Noah and the great flood, unanswered questions

reply to post by NOTurTypical


The only thing you have established here, NOTur, is that you play semantic games. I've noticed that many people who are of your persuasion do that, and not JUST with the Bible...
but with EVERYONE's words...
twist them around to mean what YOU want them to mean, rather than asking the speaker or writer to clarify, you just presume to know the intentions or to have a complete and perfect understanding.

That's the difference. Some people, when not sure what is meant by a phrase or word or sentence or paragraph or page or chapter, ASK QUESTIONS. So that they can grasp the actual INTENTIONs of the author. It's called communication skills.

Others do not. They say things that are cryptic, then when asked about what they mean they act all innocent or call others stupid for not "hearing". Some others read whatever they want into the words someone writes, and instead of asking the author "what did you mean by this?", to give the author another chance to rephrase or present their case IN A WAY THAT BOTH UNDERSTAND, they just decide No, THIS is what you meant and YOU KNOW IT.

Personally, I detest both types of people. One is a psychopathic manipulator, and the other is just dense and stubborn.

Nevertheless, you have made some good cases in point, that call to mind WHY I feel that way.

I was once very stupidly involved with an idiot who did that to people. His "defense": If someone can't take a hint about what I want then that's their fault, not mine".
I told him, "Imagine you are in a foreign country and have NO IDEA of the language they speak. You need something. But rather than learning a phrase they understand, or using clear gestures to get it across ACCURATELY, you just keep SHOUTING AT THEM LOUDER AND LOUDER in your OWN language, expecting them to get it, and then you get pissed that they don't understand and call the STUPID and STUBBORN and WRONG."

I also worked for years as a bi-lingual member of several different organizations, and taught classes in my second language to people who had a growing need to LEARN. My classes were quite successful. I also was required to interpret for people in touchy situations: not only doctor's offices, but ER situations, Operating Rooms, ICE raids (Immigration officers), court-rooms, HR meetings, as well as working hands on with learners in the second language who were raising a baby for the first time. THESE were NOT situations where it was okay to be sloppy or UNCLEAR and just blow the people off if they didn't get it. Also had to help many, many people fill out important forms that were in English only, where mistakes were not acceptable (injury forms, government forms, legal forms, etc).

But again, like I said, now I know better WHY I get so infuriated with the holy rollers who refuse to make themselves CLEAR and then blame the LISTENER for being stupid.

Utter crap!! Absolute EVIL and manipulative WRONG-DOING. And, by the way, THAT's WHAT THE PEOPLE WHO TRANSLATED THE BIBLE DID.

When this whomever gets done translating the FIRST ORIGINAL TEXTS into MODERN ENGLISH, and then it gets translated BACK INTO THE ORIGINAL TEXT and comes out precisely the SAME as the ORIGINAL,

THEN I WILL BE CONVINCED that it is what the Bible said. But even, then, I won't necessarily believe WHAT IT SAYS IS TRUE, because there is no way to prove it.

But you folks don't get that.
So, just keep up the bleating. The shepherds will come and round you up. Or their dogs.

Originally posted by vogon42

Originally posted by randyvs
....
You can bet on one thing. Not one of those varibles is prolly correct.

Thanks for the input!
Still very interesting to hear so many answers, so many beliefs. (Personally I do believe 40, meaning 20 different species, sounds a bit short)

I was leaning more on the line of ~270 different species of animals.

Deuteronomy 14:4-5 lists 10 species of clean animals; Leviticus 11:4-19 and Deuteronomy 14:7-18 lists 30 of the unclean animals. Then you have the five species of clean birds to take as well. This scenario makes more sense being as Noah would only take the animals he owned and traded.

When the story mentions "every kind"; I feel like it's an overgeneralization. Noah would say he took "all" of his animals on his barge if someone asked him.

reply to post by wildtimes

The only thing you have established here, NOTur, is that you play semantic games. I've noticed that many people who are of your persuasion do that, and not JUST with the Bible...

Wow, how utterly rude and slanderous. If I were playing games with you I would not have thanked you for bringing something to my attention that I wasn't aware of, thus conceding I was wrong in that previous assertion.

Personally, I detest both types of people.

May God bless you abundantly.

That's it. Obviously, staying on topic is impossible.

Thread closed.