Amanda
Calm as a Hindu cow
- Nov 28, 2008
- 4,426
- 1,011
- 48
Well the flood story also implies that every single person except Noah and his small family was wicked, evil and debased. i think we can surmise that that assumption would have been as untrue then as it is today.
I think a mistake a lot of people make is to take the stories literally. I don't believe they were ever intended that way, they were a way to express ideas and concepts.
But we see this all the time, don't we? Who ever screams the loudest is the one heard, and it's always the nutcases. So if you're not a Christian and you're looking in from the outside all you're likely to hear is the nonsense. Biblical scholars haven't taken the ark story literally for over 100 years, but here we are in the 21st century and non-believers still think that Christians must be crazy to believe it.
Let's take homosexuality as an example. I don't like it, it sickens me. I find it as detestable as pedophilia. But if I use the words "homosexual" and "pedophile" closely together there will be a rush of people telling me that I have an incorrect assumption about gays being pedophiles. They will know in their heart that I simply don't understand what it is to be gay. If that's you, then you know the feeling I'm talking about. Well, that's the same feeling I get when I hear the uninformed talk about religion. The assumptions I see made by non-believers are simply ridiculous and make any sort of discussion very difficult.
FYI, I know the bible stories are just that - stories, but there are quite a number of christians who take the bible literally. The entire creationism movement does. If you acknowledge that they are just stories, then why did you object to my post and defend god for killing people?
I'm beginning to suspect you have a reading comprehension problem.
I objected to your post because you called the people innocent and that isn't how the story goes. I didn't defend anything, I set the record straight about how the story goes.
I'm not going to bother with your other post where you railed about my simplistic views after I didn't give any of my views. You seem to have caught the drift of your mistake by making this post. You might try understanding what I'm saying before you respond, you'd save yourself a lot of effort.