quote:

---

Originally posted by spin

​

The text I have definitely says BHMWT.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arachnophilia

​

so it does. interesting.

---

בהמות in Isaiah 30:6 is applied differently (both contextually and grammatically) than בהמות in Job 40:15.The term in Isaiah is the plural construct form: "beasts of . . ."Amlodhi

oh, ok.see, this is why i need to learn hebrew. next fall, i suppose.

Hi Amlodhi. Naturally, I don't agree with this analysis, though it may eventually be correct. Behemoth and beasts have the same appearance in Hebrew (as very small "minute" is like sixty seconds "minute"), however, I have pointed to two indicators which support thr choice of Behemoth:

1. the phrase is Behemoth of the desert (Negeb), remembering 1 Enoch 60:7-8
   ​
   And on that day were two monsters parted, a female monster named Leviathan, to dwell in the 8 abysses of the ocean over the fountains of the waters. But the male is named Behemoth, who occupied with his breast a waste wilderness named Duidain
   ​
   Behemoth of the wilderness in Ethiopian translated into English is the desert of the Hebrew original (just as the bohu of Gen 1:2 was the desert waste, empty of life). And
2. in the following verse we have a reference to Rahab, the third in the tehom/leviathan/rahab terms to refer to the the watery chaos dragon, associated a number of times with Behemoth as the above citation indicates.

Obviously the phrase itself M$) BHMWT NGB gives no indication that it could mean the plural "beasts". You have to work from what follows to try to validate the "beasts" reading.To go against something I've already said, one proposed etymology of Behemoth is from Egyptian p-ehe-mu (water beast/ox), which does suggest the hippopotamus. We are in a passage specifically about Egypt.The reading of "beasts" seems generally questionable.spinThis message has been edited by spin, 12-11-2004 02:56 PM

There are plenty of scripture references of dinosaurs in the Bible try these:
Psalms 74:13; 91:13; 148:7
Isaiah 43:20
Job 40; 41And may I say you mentioned earlier that most Christian's do not understand evolution and I do not doubt that there is an amount of veracity to this, but at the same time are you going to tell me that evolutionists do? And the fact that you say the Bible does not mention men and dinosaurs lived together tells me right there you do not understand our beliefs.

Welcome FireHazard.I'd suggest that in a post like this it would be convenient if you would copy the actual text of the scriptural reference into your post. This will save time for people who do not have the whole thing memorized.

Welcome to the site - if you want to reply to someone - click on the reply button under the post then people can see who you are talking to.

Well,let's look at those. Nope,no dinosaurs there. Nope, no dinosaurs there. Nope, no dinosaurs there. Sure, but I do think many, many Christians also understand Evolution. No one questions your beliefs. All we say is that there is NO evidence that dinosaurs and man lived at the same time.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Originally posted by spin

​

Naturally, I don't agree with this analysis, though it may eventually be correct.

---

And you know that your opinion is one that I don't dismiss lightly.The plural construct form is grammatically correct from the viewpoint that it refers to any of the referent beasts (plural; asses, camels, lion and lioness, viper and flying seraph) of or (from) the Negev (southern desert).However, I do see your point. If the phrase "The burden of the beasts of the Negev" is an introductory preface to the proclamation itself (which I think it is), then "behemoth" here need not be referring to the later mentioned "beasts" in the plural.In that case, the phrase might be more properly interpreted: "The proclamation (of doom) of the "behemoth" (singular metaphor) of the south". Alluding, (of course), to Egypt (as well as to those Judeans relying on, and fleeing to, Egypt).Isaiah does seem to use "rahab" as a synonym for Egypt. I can't off-hand though think of another instance where he (or anyone) metaphorically refers to Egypt as "behemoth".Nonetheless, your point is well taken and I intend to look into this further.As always, thanks for the interesting insights.Amlodhi

Actually I think this link shows a good deal of evidence of Dinosaurs and Humans coexsisting:
Dinosaur and Human Co-existence: FOOTPRINTS
What makes it all the worse is that the above is from a simple google search...amazing what happens when you do some actual digging, here have another link:
More Evidence that Dinosaurs and Man Co-existed !Plus are you really unable to see the Bible talking about dinosaurs in those references, I figured that most would consider a dragon a dinosaur guess not, I did however notice you did not mention the passages from Job so here let me show you, by the way this is God showing his strength above even the Leviathan which most scolars will agree is probably what we consider a Bracciasauras or however you spell it:
Job 41:1 Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down? 2 Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn? 3 Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee? 4 Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever? 5 Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens? 6 Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants? 7 Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish spears? 8 Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more. 9 Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him? 10 None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me?By the way, this was all easily accessed by doing a Biblical search at Read the Bible. A free Bible on your phone, tablet, and computer. | The Bible App | Bible.com which just goes to show even us average Joes who couldnt possible comprehend evolution are able to get in and at least defend the only moral thing left in society today.GOD BLESS

Paluxy Tracks. ROTFLMAOYou're talking to someone who's actually tramped that area. Trust me, the only "Human Footprints" there were hoaxes. Ain't that the truth. LOL. I believe that's what I said. Are you saying you can see a dinosaur there?I skipped the Isaiah and Job passages because they've been fully discussed here many, many times.

BUT...

even if we found dinosaurs living tomorrow it would have no adverse effect on the Theory of Evolution. It might strengthen it slightly because for the first time we'd get to study soft parts and actual behaviour.As a Christian, I have to say that Evolution is a fact and that the Theory of Evolution is the best explanation anyone has come up with so far. What moral thing is that? Ignorance? Bad Theology? Worse science?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You didn't dig far enough. Here's a few for you:From Acts and Facts Magazine | The Institute for Creation Research:"In view of these developments, none of the four trails at the Taylor site can today be regarded as unquestionably of human origin. The Taylor Trail appears, obviously, dinosaurian, as do two prints thought to be in the Turnage Trail. The Giant Trail has what appears to be dinosaur prints leading toward it, and some of the Ryals tracks seem to be developing claw features, also. ... The various controversial prints labeled as human by Carl Baugh in recent years are of uncertain origin, and at best are not comparable in quality to prints at the sites discussed above, thereby providing no support for the original position."From Missing Link | Answers in Genesis ""Those researchers who were previously enthusiastic about the Paluxy tracks and have now withdrawn their unqualified support include such creationist notables as John Morris (who even wrote a book about them, but had the courage to publicly withdraw) and Paul Taylor (head of Films for Christ, which made the famous film Footprints in Stone). It cannot be said of either of these people that they did not personally study the trails in great depth, nor that they had a motive for not wanting them to be human tracksquite the opposite. Taylor had the courage to withdraw his popular film because he had seen enough evidence, even in the famous ‘Taylor trail’, to have to say that one should not use them anymore. I.e. he went from open enthusiasm to extreme caution, which is our view. It seems some quarters in creationism are stuck in somewhat of a time warp in this matter."And, of course, the ultimate source of Paluxy information, http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html:"For many years claims were made by strict creationists that human footprints or "giant man tracks" occur alongside dinosaur tracks in the limestone beds of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose Texas. ...However, the "man track" claims have not stood up to close scientific scrutiny, and have been abandoned even by most creationists. "

Well, there's some pretty steep differences. Not the least of which is that dragons are fairy tales, and dinosaurs are a family or archosaurs that went extinct 65 million years ago.And the fire-breathing, flying, shapeshifting, magic, etc. Funny, but I've never seen a single one of you "average Joes" do anything but either accept the veracity of the scientific theory of evolution over creationist clap-trap, or run off with your tail between your legs. As it happens, you do actually need to comprehend evolution before you can "get in."

Jar, you have to be just the most repulsive person on the earth to sit there and make the claim that you are a christian but then support evolution; it is spitting in the face of God, to go as far as to say His word is untrue and defend evolution is repulsive and hypocritical, the idea of even hearing you say those words sickens and shocks me, so before you start laughing at me for actually trusting my faith how bout you reexamin your own because sounds like God is going to be doing some serious work in your life. Now to actually go out and say the theory of evolution is full proof and factual is arrogant, am I to understand the idea of an all-knowing, all-poweful, loving God creating the universe is hard to believe, but that false science, mathmatical improbabilities, and constant bombardment of all that is morally right, is easy to believe because by accepting this "theory" which should be considered a hypothesis since it can not be proven is horrendous, and frankly arrogant. And since I am sure you are going to come back with how can you prove what you say, let me just say a couple of things, since evolution has been introduced to our soceities it has spread like cancer, infecting different avenues of life, and now it is being taught in our schools, even though the Senate has ruled it to be a religion, which just goes to show more stupidity. Since you believe in evolution, I guess it is safe to suggest that you believe in survival of the fittest, which I will say is basically true, in the animal kingdom, and maybe the business world, but it should have no standing in soceity. Too bad for the unborn children that are going to be killed today because they are helpless, and what by the above law would be considered, "unfit" since they cant survive. Is this what you really what to claim to...a foundational belief system that leaves men spiritually bankrupt?
And you know what being that I am still really young and inexpierenced with the world, I can not prove dinosaurs exsisted besides what I read in the Bible, which I believe to be true, as does any Christian who honestly believes in Christ. Like I said I maybe really inexpierence with the world, but from what you have demonstrated it is not something I am looking forward to...

I didn't know that!!!!

yah ruled a religion in 1961 Torcaso v Watkins:
-"Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the exsistence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, SECULAR HUMANISM, and others."What does Secular Humanism teach when concerning creation of the universe and the world EVOLUTION so talk about hypocrits in our own Senate. The problem is it didnt receive as much publicity because Secular Humanism was dominating and they kept it under tight wraps.
So if it is so wrong to teach the Bible in schools how can we teach evolution?