[_ Old Earth _] Dinosaurs ?

[lordkalvan]

But, as the videos, and I have watched them all on one series and I'm working on the others, do establish, requiring physical evidence has nothing to do with worshiping God nor to do with the great Commission given us by Jesus. I have offered you discussion material on fact as viewed from the spiritual perspective and as I understood it this sub-forum is Science vs. Christianity, am I wrong? If I read the title correctly what you seem to have progressed to is to demand I , a Spirit filled, Christ saved, fully committed Christian turn to follow you instead of Jesus.

Let me explain, the Bible is the Final Court of Arbitration for the followers of Jesus until that day, He returns. Now, I must do this without being offensive so please read and even reread the listed scripture.

In Matt. 22:1-14, the parable of the Wedding Feast. It is important to remember that if a person is found anywhere, at this Feast in Heaven, will not be cast out. Why am I going here? What I am about to say is, often, not received in the light it is spoken. Not every person that will be found in Heaven is a member of the Bride of Christ. This is one of the lessons the Holy spirit has taught me, believe me, I've never heard any preach this but myself. There are many more guests than there are members of the Bride of the Christ.

So, who is the Bride of Christ? I pray I am one of the members but I'll not know until I am there, the Spirit is not going to blow my pride bubble up for me and I suspect the world is glad of that. But this link to the document will illustrate much of what I'm referring to. http://coldcasechristianity.com/2012/are-there-different-degrees-of-reward-in-heaven/

Now, the Bible is the last Court of Arbitration for the Bride of the Christ and it should be so for all of the word but we all know that will never be. I am never to be moved in this world from obedience to my LORD because He has blessed me with the prescience of the Spirit and that is where I will live until I pass over. So it is that Translating the Bible is an action of moving the text from one language to another. though I have spoken bit and pieces of more than three languages while I was in the Army, I have never spoken any of them fluently enough to translate the Bible. As for having ideas about what a passage might mean, I do my very best not to go there but instead surrender myself to God that He might (Preacher speak) hide me behind the Cross of Jesus.

So it is that I offer you god's truth and god's truth does supersede any other ideas man might have.

I doubt neither your sincerity nor your faith, but if you require me to accept claims regarding references in the Bible that dinosaurs co-existed with human beings - claims that are driven solely by an interpretation of the Bible that Earth is 'young' and thus necessarily requires this co- existence - then you are going to have to provide some evidence independent of this interpretation to support those claims. YouTube films about 'fact as viewed from the spiritual perspective' do not constitute such evidence.

 

[lordkalvan]

Okay, so, now from the scriptures I live by, what would you have me do because you reject my offerings?

If you make claims about physical evidence that are driven solely by a particular interpretation of the Bible that is not widely accepted by, as far as I am aware, the majority of Christians, then I expect you to be able to back up those claims with references to non-biblical material (papers, articles, etc) whose merits can be discussed. That means that we need to discuss the actual science that either substantiates or casts doubt on that interpretation.

 

[th1b.taylor]

If you make claims about physical evidence that are driven solely by a particular interpretation of the Bible that is not widely accepted by, as far as I am aware, the majority of Christians, then I expect you to be able to back up those claims with references to non-biblical material (papers, articles, etc) whose merits can be discussed. That means that we need to discuss the actual science that either substantiates or casts doubt on that interpretation.

Kalvan,
Had you done the investigation that I know you did not do you would now know that all of the physical evidence that supports you favored faith amounts to about ten percent of the total evidence concerning this issue. But, just, as most of the Scientific Community has chosen, sounds like conspiracy, to selectively push that ten percent and to ignore the other ninety, so have you chosen, here, to do the ostrige on me The video records I offered you do not require you purchase anything except you choose to do so, I'm sorry but that excuse is very thin.

When I do research, and believe me, a veteran on VA relief makes a lot less money than you do, I google the subject and the papers are there. I gave the keys to you but you do not want to drive and all I am willing to do unless you begin to investigate for yourself is to let you continue to walk. Believe me, and I'm thinking Rick already know it, I am tired of both of you piling on and baiting me with behaviour I would beat my sons, grown men, both, into submission over. Now, please don't try to play me for an idiot again, I really am tired of this baiting and I'm looking for intelligent conversation, that's all.

I have provided enough research material to keep a serious person busy for a year or two if they are serious. I just pray the difference here is one of aging as a Christian. I believe I recall through the fog of this MS that you were the more respectful of you men and had mentioned that you admired my faith and devotion to it, well, I pray that the difference between you and me is aging since the day of our salvations.

I ran from God for twenty-three years and a month... after He spoke, audibly, to me the very first time we communicated. that was the first tour I volunteered for in Vietnam. the morning after I found Paul Edgar Heinen with his legs, arms and head blown off and lying all over his squad's tent, he was my best friend.

The next morning I was cursing God, me, a self professed Atheist for years. And God spoke, audibly, to me the only time He has done that for me. then I volunteered for two more tours and as hard as I was running from God, He kept my bacon from falling in the fire several times, that I know of. I owe God more than I can ever repay.

For me and for two of my friends, there is nothing we will not do for God. One of my men was shot down thirteen times in one tour. I was a drunk, pill poping, needle shooting, MJ and Opium smoking fool and still, God saved me, there is nothing I have reserved from God and I have zero hope of ever repaying what God has done for me.

So, when I say the Bible is the final Book of Arbitration, I am serious. God inspired the entire book and He has kept it pure from the day He began to inspire Moses until this very moment. If God said it, it doesn't matter what any created man, created by God, thinks. God is the truth and the Almighty creator that spoke the Galaxy into place in a single day is never wrong.

Praying for god to pour out the same blessing on you and yours as He has poured out on me and mine.

 

[lordkalvan]

Kalvan,
Had you done the investigation that I know you did not do you would now know that all of the physical evidence that supports you favored faith amounts to about ten percent of the total evidence concerning this issue. But, just, as most of the Scientific Community has chosen, sounds like conspiracy, to selectively push that ten percent and to ignore the other ninety, so have you chosen, here, to do the ostrige on me The video records I offered you do not require you purchase anything except you choose to do so, I'm sorry but that excuse is very thin.

When I do research, and believe me, a veteran on VA relief makes a lot less money than you do, I google the subject and the papers are there. I gave the keys to you but you do not want to drive and all I am willing to do unless you begin to investigate for yourself is to let you continue to walk. Believe me, and I'm thinking Rick already know it, I am tired of both of you piling on and baiting me with behaviour I would beat my sons, grown men, both, into submission over. Now, please don't try to play me for an idiot again, I really am tired of this baiting and I'm looking for intelligent conversation, that's all.

I have provided enough research material to keep a serious person busy for a year or two if they are serious. I just pray the difference here is one of aging as a Christian. I believe I recall through the fog of this MS that you were the more respectful of you men and had mentioned that you admired my faith and devotion to it, well, I pray that the difference between you and me is aging since the day of our salvations.

I ran from God for twenty-three years and a month... after He spoke, audibly, to me the very first time we communicated. that was the first tour I volunteered for in Vietnam. the morning after I found Paul Edgar Heinen with his legs, arms and head blown off and lying all over his squad's tent, he was my best friend.

The next morning I was cursing God, me, a self professed Atheist for years. And God spoke, audibly, to me the only time He has done that for me. then I volunteered for two more tours and as hard as I was running from God, He kept my bacon from falling in the fire several times, that I know of. I owe God more than I can ever repay.

For me and for two of my friends, there is nothing we will not do for God. One of my men was shot down thirteen times in one tour. I was a drunk, pill poping, needle shooting, MJ and Opium smoking fool and still, God saved me, there is nothing I have reserved from God and I have zero hope of ever repaying what God has done for me.

So, when I say the Bible is the final Book of Arbitration, I am serious. God inspired the entire book and He has kept it pure from the day He began to inspire Moses until this very moment. If God said it, it doesn't matter what any created man, created by God, thinks. God is the truth and the Almighty creator that spoke the Galaxy into place in a single day is never wrong.

Praying for god to pour out the same blessing on you and yours as He has poured out on me and mine.

Let me emphasise again that I doubt neither your faith nor your sincerity, but telling me to do the research required to support your claim concerning the co-existence of dinosaurs and human-beings is not how these exchanges of views work. If 90% of the evidence favours your claim and has been ignored by the 'Scientific Community', it should be a relatively simple exercise to cite and reference some of that evidence. I don't see any evidence for dinosaurs in the Bible, simply a post facto rationalisation that, because one particular literalist interpretation of the Bible places the age of Earth at around 6000 years, it follows that dinosaurs and human beings must have co-existed.

 

[th1b.taylor]

Let me emphasise again that I doubt neither your faith nor your sincerity, but telling me to do the research required to support your claim concerning the co-existence of dinosaurs and human-beings is not how these exchanges of views work. If 90% of the evidence favours your claim and has been ignored by the 'Scientific Community', it should be a relatively simple exercise to cite and reference some of that evidence. I don't see any evidence for dinosaurs in the Bible, simply a post facto rationalisation that, because one particular literalist interpretation of the Bible places the age of Earth at around 6000 years, it follows that dinosaurs and human beings must have co-existed.

I have no desire for you to research my faith and anyway, you appear to have begun that journey. I want you to follow an Empirical Research project, similar to the one I was involved with when God interrupted my entire life by speaking to me. I had already began to see the fallacy of the side of the issue from where you stand right now.

A Christian must be thorough to, ever, be effective, examining all sides of any issue. To do less is to be deceived, rather, easily by the pundits off one side, usually resulting in thinking they have taken the superior position. Like yourself, I kept up with as much current information on Evolution as I could and in the military keeping up is not an expensive endeavor because at the PX cost is pennies on the dollar or was when I was paid from $67 to just under $500 without my fifty dollars Combat Pay.

All I want anyone to do is to examine all the facts and to not be spoon fed an ideology passing for Empirical Science. True and pure science can stand examination from any direction but when I began to look at what I had been spoon fed, and I was the one paying for the spoon, the house of cards tumbled like a Gale Force Wind had hit them and about nine tenths of the available evidence demonstraed and still does that the Creation Model stands all critical examination.

I'll tell what, how about a deal? How about you search "Lucy, she's no lady" and then you examine all the evidence and disprove the claims they present?

 

[lordkalvan]

I have no desire for you to research my faith and anyway, you appear to have begun that journey. I want you to follow an Empirical Research project, similar to the one I was involved with when God interrupted my entire life by speaking to me. I had already began to see the fallacy of the side of the issue from where you stand right now.

A Christian must be thorough to, ever, be effective, examining all sides of any issue. To do less is to be deceived, rather, easily by the pundits off one side, usually resulting in thinking they have taken the superior position. Like yourself, I kept up with as much current information on Evolution as I could and in the military keeping up is not an expensive endeavor because at the PX cost is pennies on the dollar or was when I was paid from $67 to just under $500 without my fifty dollars Combat Pay.

All I want anyone to do is to examine all the facts and to not be spoon fed an ideology passing for Empirical Science. True and pure science can stand examination from any direction but when I began to look at what I had been spoon fed, and I was the one paying for the spoon, the house of cards tumbled like a Gale Force Wind had hit them and about nine tenths of the available evidence demonstraed and still does that the Creation Model stands all critical examination.

I'll tell what, how about a deal? How about you search "Lucy, she's no lady" and then you examine all the evidence and disprove the claims they present?

Conventionally, in discussions such as this it is usually the one who makes a particular claim who bears the burden of proof to support it, not suggest that others research the claim and 'disprove' it. So far I have seen no evidence countering the conclusion that Lucy was bipedal and female and most certainly nothing to suggest she was a chimp. I am aware of creationist claims about fraudulent manipulation of Lucy's pelvis, claims based on a PBS documentary made many years after the papers describing Lucy's discovery and her reconstruction were published. These papers described in detail how and why a cast of the pelvis (not the pelvis itself) was reconstructed, but creationist sources generally tend to pimp scientific data to enable their preexisting conclusions.

 

[twinc]

Conventionally, in discussions such as this it is usually the one who makes a particular claim who bears the burden of proof to support it, not suggest that others research the claim and 'disprove' it. So far I have seen no evidence countering the conclusion that Lucy was bipedal and female and most certainly nothing to suggest she was a chimp. I am aware of creationist claims about fraudulent manipulation of Lucy's pelvis, claims based on a PBS documentary made many years after the papers describing Lucy's discovery and her reconstruction were published. These papers described in detail how and why a cast of the pelvis (not the pelvis itself) was reconstructed, but creationist sources generally tend to pimp scientific data to enable their preexisting conclusions.

imho it seems vice versa is the case - a bit like Piltdown and the many other frauds, fakes and cons - btw the biggest con and cover up was exposed in Dinosaur 'digs' examples of all the major plant divisions and all the major animal phyla groups living today were found fossilized alongside the Dinosaurs - a hugh cover up uncovered imho - twinc

 

[lordkalvan]

imho it seems vice versa is the case - a bit like Piltdown and the many other frauds, fakes and cons....

Curious that the only case you actually cite was never widely accepted as authentic outside Britain, dates to more than 100 years ago, and was exposed for what it was by palaeontologists.

...btw the biggest con and cover up was exposed in Dinosaur 'digs' examples of all the major plant divisions and all the major animal phyla groups living today were found fossilized alongside the Dinosaurs - a hugh cover up uncovered imho - twinc

Quite simply nonsense. You do know that many of the animal and plant phyla currently extant predate the dinosaurs?

 

[twinc]

Curious that the only case you actually cite was never widely accepted as authentic outside Britain, dates to more than 100 years ago, and was exposed for what it was by palaeontologists.

Quite simply nonsense. You do know that many of the animal and plant phyla currently extant predate the dinosaurs?

yes but of course and the Bible says so but only by 3 days and not millions or billions of years - lush fruits and veg and herbs or else the Dinosaurs with their big appetites would have starved and they had to be herbivores since they could not silently creep up and catch any prey or out run them or even fly - twinc

 

[lordkalvan]

yes but of course and the Bible says so but only by 3 days and not millions or billions of years - lush fruits and veg and herbs or else the Dinosaurs with their big appetites would have starved and they had to be herbivores since they could not silently creep up and catch any prey or out run them or even fly - twinc

I'm afraid I don't follow your argument as it relates to the response I made to the point about the co-existence of members of various phyla with dinosaurs.

 

[LovethroughDove]

Sorry all. I wasn't able to read all the responses, but wanted to put in my 2cents.

I believe dinosaurs were in the fifth day of creation

Genesis 1:21-22 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth."

They are that some dinosaurs are more bird-like than they first thought.

2 Peter 3:8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

This explains how God sees time. We can't count time, as he counts it. So, millions of years could go by.......and it would be a second in God's time.

I also believe that God had the dinosaurs as an example to us of extinction In Revelation, Science has basically proven events in Revelation that happened to the dinosaurs.

 

[Edward]

yes but of course and the Bible says so but only by 3 days and not millions or billions of years - lush fruits and veg and herbs or else the Dinosaurs with their big appetites would have starved and they had to be herbivores since they could not silently creep up and catch any prey or out run them or even fly - twinc

But it is said that pre flood conditions were such that the oxygen in the atmosphere was much richer and consequently the plant life was all much bigger. So as far as I understand, it could have sustained them just fine.

 

[Edward]

Let me emphasise again that I doubt neither your faith nor your sincerity, but telling me to do the research required to support your claim concerning the co-existence of dinosaurs and human-beings is not how these exchanges of views work. If 90% of the evidence favours your claim and has been ignored by the 'Scientific Community', it should be a relatively simple exercise to cite and reference some of that evidence. I don't see any evidence for dinosaurs in the Bible, simply a post facto rationalisation that, because one particular literalist interpretation of the Bible places the age of Earth at around 6000 years, it follows that dinosaurs and human beings must have co-existed.

Let's see here, there's a passage in Job that describes a creature called a behemoth.

Job 40:
15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares./(KJV)

Now some have said that this describes a Hippo, but Hippos do not have a tail like a cedar tree. This sounds like more of a Brontosaurus than a hippo. (It also describes it as being vegetarian). So there's that...

Ezekial 29:3 could be talking about a dinosaur.
Isaiah 27:1 could also. It describes Leviathan, a sea monster, but that seems to be dinosaurish.
Psalms 104:25 speaks of "great Beasts"...which is open for interpretation. You guys will probably shoot it down as an elephant or something, but we don't really know...it could be a dinosaur.

As far as the term "dragon" goes... the word “dragon” is used a number of times in the Old Testament. In most instances, the word dinosaur could substitute for dragon and it would fit very nicely. Creation scientists believe that dinosaurs were called dragons before the word dinosaur was invented in the 1800s. We would not expect to find the word dinosaur in Bibles like the Authorized Version (1611), as it was translated well before the word dinosaur was ever used.

Also, there are many very old history books in various libraries around the world that have detailed records of dragons and their encounters with people. Surprisingly (or not so surprisingly for creationists), many of these descriptions of dragons fit with how modern scientists would describe dinosaurs, even Tyrannosaurus. Unfortunately, this evidence is not considered valid by evolutionists. Why? Only because their belief is that man and dinosaurs did not live at the same time!

However, the more we research the historical literature, the more we realize there is overwhelming evidence that dragons were real beasts, much like our modern reconstructions of dinosaurs, and that their existence has been recorded by many different people, even just hundreds of years ago.

 

[lordkalvan]

Let's see here, there's a passage in Job that describes a creature called a behemoth.

Job 40:
15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares./(KJV)

Now some have said that this describes a Hippo, but Hippos do not have a tail like a cedar tree. This sounds like more of a Brontosaurus than a hippo. (It also describes it as being vegetarian). So there's that...

Thanks for your lengthy reply. I will try to do it justice.

The passage you cite above is subject to another interpretation, based on the use of euphemisms as acceptable substitutes for sexual organs and acts, a use that occurs elsewhere in the Bible and in contemporary literature. Thus 'strength' and 'force' are used as euphemisms for sexual vigour, 'eateth' for the act of sex, 'tail' and 'stones' for the male sex organs, and so on. You can find a more detailed discussion of this imagery at http://www.keithhunt.com/Sex1.html

Ezekial 29:3 could be talking about a dinosaur.

In Asian mythology dragons are serpent-like and, indeed, the Bible occasionally describes dragons as serpents. Serpents are not very dinosaur-like and many mythological creatures are found in ancient literature - including the Bible - without any suggestion that they are anything other than mythological or symbolic.
[Isaiah 27:1 could also. It describes Leviathan, a sea monster, but that seems to be dinosaurish.
[/quote]Again, leviathan is described as a serpent and serpents aren't very dinosaur-like. Why would leviathan not be symbolic in this context?

Psalms 104:25 speaks of "great Beasts"...which is open for interpretation. You guys will probably shoot it down as an elephant or something, but we don't really know...it could be a dinosaur.

Indeed 'great beasts' could refer to almost any large animal.

As far as the term "dragon" goes... the word “dragon” is used a number of times in the Old Testament. In most instances, the word dinosaur could substitute for dragon and it would fit very nicely.

And so could 'serpent', as it does a number of times.

Creation scientists believe that dinosaurs were called dragons before the word dinosaur was invented in the 1800s. We would not expect to find the word dinosaur in Bibles like the Authorized Version (1611), as it was translated well before the word dinosaur was ever used.

Let us suppose that 'dragon' does indeed, on occasion, actually reference dinosaurs: the writers could simply have been inspired by the fossilised bones of these creatures which they had seen exposed by erosion. Absent any substantive, independent evidence to corroborate the co-existence of humans and dinosaurs, such an idea seems to be little more than wish-fulfilment based on a pre-existing conclusion.

Also, there are many very old history books in various libraries around the world that have detailed records of dragons and their encounters with people. Surprisingly (or not so surprisingly for creationists), many of these descriptions of dragons fit with how modern scientists would describe dinosaurs, even Tyrannosaurus. Unfortunately, this evidence is not considered valid by evolutionists. Why? Only because their belief is that man and dinosaurs did not live at the same time.

Myth and legend are not history. European dragons are depicted as six-limbed (four legs, two wings) fire-breathers with an avaricious enthusiasm for gathering treasure, a body-plan and habit that fits no known dinosaur.

However, the more we research the historical literature, the more we realize there is overwhelming evidence that dragons were real beasts, much like our modern reconstructions of dinosaurs, and that their existence has been recorded by many different people, even just hundreds of years ago.

I would suggest that the evidence is very far from overwhelming and is no stronger than it is for the existence of minotaurs, cockatrices, centaurs and winged horses.

 

[Edward]

Thanks for your lengthy reply. I will try to do it justice.

The passage you cite above is subject to another interpretation, based on the use of euphemisms as acceptable substitutes for sexual organs and acts, a use that occurs elsewhere in the Bible and in contemporary literature. Thus 'strength' and 'force' are used as euphemisms for sexual vigour, 'eateth' for the act of sex, 'tail' and 'stones' for the male sex organs, and so on. You can find a more detailed discussion of this imagery at http://www.keithhunt.com/Sex1.html


In Asian mythology dragons are serpent-like and, indeed, the Bible occasionally describes dragons as serpents. Serpents are not very dinosaur-like and many mythological creatures are found in ancient literature - including the Bible - without any suggestion that they are anything other than mythological or symbolic.
[Isaiah 27:1 could also. It describes Leviathan, a sea monster, but that seems to be dinosaurish.

Again, leviathan is described as a serpent and serpents aren't very dinosaur-like. Why would leviathan not be symbolic in this context?

Indeed 'great beasts' could refer to almost any large animal.

And so could 'serpent', as it does a number of times.

Let us suppose that 'dragon' does indeed, on occasion, actually reference dinosaurs: the writers could simply have been inspired by the fossilised bones of these creatures which they had seen exposed by erosion. Absent any substantive, independent evidence to corroborate the co-existence of humans and dinosaurs, such an idea seems to be little more than wish-fulfilment based on a pre-existing conclusion.

Myth and legend are not history. European dragons are depicted as six-limbed (four legs, two wings) fire-breathers with an avaricious enthusiasm for gathering treasure, a body-plan and habit that fits no known dinosaur.

I would suggest that the evidence is very far from overwhelming and is no stronger than it is for the existence of minotaurs, cockatrices, centaurs and winged horses.[/QUOTE]

...and here we go. Oh, this has to be euphemisms and analogies and obviously couldn't be correct, because that would just blow the argument out of the water. Sex organs and sexual acts man? So some beast (but definitely not a dinosaur) had sex with the grass like an ox? Oh, now I get it. I've never heard it explained so eloquently before and that clears up all of the confusion about this. Hmm.

I dunno man. I'm thinking that you should have spent a little bit more time on it before just posting anything that came to your head about it. Wow.

 

[Drew]

If you have read the Bible, you have interpreted it. It is impossible to read the Bible, to read anything, without interpreting it.

I agree. It would be nice (perhaps) if the universe were structured so that we had "direct" access to the nature of reality that was not mediated by things like language and culture. But that's not the world we live in. When we crack open our Bibles, we read with a particular interpretive mindset, whether we realize it or not. For example, one such mindset (which seems to be very popular) is to read with the presupposition that the Bible is pure "history", unalloyed by allegory or metaphor. Well, one cannot simply presume this. Another example: many texts that refer to "death" are interpreted as really alluding to "spiritual" death to the exclusion of physical death. Again, this is an act of interpretation - the word "death" could, of course, refer to death in the sense of complete extinction of the totality of the human person.

Yes, the fact that we necessarily interpret adds a large element of obscurity. But instead of denying this, we should embrace it and try to deal with (e.g. by understanding the cultural setting in which the various texts were written).

 

[lordkalvan]

...and here we go. Oh, this has to be euphemisms and analogies and obviously couldn't be correct, because that would just blow the argument out of the water. Sex organs and sexual acts man? So some beast (but definitely not a dinosaur) had sex with the grass like an ox? Oh, now I get it. I've never heard it explained so eloquently before and that clears up all of the confusion about this. Hmm.

I dunno man. I'm thinking that you should have spent a little bit more time on it before just posting anything that came to your head about it. Wow.

Any time that you can show that euphemisms like these are not used in the Bible and contemporary literature, please feel free to do so. In the meantime, before offering unsupported mockery you may want to reflect on these observations.

When translated into various versions of the Bible, the verse referring to Behemoth's ceadr-like tail takes the following forms:

1. REV: His tail is rigid as a cedar.

2. RSV: He makes his tail stiff like a cedar.

3. Septuagint: He sets up/erects (estesen) his tail like a cypress.

4. Vulgate: He ties up/binds (constringit) his tail like a cedar.

5. Luther: His tail stretches (streckt sich) like a cedar.

6. Statenvertaling: According to his pleasure (Als ‘t hem lust), his tail is like a cedar.

7. Diodati: He raises (rizza) his tail like a cedar.

Do these phrasings not suggest a certain something to you? Also, the etymology of the English word penis is derived directly or indirectly from the Latin penis, meaning both 'penis' and, originally, 'tail'. You might also want to reflect on the fact that any animal described as having a 'navel' can only be a placental mammal as dinosaurs hatched from eggs (like birds).

 

[twinc]

I agree. It would be nice (perhaps) if the universe were structured so that we had "direct" access to the nature of reality that was not mediated by things like language and culture. But that's not the world we live in. When we crack open our Bibles, we read with a particular interpretive mindset, whether we realize it or not. For example, one such mindset (which seems to be very popular) is to read with the presupposition that the Bible is pure "history", unalloyed by allegory or metaphor. Well, one cannot simply presume this. Another example: many texts that refer to "death" are interpreted as really alluding to "spiritual" death to the exclusion of physical death. Again, this is an act of interpretation - the word "death" could, of course, refer to death in the sense of complete extinction of the totality of the human person.

Yes, the fact that we necessarily interpret adds a large element of obscurity. But instead of denying this, we should embrace it and try to deal with (e.g. by understanding the cultural setting in which the various texts were written).

 

[twinc]

btw God and death are incompatible and so there was no death at all before the Fall - this is clearly stated in Catholic Bibles at Wisdom 1:13 and 2:24 - twinc

 

[Edward]

Any time that you can show that euphemisms like these are not used in the Bible and contemporary literature, please feel free to do so. In the meantime, before offering unsupported mockery you may want to reflect on these observations.

When translated into various versions of the Bible, the verse referring to Behemoth's ceadr-like tail takes the following forms:

1. REV: His tail is rigid as a cedar.

2. RSV: He makes his tail stiff like a cedar.

3. Septuagint: He sets up/erects (estesen) his tail like a cypress.

4. Vulgate: He ties up/binds (constringit) his tail like a cedar.

5. Luther: His tail stretches (streckt sich) like a cedar.

6. Statenvertaling: According to his pleasure (Als ‘t hem lust), his tail is like a cedar.

7. Diodati: He raises (rizza) his tail like a cedar.

Do these phrasings not suggest a certain something to you? Also, the etymology of the English word penis is derived directly or indirectly from the Latin penis, meaning both 'penis' and, originally, 'tail'. You might also want to reflect on the fact that any animal described as having a 'navel' can only be a placental mammal as dinosaurs hatched from eggs (like birds).

Dude, you gotta be kidding me. It's talking about his penis huh? So I guess that means that my dog has a penis that he wags when I come home? He can make it straight and stiff too, when he's on alert for game. No offense man but that's gotta be the strangest thing I ever heard.