Dinosaurs on the Ark: How It Was Possible

[AV1611VET]

Your rephrasing does not make sense.

Actually it does. You just don't know me as well as others here do.

If you do not believe in these historical eras, just think:

a) why are there ideas like eternal waters, cosmic waters, leviathan in the sea, talking snake, man from dust in the OT
b) why are there ideas like Logos or in the NT?

It's hard when you mix myth in with truth. Now I have to separate them. I'm sure you can't tell the difference though, so I'll stop whining about it.

1. Eternal waters and cosmic waters are lies of the Devil.
2. Leviathan in the sea is just that: a leviathan in the sea.
3. Talking snake is a misunderstanding. It was a talking serpent-beast. Probably a dragon. No snake talked to Eve.
4. Man from dust in the OT is just that: man from dust.
5. Logos in the NT is paying homage to the corrupt Greek language (Classical Greek vs Koine Greek), and a disservice to the King James Bible. Result: confusion of tongues.

Because the OT was written in the mythological era while the NT was written in the philosophical era.

I couldn't help but notice that your "mythological era" started with Sumeria. A land so evil, the Antichrist will resurrect one of its cities during the Tribulation period. Out of Sumeria came all sorts of lies.

Sumeria was probably the area where Satan's throne was at the time. So Satan had his muses write all sorts of junk about the sky being a solid dome, and whatever.

Today, I don't know where his throne is, but his muses are still manipulating the arts and sciences.

If you want to ignore that the surrounding culture influenced the language of the biblical writers, you are wilfully choosing not to understand the Bible.

Really?

Tell me, myst, in your opinion, what language is being referenced here?

Genesis 11:1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

 

[renniks]

Apparently the dictionary doesn't either? Because I'm not the one that put theory of evolution in there as an example.

This post right here ^^^ is one of the reasons I know, you know nothing about evolution.

What Do We Mean by “Theory” in Science?

 

[renniks]

So .. what about all the miracles in the New Testament? A man rising from the dead is believable, but not a talking snake?

Because the OT was written in the mythological era while the NT was written in the philosophical era.

 

[trophy33]

1. Eternal waters and cosmic waters are lies of the Devil.

Or, a mythological worldview.

2. Leviathan in the sea is just that: a leviathan in the sea.

Or, a mythological worldview.

3. Talking snake is a misunderstanding. It was a talking serpent-beast. Probably a dragon. No snake talked to Eve.

Serpents also do not talk. And dragons do not exist, they are mythological creatures like unicorns. If you want to say that dragons are dinosaurs, dinosaurs also did not talk in human language.

4. Man from dust in the OT is just that: man from dust.

Or, a mythological description of our mortality. Our body looks like dust after decomposition.

5. Logos in the NT is paying homage to the corrupt Greek language (Classical Greek vs Koine Greek), and a disservice to the King James Bible. Result: confusion of tongues.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Logos is a common philosophical Greek term, adopted by the apostle John to describe the eternal existence of Jesus and his relation to God.

In Greek philosophy, Logos was the eternal emanation of God through which everything else was created, namely visible, material world.
John adopts this term, because his audience could understand it and used it to present that Jesus is this Logos.

It has nothing to do with the medieval KJV.

I couldn't help but notice that your "mythological era" started with Sumeria. A land so evil,

Any evidence that it was so evil, compared to other empires?

the Antichrist will resurrect one of its cities during the Tribulation period.

Nero did not resurrect any Sumerian city during the tribulation period.

Sumeria was probably the area where Satan's throne was at the time.

Any evidence?

So Satan had his muses write all sorts of junk about the sky being a solid dome, and whatever.

Or, ancient people could not understand why objects in the sky do not fall down on them, so the sky being solid with holes for rain made the most sense to them, including biblical authors.

Today, I don't know where his throne is

Nowhere.

Tell me, myst, in your opinion, what language is being referenced here?
Genesis 11:1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

Its like asking me what kind of tree was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Its not a scientific description.

Please, do not say it was Hebrew. If anything, then it would be some proto-mesopotamian language.

 

[AV1611VET]

...

I'm not going to write a mile-long rebuttal to so much wrong.

IF you want to, pick one of them and I'll correct you.

If not: nothing ventured, nothing gained.

 

[Frank Robert]

If you want to say that dragons are dinosaurs, dinosaurs also did not talk in human language.

I have an African Gray avian dinosaur who disagrees with you.

 

[trophy33]

So .. what about all the miracles in the New Testament? A man rising from the dead is believable, but not a talking snake?

We must undestand:
a) the era of the writing
b) the genre of the writing
c) the context of the writing

a) era - philosophical (no mythological topics should be present in gospels, or they should be at least rare)
b) genre - gospels are historical records as common in the Roman empire; a totally different genre than Gen 1-2 from the Babylonian era.
c) the context is that the unique Son of God, the embodied creator of our material world, performed extraordinary wonders. A little more believable than a talking snake.

 

[trophy33]

I have an African Gray avian dinosaur who disagrees with you.

Nobody can argue with an African Gray avian dinosaur.

Does he tempts you to do evil things, too?

 

[Frank Robert]

Nobody can argue with an African Gray avian dinosaur.

Does he tempts you to do evil things, too?

Not real evil, just imitates our Cockatoo's screeches and then laughs at us when we scold her.

 

[Astrophile]

If this was just made up to comfort us, why was Hell made up?

To frighten us into doing what our rulers tell us to.

 

[AV1611VET]

To frighten us into doing what our rulers tell us to.

Let me get this straight.

People have loved ones who die.
People miss their loved ones, so they make up a place called HEAVEN, so they can see them again.
Then they make up a place called HELL to scare themselves into going to HEAVEN so they can see their loved ones.

Is that about right?

 

[Astrophile]

Sure. No dinosaurs in the whole Bible.

It depends whether you regard birds (including ravens and doves) as dinosaurs.

 

[trophy33]

It depends whether you regard birds (including ravens and doves) as dinosaurs.

They are most probably the descendants of dinosaurs, but certainly not dinosaurs anymore

 

[HitchSlap]

Let me get this straight.

People have loved ones who die.
People miss their loved ones, so they make up a place called HEAVEN, so they can see them again.
Then they make up a place called HELL to scare themselves into going to HEAVEN so they can see their loved ones.

Is that about right?

You're kinda' right (per usual).

Let me help you out:

 

[Astrophile]

Let me get this straight.

People have loved ones who die.
People miss their loved ones, so they make up a place called HEAVEN, so they can see them again.
Then they make up a place called HELL to scare themselves into going to HEAVEN so they can see their loved ones.

Is that about right?

Partly. I think that people dream about their deceased loved ones, or have hallucinations of them, and these dreams and hallucinations convince them that their loved ones are not really dead but their lives continue in some way in some realm called Sheol, or Heaven or the Elysian fields, Valhalla, etc.

In my opinion, this belief proved convenient for rulers, who were able to invent a place of post-mortem torment, called Hell, to frighten their subjects into obeying the law. Jesus had a lot to say about 'the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels', and I remember that my religious education at primary school (during the 1950s) included a great deal about hell and the last judgment. I have wondered since whether my teachers did not themselves believe in hell but used it as a threat to frighten us into good behaviour, or whether they had been taught about it when they were children and had never freed themselves from the belief.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Let me get this straight.

People have loved ones who die.
People miss their loved ones, so they make up a place called HEAVEN, so they can see them again.
Then they make up a place called HELL to scare themselves into going to HEAVEN so they can see their loved ones.

Is that about right?

There are many selective pressures regarding the success of religions. And of course in different cultures/environments different species of similar religions may flourish depending on what niches could be filled. When certain traits are present within a religion, it is more likely to be successful enough to be passed on to the next generation. One selective pressure is the presence of the positive attributes, like eternal life, and being reunited with loved ones, and a source of community, etc. On the other hand, there are fear-based selective pressures like punitive repercussions for leaving the religion, like Hell, or shunning, or what have you. The most successful religions will strike a good balance. If it's entirely fear-based, their heart won't be in it. There goes the happy community. But if you have no fear, including no fear of questioning your beliefs, and people might end up on that slippery slope of questioning too much.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Fact:
noun
a thing that is known or proved to be true.
the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.

Theory:
a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained
example: "Darwin's theory of evolution"

People on this thread:"Let's just pretend these words mean the same thing."

You used the wrong definition for theory. A scientific theory is a concept that deals with an idea that has been tested and confirmed countless times. The scientifically illiterate quite often make this error. They make the mistake of thinking that a Law is at the top of the hierarchy in the sciences. It is actually the theory that ranks at the top.

Here is a better definition:

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.[3]

And yes, by your first definition evolution is a fact. Just because a minority of people cannot or will not understand it does not change that one iota.

 

[HitchSlap]

You used the wrong definition for theory. A scientific theory is a concept that deals with an idea that has been tested and confirmed countless times. The scientifically illiterate quite often make this error. They make the mistake of thinking that a Law is at the top of the hierarchy in the sciences. It is actually the theory that ranks at the top.

Here is a better definition:

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.[3]

And yes, by your first definition evolution is a fact. Just because a minority of people cannot or will not understand it does not change that one iota.

I think he hears us, he's just not listening.

 

[AV1611VET]

Here is a better definition:

When I got my PhD in Advanced Neuclear Physics at BocksTop University, I learned that a "theory" is an "educated guess."

 

[HitchSlap]

When I got my PhD in Advanced Neuclear Physics at BocksTop University, I learned that a "theory" is an "educated guess."

Is this the same place where Hovind got his pHd?