Does anyone know if the following argument has been made about the flood in the Abrahamic religions (Jewis, Christian, Islam)?
Since free will exists, I have two questions about the flood.
One - Since people can change, and many do as they mature, god could not have known what the people would do in the future. Many may have seen the light and mended their ways. So, god cast millions into hell for eternity rather than give them a chance to mend their ways and convert, be forgiven, and get an eternity in heaven.
Free will not only means the ability to do wrong, it also means the ability to do something right.
So, this is not a case of god knew what they were all going to do, free will prevented that.
Two - Since free will exists there is always the chance god killed the person(s) that could have changed mankind so everyone was saved. If that is the case, then god either took the chance that he would do that, or actually wound up doing it. In either case, there is good cause to think god may be responsible for the majority that go to hell. Again, free will prevents god from knowing which way people will go.
If free will is not a valid argument, then how can god send people to hell when he obviously made them bad before they were born and had no choice in the matter? This would make god and satan equals, and just enemies in ego.
Why seek rational explanations for irrational beliefs?
It's a fable. There is a message (about a wrathful god I guess), but it was never meant to be taken literally or analyzed like this. The Biblical flood myth is based on much older Babylonian myths
But creationists use it to explain considerable fossil records. If they believe the flood to be true then they must also answer for this?
I never understood how free will would prevent an omniscient deity from knowing the future. An all knowing creator should, in fact, know what choices people would make before he even created them. Omniscience makes the entire idea of sending people to earth to test them before God tosses them into heaven or hell pointless, regardless of free will.
I've discussed this with Christians before, and the only answer I've ever gotten was that god knows all possible outcomes, but does not know which outcome people will choose. In the case of the flood, the entire world (except Noah's family, apparently) had used their free will to become irreversibly corrupt and there was no hope for the future, so the world needed a reboot.
So, all the children and babies had already set a path that was corrupt?
How does someone knowing all POSSIBLE outcomes mean no one will change? After all, even I know for a fact that if god had "shown his face to the people" then they would have changed, which is a POSSIBLE outcome.
If he knew this in advance and did nothing, then he is malevolent.
If he knows all the possible outcomes then why would god bother to change the fact that electromagnetic radiation had no index of refraction to having an index of refraction to produce rainbows? Re-assuring the people afterwords rather than warning them beforehand is again malevolent. And in this story he had the power to do something, anything rather than kill everyone.