[img]http://2.bp..com/_CAe4xqG2hCU/S2BiwSnugCI/AAAAAAAABH0/CxrSmUEXhIk/s400/01083_plate2.jpg[/img]

God killing innocent animals and children. There are obviously better pictures of animals, drowning and dying. and all that you guys care about is lizards?? how about mass genocides.
floating dead bodies. and heartless noah.

debosky:

The description cannot be conclusively said to be a dinosaur - describing a big creature does not necessarily make it a dinosaur, especially as dinosaur is a species which you keep repeating the bible did not talk about - it spoke about kinds.

We are not even sure that this passage is completely literal or completely metaphorical or a combination of both, as it talks further in verse 24 about putting a snare through its nostrils.

There is no evidence that the behemoth is a dinosaur, or are dinosaurs the only creatures that eat grass? The Behemoth has been called a variety of things from water buffalo, to elephants to hippopotamuses. There is nothing conclusive to deem them dinosaurs.

Besides, what about verse 24 of the same passage in job that talks about putting a snare through the nostril of the behemoth? Does that mean that Dinosaurs were domesticated or could this passage simply be a metaphorical one?

Below is an article that addressed the description of the animal spoken about in Job 40. You can read the rest in the link suggested.

Not long after the Flood, God was showing a man called Job how great He was as Creator, by reminding Job of the largest land animal He had made:

Look now at the behemoth, which I made along with you; he eats grass like an ox. See now, his strength is in his hips, and his power is in his stomach muscles. He moves his tail like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are tightly knit. His bones are like beams of bronze, his ribs like bars of iron. He is the first of the ways of God; only He who made him can bring near His sword (Job 40:15–19).

The phrase "first of the ways of God" suggests this was the largest land animal God had made.  So what kind of animal was "behemoth"?

Bible translators, not being sure what this beast was, often transliterated the Hebrew, and thus the word behemoth (e.g., KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV).  However, in many Bible commentaries and Bible footnotes, "behemoth" is said to be "possibly the hippopotamus or elephant."²²  Some Bible versions actually translate "behemoth" this way.²³  Besides the fact that the elephant and hippo were not the largest land animals God made (some of the dinosaurs far eclipsed these), this description does not make sense, since the tail of behemoth is compared to the large cedar tree (Job 40:17).

Now an elephant's tiny tail (or a hippo’s tail that looks like a flap of skin) is quite unlike a cedar tree.  Clearly, the elephant and the hippo could not possibly be "behemoth."

No living creature comes close to this description.  However, behemoth is very much like Brachiosaurus, one of the large dinosaurs.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/what-happened-to-the-dinosaurs

Leviathan
[img]http://dragonsandseamonsters.files./2008/04/leviathan1.jpeg[/img]

hahaha
other animals in the bible
[img]http://3.bp..com/_jK3XuoneXrI/R7PGaCVhVaI/AAAAAAAABBs/0vGYHWxU0Wc/s1600-h/Satyr11.jpg[/img]
[img]http://3.bp..com/_jK3XuoneXrI/R7PLMCVhVcI/AAAAAAAABB8/n0h3mM-aCTE/s1600-h/use_cockatricec.jpg[/img]

rabbits that new cud
and bats that are birds

OLAADEGBU:

Below is an article that addressed the description of the animal spoken about in Job 40. You can read the rest in the link suggested.

Not long after the Flood, God was showing a man called Job how great He was as Creator, by reminding Job of the largest land animal He had made:

Look now at the behemoth, which I made along with you; he eats grass like an ox. See now, his strength is in his hips, and his power is in his stomach muscles. He moves his tail like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are tightly knit. His bones are like beams of bronze, his ribs like bars of iron. He is the first of the ways of God; only He who made him can bring near His sword (Job 40:15–19).

The phrase "first of the ways of God" suggests this was the largest land animal God had made.  So what kind of animal was "behemoth"?

Bible translators, not being sure what this beast was, often transliterated the Hebrew, and thus the word behemoth (e.g., KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV).  However, in many Bible commentaries and Bible footnotes, "behemoth" is said to be "possibly the hippopotamus or elephant."²²  Some Bible versions actually translate "behemoth" this way.²³  Besides the fact that the elephant and hippo were not the largest land animals God made (some of the dinosaurs far eclipsed these), this description does not make sense, since the tail of behemoth is compared to the large cedar tree (Job 40:17).

Now an elephant's tiny tail (or a hippo’s tail that looks like a flap of skin) is quite unlike a cedar tree.  Clearly, the elephant and the hippo could not possibly be "behemoth."

No living creature comes close to this description.  However, behemoth is very much like Brachiosaurus, one of the large dinosaurs.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/what-happened-to-the-dinosaurs

I have nothing against this article - but once again, no one knows what creature was being described in Job, not to talk of saying that it definitely was a dinosaur. We don't know - if we don't know, then it cannot serve as 'proof' that dinosaurs were on the ark. Simple.

What you have posted is an attempt to explain dinosaurs not evidence thereof.

All you can say is that the description is 'like' so and so - no one knows.

debosky:

I have nothing against this article - but once again, no one knows what creature was being described in Job, not to talk of saying that it definitely was a dinosaur. We don't know - if we don't know, then it cannot serve as 'proof' that dinosaurs were on the ark. Simple.

What you have posted is an attempt to explain dinosaurs not evidence thereof.

All you can say is that the description is 'like' so and so - no one knows.

Move on to the next chapter in the book of Job (41). There you will see the description of a great animal that lived in the sea, called Leviathan that breathed fire. Does it not fit the description of the mighty 40 ft. Sarcosuchus imperator or the 82 ft. Liopleurodon? See also Psalm 74:13 and Isaiah 27:1

We can see that not long after the Flood, that God was drawing Job's attention to the largest animals He had made revealing His greatness as the Creator.

OLAADEGBU:

Move on to the next chapter in the book of Job (41).  There you will see the description of a great animal that lived in the sea, called Leviathan that breathed fire.  Does it not fit the description of the mighty 40 ft. Sarcosuchus imperator or the 82 ft. Liopleurodon?  See also Psalm 74:13 and Isaiah 27:1

We can see that not long after the Flood, that God was drawing Job's attention to the largest animals He had made revealing His greatness as the Creator.

Is there evidence today of a fire breathing animal? Is the Sarcosuchus or the Lipleurodon a fire breathing animal? 

It is quite difficult to be sure whether such an animal is a real creature or a poetic description. The last verse of Job 41 says : He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.

Why would an animal be 'king over all the children of pride'?

You see my hesitance in cherry picking aspects to claim they are dinosaurs when we are not told they are.

I invite you to read Job 3:8, where Job talks of magicians controlling Leviathan - Tell the sorcerers to curse that day, those who know how to control Leviathan.

the ancients believed that Leviathan could be controlled to cause eclipses. How much of that is mythical/poetic language and how much is a description of a real animal? We don't really know. If we don't really know, it's difficult to conclude either way.

Isaiah 27:1 talks about a creature to be 'killed at the end of time' - does that mean the Leviathan is still alive now?

In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

debosky:

Is there evidence today of a fire breathing animal? Is the Sarcosuchus or the Lipleurodon a fire breathing animal?

It is quite difficult to be sure whether such an animal is a real creature or a poetic description. The last verse of Job 41 says : He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.

Why would an animal be 'king over all the children of pride'?

You see my hesitance in cherry picking aspects to claim they are dinosaurs when we are not told they are.

I invite you to read Job 3:8, where Job talks of magicians controlling Leviathan - Tell the sorcerers to curse that day, those who know how to control Leviathan.

the ancients believed that Leviathan could be controlled to cause eclipses. How much of that is mythical/poetic language and how much is a description of a real animal? We don't really know. If we don't really know, it's difficult to conclude either way.

We all know what pigs, dogs, serpents, goats and sheep represent in human behaviours, why can't a real animal represent pride? We know peacocks represent pride among other things.

Dragon legends

In the book of Job, God describes a behemoth and a fire-breathing leviathan (Job 40:15–24; 41:1–34). These creatures are unlike anything we find today. Is it possible these dragons refer to dinosaurs and other reptile-like creatures of the air and sea?

Dragons appear again and again in the records of cultures around the world, as well as in their art and pottery. The similarities are hints that many accounts may be based on actual encounters with these creatures—dinosaurs and other reptiles which God created on Day Five and Six (Genesis 1:20–25) and which survived the Flood aboard Noah’s Ark (Genesis 6:19).

Dragons may not be around today for the same reasons that other animals go extinct—changes in environment, food issues, hunting by man. Let’s face it, most legends end with a dragon’s death. But their memory lives on.

Click on the suggested link for the locations of where these records are around the world.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v6/n4/dragon-legends

OLAADEGBU:

We all know what pigs, dogs, serpents, goats and sheep represent in human behaviours, why can't a real animal represent pride? We know peacocks represent pride among other things.

This is not simply representing pride - it says KING over all the children of pride. What about references to being killed at the end of time?

No biblical scholar will say for certain that the Leviathan was a real animal - we don't know.

debosky:

This is not simply representing pride - it says KING over all the children of pride. What about references to being killed at the end of time?

No biblical scholar will say for certain that the Leviathan was a real animal - we don't know.

The real difference between us is that I take a straightforward approach to reading the biblical accounts while you tend to spiritualise or allegorise historical facts recorded.

Faulty man's ideology asserts that dinosaurs and humans never lived together and that the dinosaurs died out about 65 million years ago.

A literal reading of the Bible shows conclusively that man and dinosaurs lived together before and after the Flood, and since dinosaurs were land animals, it means that they were created on Day 6 (Genesis 1:24-25).  Also, we see remarkable descriptions of an Apatosaurus and a fire-breathing dragon in Job 40:15-24 and Job 41, respectively.  But if you take the words of men as truth you will not be able to accept the straightforward meaning of the Bible.  When it is a figure of speech you should take it as a figure of speech and when it is speaking of an historical account you would be able to distinguish between the two.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2000/04/03/dinosaurs-on-noahs-ark

OLAADEGBU:

The real difference between us is that I take a straightforward approach to reading the biblical accounts while you tend to spiritualise or allegorise historical facts recorded.

I am not allegorising anything - is it a straightforward 'historical fact' that Leviathan will be killed at the end of time or an allegorism?

Faulty man's ideology asserts that dinosaurs and humans never lived together and that the dinosaurs died out about 65 million years ago.

Trust you to throw in your pet strawman - where on this thread has there ever been a reference to dying out 65 million years ago?

A literal reading of the Bible shows conclusively that man and dinosaurs lived together before and after the Flood, and since dinosaurs were land animals, it means that they were created on Day 6 (Genesis 1:24-25).  Also, we see remarkable descriptions of an Apatosaurus and a fire-breathing dragon in Job 40:15-24 and Job 41, respectively.  But if you take the words of men as truth you will not be able to accept the straightforward meaning of the Bible.  When it is a figure of speech you should take it as a figure of speech and when it is speaking of an historical account you would be able to distinguish between the two.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2000/04/03/dinosaurs-on-noahs-ark

What is the straightforward meaning of Isaiah 27:1 referring to the same Leviathan? What is the straightforward meaning of 'breathing fire' Are you saying the creature actually breathes fire?

I've asked you questions you've sidestepped - please answer them first.

Tell me whether Job 41 is a fully historical account or using a figure of speech or both - please mark it out verse by verse so I'm clear what you're saying here. Very convenient to pick and choose as it suits you as usual.

No 'straightforward' reading of the bible can connect a fire breathing animal to any dinosaur, unless you have evidence that dinosaurs are fire breathing.

No straightforward reading of the bible can give conclusive evidence of dinosaurs being recorded. That is the fact - you can say such and such appears to be LIKE a dinosaur, but there is no conclusive evidence.

Unfortunately, it is too much for you to simply admit - we don't know if the Behemoth and Leviathan were dinosaurs or not. Heck, respected biblical scholars even say they don't know whether these animals were mythical/representations of the devil or something else.

We don't even know when dinosaurs died out - whether it was before the flood or after. The bible doesn't record when specific species died out.

Could Behemoth have been a Dinosaur?

Bible scholars dissect Job 40:15-24 to arrive at the answer.

Job 40:15
40:15 behemoth. The word "behemoth" means, simply, "huge beast," and commentators commonly take it to be either an elephant or a hippopotamus. The subsequent description, however, fits neither of these, nor any other living animal. On the other hand, it seems to match the probable description of a great land dinosaur, such as the tyrannosaurus.

Job 40:17
40:17 tail like a cedar. No elephant or hippo has a tail like a cedar! This description supports the theory mentioned above that a behemoth may have been a dinosaur.

Job 40:19
40:19 chief of the ways. The behemoth was the "chief" of all created land animals, which could only, therefore, have been one of the great land dinosaurs. These, like all other animals, were created on the fifth and sixth days of creation week. Seemingly, the dinosaur had representatives preserved on Noah’s ark. Some descendants survived to and beyond Job’s day, giving rise to all the traditions of dragons in various parts of the world.

Job 40:19
40:19 his sword. No mere man could overcome such an animal, but God could! As Job beheld the great reptile, it might well have called to his mind the old Serpent of Eden, who was ultimately responsible for all the world’s sin and suffering. He also knew of the ancient promise of the Redeemer who would come some day to slay the Serpent. Furthermore, he had expressed faith in that coming Redeemer (Job 19:25), and had sensed that his sufferings might somehow be a trial to which God was subjecting him (Job 23:10). Perhaps God was helping him realize what was really going on behind the scenes in connection with his trials.

Read the suggested link for more details.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/tj/v15/n2/behemoth

Ola, there were flesh eating and grass eating dinosaurs so I don't buy the description in the Job passage you quoted.

Besides, most of mankind would have been eaten by the carnivorous dinos.


Bottom line is, the bible is very inconsistent and most of the stories were told to justify gender inequality, slaying innocent people, stealing land, etc.

kelz88:

Ola, there were flesh eating and grass eating dinosaurs so I don't buy the description in the Job passage you quoted.

You must have been watching too much of films like the Jurassic Park, The Lost World or the planet of the Apes that made you believe that most dinosaurs were aggressive meat eaters.  The fact that they had sharp teeth does not tell you what they ate or how they behaved.  Scientists who studied fossil dinosaur dung have been able to determine that the diet of some dinosaurs were vegetarian.  All animals and humans before the Fall were vegetarians but this changed after the Flood.  See Genesis 1:30 and 9:2 respectively.  Even today many animals that have sharp teeth are basically vegetarians such as the giant pandas whos teeth were designed to eat bamboo.  Different species of bats eat fruit, nectar, insects or suck blood.  Bears have teeth with carnivore features, but some are vegetarian, and many, if not most, are mainly vegetarian.

kelz88:

Besides, most of mankind would have been eaten by the carnivorous dinos.

That should be expected but God has given us dominion over them.  We have learned to tame them.

"And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea.  They are given into your hand" (Genesis 9:2).

kelz88:

Bottom line is, the bible is very inconsistent and most of the stories were told to justify gender inequality, slaying innocent people, stealing land, etc.

You are entitled to your opinion.  The fact that the Bible seems counter-intuitive to you doesn't mean that it is not logical.  To argue that something is inconsistent or impossible because it seems counter-intuitive is not rational.  It is just a mere opinion, it is not evidence at all and would be a silly argument.

Scientists who studied fossil dinosaur dung have been able to determine that the diet of [b]some [/b]dinosaurs were vegetarian

You said it. ^^

LOL@God gave us dominion over them. So that's why you can go into a lion's den and come out alive?!

Dude, there are so many inconsistencies in the bible. Everyone knows that. Just that some people like you have refused to admit it so you are not banished to hell.

Your kind have still not explained why God who claims to know all regretted some of his actions. Why in some bits of the bible God could be seen, but couldn't in others. Why he was so wicked in the old testament, then had a change of heart in the new testament. Why he told Abraham to kill his own son, in order to test his fate. Why he said thou shalt not kill, yet he instructs some men in the bible to kill. Is it only lawful when he commands it? What kind of message is he sending across?

The list is endless. ^ How can you say there is no evidence? Have you ever read the bible?


Guess we just have to agree to disagree with each other's views/interpretation.

There is only one real behemoth.




top song
Defiling Morality ov Black God

if God says raping is good then he is right
God is always right
regardless of any evidence against what he claims
nothing at all you say matters,because god is right
he can invent any animals he likes because god is right

hahahaha

some nice contradictions

God can't be tempted, of course
James 1:13
    Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.


wait wait, God can be tempted!!!

Exodus 17:2
    Wherefore the people did chide with Moses, and said, Give us water that we may drink. And Moses said unto them, Why chide ye with me? wherefore do ye tempt the LORD?




Deuteronomy 6:16
    Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God.

Matthew 4:7, Luke 4:12
    Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

Acts 15:10
    Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?



hahahaha
btw, God can be tempted , hahahahah

kelz88:

You said it. ^^

LOL@God gave us dominion over them. So that's why you can go into a lion's den and come out alive?!

You are on your own if you go into the lion's den. Are you Daniel?

kelz88:

Dude, there are so many inconsistencies in the bible. Everyone knows that. Just that some people like you have refused to admit it so you are not banished to hell.

In your opinion to be precise.

kelz88:

Your kind have still not explained why God who claims to know all regretted some of his actions. Why in some bits of the bible God could be seen, but couldn't in others. Why he was so wicked in the old testament, then had a change of heart in the new testament. Why he told Abraham to kill his own son, in order to test his fate. Why he said thou shalt not kill, yet he instructs some men in the bible to kill. Is it only lawful when he commands it? What kind of message is he sending across?
The list is endless. ^ How can you say there is no evidence? Have you ever read the bible?

You seem to have so many unanswered questions, read the Bible it has all the answers.

kelz88:

Guess we just have to agree to disagree with each other's views/interpretation.

Either of our opinions or interpretations does not matter what really matters is the matter of the heart.

@OLAADEGBU
It seems by now you know the God is fake you are just in denial

gotizsata:

@OLAADEGBU
It seems by now you know the God is fake you are just in denial

Does your case not support the view that satanists find it convenient to hide under the camouflage of atheism?

@OLAADEGBU
May the believers in Jesus and the Devil please stand up,

hahahahaha Satanist believe in Jesus just like you.
Whatever rock they hide under (like the mighty rock of atheism) they must believe in God to be Satanist. So they must be Christians, or Religious.

gotizsata:

@OLAADEGBU
May the believers in Jesus and the Devil please stand up,

hahahahaha Satanist believe in Jesus just like you.
Whatever rock they hide under (like the mighty rock of atheism) they must believe in God to be Satanist. So they must be Christians, or Religious.

If they were no God there will be no atheists

if you can imagine a God, you can imagine lack of one, give it a try, there is nothing more satisfying

gotizsata:

if you can imagine a God, you can imagine lack of one, give it a try, there is nothing more satisfying

God doesn't even believe in atheists.

@OLAADEGBU
God does not believe in Himself in the first place so why should we believe in him?

gotizsata:

@OLAADEGBU
God does not believe in Himself in the first place so why should we believe in him?

Do you believe in your own existence? Prove to me that you exist. Have you ever seen your brain before? If the answer is no, do you believe it exist?

OLAADEGBU:

Do you believe in your own existence? Prove to me that you exist. Have you ever seen your testicles before? If the answer is no, do you believe they exist?

Fixed that for you!

[Posted by: OLAADEGBU]

Do you believe in your own existence? Prove to me that you exist. Have you ever seen your brain before? If the answer is no, do you believe it exist?

[quote][/quote]
You have used this same argument in so many threads, its beginning to be a trade mark. You know what if you want a proof of a brain or you really want to see my brain or anybody else's, just follow me to MeCure and we'll do a CT scan. There you will see my brains and that will very much give things a rest. This argument came up from about Einstein and his proffessor and you have used it so many times its becoming boring. I am not yet an atheist but there is so much evidence of absence of God that there is absence of evidence that He exists. The idea of God, prayer and all other things that come with theist's assertion are some what overated, let me ask some few questions:
What value is it for a man to believe, worship and serve God in life apart from the promise of eternity in Heaven which no one (including you) is sure of.
I am going to use one analogy which can be applied to other areas of life: Assuming 100% mutual fidelity
1) If you believe worship and serve God and you sleep with your wife, will she get pregnant? Chances are that she will especially if this happens during her ovulation which increases the odds of fertilisation.

2) If you sleep with your wife, will she get pregnant? Chances are that she will especially if this happens during her ovulation which increases the odds of fertilisation.

3) If you believe worship and serve God and you do not sleep with your wife, will she get pregnant? The chance of her getting pregnant is zero except of course we are expecting another immaculate conception.

4) If you do not sleep with your wife, will she get pregnant? The chance of her getting pregnant is zero except of course we are expecting another immaculate conception.
This same analogy can be applied to almost any other thing in life and that almost brings me to a conclusion that life is cpntrolled by probabilities what you do per time shifts the probability of outcomes in different direction.

Do you want to tell me that only unbelievers die in accidents or that believers are the only successful people or that bad things do not happen to you because you believe in God and/or Jesus? Well I think not. I think we are all exposed to the whims and caprices of nature and Nature is at best blind and mindless.

dekung:

You have used this same argument in so many threads, its beginning to be a trade mark.

Until you answer the question don't expect me to stop using it.

dekung:

You know what if you want a proof of a brain or you really want to see my brain or anybody else's, just follow me to MeCure and we'll do a CT scan. There you will see my brains and that will very much give things a rest.

I don't have to see your brain before I know that it exists. My question to you is: Have you ever seen your brain before, and if not would I be right to conclude that it does not exist?

dekung:

This argument came up from about Einstein and his proffessor and you have used it so many times its becoming boring. I am not yet an atheist but there is so much evidence of absence of God that there is absence of evidence that He exists.

There is no such thing as an atheist, it does not exist. The evidence that God exists is all around us if you may see. When I look at a building, how do I know that there was a builder? I can't see, hear, touch, taste or smell him/her. But the building is the evidence that there was a builder, what other evidence do I want? It doesnt' even take faith to know that there was a builder all I need are my physical senses.

"For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse" (Romans 1:20 The Evidence Bible).

dekung:

The idea of God, prayer and all other things that come with theist's assertion are some what overated, let me ask some few questions:
What value is it for a man to believe, worship and serve God in life apart from the promise of eternity in Heaven which no one (including you) is sure of.

Like I said earlier, you don't even need to have faith before you know that God exists. The evidence is loud and clear as long as you have eyes to see. When I look at a painting, how can I know that there was a painter? The paintings is all the evidence I need to know that there was a painter. The same principle applies with the existence of God.

But if I need the builder to do me a favour, then I need to have faith in him and that's where prayer, believing, receiving and seeing comes in all life and godliness, in this life and eternity which is the life-time of the never dying God.

"Without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him" (Hebrew 11:6 The Evidence Bible).

dekung:

I am going to use one analogy which can be applied to other areas of life: Assuming 100% mutual fidelity
1) If you believe worship and serve God and you sleep with your wife, will she get pregnant? Chances are that she will especially if this happens during her ovulation which increases the odds of fertilisation.

2) If you sleep with your wife, will she get pregnant? Chances are that she will especially if this happens during her ovulation which increases the odds of fertilisation.

3) If you believe worship and serve God and you do not sleep with your wife, will she get pregnant? The chance of her getting pregnant is zero except of course we are expecting another immaculate conception.

4) If you do not sleep with your wife, will she get pregnant? The chance of her getting pregnant is zero except of course we are expecting another immaculate conception.
This same analogy can be applied to almost any other thing in life and that almost brings me to a conclusion that life is cpntrolled by probabilities what you do per time shifts the probability of outcomes in different direction.

This life only becomes a game of chance if you don't know the Creator. The Creator is a God of providence. He has a plan for everyone of us it is up to us to discover this plan allow Him to bring us to our expected end. You have the freewill to either know His Will and obey it or to ignorant or rebel against it the choice is ours to make.

dekung:

Do you want to tell me that only unbelievers die in accidents or that believers are the only successful people or that bad things do not happen to you because you believe in God and/or Jesus? Well I think not. I think we are all exposed to the whims and caprices of nature and Nature is at best blind and mindless.

Christians are no better than non Christians but they are infinitely better off. It is like two men on a plane, one of whom is putting on a parachute while the other is not. Neither is better than the other, but the man with the parachute is certainly better off than the man who is not wearing a parachute. You will know the difference when they jump from the plane at about 30,000 ft in the air.

Jesus had warned that if we jump into death without Him, we would perish. Even harsher than the law of gravity is the Law of an infinitely holy and just Creator. The Bible says that sinners are God's enemy (Romans 5:10) and that it is a fearful thing t fall into the hands of the living God (Hebrews 10:31 The Evidence Bible).

Waiting for the evidence?

This Great and Wide Sea
December 18, 2011

"So is this great and wide sea, wherein are things creeping innumerable, both small and great beasts" (Psalm 104:25).

The oceans of the world are indeed great and wide and comprise essentially one sea, in contrast to the Seas of the pre-Flood world (Genesis 1:10), which were probably relatively narrow, numerous, and distributed more or less uniformly around the globe, as inferred from the marine fossil deposits laid down in those basins by the Flood. The present oceans, however, now contain the vast reservoirs of water poured out through the fountains of the great deep--all of which were broken up in one day--plus the torrents coming from the windows of heaven, which were opened that same day (Genesis 7:11).

The Flood not only destroyed everything on the land (Genesis 7:22), but also great numbers of marine organisms. After the Flood, however, with the vastly enlarged oceanic environments available, the surviving marine organisms quickly spread and proliferated, so that the oceans now indeed harbor innumerable creeping things as well as both small and great beasts. Some whales, for example, are even larger than the great dinosaurs, which had mostly been drowned and buried in the waters and sediments eroded by the Flood. Even the fearsome Leviathan (possibly something like a giant plesiosaur or sea serpent) plays there (Psalm 104:26). Those men who now "do business in great waters" do indeed "see the works of the Lord, and his wonders in the deep" (Psalm 107:23-24).

In the coming New Earth, however, there will be "no more sea" (Revelation 21:1). All the innumerable sea creatures will be gone as well. There will still be an abundance of water, however. There will be "a pure river of water of life, . . . proceeding out of the throne of God" and "whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely" (Revelation 22:1, 17). HMM

For more . . . .