Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The Loch Ness Monster is real. His biblical name is Leviathan.the Loch Ness Monster all have something in common. All three of them are urban legends
The Loch Ness Monster is real. His biblical name is Leviathan.
Urban legend is not a myth, though.They are different genres:When I recently made a joke in one of my other threads it gave me an idea for this one. Bigfoot, the abominable snowman, the Loch Ness Monster all have something in common. All three of them are urban legends which got me wondering,.. even though I don't believe in any of them,.. is it possible that even a myth has at least a tiny bit of scientific truth to it?
The Leviathan is mentioned five times in the OT, in Job 3:8, Job 40:15–41:26, Psalm 74:14, Psalm 104:26 and Isaiah 27:1.
Urban legend is not a myth, though.They are different genres:
A legend is presumed to have some basis in historical fact and tends to mention real people or events. Historical fact morphs into a legend when the truth has been exaggerated to the point that real people or events have taken on a romanticized, "larger than life" quality.
In contrast, a myth is a type of symbolic storytelling that was never based on fact. Throughout time, myths have sought to explain difficult concepts (e.g., the origin of the universe) with the help of common story devices, such as personification and allegories.
Legend vs Myth - Difference and Comparison | Diffen
When I recently made a joke in one of my other threads it gave me an idea for this one. Bigfoot, the abominable snowman, the Loch Ness Monster all have something in common. All three of them are urban legends which got me wondering,.. even though I don't believe in any of them,.. is it possible that even a myth has at least a tiny bit of scientific truth to it?
Here's the evidence:
They're not really urban legends, they're cryptids - cryptozoological folklore.When I recently made a joke in one of my other threads it gave me an idea for this one. Bigfoot, the abominable snowman, the Loch Ness Monster all have something in common. All three of them are urban legends which got me wondering,.. even though I don't believe in any of them,.. is it possible that even a myth has at least a tiny bit of scientific truth to it?
Yes.When I recently made a joke in one of my other threads it gave me an idea for this one. Bigfoot, the abominable snowman, the Loch Ness Monster all have something in common. All three of them are urban legends which got me wondering,.. even though I don't believe in any of them,.. is it possible that even a myth has at least a tiny bit of scientific truth to it?
So what was Nebraska Man? myth or legend?A legend is presumed to have some basis in historical fact and tends to mention real people or events.
In contrast, a myth is a type of symbolic storytelling that was never based on fact.
I meant YES it is possible that a myth has a tiny bit of scientific truth to it.Which is what?
I meant YES it is possible that a myth has a tiny bit of scientific truth to it.
I personally believe that Paul Bunyan was a real person (to wit, a Nephilim).
His blue ox, Babe, though, is another matter altogether.
No.Could he be the same as bigfoot?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?