When creationists talk about the Flood, it’s usually to declare how wonderful it was for Noah to build his miraculous boat to save his family and all the animals. But they rarely discuss the incredible cruelty of a global flood.
We didn’t directly mention cruelty when we wrote Top Ten Reasons Noah’s Flood is Mythology. But we mentioned it indirectly when we said:
And the Number One reason the Flood is mythology is: It didn’t work! We’re told that the purpose of the ghastly planet-killing exercise is that mankind was wicked. That’s the reason everything was cruelly destroyed — except for Noah, his righteous family, and their chosen menagerie. Okay, fine, but there’s one little detail — the whole business was a colossal futility! There is still wickedness in the world, which means the planetary slaughter was not only cruel beyond imagining, it was also stupid.
We’ve mentioned the Flood’s cruelty in other posts by saying stuff like:
Yahweh killed everything on the face of the Earth (except for what was in the Ark). Pregnant women — dead. Their unborn babies? Dead. Little children playing with puppies? Dead. Butterflies and songbirds? Dead. That goes far beyond “mere” genocide. It’s deliberate death on a planetary scale — global slaughter.
Today, however, the cruelty issue is being confronted head on by the creation scientists at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — the granddaddy of all creationist outfits, the fountainhead of young-earth creationist wisdom. Their post (or article, or something) is titled Was the Global Flood Too Extreme? It was written by Brian Thomas. At the end it says: “Dr. Thomas is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research and earned his Ph.D. in paleobiochemistry from the University of Liverpool.” Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
Bible critics have long claimed the God of the Old Testament was unjust and mean. Some cite Noah’s Flood as an example: If God is really good, then why would He drown all those humans? The best answer to give depends on the attitude of the questioner.
That’s odd. There should be one best answer, regardless of the attitude of the questioner, but Brian says:
Most who say God is unjust probably have little interest in the truth. Those with bad attitudes don’t listen well, and Christians shouldn’t waste time trying to defend our good God to people with closed hearts. But how can we be sure of another person’s attitude?
Huh? Aren’t folks like Brian supposed to teach people The Truth™? He’s saying that some people aren’t worth the effort, and he explains how to identify them:
One way is to ask questions that test their intention. For example, if they express a problem with the way they think God handled something, then ask which book, chapter, and verse from the Bible they object to. Often this is all it takes. A scoffer may just walk away. [Because he’s a fool!] They may even offer unkind words as a parting shot. If that happens, your kindness will speak more than words.
Brian seems to be speaking from experience. He continues:
But someone may actually take you up on the offer to discuss Bible verses. That rare person may want a real answer to why a good God would flood the whole world. What would you say?
Ah, now we’re getting to it. What’s the answer to the question of whether the Flood was cruel? Let’s read on:
You could ask how they know that the pre-Flood people’s punishment was more than their crimes deserved. Does your friend have some special insight into the good behavior of those ancients that suggests they didn’t actually deserve the divine death penalty? [Ask: “Were you there?”] Of course, such insight is impossible without a time machine to reveal how the ancients behaved. Without that machine, we access the past through reliable eyewitness accounts. [Hee hee!] The Genesis text the skeptics want to dismiss has just that. It says about pre-Flood man: “Every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”
That’s what the bible says, and you can’t challenge it. After all, you weren’t there! But what about the infants, the unborn children, the puppies, the song birds? Brian doesn’t discuss any of that. Presumably, they were evil too. He goes on for a few more paragraphs, and ends with this:
Was a worldwide flood judgment too extreme? Only to those who don’t want to acknowledge the just penalty for their own sins by pretending that God lacks love.
Well, dear reader, whatever you may think of it, that’s the official answer. The Flood was the right thing to do, and if you don’t agree it’s because you’re evil. Your reward will be to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire.
Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.