Its actually in a good ammount of the bible, its just so ignored, I mean I remember reading deuterodomy, I never saw the part about the dragon, or maybe I just did not descern very well. Anyways, it was a shocker that the dr dude went to jail, but that does not make anything he said suddenly false.............................. By any means, he sinned, just like even David did. Jeeze, I almost hate reading the bible, because there is never this really well rounded character, they all end up doing stupid things. ITS SO ANNOYING! Though, no one ever got in trouble with god because of tax evasion >_> Why, seriously, why....

anyways http://www.fairrosa.info/dragon/bible.html, now I am focusing on the old testement.

13 Thou didst divide the sea by thy strength: Ex. 14.21

See, this is an act, a verb, and action, they did something to a dragon.

Now, its obvious that the bible knew about dinosaurs, so does anyone really have an explanation.... I mean you can say, they dug up bones, but I am pretty sure if thats all it was, they would not of used dragon bones with such depiction. And their would be historical text mentioning digging up bones. Though I could be wrong about that.

I know its kind of a tough sell, since we dont see them, but I would hope you would check out the videos, because int he video he said that at least 20,000 people have reported incidences. But, since people dont believe they exist, they dont even listen, because of BIAS.

No, tail does not mean Male genitalia......

[QUOTE="SegaGenesisfan"]

Time to read the rest of that post, honestly, you just made up the part about the tail, about all of that is false sir. I think tail is tail, where did you get the idea that tail means penis?

GabuEx

From the fact that it "extends like a cedar" and that it is sandwiched between a verse describing the "strength of its loins" and a verse describing "the sinews of its testiculorum". You honestly believe that in the midst of all that it would randomly start talking about its literal tail for no apparent reason?

There has never been a culture alive that did not have euphemisms for the male sexual organ.

Your really stretching things, you just made all that up for the sake of your arguement >_>, dude its tail like a cedar, obviously its talking about a really big tail, NOT A HUMONGOUS DICK!!!!!!!!!!! @#K$J!@#KLJ$!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0Z75ngqeQY&feature=related

Ok, no one post for like an hour at least, because this video has everything you want to know about dinosaurs and the bible, grab some popcorn. At least spend like 40 minutes on the video. So if people start commenting after this, I know they did not even try >_>. To be honest, this thread has been full of strawman fallacies >_>.

[QUOTE="SegaGenesisfan"]

[QUOTE="Treflis"]Maybe someone added it when they printed newer copies.skelebull3000

The people who made the king james bible naturally would not know about dinosaurs, since they basically were all hunted. I mean whats the liklihood that people would let such creatures just walk around them, hmmm? Very invalid statement, why would anyone in the sixteen hundreds add it when they never seen one?

So, do you believe in vampires then? I mean, there are tonnes of accounts on them!

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/From_where_do_vampires_come_from

First of all, false analogy, second of all, it came from "vampire freakin bats." So there was a existing creatures which is the source of their inspiration. And of course Dracula, blah blah blah.

[QUOTE="SegaGenesisfan"]

Uh oh, looks like my arguement is gaining strength. Well to be honest any bible translated like the King Jame bible, they would not know what a dinosaur is.

Some commentators have suggested that the Behemoth could be a hippo, or an elephant. But both of these suggestions ignore the physical description of the Behemoth given in the Bible.

Hippos and elephants have very short tails. The Behemoth described in the Bible had a tail so long and so strong that God compared it to a cedar tree.

The Behemoths tail was as long as, and as strong as the trunk of a tree. Yet it could easily bend like one of its flexible branches.

This description fits no living animal. - This does not imply that the behemoth was a mythical animal, perhaps it is just an extinct one.

Cedar trees were on of the largest and most spectacular trees in the ancient world.

GabuEx

The Hebrew word in verse 17 for "move" more properly means "extend", and the Hebrew word of whose sinews are described is translated into the Vulgate as "testiculorum" - take a wild guess what this is talking about. Additionally, in verse 16 it describes "the strength he has in his loins".

Quite frankly, the word "tail" is in all likelihood a euphemism for the, ah,main male genital organ.

Uh oh, looks like your argument fell apart. :P

Time to read the rest of that post, honestly, you just made up the part about the tail, about all of that is false sir. I think tail is tail, where did you get the idea that tail means penis?

Maybe someone added it when they printed newer copies.Treflis

The people who made the king james bible naturally would not know about dinosaurs, since they basically were all hunted. I mean whats the liklihood that people would let such creatures just walk around them, hmmm? Very invalid statement, why would anyone in the sixteen hundreds add it when they never seen one?

http://www.fairrosa.info/dragon/bible.html

Ok, this is the whole list of the account of dragons/dinosaurs.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="curono"] Only if "beach" has intelligence, ability towards speech and intelligence. These are 2 different things. Dont get smarty on me... The "sacredness" of the words is not due to the writer. The writer is just a vehicle of God's will. Is your hand a vehicle of the beach's will? Guess not. curono

Okay, so if it's a person who inspires it?

Time to use this

............................................________
....................................,.-'"...................''~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?......................................................,
.................../...........................................................,}
................./......................................................,:'^'..}
.............../...................................................,:"........./
..............?.....__.........................................:'.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:'........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:'........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./'..../"............../
...,,,___.'~,......"~.,....................'.....}............../
............(....'=-,,.......'........................(......;_,,-"
............/.'~,......'-...................................../
.............'~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__
,,_..........}.>-._...................................|..............'=~-,
.....'=~-,__......',.................................
...................'=~-,,.,...............................
................................':,,...........................'..............__
.....................................'=-,...................,%'>--==''
........................................_..........._,-%.......'
...................................,

It does not matter for this thread who wrote the bible, god does not even matter, I am simply stating the fact that the authors even knew about dragons, and described them as if they existed. Forget anything about god for the sake of this thread, the bible is obviously a historical text. Lets focus ont he fact that the any of the authors bothered to mention dragons.

Um... dragons have been part of ancient mythology since the Greeks? That really doesn't prove anything. hamstergeddon

Actually, on the contrary, I am pretty sure they seen them, and were just drawing them in their potteries. It was not just something they made up on the top of their heads. There are very accurate potteries that resemble real dinosaurs.

Dinosaur also means large lizard.... Anyways the bible in the Book of Job uses Behemoth, which means large

"15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.

17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.

19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.

20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.

21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.

22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.

23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.

24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares."

http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/behemoth.html

Uh oh, looks like my arguement is gaining strength. Well to be honest any bible translated like the King Jame bible, they would not know what a dinosaur is.

Some commentators have suggested that the Behemoth could be a hippo, or an elephant. But both of these suggestions ignore the physical description of the Behemoth given in the Bible.

Hippos and elephants have very short tails. The Behemoth described in the Bible had a tail so long and so strong that God compared it to a cedar tree.

The Behemoths tail was as long as, and as strong as the trunk of a tree. Yet it could easily bend like one of its flexible branches.

This description fits no living animal. - This does not imply that the behemoth was a mythical animal, perhaps it is just an extinct one.

Cedar trees were on of the largest and most spectacular trees in the ancient world.

Yeah, I think its time that people discuss how the bible knew of these creatures, and NOT for the love of god, post a lotr picture, while about NINE THOUSAND PEOPLE QUOTE THE PICTURE!