Split from: DV Christians Unite! (Christian Only Thread)

[DarkKiky0]

"Behold now the behemoth that I have made with you; he eats grass like cattle. Behold now his strength is in his loins and his power is in the navel of his belly. His tail sways like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are knit together. His limbs are as strong as copper, his bones as a load of iron. His is the first of God's ways; only his Maker can draw His sword. For the mountains bear food for him, and all the beasts of the field play there. Does he lie under the shadows, in the cover of the reeds and the swamp? Do the shadows cover him as his shadow? Do the willows of the brook surround him? Behold, he plunders the river, and does not harden; he trusts that he will draw the Jordan into his mouth. With His eyes He will take him; with snares He will puncture his nostrils." "...behold ! in plaited mail / Behemoth rears his head" I don't know any giraffe or elephant to be like that. What giraffe or elephant has plaited mail and a tail like a log? 1 Can you pull in the leviathan with a fishhook or tie down his tongue with a rope? 2 Can you put a cord through his nose or pierce his jaw with a hook? 3 Will he keep begging you for mercy? Will he speak to you with gentle words? 4 Will he make an agreement with you for you to take him as your slave for life? 5 Can you make a pet of him like a bird or put him on a leash for your girls? 6 Will traders barter for him? Will they divide him up among the merchants? 7 Can you fill his hide with harpoons or his head with fishing spears? 8 If you lay a hand on him, you will remember the struggle and never do it again! 9 Any hope of subduing him is false; the mere sight of him is overpowering. 10 No-one is fierce enough to rouse him. Who then is able to stand against me? 11 Who has a claim against me that I must pay? Everything under heaven belongs to me. 12 I will not fail to speak of his limbs, his strength and his graceful form. 13 Who can strip off his outer coat? Who would approach him with a bridle? 14 Who dares open the doors of his mouth, ringed about with his fearsome teeth? 15 His back has rows of shields tightly sealed together; 16 each is so close to the next that no air can pass between. 17 They are joined fast to one another; they cling together and cannot be parted. 18 His snorting throws out flashes of light; his eyes are like the rays of dawn. 19 Firebrands stream from his mouth; sparks of fire shoot out. 20 Smoke pours from his nostrils as from a boiling pot over a fire of reeds. 21 His breath sets coals ablaze, and flames dart from his mouth. 22 Strength resides in his neck; dismay goes before him. 23 The folds of his flesh are tightly joined; they are firm and immovable. 24 His chest is hard as rock, hard as a lower millstone. 25 When he rises up, the mighty are terrified; they retreat before his thrashing. 26 The sword that reaches him has no effect, nor does the spear or the dart or the javelin. 27 Iron he treats like straw and bronze like rotten wood. 28 Arrows do not make him flee, sling stones are like chaff to him. 29 A club seems to him but a piece of straw, he laughs at the rattling of the lance. 30 His undersides are jagged potsherds, leaving a trail in the mud like a threshing-sledge. 31 He makes the depths churn like a boiling cauldron and stirs up the sea like a pot of ointment. 32 Behind him he leaves a glistening wake; one would think the deep had white hair. 33 Nothing on earth is his equal—a creature without fear. 34 He looks down on all that are haughty; he is king over all that are proud. This description can pertain to ANY prehistoric sea beast really. No sea creature today could live up to this. The parts about fire are either figurative pertaining to it's ferocity, or they could be literal if the creature talked about had a red tongue. I learned in high school that people of that time hadn't seen creatures that often with red tongues and often mistook them for fire from the mouth. The Elasmosaurus is just the first ones that comes to mind. I know for a fact that there is equipment made specifically for detecting spirits, and when you find living tissue inside a bone its not assumption, thats what they found. I re looked it up myself, it shows pictures and descriptions of the process. You know, there is such a thing as being too logical if you just assume that everything is fake even when physical evidence if found and presented. We could debate about this all day but it's not going to get us anywhere. I've told my thoughts I've gathered over years, I have read the others, I respect everyones opinion, I hope you all respect mine because we are just going to go back and forth for hours about this when we have basically said all we can say already without repeating ourselves over and over. Nobody is going to convince me and vice versa, who does change their mind in debates anyway? Well, I guess if anyone wants to keep going then go ahead, it's your choice, but I have said my piece. I'm just tired of seeing people debating things when all they are doing is going in circles until someone gives out, so I'm just nipping it in the bud. Let's all start another topic or another side to this topic and keep it civil like it has been so far. I also notice that people tend to get kind of heated, not saying anyone will, just don't want it to get there, and I get a feeling it's headed that way.

[Darkmatters]

Behold now his strength is in his loins and his power is in the navel of his belly. Wait - if it actually says he has a navel in his belly then it can't be a dinosaur. They're reptiles, born from eggs - no umbilical therefore no navel. /debate

[DarkKiky0]

Wait - if it actually says he has a navel in his belly then it can't be a dinosaur. They're reptiles, born from eggs - no umbilical therefore no navel. /debate The rendition “navel,” comes from the original Hebrew term, sharir. Scholars suggest that the term originally meant “firm, hard,” hence, denoted “the firm parts of the belly” Another interesting thing I have come across about a year or so ago, It is said that the unicorns mentioned in the bible are actually single horned rhinoceros, and were called unicorns in the bible by the Latin term for this type of rhinoceros being unicornis.

[TheSilverWolf]

One thing that confuses me is the idea that alot of Christians have, that the earth has to be some 10,000 years old for the Bible to be true; I am not sure how these Christians come up with these numbers myself. But Darkk, I have to ask you this: could at least some of the critters being referred to in the Bible be reference to either Demons that God is warning us of (ie like the Beast in revelations, which--and I could be wrong here--seems to refer to Satan)? Also, and I'm not stating this about anyone here, but about humanity in general, it is foolish to think we have discovered every living creature on planet earth. Like you stated, Darkk, what you said could really describe a wide variety of dinosours, from some giant sea creatures (except the eating grass part, but I suppose a large enough sea creature could graze on grass by the shoreline), to giant land monsters like the stegosaurus. Perhaps one of such creatures IS still alive today. I'm talking, of course, about sightings such as the Loche Ness Monster. There are other similar sightings of creatures like Nessie elswhere--there's even one often referred to as America's Loche Ness Monster. So, technically, the creature wouldn't have to be extinct, is what I'm trying to get at, and taking a long time to get there What do you think about that idea, Darkk? And actually, what you said Blue, about people detecting spirits without using devices specifically made for that purpose, you are partially correct, partially wrong. As a wannabe paranormal investigator, I've done research one specific equipment those people use. And while there didn't used to be stuff made solely for that purpose, the last few years or so there has been technology that is made specifically for detecting paranormal activity and gathering EVP-like things. Google it, you'll probably be surprised I would also point out on that note, we use tools everyday for other purposes then they were invented for, so why can't the same thing be said for paranormal investigating? How many medications do you take? I guarentee you are either taking something now, or have in the past, that was given to you for what they call off-label use. In other words, you have or are taking some medicine that is being used to treat a symptom or condition that it was never meant to be used for. Interestingly enough, some antidepressants fall into this category. If you've ever used a shovel to chip ice, the same thing can be said. See what I'm getting at? Just because something wasn't designed for a particular purpose, it doesn't mean that it wouldn't be good at it. ~SilverWolf~

[Darkmatters]

The rendition “navel,” comes from the original Hebrew term, sharir. Scholars suggest that the term originally meant “firm, hard,” hence, denoted “the firm parts of the belly” Oh, so what you're saying is there have been mistakes made in translating the bible, and now we have to guess at what was actually meant.. One thing that confuses me is the idea that alot of Christians have, that the earth has to be some 10,000 years old for the Bible to be true They added up the begats - plain and simple. You know, Fred begat Jack, Jack begat Joe... etc. The bible gives a clear unbroken lineage from Adam on down.

[DarkKiky0]

I completely agree with that point. There are vast amounts of ocean unexplored, who knows what could be lurking there. They are still making new discoveries in the rain forest as well. They just discovered a plant that can produce spores that will cause living creatures to become zombie like. Not to mention there are numerous sightings from all over the world, like from people in rural areas of Brazil for example, claiming to have seen a Pterodactyl. Did they? Who knows, but it could be a possibility. I think just about every huge lake in the world has a supposed lake monster, that tons people swear they saw. could at least some of the critters being referred to in the Bible be reference to either Demons that God is warning us of (ie like the Beast in revelations, which--and I could be wrong here--seems to refer to Satan) I know that the Devil has been described as a black dragon in many parts of the bible, and that's in Revelations. When it comes to Revelations, it is packed full of imagery, so some of the creatures could indeed be talking about the devil and his minions, not to mention the Anti Christ and his helper. I have read Revelations twice and a lot of it is hard to understand. My mom goes to a lot of church sermons where the preacher dedicates weeks and weeks of Sundays to explaining Revelations alone, and it's the shortest book of the Bible. One whole Sunday sermon was used to explain one single passage.

[Darkmatters]

who knows what could be lurking there... They are still making new discoveries... claiming to have seen a Pterodactyl. Did they? Who knows, but it could be a possibility. I think just about every huge lake in the world has a supposed lake monster, that tons people swear they saw. Yep, people see all kinds of things. Now if there was some actual evidence, that would be a different matter.

[DarkKiky0]

Oh, so what you're saying is there have been mistakes made in translating the bible, and now we have to guess at what was actually meant.. I'm saying that different words had different meaning back in bible times. There is a great possibility too that the bible has parts that could be mistranslated. It was said to be written over a period of 2,000 years and translated into 469 languages with a complete Bible, and 2527 with at least some portion of scripture translated, so it is not impossible to have been mistranslated somewhere. Who knows what the original bible says, most of it is kept locked away in the Vatican, all I know is I follow the basic rules. No lying, killing, ect. All the specifics things need to be held at arms length. Now if there was some actual evidence, that would be a different matter. That's the whole point.

[TheSilverWolf]

I would kill (okay, not litterally, but you get the idea) for solid undeniable proof of Bigfoot, Nessie, a pterodactyl, or even alien visitors for that matter. It's up to scientists and investigators to get that proof, but science likes to dismiss that stuff entirely. Hence, the never ending circle of not getting proof! It's like saying you won't believe there are Bears in the forest just because you fail to see one yourself after spending years hiking in the woods. They're not exactly common creatures to find just hanging out, because MOST of the time they want to avoid us two-leggers I get what you say, Darkmatters, about adding up the begats, but here's the thing: the world was created PRIOR to Adam/Eve. Do Christians forget this? Weren't we his last creation, Day 6? He rested on Day 7. Who is to say what a "Day" is to God. Seems to me that his description of Earth's creation could easily encompass the birth of our planet, Sciences' explanation of it. And given that God created animals before he created US, there is plenty of room for there to be Dinosaurs before we were around. All God really stated, when it comes right down to it, is his order of creation. The Bible is pretty vague as to exactly when things happened. I don't think there's many that literally take the 7 day analogy to be literal (though I know there's some out there that do). What I'm saying, is there's plenty of room for the earth to be millions of years old, even following the Creation story in the Bible as I understand it. Remember, it wasn't just Jesus that used imagery and parables, in his communication with others via dreams, he often used symbolism, after all. So, when it states 7 "days" he might mean HIS days, which...well, until we actually meet him, we've no way of knowing just how long a day is to God. Darkk, wouldn't you just LOVE to see some of those other books that The Vatican keeps away from us? ~SilverWolf~

[TiredPhil]

Just by putting up the title "DV Christians Unite! (Christian Only Thread)" you have alienated a huge segment of people. This may be your intention, but I should imagine you have also alienated many christians as well. Can you imaging Jesus Christ saying to the crowd "Christians only" I dont think so. Substitue the word Christian with any other religion, and look how offensive it can appear Eg DV Athiests Unite! (Athiests Only Thread)" DV Muslims Unite! (Muslims Only Thread)" DV Hindus Unite! (Hindus Only Thread)" Why not start again with a less offensive title, and put this one to rest. Making a thread an automatic target for all other religous beliefs or non beliefs might not have been your best choice

[DarkKiky0]

Oh my goodness, I would LOVE for the chance to take a peek inside the Vatican and see all the goodies they got in there. Theres even rumors that they have Solomons ring! How handy would that be for those left behind after the rapture. It's funny you mention the order and time of creation, because one of the things I found out a couple years ago was in the bible there's a passage that says "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years". Which makes much more sense then when you think about the time span it says God created everything. I've told others, some agreed and others still insist the 7 days are literal, and they may have been from Gods stand point, but not from a humans. I think it's a very interesting topic for discussion. TiredPhil, that was already discussed earlier in the thread. It came to it that it was not intended for offense, he was just saying that he wanted a place where people could discuss the bible without being ridiculed. Nobody on this thread minds if a non-Christian put up their thoughts, as long as they aren't hate mongering. You see

[Darkmatters]

Who is to say what a "Day" is to God. So, what you're saying is we actually have no idea what the words in the bible really mean? I would kill (okay, not litterally, but you get the idea) for solid undeniable proof of Bigfoot, Nessie, a pterodactyl, or even alien visitors for that matter. It's up to scientists and investigators to get that proof, but science likes to dismiss that stuff entirely. Hence, the never ending circle of not getting proof! But people HAVE investigated all these things - many many people!! Not one shred of evidence for any of them. That's not the fault of "scientists" - it's because there is no evidence to be found. You do know that the famous bigfoot film and the famous Nessie photo were actually revealed to be hoaxes years later, right?

[TiredPhil]

TiredPhil, that was already discussed earlier in the thread. It came to it that it was not intended for offense, he was just saying that he wanted a place where people could discuss the bible without being ridiculed. Nobody on this thread minds if a non-Christian put up their thoughts, as long as they aren't hate mongering. You see I know, but the title is still a little "off" Said my bit, so am going now. Bye

[TheSilverWolf]

Darnit, I had this nice post written up and I'll be darned if my internet didn't blip out. I hate satellite internet :s I was actually thinking of that verse you mentioned Darkk, it I think it really proves how God often spoke to us using symbolism and imagery. Like Jesus often used parables to teach a lesson, you know? I don't fault those who take that 7 day creation to mean literally 7 days, but I would implore them to look at thinks before making that judgement. One reason I mentioned it is the first argument I often hear from non-christians is how we all believe the earth is roughly 10,000 years old, and how science has already proven we are some billions of years old. It always irritates me too, because for 1, not every Christian believes we are only 10k years old, and for two, I personally believe we ARE older than that, and yet I am a Christian. Substitue the word Christian with any other religion, and look how offensive it can appear Eg DV Athiests Unite! (Athiests Only Thread)" DV Muslims Unite! (Muslims Only Thread)" DV Hindus Unite! (Hindus Only Thread)" Why not start again with a less offensive title, and put this one to rest. Making a thread an automatic target for all other religous beliefs or non beliefs might not have been your best choice With respect, TiredPhil, I see nothing even remotely offensive with your examples. If Muslims want to get together to discuss their religion, why should I be offended? If Hindu's or Bhuddists or atheists want to get together in a group, why should I be offended? If I create a thread that is titled "Fringe Discussion" (Fringe Fans Only), are you going to be offended and alienated if you aren't a fan of the show (why you wouldn't be is beyond me though :p )? There's no difference. In fact, I would say if you truly do feel alienated and offended by people wanting to talk about things within a certain group of people, you really should look inside yourself, and try to find out why that should be so offensive to you. ~SilverWolf~

[Xei]

The reason it's necessary is because one of the reasons people, or non religious scientists mainly, believe the bible can't be real is because of the perts where it mentions dinosaurs. Okay, thanks for explaining. but they DID find unfossilized dinosaur bones, it was in Alaska, I saw it on that program and it is all over the Internet, look it up for yourself. I looked it up for myself. The claims do not come from a science journal, but from a book for casual entertainment, "The Great Alaskan Dinosaur Adventure". The creationists who discovered the objects have no expertise in palaeontology. At a different point in the book they mistake a piece of wood for a dinosaur bone. Despite claiming that they would perform rigorous tests on the bones to determine whether they were fossils, they have never done so. No palaeontologists have ever examined the bones. When you find the same level of mixed layers of earth all over the world, even in places where floods are near impossible, then that's pretty clear, unless you think you know more then a scientist who has studied it. The scientific consensus is that a global flood has never occurred, unless you think you know more than a scientist who has studied it. Sorry but I don't understand what you mean by "the same level of mixed layers of earth all over the world".

[TheSilverWolf]

So, what you're saying is we actually have no idea what the words in the bible really mean? But people HAVE investigated all these things - many many people!! Not one shred of evidence for any of them. That's not the fault of "scientists" - it's because there is no evidence to be found. You do know that the famous bigfoot film and the famous Nessie photo were actually revealed to be hoaxes years later, right? First, no I'm not saying we have NO idea what the bible means; I am saying we can't be sure of the meaning of every single verse. I'm saying it needs to be looked at in context, and studied, in order to make a judgement call, and even then, there will be individuals who see things differently. The same can be said for art, music, poetry, other books. It's not always cut and dry, black and white. And I don't think that in any way disproves the validity of the Bible, any more than your interpretation of a song makes the song any less valid or meaningful to another person. It just means if you want to have a deeper understanding, you need to really study it--something I have admittedly not done myself; but would like to someday. And yes, people have investigated stuff like bigfoot, nessie, etc. But just because nobody has found any evidence yet does not mean they do not exist. And yes, there are several nessie/bigfoot videos that have come out and been proven to be hoaxes. But there are plenty that have not even been investigated. I really do believe someday, we will find evidence to at very least prove Bigfoot, but probably Nessie too--did you know, Darkmatters, that we know more about SPACE then we do about our own oceans and what lies beneath them? ~SilverWolf~

[Darkmatters]

But, if you're saying a simple word like Day could mean thousands or millions of years, then how do we know which other words in the bible might mean totally different things from what we take them to mean? Also, how do you get around the fact that the order of creation that's explicitly stated in the bible is completely different fro the actual order things came into existence, which science has since revealed? It always turns out the people who think science and biblical revelation can be compatible actually don't know science very well at all, or think that it can be interpreted very loosely the way the bible can. I recommend if you truly think your ideas can hold up, that you educate yourself in science beyond the high school level, which is very weak (and apparently far weaker today than it was when I went to school) - read Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins, one of the world's leading evolutionary biologists who is an excellent writer and can make complex ideas easily accessible to the layman, and learn the actual facts about evolution beyond "fish climbed ashore, turned into lizards, and then monkeys, and then humans". Because it's these kind of oversimplified fallacies that creationists and Christian/science apologists tend to work from, and this stuff can't by any stretch be called actual science, more on the level of cartoon graphics to entertain kids in a slightly scientific manner. I thought I had a pretty good handle on evolution until I actually read some Dawkins, and then I learned what it really means, and it was a very eye-opening experience. Oh, and I wasn't just talking about 'one of the bigfoot videos', but THE bigfoot video, the one that actually started the concept of Bigfoot. The guy who made the costume and helped film it came forward and told the truth after decades, and has been going on tours speaking all around the country explaining it. Knowing that, how can you still think "well, maybe there actually is a creature just like the hoax they created.. "?

[DarkKiky0]

I don't think the earth is only 10 thousand years old either. People assume the words of a few Christians mean that we all think that way. But, if you're saying a simple word like Day could mean thousands or millions of years, then how do we know which other words in the bible might mean totally different things from what we take them to mean? No, a day still means a day to humans, like I said, a day to God is like a thousand years. The bible actually told about that one, and others, but other words used to mean other things, like navel meaning belly button now, but back then It meant the middle area of the stomach. Usually when someone is confused about a passage they look into the part that is confusing to what it meant back then and then It makes more sense. Another example of this, which is in answer to your evolution thoughts, the Hebrew words that "made" and "formed" are translated from are two completely different words with two completely different definitions. The term "made" is translated from a Hebrew word which basically means "to prepare," and the word "formed" is translated from a Hebrew word which means "to form, fashion, frame." In other words, God "prepared" every living thing in Genesis 1, but did not actually bring it into physical form until Genesis 2. God himself has also told us, in his word, that "made" and "formed" are two separate and distinct events: Isaiah 44:2, "Thus saith the LORD that made thee, and formed thee from the womb..." Isaiah 45:18, "For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth then made it;" Another answer to you're statements about words meaning different things, here Is a passage "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." He tells us that his words don't always mean the same as his words. So it's not like were in the dark or questioning about this.

[Darkmatters]

Oh ok, thanks. So, what you're saying is we have no way to know what the words in the bible really mean.. And how about that order of creation thing? Why did he tell us things were done in a certain order, and then allow us to discover through science that it actually happened in a totally different order? Was he deliberately trying to make his own book look unreliable?

[DarkKiky0]

I JUST explained all this to you. The answers to that are in my last post. How about you actually read it. Sorry to sound rude, but you keep repeating questions that are already answered.

[LucasPotter]

Hi. Could you please explain this to me? Thank you! He tells us that his words don't always mean the same as his words.

[DarkKiky0]

a day still means a day to humans, like I said, a day to God is like a thousand years. The bible actually told about that one, and others, but other words used to mean other things, like navel meaning belly button now, but back then It meant the middle area of the stomach. "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." He tells us that his words don't always mean the same as his words. So it's not like were in the dark or questioning about this. the part that says "he tells us that his words don't always mean the same as his words", I meant "he tells us that his words don't always mean the same as our words" I had a typo

[Darkmatters]

I JUST explained all this to you. The answers to that are in my last post. How about you actually read it. Sorry to sound rude, but you keep repeating questions that are already answered. I did read your post, but I didn't see any answers. My question was why would he tell us in the bible that creation happened in a certain order, but then when we develop science it shows that the order was quite different. We know now that the sun is a star, and formed long before there was an earth or a moon. And not within a few thousand years, more like billions. And we definitively know woman was not created after man, and that human did not exist before there were animals. He tells us that his words don't always mean the same as his words. Ok, obviously this was just a typo - supposed to read 'our words' at the end I'm sure. But essentially, what it means is that we can't really know what his words mean, right? If we could be so wrong about a simple word like day, what other words in the bible might our modern translations be way off on, and how would we know which ones? After all, the bible is the word of God, right? Given to humans and written generations later after being related by word of mouth only, and subsequently translated many times. It seems to me since the entire Bible is supposed to be originally in God's own words, and by admission we can't understand what at least some of his words mean, and we don't know which words those are, there's a big problem with thinking we really understand it. The ultimate unreliable narrator. Oh, and I don't think anybody really lumps all Christians together with New Earth Creationists. I know I never did. Just fyi.

[LucasPotter]

Thanks for clearing it up!

[DarkKiky0]

He tells us which words mean different to him. I believe I already said that. We did not misread the word day, it means to us what it has always meant to us, he told us that it means something different to him. He came out, and told us it means different to him. My question was why would he tell us in the bible that creation happened in a certain order, but then when we develop science it shows that the order was quite different. I did actually answer that. the Hebrew words that mean "made" and "formed" are translated from are two completely different words with two completely different definitions. The term "made" is translated from a Hebrew word which basically means "to prepare," and the word "formed" is translated from a Hebrew word which means "to form, fashion, frame." In other words, God "prepared" every living thing in Genesis 1, but did not actually bring it into physical form until Genesis 2. God himself has also told us, in his word, that "made" and "formed" are two separate and distinct events He did not mislead us, humans translated those words not completely right, in other words, he prepared everything in the order told by the 7 days, but he put everything on earth in another order, most likely something like the order that scientists predicted. If you feel you are mislead, blame humans.