Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8984 total)
46 online now:
AZPaul3, ICANT, PaulK, Tangle (4 members, 42 visitors)
Newest Member: Jerry Johnson
Post Volume: Total: 877,305 Year: 9,053/23,288 Month: 68/1,544 Week: 343/518 Day: 11/57 Hour: 2/8


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bible Cryptids/Dinosaurs?
ringo
Member
Posts: 18268
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 121 of 202 (298461)
03-26-2006 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by LudoRephaim
03-26-2006 10:09 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
LudoRephaim writes:

Anybody with a brain can see that "shields" is figurative of "scales".

Yes, and scales are little sheilds - it is a direct one-to-one comparison. Comparing "fire" and "sparks" to "hot breath" is not the same kind of comparison at all.

You ignore my wikipedia post which said that Horses in the ancient past where said to snort flames....

So figurative language can be used to describe literal animals. Does that mean that all figurative language describes literal animals?

I have posted sources. Arachnophilia has too. Crashfrog as well.

As far as I know, arachnophilia and crashfrog would both agree that Leviathan is a mythical beast.

I would LOVE to see you quote far more sources than you have.

I only quoted Job to show the parts that you left out.

I'm not trying to "prove" anything. I'm only trying to get you to explain how you decide what is figurative and what is not. I'm still not seeing anything but "this bit is figurative and that bit isn't".


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-26-2006 10:09 PM LudoRephaim has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by arachnophilia, posted 03-26-2006 11:04 PM ringo has not yet responded
 Message 123 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-27-2006 8:24 AM ringo has not yet responded
 Message 124 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-27-2006 8:33 AM ringo has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 522 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 122 of 202 (298468)
03-26-2006 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by ringo
03-26-2006 10:52 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
As far as I know, arachnophilia and crashfrog would both agree that Leviathan is a mythical beast.

i would say that it's mythological, yes.

but let me give the "figurative language" idea a little thought, though. it does seem to be figurative for fire-breathing... but i'll see if i can dig anything else up.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by ringo, posted 03-26-2006 10:52 PM ringo has not yet responded

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 3628 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 123 of 202 (298572)
03-27-2006 8:24 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by ringo
03-26-2006 10:52 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Ringo writes:

Comparing "fire" and "sparks" to "hot Breath" is not the same kind of comparison at all.

Maybe not to you, but to the ancients it seemed okay, even when describing a Horse's snorts to fire

Ringo writes:

Does that mean that all figurative language describes literal animals?

Sometimes yes, sometimes no, depending on the animal described. I have shown that the "Leviathan" of Job 41 is not mythical.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by ringo, posted 03-26-2006 10:52 PM ringo has not yet responded

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 3628 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 124 of 202 (298576)
03-27-2006 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by ringo
03-26-2006 10:52 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
I have told you and told you again what is figurative:Simele,Metaphor,Metonymy,symbolism, etc. What isn't figurative? Anything that is NOT a metaphor, Simele, Metonymy symbolism, etc.

Crashfrog and Arachnophilia do believe that Leviathan is mythical, but my point is they actually posted sources that are reliable.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by ringo, posted 03-26-2006 10:52 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by ringo, posted 03-27-2006 9:26 AM LudoRephaim has responded
 Message 129 by arachnophilia, posted 03-27-2006 7:49 PM LudoRephaim has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18268
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 125 of 202 (298593)
03-27-2006 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by LudoRephaim
03-27-2006 8:33 AM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
LudoRephaim writes:

What isn't figurative? Anything that is NOT a metaphor, Simele, Metonymy symbolism, etc.

What I am asking you (again) is: How do you decide something is NOT a metaphor, etc.?

I don't care how many references you post to figurative language, past, present or future. That is not the issue. We all agree that figurative language exists.

I'm asking: how do you, LudoRephaim, decide what is figurative and what is not? Since the rest of us seem to agree that Leviathan was mythical, I want to know why you disagree. Why do you think crashfrog's interpretation and arachnophilia's interpretation and my interpretation are wrong and yours is right?

Until you can show why your interpretation is better, you have not "shown that the 'Leviathan' of Job 41 is not mythical".


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-27-2006 8:33 AM LudoRephaim has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-27-2006 3:49 PM ringo has responded

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 3628 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 126 of 202 (298753)
03-27-2006 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by ringo
03-27-2006 9:26 AM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Ringo writes:

How do you decide something is NOT a Metaphor,etc.?

When it doesn't LOOK like a Metaphor.

Why I believe that the "Leviathan" of Job 41 is not mythical while you do is that all the other animals mentioned in similar fashion to Leviathan in the book of Job (chapters 39-40) either are well known animals or animals that are not really impossible to fathom once existed. Another reasons is that while other parts of Leviathan's "anatomy" are agreed by you as being Metaphor (Leviathan's "doors" (jaws)"Garment" (skin) and shields (scales) in JOb 41)"fire" just CANNOT be a metaphor for anything else than fire. Heaven Forbid! (arach and Crashfrog not included in this last remark)

Leviathan does not have literal doors (it's mouth is not made out of wood, and it doesn't have a doorknob)it doesn't have literal shields on it's back (shields are weapons made of metal or wood used for defense. Scales are natural armor used for protection. They could in a sense be called "shields" but they are totally different things)and it does not shoot out of it's mouth literalfire.

Even if the "fire" is meant to be taken literally, it still doesn't prove that Leviathan actually breathed fire, as this site shows.

http://www.bibleandscience.com/science/dinosaurs.htm

so either way, it is NOT fire

this discussion is really going nowhere. It's starting to sound like one of those foolish controversies that Titus 3:9 talks about. I've used a lot of sources, you have used only words. It's as if you are here just to debate and not to share info that would be elightening on this thread. Unless you actually use more than rhetoric in this discussion, I suggest we drop this.

This message has been edited by LudoRephaim, 03-27-2006 03:50 PM


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by ringo, posted 03-27-2006 9:26 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by ringo, posted 03-27-2006 4:38 PM LudoRephaim has responded
 Message 130 by ramoss, posted 03-27-2006 9:04 PM LudoRephaim has not yet responded

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 3628 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 127 of 202 (298755)
03-27-2006 3:57 PM


BTW: the website I just quoted leans to the view that Behemoth is mythical, tough it might hint that it is based on a real animal. So here is a post that shows it could very well be a real animal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behemoth


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

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18268
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 128 of 202 (298772)
03-27-2006 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by LudoRephaim
03-27-2006 3:49 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
LudoRephaim writes:

How do you decide something is NOT a Metaphor,etc.?

When it doesn't LOOK like a Metaphor.

Then the obvious question is: what does a metaphor LOOK like?
How many metaphors do you have to add up before the whole animal becomes metaphoric?

... all the other animals mentioned in similar fashion to Leviathan in the book of Job (chapters 39-40) either are well known animals or animals that are not really impossible to fathom once existed.

That's exactly the point: since the description of Leviathan is not that of a "well-known" animal, why insist that it is one? Since it is described only in figurative terms, why insist that it is not figurative?

It's as if you are here just to debate and not to share info that would be elightening on this thread.

The OP says:

quote:
I was just wondering what other people's interpretations were about the Cryptids mentiioned in the Bible?

That's what you're getting. If you're only interested in Leviathan's shoe size, you're likely to be disappointed.

Make no mistake - this is a debate board. I'm just trying to help you get your point across more clearly.


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-27-2006 3:49 PM LudoRephaim has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-31-2006 6:58 PM ringo has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 522 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 129 of 202 (298832)
03-27-2006 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by LudoRephaim
03-27-2006 8:33 AM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Crashfrog and Arachnophilia do believe that Leviathan is mythical, but my point is they actually posted sources that are reliable.

no i didn't. i'm far too lazy. :D


This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-27-2006 8:33 AM LudoRephaim has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-31-2006 7:01 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3145
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 130 of 202 (298842)
03-27-2006 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by LudoRephaim
03-27-2006 3:49 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
When it doesn't 'Look' like a metaphor? That is pretty highly subjective, isn't it? This is particularly true that since you are working on a translation at the very best, and perhaps going through multiple translations before reaching the text you are evalutating.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-27-2006 3:49 PM LudoRephaim has not yet responded

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 3628 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 responded

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

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 3628 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 responded

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

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18268
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 133 of 202 (299926)
03-31-2006 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by LudoRephaim
03-31-2006 6:58 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
LudoRephaim writes:

Why do I believe that Leviathan's fire is figurative while you, arach, and crash think it is literal....

No no no no wait wait wait wait. Nobody said the fire-breathing is literal.

It's because anybody can see that the fire-breathing is figurative that we believe the whole animal is figuarative.

... the "leviathan" of Job 41 is a Croc....

See, the problem is that you're ignoring the whole point of the story.

God says to Job, "Look at the Leviathan. You can't catch him with a fish hook or a spear. You can't harness him. You can't control him in any way, and how much more powerful than that is God? Who are you to question God?"

Now, if Leviathan was a croc, Job's reaction would have been, "Give me enough guys and enough weapons and I'll turn your croc into shoes and purses."

It only takes three guys with spears and ropes to kill a croc. If Leviathan was a croc it would make the whole story a joke.

... this animal, when the evidence is looked at carefully, is a Crocodile.

Nope. Doesn't work at all. It's possible that crocodile sightings gave people ideas for the figuarative language used to describe Leviathan. But it can not be a literal crocodile - they're not near powerful enough.

It can not be any literal animal because God tells Job that men can not kill it.


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-31-2006 6:58 PM LudoRephaim has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by arachnophilia, posted 04-01-2006 5:19 AM ringo has responded
 Message 138 by LudoRephaim, posted 04-05-2006 9:20 AM ringo has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 522 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 134 of 202 (299999)
04-01-2006 5:11 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by LudoRephaim
03-31-2006 7:01 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

well, thank you. but i think i was pointing out a something that is technically accurate -- i don't think i HAVE posted any sources (other than the occasional passage of the original text).

i find the external sources to be subjective (someone's interpretation) or inaccurate, or sometimes not even fitting the text very well. posting something from the talmud, for instance, is only useful for demonstrating what a certain rabbi thought something meant.

in an instance like this, the only useful sources are the ones that compare ancient literature, linguistic origins and cognates, and make observations that are clearly and obviously in agreement with the text -- and i am too lazy to go find some of those. :D

but i'm kind of taking a back seat right now, see what you and ringo come up with. you've pointed out a thing or two that goes against one of my readings, so i'm left without an opinion at this time.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-31-2006 7:01 PM LudoRephaim has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 522 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 135 of 202 (300001)
04-01-2006 5:19 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by ringo
03-31-2006 7:34 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
No no no no wait wait wait wait. Nobody said the fire-breathing is literal.

i'm pretty sure i was. the book of job goes about saying "fire breathing" in a very figurative sounding way. but "his breath kindles coals" is figurative for "fire breathing." i don't suspect it's a metaphor, on top of the figurative language.

but i don't have an especially good argument for this right now. i'll wait to see what you guys come up with.

See, the problem is that you're ignoring the whole point of the story.

God says to Job, "Look at the Leviathan. You can't catch him with a fish hook or a spear. You can't harness him. You can't control him in any way, and how much more powerful than that is God? Who are you to question God?"

Now, if Leviathan was a croc, Job's reaction would have been, "Give me enough guys and enough weapons and I'll turn your croc into shoes and purses."

It only takes three guys with spears and ropes to kill a croc. If Leviathan was a croc it would make the whole story a joke.

[...]

It can not be any literal animal because God tells Job that men can not kill it.

this is a good observation.

i'd also like to point out leviathan is associated with the SEA, not just a river or watering hole. you don't go fishing for crocodiles. and as i mentioned before, leviathan is the modern hebrew word for "whale." it's something big, that lives in the water.

but i don't think it's a good enough reason to go reading prehistoric reptiles into it, either.


אָרַח

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

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by ringo, posted 04-01-2006 10:11 AM arachnophilia has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020