It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Were dinosaurs mentioned in the bible?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
SNTX - are you one of those people that claim that the earth is less than 10,000 years old?



I have never made such a claim nor do I have the knowledge to do so.



Steve




posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   
OK as a fluent speaker of the Holy tongue (HEBREW) I would like to clarify the following:
1- Behemoth in Hebrew is a large ruminant.
2- Leviatan is a whale
3- Tanin or plural, Taninim, is an allegator. As I recall, in Genesis the quote was something like this ". . .G-D created the large Taninim. . ."
It is said that the Biblical reference to Taninim is whales. I find that difficult to believe. I do believe that the reference refers to large allegators, reptiles and hence . . .Dinosaurs. . .

This of course would mean:
1- The writers of the Bible were aware of dinosaurs' existance 65 million years after their extinction. Which could mean that either:
a- The Bible is truely a Divine piece of literature. or
b- The existance of dinosaurs was known 3000-5000 years ago.
2- Dinosaurs existed after their supposed exinction (there is some evidence to support this - Look it up in any search engine - search Peru, Pottery and Dinosaur).
3- Tanninim could refer to another creature (my guess is of a form of reptile).

Then again Genesis from the creation up to Abraham is full of mythological type of references such as the references to the NEPHILIM, the great deluge and the tower of Babel.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 01:40 PM
link   
What I am going to do here, is show everyone reading this thread 2 things. The first is that SNTX provided only part of a whole data. He only provided a few facts, when providing more could have given everyone a different idea about the dinosaurs. The second thing I will show is that he did this intentionally. Could make him a hypocritical liar, but I will try as hard as I can at this point to give him the benefit of the doubt.

One reference I will use is the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. This is a reference written for christians, by christians. The fundamental kind too. The literalists. It is just one of many references I will provide if asked. Please read the following links carefully.


www.studylight.org...

www.studylight.org...

Now these are exerpts from a christian website. They cite the roots of the words. They cite the areas from which the words originated, and the animals that existed there. They cite the Bible. They cite science, and they use logic. This christian site concludes through research that SNTX did not even look into, that the references to behemoth are likely to be a hippo due to the fact that the words root was used in other texts to desciribe a hippo. Through the same reasoning, it states that leviathan most likely referred to a crocidile.

Is it possible that these references are actually for dinosaurs? I suppose the answer to that question is yes. But that yes comes with a "highly unlikely and inprobable" stamp. Most likely these are referring to the same creatures they refer to in other literary works. Even with the remote possibility that they were dinosaurs, which science pretty much can prove otherwise (though christians will not accept science), it is still not a fact.

This leaves us with a simple conclusion. Knowing that SNTX is not an idiot, I conclude that he knows that those references were likely not dinosaurs. Even if he does believe they are dinosaurs, rationally it is impossible to state that as a fact. This impossibility stands alone, and is only supported by the facts provided in the christian encyclopedia. For SNTX to state that dinosaurs were referenced in Job as fact, which he did, is completely contradictory to this evidence. Not only is it contradictory, but stating fact out of an unknown is what gets me. If I was to say, dinosaurs do not appear in the bible or text, which I stand by, it wouldn't contradict any evidence. However, it does contradict evidence to say they were referenced. Even in the remote possibilty that they were being referred to, it is still a lie to say that it is fact.

SNTX, you intentionally mislead everyone reading this forum. You stated information as fact, via copy paste methods, which you neglected to look into. Those who took your word for it now suffer knowledge that is incorrect. It is a problem that christians plague this society with every day. You knowingly did this. That makes it a lie. Christians don't lie, or at least they shouldn't, and they preach against it. Wouldn't you say it is hypocritical to lie then?



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Judah,


You said, that the words used referred to an alligator. You proceeded to say, alligators are dinosaurs right? Followed by providing a list of possibilities.

Tell me, if we never found a dinosaur skeleton, and we had alligators still today, does that really mean we know of dinosaurs? Just because we know of an animal, that turns out, after our discovery of dinosaurs, to be closely related and most definitely alive during the dinosaur ages, does not mean we know of dinosaurs. It just means we know of alligators.

In no way can a rational person draw the conclusion that knowing of alligators was indication of knowledge of an entire species. In other words, not all of your possible outcomes that you provided can be correct.

Which one do you personally believe?



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by sntx

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
SNTX - are you one of those people that claim that the earth is less than 10,000 years old?


I have never made such a claim nor do I have the knowledge to do so.

Steve


Just checking, as I couldn't understand why you would try to shoehorn dinasours into the bible otherwise.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   
You're all missing the most important point...

According to the Bible, Pre-Adamic Garden of Eden Earth had no death...no survival of the fittest...no evolution...no meat eaters...

How do we reconcile the Bible with meat eating dinasaurs? I am somewhat stumped on this one...but...

The only logical way to say that the Bible is true and that meat eating dinasaurs were real is to say that the Garden of Eden happened many millions of years ago...or the archeologists are way off..either seems plausible.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Ifs its not mentioned in the Bible then its fake. Didnt your parents teach you anything? You will go to Hell if you even question it.

Or maybe I should say it this way: If I cant bend the Bibles words to force my beliefs on you then its fake.

Isnt organized religion grand?



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Well, your not exactly correct.

We are arguing the existence of humans and dinosaurs at the same time. According to creation, they must have coexisted. Therefore they would be in the bible, theoretically. The arguments be posed here are in regards to that issue. If you would ever manage to establish this coexistence, which you wont, only then would the issue regarding vegetarianism in the garden of eden present itself as relevant. It is however, a very good argument. I wouldnt say it is missing the point though not to argue it. It is just a small part of a much larger issue.

As it stands now, it IS NOT plausible to conclude the world is significantly younger than scientists claim. There are about 20 or more independent ways of dating objects on earth and in the universe. It is not reasonable to conclude they are all wrong when they all indicate a world billions of years in age.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Ifs its not mentioned in the Bible then its fake. Didnt your parents teach you anything? You will go to Hell if you even question it.

Or maybe I should say it this way: If I cant bend the Bibles words to force my beliefs on you then its fake.

Isnt organized religion grand?




Im glad to see you realize that we are all going to hell too. I wouldnt have ever known if it wasnt for those Godly christians telling me every day.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seapeople
What I am going to do here, is show everyone reading this thread 2 things. The first is that SNTX provided only part of a whole data. He only provided a few facts, when providing more could have given everyone a different idea about the dinosaurs. The second thing I will show is that he did this intentionally. Could make him a hypocritical liar, but I will try as hard as I can at this point to give him the benefit of the doubt.




You have failed to do either of those. You have also failed to address the mistakes you made on your previous posts. If you removed the arrogance from your rhetoric your posts would probably be, at least slightly, more effective.


Steve



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Geneticus
How do we reconcile the Bible with meat eating dinasaurs? I am somewhat stumped on this one...but...



And who saw them eat meat before the fall of man? The fall of man introduced sin and death into the universe.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   
SNTX,

First you stated, "To someone who knows nothing about the past, the truth does seam to be distorted". Yet you call me arrogant? To that point, I had done nothing wrong, unless you consider pointing out a known fact that answersingenesis.com is unreliable, and has been proven so many times, on many different occasions.

Second, you stated that I was correct on several issues.

Third, you criticized a statement I made about the psalms. You stated that my logic was that literature is all metaphorical. This is not the case. I simply stated that psalms were. But considering you argued against that, I will provide an example of what you subscribe too.

Psalm 137:9: Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones

Lovely, isn't it. Now would this be considered metaphorical to you? I wonder? Tell us all, do you consider this to be metaphorical, I bet you don't even answer.

Forth, you stated that dinosuars were not predominantly predators, and that they do not play a large role in our lives today. First off, that starts because we are at the top of the food chain, and most scientists believe the dinosaurs were at the top of the food chain while they were alive, but no matter on that. Do we, or do we not write about, film about, record about, and generally retain information about everything alive today? So, if the dinosaurs are not referenced in the bible, by todays standards, WHICH YOU REFERENCED, something would be wrong.

Fifth, you mentioned many different references that you claim to be of dinosaurs. Of them, I already have shown you that without a shadow of a doubt, that is not the case within the bible, and if you would like me to go and hunt down information on every single one of your 8 or so references I will. What you said there was purely speculation with evidence to the contrary. You are not an idiot, and you know that. So that makes you a liar.

Sixth, you stated that I said there were no references in scripture of dinosaurs, and then changed my mind later and claimed there was. You again, are a liar. You did what typical people like you, and christians do. You pulled one sentence out of context and presented it in a way that you knew I had not intended. That is what liars do.

Seventh, YOU SAID I MAKE TOO MANY ASSUMPTIONS. I at the very least acknoledged that those references could, however unlikely it is, be of dinosaurs. You refused to acknowledge that they couldn't. You are quite hypocritical arent you? You are quite a poor liar. You might need to go to more theological seminars to get better at it. You made ALL OF THE ASSUMPTIONS. I just called you on it, while making none. All I did was cite evidence of WHERE THOSE WORDS CAME FROM.

Eighth, you claimed that it is not logical to conclude those pasages in the bible were not dinosaurs. Yet most people on earth, included scholars of the bible, and archeology, would disagree with you, who is clearly uneducated in this. Obviously, you did not even look at any of the evidence I showed you to the contrary that I got FROM CHRISTIANS.

Ninth, I said a large portion of the dinosaurs were large, fast, and meat eaters. You said, "WRONG". To start off, there are approximately 330 knowm species of dinosaurs. Just like you said. Thre are also several thousand that have yet to be classified and identified. Now I looked at every one of the 330+ known species and did a count of meat eaters. I came up with well over 65 percent of the known dinosaurs were meat eaters. However, I found a website claiming that it is 35%. So we will take the smaller amount. That is 115 of the 330 known species eating meat. Again, you said wrong. Which of course is another lie. Nearly all of the meat eaters were fast according to these websites, but on to the size. I am going to say that a length of 13 feet or more is large, due to alligaters and such. Go to the websites. Read for yourself. There were at least 92 species of dinosaurs that were bigger than this that we know. You lied yet again.

Tenth, you stated that humans were too smart for dinosaurs, and that they were faster. Now, meat eating dinosaurs were the fastest dinosaurs for obvious evolutionary reasons that you will not acknoledge. We do know though, that they were the fastest. Some of them ran up to 25 miles an hour. Tell me, can you run that fast? We could outsmart them you say? We are pretty smart huh. How many people are killed by dogs a year? How about sharks? Maybe lions or bears? How many people get killed by snake bites, or even spider bites? How many people die each year due to animal attacks? Yeah, we definitely outsmart them all the time.....

Eleventh, you said, I was wrong and that there was more than two references in the bible regarding dinosaurs. Buddy, most intelligent people unlike yourself would agree that there are none. I already showed you references as to why.

In closing, you lied, several times. You made statements that included words like, "Is", and "Are", when you knew that was not the case. Nowhere, do you have evidence of dinosaurs in the bible, besides the lovely fiction novel called answersingenesis.com. You knowingly lied. That makes you a liar. So give it up, and stop acting like a fool. Admit where you were wrong, and get it over with. Youll feel better about yourself if you are christians
.

Who wants to bet that SNTX (Steve) doesn't respond?

P.S. Did I get them all? Or did I miss one or two?





[edit on 2/15/2005 by Seapeople]



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Seapeople,

Once again you prove that you can not read. I am no more impressed now than I was when I read your first mistake, that is to say not at all. You can try to cover yourself with a torrent of words but the original posts remain for all to see.

You are your own worst enemy. The irony of you calling me a liar is elegant. It is somewhat sad to see you flailing about in anger, but mostly it is amusing. Trying to interact with someone who is willfully ignorant can seem like such a waste of time, but I am sure that there are others who can benefit from your display as it is an example of what not to do.

Steve



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seapeople
SNTX,

First you stated, "To someone who knows nothing about the past, the truth does seam to be distorted". Yet you call me arrogant?


You got it. Anyone who reads your posts can plainly see the arrogance. It is not what I would call subtle.


To that point, I had done nothing wrong, unless you consider pointing out a known fact that answersingenesis.com is unreliable, and has been proven so many times, on many different occasions.



I would consider calling your fallible, and relatively valueless, opinion a fact as being wrong.


Second, you stated that I was correct on several issues.


I said that nobody disputed the fact that dinosaurs once lived on Earth. I was under the impression that the fossil record was common knowledge.


Third, you criticized a statement I made about the psalms. You stated that my logic was that literature is all metaphorical. This is not the case. I simply stated that psalms were.


You might want to read the previous page one more time.


But considering you argued against that, I will provide an example of what you subscribe too.

Psalm 137:9: Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones

Lovely, isn't it. Now would this be considered metaphorical to you? I wonder? Tell us all, do you consider this to be metaphorical, I bet you don't even answer.


No, I do not consider that verse to be metaphorical at all.



Forth, you stated that dinosuars were not predominantly predators, and that they do not play a large role in our lives today. First off, that starts because we are at the top of the food chain, and most scientists believe the dinosaurs were at the top of the food chain while they were alive, but no matter on that. Do we, or do we not write about, film about, record about, and generally retain information about everything alive today? So, if the dinosaurs are not referenced in the bible, by todays standards, WHICH YOU REFERENCED, something would be wrong.



As I already answered the Bible is not meant to be a record of everything that happened. It reveals knowledge that we can not gleam on our own. If you are going to have the gall to tell me that I am a fool the least you can do is pay attention.



Fifth, you mentioned many different references that you claim to be of dinosaurs. Of them, I already have shown you that without a shadow of a doubt, that is not the case within the bible, and if you would like me to go and hunt down information on every single one of your 8 or so references I will. What you said there was purely speculation with evidence to the contrary. You are not an idiot, and you know that. So that makes you a liar.


I quoted a portion of an article that contains many examples. You can do all of the hunting you'd like. You have not supported your accusations of me being a liar.



Sixth, you stated that I said there were no references in scripture of dinosaurs, and then changed my mind later and claimed there was. You again, are a liar. You did what typical people like you, and christians do. You pulled one sentence out of context and presented it in a way that you knew I had not intended. That is what liars do.


I'm sure you noticed that the post I was quoting you from is on the same page. The context is there for all to read. Once again your accusation falls flat, not that it matters as you destroyed your own credibility long ago.



Seventh, YOU SAID I MAKE TOO MANY ASSUMPTIONS. I at the very least acknoledged that those references could, however unlikely it is, be of dinosaurs. You refused to acknowledge that they couldn't.


That's because the meaning of the references are clear.


You are quite hypocritical arent you?


I certainly have the potential to be one. That is our carnal nature. I do not however believe I have displayed hypocrisy on this thread, neither have you shown me to have been hypocritical.


You are quite a poor liar. You might need to go to more theological seminars to get better at it.


Repeated accusations without demonstration of any kind of basis makes said accusations weaker.


You made ALL OF THE ASSUMPTIONS. I just called you on it, while making none. All I did was cite evidence of WHERE THOSE WORDS CAME FROM.


Now you claim that you do not make assumptions. The psychological implications are mildly intriguing.


Eighth, you claimed that it is not logical to conclude those pasages in the bible were not dinosaurs. Yet most people on earth, included scholars of the bible, and archeology, would disagree with you, who is clearly uneducated in this. Obviously, you did not even look at any of the evidence I showed you to the contrary that I got FROM CHRISTIANS.


You must have a very loose definition of evidence. Do you think that posting something from a "Christian" source makes it irrefutable? Are you a comedian or do you really expect people to take you seriously?



Ninth, I said a large portion of the dinosaurs were large, fast, and meat eaters. You said, "WRONG". To start off, there are approximately 330 knowm species of dinosaurs. Just like you said. Thre are also several thousand that have yet to be classified and identified. Now I looked at every one of the 330+ known species and did a count of meat eaters. I came up with well over 65 percent of the known dinosaurs were meat eaters. However, I found a website claiming that it is 35%. So we will take the smaller amount. That is 115 of the 330 known species eating meat. Again, you said wrong. Which of course is another lie. Nearly all of the meat eaters were fast according to these websites, but on to the size. I am going to say that a length of 13 feet or more is large, due to alligaters and such. Go to the websites. Read for yourself. There were at least 92 species of dinosaurs that were bigger than this that we know. You lied yet again.


There you go repeating accusations without basis. It is almost as if you think people are too lazy to go back to page one and read the posts.



Tenth, you stated that humans were too smart for dinosaurs, and that they were faster. Now, meat eating dinosaurs were the fastest dinosaurs for obvious evolutionary reasons that you will not acknoledge.


Why would I acknowledge something that isn't true? FYI: That was a rhetorical question.


We do know though, that they were the fastest. Some of them ran up to 25 miles an hour. Tell me, can you run that fast?


No, not even close. Luckily no wild animals have ever hunted me. I must be one of the lucky ones.


We could outsmart them you say? We are pretty smart huh.


Yes, some of us are, and some while they have the potential to be chose to waste their intelligence.


How many people are killed by dogs a year?


Not very many.


How about sharks?


Even less


Maybe lions or bears?


I going to have to guess that is a very small number.


How many people get killed by snake bites, or even spider bites?


Very few


How many people die each year due to animal attacks?


Wow this is embarrassing. I'm going with very few again.


Yeah, we definitely outsmart them all the time.....


That is right!


Eleventh, you said, I was wrong and that there was more than two references in the bible regarding dinosaurs. Buddy, most intelligent people unlike yourself would agree that there are none. I already showed you references as to why.


I thought we covered this yesterday. You have provided nothing to refute what I said on page one.



In closing, you lied, several times.


See my answer to this accusation posted above.


You made statements that included words like, "Is", and "Are", when you knew that was not the case.


I stand by my statements.


Nowhere, do you have evidence of dinosaurs in the bible, besides the lovely fiction novel called answersingenesis.com.


The preceding comment doesn't even make sense.


You knowingly lied. That makes you a liar.


Without your repetition this thread would be a lot shorter.


So give it up, and stop acting like a fool. Admit where you were wrong, and get it over with. Youll feel better about yourself if you are christians


Thanks for the concern, but I feel fine.



Who wants to bet that SNTX (Steve) doesn't respond?


Since your post was mostly air and little substance I wasn't going to respond, but I found myself with a couple minutes to spare.


Steve



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 06:27 AM
link   
There were much more dinosaur species than 350. Remember they were the dominant creatures from the late Triassic till the creatacious. There were dinosaurs that were faster than 25 miles an hour. Its thought that some could get up to perhaps 80 km per hour or 50 miles an hour. Some dinosaurs were just as smart perhaps even smarter than dolphins. The raptors and Troodon for example.

Dinosaurs did produce the largest creature that ever existed on the earth. Look at Argentinosaurus, Seismosaurus and a new dinosaur from argentina which is around 167 foot or 55 m.



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by sntx
Seapeople,

Once again you prove that you can not read. I am no more impressed now than I was when I read your first mistake, that is to say not at all. You can try to cover yourself with a torrent of words but the original posts remain for all to see.

You are your own worst enemy. The irony of you calling me a liar is elegant. It is somewhat sad to see you flailing about in anger, but mostly it is amusing. Trying to interact with someone who is willfully ignorant can seem like such a waste of time, but I am sure that there are others who can benefit from your display as it is an example of what not to do.

Steve


Steve, buddy,

Answer one simple ?.

Did you say that the references you pointed out WERE references to dinosaurs, or did you say they could be?

Please answer this question.

Im not trying to impress you. I have no need to impress liars.

[edit on 2/16/2005 by Seapeople]



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Just so everyone is aware of what we are dealing with when we talk to sntx, I will point out something that is somewhat hidden in the middle of a long post. I asked him this:

Psalm 137:9: Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones

Lovely, isn't it. Now would this be considered metaphorical to you? I wonder? Tell us all, do you consider this to be metaphorical, I bet you don't even answer.

His Answer: "No, I do not consider that verse to be metaphorical at all."

So, sntx does not believe that statement is metaphorical, and therefore believes it is direction in life. The bible states, in normal terms, happy are those who kill their children by smashing them off of rocks. And, being the good christians he is, he agrees.

You should be put in jail. You basically just let us all know that you would be happy to smash children off of rocks. Nice touch pastor steve. At least you are done lying...about that.

By the way, you called my arguments valueless. I provided facts in MUCH greater detail than you have attempted. I researched your illogical claims from a christian standpoint, and found that through research it is known what leviathen and behemoth were. They came to these conclusions througth THE ACTUAL USE OF THE WORDS. Something you just toss out I guess.

You call my arguments valueless. Give me one peice of non answersingenesis evidence that you have provided in your defense as of yet. Just one. You, are looking worse every time you post. I wonder what you will lie about now.

Oh, by the way,

You said to me "do you think that posting something from a christian source makes it credible? That makes you a comedian..yada yada yada. Were you not the first one to do that very same exact thing SNTX? Yet you defended yourself very harshly starting this argument. This argument started because I pointed out to you that your source was unreliable. Again, hypocritical, arent you?

Go ahead, answer the question in the previous post, please. I dare you.

[edit on 2/16/2005 by Seapeople]



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Seapeople...
Facts and logical lines of argument are not what Christianity is based on. For the sake of your own health I suggest you ignore this ignorant drone, as all he is capable of doing in debate is spouting off biblical verses and religious theory under the pretence that they are facts. People like that cannot be argued with as they are so entrenched, not even in their own beliefs, but in those of the organisation which indoctrinated them.

He is beyond redemption.

I have no respect for anyone who does not believe that the mere mortals who wrote the bible were capable of lying. The bible is not the word of "God".

If you have faith in a higher power then I can respect that, but it is a foolish, lazy and ignorant thing to take every word spoken by a priest or written by a so-called prophet as fact, simply because they claim to be men of "God".



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seapeople

Steve, buddy,

Answer one simple ?.

Did you say that the references you pointed out WERE references to dinosaurs, or did you say they could be?

Please answer this question.



What I said does not require clarification and as I have already mentioned can be read on page one. I will quote my posts so you don't have to take the effort of looking back, although it might help to do so.


Originally posted by sntx

There are many references to dinosaurs in scripture.

When you actually read the passages it is not logical to conclude that they could be referring to alligators or hippos. The reasoning can be read in my first post.

"Not long after the Flood, God was showing a man called Job how great He was as Creator, by reminding Job of the largest land animal He had made: ‘Behold now behemoth, which I made with you; he eats grass like an ox. See now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the muscles of his belly. He moves his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are like tubes of bronze; his limbs are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: his maker brings near his sword’ (Job 40:15–19). The phrase ‘chief of the ways of God’ suggests this was the largest land animal God had made. So what kind of animal was ‘behemoth’? Bible translators, not being sure what this beast was, often transliterated the Hebrew, and thus the word behemoth (e.g. KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV). However, in many Bible commentaries and Bible footnotes, ‘behemoth’ is said to be ‘possibly the hippopotamus or elephant.’24 Some Bible versions actually translate ‘behemoth’ this way.25 Besides the fact that the elephant and hippo were not the largest land animals God made (some of the dinosaurs far eclipsed these), this description does not make sense, since the tail of behemoth is compared to the large cedar tree (verse 17). Now an elephant’s tiny tail (or a hippo’s tail that looks like a flap of skin!) is quite unlike a cedar tree! Clearly the elephant and the hippo could not possibly be ‘behemoth.’ No living creature comes close to this description. However, behemoth is very like Brachiosaurus, one of the large dinosaurs."




Originally posted by Seapeople

Just so everyone is aware of what we are dealing with when we talk to sntx, I will point out something that is somewhat hidden in the middle of a long post.


Do you really consider something I posted in plain language to be hidden?



I asked him this:

Psalm 137:9: Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones

Lovely, isn't it. Now would this be considered metaphorical to you? I wonder? Tell us all, do you consider this to be metaphorical, I bet you don't even answer.

His Answer: "No, I do not consider that verse to be metaphorical at all."

So, sntx does not believe that statement is metaphorical, and therefore believes it is direction in life. The bible states, in normal terms, happy are those who kill their children by smashing them off of rocks. And, being the good christians he is, he agrees.



To say that because I said it is not metaphorical means that I take it as direction is a huge assumption. Since you claim to not make assumptions I will assume it is just a mistake on your part. I do not take it as direction and would never assume to have authority over anyones life. Reading the whole psalm may help you understand it, but unless you guided by the spirit of truth you probably won't.



You should be put in jail.


Based on what charge?


You basically just let us all know that you would be happy to smash children off of rocks. Nice touch pastor steve. At least you are done lying...about that.


You are the one drawing false conclusions and making false accusations.




By the way, you called my arguments valueless. I provided facts in MUCH greater detail than you have attempted. I researched your illogical claims from a christian standpoint, and found that through research it is known what leviathen and behemoth were. They came to these conclusions througth THE ACTUAL USE OF THE WORDS. Something you just toss out I guess.


Yes, I toss out nonsensical arguments. There is nothing wrong with that.



You call my arguments valueless. Give me one peice of non answersingenesis evidence that you have provided in your defense as of yet. Just one.


I don't consider words to be evidence. They are a method of communicating. A method that unfortunately falls short when applied to the willfully ignorant.


You, are looking worse every time you post. I wonder what you will lie about now.


How I look to you is of no significance. Your statement is just another example of the value you have to add to this discussion.



Oh, by the way,

You said to me "do you think that posting something from a christian source makes it credible? That makes you a comedian..yada yada yada. Were you not the first one to do that very same exact thing SNTX? Yet you defended yourself very harshly starting this argument. This argument started because I pointed out to you that your source was unreliable. Again, hypocritical, arent you?


You tend to throw words around without knowledge or care of their definition. My statement that citing a Christian source does not make you argument irrefutable is in no way hipocritical.




Originally posted by CiderGood_HeadacheBad



Seapeople...
Facts and logical lines of argument are not what Christianity is based on. For the sake of your own health I suggest you ignore this ignorant drone, as all he is capable of doing in debate is spouting off biblical verses and religious theory under the pretence that they are facts. People like that cannot be argued with as they are so entrenched, not even in their own beliefs, but in those of the organisation which indoctrinated them.

He is beyond redemption.

I have no respect for anyone who does not believe that the mere mortals who wrote the bible were capable of lying. The bible is not the word of "God".

If you have faith in a higher power then I can respect that, but it is a foolish, lazy and ignorant thing to take every word spoken by a priest or written by a so-called prophet as fact, simply because they claim to be men of "God".


Do you have anything to contribute to this thread aside from ad hominem attacks and false assumptions about me? If you do, please share.


Steve



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   
In Genesis 1:21, the Bible says: ‘And God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed, after their kind.

This could very well mean the dinosaurs...man was created after the dinosaurs. True, man could not have lived with them. Dinosaurs would have eatten man and his house too. God destroyed the dinosaurs before man was created. And there was a reason the dinosaur was created in the first place. Fossil fuel for one. and the only one I can think of at this writing.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join