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.

 

Ok so a true christian wouldnt believe in dinosaurs?

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   


You know they dry. THis is just knowing. I don't think the bible should have to describe every detail to back up every intial statement.


But when someone doesn't believe the bible they are asked to provide exactly the detail to back up the belief.




posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by Sparky63
 


Show me a crocodile that blows FIRE out of it's mouth/nose please. I'll even accept a fossilized one, none exist. And if they did we still have crocodiles and alligators today how come none of them blow fire today?

God described behemoth very distinctly in Job 40. "It's tail is as big as a Lebanon Cedar" the only tree today that is even close to a Lebanon Cedar is the American Redwood. Show me an animal, besides the big dinos, that had tails as big as American Redwoods?


You can chalk most of this up to poetic license.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Sparky63
 


Good job thanks sparky never saw them before just read about them wow! What a puzzle. Neat the world we live in.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal

God described behemoth very distinctly in Job 40. "It's tail is as big as a Lebanon Cedar" the only tree today that is even close to a Lebanon Cedar is the American Redwood. Show me an animal, besides the big dinos, that had tails as big as American Redwoods?


Actually Job 40: 17 does not say it's tail is as "Big" as cedar.

Here is the quote from a few different translations:

(Job 40:17) 17 It bends down its tail like a cedar; The sinews of its thighs are interwoven.

Job 40:17 (New International Version)
17 His tail [a] sways like a cedar;
the sinews of his thighs are close-knit

Job 40:17 (King James Version)
17He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

Job 40:17 (English Standard Version)
17He makes his tail stiff like a cedar;
the sinews of his thighs are knit together.

Job 40:17 (Young's Literal Translation)
17He doth bend his tail as a cedar, The sinews of his thighs are wrapped together,

Job 40:17 (21st Century King James Version)
17He moveth his tail like a cedar; the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

So actually, none of these translation give any clue as the the actual size of it's tail...but rather, it is likely to be understood as meaning that the animal can set its thick tail rigidly upright or swing it about like a tree. Just like a Hippo can do. (once again...poetic license comes into play as the writer attempts to stir the imagination of the reader and make a point about the power of the creator of such awesome beasts.)





[edit on 2-3-2009 by Sparky63]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 02:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by Skinon
 


you seem to be calling Bible Believers stupid.

Just look at your guess that Bible believers don't believe in Dinosaurs


Im not calling bible believers stupid, but i personally dont understand how you can buy into something as ridiculas as religion in the first place. I mean is it so hard to believe that this universe has been in existence for eternity, i mean theres probably an unlimited amount of big bangs happening all over the entire infinate blackness of space.

So you need something to make this crazy world make sense to you, what better then saying some alpha being created everything outta nothing



I know personally there is zero point arguing this to a christian, so i dont. What i believe is just to wait because we all gonna find out eventually, and if i die and find out there is a god and heaven then sweet as! bring it on. But when christians die and nothing like that happens, then what? i bet you wouldnt accept it, your whole existance will be shattered, probably roam the world as ghosts or lost souls tryng to accept the fact.

And please read the title properly, in no way does it denote that i think every christian doesnt believe in dinosaurs, thats what the question mark is for, i am asking a question, i want to know the reasons why hardcore christians which i think have definatley got some sort of mental issue goin on could think that the world is 6000 years or whatever old. I want to see what they have to say about it. I want to try to understand how someone could think something like this and still be in our society as supposed 'normal' persons. It boggles the rational mind.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skinon
I have always wondered this, Some christians believe the world is something like 4000 years old, no one here would believe that right?? So whats the deal with dinosaurs and fossils?


The Roman Catholic and Protestant sides of Christianity do not believe in Intelligent design etc. Catholic schools and Priests teach that the bible should not be taken completely literally and much of the old testament are metaphors. So they also know dinosaurs are real.

The whole thing that you are on about with Christians is mainly a US phenomenon... You lot don't do things in halves.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skinon
I have always wondered this, Some christians believe the world is something like 4000 years old, no one here would believe that right??

There’s no proof that the earth isn’t 4 seconds old. So it’s really not a stretch.


So whats the deal with dinosaurs and fossils?

We find bones in the ground; we imagine they were once creatures we’ve recently dubbed dinosaurs.


Did god create them first and played with them for a few hundred million years then get sick of them and reset the slate to start with humans?

may be


Do you believe dinosaurs existed?

Yes, I BELIEVE they did.


if god existed then science wouldn't.

That’s illogical


Of course the funniest thing about this is that people can argue till there blue in the face and it wont change a thing.
not true, because then people are blue in the face, as opposed to their previous color. Something changed.


But when we die we are all going to find out the answer and alot of people are gonna feel like chumps.

I’d really love to know how that works.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by JPhish
 


There’s no proof that the earth isn’t 4 seconds old. So it’s really not a stretch.


No proof, but an abundance of evidence.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 


circumstantial evidence;

look into the omphalos hypothesis.

if it sounds ridiculous to you, i suggest watching a movie called Dark City; It presents the concept quite well.

[edit on 3/3/2009 by JPhish]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:37 AM
link   
as far as i know Jesus Christ was not a paleontogist,and never uttered a single word about dinosaurs



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by JPhish
 


Circumstantial. With no decent explanation with any evidence to say that the entire universe was created as is 4 seconds ago, it's more reasonable to assume the former for practicality sake.

Considering the evidence for dinosaurs living 65+ thousand years ago before mostly becoming extinct, leaving a few to evolve into birds; there is an abundance for and little if any against. The evidence makes the theory more practical, good theory beats no theory (keeping the actual scientific definition of theory in mind of course).

[edit on 3-3-2009 by Welfhard]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 


ooo i like you
i agree. But the more theories the merrier i say, this way people may choose to believe which ever one makes the most sense to them.

[edit on 3/3/2009 by JPhish]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:48 AM
link   
Well the evidence that the earth is at least for seconds old, is that i took a photo 2 mins ago, loaded it up on the computer and its become evidence that 2 minutes ago this world existed.

I believe that if there was a god who simply popped things out his arse to create life there wouldnt be scientific explinations that describe what matter is. So is matter god? could god simply be the energy that is used to move particles.... hmmmmmm could be a new thread about that...



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by JPhish
 

We can pick and choose all we like but in this case one theory is far far superior to all others because of the evidence for it and that it works perfectly with all the other superior theories of different fields. People have been working towards this for centuries and the modern versions of which are astounding. They are all incomplete but all are being refined everyday. Why believe something less, how does one rationalise that?



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skinon
Well the evidence that the earth is at least for seconds old, is that i took a photo 2 mins ago, loaded it up on the computer and its become evidence that 2 minutes ago this world existed.

there really is no evidence that the world is any older than the moment it is being perceived in. So no.


I believe that if there was a god who simply popped things out his arse to create life there wouldnt be scientific explinations that describe what matter is.

why?


So is matter god?

maybe?


could god simply be the energy that is used to move particles..

maybe?


hmmmmmm could be a new thread about that...

"turtles all the way down"



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by JPhish
 

We can pick and choose all we like but in this case one theory is far far superior to all others because of the evidence for it and that it works perfectly with all the other superior theories of different fields. People have been working towards this for centuries and the modern versions of which are astounding. They are all incomplete but all are being refined everyday. Why believe something less, how does one rationalise that?
which theories are you contrasting? One theory being superior to another eventually comes down to opinion. How does one rationalize their subjective reality?(rhetorical question) i believe they do so through personal inferences.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by JPhish

Originally posted by Skinon
Well the evidence that the earth is at least for seconds old, is that i took a photo 2 mins ago, loaded it up on the computer and its become evidence that 2 minutes ago this world existed.

there really is no evidence that the world is any older than the moment it is being perceived in. So no.



Are you going for a langoliers type situation? How would a photo of the past not be evidence of earth existing in a prior time? As soon as a photo is taken then that is a snapshot of the past, meaning that this entity existed and here is photographic proof that it existed otherwise photos wouldnt work. you would take a photo and it would implode on itself or something.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by JPhish
 


Playing dumb? You know what ones are superior. The one's which have all that evidence. The one's which new technologies are built on etc.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 05:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skinon

Originally posted by JPhish

Originally posted by Skinon
Well the evidence that the earth is at least for seconds old, is that i took a photo 2 mins ago, loaded it up on the computer and its become evidence that 2 minutes ago this world existed.

there really is no evidence that the world is any older than the moment it is being perceived in. So no.



Are you going for a langoliers type situation? How would a photo of the past not be evidence of earth existing in a prior time? As soon as a photo is taken then that is a snapshot of the past, meaning that this entity existed and here is photographic proof that it existed otherwise photos wouldnt work. you would take a photo and it would implode on itself or something.

you're thinking too hard . . . if the past is completely fabricated (including your memories) you essentially have no proof that the universe existed before this moment.



Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by JPhish
 


Playing dumb? You know what ones are superior. The one's which have all that evidence. The one's which new technologies are built on etc.


i AM dumb my friend, i need not play the part. Do i know which ones are superior? I believe i know which ones are superior, but what i believe and what you believe may be very different things. I don't like to make assumptions, so please, which theory/theories do you believe to be superior?

[edit on 3/3/2009 by JPhish]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Skinon
 


It's bad when you answer your own questions and come up with the wrong answers. You were never promised all the answers.......What is wrong with using dinosaur bones as building materials? Perhaps the fallen and rebellious angels put them there just to discredit belief in God. See it worked with you. Unless you're a palentologist you have probably never seen a jurassic fossil "in situ", so how do you know they're not fake? On that note, did you know there are no "complete" dinosaurs? They are composites made of (hopefully) bones of similar creatures. The assemblers frequently get it wrong. Have you ever thought that all of us might have a little dinosaur in us?



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join