U[quote=“Timtofly, post:176, topic:40301”]
We really do not get to say what was true. We only get the privilege of believability.
As I read elsewhere, if something is true, it does not change just because you choose not to belief it. So I can certainly agree with the first part of that statement. Not sure what you mean by the last part, but makes me think about why we find something believable.
First, the evidence supporting the issue. What does the physical evidence say. If we are examining a painting and want to see if it was painted by Van Gogh, we look at the pigments used, the age of the canvas,the patina, etc. when we look at the Flood account, we find it lacking with a literalist interpretation, but potentially consistent with a local flood, and entirely conpatable with a symbolic interpretation.
Second , we look at consistency. In the case of Biblical interpretation, is it consistent with scripture and the overall message of the Bible. With a painting, is it consistent with the artists other works. Van Gogh could have painted a nice cheesy little Christmas scene with lit up buildings, but would he? When applied to the flood, the metaphoric message of God being angry with sin but providing salvation from his judgement and providing new life, is consistent with the rest of scripture, the drowning of infants and pregnant women, I have trouble with.
Third, historical accounts. With a Van Gogh, was it mentioned in notes or documented by someone in the past, or did it just appear on the scene? With the flood, that is tricky, given the Gilgamesh accounts of a flood have older documentation, though they maybe derivative. The question is which is derived from what.
Next, we ultimately have to rely on faith. If it looks like a Van Gogh and tests out to be consistent with a Van Gogh, some may believe it is, but others may still think it was perhaps a gifted student of his that painted it. With the flood, faith that the literal account is accurate is more difficult given the inconsistency with the physical evidence and the seeming inconsistency with the totality of the message of the Bible, IMHO.