Literal Genesis is incoherent.

[Hespera]

'OhYeah? SezYou.', is hardly literary criticism.

Nor is it what anyone but you said, in an attempt at uh yes, mockery and sarcasm.

on the other hand, pointing out what the actions of a fictional person reveal about the character of the individual being portrayed is quite legit.

 

[TheBear]

OP date - 24th September 2005, 01:43 PM


WOW!


How many of these ancient threads have been resurrected of late? Most of the OP's in these old threads haven't been around for years.


What's going on?

 

[Cabal]

The person who is carrying the beliefs.

I'd be inclined to say that and the beliefs themselves.

 

[Split Rock]

OP date - 24th September 2005, 01:43 PM


WOW!


How many of these ancient threads have been resurrected of late? Most of the OP's in these old threads haven't been around for years.


What's going on?

It is the work of AV1611VET... "The Great Dead Thread Necromancer." (cue scary music)

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Reductio ad absurdum is not necessarily the same thing as mockery and sarcasm - though if beliefs imply ridiculous things, then who's at fault here, the beliefs or the person pointing that out?

< Mmmmm. That 'You made me do this to you' rationale sounds familiar.

 

[Cabal]

< Mmmmm. That 'You made me do this to you' rationale sounds familiar.

Not really, you're just not understanding the concept. But feel free to use the standard Christian appeal of "weh weh weh they're mocking me, therefore I must be right!" It still won't help your case.

 

[USincognito]

OP date - 24th September 2005, 01:43 PM


WOW!


How many of these ancient threads have been resurrected of late? Most of the OP's in these old threads haven't been around for years.


What's going on?

The village idiot's been necroing 5-9 year old threads and responding to people who haven't posted in 3-5 years. For some reason people don't check the date of the OP... or who it was that did it... and we're off to the races with more nonsense.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Nor is it what anyone but you said, in an attempt at uh yes, mockery and sarcasm.

on the other hand, pointing out what the actions of a fictional person reveal about the character of the individual being portrayed is quite legit.

It's your conclusions that have my head shaking. A God who created people destroys them because they have become totally evil and degenerate. He starts over with a few that have at least some redeeming qualities, and you find fault with this. Do you understand my puzzlement?

 

[Hespera]

It's your conclusions that have my head shaking. A God who created people destroys them because they have become totally evil and degenerate. He starts over with a few that have at least some redeeming qualities, and you find fault with this. Do you understand my puzzlement?

Its a very simple childs story that anyone can understand.

You look at it as a real story about real people and a real god.

It is however a work of fiction. I am a bit puzzled how anyone can fail to grasp this extremely obvious fact.

It being a work of fiction is quite open to analysis as such. The 'god' portrayed therein would be profoundly immoral by anything even remotely resembling human standards, for his actions.

What puzzles you about this?

In a lot of novels the point is very much about character development. You did take a lit course?

To an atheist it is puzzling how a goddist can believe in this work of fiction, and then make excuses for the god for its monstrous behaviour.

What is so puzzling to you? that people dont believe your god, the ark story, and find literary analysis entertaining?

 

[Doveaman]

OP date - 24th September 2005, 01:43 PM

WOW!

How many of these ancient threads have been resurrected of late? Most of the OP's in these old threads haven't been around for years.

What's going on?

They are resurrected for the benefit of those of us who are new here.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Its a very simple childs story that anyone can understand.

You look at it as a real story about real people and a real god.

It is however a work of fiction. I am a bit puzzled how anyone can fail to grasp this extremely obvious fact.

It being a work of fiction is quite open to analysis as such. The 'god' portrayed therein would be profoundly immoral by anything even remotely resembling human standards, for his actions.

What puzzles you about this?

In a lot of novels the point is very much about character development. You did take a lit course?

To an atheist it is puzzling how a goddist can believe in this work of fiction, and then make excuses for the god for its monstrous behaviour.

What is so puzzling to you? that people dont believe your god, the ark story, and find literary analysis entertaining?

Thanks Hespera. I think I do understand your position now.

 

[TheBear]

They are resurrected for the benefit of those of us who are new here.

That doesn't even make sense. Any topic can be rehashed by starting a new thread. It's done all the time. How is digging up old threads, where many of the thread participants and OP's haven't been around for years, (and thus, unable to clarify remarks, etc), more beneficial to "those of us who are new here", than just starting a new thread on the subject? Explain that one to me. I'd really like to know.

From where I'm sitting, your reply looks like nothing more than a knee-jerk defense of a like-minded member.

 

[AV1611VET]

From where I'm sitting, your reply looks like nothing more than a knee-jerk defense of a like-minded member.

Um ... excuse me ... I've necrobumped threads from people still here; so your point can take a hike.

And to prove it -- I'll demonstrate.


QV please: 79

 

[TheBear]

It is the work of AV1611VET... "The Great Dead Thread Necromancer." (cue scary music)

The village idiot's been necroing 5-9 year old threads and responding to people who haven't posted in 3-5 years. For some reason people don't check the date of the OP... or who it was that did it... and we're off to the races with more nonsense.

Just as I suspected.

Thanks, guys.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why would an ultimate god need 6 whole days to create the universe?

He took six days on purpose, so as to make it a template for the workweek.

Exodus 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

He took six days on purpose, so as to make it a template for the workweek.

Exodus 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

5 years after you last resurrected this thread, you go and do it again.

I really have to ask: why?

 

[AV1611VET]

5 years after you last resurrected this thread, you go and do it again.

I really have to ask: why?

Just in case someone was planning to ask again.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Just in case someone was planning to ask again.

Yet obviously no-one cared enough for five years to ask...

 

[AV1611VET]

Yet obviously no-one cared enough for five years to ask...

I can't help it if people don't know what to ask.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I can't help it if people don't know what to ask.

... so you're God now are you?