Dinosaurs and the Bible

[aquaknight]

If it was a Sauropod, some mention of the extremely long neck would have been there? Or what about the misuse of the word tail? Apply that to the elephant's trunk's and it would fit. Esp. since the point of that Chapter was addressing how strong the animal was. Watching an Elephant topple a bunch of trees, may have sparked that.

 

[bang guy]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2507269
Shut up! I refuse to read that!

You bring up a great point, of course. Many of the "faithful" have faith so weak they are afraid to open a science book. It's sad as that leads to the crazy entrenched positions so many take.

Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
http:///forum/post/2507457
I know many people who are strong in their faith and read those science books to try to debate them too though.
I respect the debate. I don't respect the irrational fear of information.

 

[jaymz]

Not sure if anyone has said this yet, but some christian sects believe that God buried dino bones to test their faith.
also god thought they were so ugly and smelled so bad he considered them a failure. so he smashed the erf with a big rock killing them all. And kept them out of his books. God cant be seen not 'loving' one of his creatures. And his mass killing of all the dinos at once gave us oil. and that has been a GodSend

 

[jaymz]

Oh and clownboy. The bible is writtin so vaguely that anyone who wants to buy into it can twist the words to answer their questions. And yes that description could be a croco. they are very power jumper and lungers. and can run very quicky over short distances with a long muscular neck and strong stomach for twisting thier prey to death. and they are not bothered by a raging river and lurk below the lotus. But then again, Crocs have been around since the dinos.

 

[jaymz]

Originally Posted by mathwhiz
http:///forum/post/2507955
Many have tried for years to disprove the Bible and have been uable to. In some cases, some have actually ended up converting themselves.

Yeah well disprove scientology. You cant but it is the biggest load of $#it i have ever heard. An alien overlord corralling aliens of many species and bringing them to earth and tossing them into a volcano and now there souls are inhabiting us human. And the angry/sad souls are the cause of our mental issues including depression and rage. Go ahead disprove it
To me this actually explains why people are so different as people. Why this guy/gal is great and this one wants to kill everyone that wears a blue shirt.

 

[bang guy]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
http:///forum/post/2508101
Well then, what is it? A Sauropod, of course. Read it over again with this in mind, and it makes perfect sense.
How does a Sauropod hide in the reeds of a marsh? That's like an Elephant hiding in a strawberry patch.
But then, I've never seen an Elephant in a strawberry patch, maybe it works.

 

[1journeyman]

The description in Job sounds to me like a Hippo.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by m0nk
http:///forum/post/2507619
That's the problem. We don't want you to try and save us; I am perfectly comfortable in my own religion. I mean that with the utmost respect, of course. I try to never be rude and insulting to anyone else's religion and therefore would expect everyone else to do the same.

 

[scotts]

One of the many questions this brings up is how old is the world. Is it 6,500 years old or billions of years old?

 

[rainmkr07]

Originally Posted by Scotts
http:///forum/post/2508419
One of the many questions this brings up is how old is the world. Is it 6,500 years old or billions of years old?
Ya. I'd like to know that answer. If the world is millions or billions of years old, doesn't that disprove the Bible once and for all?

 

[mfp1016]

Originally Posted by rainmkr07
http:///forum/post/2508422
Ya. I'd like to know that answer. If the world is millions or billions of years old, doesn't that disprove the Bible once and for all?
I find it funny that so many people are out to scientifically disprove the Bible, a document founded only faith.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rainmkr07
http:///forum/post/2508422
Ya. I'd like to know that answer. If the world is millions or billions of years old, doesn't that disprove the Bible once and for all?
Nope. for two reasons:
1. The Bible is not written as a timeline. Proving how old the universe is only strengthens the argument that the Creation Account "6 days" are not literal (many argue that anyway)
2. God could have simply created an "aged" universe...
You'll never scientifically disprove or prove the Bible or the existence of God. If you don't want to accept the validity of the Bible and the existence of God you are certainly entitled to do so. Just as others have chosen to believe in the same.

 

[bang guy]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2508449
Nope. for two reasons:
1. The Bible is not written as a timeline. Proving how old the universe is only strengthens the argument that the Creation Account "6 days" are not literal (many argue that anyway)
2. God could have simply created an "aged" universe...
You'll never scientifically disprove or prove the Bible or the existence of God. If you don't want to accept the validity of the Bible and the existence of God you are certainly entitled to do so. Just as others have chosen to believe in the same.

I agree 100%

 

[clown boy]

Originally Posted by Jaymz
http:///forum/post/2508211
Not sure if anyone has said this yet, but some christian sects believe that God buried dino bones to test their faith.
also god thought they were so ugly and smelled so bad he considered them a failure. so he smashed the erf with a big rock killing them all. And kept them out of his books. God cant be seen not 'loving' one of his creatures. And his mass killing of all the dinos at once gave us oil. and that has been a GodSend

Uh... no... that's not a legitimate Christian doctrine.

 

[clown boy]

Originally Posted by rainmkr07
http:///forum/post/2508422
Ya. I'd like to know that answer. If the world is millions or billions of years old, doesn't that disprove the Bible once and for all?
The idea that the earth is billions of years old is a theory. It is now, and it has always been. Unfortunately, many people treat it like fact, when there is, in fact, no evidence for it and plenty of evidence against it. Sure, there are things that look like they might support the theory, but nothing that proves it.

 

[rainmkr07]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
http:///forum/post/2508477
The idea that the earth is billions of years old is a theory. It is now, and it has always been. Unfortunately, many people treat it like fact, when there is, in fact, no evidence for it and plenty of evidence against it. Sure, there are things that look like they might support the theory, but nothing that proves it.
What evidence is there against the Earth being 4.5 billion years old?

 

[mfp1016]

Science is in no way exact. Science is nothing but a sea of conjecture.

 

[ophiura]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
http:///forum/post/2508477
The idea that the earth is billions of years old is a theory. It is now, and it has always been. Unfortunately, many people treat it like fact, when there is, in fact, no evidence for it and plenty of evidence against it. Sure, there are things that look like they might support the theory, but nothing that proves it.

As has been discussed in numerous other threads, your interpretation of "theory" and the scientific purpose of "theory" are NOT the same. In addition, scientists do NOT prove hypotheses, they work to falsify them, which is a very fundamental and basic principle of science that needs to be understood. Scientists make experiments and observations to falsify hypotheses. If the hypothesis is not at that time falsified, it is not proven, it just stands until the point when it is falsified. The accumulation of observations that do not falsify the hypothesis may result in it ultimately reaching the scientific definition of a "theory" (such as gravity and relativity), but if a single scientific and testable observation out of a defined experiment disproves the hypothesis then it should be discarded or reconsidered. This is assuming, of course, you have good, objective scientists (and I will be the first to say there are many who are not). But if you are looking to prove a hypothesis, you are not working in the scientific realm or at least according to the standard scientific method, IMO.

 

[clown boy]

Originally Posted by rainmkr07
http:///forum/post/2508497
What evidence is there against the Earth being 4.5 billion years old?
Well, for one thing, there's the moon. We are slowly losing the moon. It moves away from the earth at about an inch per year. So do a little thinking, and you realize that before, the moon was closer. Go back a couple of tens of thousands of years, and the moon's gravitional pull would make the tides drown everything on earth twice a day. You can only drown comfortably once a day...

If you'd like more facts, let me know.

 

[mike22cha]

I heard about (not sure how real it actual is) that there is a place in Texas where a creek or river is breaking down some thin rock layers revealing human and dinasour footprints side by side. Again I don't know if it's all just a fake or if it's so unpopular because the evolutionists/uniformitarians don't want to admit that they are wrong and do some more research on it.
Again not sure about the liability of it, just something I have heard.
Also there are many ledgends in most cultures about dragons. All the way from Britian to China there are stories/ledgends of dragons.