The Noachian Flood

[Lion IRC]

... what was that all about?

Looks like God giving humans a second chance to start over.
And the Flood is just one part of a much longer story.

[SpecUVdust]

Looks like God giving humans a second chance to start over.
And the Flood is just one part of a much longer story.

REALLY?!?! You ALREADY missed the entire point that has been made. ALREADY!? You just couldn't keep up at all with the other more powerful brain waves, huh? They ate up all the info and you're still hungry. Awe, poor thing.

Satan? yahweh?
yahweh descended from An: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anu
I wonder what "sat" meant in sumerian or akkadian....

I know this is for a laugh(or is it?) but I'm actually interested to find out.

[The Grand Nudger]

Looks like God giving humans a second chance to start over.
And the Flood is just one part of a much longer story.

Yes, one clearly fictional part of a larger clearly fictional story. I have to add, btw, that god didn't give "humans" another start in this narrative, he simply spared his good buddy Noah and company. Fucking cronies.

[Cyberman]

That would be the same Noah, of course, the self-same "preacher of righteous" whose first act upon reaching dry land was to slaughter fifty percent of what would then be critically endangered species and then burn their carcasses so that Yahweh could smell a sweet savour. Next he planted grapes, got pissed on their wine and blamed his son Ham for stumbling upon his own drunken and naked carcass, thus giving him the pretext for cursing Ham's son Canaan. As the Skeptic's Annotated Bible puts it: "If you want to be just, perfect, and righteous, kill lots of endangered species, get drunk, expose yourself to your children, and then curse your grandchildren because their parents saw you naked. I know it sounds a bit strange, but to God it is just, perfect, and righteous behavior."

Regardless, I reiterate that the reboot clearly didn't work since, if the preachers and the politicians are to be believed, the world today is just as wicked and sinful as it was supposed to be then, if not more so.

In fact, just as with Josephus and the infamous Testimonium Flavianum, remove the Noah story and the Genesis narrative is completely unaffected. It's almost as though nothing happened. Sloppy storytelling, to say the least.

[popeyespappy]

First, it's clear from the narrative that Yahweh has not yet been granted the omniscience upgrade. Indeed, the character at this early stage is really rather limited in comparison with its later portrayal; it has trouble locating characters hiding behind a tree, for instance.

Reference please!

[Cyberman]

Certainly.

And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.

[popeyespappy]

Thanks, I can't wait to trout that one out the next time the issue of omniscience comes up during discussions with my preacher cousin.

[Jackalope]

Certainly.

And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.

[in before the apologists]

God was just pretending, amirite?

[Minimalist]

... what was that all about?

Looks like God giving humans a second chance to start over.
And the Flood is just one part of a much longer story.

Why did your 'god' fuck up so badly the first time?

Some fucking 'god' you've got there.

BTW, didn't "god" look at his creation and pronounce it good? Makes him seem like even more of a fuck-up.

[Cyberman]

[in before the apologists]

God was just pretending, amirite?

That must be it. We're about to find out that any other interpretation is totally wrong anyway, so that's as good an explanation as any and probably better than most.