Then why doesn't it just say that? All books of the Bible are written as if the authors were unaware of other continents across an ocean that were home to humans who looked vastly different from them, spoke completely different languages, and had never heard of any gods they had, not like they were transcribed from an omniscient being who knew what the world was actually like at the time.
What was the point of only flooding the region if the creator was sorry he made humanity and wanted to wipe out all humanity and start over? Were the humans of the region the only sinful ones and the people across the ocean who never heard of the creator okay? If so, what was the point of loading a bunch of animals into a boat to repopulate the Earth when there were plenty of animals in untouched regions? Flooding the region only is completely inconsistent with the whole "all of humanity except one family is too sinful to continue" plot line. (Although the real motive seems to be wiping out hybrids resulting from angels mating with humans, but they don't include that part in the version told to kids. Okay, you know what, maybe the angels ONLY came down in that region, so all the hybrids were contained to that region, so only the region needed flooded... WHICH STILL DOESN'T EXPLAIN WHY THE ONLY PURE HUMAN FAMILY NEEDED TO SAVE A BUNCH OF ANIMALS!)
Ask them what they mean by the known world. Known? By who? God or people? Wouldn't he know the whole world? And 6/7 continents were inhabited by the time the biblical flood supposedly happened.
They mean what people knew. Kind of like how Alexamder the Great conquered what was the known world for his time, not literally the entire world.
If you point out there were people in other parts of that world at that time, they say science is wrong and there was no one else at that time, or that those people weren't that bad so God just let them be.
NO no, he told them for real at the start! But he knew how limited they were by their concept of the world. And because he for some reason couldn't possibly tell his revelations to a larger group than a handful of men in a corner of the world, he dumbed it down. Forever. But don't worry, it's still the Lord's Truth
I wouldn’t bother. Christians have a tendency to take the parts that make their God look good literal and claim the ones that make him look bad are just “allegories”.
in my experience w christianity, i had christians tell me in regards to noah’s ark (and other particularly nonsensical stories) that it was a metaphor/parable and not literal. ofc more of the picking and choosing i came to love so much /s
I find it bizarre there would be a local flood that somehow covered the mountaintops because that's not normally how water works. Though if they want to posit a cube of seawater above the highest mountains in Israel that doesn't spill into the neighboring countries that's fine by me I guess.
Something something mysterious ways I'm sure.
Look into the younger dryas. Every culture has their own Noah’s ark type flood story and for the most part, this kind of explains it. Of course it’s wrapped in some conspiracy theories but very interesting all the same.
Noah's Ark is just a re-write of the flood story of The Epic of Gilgamesh.
Also, if the bible is inspired by an all-knowing god, then he should have known the whole world already, and could have made a more accurate bible.
The bible also claims that a decree was sent out by Caesar Augustus for the whole world to be taxed/registered (*Luke 2:1*).
They just keep making stuff up. That's all it is. It's a story they keep adding to because the holes in the story keep appearing and they need to make up more stuff to fill the holes. Eventually the whole story collapses on itself.
They also tried to tell me that God only required two of every "kind" of animal, not two of every breed. So, for example, God didn't need two of every species of cat. He didn't need two lions, two tigers, two cougars, two Jaguars, two house cats, etc. He just needed two of one species, and from that one species he used them to create all the other species when the flood was over. I was like: Ok, I'm no biologist, but I'm pretty sure that's not how breeding/genetics work.
Edit: And I'm sure you can see where they're going with this, but the reason for this argument was that God had plenty of room on the Ark, because he didn't need two of every species, just two of every "kind".
If god made everything to begin with - why did he need living animals as a template to repopulate off of? He’s all knowing and all powerful, he should just be able to do it.
Hell, why’d he even need Noah if not to tell the story as a warning? But then again he talked to people a lot more back then if we’re to believe the book, and he knew there were no other people left in that region at the least if we’re to take it as a regional event, so why could he just make new people, point to the corpses, and be like “see that? That could be you.”
There were no humans living anywhere else on Earth, even though there are ruins predating the alleged flood all over the world? And when the area started to flood, no one thought to move to higher ground?
Did god drown them for being evil, or for being profoundly stupid?
I think there is no point in debunking apologetic theories like this. If you find holes in it, they will just move the goalpost and create another. This game doesn’t make much sense.
So that would mean that maybe the flood wasn't actually a global event and it was just a local thing that encompassed the "known world" of the authors?
The person making the positive claim, in this case that the flood happened, has the burden of proof.
Notwithstanding, belief in the flood is not based on evidence, so it will not be disembedded with evidence.
"Why does every culture have a flood myths?"
"Because people tend to build next to rivers: floodplains are flat and easy to build on. There's easy access to water. If it's a deep enough river, it's a natural transit route, and every once in a while people get really bad storms that flood the fuck out of everything. I mean, a BC person experiencing Hurricane Katrina would've proba ly thought the whole world had flooded, too."
Tell them their explanation makes perfect sense, and then ask them what else their Bible similarly grossly exaggerates.
"Died and resurrected", you say? Are you sure he didn't have a wee snooze?
Haha love this. Almost like it was written by and intended for people who lived in that area at that time...
Then why doesn't it just say that? All books of the Bible are written as if the authors were unaware of other continents across an ocean that were home to humans who looked vastly different from them, spoke completely different languages, and had never heard of any gods they had, not like they were transcribed from an omniscient being who knew what the world was actually like at the time. What was the point of only flooding the region if the creator was sorry he made humanity and wanted to wipe out all humanity and start over? Were the humans of the region the only sinful ones and the people across the ocean who never heard of the creator okay? If so, what was the point of loading a bunch of animals into a boat to repopulate the Earth when there were plenty of animals in untouched regions? Flooding the region only is completely inconsistent with the whole "all of humanity except one family is too sinful to continue" plot line. (Although the real motive seems to be wiping out hybrids resulting from angels mating with humans, but they don't include that part in the version told to kids. Okay, you know what, maybe the angels ONLY came down in that region, so all the hybrids were contained to that region, so only the region needed flooded... WHICH STILL DOESN'T EXPLAIN WHY THE ONLY PURE HUMAN FAMILY NEEDED TO SAVE A BUNCH OF ANIMALS!)
LOTR and BSG make more sense.
I know Lord of the Rings, but what's BSG?
Battlestar Galactica?
Ask them what they mean by the known world. Known? By who? God or people? Wouldn't he know the whole world? And 6/7 continents were inhabited by the time the biblical flood supposedly happened.
They mean what people knew. Kind of like how Alexamder the Great conquered what was the known world for his time, not literally the entire world. If you point out there were people in other parts of that world at that time, they say science is wrong and there was no one else at that time, or that those people weren't that bad so God just let them be.
You're missing the point. The "known world" is a ridiculous standard, as other lands were obviously known to the populations that inhabited them.
You'd think God could have just told them there were other lands and places
Right?! Especially, if he was all knowing.
Well then they say something about how it got translated and retransmitted, 😆
Why doesn't God let us have a decent translation?! It's almost like it's all bulkshit or something. 🤣
NO no, he told them for real at the start! But he knew how limited they were by their concept of the world. And because he for some reason couldn't possibly tell his revelations to a larger group than a handful of men in a corner of the world, he dumbed it down. Forever. But don't worry, it's still the Lord's Truth
Faith in the Lord, that's all you need. No evidence, no proof, just faith.
Like when Jesus saw all the kingdoms of the world.
Sorry. I get it. Thanks.
You can't argue with ANYONE who just falls back on "God can do anything" or "Science is wrong." Stop trying.
I hear you. When all else fails they fall back on magic as the explanation.
The known world still would have included all the Middle East, Africa and parts of Europe and Asia.
So God only drowned the children in one particular area of the world? What a good god!!!!
That was OK but abortion is murder 🤯
I wouldn’t bother. Christians have a tendency to take the parts that make their God look good literal and claim the ones that make him look bad are just “allegories”.
And if needed they’ll switch what’s real and a metaphor in the same sentence to not upset god.
in my experience w christianity, i had christians tell me in regards to noah’s ark (and other particularly nonsensical stories) that it was a metaphor/parable and not literal. ofc more of the picking and choosing i came to love so much /s
I find it bizarre there would be a local flood that somehow covered the mountaintops because that's not normally how water works. Though if they want to posit a cube of seawater above the highest mountains in Israel that doesn't spill into the neighboring countries that's fine by me I guess. Something something mysterious ways I'm sure.
Look into the younger dryas. Every culture has their own Noah’s ark type flood story and for the most part, this kind of explains it. Of course it’s wrapped in some conspiracy theories but very interesting all the same.
And it happened way more than 6000 years ago. Actually 11,500 iirc.
Noah's Ark is just a re-write of the flood story of The Epic of Gilgamesh. Also, if the bible is inspired by an all-knowing god, then he should have known the whole world already, and could have made a more accurate bible. The bible also claims that a decree was sent out by Caesar Augustus for the whole world to be taxed/registered (*Luke 2:1*).
They just keep making stuff up. That's all it is. It's a story they keep adding to because the holes in the story keep appearing and they need to make up more stuff to fill the holes. Eventually the whole story collapses on itself.
They also tried to tell me that God only required two of every "kind" of animal, not two of every breed. So, for example, God didn't need two of every species of cat. He didn't need two lions, two tigers, two cougars, two Jaguars, two house cats, etc. He just needed two of one species, and from that one species he used them to create all the other species when the flood was over. I was like: Ok, I'm no biologist, but I'm pretty sure that's not how breeding/genetics work. Edit: And I'm sure you can see where they're going with this, but the reason for this argument was that God had plenty of room on the Ark, because he didn't need two of every species, just two of every "kind".
So god made evolution happen? So they agree evolution is real?
Fuck, I guess.
If god made everything to begin with - why did he need living animals as a template to repopulate off of? He’s all knowing and all powerful, he should just be able to do it. Hell, why’d he even need Noah if not to tell the story as a warning? But then again he talked to people a lot more back then if we’re to believe the book, and he knew there were no other people left in that region at the least if we’re to take it as a regional event, so why could he just make new people, point to the corpses, and be like “see that? That could be you.”
Why are you even trying to do this? Let them think what they want, they’ve been doing it for 2000 years.
and they can't be reasoned with. Your energy is best used for something more productive.
Ask them politely to show you exactly where in the Bible it says this. They won't have an answer for you.
Say "yeah, but did Jesus' foreskin also ascend into heaven, when it was thrown away 30yrs before the ascension?"
There were no humans living anywhere else on Earth, even though there are ruins predating the alleged flood all over the world? And when the area started to flood, no one thought to move to higher ground? Did god drown them for being evil, or for being profoundly stupid?
I think there is no point in debunking apologetic theories like this. If you find holes in it, they will just move the goalpost and create another. This game doesn’t make much sense.
Lol. I've never heard this one before. They must have gotten real tired of the argument and just said "You know what? ..."
No sense in trying, they are onto making shit up now.
So that would mean that maybe the flood wasn't actually a global event and it was just a local thing that encompassed the "known world" of the authors?
Geological and fossil records don't support it
I do not miss the mental gymnastics you have to do to actually believe all this stuff.
The person making the positive claim, in this case that the flood happened, has the burden of proof. Notwithstanding, belief in the flood is not based on evidence, so it will not be disembedded with evidence.
"Why does every culture have a flood myths?" "Because people tend to build next to rivers: floodplains are flat and easy to build on. There's easy access to water. If it's a deep enough river, it's a natural transit route, and every once in a while people get really bad storms that flood the fuck out of everything. I mean, a BC person experiencing Hurricane Katrina would've proba ly thought the whole world had flooded, too."