evolution

"Her snorting throws out flashes of light;
her eyes are like the rays of dawn.
Firebrands stream from her mouth;
sparks of fire shoot out.
Smoke pours from her nostrils
as from a boiling pot over a fire of reeds.
Her breath sets coals ablaze,
and flames dart from his mouth. "
Indeed, NONE, it's a mythical beast that's described, NOT a dinosaur.
so, WHERE are the dinosaurs than?
Do also note that the latest translations have changed the names of Levithian and Behemoth into elephant, hippo or crocodile.

Dragon or Dinosaur my ass...sounds like my mom...

NOTE: I changed 'his' with the word 'her'

Many parts of the Bible are translated incorrectly, I believe. I heard somewhere that there was an entire book that was omitted because it, unlike the other books in the Bible, said that If I were Christian, I certainly would believe that.

The four gospels are only four out of dozens that were whittled down/eliminated by the formation of the church canon, and by censorship and physical destruction of rival texts.

yup, the translations are rather badly done from time to time 😖

Yerssot> Thansk for the chapter-reference.
I'm sorry, but the dinosaurs were not fire-breathers. To me, that description looks like a good old-fashioned dragon.

The One Part 2> Even if Jesus was not recognised as the son of God, what he supposedly accomplished was still amazing. But tere are no records of him from contemporary Greek or Roman scholars. And their writins have survived until today. At least ONE of them ought to've recognised this person, no?
And you BELIEVE you will have proof of the existence of divinity when we die. You don't really know that, do you?

Finti> 😆 Wasn't it Marilyn Manson who said that? Tha Hell to him sounded a lot more fun than heaven?

MCElite> It's okay 🙂 And yes, the Bible is full of faulty translations. Who can blame the old munks? Bad light, bad eye-sight, translating for hours and hours. Lucifer, as an example, was a faulty translation from the Latin "Morning star".

jE¬KiLL¬HYDe > I'm sure you can find Christian scientists. Not all scientists are fundamentalists.

Bad translations: It's debatable whether the word translated into "Virgin" (virgin mary) wasn't really a word meaning maiden. In Gensis it says that ELohim created shemaim and Årætz. Now, Hebrrw words ending n "im" are plural. So what do you get: "The GodS created the HeavenS and the Earth."

I know, that's why I said that TF should find me a dinosaur that fits the description 😖

I know, that's why I said that TF should find me a dinosaur that fits the description

Originally posted by The Omega
The One Part 2> Even if Jesus was not recognised as the son of God, what he supposedly accomplished was still amazing. But tere are no records of him from contemporary Greek or Roman scholars. And their writins have survived until today. At least ONE of them ought to've recognised this person, no?
And you BELIEVE you will have proof of the existence of divinity when we die. You don't really know that, do you?

Yes, you are correct on both accounts, Omega. There are no definite records of Jesus in the Greek and Roman historical texts. Still, there is no doubt in my mind that a guy like this existed. I also don't believe that his influence was as wide spread as many "scholars" would like their followers to believe. And that would explain why he isn't in the texts. Unlike others, I have no reason to debate his divinity with you, because their is no evidence whatsoever, and is a belief based solely on faith.

I believe that I will know one way or the other when I die. There's really no way it can be. I either cease to exist or I become a higher form in heaven or hell. I don't know which it will be, but I know the proof will be there.

I either cease to exist or I become a higher form in heaven or hell. I don't know which it will be, but I know the proof will be there.

The One Part 2> That there is no doubt in your mind, without proof, is, as you say, faith. And that is undebateable. But as long as you recognise the fact that you BELIEVE in something, in the absence of proof, that is fine. I do not understand this, honestly, but people believe in all kinds of things, from gods to aliens, and our culture accepts that.

And as Finti says - if we cease to exist upon death, you will be not be there to GET the proof, as you no longer exists. But, well, that's not really the issue here 🙂

The issue was evolution vs. creation. After 17 pages no one has offered me a single piece of evidence in support of creationism. My original complaint was how anyone in their right mind can claim evolution and creation should be taught as two equal but competing theories. There is plenty of evidence to back up evolution (as I offered on the first few pages of this thread) - there is NONE to back up creation.
All I've gotten are some feeble attacks on evolution, which were easily refuted - and anyone with half a brain should know that attacking ONE theory doesn't prove another.

It's like politicians attacking one another. As if that would make the attacking politician better than the one she/he's after. Odd idea.

These last few pages have been thoroughly useless ✅

Trying to prove how dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time and the humans made the dinosaurs go extinct... Yeesh... 😖

Originally posted by Darth Revan
I'm afraid I fail to see your point... 😕

For me the power of the "Thinking mind" is what helps these two become reasonable. People say that science is reasonable but NOT religion. Which is not true! For me both Science and Religion are true. Those that dismiss Religion are making a HUGE mistake! Simply because Religion involves the "Metaphysical" questions.

Unlike the Sciences, which focus on various aspects of nature, metaphysics goes beyond particular things to inquire about more general questions, such as "what lies beyond nature?", how things come into being?, what it means for something to be?, and whether there is a realm of being which is not subject to change and which is therefore the basis of knowledge?

A scientist can show everyone the ingredients that makes the universe. But deep in reason can she/he explain the purpose of the big bang? A scientist can explain how the Big Bang generated, but the question goes beyond that! What was the purpose of such an event for? Thus Metaphysics enters here and some metaphysics arguments involve religious ideas such as Theology.

Originally posted by The Omega
The One Part 2> That there is no doubt in your mind, without proof, is, as you say, faith. And that is undebateable. But as long as you recognise the fact that you BELIEVE in something, in the absence of proof, that is fine. I do not understand this, honestly, but people believe in all kinds of things, from gods to aliens, and our culture accepts that.

And as Finti says - if we cease to exist upon death, you will be not be there to GET the proof, as you no longer exists. But, well, that's not really the issue here 🙂

The issue was evolution vs. creation. After 17 pages no one has offered me a single piece of evidence in support of creationism. My original complaint was how anyone in their right mind can claim evolution and creation should be taught as two equal but competing theories. There is plenty of evidence to back up evolution (as I offered on the first few pages of this thread) - there is NONE to back up creation.
All I've gotten are some feeble attacks on evolution, which were easily refuted - and anyone with half a brain should know that attacking ONE theory doesn't prove another.

It's like politicians attacking one another. As if that would make the attacking politician better than the one she/he's after. Odd idea.

I said evolution and creationism should be taught as equals. Not having grown up in Georgia like I did (oh boy could I tell you stories!), you will have to trust me that this is a good idea for this particular issue. Not neccessarily good for another state or country. Georgia is the belt buckle of the Bible Belt of the US. There are just too many people with influence that will eliminate evolution completely if the issue is forced. Despite the original post, evolution is not banned, but not taught as the premier theory of human development. I think the kids should be exposed to all lines of thinking with nothing taking precedence over another. Let them decide for themselves.

My horoscope says it all about my views of great scientific minds.

Gemini: (May 21—June 21)
You've always believed that you can judge a man by his handshakes, which is why you continue to denounce the theories of Stephen Hawking.

🙂

Not having grown up in Georgia like I did (oh boy could I tell you stories!),

Darth Revan> (Hands you a cookie) I know EXACTLY have you feel.
Windancer> That YOU think science is religion, because YOU are religious, is just plain silly. And I do dismiss religion. Tell me one good reason why I shouldn't? Religion has done ALL the things I personally believe are morally wrong.
You need a meaning with your life? Fine. That still doesn't prove that science is religion - that is - something people believe in the absense of proof. Science relies ON proof.
The One Part2> Ah, but NOW you've pulled POLITICS and religious fanatics onto the stage. I understand your point. Rather have both evolution and cretaion taught, than risking the fanatics remove evolution all-together. However - that MUST be fought regardless, even if you're just ONE man (woman?). We should not teach our children to believe in things that cannot be proven in schools.

Finti> My symphathies. I've never been in Arkansas, but I know people who has...

Arkansas was great, some church societies was not

Originally posted by The Omega
Windancer> That YOU think science is religion, because YOU are religious, is just plain silly.

What??? is obvious you didn't read my first post in this thread! I'm NOT a religious person! All I said was that to dismiss Religious ideas or theories was a HUGE mistake! So you don't think that Theology isn't significant for humanity many questions???

Originally posted by The Omega
And I do dismiss religion. Tell me one good reason why I shouldn't?

Well, that's the choice YOU made! I'm not going to plead or ask you to reconsider your views! If you dismiss religion, Fine! that's your choice in this matter!

Originally posted by The Omega
Religion has done ALL the things I personally believe are morally wrong.

You are only looking for the bad things that religion has done! There are also many things that religion, and religious people have done in the past to help humanity method of thinking!. How has Religion help humanity? For a starting point take a look at the contribution that several man have given to Philosophy! Examples: Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, Comte, Berkeley, Descartes and the list goes on!

Originally posted by The Omega
You need a meaning with your life? Fine.

The meaning of life? We all need it! Not just me! Life isn't all about science and the mechanics behind it! There is so much more that needs to be discover, science is only the tool but NOT the answer to existence!

Originally posted by The Omega
That still doesn't prove that science is religion - that is - something people believe in the absense of proof. Science relies ON proof.

Sure you need proof to find the truth! How about using Metaphysics to go beyond that? Why settle for the mechanics that work behind a thing? Why not dig deeper and find the essence of a thing? Science can do it, but NOT alone it also requires extended Philosophical ideas!

Dont you think lifes alot more fun without meaning?

Omega> how come you think religion is wrong, and apparently virgin was just used as a word for young mother.

Awhile ago someone said it was illegal for guys not to be married over 20 somewhere i heard jesus was married but this was ommited from the bible (its probably crap and how did they know this if it wasnt in the bible?)

A survey was done about two years ago about religion v science adn the most religious people (in general) tyrned out to be scientists purely becos they wanted answers to higher questions (not really related just thought it was interesting.)

and apparently virgin was just used as a word for young mother.

its probably crap and how did they know this if it wasnt in the bible?)

And some of the gospels that were scraped, like the Gospel of Thomas very much said that Jesus was married. But the Gnostic gospels didnt tell about Jesus as a divine being nor that you had to be divine to have a direct contact to God, so it never made "The NT".

well, it's clear that finti here is right!
if it doesn't fit the picture of perfect it was kicked out, the bible is one of the biggest propagandabooks there is