Explain please

[TimAllen]

in other words shutup dont ask questions

I never said don't ask questions, but if you are going to ask, you need to be open minded enough to consider the answer a valid one, based on our answers that are found in the Bible.

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

The story is in the links I provided. Read and we'll discuss when you have meaningful questions.

But, since you've already decided the stories you've heard are better than the source, and that you have no interest in doing actual research to answer your question, I'm suspecting you won't do that. And, since you've already made your decision as to the veracity of the story, you seem to be doing nothing other than picking a fight. If you had actual questions you don't think you already know the answers to, you'd do research, not beg people to argue with you.

I asked you to quote where I stated what I've been taught (like you said you would) and then post the true story and we will discuss from there. I am at work and don't have time to tediously weed through research.

Quit being a jackass, there is no viable direction. You believe it or you don't and you know that. Your mindset is known, you cannot be proved wrong, you cannot be convinced that 2 of every animal got on a big boat, you just want to stir shiat with those who believe.

Sure I can...try harder :shrug:
I wouldn't have asked if I didn't legitimately want insight on the topic :shrug:

Noahs Ark is a parable.

1. a short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson.

Everyone knows this!

no they don't. If they did then why do they try to prove it as truth?

 

[dems4me]

I never said don't ask questions, but if you are going to ask, you need to be open minded enough to consider the answer a valid one, based on our answers that are found in the Bible.

If you already know the answer and are not open minded - why ask in the first place :shrug:

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

A parable by definition is a fictional illustration.

I dont think pcjohnnyb was taking issue with that definition (although i am not speaking for him/her). It was those on here (who have posted) that it actually occurred that the question was posed to.

Spot-on

I am fine with accepting that it was a (made up) story used to teach people morals, values, ect...but then why is it that people actually felt the need to justify it as being true?

 

[HadEnough]

Spot-on

I am fine with accepting that it was a (made up) story used to teach people morals, values, ect...but then why is it that people actually felt the need to justify it as being true?

Because they are insecure in their Christianity. You usually see this behavior in new Christians and in those who are leading less than stellar lives.

 

[This_person]

I asked you to quote where I stated what I've been taught (like you said you would) and then post the true story and we will discuss from there. I am at work and don't have time to tediously weed through research.

And then went on to state that the true story is not really the true story. Why waste my time when you aren't really trying to ask questions, but pick a fight?

Sure I can...try harder :shrug:
I wouldn't have asked if I didn't legitimately want insight on the topic :shrug:

Then comment on my numerous potential other answers besides the strictest, most literal interpretation of the story.

no they don't. If they did then why do they try to prove it as truth?

We believe it as truth.

 

[Pete]

Sure I can...try harder :shrug:
I wouldn't have asked if I didn't legitimately want insight on the topic :shrug:

Bullchit, you yourself admit you heard the story your whole life and don't believe it nor the man-made stories in the bible. WTH is supposed to make me believe someone on a internet forum is going to provide you with the epiphany that has eluded you your entire life and make you reverse your self proclaimed disbelief?

 

[This_person]

Spot-on

I am fine with accepting that it was a (made up) story used to teach people morals, values, ect...but then why is it that people actually felt the need to justify it as being true?

If you're asking, that means you don't know the answer.

Yet, you have continuously only accepted that it's not a true story when someone answers that.

Incredible.

 

[TimAllen]

1. a short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson.

That's all Noah's Ark is.

Noah's Ark was not a parable.

 

[This_person]

The authors of the Old Testament "borrowed" a story from preceding religions to make it easier to entice followers into this "New" religion/faith/belief.

So, could it have been true for the previous religion?

 

[HadEnough]

Noah's Ark was not a parable.

Yes it was. As are almost all of the stories in the Old Testament. Why does that scare you?

 

[This_person]

And you fail to understand that you can not use your "Proof" to prove itself. If you'd understand that, and act accordingly, then there could be open dialogue to discuss it

How about documented proof of a major flood? One that is in line with the story?

 

[This_person]

Yes it was. As are almost all of the stories in the Old Testament. Why does that scare you?

That people think this scares me less than it scares those people to think it could have been true.

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

Noah's Ark was not a parable.

Then I would like you and all of the other believers of this to explain how it legitimately occured.

Yes it was. As are almost all of the stories in the Old Testament. Why does that scare you?

Ok, I am really starting to like you

 

[This_person]

Then I would like you and all of the other believers of this to explain how it legitimately occured.

Okay

Maybe it's not as clear cut as that. Maybe God left part of the world alone, and that's where other animals survived - but it was the whole known world to the mankind He created. Maybe there were other Noah's elsewhere, but they don't matter to the overall story, so they were not included (remember, the Bible is all you NEED to know, not all you WANT to know). Maybe when Noah gathered the animals, he only gathered eggs and sperm (thus, their "male"ness and "female"ness), and had a lab to provide the world with the first test tube babies when he was back on dry ground - and that's why it was seven pairs of some, and two pairs of others.

Saying it's impossible for someone to do is very close minded. I know it was considered impossible to have man land on the moon, and to have one guy shoot the president, and to make computers so small, and to etc., etc.​

Here's a series of potential ways it could be true. Not an all-inclusive list, by any means, but a series of pontentials.

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

How about documented proof of a major flood? One that is in line with the story?

there is NO documentation of a WORLDWIDE (we're going with your story here...entire world remember?) flood in that time period. There is documented story of a flood in that tiny area of the globe, which would thus mean that there could have definitely been a flood...it COULD have even been documented as being "worldwide" because it was the entire area known to those people, and they could have very well said they took two of every animal aboard the boat because they took 2 of every KNOWN animal...the simple fact is that the actual idea of this single man saving the entire population of the animal kingdom while all the evil men were wiped out...is just that, a story.

 

[This_person]

there is NO documentation of a WORLDWIDE (we're going with your story here...entire world remember?) flood in that time period. There is documented story of a flood in that tiny area of the globe, which would thus mean that there could have definitely been a flood...it COULD have even been documented as being "worldwide" because it was the entire area known to those people, and they could have very well said they took two of every animal aboard the boat because they took 2 of every KNOWN animal...the simple fact is that the actual idea of this single man saving the entire population of the animal kingdom while all the evil men were wiped out...is just that, a story.

If it was all the people that existed at the time, and all of the animals and all of the known world at the time, how is it less true than what was written?

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

Here's a series of potential ways it could be true. Not an all-inclusive list, by any means, but a series of pontentials.

see my most recent post.

your list does not explain how the STORY is true, the story said all animals, in pairs of two, ect ect...your explanation is one that shows how the idea could have been a true occurance in some sense, and have occured to the entire known world, and this I agree with

 

[This_person]

No because the previous religion, by definition, couldnt exist outside of the Old Testament.

the religion could have existed (why else would God declare there to be "no other gods before me"?), just not accurate.

 

[HadEnough]

Let me try to rationalize this. Let's say there was a major flood. The people who wrote the story saw water for as far as they could see. In their minds the world was flooded. Very possible answer.