yes there is a mention of "the great beasts" there is also a mention of God creating other worlds... but I have to do alot of research to back myself up!

Wow this is a very interesting thread to read. But let me throw my take into this. I myself believe int he evolutioninary theory. Just like people belive in God it is a belief, it just happens though i belive in the Evolutionary theroy becasue it has substancial evidence, now i used the word evidence for a reason, it isnt proof. Creationism (spelling), or the theories that go around the idea of a higher power "creating" everything. I myself dont belive in any of that, becasue where is the proof? i like proof, maybe its just me .

Faih is a comfort a padding to explain the unexplained, or to easily explain the complexity of the world. Some people like that and dont wish to think about such things, but me... i choose to believe in what i see and the logical explinations and exploritions of phenonimoun, and natural occurences.

http://www.christiananswers.net/dinosaurs/dino-behemoth.jpg
Dinosaur-like creatures are mentioned in the Bible. The Bible uses ancient names like "behemoth" (beh-HEE-moth) and "tannin." Behemoth means kingly, gigantic beasts. Tannin is a term which includes dragon-like animals and the great sea creatures such as whales, giant squids, and marine reptiles like the plesiosaurs (PLEE-see-oh-sors) that may have become extinct (died out).
The Bible's best description of a dinosaur-like animal is in Job chapter 40...


"Look at the behemoth, which I made along with you and which feed on grass like an ox. What strength he has in his loins, what power in the muscles of his belly! His tail sways like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are close-knit. His bones are tubes of bronze, his limbs like rods of iron. He ranks first among the works of God..."
-Job 40:15-19 (NIV)

The book of Job is very old, written after the worldwide flood of Noah's time and probably about 2,000 years before Jesus was born. Here God describes a great king of the land animals like some of the biggest dinosaurs, the Diplodocus and Apatosaurus. It was a gigantic plant-eater with great muscles and very strong bones. The long Diplodocus had leg bones so strong that he could have held three others on his back.
The behemoth were not afraid. They did not need to be; they were huge. Behemoth tails were so long and strong that God compared them to cedars--one of the largest and most spectacular trees of the ancient world.

After all the behemoth had died out, many people forgot about them. Dinosaurs were extinct and the fossil skeletons that are in museums today did not begin to be put together until about 150 years ago. Today, some people have mistakenly guessed that the behemoth mentioned in the Bible might be an elephant or a hippopotamus. But those animals do not have tails like the thick, tall trunks of cedar trees!

I myself dont belive in any of that, becasue where is the proof? i like proof, maybe its just me .

the proof is your own faith in God and that he wrote the Bible through men.

Faith is all i need to believe in creation!

desides if everyone here has read revelations, half of all that has come true. We are in the last days to woe to thoses who do not believe!

Xerraier, I'll try to put it as simply as possible. There were two main "evolution" theories at some point. First there was Lamarck and then Darwin's theory followed.  Lamarck believe that species evolved and adapted to their environment. In other words if an animal had no fur and lived in a cold area, that animal species would eventually grow fur to adapt. That theory is a little hard to believe and it's hard to imagine "willing" some mutation to happen.  Then Darwin proposed that mutation were accidents and that such accidents had sometimes fortunate outcomes. In other words, lets take the animal species as above, with no fur. They lived in a warm region so they were doing fine.  But sometimes, genetic accidents happen: some babies are born with more hair, some with less hair.  Being a genetic trait, the animal with more hair transmits this trait to its kids. And if the kids coupled with another hairy individual, their kids eventually get more and more hair, etc.  Those weird defects are at a big disadvantage in the warm climate they live in, and they probably don't have a long life expentancy. But then the climate of the region changes and the region becomes much colder. All of the sudden, it becomes an advantage to have hair to protect you from the cold. As it gets colder, the hairless animals die and the hairy ones survive. That's basically Darwin's theory: the survival of the fittest.

The above is just a very small scale example of evolution. But it is believed to be the whole history of evolution since the beginning of life on earth.  Species mutate. Sometimes the mutations are bad and the mutated animals dies. Sometimes the mutations are fortunate and the mutated animal survive while their ancestors die. That's what evolution refers to.

As mentionned before, it has been proven that it happens. As mutations happen through many many generations, it's impossible to observe on animal with longer life spans. But with life forms that have a short life span, we can easily observe tens or even hundred of generations in a relative short time. That's how we know that flies and mosquitoes mutate and survive. That truth is also what gives doctors and phamaceutical companies the most problems, as virii and bacterias also mutate. Through mutations, new species of virii and bacterias survive as being anafected by antibiotics and other medications. Evolution is a fact. It cannot be proven because unless we invent a time machine to go witness it in person, we'll never know for sure. But it's relatively easy to put two and two together. If lower life forms mutate and evolve, wouldn't that be the explanation why there are so many different species of the same animals? Wouldn't it explain why Cro-Magon died while Neanderthal survived for a while, then dies in turn while Sapiens surived?

Anyway that's basically what evolution is about. Hope this helped you.

What about the other half that hasn't come true? Are we still waiting for them to come true since there is never a specific date when if at all anything mentioned will happen.

The reason why I asked is ...at work i overheard some people talking about Human and Dinosaur bones found together. I don't know where because i walked in on the tail end of the conversation

What about the other half that hasn't come true? Are we still waiting for them to come true since there is never a specific date when if at all anything mentioned will happen.

I hope the rest dosen't come true in my lifetime. I have faith it will come true but for us Christians, the end times are a time of great persucution. Although I would like to be around to see the second coming...

I subscribe to a quarterly magazine called Biblical Archeology Review (BAR) http://www.bib-arch.org/bswb_BAR/indexBAR.html

This magazine features stories about archeological digs (mostly in the middle east) that in some way or another prove the Bible as a historical document. It is amazing just how much of the Bible is historically acurate.

Lots of good reading for those interested.

desides if everyone here has read revelations, half of all that has come true. We are in the last days to woe to thoses who do not believe!

  First off, would you please stop typing desides, when you mean besides ? Secondly. if you're so familiar with the Bible, why is it you don't know, it's the book of "The Revelation", not Revelations? 

I type decides instead of besides bevause of my accent I guess... anyways it will never stop. DESIDES why should I quit?

I just looked in 2 bibles. I was wrong. it is simply

revelation

My Bible says "The Revelation to John".

Religion/God/Faith is an entirely personal perception of what one considers to be 'true'.

Since there are something like 4 billion people on this planet it is safe to say there are also 4 billion 'truths'....each and everyone of them 'slightly' different.....each one of them equally valid.

Science, on the other hand consists of an on-going hypothesis, amended and altered/revised as and when additional data is input.

Both 'theologies' can co-exist, though it's preferable that one does not supplant the other.

Science as a religion, and Religion as a science are both equally flawed and perhaps dangerous.

With 'organised' religion we get a rallying to war...with devotion to science we get the capacity to wage that war with alacrity.

All else is just posturing, really....

HHHMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM,.........I think I'll just beat a hasty retreat right here to the Chocoalate Planet thread. I was going to throw in $.02 worth of my opinion but....why? These types of arguments have been completely done to death.


Yes I believe in Evolution and yes I believe in God. We'll probably never understand God or the Universe until we EVOLVE into a higher state of being.


Sorry, couldn't resist.

>

Jafo what is "alacrity"?
[Message Edited]

I believe in God and I believe in evolution. I believe that the Bible there is some truth in it.

Most television evangelists, especially those that perform "miracles" and "healings", are con artists just trying to get money from gullible people and the elderly. Especially the elderly fall prey to these con artists since naturally where they will be in he afterlife is on their minds a lot more.

I am not a big fan of organized religion. The scandel in the Catholic Church is a great example of what is wrong with organized religion. It would seem that if a priest abuses a child, that he would then no longer be considered a man of God and be kicked out of the organization. Instead priests have been moved church to church with hush money being paid to the family of the victims.

Another thing that bothers me in organized religion is the new left wing influence on organized religion. Now a certain lifestyle choice that scripture clearly says is wrong is being considered acceptable to some denominations. Why is it that to love the person, you have to accept their sins as normal? What is wrong with love the person but hate the sin?

As I've said, I don't think I believe in God, but I'm not 100% sure. On the other hand I can tell you absolutely positively that I do not believe in religions. And I'll tell you why. There are hundreds of religions on this planet, and 4 main ones (including anemism). If there is a God, how can one be so sure that his is the true God?  The reson I say I'm not totally convinced there is no God is I can't stop thinking Billions of people can't all be wrong. There may be some truth in there somewhere. But the problem is that those billions of people don't all believe in the same thing. Which in turn brings me back to thinking that if they don't believe in the same thing, then maybe there is nothing to believe in at all after all.

Isn't it presumptuous to think that you are right, you believe in the real thing but everybody else is wrong?

Religious people have a nasty tendency to either overlook and ignore other religions or say "they are wrong and I am right" and look at them in comtempt, usually the former. None of it is satisfatory ofcourse.

And Paxxy, Cro Magnon = Homo Sapiens Sapiens, ergo: we. They/we did not die out.

As for Hus: the thought that Neanderthals were unintelligent and slumped is prejudice. The current train of thought is that we as a species we're just a little bit more succesfull, which meant that over a period of thousands of years, we prospered, while they declined.

Yes, craeonics. Sorry you are right. Home Sapiens Neanderthalis preceeeded Home Sapiens Sapiens, of which Cro-Magnon is indeed an early version. I guess one could say that Cro-Magnon is the beta version of the modern man.

Motion, thanks for the link. I've watched two shows now on the Historical text value of the Bible and both did key on the Middle East. But they also branched off into areas before the Bible, also one of the existence of Hell which is actually a new thing added years after the beginning of Christianity.

Greeks had Hades and the Jewish faith had something else, but neither had Hell as it is known today.

One of the shows went about proving how the three Cities Kind David or Solomon was supposed to have built and someone claimed to have found could not be what they have been claimed. The gates at each which were used to make this claim happened to be addition something like 200 years after the guy was dead and the Cities had been built while he was alive (he built them).

But there is historical fact as with any Shaman's stories passed down over the ages. That was one of the key functions of tribal spiritual leaders and there was a lot of tension between their leaders and the spiritual leaders even back then.
Though, if a tribal leader screwed up he was a Man making a mistake which probably was forgiven by the people, if the Shaman screwed up there was a good chance they got dead one way or the other because they made the Gods turn their back on them.

Odd how some claimed God turned its back on the USA and allowed 9/11 to happen because of sin and such...