Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 2:06:37 GMT -5
Anyone recall the images Xna posted on the Humor thread of so-called "Bibical animals"? ie Leviathan, unicorn, seven headed dragon of Revelations and the Behemoth. These weren't what translators and artists made them out to be - they were either common animals still with us or as symbols of something (ie the seven headed dragon.)
In a similar vein Rational posted a graphic of the so- called biblical Earth. This is just as disingenuous as the biblical monsters.
When the bible said the sun rose in the East and set in the West it was simply stating the obvious (and Einstein would say that is perfectly valid.) It speaks of the "four corners of the Earth" in the same way.
As far as I can tell, there is no formal description of the Earth or the Universe in the bible. As Galileo made clear "The bible tells us how to go to Heaven, not how the Heavens go."
It's grist for the mockers and Atheist's Mill. I am impressed that people have to resort to caricatures and misrepresentation to mock the bible.
But the bible DOES tell us how the Earth came to be in Genesis. First God created the heaven then the Earth and the Earth was dark and oceanic and there was no land until it rose from the ocean and the atmosphere became transparent and life came out of the sea and life came out of the land and finally God made man in his own image and breathed life into this man, and set him amongst other humans - already upon the Earth.
That is seriously impressive. Until about fifteen years ago scientists still believed the Earth was a dry, molten planet with a transparent atmosphere. This annoyed me as it didn't agree with the dark ocean planet of Genesis.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Oct 29, 2015 8:34:51 GMT -5
For some folks, imagery is an important part of expressing the inexpressible portion of their belief structures. I find no fault with that. In fact, I believe that images are often the most effective method of communication between individuals. Images convey information and knowledge, that is often more revealing than the "dressed-up" and "socially tolerable" speak so often evidenced in written and spoken communication.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 29, 2015 10:23:58 GMT -5
The problem with language is that it is subject to abuse. Swearing and cursing are repeat offenders, as well as ill-conceived sanctimony.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 29, 2015 13:29:29 GMT -5
These weren't what translators and artists made them out to be - they were either common animals still with us or as symbols of something (ie the seven headed dragon.) That is a convenient way out. Either the bible had correctly stated something about an animal that exists or, rather than admit there is an error, let's call it a 'symbol'. Call it what you will. The various models of the world/universe have been created for centuries by people reading the description presented in the bible and rendering it on paper. For the most part these renderings were done by theists and not atheists. While it certainly is still in use today, most humans will state that it is incorrect. You can say the stars will fall from the sky but the concept of stars falling reveal a lack of knowledge regarding the makeup of the universe. Come on bert, you are the one saying that the bible gets it right. There is the serious under counting of the number of stars present. Does the drawing match the description or not? You left out the part where there was light and darkness before the sun was formed. You forgot to mention that the bible has the earth being created prior to the sun. You completely ignored the firmament - a dividing 'structure' between two bodies of water. Impressive? Life could arise from land or sea. And the bible states both. I think you see it as impressive because you select the parts that can be twisted into some sort of support for current theories and just ignore the parts that simply don't make sense. Or call them symbols.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 16:56:35 GMT -5
KJ version: [1] In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. This is not a preamble to the six days. First the "heaven" and then the Earth. No time, no method.
[2] And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
The existence of an early ocean was not accepted until 2005 when Australian scientists were able to study the chemical composition of zirconian crystals dating from the pre-continent age.
[3] And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. [4] And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. [5] And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Assuming a Titan analog, the early Earth would have been dark until the cloud deck cleared, bringing light. This would have exposed the day and night cycle caused by the Earth’s rotation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 17:00:38 GMT -5
The sequence in Genesis for life is out of step. Genesis states the Earth brought forth life, then the seas.
In correct sequence, to an observer, the seas bring forth life, then the land brings forth life. But life didn't evolve from the land, as far as we can tell. What this verse is telling us is that every land plant and land animal didn't make some trek out of the oceans - it just appeared on land as if the land itself had created life.
I find the oceanic planet interesting too. How long ago did scientists believe the continents were as old as the Earth itself?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 17:03:40 GMT -5
From the humor site, to Xna, re mythic animals...
There is no "unicorn" for instance, in the bible. That's just an odd translation of the Hebrew "re'em." And no-one knows what a re'em is.
Leviathan is any large sea creature in Hebrew - such as a whale, large shark etc..
The only valid graphic is Dagon, and this was a Semitic fertility god.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 29, 2015 17:56:45 GMT -5
KJ version: [1] In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. This is not a preamble to the six days. First the "heaven" and then the Earth. No time, no method.Spin it as you need to bert, but without the sun there is not possibility for the earth. 4 days before there were stars, sun, and moon? It may well be the oldest bit of earth ever found but the conclusions reached speak to the ratio of oxygen isotopes and the fact that there could have been liquid water. There are also the remains of the radioactive decay that help with the dating. But still, most zircon is formed in magma so when the earth was formed there would not have been a lot of standing water. And from where did the light originate? Missing out on the sun when telling the story of the creation of the earth is a rather large gap in the story.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Oct 29, 2015 17:59:05 GMT -5
From the humor site, to Xna, re mythic animals... There is no "unicorn" for instance, in the bible. That's just an odd translation of the Hebrew "re'em." And no-one knows what a re'em is.
Leviathan is any large sea creature in Hebrew - such as a whale, large shark etc..
The only valid graphic is Dagon, and this was a Semitic fertility god. Job 39:9-12King James Version (KJV) "Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?" If the KJV was good enough for Jesus, then it's good enough for me. Why would anyone dare question the King James Version? So don't mess with the KJV. Remember these too? MAT 5:18"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Rev 22:19"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 18:28:17 GMT -5
Weak argument Xna. Sorry. What we think of as "unicorns" today wasn't what other generations thought. We can be sure when the biblical author wrote "unicorn" he wasn't thinking of a flying horse with a horn on its head.
Another quite interesting one is the word "world." ie the whole world was flooded in Noah's day. In Jesus day the term "world" meant the Roman Empire.
Note how we have changed the meaning of the word "universe" in our own generation. It used to mean "everything out there" but now it means "one of many possible places out there."
|
|
|
Post by xna on Oct 29, 2015 18:34:00 GMT -5
Weak argument Xna. Sorry. What we think of as "unicorns" today wasn't what other generations thought. We can be sure when the biblical author wrote "unicorn" he wasn't thinking of a flying horse with a horn on its head. Oh well, I can still believe there are Narwhal's and those other polycephalic beasts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 18:52:05 GMT -5
Quote - "Spin it as you need to Bert, but without the sun there is not possibility for the earth. 4 days before there were stars, sun, and moon?"
It says that God created the heaven and the earth. Cue to scene 1, day 1 - you are standing on the earth, already formed. The "heavens" - already formed.
It is not hot and dry, but cold, dark and very wet.
Let me guess, without research - first reference to oceanic earth - bible first reference to continents emerging - bible first reference to cloud earth - bible first reference to life coming from the ocean - bible first reference to humans being the "last" creation - bible
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Oct 29, 2015 19:39:41 GMT -5
Quote - "Spin it as you need to Bert, but without the sun there is not possibility for the earth. 4 days before there were stars, sun, and moon?" It says that God created the heaven and the earth. Cue to scene 1, day 1 - you are standing on the earth, already formed. The "heavens" - already formed.
It is not hot and dry, but cold, dark and very wet.
Let me guess, without research - first reference to oceanic earth - bible first reference to continents emerging - bible first reference to cloud earth - bible first reference to life coming from the ocean - bible first reference to humans being the "last" creation - bibleI don't follow this kind of thing THAT closely. But I thought there was now enough evidence to keep one's mind open to the possibility that life on earth first came from outer space?
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Oct 29, 2015 19:56:57 GMT -5
These weren't what translators and artists made them out to be - they were either common animals still with us or as symbols of something (ie the seven headed dragon.) That is a convenient way out. Either the bible had correctly stated something about an animal that exists or, rather than admit there is an error, let's call it a 'symbol'. Is there any reason to suppose (and I am not restricting the question to Christianity) that the ancients ever intended any of their writings to be taken literally? To them, expressing life's deepest Truths, relied on mystery, metaphor and myth. Something that literalism (which I suspect only showed up with a Newtonian view of the world) could never encompass. Myth does not equal a lie (contrary to how a lot of people might see it in our day and age). It is reaching for Truths that are otherwise inexpressible. Words, at best, are pointers to an underlying reality. They are not reality anymore than a restaurant menu equals a meal.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 29, 2015 20:02:59 GMT -5
Weak argument Xna. Sorry. What we think of as "unicorns" today wasn't what other generations thought. Really? What did they think? How can we be sure? Unicorns, minus the wings, have been referred to for a long time. 2,500 years before Jesus. Now too far removed from the time the OT was written. Can you support your premise that the writer was not thinking of a one horned animal? This also needs a little research. 'World' in the Greek of the time of Jesus sometimes included the earth, everything on the earth, and even the stars. Do you have anything to support your premise? Usually it is preceded by either a definite article (the universe) or a possessive pronoun (our universe). Maybe we should start using Universe when referring to our universe and universe(s) when referring to hypothetical universes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 20:03:24 GMT -5
Sharon - I think it's called Panspermia - the life seeding of earth from space.
Fred Hoyle, I think... The theory is getting more traction these days. Just this week - oxygen found on a comet.
It could be that life moves from planet to planet, and from star system to star system.
But it needs to be fairly primitive - maybe at the amino, RNA, DNA stage max.
As an aside - we are sending machines into space. Soon machines in space will create more machines. It could be that alien "life" is machine - having outlasted its creators.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 20:14:01 GMT -5
Quote - "This also needs a little research. 'World' in the Greek of the time of Jesus sometimes included the earth, everything on the earth, and even the stars. Do you have anything to support your premise?"
Greece wasn't invented in Noah's time. People's idea of what the world was continued to change until the 1500's. Words change, meanings change.......
I looked up Unicorn, the Hebrews spoke of an animal called Re'em. The 1611 KJ translators had no idea what this was.
[râʾem, râʾeym, reym, rem /reh·ame/] n m. From 7213, TWOT 2096a, GK 8028, Nine occurrences. AV translates as “unicorn” nine times. 1 probably the great aurochs or wild bulls which are now extinct. The exact meaning is not known. 1 reem or רְאֵים reem or רֵים rem or רֵם rem (910b), from 7213, a wild ox:--wild ox(7), wild oxen(2).2 8028 רְאֵם (reʾēm): n.masc. ≡ Str 7214, TWOT 2096a—1. LN 4.1–4.37 (most versions) wild ox, aurochs, i.e., an extinct, long-horned, ancestor of the domestic cattle, Bos primigenius bojanus (Nu 23:22, 24:8, Dt 33:17, Job 39:9, 10, Ps 22:21[EB 21], 92:11[EB 10], Isa 34:7+), note: kjv, lxx, VULG. translate as a single-horned animal, such as rhinoceros or mysterious unicorn, 2. LN 4.1–4.37 unit: בֵּן רְאֵם (bēn reʾēm) adolescent wild ox, i.e., a non-domestic ox likely under two years old (Ps 29:6+) 3
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Oct 29, 2015 20:36:22 GMT -5
Sharon - I think it's called Panspermia - the life seeding of earth from space.
Fred Hoyle, I think... The theory is getting more traction these days. Just this week - oxygen found on a comet.
It could be that life moves from planet to planet, and from star system to star system.
But it needs to be fairly primitive - maybe at the amino, RNA, DNA stage max.
As an aside - we are sending machines into space. Soon machines in space will create more machines. It could be that alien "life" is machine - having outlasted its creators. On having based a great deal of my efforts in this life based on whether something holds the value of a '1' or a '0', I strenuously reject the idea that anything of import could ever be described as a machine. No more than Newtonian physics offers an explanation for 'stuff' that is currently on the radar screen of our species. When I read of some of the advances in quantum computing these days, and some of the suppositions of where it may go, I get the sense that they are approaching something much closer to "reality". But our best understandings and imaginations are still primitive at best. It is crazy. It is wonderful. It is awe-inspiring. But I wouldn't doubt that we. as a species, will grow into it - provided we don't dead end ourselves as an evolutionary impulse of the universe before then. Back to the sixties and the "We are stardust" songs. I have always resonated with these.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 20:47:54 GMT -5
Nathan I don't watch Youtube - bandwidth issue. And I would be wary of watching this one in any case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 20:56:57 GMT -5
Nathan I grew out of dragons when I was in my teens.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 29, 2015 21:17:19 GMT -5
Quote - "Spin it as you need to Bert, but without the sun there is not possibility for the earth. 4 days before there were stars, sun, and moon?" It says that God created the heaven and the earth. Cue to scene 1, day 1 - you are standing on the earth, already formed. The "heavens" - already formed.There is nothing about the formation of the heavens on day 1. And on day two there is the formation of the firmament, a strange thing. You are ignoring data that is present, and just as relevant as verse 1,: And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.That was day 4. Not in the beginning - it was hot enough to form minerals in the magma. Humans are not the last creation. There are many species 'newer' than Homo sapiens. The Egyptians called it Nu or Nun and said in the beginning there was only water, churning and bubbling. Then out of the chaos of water a dry hill appeared. And then another and another. Did the origin of life include references to deep-sea vents? Your guesses appear to be unsupported claims.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 29, 2015 21:25:00 GMT -5
Quote - "This also needs a little research. 'World' in the Greek of the time of Jesus sometimes included the earth, everything on the earth, and even the stars. Do you have anything to support your premise?" Greece wasn't invented in Noah's time. People's idea of what the world was continued to change until the 1500's. Words change, meanings change....... And the bible wasn't written in Noah's time. You don't know what the translators knew or didn't know. Nor what the original authors were referring to. They may have all visited the British Museum and seen the seals carved 4,500 years ago that depict a unicorn!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 21:45:20 GMT -5
they all looked photoshopped
|
|
|
Post by xna on Oct 29, 2015 21:45:26 GMT -5
Unicorn caught on Camera, Bert ... I wish you could see it. VERY interesting 3 different footages of Unicorns. Like I said you might learn something, new... Bert.www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFf6GfID8G8 WOW This is amazing. So good to see the unicorns survived the flood.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 21:46:09 GMT -5
Nathan I don't watch Youtube - bandwidth issue. And I would be wary of watching this one in any case. You should and MUST watch it, you might learn something new, Bert... I hope people on TMB watch it for themselves.Wooly Mammoth caught on Camera in Russia 1948www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7pdAFGDT6ITop 10 Mysterious Creatures Caught On Camerawww.youtube.com/watch?v=ybsREQcoerA pretty good one of the mammoth...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 21:46:44 GMT -5
Unicorn caught on Camera, Bert ... I wish you could see it. VERY interesting 3 different footages of Unicorns. Like I said you might learn something, new... Bert.www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFf6GfID8G8 couldn't tell too fast and to fuzzy...
|
|
|
Post by xna on Oct 29, 2015 21:50:06 GMT -5
Nathan I grew out of dragons when I was in my teens. Dragons are real.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Oct 29, 2015 21:57:16 GMT -5
Anyone recall the images Xna posted on the Humor thread Giants are real. Check it out. Here is a modern day example.
|
|