Noah’s Ark seems like a myth

[dbasra99]

Hello. I am new here. Trying to find a place to openly discuss my faith issues without being attacked.

I had a total faith deconstruction that led me to severe depression. My faith has been somewhat been rebuilt but I still struggle with many issues.

For example, for many years I have not been able to believe the story of Noah. This is both from science and theology standpoints.

I have listened to many models by numerous apologists but no one brings me closure on this.

I see nothing more than a story of a great natural catastrophe that is blamed on God and is expressed in various ancient religions. However the references in the New Testament trouble me.

I am interested in what others think.

Thanks.

[dbasra99]

[Replying to dbasra99 in post #1]

Welcome to the forum. I believe in a global flood and debated this many times. When one actually studies this and compares all the models, the global flood model makes the most sense. Here is my most recent debate on this:
viewtopic.php?p=1055177#p1055177

Thank you. I started to read over the debate but I have a quick question before I do a full dive.

Do you believe that Flood moved the continents in a very short period and that radioactive decay rates were increased during this period?

Thanks.

[otseng]

Do you believe that Flood moved the continents in a very short period and that radioactive decay rates were increased during this period?

Yes, the plates were moved quickly during the flood. I'm currently agnostic on radioactive decay rates in the past.

[dbasra99]

Do you believe that Flood moved the continents in a very short period and that radioactive decay rates were increased during this period?

Yes, the plates were moved quickly during the flood. I'm currently agnostic on radioactive decay rates in the past.

Ok. I am sure you are aware that the energy released by the plates being moved at that speed would vaporize all water and eliminate any life. The change in radioactive decay would sterilize all life.

[JehovahsWitness]

Do you believe that Flood moved the continents in a very short period and that radioactive decay rates were increased during this period?

Yes, the plates were moved quickly during the flood. I'm currently agnostic on radioactive decay rates in the past.

I came across this article earlier while researching another topic - cant get my head around it myself but it is on topic so here's the LINK: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101972241#h=49

[otseng]

Ok. I am sure you are aware that the energy released by the plates being moved at that speed would vaporize all water and eliminate any life.

Yeah, this is a common charge by skeptics. Please read through what I've posted to understand my position first.

The change in radioactive decay would sterilize all life.

Again, I'm agnostic on what the radioactivity level was in the distant past.

[otseng]

I came across this article earlier while researching another topic - cant get my head around it myself but it is on topic so here's the LINK: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101972241#h=49

In general, I accept the science of C-14 dating. Yes, there are many assumptions when using it. But if all the assumptions are true, then I accept C-14 dates. But if the assumptions turn out to be incorrect, it will give a false date. For example, I presented evidence the 1988 C-14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was invalid because the sample they took was heterogeneous.

viewtopic.php?p=1113898#p1113898

[dbasra99]

Ok. I am sure you are aware that the energy released by the plates being moved at that speed would vaporize all water and eliminate any life.

Yeah, this is a common charge by skeptics. Please read through what I've posted to understand my position first.

The change in radioactive decay would sterilize all life.

Again, I'm agnostic on what the radioactivity level was in the distant past.

This is not a charge by skeptics it is a fact of physics. It is also accepted by YEC as essentially unsolved and would require a miracle.

[dbasra99]

Many people focus on the science and history. My doubts also are more about theology and how I see God. Maybe I put God into a box.

I wonder how God would allow humans to get so bad that
He has to drown everyone. That just sounds goofy to me and much like other flood mythology.

Also, the inclusion of giants into the story and the possibility of angels having sexual relations with humans sounds like God was not helping the situation. This all sounds like mythology jumbled into another story. I realize that there are many theories on the giants on “sons of men”.

So, my struggle is not only with science, myth history but also the general theology.

[JehovahsWitness]

I wonder how God would allow humans to get so bad that
He has to drown everyone.

Biblically he was obliged to* because if his position vis-a-vis of the issue of universal sovereignty balanced with his loving nature.


[ * ]According to the bible narrative he did not drown "everyone" and the method of destruction was if course one of many possible options. We can but speculate on why He chose water.

... the possibility of angels having sexual relations with humans sounds like God was not helping the situation.

The biblical account does not portray GOD (YHWH) helping or assist the rebellious angels . Apart from intervening to ensure the righteous were not entirely eliminated from the face of the earth, he evidently withdrew any direct interaction with human society. (See above)




JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

[JehovahsWitness]

Also, the inclusion of giants into the story

... there are no giants in the biblical account.