Johnny Skeptic

Genesis 6:11-18 say "The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it. And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee."

God allowed only Noah, his wife, his sons, and their wives to go into the ark, but what about Noah's daughter-in-laws fathers, mothers, sisters, and brothers? Surely some of those people were decent enough human beings to be allowed to go into the ark.



Genesis 5:28-31 say “And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed. And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.�

Genesis 7:6 says “And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.� If Noah’s father Lamech lived for 777 years as the texts say, he was still alive at the time of the flood and did not go into the ark. Lamech had two wives and had children with each of them. None of those children went into the ark either.

jakejonesiv

Using these numbers supplied, Lamech died five years before the flood. 777 - 182 = 595.

The math looks OK to me. Am I missing something?

Nothwistanding, the flood tale is a myth, as is Noah.

Jake Jones IV

Johnny Skeptic

I goofed regarding Lamech, but still, according to the texts, Noah had many close living relatives who did not go into the ark, and surely at least one of them was of comparable character to his in-laws.

Dean Anderson

Methuselah, on the other hand (Noah's grandfather) died in the year of the flood - possibly in the flood itself - if you do the maths...

Tigers!

The criteria for salvation from the flood was simply to enter the Ark. If they did not enter they would not have been saved. Thus it required an act of will to enter the Ark. They had to believe that Noah was not foolish and telling the truth. Then they had to physically enter the Ark.
So a two stage process - firstly the moral/intellectual assent that Noah was truthful and then secondly the physical assent by entering the Ark. Some of these may well have done the first but not the second. The biblical record is silent concerning Noah's relatives motives.

Tigers!

The bible notes that Methuselah was a godly man. If he was capable of doing so he would have been on the ark, ergo he died in the year of the flood but before it occured.

Johnny Skeptic

But most of the people in the world had never heard of Noah or the God of the Bible. Genesis 6:13 says "And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth." Millions of babies and unborn children were killed in the flood. Babies and unborn children are not filled with violence.

It is much too convenient that the only people who wanted to go into the ark were Noah's immediate family and in-laws. A global flood was an outlandish claim for anyone to make. Why kill innoccent animals in order to get rid of bad people, not to mention destroy most of the plant life on earth? Why should Noah have been trusted by people who barely knew him, or even by people who knew him well? What do the texts say about Noah's character? Well, Genesis 6:8 says "But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord." Believe it or not, that is all that is said about Noah's character! Eso es todo! C'est tout! Actually, Noah's character was not an issue at all. The sinfulnesses of mankind was the only issue. If Noah, his immediate family, and his in-laws did not exist, God would have killed all of the other people in the world anyway.

Thomas II

But what about the animals? Who told the animals that they had to go to the ark and behave while they were there?

What did they feed all these animals the time they were inside the ark?

What about the smell inside the ark?

Who had the job of cleaning all the waste from all these animals?

John Kesler

The Bible says that only Noah was righteous:

It appears that the reason that Noah's wife, sons, and their wives were allowed on the ark was because of Noah's righteousness. This is the same thing that we see in reverse in Joshua 7, which tells of Achan's family and animals being killed because of Achan's sin.

When Ezekiel wrote, the idea of personal accountability had emerged (see 18:20), and Noah was used to make this point:

Tigers!

The Ark Noah was building was huge, people would have heard of it or gone to see it. It also would have taken many years to build. It would have been the topic of much discussion (good & bad). They would have heard Noah say why he was building the Ark.
Just because a claim appears outlandish does not automatically mean that it is not correct. Outlandishness, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder. Time always tell the truth of claims, outlandish or otherwise.
Innocence is a quality we ascribe to moral agents. I am not sure that animals are moral agents.
Why shouldn't he be trusted? Did they have reason not to trust him? See comments above.
Sorry, my French is almost non-existent.
Good character does not save one from drowning, only a sea-worthy vessel will. There was much opportunity for others to avail themselves of the offer of salvation. Right until the rains came and the fountains of the deep burst open, the door was open.
Good character does not guarantee wisdom nor odedience. It is most certainlty indicative but not absolute.