See??? You still have not debated my original point but want to goad me into another argument. You are only hear to provoke. I don’t know scripture nearly as well as others. I do know that the root Greek for flesh is the same as used in John1:14 And thus why the NLV chose the word human in this passage “So the Word became human and made his home among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness.e And we have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son.”

Yet you’re applying it strictly to ALL.

I know that your purpose is not to explore this topic because you are pressing for a specific argument instead of discussing the original point you made. I am not a literal interpretation person obviously since I laid out my belief that God chose to use a flood to remove a corruption of human DNA in the area. The book of Enoch is my source material for that reasoning. It wasn’t a magical boat it didn’t need to be. The flood was in a specific area this has been well proven through geological record. The descendants of those people have carried that story through out the world. This too is well documented and why flood stories can be found in almost all cultures. God preserved animal species that would not have otherwise survived using the ark. He persevered Noah and his family because they were still human AND could resist the corruption of the fallen thus preserving their humanity in the future as well. Perhaps they had genetic immunity or were neurodivergent so not easily manipulated. Maybe the corruption removed the ability to seek God. Maybe they were capable of surviving life in that area after the flood. I know it wasn’t just that he just liked them better because he allowed many a jack wagon to live many times. This was MUCH bigger a reason then he disliked the humans. That is childish interpretation. When I refuse my children sugar because it isn’t healthy they also think I don’t like them. There is many possible reasons. That is MY interpretation.Other Christians have other interpretations some literally. That is their right. Some Christians know the Bible word for word and will use it to debate you. I don’t although I am learning but even then I see no point in using scripture you don’t believe in as a basis for a discussion with you . Your turn- Why do you assume your interpretation is correct? Have you researched the Greek Hebrew and Aramaic translations and cross referenced them to other scriptures to insure it aligns through out? Do you believe that it is coincidental that there was a massive flood AND species incapable of surviving that catastrophe somehow jumped to other areas? How do you explain the human genome tracking to only one woman yet still surviving? Coincidentally why does that genuine match the area of the flood? Almost like one family survived. If you want possible explanations for how God could use the flood but not be motivated by human frustration I gave you many. If as I assert you just want to make fun of others beliefs and take out your piss and vinegar- then you will once again google a bible verse and demand a literal interpretation to validate YOUR point. Christians are not one size fits all in their approach to their faith. We argue even amongst ourselves about that. So you trying to debate ME on my interpretation when you aren’t even a believer isn’t something I am interested in. FYI I checked my source material on my interpretations. Christ is my source material. When one interprets scripture through a lens of love and reconciliation -Christ- then the narrative makes sense. If the flood was an act of love not a petty act then there is a reason.