What Is The Christian View On The Dinosaur? (Catholic, sunday, principle)
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.
Again, you lie, Tom. simple Fact IS: the city has refused to provide the samples necessary, and you know it, and yet you persist. As I've said, this behavior is hardly very Christian of you. To knowingly lie outright and repeatedly.
well, I'm not going to let you get away with your persistant lies on this one, ever. "Science" in the form of me and my alma mater, are only too happy to check out the true age of these figurines. It's the religious and tourism-driven folks in Acambara that won't provide us with samples. They can't have the truth out there, for obvious reasons.
Try saying the following in one of your posts, Tom:
"Acambara won't provide science with the samples necessary to test these for age with modern irrefutible systems"
Try it, I dare you! I know; you just can't bring yourself to mutter the truth; that part's obvious is all of your posts.
Of course, all the other evidence (geologic, paleontological, DNA, bones found alongside the dino finds, and various highly developed and proven isotopic dating techniques) ALL prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that dinosaurs walked the earth well before man, in the period 250 to 150 million years ago.
To even speculate that massive, always hungry vicous predatory dinosaurs would kindly co-exist with completely culturalized man, allowing themselves to be saddled and ridden around ("Hey there big fella! Hold up while I adjust my saddle!") is absurd on its face, and at so many levels. Any child can see that's purenonsense, and yet it's the only way that the vast Christian myth can go on, so the fictions have been developed to support such total cr@p-think. All the while knowing full well that they were generating lies, lies and more lies.
Well, maybe that's a true characteristic of Christianity after all? Seems to be, huh, Tom?
Fortunately only the vastly scientifically and logically illiterate need and want to believe it; the rest of the educated world moves on. Have you heard my much repeated phrase, Tom?
"Science Abandons the Absurd!" Repeat it to yourself, and often. It's true.
So any other discussion to the contrary is simply an exercise in stupidity for the shear sake of stupidity. Or religious apologism. It's akin to endlessly arguing that the Earth's flat, which I assure you it isn't! It's just a diversion from the truth, which is a goal of Christian teaching. so, if you have to lie a little, so what. It's OK. god won't care!
I know the figurines have been tested four times. And I believe each group went to the city and personally ask for a sample. If you were that interested, I would suggest you personally go there yourself, as the other groups have done.
Is this thread. A firing line for stoning christian people Or what?
Dinasours are not a part of this "World" and what really matters. I don't see any running around. Don't let meanningless debates cloud anyones judgement...Come back too the real world People. Where theres no dinasours! Shees Lol!
How bout we talk about yetties. Do they exist? Yawns!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31mlbB8KFmY
This museum has received much criticism from the scientific community who see the timeline for creation to go well beyond 6 days and deny that man walked with dinosaurs.
If dinosaurs were around in the days of Noah then I cannot see how the arch would have held all the animals and the only animals mentioned in scripture are basically the animals we have today. There are ample ancient cave drawings, pictures and sculptures of early man but not a one of the largest animals to ever live. Why the ancient art world would have ignored this is unclear.
Is science wrong?
Is the Bible wrong?
If on the arch then where are the dinosaurs today?
The word dinosaur was coined by Dr. Leakey, so you wont find this word in the bible. The word used in the bible for these large animals is "Dragon". The word behemoth is used for the large suropod mentioned by Job. Leviathan is an aquatic dinosaur.
Dinosaurs are land based animals, so they were created on day 6 of the creation week along with man. Dinosaurs were on the ark. No one said that Noah took full grown samples of each animal. He probably took only juvinille versions. The number is around 2500 "kinds" of animals on the ark. An example of "kind" is the horse kind which includes the zebra and the donkey.
There are cave painting of dinosaurs, but these get relegated to mythical creatures because we cannot believe that animals coexisted with man. The temples in angkor also have stone carvings of what appears to be stegasaurus along side monkeys and elephants (other common animals), so these are creatures that the people of angkor were familiar with.
Alot of animals types have gone extinct since the time of Noah's ark, either by being hunted or loss of habitat in the fallen world. So there are many creatures that are no longer alive on the earth. Of course that is, that we know of. There are many discoveries occuring all the time and we may find a suropod in the Africian congo, just like the discovery of the silver ape or the Coelacath fish caught of the coast of Madagascar.
Is science wrong? Since is a constantly changing subject, so yes science is wrong. We have only a small glimpse into the world through the clouded lense of science and with each new discovery, an old theory is laid to the wayside. There are some rules which we hold to stronger then others like gravity, but even this will change one day as a new theory arises or law overrides what we know.
Is the bible wrong? No the bible is the word of God and is unchanging. No matter what science says the bible is the truth and ultimate authority. It is first from the bible where we should get our worldview. This perspective brings clarity to the world around us.
The word dinosaur was coined by Dr. Leakey, so you wont find this word in the bible. The word used in the bible for these large animals is "Dragon". The word behemoth is used for the large suropod mentioned by Job. Leviathan is an aquatic dinosaur.
Dinosaurs are land based animals, so they were created on day 6 of the creation week along with man. Dinosaurs were on the ark. No one said that Noah took full grown samples of each animal. He probably took only juvinille versions. The number is around 2500 "kinds" of animals on the ark. An example of "kind" is the horse kind which includes the zebra and the donkey.
There are cave painting of dinosaurs, but these get relegated to mythical creatures because we cannot believe that animals coexisted with man. The temples in angkor also have stone carvings of what appears to be stegasaurus along side monkeys and elephants (other common animals), so these are creatures that the people of angkor were familiar with.
Alot of animals types have gone extinct since the time of Noah's ark, either by being hunted or loss of habitat in the fallen world. So there are many creatures that are no longer alive on the earth. Of course that is, that we know of. There are many discoveries occuring all the time and we may find a suropod in the Africian congo, just like the discovery of the silver ape or the Coelacath fish caught of the coast of Madagascar.
Is science wrong? Since is a constantly changing subject, so yes science is wrong. We have only a small glimpse into the world through the clouded lense of science and with each new discovery, an old theory is laid to the wayside. There are some rules which we hold to stronger then others like gravity, but even this will change one day as a new theory arises or law overrides what we know.
Is the bible wrong? No the bible is the word of God and is unchanging. No matter what science says the bible is the truth and ultimate authority. It is first from the bible where we should get our worldview. This perspective brings clarity to the world around us.
Let's summarize the problem with creationism.
There is not a shred of evidence for it. The dickering about the term 'dinosaur' is beside the point. The point is that there is nothing in the Bible that suggests that prehistoric animals co -existed with man. The terms 'leviathan' and 'Behemoth' could be anything. Even mythological. The real evidence is that no remains of dinosaurs, titanotheres or Edaphosaurus are found other than as stone fossils. No bones found with mens' habitats. No teeth, nothing.
Extinction? Because many kinds of animals have been hunted by men to extinction from Roman times onwards. We know what was around as they are shown in ancient art. No dinosaurs. No Glyptodonts. No prehistoric animals. You suggest, Nikk, that some unidentifiable cave - paintings may be dinosaurs. But the real evidence is that no dinosaur remains are found with cave bods. Attempts to show 'footprints' with ancient animals turned either to be ignorance or hoax.
The Ica stones are very doubtful indeed. The Ta Phrom stegosaur is interesting but, frankly, it looks as much like a crocodile as a stegosaurus.
This is terribly flimsy material to base a claim that dinosaurs - and all the other prehistoric animals, too - were on the ark.
So you have to postulate juveniles and even then 'kinds' to make even that feasible. And they supposedly evolved as breakneck speed into all the variants we have now. And you have the sauce to twit science for being 'wrong'.
You see science as 'wrong' because it is always ready to reappraise in the light of new evidence. True. That's what's good about science. But it has always moved on. building on previous knowledge. Copernicus and Newton are still 'right'. The Bible? Unchanging, no matter what evidence undermines it. Knowledge that leaves it behind is ignored and dismissed. It is propped up by creationist nonsense such as 'kinds', juvenile dinosaurs on the Ark and misunderstanding, misrepresentation and speculation.
There is no good evidence for a flood, no good evidence for the ark, exodus, the resurrection, God or any Bible-based theories. It is the last thing on which we should base our worldview.
Sicne I don't feel like delving through so many pages of what is sure to be the same old lame arguments by the Creationists, I'll just throw my two cents in here...
Every means of scientific study, reserarch and investigations shows that the dinasours died out millions of years before man evolved.
Every single bit of false evidence offered by charletons (like at the Creation Museum) have proven to be frauds, either created or purposely misrepresented.
Why a religion simply must rely on fraud (like the pre-Columbian hebrew culture frauds as well) in an attempt to substantiate their religion simply boggles my mind.
ESPECIALLY coming from one of the many religions claiming to by the "only true religion".
This is ultimately a pretty small element of world Christianity. That it's an unusually loud element of Christianity doesn't make it normative.
The Ica stones are very doubtful indeed. The Ta Phrom stegosaur is interesting but, frankly, it looks as much like a crocodile as a stegosaurus.
The shape of the so-called stegosaur carving at the Ta Phrom Temple at the Angkor Wat complex is far too bulky for a crocodile, not to mention the legs are too long for a croc. I can see that what appears to be 'back plates' might give the impression of a croc, but they more closely resemple the same design features surrounding the outer circular frame. They aren't as well-designed on the animal because they were probably too small to carve better detail and atristically, it'd look too confusing to completely surround the shape of the animal with such features.
If you look at the far left side of the head, just above the eye, and extending to just below the back of the animal, it's clearly a known mammal, most likely a gaur. Possibly a water buffalo. The bulky body easily fits either of those two animals and would have been well-known to the artisans of the past. It also makes sense because the animals above and below the so-called 'steggy' carving are also of animals common to the area.
Notice in this photo, the creature below has the same kind of features on the left side. I'm not sure what animal it represents. Below that the mythical guardian holding the sword has similar features around it's head. There are some differences between the carvings, but that's not unusual since there would've been a number of artisans working different elements on the same project.
But you're right. If someone wanted to see it as a croc, they could just as easily as seeing a steggy. Seeing it as a stegosaurus is nothing more than pareidolia, like looking at clouds and seeing a face.
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.
Lol!
