a big flaw in the old testament..

Originally posted by twhitehead
This is actually an example of very cunning thinking. You need to get rid of someone and you need a justification which the general populace will accept. You also appeal to peoples fear and superstitions and give them something to blame all the unexplained happenings on and something to blame all their failures on. ("My crops failed because of that witch" ...[text shortened]... of witch hunting is not confined to olden times, it still take place today in some societies.

True...but I refer to the ones who'd make the accusations, I'm talking about the ones that didn't yet still thought it was a totally fair system. (ie: the general populace)
I just made a poor job of getting this point across 😳 (I'll be going to bed in about 1/2 an hour after an 8 hour night shift)

Originally posted by DoctorDara
1. Scientific- Where? The Age of the Dinosaurs may have ended, but dinosaurs are still walking and swimming among us. Use your head, don't just regurgitate some crap you learned in 2nd grade. 98% is not 100% and if you believe in evolution you should be very happy that you're part of the same minority that survived. You can admit a shark is a dinosaur in one breath and then in the next talk about no scientific evidence of dinosaurs and humans co-existing. What crap. Honestly your logic baffles. Or lack therein. Think about it the next time you see a butterfly, a frog, or go to a sushi restaurant and order squid. As for more dinosaur-like sightings, most of them fall under the paranormal which I am trying to leave debates like does the Lock Ness Monster exist out of this.

I don't know where you got 98%/100%, but I didn't say it, so it was a phantasm of your brain
that you were arguing with, not me.

I will observe that your understanding of speciation is painfully lacking. A shark is not a
dinosaur. A coelacanth is a fish, not a dinosaur. A simple glance at a species-tree will
demonstrate to you that you are woefully confused.

Are there things which are biologically as old as dinosaurs which are living today? Yes. Some are
even older. But a crocodile isn't a dinosaur just because it has not evolved any further.

Now, if you want to say that leviathan refers to a crocodile, you will find no argument from me.
If you want to argue that it is a plesiosaur, then you are being absurd.

There is no scientific evidence that a dinosaur ever interacted with a human. The only reason that
anybody ever entertains the possibility is because they espouse a literal (mis)reading of this passage.

2. Literary- Using a comparison to describe how big, large, or wide something is does not make the underlying concept invalid that for example something is big, small, etc. I asked you not to speak from your personal opinion of the overall validity of Jewish oral/written tradition, but to the specific passages mentioned.

First, you never specified anything regarding my opinion, merely that I should offer the scientific
and literary reasons to discount belief that the Bible writers were referring to dinosaurs. The
general trends and procedures of Jewish oral/written composition are very material to a discussion
of the latter. Consequently, my comments about Jewish literary methodology are very relevant,
specifically because these documents are Jewish texts.

Perhaps you didn't read the wikipedia site you just quoted above, but you will notice that the author
offers several readings of the text. Perhaps you skipped it, but the very first interpretation offered
by author of the article is a midrashic reading. These beasts are metaphors for something
important to the Jewish people -- salvation at the end of days.

The very next explanation is the hippopotamus, noting that 'tail' could be a euphemism for penis
(which is also a common thing, consider the Song of Songs and the sexual metaphors used there).
Since the hippopotamus is indeed still alive, it's much more plausible than an apatasaurus.

The final proposal is that it is a dinosaur; but the author of the article observes that paleontology
suggests that sauropods went extinct 65 million years ago, and that the text is allegory
at best. Only believers in the literal truth of the Bible have to believe in the idea that dinosaurs
and humankind co-existed, the author notes.

Now, perhaps you think this is stupid (as you wrote above, even though you forgot), but at least
five different factors are contributing to your over all confusion:

1) This passage of the Bible must be literally understood;
2) Dinosaurs exist today;
3) Coelacanth, sharks, and whatever else anyone alive has seen are dinosaurs;
4) The Bible can be fluently understood without a background in Hebrew, Greek, and the literary
traditions in which the texts were written; and
5) The existence of paintings and writings about fantastical creatures means that the people who
wrote about them really saw them.

I'd be happy to walk you through the corrections required in order to amend any of these areas
(or any other areas which you seem to be misguided).

Street talk? I called you foolish, not stupid. One implies a lack of intelligence, another a lack of wisdom. You lack wisdom. Of course biblically the bible also says that it's impossible to correct a fool, so maybe I'm being foolish in trying to talk with you.

Perhaps you forgot already what you wrote, but if you look above, you will notice you wrote the
following.

Originally posted by DoctorDara
You gonna be stupid and try and tell me it's a hippo?

Tell me, is it a lack of intelligence that makes you forget the words you wrote, or a lack of something else?

Nemesio

Originally posted by Agerg
True...but I refer to the ones who'd make the accusations, I'm talking about the ones that didn't yet still thought it was a totally fair system. (ie: the general populace)
I just made a poor job of getting this point across 😳 (I'll be going to bed in about 1/2 an hour after an 8 hour night shift)

I doubt they thought it was a fair system. Very similar situations still take place in the more rural parts of Zambia. In many areas it is nearly impossible to get rich or if you do to display your wealth. Pretty soon someone will accuse you of using witchcraft to obtain wealth. Many factors are involved and very similar situations arise throughout society where successful, disliked or distrusted people are dealt with by society on false pretenses. True, drowning or burning at the stake are frowned upon these days but it doesn't mean that witch hunts don't happen. I wouldn't characterize it as foolishness as it happened in even the most educated societies and institutions.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I doubt they thought it was a fair system. Very similar situations still take place in the more rural parts of Zambia. In many areas it is nearly impossible to get rich or if you do to display your wealth. Pretty soon someone will accuse you of using witchcraft to obtain wealth. Many factors are involved and very similar situations arise throughout societ ...[text shortened]... terize it as foolishness as it happened in even the most educated societies and institutions.

hmm...I would prefer not to embarrass myself any further here and back down from this one 🙂 carry on the debate...(I'll come back when wide awake)

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Are you saying that depending on xlacir's reference, you might concede that centaurs existed?

Do you think fallen angels created dinosaurs?

1. No -- I only said I would have a better idea of what he's talking about.

2. No.