Flood vs Jesus

[higgy1911]

Just a quick question. If sending his son to die to redeem humanity was an option, why did God try the flood thing first?

And if you are not a literalist, how do these two stories work together and what do they represent?

Basically I'm trying to understand the "kill the unrighteous, promise not to again with water, redeem the unrighteous with blood sacrifice" line of thought. Literal or metaphorical.

[Divine Insight]

Just a quick question. If sending his son to die to redeem humanity was an option, why did God try the flood thing first?

From my understanding of Christian theology it's not merely an "option", but rather it's the only possible solution to the problem.

And I totally agree that the flood is an extreme contradiction to this.

In fact, if having Jesus die for three days is the only way that humans can be forgiven their sins, then not only does the flood not make sense, but neither does the story of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve should have been offered the option to accept having Jesus die in their place.

So I agree that this is a huge problem, and one that, IMHO, cannot be apologized away.

[otseng]

Many of the things in the Old Testament are foreshadows of Jesus, including the flood.

The flood was not simply just "killing the unrighteous". The unrighteous had plenty of time to change their ways and to even save themselves by getting on the ark. Noah certainly had preached to others and warned them about what was to come. Not surprisingly, they just scoffed at his warnings.

The purpose of the flood was not to redeem humanity. That could only be accomplished through the sacrifice of Jesus. I've recently come to believe that a major purpose of the flood was to advance technology. Without the flood, we'd all still be tending gardens in our straw huts. Yeah, I know what you're thinking, where in the world did I come up with that? It's a little involved, so I'll explain at a later time.

Another question you can ask is - why didn't just God send Jesus instead of flooding the whole world? Wouldn't that be a better option?

I personally believe that Jesus came at the most optimal time in human history (and also the most optimal place). So, in the grand scheme of things, Jesus coming to earth at the time of the flood would've been a bad time.

As to promising not to flood the earth again, from a physical perspective, it's no longer possible. (Yes, I believe there is a physical explanation, and not just a miraculous event, for the worldwide flood.) Even though it is good news that the world will no longer be judged by water, the bad news is that the next judgment will be with fire.

"As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man."
Matthew 24:36

This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.� For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
2 Peter 3:1-7

[ttruscott]

Just a quick question. If sending his son to die to redeem humanity was an option, why did God try the flood thing first?

And if you are not a literalist, how do these two stories work together and what do they represent?

Basically I'm trying to understand the "kill the unrighteous, promise not to again with water, redeem the unrighteous with blood sacrifice" line of thought. Literal or metaphorical.

Just a quick answer then:
You are mixing up the two kinds of unrighteous people. There are the lost sheep gone astray, HIS sinful good seed aka sinful elect on the one hand and there are the reprobate goats, the tares condemned already on the other.

The flood is not a representation of Christ's death for HIS lost sheep but of the righteous judgment against the Satanic goats, Matt 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, [the goats] ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. The flood is an allegory in a physical time and event, a type for the fulfillment of the anti-type, that is, the final judgement against Satan and his demonic angels.

GOD did not try the flood, so see if it worked, HE caused the flood so the story of it would last for all time and be a great help for the Christians in the end times facing the obviously all powerful anti-Christ by their knowing that in time past HE saved 8 people though the whole world was against them.

[higgy1911]

Thanks for the responses guys. I'm off to mull it over now.

[Wootah]

You could also ask why the law if we later need Jesus or why any specific moment in history if we need Jesus.

A lot of it is foreshadowing of Jesus and his nature. He is our ark and he will wipe out sin.

It's also simply true that time and time again in the Bible God tolerates sin until it has gone too far. There are plenty examples of the Israelites but also the surrounding tribes getting wiped out when their sin has become too great. The flood represents that first time I guess when we see what happens if sin is not kept in check.

Sin has never again gripped the earth so fully so as to have everyone (except one family) deserving of justice. I fear it might in the end times but I am very weak on end times theology.

[JehovahsWitness]

Just a quick question. If sending his son to die to redeem humanity was an option, why did God try the flood thing first?

The flood was to protect the last family on earth that actively had faith in the True God. Also wiped out the Nephelim and forced the angelic "sons of God" back into the spirit realm (to which they had henseforth been restricted); Something that no doubt slowed down demonic influence and man's technological progress to some extent.

God's judgement of that generation demonstrates God feels about sexual perversion and excessive violence and serves as a warning to those today that wrongfully conclude God is indifferent to the similar conditions we are experience today. It also provides people of faith evidence that when God will finally kills off all the wicked (at Harmageddon), he is capable of preserving the lives of those that love him.






JW





RELATED POSTS

Is God SELECTIVE in his use of his powers of foreknowledge?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 14#p848314

How can an OMNISCIENT God not know something?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 98#p894598

How can a perfect God "regret"? [this post]
viewtopic.php?p=1014669#p1014669

Does God "changing his mind" mean that he ' He failed to get it right the first time'?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 44#p895644
[/quote]

To learn more please go to other posts related to ....

THE BIBLE , WAR and ... VIOLENCE

[2timothy316]

Just a quick question. If sending his son to die to redeem humanity was an option, why did God try the flood thing first?

The flood was to protect the last family on earth that actively had faith in the True God. Also wiped out the Nephelim and forced the angelic "sons of God" back into the spirit realm (to which they had henseforth been restricted); Something that no doubt slowed down demonic influence and man's technological progress to some extent.

God's judgement of that generation demonstrates God feels about sexual perversion and excessive violence and serves as a warning to those today that wrongfully conclude God is indifferent to the similar conditions we are experience today. It also provides people of faith evidence that when God will finally kills off all the wicked (at Harmageddon), he is capable of preserving the lives of those that love him.

“there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.�—Ac 24:15.

Those that died in the flood may not be gone forever either. Another thing that Jesus' death paid for was the death for people throughout all of mankind's history. This includes who knows how many that died in the flood. The incorrigibly wicked might have no more chance as life but how many of them didn't understand God's promise and deserve to hear about it?

When Armageddon comes there will be clear sides. The whole world will know who Jehovah God is and who is on His side. Indeed He will preserve those that have chosen to love Him. How do we show love for Him? “This is what the love of God means, that we observe his commandments; and yet his commandments are not burdensome.�—1 John 5:3.

[Elijah John]

Just a quick question. If sending his son to die to redeem humanity was an option, why did God try the flood thing first?

The flood was to protect the last family on earth that actively had faith in the True God.

So faith in the one True God is enough then. Notice there is no evidence that Noah and his family prayed "in Jesus name" in order to be saved, or for anything for that matter. Yet it is certainly not a huge leap to believe that God heard and honored their prayers.

And Noah and his family knew nothing about the "saving work of Christ on the cross" and yet, were saved.

They simply believed in God and walked in His ways. Like Abraham, they believed in God and it was counted for them as righteousness.

[JehovahsWitness]

So faith in the one True God is enough then. Notice there is no evidence that Noah and his family prayed "in Jesus name" in order to be saved [...] .

Noah and his family were saved from a global destruction this is NOT to be confused with been "saved" or redeemed from adamic sin and death.

QUESTION What is "adamic sin"?

Adamic sin refers to the sin or imperfection all humans have inherited from our forefather Adam. All humans, includeing faithful men and women of the past have been born "imperfect" and thus subject to sin and finally to grow old and die (compare Romans 5:12). Individuals throughout history, despite not being perfect, have been able to have a righteous standing before God because they faithfully obeyed God and followed his instructions.

Thanks to Jesus blood (human) sacrifice God has the legal basis to bring such faithful ones as Noah and his family, Abraham and Moses, back from the dead where they will no doubt be delighted to put faith in the redemptive power of the ransom, thus putting themselves in line for everlasting life in paradise free from the effects of adamic sin and death (see Act 24:15)

JOHN 11:21-26
"Martha then said to Jesus: “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died. Yet even now I know that whatever you ask God for, God will give you.� Jesus said to her: “Your brother will rise.� Martha said to him: “I know he will rise in the resurrection on the last day.� Jesus said to her: “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who exercises faith in me, even though he dies, will come to life; and everyone who is living and exercises faith in me will never die at all. Do you believe this?�