image provider

Refuting Noah

Here is an email I received in response to one of my essays.

Refuting Noah

Michael McCrady : : 2000-02-08

Let us start with my refute of your Noah.html. Your presupposition that God exists suggests <see question below> to me that you are not trying to decide the existence of Him, but trying to determine the reasons for His usage of man to create a tangible thing to base our beliefs on; therefore, I will join you in that struggle to determine what is real and what is fiction.

What can you expect of me? I will provide you with feedback on this article to start. I will refute parts of your document, using logical, factual and explanatory means. Then, if you wish, we can continue with other articles of your choosing.

If that is fair enough, then my expectations for you are thus (which I myself will abide): I expect you to refrain from personal attacks, profanity and insightful assaults to my person or my faith. We may question each others’ beliefs and the foundation for those beliefs, but making it personal is not my goal, nor I expect yours.

That said, I will start with the Introduction of your Noah.html and once sent, if I receive a response, I will interpret your actions as you have read and agreed with the above statements pertaining to expectations.

Ok, so:

If there is <a God>, did he write, dictate or inspire the entire Old and New Testaments?

I am only going to tackle <the question above>. Jerry Falwell claims that every last word in the Bible is the infallible word of God and that any minister who does not espouse this should get an honest job. I claim that is ludicrous and, oddly, blasphemous and further that Jerry made a Freudian slip. My basic thesis is, God could not have been responsible for writing the entire Bible, or He would have done a much better job. If God were the author of the entire Bible, it would mean that He was inconsistent, bungling and forgetful, quite different qualities than we normally attribute to Him.


The creation account in the Bible is clearly not literally true. All physical evidence points against it. Since God presumably created all the physical evidence, it would seem He does not want us to believe the Genesis account either…

Before I continue, I must remark on your choice of wording.

Now, I would like your explanation of what you would mean by a better job. What would you consider to be a better job? If God gave the technical specs of DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) to a 4th century man(woman/child), they would undoubtedly put that information into their own perspective, as to the environment around them. In that case, we would have the same information we have now. As we read the books of the Old Testament, we find that they are God’s word, as spoken by the Old Testament prophets. These men must have had to translate images and concepts in their own time and space to have been able to tell them to others or write them on paper. If I have to explain to my children how computers work, I guarantee I will use language I know they will understand and I will certainly abbreviate portions that I don’t think they are ready for. Our Father is just that, wisdom of the ages and will give us information when He thinks we are ready. <We are all children in God’s eyes>

[Your position is that God was deliberately sloppy and inaccurate in writing the Bible because the people of the time were too stupid to understand even an elementary description of the truth. According to you, God lied, where he could have simply remained silent. Consider that the Greeks had formulated an atomic theory (so it was understandable in those times) even if they had no way of demonstrating its correctness.]

This page is posted
on the web at:

Optional Replicator mirror
on local hard disk J:

Canadian Mind Products
Please the feedback from other visitors, or your own feedback about the site.
Contact Roedy. Please feel free to link to this page without explicit permission.

Your face IP:[]
You are visitor number