The Bible says that, in the time of Noah, every inclination of human beings was evil continually. That's hard to believe because, around that time, we know that some human beings must have been doing some good. They migrated across seas and vast distances, which requires a good deal of cooperation. Not everyone thinks about doing evil every waking moment, so there's need to exaggerate here.
We now know that a flood that covered the earth's tallest peaks didn't happen. There were certainly large flood events that occurred in that region then, but I think it's a stretch to assign a deity who triggered the flood because that entity regretted making human beings, who by that time radiated across the earth, sacrificing children and all that. A local flood compounds the logical problems and doesn't make it any less dubious.
My question is about afterwards. It's hard to believe that Noah would be so upset about Ham seeing him naked that he'd curse his son's decedents. How did he know that God would be down with generational curse just because he was offended for being laughed at?
Maybe he wasn't just spied in his birthday suit. Maybe something else happened. Another interpretation is that Ham raped his father, but that's a reach. That would mean God rescued a reprobate from all the reprobates on the earth He said he regretted making. That's merely protracting the problem.
Here's some are some humorous and thought-provoking commentaries on the story from The Bible Reloaded guys. There's some foul language, but it makes some good points on the literal interpretation.
• Edited by a Moderator •
Does a local flood erase the difficulties of the story or merely create new problems?
We now know that a flood that covered the earth's tallest peaks didn't happen. There were certainly large flood events that occurred in that region then, but I think it's a stretch to assign a deity who triggered the flood because that entity regretted making human beings, who by that time radiated across the earth, sacrificing children and all that. A local flood compounds the logical problems and doesn't make it any less dubious.
My question is about afterwards. It's hard to believe that Noah would be so upset about Ham seeing him naked that he'd curse his son's decedents. How did he know that God would be down with generational curse just because he was offended for being laughed at?
Maybe he wasn't just spied in his birthday suit. Maybe something else happened. Another interpretation is that Ham raped his father, but that's a reach. That would mean God rescued a reprobate from all the reprobates on the earth He said he regretted making. That's merely protracting the problem.
Here's some are some humorous and thought-provoking commentaries on the story from The Bible Reloaded guys. There's some foul language, but it makes some good points on the literal interpretation.
• Edited by a Moderator •
Does a local flood erase the difficulties of the story or merely create new problems?
Comment