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

Oh brother! What a low view of God’s Word. No wonder you believe in evolution! Jesus said “Thy word is truth.” He said every word - in fact every jot and tittle in the Word will come true. But you think you can pick and choose and still arrive at the message God is trying to communicate?

Hey, Tokyo Guy, glad to meet you. Let me ask you a question about ‘picking and choosing’ the words of God.

Why do you not take seriously the words of Jesus to the rich young man? He encouraged the man to give his wealth to “the poor” (probably a reference to an obligated brotherhood); he taught Christians to live in community with other Christians. Why do you not seek out a Christian community of brothers and sisters and exchange your treasure for the safety of your soul?

George

How could there be any archaeological records or historical records of it? It was all destroyed in the flood!

Was the whole world wicked? Read what God has to say in Genesis 6 for your answer. Why ask us? God knows best. We weren’t alive then.

Hi George,

Good question. As you know Jesus is a master teacher and He is able to read people’s hearts. He did
so here very accurately. Earlier in the passage Jesus said “Why do you call me good? Only God is good.” Now, is Jesus saying that he is not God here? Of course not. Context is the key. He is speaking to this man to get at the heart of his problem. He is pointing out his heart idol that is keeping him from salvation. He knew the young man did not view him as God and had a works oriented view of righteousness.
The young man needed to see that he was not able to keep all of God’s commands – that it was impossible to earn your way to heaven. The young man was kind of full of himself and actually thought he had kept all the commands. He seemed proud of his “self-righteousness” and this was Jesus’ way of
helping him to see his sin. Jesus never told others to go and sell everything they had and give to the poor in order to have treasure in heaven. I don’t know of anyone who takes these verses literally. So it is not a matter of picking and choosing, but of proper interpretation. People on this thread are talking about parts of the Bible not being true! That’s a whole different issue!

There was a time when Jesus said to hate your mother and father, but no one understands Him to be actually saying that we should hate them. The 10 commandments tell us to respect and obey them. So context is key. This a bit of a different issue from what I mentioned. Biologos rejects Adam in spite of the fact that no where is Scripture does anyone take Adam as a fictional being. The whole Bible views
the Adam and Eve account as literal, including Jesus Himself.

I’m not sure what you mean by saying that Jesus taught us to live in community. He commanded us to go into the whole world and preach the gospel. He obviously believed that everyone everywhere needed to hear the truth of the good news He came to preach. He told us to be His witnesses and to be in the world, but not of it. “As the Father has sent me, so send I you.” He sent us out as His representatives, as sheep among wolves. And no where does the Bible teach that we can buy our own salvation.

So my point is that proper interpretation and actually rejecting the historical record as false are two very different things. I do not claim to be perfect. I’m sure you could find something and confront me and say “Why aren’t you doing this?” My failure or lack of obedience would still be a different issue from a total rejection of certain biblical historical events/teachings.

Tokyo Guy, your response reminds me of what a Rabbi might say to someone interested in Messianic Judaism… or what an Anglican might say to an American Baptist … or what an Evangelical might say to a Christian Scientist.

If you think spoke the Greek to the Greek writers of the New Testament, you have to wonder why God spoke the Greek differently to different people. There are some HUNDREDS of original Greek gospel texts that differ from each other. What to do? I think examining one’s heart is an excellent beginning. When I look in my heart, I challenge the ongoing validity of capital punishment for someone who works on the Sabbath. But that’s a rule not a ‘history’ … so let’s try something else…

I challenge the ongoing validity of the story about Jonah spending 3 days INSIDE A FISH … and lives to tell about it. This is a ‘story’. Is it true? Nothing in my heart or mind allows me to think it is. It’s a parable. When I read the ‘stories’ of Genesis, I see them as parables as well.

I think trying to design an economic and political system based on parables is unwise (affecting government spending on education and the sciences) - - probably even dangerous.

George

BioLogos doesn’t “reject Adam.” BioLogos promotes the harmony between mainstream science and faith. Here is the What We Believe statement. Different writers who contribute articles to BioLogos have different takes on how to interpret the account of Adam in the Bible. There is no “BioLogos view” on Adam, just an openness to conversation on how to reconcile the Genesis account with scientific discoveries in genetics and anthropology.

3 Likes

OK, thanks. Sorry for misstating their position. I have heard numerous Biologos people make such statements. For me the fact that they are even open to re-interpreting the clear teaching of Scripture because of what 21st century scientists say based on their materialistic interpretations of nature and the data we have is problem enough.

Jim

Well George, no one can make you think differently. You are free to your opinion. I simply disagree. There is nothing about these passages that would make anyone think they are parables. In fact Jesus refers to them as if they actually happened. Peter says that in the last days false teachers will come who deny the flood even happened. The global judgment of the flood is compared to the coming global judgment of all mankind when Jesus returns. So, I prefer to interpret the stories as historical since that is what Jesus and the other inspired biblical writers did.

Jesus compares his 3 days in the grave with Jonah’s 3 days in the belly of the fish. He gives no indication that this is a parable or made up story, as He normally did when He did actually speak in parables. I’m not responsible for how you interpret the text; you are. I prefer to stick with what Jesus says as opposed to lean on my own feelings of what could and could not have happened in the past.

The death penalty for breaking the Sabbath was written in the OT Mosaic Law and was intended to apply to the Jews in that OT period. However, Jesus came to fulfill the law and to set us free from the Law so those OT rules do not apply to us today. We don’t require people to get circumcised in order to become a Christian. We become Christians, not Jews.

blessings!

Jim

Tokyo Guy - - the reason Jesus mentions Jonah’s 3 days in the belly of the fish is because it was NOTORIOUS THEN as a parable of visiting the underworld… 3 days in the waters of the afterlife.

George

10 posts were split to a new topic: Evangelicals and others and their different approaches to the Bible and biblical authority

Nice idea George, but just where do we learn that this is a parable. Jesus speaks as if it actually happened, doesn’t He? If not, how would He have spoken differently if indeed it did happen?

@tokyoguy111

You assume that Jesus WANTED to speak in a way that was easy to understand. This is a typical Creationist position. But even the New Testament makes it clear that this is not so:

Mat 11:15 - - He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Mat 13:9 - - Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Mat 13:43 - - . . . Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Mar 4:9 - - And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Mar 4:23 - - If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.

Mar 7:16 - - If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.

Luk 8:8 - - And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Luk 14:35 - - It is neither fit for the land, nor yet for the dunghill; but men cast it out. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Find your ears!

George

OK, George, did Jesus ever say this kind of thing when He was speaking about the historical record of the OT? Or was it mostly when he was speaking in parables? And much of when He was speaking to unbelievers?

You are right that there were times when He it seems He didn’t intend for EVERYONE listening to understand. But don’t forget, He would often then go on and explain the meaning of His parable to his disciples. So, it wasn’t that He didn’t intend for anyone anywhere understand. It was simply that at times, there were some people who He didn’t want to understand.

So, you claim to use context and interpret God’s Word in context, but when it comes to these statements, you just totally ignore the context and take these statements OUT of context and apply it to any Scripture anywhere that feel a need to re-interpret. This is not being a “workman who …correctly handles the word of truth.” in my view.

But let me get this straight. You actually think that when Jesus said “He who has ears, let him hear”, you think He meant that we were not to understand His references to Genesis in a literal way, but should understand that He was not really saying what He meant. Some would call that a lie, but that’s beside the point. But anyway, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” means, to you, that we can take anything Jesus said and hear it as we think it should be heard, assuming Jesus didn’t want the people back then to really understand what He was saying.

Oy veh!

Tokyo Guy,

While you and Young Earthers feverisly try to rationalize the words of the Bible to support an unrealistic view of the entire Universe … the position I hold is much simpler:

What does God’s Book of Nature tell us? Is the Earth billions of years old? The answer is YES - undeniably.

Is there any kind of animal where a human could live INSIDE … for 3 days (Jonah’s fish / whale)? The answer is NO. Even the largest whales have throat diameters that would only accommodate a basketball.

And once past the throat … where would the oxygen come from that would keep a prisoner human alive, in the fish’s gut, for almost half a week? There isn’t any. How would he survive the processes of digestion? He couldn’t.

IT’s A STORY. But what about Jesus referencing the STORY? He LOVED stories too. He did not present footnotes with his every discussion so that people would know what was and was not A STORY.

Did Jesus think his followers would hang on his every word… and accept what he said as irrevocably true regardless of how impossible it could be? Probably not.

Mr. Tokyo … do you think there were no rainbows after a rain until AFTER Noah’s Ark? The account of the creation of rainbows IS A STORY.

Until Evangelicals learn to ACCEPT that religion includes a a certain number of figurative stories … they are going to lose generations of young men and women who believe the witness of their eyes and ears is how God wanted them to perceive Truth … and how God makes the Universe and natural laws work.

George

Sorry to enter your discussion but could you tell me where Scripture reveals that it rained on Earth before The Flood

Tel… glad to have you in the “mix”.

So… there you are … trying to use the Old Testament as a manual of science. If Genesis doesn’t mention rain, it didn’t rain?

AnswersInGenesis provides a Creationist timeline for the flood:

Event/Person Passage Total Time from Creation (years)
God created everything. Genesis 1–2 0
Adam became the father of Seth at 130. Genesis 5:3 0 + 130 = 130
Seth became the father of Enosh at 105. Genesis 5:6 130 + 105 = 235
Enosh became the father of Kenan at 90. Genesis 5:9 235 + 90 = 325
Cainan became the father of Mahalalel at 70. Genesis 5:12 325 + 70 = 395
Mahalalel became the father of Jared at 65. Genesis 5:15 395 + 65 = 460
Jared became the father of Enoch at 162. Genesis 5:18 460 + 162 = 622
Enoch became the father of Methuselah at 65. Genesis 5:21 622 + 65 = 687
Methuselah became the father of Lamech at 187. Genesis 5:25 687 + 187 = 874
Lamech became the father of Noah at 182. Genesis 5:28 874 + 182 = 1056
The Flood started when Noah was 600. Genesis 7:6 1056 + 600 = 1656

Can you imagine an Earth atmosphere where it DIDNT rain for more than a thousand years? … ANYWHERE? There were no jungles before the flood?

Genesis says there are waters in heaven… above the firmament… which separated these waters from the waters below. So … there was certainly WATER up there, right ?? - - even if we accept the rationalization that it wasn’t stored there in liquid form.

But let’s assume it NEVER rained… this would mean that the only way a full earth of living creatures would be able to survive is for the atmosphere (at least the bottom-most layer) to be FULL of moisture, yes?

And it is this MOISTURE in the air, between our eyes and the sun (not actually rain) that is the source of rainbows, right?

Tel, please don’t be offended, but your need to be convinced that there was rain for more than 1,500 years pretty much assures all of us that you are unlikely to ever accept the BioLogos position. But perhaps you consider this a form of flattery. Pax vobiscum !!!

George

P.S. I like your note on your website:

“Whoever kills an innocent person it is as if he has killed all Humanity.” [Quran, from the book of “Surat L’maidah” (The Table Spread with Food), Chapter 5:32]

1 Like

@gbrooks9, @Patrick,@Eddie

As a philosophy professor of mine once said: The Bible does not say that before Noah’s flood that it did not rain. He was a liberal Protestant and believed that Jesus was lower than God the Father. He was an Arian. He and I agreed on two things: It rained before the flood, and God could have created things by Theistic Evolution. The fundamentalists in the class were the ones who said that it don’t rain before the flood. George, does your statement make you a fundamentalist? Patrick, I sent this to you because I thought you would find it amusing. Henry

tel, it doesn’t really say either way. Some creationists used to think that maybe it never rained before the flood, but the only thing we see in the Bible is that the Garden of Eden was watered from below. We are never told either that it did or did not rain before the flood. So it would be a bit presumptuous to be dogmatic about that.

Thanks for your views

This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.