Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bible Cryptids/Dinosaurs?
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 131 of 202 (299919)
03-31-2006 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by ringo
03-27-2006 4:38 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
I was close to abandoning this thread, but I'll once more enter the fray...
Why do I believe that Leviathan's fire is figurative while you, arach, and crash think it is literal (and thus a mythical animal)is (among other reasons that I have posted) because of the sources that I found on that particular animal. The wikipedia source on Leviathan stated that the "fire" might be poetic language for it's "hiss" just as Horses where said to shoot fire out of their nostrils in ancient literature. That, combined with the powerful case on the "institute for Biblical and scientific studies" which demolishes the idea that the Leviathan of Job 41 is just a Croc and nothing more (and this site is not a creationist site of any sort. It is theistic evolutionist. Although I have a few differences with the people who run it in terms of how much of a role TOE played in the origin of animals and man, we both agree that the Bible is a book about how to get into Heaven, not about science)had me to conclude that the "leviathan" of Job 41 is a Croc, instead of a yet unknown animal not known to modern science.
How do I know what is figurative and what is not? I go by the evidence, and the evidence seems to show that the "Leviathan" of Job 41 is not a mythical or supernatural beast, or even a undiscovered creature, but just simply a Croc. If you read "dinosaurs and the Bible" by Ralph O. Muncaster, it shows that this animal, when the evidence is looked at carefully, is a Crocodile.
The wikipedia article on "Behemoth" seems to show that the ancients exaggerated on the discription of animals (see what it says on the tiger)so the "fire" could be an embellishment on the Croc. I personally dont think that the "fire" is embellishment (for theological reasons) but for people who are either acceptable that the Bible does indeed embellish at times, or those who have no Biblical religion at all (either Jewish or Christian)it should invoke considered thought.
I am NOT going to answer again "what is figurative" but if you want a direct answer, I can post Wikipedia and other articles on Metaphors, simele, personification, symbolism (fire might just be as such in this poem) and others. I stated that the evidence lead me to conclude that the "Leviathan" of Job 41 is a Crocodile. If you have any, please show evidence to the contrary, not words or opinion.
This message has been edited by LudoRephaim, 03-31-2006 07:01 PM

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by ringo, posted 03-27-2006 4:38 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by ringo, posted 03-31-2006 7:34 PM LudoRephaim has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 132 of 202 (299921)
03-31-2006 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by arachnophilia
03-27-2006 7:49 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Arach, dont think that for a minute. Your one of the toughest dudes I've debated on here

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by arachnophilia, posted 03-27-2006 7:49 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by arachnophilia, posted 04-01-2006 5:11 AM LudoRephaim has not replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 138 of 202 (301058)
04-05-2006 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by ringo
03-31-2006 7:34 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Ringo: a Croc's hide is strong enough to repell harpoons and spears (Dinosaurs and the Bible" Ralph O. Muncaster)
I will quote the book's words later. Gotta go.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by ringo, posted 03-31-2006 7:34 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by ringo, posted 04-05-2006 11:39 AM LudoRephaim has replied
 Message 140 by arachnophilia, posted 04-05-2006 5:36 PM LudoRephaim has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 141 of 202 (301382)
04-05-2006 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by ringo
04-05-2006 11:39 AM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Finally, you quote a SOURCE !!!!
Ask you a question: The source you posted shows that people today can hunt Crocs with spears, but it doesn't say HOW they hunt the crocs. Do they stab them through the back? Head? Do they get them to open their mouths and then stab them in the throat? Do they hunt full grown 20-foot adults (I dont think they would wade in water or sail in such a small boat if doing so, lest they be EATEN by a 20 foot Croc!)Are they hunting young Crocs? smaller females? Are you sure they can pierce a huge Croc's back? I'd like to see absolute proof that they can do it with spears.
Karankawa Indians (on average 6-7 feet tall, depending on what source you read) could kill quite large alligators by ramming huge logs into their mouths, but they didn't wade in the water or do so from such small craft.
The story in Job seems to take place in the time of Abraham, or Patriarchial age (Holman Bible dictionary, 924)which would put him in the Bronze age, when bronze was plenty and iron scarce yet precious. The spearmen in your pics seem to have iron tipped spearheads. I doubt they could exert enough force to pierce a 17-20 footer's back scales, let alone if they where made out of bronze. Can bronze spearpoints actually pierce a huge Croc's back?
You said before that if you had a few guys, a rope and some spears that you could take a Croc or something like that. Could you do it alone? Could you do it by yourself, armed with nothing but bronze age weaponry, against an animals that can weigh over 200 pounds, has a tough hide, can bite with a force of 3000 pounds of psi, and a nasty temper? What about if you where covered with boils (Job 2:7)? Job never gets to add "if I had a few guys" Because God asks if HE, not he and many others, HE could take on a Leviathan. There was plenty of time for a whole bunch of guys to be mentioned to help Job against Leviathan, just as fishhooks, ropes, spears, harpoons and hooks are mentioned as being available in this hypothetical clash between Job and Leviathan (Look closely at Job 41) Yet they never are. God doesn't need anybody to help him take on such beasts, and Job is being asked if he could do the same. Modern man can kill Crocs with spears. But what about the ancients of the Middle East, who had primitive brinze age weaponry? What about the people that lived where Job lived? Would they tackle a massive male croc?
You said that Leviathan was a single creature because it only mentions one, hence mythical. I guess wild oxen are mythical two, since only ONE is mentioned (Job 39:9-12) I guess wild donkeys are mythical two, since onlyone is mentioned in Job (Job 39:5-8)
You say that Leviathan is supernatural because, unlike a croc, it can't be killed or hunted (Job 41) Then I guess wild Oxen could not be domesticated, since they seem undomesticatable in the text (Job 39:9-12)Yet, if I remember corectly, all modern cattle breeds came from the wild ox, also called Aurochs (Land of lost monsters by Ted Oakes, 103)If aurochs where domesticated into modern cattle, why do they seem to be untameable in Job? Probably because Job and the people around him didn't know HOW to do so. Job doesn't seem to be an expert on domesticating wild animals (see Job 1)yet the Leviathan of Job 41 isn't a croc because Job himself can't kill it?
Remember: the Bible is not a science book. Lions are not the strongest animal alive (Proverbs 30:30)Aurochs where domesticated, and Crocs dont breathe fire.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by ringo, posted 04-05-2006 11:39 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by ringo, posted 04-05-2006 10:55 PM LudoRephaim has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 142 of 202 (301383)
04-05-2006 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by arachnophilia
04-05-2006 5:36 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Good thinking Arach Ill dig a little more into the source.
Chao

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by arachnophilia, posted 04-05-2006 5:36 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by arachnophilia, posted 04-06-2006 1:11 AM LudoRephaim has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 145 of 202 (309467)
05-05-2006 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by ringo
04-05-2006 10:55 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Ringo writes:
This is about as much as I could find about how a Croc might be killed with spears
Your source says that the scales or scutes on a Croc's back are so tough that spears and arrows Will Not go through though them sounds similar to how Leviathan is described in Job 41:7 where it asks (sarcastically) if you can fill his skin with Harpoons. And dont quote sources that says that a Croc can be killed with spears to the mouth or underbelly. It's dumb to do so when you remember that the Wild Ox is shown to be untamable in Job 39, yet prehistoric peoples domesticated it and made it what we would call domestic Cattle! It isn't that the Wild Ox is absolutely untameable or that the Croc is unkillable. Its the point that Job couldn't do either task. In his region people might not have known how to tame Aurochs or hunt large Crocs. If he can take on a flesh and blood animal (that other people can and have), how can he take on God.
Ringo writes:
well, apparently they apparently do wade in water and use small boats.
Yeah, and their dumb butts!
Ringo writes:
Did God rule out getting help?
He doesn't rule out equipment to fight the Leviathan, but the emphasis is on Job and Job alone, not him and a bunch of good'ol Boys.
Ringo writes:
No. I said the Bible specifically that there is only one Leviathan.
oh brother....
"Is the Wild Ox willing to serve you? Will he spend the night at your manger?"
"upon Earth there is not his like, who is made without fear" Job 41:33.
See how off that is? If Leviathan in Job 41 is a mythical creature because this verse seems to refer to him in the singular sense, then I guess the Wild Ox has to be figurative, because it alos refers to it in the singular sense! Are Aurochs Mythical??
BTW: what's the difference between "mythical" and "Supernatural"?
This message has been edited by LudoRephaim, 05-05-2006 05:27 PM

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by ringo, posted 04-05-2006 10:55 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by ringo, posted 05-05-2006 7:01 PM LudoRephaim has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 146 of 202 (309468)
05-05-2006 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by arachnophilia
04-06-2006 1:11 AM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Arachnophilia writes:
Go figure
Indeed.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by arachnophilia, posted 04-06-2006 1:11 AM arachnophilia has not replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 147 of 202 (309472)
05-05-2006 5:32 PM


This is a pretty foolish argument, but it ultimately depends on how we interpret Job.
I'll leave it at that.

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 153 of 202 (309641)
05-06-2006 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by arachnophilia
05-05-2006 11:26 PM


thank you Arach
Arachnophilia writes:
To be fair, I think you are being a little over-literal here
Arachnophilia writes:
Also, it's speaking consistently in the singular, as if one individual represents a species
THank you Arach It is hard to get that across for some reason. The Wild Ox is mentioned over and over as singular, yet there was an entire species of Aurochs and countless numbers of them in history. Leviathan is mentioned in the same singular sense, yet it HAST to be just one lol. Thank you for the help.
I knew about the tradition of the Leviathan you spoke of. It is very interesting. There is a ancient story that in the end times Behemoth and Leviathan would battle to the death. Their dead flesh would be edible and used for food by the Jews. These are neat traditions and stories.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by arachnophilia, posted 05-05-2006 11:26 PM arachnophilia has not replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 154 of 202 (309645)
05-06-2006 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by ringo
05-05-2006 7:01 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Ringo writes:
Yes, I know you think unicorns and dragons are real
"Unicorn" as rendered in the Good ol' King James Version (which you seem to LOVE to quote) is better rendered "Wild Ox" which is why more modern and far, far, far better Bible translations render it "wild Ox"
The idea of a species of horse with a horn in it's head is as far as I know not Biologically impossible, nor is a deformity on a Horse that seems to resemble a "horn" is not biologically impossible either (Ripley's "Believe it or not" has a file on a man who was actually growing a horn on the back of his head. Freaky stuff) But until somebody brings forth a fossil or some kind of powerful proof for Unicrons to exist, I will regard it a possible, though not probable.
Plus, the Unicorn might have been partially based on the Rhino, which from what i've heared is somewhat related to horses. So there you go.
As for Dragons: Anybody with a brain would know that Dragons are real animals. Just do research on an animal known as The KOmodo Dragon

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by ringo, posted 05-05-2006 7:01 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by CK, posted 05-06-2006 12:08 PM LudoRephaim has replied
 Message 156 by ringo, posted 05-06-2006 12:15 PM LudoRephaim has replied
 Message 157 by arachnophilia, posted 05-06-2006 3:51 PM LudoRephaim has not replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 160 of 202 (310254)
05-08-2006 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by CK
05-06-2006 12:08 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Charles Knight writes:
It has no connection at all with Dragons of the mythical sense
True, but the name is still used to describe it. We dont call them "Komodos" we call them "Komodo Dragons" and if an mideval European was ever to see one, they would probably call it a dragon as well. It may not breathe fire or fly or sack Castles, but it is called "Komodo Dragon" because it is so friggin big. In a sense, dragons do exist, but as Komodo Dragons, not as creatures of mythology and fairy tales.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by CK, posted 05-06-2006 12:08 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by CK, posted 05-08-2006 3:00 PM LudoRephaim has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 161 of 202 (310256)
05-08-2006 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by ringo
05-06-2006 12:15 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Ringo writes:
We als have dragonflies, which are not real dragons
But you seem to miss the wording. It's called a Dragonfly. It is not called a dragon, but the way the wording is used, a fly that is LIKE a dragon. Plus in prehistoric times there where dragonflies so large that they could be jokingly called just "Dragons".
Ringo writes:
A Figurative beast, not a real one.
How do you define figurative? hehehe

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by ringo, posted 05-06-2006 12:15 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by ringo, posted 05-08-2006 2:49 PM LudoRephaim has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 164 of 202 (310383)
05-08-2006 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by CK
05-08-2006 3:00 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Charles Knight writes:
like what?
Meganeura a Dragonfly with a 2.5 feet long wingspan.
Meganeura - Wikipedia
BTW: Do they also call Komodo Dragons just "giant monitors?"

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by CK, posted 05-08-2006 3:00 PM CK has not replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 165 of 202 (310385)
05-08-2006 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by ringo
05-08-2006 2:49 PM


Leviathan
Ringo writes:
If Leviathan was a mere animal, what's the point?
If Job cannot take on a mere animal, how can he take on God?

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by ringo, posted 05-08-2006 2:49 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by ringo, posted 05-08-2006 6:58 PM LudoRephaim has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5083 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 167 of 202 (313850)
05-20-2006 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by ringo
05-08-2006 6:58 PM


forest for trees
Ringo writes:
If the animal was a mere crocodile, Job could take it on.
And if the wild Ox was a mere animal, Job could tame it. Sigh....
The wild ox (aurochs) seems to be untameable to Job (Job 39:9-12). Yet people where able to tame them in the distant past (all your cattle breeds come from them)Even if Job could use other people, it seems to be impossible for him to tame the Wild Ox. maybe because he 1. Doesn't know how 2. isn't physically capable of the demanding work to do so (he did have cysts over all his body (Job 2:7)or 3. was too afraid to do so.
Since Job himself could not tame the wild ox (aurochs) yet other people where able to do so, what does that tell you about Job being unable to kill the Leviathan???

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by ringo, posted 05-08-2006 6:58 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by ringo, posted 05-20-2006 2:27 PM LudoRephaim has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024