duderonomy Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 The geology/zoology of the story is impossible. (see my posts) The morality of the story is reprehensible. The internal logic of the story is flawed (see mm above) What's left? #betweentheverses IH this thread has thoroughly and completely shot down the ark story. You are having to make stuff up to make sense of it. Doesn't this tell you something? I'd like to hear your thoughts. BUMP It's a bad sign when you have to start pulling maybes out of your ass to even make potential sense of something. It is your opinion and some others here that this thread has shot down completely the story of the ark. That's fine. I will say though, I'm puzzled why some found my 'in between' the verses explanation stupid. You can read a well written biography of a famous person alive today and in between the pages of that written account might be many things we do not know about. I knew it! I read the biography of George Bush and I could just tell that he was really Batman...it just wasn't in the book. It was in between the verses! We found your 'in between' the verses explanation stupid Ironhorse, because it was stupid. Oh, and it wasn't this thread that shot down the story of the ark The story of the ark did that all by itself. (Edited to add that I didn't really read any biography on George Bush...but you get the point.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moanareina Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 It is your opinion and some others here that this thread has shot down completely the story of the ark. That's fine. I will say though, I'm puzzled why some found my 'in between' the verses explanation stupid. You can read a well written biography of a famous person alive today and in between the pages of that written account might be many things we do not know about. Your level of chosen stupidity just got some more revelations... All you can do by reading a well written biography of a famous person alive today is reading a story someone wrote down from his memory and made it suit a good writing. The stuff you think you read in between lines you need to verify by the author and other sources if you want to derive claims from it. That is what you will learn when taking literature classes actually. Just had literature exams in march and I tell you, if I just read in between the lines and told those examiners about what I had found they would not have been happy with me. You can speculate of course but if you start making claims due to what YOU read in between the lines there will be someone else coming up with totally different conclusions...and none of them might be what the author actually had in mind or what you could find out about him. And what you think is in between the lines when it comes to Noah's ark is pretty much a mystery to me. Comparing that story with a well written biography is even more crazy...it seems more like someone tries to escape a trap he set himself up...if you can't see that...or if you think you can get away with it...your level of chosen stupidity is even greater than I assumed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted September 17, 2014 Author Super Moderator Share Posted September 17, 2014 It is your opinion and some others here that this thread has shot down completely the story of the ark. That's fine. I will say though, I'm puzzled why some found my 'in between' the verses explanation stupid. You can read a well written biography of a famous person alive today and in between the pages of that written account might be many things we do not know about. Ironhorse, are you familiar with the phrase, "If it wasn't written down, it didn't happen"? There's a reason that phrase exists. Can you think of what that reason might be? It's highly applicable here, so think really hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverlandrut Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 It is your opinion and some others here that this thread has shot down completely the story of the ark. That's fine. I will say though, I'm puzzled why some found my 'in between' the verses explanation stupid. You can read a well written biography of a famous person alive today and in between the pages of that written account might be many things we do not know about. Ironhorse, are you familiar with the phrase, "If it wasn't written down, it didn't happen"? There's a reason that phrase exists. Can you think of what that reason might be? It's highly applicable here, so think really hard. We use that phrase is medicine all the time. "If it wasn't documented, it didn't happen." Of course, it could have happened, but there is no way to know (which is the point). If it was that important, it should have been documented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverlandrut Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 It is your opinion and some others here that this thread has shot down completely the story of the ark. That's fine. I will say though, I'm puzzled why some found my 'in between' the verses explanation stupid. You can read a well written biography of a famous person alive today and in between the pages of that written account might be many things we do not know about. Ironhorse, are you familiar with the phrase, "If it wasn't written down, it didn't happen"? There's a reason that phrase exists. Can you think of what that reason might be? It's highly applicable here, so think really hard. We use that phrase in medicine all the time. "If it wasn't documented, it didn't happen." Of course, it could have happened, but there is no way to know (which is the point). Therefore, it must be assumed not to have happened. If it was that important, it should have been documented. Non-coincidentally, it's the same with evidence. Your claim MIGHT be true, but without evidence it is impossible to know. It is foolish (and incorrect) to claim knowledge without evidence. You maybe justified in claiming it as your opinion, but not knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 Strange that Jesus could not be bothered to write anything down. Well not strange if Jesus was illiterate or imaginary. It's only strange is Jesus is God the Son who desires that all be saved so he went to all the trouble of the Virgin Birth and Calvary and the Empty Tomb and then couldn't be bothered to write the salvation message Himself so that the story is accurately conveyed without contradictions. It makes perfect sense if the whole thing is a myth. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverlandrut Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 Strange that Jesus could not be bothered to write anything down. Well not strange if Jesus was illiterate or imaginary. It's only strange is Jesus is God the Son who desires that all be saved so he went to all the trouble of the Virgin Birth and Calvary and the Empty Tomb and then couldn't be bothered to write the salvation message Himself so that the story is accurately conveyed without contradictions. It makes perfect sense if the whole thing is a myth. Yep! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts