LibertyKid
Platinum Member
- May 26, 2021
- 1,715
- 1,056
- 938
This statement assumes that one has to believe in the literal interpretation and take on the flood. Moses had plenty of influences where he might have been able to drop that story into the history of Israel.And regret that He created humans in the first place? That doesn't sound like love to me.
The problem today is that Christians (no all, but the majority) are completely unable to separate the O.T. from the N.T. and more specifically the Gospels that provide the Testimony of Jesus.
It is absolutely plausible, that Moses and all the other OT authors have attributed to 'God', historical events, attributes and characters of God improperly. The warring and murdering god of the OT is not represented in the example of Jesus, who not only did not bring about war against Rome and the messianic age (as the Jews expect and still assume today) but was the peaceful, compassionate, loving example who then allowed those he loved, to crucify him due to their misunderstanding of God which is also represented in mass in the O.T.
In summary, if the Jews fully understood who God was from the onset, they would have recognized their Messiah.
Now today, Christians are making the same mistake by attempting to harmonize the O.T. and the N.T. into the unnecessary "Word of God". And because it's the WOG, it has to be infallible and perfect, which leads to hermeneutic stretches of interpretation.
Christianity can absolutely exist without the O.T., and one does not have to be believe in the flood being literal to be a "christian".