply to the Great Flood.

Gerge

[Patrick]

@Eddie

Why don’t you try reading the Noah story, where the answer to your question is clearly given?

Generally speaking, it is good policy not to evaluate a piece of writing before you have ascertained exactly what it says.

I read the Noah story just recently. As well as all of Genesis. A JW gave me their bible and dared me to read it. I read all of Genesis. I must say that their version is written in clear everyday American English. I found it even more appalling than ever. Rape, genocide, killing. Everything Dawkins said it was and even more morally reprehensible than ever. I see where the Koran gets its violoence from.

[gbrooks9 (George Brooks)]

@Eddie

“Genocide” is a word laden with connotations because of 20th-century events. I don’t think it should be tossed around for rhetorical purposes, to score big in arguments. The Noah story is about sin and wickedness, not about inferior versus superior races and one race being extinguished by another.

Eddie… wouldn’t you have been REALLY surprised if you found ANY of us here on this list using Genocide in the context of 2,000 years ago? This goes to the crux of the matter - - many people, and maybe especially BioLogos supporters, do not think the “ancient corporate sensibility” is valid for today. We simply don’t agree that infants and toddlers should not have been part of the Great Flood - - even if it had actually happened.

George

[Patrick]

Do you want me to watch the ISIS beheading videos to get a better understanding of their brutality in the name of God?

No, I read Noah’s story enough times to know that it is a story of God’s genocidal wrath on all life on Earth. And God is a repeat offender. He does it again at Sodom and Gamorah and many other times in the OT. The Genocidal Monster label of Dawkins fits.

[Patrick]

I am more likely to take a Koran class than a Bible class to continue my work in cybersecurity unless the YECs start taking people hostage to force them to see Noah’s ark in Kentucky.

[beaglelady]

@Eddie

get the impression, from a number of your posts, especially in recent months, that you think large parts of the Bible teach things that are not only untrue, but even morally bad. Is that your position? If so, should we infer from such statements that you have left the Christian faith? I like to know if the person I am responding to is purporting to speak for Christianity, or for secular humanism.

There you go again, suggesting that I’m not a Christian. I didn’t think that was allowed here. Have the rules changed again? Certainly I’m not a fundagelical.

[gbrooks9 (George Brooks)]

@Eddie

Even if we accept your Enlightenment point of view about children and infants, the term “genocide” is still wrong; “infanticide” would be the right term.

If you wipe out most of the adults and all of the infants … that would satisfy the modern definition of Genocide.

If the fact there are SOME survivors disqualifies the event, then I presume the Armenian Genocide does not qualify, and the Nazi “political machine” is ALSO disqualified … because, after all, there are still Jews.

Your willingness to argue just about anything to the death is most impressive.

George

[beaglelady]

So perhaps the story of Noah’s Ark isn’t a genocidal story after all. It’s merely the story of the willful destructions of almost every man, woman, and child on the entire planet. That would include the unborn fetuses of pregnant ladies. Not to mention the animals. So that’s okay then…my bad!