Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Christianity forum will not host the topic nor will the Science forum. It seems to me that it belongs in this forum for readers to ponder or not to ponder as I reckon it shall remain a mystery to most, if not all.
It has been declared as a fact that mankind has never set eyes on a dinosaur in respect to the evolutionary timetable; and yet we do have physical evidence that only a christian site can show & prove that mankind has seen a dinosaur at one time or another as shown at this link below.
So for those that post in the science forum, and having a scientific mind, what say you for the physical evidence at that link that depictions of dinosaurs as etched, carved, or drawn by man exists?
Even the Bible describes the behemoth as a dinosaur in Job 40th chapter of its tail as a cedar which is a tree for describing the length of its tail. Therefore in spite of the errant footnotes of it being a hippo or an elephant when both of those tails are hardly the length of a tree, with these extrabiblical physical evidence of man depicting a dinosaur in one form or another, does it show a world living in denial because one aspect of the evolution theory in its timetable, supposedly puts the extinction of dinosaurs way before mankind came unto the scene to even describe one?
So for those that post in the science forum, and having a scientific mind, what say you for the physical evidence at that link that depictions of dinosaurs as etched, carved, or drawn by man exists?
First of all, I would say: What exactly do you mean by "dinosaur?" I'd say it's a pretty accepted fact that dinosaurs and humans have gotten along for quite a while. Personally, I like them fried, but to each his own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorInSpirit
Even the Bible describes the behemoth as a dinosaur in Job 40th chapter of its tail as a cedar which is a tree for describing the length of its tail.
To that, I would say: Be very, very careful in trying to use the Bible as a science book. It isn't a science book. Large parts of it aren't history either. Job is one of them. The Bible also mentions creatures covered in eyes with multiple wings. I'm not too expectant of finding such things in the fossil record, because the Bible isn't a science book. Don't try to pound a square peg into a round hole.
If you can find a cave painting with a dino in it, then that would be pretty good. Until we had excavated bones and reconstruction from those, I dont see how they could have known what dinos looked like, do you? Not sure we do have cave painting of them though.
[sarcasm]However, we do have cave paitings of helicopters... but of course they are not really helicopters as we know them are they? They must be just someone's artistic imagination. [/sarcasm]
First of all, I would say: What exactly do you mean by "dinosaur?" I'd say it's a pretty accepted fact that dinosaurs and humans have gotten along for quite a while. Personally, I like them fried, but to each his own.
To that, I would say: Be very, very careful in trying to use the Bible as a science book. It isn't a science book. Large parts of it aren't history either. Job is one of them. The Bible also mentions creatures covered in eyes with multiple wings. I'm not too expectant of finding such things in the fossil record, because the Bible isn't a science book. Don't try to pound a square peg into a round hole.
Dinosaurs give us oil, not chicken!
And The Revelation (to John) was a vision, given by the Holy Spirit... Genesis tells us that there were giants upon the earth.
And The Revelation (to John) was a vision, given by the Holy Spirit... Genesis tells us that there were giants upon the earth.
Genesis also has a talking snake and camels in the fertile crescent when there were no camels in the fertile crescent. So Biblical interpretation takes a little more effort than the latest Bill O'Reilly book.
First of all, I would say: What exactly do you mean by "dinosaur?" I'd say it's a pretty accepted fact that dinosaurs and humans have gotten along for quite a while. Personally, I like them fried, but to each his own.
I believe the movie Jurassic Park has removed all doubts to what I was referring to as a dinosaur, but seemingly, your opinion that a chicken is a dinosaur is noted, even though science does not consider a wooly mammoth nor a pteranodon as a dinosaur simply because of the time period they are living in.
Have you ever taken a step back and considered that in any theoritical extinction level event, that a dinosaur could survive & still be alive today? Science claimed that smaller animals were around that had emerged from the catastrophe and remain today, then how about the elephants or the giraffes? And if the bigger animals could be here today, then what does that say about the dinosaurs? Granted, even smaller animals have become extinct as the larger animals are becoming extinct today due to mankind and his influence on the ecosystem, but there are still vast parts of the jungle that has not been civilized yet to discover if there are any dinosaurs left that has not been hunted to extinction by mankind.
Reports of a dinosaur sightings in the Congos still remain a mystery because nobody in the field of science care to be labled a creationist in finding one even if they aren't creationists. This goes to show the extreme opposite of what science went through when persecuted by the "Church". Now atheists persecute science from having any academic liberty to pursue anything that threatens the evolution theory. Indeed, one would think a separation of atheist and state is warranted for our constitution since the very laws of science speaks against everything that the evolution theory is, but they do not see it because they want to believe in the evolution theory so much that the laws of science are bendable but the evolution theory is not; even though macroevolution cannot be observed nor proven. Even now, liars are changing the definition of macro evolution to cross over to micro evolution, claiming a new kind of lizard from its former specie as another lizard is what macro evolution is when it is not, because it is still a lizard and it can still mate with its former species of that lizard.
But they do not care. Just as they do not care that punctual equilibrium or rapid macroevolution was presented to disprove gradual macroevolution, because there are huge gaps of transitional fossils in the fossil records, and so they lie and say both are true.
Just as they do not care that the latest discovery is that birds did not evolve from dinosaurs, and in proving it, they offer the theory that dinosaurs evolved from the birds, and liars try to say both are true.
So if you like that kind of science where they blur the lines of the definitions and other aspects of the evolution theory where no leg can be stood on, and thus not being able to point to something and say this is true now, but are still clinging to disproven theories of evolution by evolutionists, then I have to wonder if you could ever consider any science as a false science where spontaneous generation must be true then.
And yet real science involves proving or disproving the hypothesis; that means you do not consider them facts until they are observed and proven to be true. And if you cannot do that with any theory that cannot be observed nor proven, thus hardly fitting in the category of theories to be pursued in the realm of real science that can be observed and proven, then the evolution theory is a colossal waste of time as it is nothing but a fairy tale spinning on other hypothesis "assumed" to be true when nothing about the evolution theory in regards to macroevolution can be observed and proven to be true.
The world loves macroevolution, even though now, it is proven it was never true in the first place when they are now speaking out of both sides of their mouths, thus proving they never had a leg to stand on.
Quote:
To that, I would say: Be very, very careful in trying to use the Bible as a science book. It isn't a science book.
Eyewitnesses testimonies can serve as a resource for confirmation that dinosaurs existed with mankind.
Quote:
Large parts of it aren't history either. Job is one of them.
Granted, Job is not a historical account where there is any reference to place it by, let alone when, but to say that large parts of the Bible is not history is a gross exaggeration when the N.T. is connected to the O.T. by genealogy. It has references to names and events in history. The whole point of the Bible was to share Israel's roots to a spiritual lineage in why they were chosen as God's holy people.
Many times scoffers in science and history dismiss cities of having existed in the Bible until they'd found it. One such example was the city of Haran where Abram had come from to go to the promised land. Educated scholars of the day heckled the Bible because Haran did not exists & claimed it never did until they had found it later on.
So let that one example among others be the reason why Bible should be taken seriously whereas men in science and in history should not be taken seriously, because they are fallible men, and many of them are purposeful liars because they are atheists whom do not want to believe in God, let alone the Bible. They did not care to seek for the truth, but for reasons not to believe. It is hardly any effort to dismiss the Bible than it is to actually go out of their way to disprove it. Evil people do exists.
Quote:
The Bible also mentions creatures covered in eyes with multiple wings. I'm not too expectant of finding such things in the fossil record, because the Bible isn't a science book. Don't try to pound a square peg into a round hole.
If you are referring to a reference that I think you are referring to in Ezekiel 1st chapter, that is man's attempt to describe something that we can refer to in what that man was seeing, but was having trouble finding the words. From the description, it reads like he was describing a UFO. It can hardly be a creature when it has a wheel upon the earth.
Ezekiel 1:15 Now as I beheld the living creatures, behold one wheel upon the earth by the living creatures, with his four faces.16 The appearance of the wheels and their work was like unto the colour of a beryl: and they four had one likeness: and their appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a wheel.17 When they went, they went upon their four sides: and they turned not when they went.18 As for their rings, they were so high that they were dreadful; and their rings were full of eyes round about them four.19 And when the living creatures went, the wheels went by them: and when the living creatures were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up.20 Whithersoever the spirit was to go, they went, thither was their spirit to go; and the wheels were lifted up over against them: for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels.21 When those went, these went; and when those stood, these stood; and when those were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up over against them: for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels.22 And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creature was as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above.23 And under the firmament were their wings straight, the one toward the other: every one had two, which covered on this side, and every one had two, which covered on that side, their bodies.24 And when they went, I heard the noise of their wings, like the noise of great waters, as the voice of the Almighty, the voice of speech, as the noise of an host: when they stood, they let down their wings.25 And there was a voice from the firmament that was over their heads, when they stood, and had let down their wings.26 And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it.
There are other references listed at this link below for cherubims & seraphims as angels.
So no, you are not going to find fossilized remains of celestiel beings for they can never die.
So you are making references out of context and hardly reading it for what it says. You have to decide for what purpose you did that for, but I am willing to suspect that you had done it out of poor recollection. I have done it too, myself, when recollecting people and events in the Bible without actually looking it up for confirmation, and so I can give you the benefit of the doubt.
If you can find a cave painting with a dino in it, then that would be pretty good. Until we had excavated bones and reconstruction from those, I don't see how they could have known what dinos looked like, do you? Not sure we do have cave painting of them though.
At this link given again from the OP, it does give two physical evidence of cave paintings of a dinosaur. Just scroll down and you will see two pictures of two references to such a cave painting.
Genesis also has a talking snake and camels in the fertile crescent when there were no camels in the fertile crescent. So Biblical interpretation takes a little more effort than the latest Bill O'Reilly book.
Satan was in that serpent; and because he tempted Eve through that serpent, that serpent lost its many legs for which now they crawl on the ground on their bellies.
As for the camels, men in history and science have been proven wrong by the Bible; so when you state something like that, be sure you know "how" they present their "facts" . Just because they have no visible evidence that camels were there at that time, it does not mean they weren't there. They just haven't found any... yet, and they may never will find any, seeing how anything physical can be lost given time.
Men of history mocked the Bible that the city of Haran where Abram had set out from did not exists until they had found it. They are still in that mentality of mocking the Bible and yet none go forth to disprove its existence as testified of in the Bible. Why would they when they do not believe it existed nor the Bible's account that it did? Is that the way to do history? No.
Seems like men ought to say what they really mean; they do not know if it exists or not, rather than mock the Bible and say such and such does not exists for public records to be accepted by the world when it is nothing more than off the cuffs remarks.
Christianity forum will not host the topic nor will the Science forum. It seems to me that it belongs in this forum for readers to ponder or not to ponder as I reckon it shall remain a mystery to most, if not all.
It has been declared as a fact that mankind has never set eyes on a dinosaur in respect to the evolutionary timetable; and yet we do have physical evidence that only a christian site can show & prove that mankind has seen a dinosaur at one time or another as shown at this link below.
So for those that post in the science forum, and having a scientific mind, what say you for the physical evidence at that link that depictions of dinosaurs as etched, carved, or drawn by man exists?
Even the Bible describes the behemoth as a dinosaur in Job 40th chapter of its tail as a cedar which is a tree for describing the length of its tail. Therefore in spite of the errant footnotes of it being a hippo or an elephant when both of those tails are hardly the length of a tree, with these extrabiblical physical evidence of man depicting a dinosaur in one form or another, does it show a world living in denial because one aspect of the evolution theory in its timetable, supposedly puts the extinction of dinosaurs way before mankind came unto the scene to even describe one?
What you think is evidence or proof, isn't actually evidence, or proof.
Good try. But creationists have developed an immunity to logic and reason.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
