Christians

1193920311581.jpg (84 KB)

Don’t believe in dinosaurs

  • Leave a comment ?

    33 Responses to Christians

    1. im christian, and i believe in dinosaurs 🙁

      Reply

    2. If they don’t, they don’t know their Bible. Job 40 has dino, Apatosaurus or some such, Job 41 has fire-breathing dragon.

      Reply

    3. Since when do we not believe in dinosaurs? Oh wait, you’re generalizing about something you dont even know anything about. I get it now. It’s supposed to be funny. Haha.

      Reply

    4. Job 40 talks about a creature called Behemoth. The only thing that makes it sound like a dinosaur is the verse ” he moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together”
      This interesting thing is that in the Vulgate, the word “stones” is actually “testiculorum” and that “tail” was a euphemism for penis. Behemoth was not a dinosaur.

      Job 41 is describes the Leviathan that breaths fire. Psalms 74 says the Leviathan had multiple heads. Leviathan was not a dinosaur.

      Reply

    5. @reboot
      I disagree. All that proves is that those verses may have euphemistically been talking about a Behemoths genitals. It neither confirms nor denies exactly what kind of creature the behemoth really is.

      The same is true of the leviathan. There is too much euphemism and allegory in the Bible to make these kinds of objective scientific deductions…

      Reply

    6. @Phyreblade,
      “There is too much euphemism and allegory in the Bible to make these kinds of objective scientific deductions”
      Hey, I was refuting an “objective scientific deduction” by DCR. Don’t get on my case, when I’m not one trying to imply zoological results from a passage that is explicitly metaphorical.

      Reply

    7. And reboot, since when does a thing that has a penis the size of a cedar walked the earth? Does not your own science prove their [dinosaurs] size? Then it would stand to reason, from common sense, that something that big would, in fact, be a dinosaur. And how can you go from “it had a huge dick” to “its not a dinosaur”?? That just doesn’t make sense. Behemoth vs dinosaur you say? If I say tyrant lizard, or t-rex, does that mean its not the same thing as tyrannosaurus rex? No, it’s the same animal, the letters are just arranged differently.

      Reply

    8. LPT, it does NOT say “size” of a cedar. It says it “moves” like a cedar. Now last time I checked, cedars are the most mobile life-form on earth. So you tell me what the fuck that means, cause I have no idea. I think its the insane ranting of a guy who went nuts in the desert and he’s family died and he was stricken with some disease.
      “and how can you go from “it had a huge dick” to “its not a dinosaur””
      Do you know what Occam’s Razor is? There are lots of animals that eat grass and have big dicks. If that’s all the information that you have, then there is no rational reason to jump to the conclusion that its a creature that’s been extinct for 200 million years.

      Reply

    9. You guys owe me a new keyboard after I spit my beer out laughing at this argument.

      Reply

    10. Ok, so i jumped to that conclusion of size. I think what moving it like a damn tree means the thing’s got wood all the damn time. rofl, permanent little blue pill.

      As to occam’s razor, there is also no reason NOT to jump to that self-same conclusion. There is absolutely no evidence to support it either way.

      Reply

    11. @reboot
      I’m not trying to get on your case or anything, but in your post you say “Behemoth was not a dinosaur.” followed shortly thereafter by “Leviathan was not a dinosaur.” Those both sound to me like a categorical zoological determinations based on allegorical evidence.

      Perhaps you ought not to make zoological determinations based on metaphorical texts, when faulting another for doing the same. 😛

      @SlimTek
      Your keyboard is in the mail… 😀

      Reply

    12. LPT, I think are missing the point of Occam’s razor.
      Hypothesis 1) Behemoth is a metaphor.
      Hypothesis 2) Behemoth is a mundane animal (elephant, hippo or something)
      Hypothesis 3) Behemoth is a dinosaur, even though dinosaurs have been extinct for 200 million years.
      All three hypothesis are consistent with the given evidence. So which ever one is simplest is the most likely to be true. That is the reason not to jump to conclusion that Job was guest starred in the Flintstones.
      As a side note, in the Vulgate, the word for “move” could also be translated to “extend or grow”, so “permanent little blue pill” is not a bad interpretation.

      Reply

    13. My internet-tubes are getting clogged by this thread…

      Reply

    14. @reboot
      “he moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together”
      This interesting thing is that in the Vulgate, the word “stones” is actually “testiculorum”

      Does this mean that his balls are stuck together? Sounds painful.

      Reply

    15. My very religious christian friend, who I think is Born-again christian or something like that, says that dinosaur fossils, or all fossils for this matter, are placed on earth by god to test our loyalty to him and the earth is only 5000 yrs old (or whatever the bible says). I respect his beleif, but damn!

      Reply

    16. @ piece
      That made my day.

      Reply

    17. @piece
      Why do you respect his belief?

      Reply

    18. That wily God, always trying to trick us into disbelieving him. What a pisser.

      Reply

    19. @angrymatt
      that doesn’t sound like the loving god the bible describes. 😀

      Reply

    20. Ando-

      Why respect his belief? Well, the first problem is that fundamentalist Christians make their argument against atheists by saying that they’re assholes. And then, when you disrespect them, you sound like an asshole.

      Can we (atheists + agnostics) try NOT playing into their hands for once? We may be as sure of our position as they are of theirs, but we’re not exactly in the majority around and about these parts. It’d be nice if we could start helping ourselves on that front once in a while…

      Reply

    21. not that i am saying these people are right, but they are Christian, and they believe in Dinosaurs.

      www.creationevidence.org/cemframes.html
      click under ‘excavations’ on the left side menu.

      www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/06/19/wdino19.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/06/19/ixworld.html

      www.dinosauradventureland.com/aboutDAL.php

      www.sixdaycreation.com/

      www.answersingenesis.org/Docs/2.asp

      www.gospelway.com/topics/god/dinosaurs.php

      again, i post these sites NOT IN AGREEMENT with them. i just post them to show that the idea that Christians don’t believe in dinosaurs is retarded and bigoted.

      but believe what you want to, monkeys.

      Reply

    22. The telegraph.co.uk link gave the best laughs.

      Reply

    23. yeah, funny stuff. they’re prolly insane. but they DO beleive in dinosaurs.

      Reply

    24. The point behind this picture, as piece said, is that it’s pretty hard to believe in something that’s at least 64 MILLION years old when you believe the Earth was created around 6 thousand years ago (well after the domestication of the dog, for reference)

      Reply

    25. thanks for clearing that up, corman. I was totally under the impression that the point of the pic was that christians dont beleive in dinosaurs.

      and you know, the Coelacanth first entered the fossil record 400 million years ago and was thought to have gone extinct 80 million years ago. but they have been re-discovered since 1938.

      ironically, the ‘modern’ species of coelacanth made the endangered species list in 1989.
      www.cites.org
      www.cites.org/eng/cop/11/prop/51.pdf

      Reply

    26. My cousin’s friend was never allowed to play with dinosaur toys because they were invented by sinful people. I used to lol at him.

      Reply

    27. Many Christians who believe in dinosaurs do NOT believe they existed 64 million years ago, quoting problems with carbon dating (there are some, I believe) and I believe they prefer something with an argon dating (its not coming to me right now, and I don’t care too look it up).

      Reply

    28. …but I bet there’s lots of carbon dating of religious artifacts that they don’t have a problem with. Science is only their enemy when it directly and irrefutably disproves the Bible (such as with dinosaurs, in which case carbon dating is ‘wrong’).

      Reply

    29. Christianity: believe what we say or we’ll hurt you!
      eg: the spanish Inquisition…

      “Hey tokimata what ya say?”
      “I just got back from the Autum de Fey!”

      Reply

    30. The problem with Creationist is that

      A: they take everything too literally

      B: dont realize that religion is a SPIRITUAL matter, while science is a PHYSICAL matter.

      C: assume that if the traditional theory is wrong, then their alternative must be right.

      Reply

    31. The only thing that matters to me is that churches mainly lead you in a positive direction in life.

      Reply

    32. You know… Saying this is something like saying “Atheists”

      “They don’t believe rape is evil.”

      Just because it may in some cases be technically true, saying it still makes you an asshole.

      Reply

    Leave a Comment




    Advertisements Alcohol Animated Images Art Awesome Things Batman Cars Comic Books Computers Cosplay Cute As Hell Animals Dark Humor Donald Trump Fantasy - Science Fiction Fashion Food Forum Fodder Gaming Humor Interesting LOLcats Military Movie posters Movies Music Nature NeSFW Politics Religion Sad :( Science! Sexy Space Sports Star Trek Star Wars Technology Television Vertical Wallpaper Visual Tricks Wallpaper Weapons Women WTF X-Mas