Really makes ya think

Really makes ya think.

What message was this trying to convey? That some of the descriptions found in the Bible are bizzare?

His point is that the reference in the book of Job clearly refers to a dinosaur, which is of course incredibly stupid

The Behemoth was a dinosaur, therefore humans and dinosaurs coexisted, therefore scientific dating of the age of the earth is false, therefore it was created about 6000 years ago, therefore Genesis is both literal and accurate, therefore God is real, therefore my religion is correct.

This does not follow

If they were good at logic, they wouldn't be religious, at least not in the devout sense

That's really the problem. Anyone who claims that anyone who's professed themselves as Christian or under any religious or spiritual belief can not into logic or rational thought should rethink their blanket statements. Through many "religious" philosophers and scientists great improvements have been made to our daily lives. Do we throw Diogenes in the trash because the popular religion in his region had to do with bearded men fighting eachother in the skies? Can we forget that the beginnings of genetic theory is attributed to a catholic monk because he subscribed to a certain god? I hold no hate for those who feel religion is an end all be all death knoll for logical thought but I feel they should start reconsidering what they say if they want to be taken seriously anymore.

His point is that behemoth = dinosaur, therefore creationism makes sense, which is stupid.

But I agree with the pic's point that it doesn't make sense for behemoth to be a hippo or an elephant, as most literature on them says, rather unique creatures of Judeo-Christian religion

Why is this only a problem in the US? The rest of the civilized world does not seem to have this issue.

It's probably the innate sense of entitlement we seem to foster here. Many think their opinions are more valuable than others and because of this people tend to learn one way of thinking and stick to it forever even when facts strike their thoughts down.

>like a cedar

Almost certainly refers to the leaves of the cedar rather than the actual tree. Pic related: Doesn't look like any kind of dinosaur tail to me.

Why do people always think this is literally a tail the book is talking about, when the second half of the sentence is clearly talking about his balls? Behemoth's "tail" is its cock.

Presumably like the trunk of a cedar

Short and stubby?

>being religious is a problem

*tips fedora*

could the Bible be any more cryptic

>the second half of the sentence is clearly talking about his balls
>the sinews of his toes are wrapped together

pretty sure this is just one of the simple verses.

Islam, yo

actually muslims tend to be old earth creationists

How are you reading "toes" from "stones"?

The ability to apply a systematic process like math or the scientific method is not proof you can apply logic well in an abstract situation, nor can the logical formulas of medieval Christian philosophers be considered sound today in an era where the Aristotelian universe has been torn apart on a metaphysical and scientific level.

Maybe.

Or maybe the cone of the cedar is meant

Being religious is not a problem, being a YEC is.
I said civilized world, that usually does not include muslims.

...

>"Look now: the Beast that I made: he eats grass like a bull. Look: the power in his thighs, the pulsing sinews of his belly. His penis stiffens like a pine; his testicles bulge with vigor."

what's wrong with being a YEC?
so believing a guy was resurrected, healed people on touch, resurrected others, and walked on water is apparently fine and scientifically reconcilable but not that the earth is 6k years old?

i kekd

None of those things is credible. Christians /can/ reconcile their dogmas with reason and logic, but only by taking a strictly allegorical reading of the "historic" claims in the Bible.

Beleiveing in the teachings of jeasus christ is OK. believing that a bronze age myth is accurate to the letter and then try to 'disprove' science because it does not align, is pretty fucking stupid.

less secularised populations in america
biblical hyperliteralism inherent in fundamentalist protestantism not really found elsewhere

I never offered that though looking back at my post I can see that I accidentally implied it. The point I was trying to make is that people who hound anyone that claim to hold ungrounded faith are worthless in their aptitude to think logically are too reactionary and unthinking in my non-degree holding opinion.

Well certainly there are great Christian scientists/thinkers, but I think in even the best case they tend to fail to apply the same standard to their religion as they would apply to everything else in their lives

There's evidence to directly contradict the fact that the earth is only 6000 years old.

This. It's easier to just take your religious text as literal truth and exclude any arguments or evidence as to why not to do that. The alternative is to critically assess the text in order to arrive at a non-literal interpretation of some elements. Not only is that more difficult, some groups see it as a threat to the integrity of the religion as a whole, i.e. picking and choosing what to believe based on your observations and the acknowledgement of the human influence on the religion, vs accepting everything as the final word from a higher power.

>it's a, "I read a translated version of the bible but try and make semantic arguments from it" episode

>evidence

satan's snares

The original European settlers of America were radical protestants. The Europeans chased them out.

and catholicism has been more willing to accommodate non literal interpretations in recent decades

>Thinking Job is literal

Yo OP, so you are a YEC? Seriously?

the kjv is the infallible Word of God.

Non-literal interpretations were a major thing in Christianity since before they were even legal. An entire school of allegorical exegesis, the Alexandrian School, became major in Christianity by the second century. It produced several saints and influential Church Fathers.

KJV is a pretty based translation, not gonna lie, even if it has a nutty following. It is the most literal translation you can get next to Young's.

how dogmatic of you, no wonder you have so many problems with facts and science.

Sssshhh, yuro DOOS VOLT faggots aren't too fond of logic

>muh tradition
>I like church art and actitechture, therfore I must be a Catholic

Are you dumb?

The cedar is very very big and thick like the tail of the giant monster

>make the mistake of taking a collection of bronze age myths literally
>now has to fight endlessly against every fact of science that might contradict it
sounds rather stupid.

>god shows the negro to the white male.

Brilliant