So I've finally started "participating" in a few discussions... debates... whatever one might call them here on Matchdoctor. I've always taken an active interest in many ideas and studies, and more or less nodded to myself and kept my opinions civil, meaning internal.
But now... ok. Here we go...
I tried making some logical points the other day about some data regarding Intelligent Design, I may as well have been debating fine points of table manners discussed in the Bible and contrasting with sleeping etiquette in verses found in the Tao Te Ching. The premise of faith is faith and should have no discourse with logic, science or theory... any theory. Dogma doesn't have a lot of fondness for theory.
However, there are certain people of certain faiths who feel bound and determined to "prove" or debate certain issues. Pity.
In the line of reasoning I went through (see my previous post: Time Is On My Side) I mentioned something about Dinosaurs in the Bible. I received a note "correcting" me on this issue.... suggesting I look up Job 40:15.
Now, I love science fiction. I was excited. Was this perchance where the Bible smuggled away the goods on "man walked beside the dinosaurs"? Could the fundamentalists be right? I had visions of discarded books of the Bible being found somewhere, describing the battle for dominance of the Earth with the early Jews.
No such luck.
I did a little research:
In Job 40:15, God says to Job, “Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.” This word behemoth appears only once in the whole Bible. This makes it difficult to translate because the full descriptions of behemoth in Job 40 do not match any known living animal.
http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/behemoth.html
It seems a mention of comparing the creature's tail to a cedar is at much debate:
http://bible.cc/job/40-17.htm
Especially as the idea of "like a cedar" lends itself to interpretation that the tail was as *big* as a cedar.
William Shakespeare used two words "will" and "nothing" quite a lot, and the double meaning at the time included the male and female genitalia, respectively. Those meanings have altered over time. It's no major stretch to give some consideration that the real items that are refered to by "behemoth" and "cedar" may not have survived time and/or translation over the millenia.
...again:
The entire description given in these verses fit certain types of dinosaurs very well. But we're going to zero in on one particular verse. It's in verse 17 it says, "He moveth his tail like a cedar:".
http://www.creationists.org/dinosaurs.html
Now, assuming by some descriptions shown in the Bible of what a cedar *looks* like... isn't the key word combination... moveth and cedar... describing that it sways like one? That would turn the phrase into a simile of motion, not a simile of proportionate size.
The case for "dinosaur" does seem to hinge on this description. Of course, there were mythical beasts in the imaginations of people long ago... creatures of faerie, monsters, giants, etc... I still have yet to see the remains of a unicorn or mermaid.
Egyptian culture at that time was filled with man-beast combinations in their artwork. Other cultures had things like minotaurs and hydras, spirits of elements and so on.
Did they also have dinosaurs?
Did anyone?
Concurrent cultures as old as the Jewish one, like Egypt, China and India all have a written language and records from ancient times. One might think that they would have some of their own written accounts of dealing with big carnivores, massive herbavores... maybe even some guide on how to domesticate and train a smaller one for riding.
If man walked with dinosaurs I would expect to find some conclusive proof... a tool made from a dinosaur bone, not from a fossil either. Sharp claws, jagged teeth... I'd think they'd be useful.
Assuming dinosaurs did roam the land with man.... why no cave paintings of them being hunted? The fossils are everywhere... surely some tribes in some lands ATE those big, beefy lizards.
Do any Jewish recipes for Bronto-burger lie hidden in a book somewhere? If so, isn't reptile a non-cloven hoof and therefore ok to eat? I'm not sure, I'm not Jewish.
Considering what pride man takes in trinkets from a difficult hunt and kill (lion rugs, elephant tusks, etc...) wouldn't a throne room somewhere have some nice giant ribs of that massive T-Rex showing off how brave their king was?
Not a trace, apparently. We can find arrowheads made of bone, combs and tools as well.... but none of a velociraptor bone. Hunted to extinction without a trace? Eaten- bone, skin and all?
Another thing... if there was a world wide flood... what killed the aquatic dinosaurs? If the waters merged both salt and fresh waters, why did both fresh and salt water fish survive? I would have expected one or the other to have been wiped out. God was selectively killing the BIG fish along with mermaids?
I think it may be time for someone to step forward and suggest that Christians focus on the part of the Bible they can claim, the New Testament... and leave the Old to those who wrote it, the Jews. I have a feeling they are better equipped to interpret it. Something like 5000 years of experience. The Christian "johnny come lately" crowd hasn't made up their mind about any books, ideas, denominations or revisions since the Romans decided to stop killing the cannibals (blood and flesh of Christ, yanno) and declared Jesus (Greek for Joshua) a deity, just like they declared Augustus Caesar a deity. It's a Roman tradition kinda thing.
For those who deny any "middle ground" creatues, a little of one thing and another in reference to evolution, I'd like to introduce you to Archaeopteryx:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archeopteryx
I would appeciate hearing from any Jewish people who would give some of their interpretation on this issue... as well as any recipies they might know for dinosaur meat.
Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)
|
|
read more blogs!
Blogs by Xanadath:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| God, Dinosaurs, Linguistics and Kosher Meals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
misschoos
|
Sep 10 @ 10:09AM
|
|
|
as well as any recipies they might know for dinosaur meat.
Quorn takes on the flavour of anything you cook with it, all you have to do is get hold of a decent sized dinosaur and cook it with the Quorn. 
Ok it's not strictly dinosaur meat, just tastes like it. 
|
|
JimNastics
|
Sep 10 @ 10:10AM
|
|
|
tastes like alligator.
|
|
kjac
|
Sep 10 @ 10:32AM
|
|
|
"man walked beside the dinosaurs"?
I saw this once before. When it was King Kong.
|
|
kjac
|
Sep 10 @ 10:33AM
|
|
And Jim, SuperCroc did not find your post amusing. 
|
|
hammertime
|
Sep 10 @ 11:18AM
|
|
|
I think it may be time for someone to step forward and suggest that Christians focus on the part of the Bible they can claim, the New Testament... and leave the Old to those who wrote it, the Jews. I have a feeling they are better equipped to interpret it. You might want to watch this:
http://videos.matchdoctor.com/3272/Lewis_Black_-_Was_the_earth_created_in_7_days.html
You have to consider Christian history. Here we have Christians using the Old Testament to prove their delusion archeology all the while persecuting the very people who wrote it because they were the Christ Killers. Thats true. The Christians have an evil antisemitic history beginning from Justin Martyr who invited the Jews to convert and when they didn't were then demonized and vilified for centuries. It wasn't until a few decades after the Holocaust that Catholic church dropped their official stance of Jews being held responsible for deicide (the killing of god).
Lets face the truth. The Nazi antisemtic war machine was fueled by stupid religious beliefs in the very people who carried out the horror on the front lines. Martin Luther was a major influence and one could even suppose Hither was Luther reincarnated.
In 1543 Luther wrote "On Jews and their Lies"
I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that these miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure to themselves even us, that is, the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them
There is no other explanation for this than the one cited earlier from Moses — namely, that God has struck the Jews with 'madness and blindness and confusion of mind.' So we are even at fault in not avenging all this innocent blood of our Lord and of the Christians which they shed for three hundred years after the destruction of Jerusalem, and the blood of the children they have shed since then (which still shines forth from their eyes and their skin). We are at fault in not slaying them. Rather we allow them to live freely in our midst despite all their murdering, cursing, blaspheming, lying, and defaming; we protect and shield their synagogues, houses, life, and property. In this way we make them lazy and secure and encourage them to fleece us boldly of our money and goods, as well as to mock and deride us, with a view to finally overcoming us, killing us all for such a great sin, and robbing us of all our property (as they daily pray and hope). Now tell me whether they do not have every reason to be the enemies of us accursed Goyim, to curse us and to strive for our final, complete, and eternal ruin!
Do you see history unfold?
The Old Testament is based on The Torah and pretty much reeked with mistranslations and resulting in delusional beliefs. I think when any Christian has a question about what's in the Old Testament they should ask a Rabbi or at least a Jew and get closer to the source. Lets face it too that Judaism itself copied much of its religion from Sumerian and Egyptian mythology so even when you do get closer to the source you're still far from reality.
|
|
hammertime
|
Sep 10 @ 11:33AM
|
|
Speaking of delusional archeology. Genesis talks about one eyed giants, the sons of god, who roamed the earth. Where do you think that fable came from? Well, there were fossils that were dug up over a few thousand years ago. Fossils of woolly mammoth when decomposed appears to be giant humans with one eye to someone with an active imagination driven by superstition. The one eye is that hole in the head where the trunk used to be. Thats all thats left when nothing but a skeleton remains.
I'm having a bit of a problem imagining these "giants" mating with humans. Thats more bizarre than any bestiality pornography but leave it up to religious folks to create extreme perversions they can fantasize about.
|
|
Martin666
|
Sep 10 @ 11:53AM
|
|
Obviously, man and the dinosaurs share a long mutual relationship together. There is much documented history about this, so I'm not sure what all the discussion here is about. The best known historically verifiable instance occurred in southern France about 40,000 years ago as Cro-Magnon man first moved into the territory of Neanderthal Man and began to supplant him in his own home range. You see, it was still cold because of the glaciers, and Cro-Magnon man came up with the strategy of killing a deer and then using that deers skin to keep him warm. This allowed him to better adapt to his environment and gave him a competetive edge in his conflict with the Neanderthals .
The Neanderthals appreciated this, however, and quickly moved to counter the Cro-Magnon advantage by developing their own clothing strategy. So each Neanderthal warrior went out and killed a brontosaurus and made a set of clothes out of it's skin. Then they went looking for Cro-Magnon intruders.
The problem, of course, was that each Brontosaurus skin weighed over 9,000 pounds and left the Neanderthal wearing it mostly unable to run. The Cro-Magnons, recognizing a good thing when they saw it, ran up and hit the neanderthals on the head with a stone ax. Thus endeth the neanderthals.
From this experience, modern man learned a valuable lesson: dinosaurs and humans don't mix.
|
|
hammertime
|
Sep 10 @ 12:09PM
|
|
The problem, of course, was that each Brontosaurus skin weighed over 9,000 Sounds like a Hummer and they certain use lots of fossil fuel so I guess in a sense those who drive Hummers are wearing a Brontosaurus.
|
|
Xanadath
|
Sep 10 @ 12:15PM
|
|
|
I'm still waiting for the authoratative voice of a Christian Scientist to link me to the "how to make a bris from pteradactyl wings" from Jewish tradition... or watch an actual debate over the Old Testament between a Christian, Jew and Muslim. Oh what fun!
|
|
eastham
|
Sep 10 @ 6:15PM
|
|
|
The antipathy that evangelicals hold for evolution is not, fortunately, shared by the vast majority of Christians. They hold the creation story in a Vulcan death grip even though believing in it is not a key tenet of Christianity. The last Pope, John Paul II, not exactly a flaminng liberal wrote not one or two, but a half dozen encyclicals on the importance of evolution and how evolution can easily co-exist with faith.
|
|
hammertime
|
Sep 10 @ 6:29PM
|
|
East,
The reason and the only reason they have this death grip on Creationism is pure politics. It has do with weaseling their way into the public educational system by challenging (unsuccessfully) evolution and introducing their pseudo-science for the specific purpose of introducing Christian dogma into public politics. There is no other reason. They want a theocracy.
|
|
kjac
|
Sep 18 @ 7:40PM
|
|
|
They want a theocracy.
Why not? Look how well it's working in Iran, Israel, and the rest of that region. Theocracy kills freedom, maims rights, and butchers common sense.
|
|
|