A Loving God?

Question 4 of 13 concerning the validity of religion

How Could a Loving God Wipe Out Nearly All Life on Earth, Even Blameless Animals, Just to Start Over Anew?

We are all familiar with the story of Noah and his family and how he built an ark and took two animals of each species aboard in order to escape the destruction of all life from a flood that covered the entire surface of the earth. There are so many problems with this story that I don’t know where to begin. First, a world-wide flood would have left evidence that geologists could study, but no such evidence exists.  I can’t conceive of the size of the ship it would take to carry two of each species on the planet, plus food. And speaking of food, what did the carnivores eat? Noah would have had to pack in a lot of extra animals just to feed the carnivores, and these on-board ani-meals had to eat as well, until they became fodder that is. To avoid the problem of limited space, Biblical literalists claim that not all species were taken aboard the ark but only major species. However, if that were the case, how do we explain the zoological diversity we see today?  And I assume that the creatures of the sea fared pretty well, since they aren’t mentioned, but why did they get a pass while all land animals were annihilated?

Let’s set aside the vast improbability of the flood story for a moment and look at this from a completely different angle – one that is harder to fathom than the story itself. How could a supposedly loving God destroy virtually all life on earth, even blameless animals, simply to start over?  Talk about wrath, not to mention impatience!  What did God expect from imperfect beings, which he created, by the way?  So, who screwed up the most in this whole event?  I say God, because we are talking about a perfect being that created imperfect beings. What happened to unconditional love?  Was it really necessary or fair for God to take out his anger on us and the rest of earth’s inhabitants?  Couldn’t He have helped us along a little?  This behavior just doesn’t fit with the concept of a benevolent God. It’s hard for me to imagine anyone who takes a literal interpretation of the flood story and still views the God depicted therein as a benevolent God. And for those that don’t take the flood story literally, then how do you know which stories in the Bible to take literally and which ones are simply fairytales?