|
|
|
Lars_H
SFN Regular
Germany
630 Posts |
 Posted - 05/19/2002 : 16:59:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Where is the unicorn mentioned? I seaerched two translations and did not find it.
A chapter and verse would be helpful.
Kacey
The list of animals I meant was in the 39the chapter of the book of Job. The Unicorn itself comes in verse 9 and ten. That is why I said Job 39 in my post.
If you did not find a unicorn in your bible than you must have either not looked very long or a very unusual translation. Most translations of the bible includindg the KJV mention the unicorn nine times.(Numbers 23:22; 24:8; Deuteronomy 33:17; Job 39:9,10; Psalm 22:21; 29:6; 92:10; Isaiah 34:7)
PS:
Yes I know that some translators choose to translate the animal in question as 'Wild Ox' rather than Unicorn. I also think that this is more likely what the original author ment.
All this does not matter for my point. I did not want to argue about historic or scientific accuracy of translation of the bible. I just mentioned an instance of people (in this case the transltors of the old testament) mentioning a mythical animal along with a number of real ones withou it carrying any meaning. If the translators did not find it odd to mention a mythical animal here then maybe the people who made up the chinese zodiac did think similarly.
Edited by - Lars_H on 05/19/2002 17:09:18 |
 |
|
|
Kacey
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 17:01:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Why did they have a Zodiac at all when it's existence was meaningless in the first place making anything to do with it meaningless?
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
.
I don't know. Perhaps like other people they thought it had meaning. If they thought it had meaning then why did they include a fake anima with the real?
Just because you don't believe in the zodiac doesn't mean the animals weren't real.
Kacey |
|
|
|
Kacey
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 17:08:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
Where is the unicorn mentioned? I seaerched two translations and did not find it.
A chapter and verse would be helpful.
Kacey
The list of animals I meant was in the 39the chapter of the book of Job. The Unicorn itself comes in verse 9 and ten. That is why I said Job 39 in my post.
If you did not find a unicorn in your bible than you must have either not looked very long or a very unusual translation. Most translations of the bible includindg the KJV mention the unicorn nine times.(Numbers 23:22; 24:8; Deuteronomy 33:17; Job 39:9,10; Psalm 22:21; 29:6; 92:10; Isaiah 34:7)
Thanks for presenting the verse Lars_H. I did some research and found a few references. The research indicated that the unicorn was not the mythical unicorn that you havepesented but rather a wild ox or rhinocerous. You can read my reply back a few post.
Kacey |
|
|
|
Lars_H
SFN Regular
Germany
630 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 17:32:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Thanks for presenting the verse Lars_H. I did some research and found a few references. The research indicated that the unicorn was not the mythical unicorn that you havepesented but rather a wild ox or rhinocerous. You can read my reply back a few post.
Kacey
As I have added a to my post above, I now realize that my post my be a bit misleading.
My point was never about wether or not the old testament really mentioned Unicorns.
My point was that many people accept the mentioning of a mythical animal in this list just as many people accept the mentioning of dragons in the chinese zodiac. In the past people maybe did not know that those creatures were not real. Today they might do so because they either belive in the supernatural so much that beliving in unicorns and dragons comes natural to them. Or they might not think it to be anything out of the ordinary when a mythical beast is mentioned in a mythical context like the Bible or the zodiac.
...
The inclusion of the dragon in the chinese zodiac might have happened along similar lines as the inclusion of monokerebos in the greek translation of the old testament.
One guy points at stars/unknown hebrew word and asks his colluege. "What couls this be?"
Second guy looks scratches head and answers "Looks like Dragon/Unicorn to me".
The reason why the first guy accepted this instead of saying that dragons/unicorns do not exist might have been similar.
|
|
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 18:39:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I read a very interesting artical some years back in some magazine or other concerning the orgines of the dragon myths. The thought was that fossil dinosaur bones had been found and, to the finders, these remains could only have come from dragons. Sounds pretty good, anyway. The artical further stated that these fossils were important in Chinese medicine. They were ground into a powder and sold as, if I remember right: 'Dragon Dust'. It was reputed to cure all of the usual and act as an aphrodsiac in the bargan.
Edited by - filthy on 05/19/2002 16:44:42
I've seen "dragon bone" (at least that's what I think "os draconis" means; the ingredients were listed in Chinese and Latin) listed among the ingredients of a (probably smuggled) Chinese patent medicine a friend got in Chinatown in Philly a couple of decades ago.
It had some other rather picturesque stuff in it as well. 
Ford, there's an infinite number of monkeys outside who want to talk to us about this script for Hamlet they've worked out. |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 18:39:55 [Permalink]
|
Kacey, central northern China is one of the best places you can hope for if you want to find dinosaur fossils. The American Museum of Natural History has sent many expeditions there and they have made spectacular finds. It's even better than the American Bad Lands.
In many places the big fossils are right at the surface.
The conclusion that the Chinese could have seen these dinosaur bones and decided that they were dragons isn't a great stretch of the imagination. You probably have a good case there.
Living dinos however are just plain silly. Except for birds they have all been dead for 65 million years.
--Dr Slater
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
|
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 18:53:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
If the existence of a dragon in the Chinese zodiac is evidence of the existence of real dragons, what do we make of such familiar constellations in our own system as Hydra, Monoceros (the Unicorn) and Pegasus?
[red]As I pointed out in the first post the dragon is asociated with 11 other currently living species of animals. The constellations you present are not.
Kacey
They share the sky with such real animals as Cetus, the whale, Aquila, the eagle, Cygnus, the swan, Taurus, the bull, etc., as well as such real artifacts as Lyra, the lyre, Libra, the scales, Sagitta, the arrow...
Or do we only count the constellations which lie along the ecliptic (the "zodiac")? If so, why? Much of the rest of the northern celestial hemisphere was also named by the ancients.
I'm sorry, but if you want to make a case for the biological existence of dragons, and that they were dinosaurs, you need something of a lot more direct probative value than a "could have been" argument based on an interpretation of folklore and mythology.
I'm not versed in the logical fallacies, but I think I detect a whiff of the argument to ignorance here.
Ford, there's an infinite number of monkeys outside who want to talk to us about this script for Hamlet they've worked out. |
|
|
|
Kacey
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 20:48:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
[quote]
I'm sorry, but if you want to make a case for the biological existence of dragons, and that they were dinosaurs, you need something of a lot more direct probative value than a "could have been" argument based on an interpretation of folklore and mythology.
I'm not versed in the logical fallacies, but I think I detect a whiff of the argument to ignorance here.
.
Besides this case for the biological existance of dragons as dinosaurs there are many others. Here are 10.
There is other cultures outside of China that have dragons and dragon slayers in their history. This could have been the real demise of the dinosaurs.
There are ancient depictions of dinosaur like creatures etched in stones. For example one look very much like a picture of a dinosaur fighting a mammoth.
The ancient Sumatrans produced multiple pieces of art depicting long-tailed, long-necked creatures with a headcrest. Some of these animals resemble hadrosaurs.
A Mesopotamian cylinder seal dated at 3300 BC. has depictions of a saurapod on it. Some of the details could not have been seen or determined from the fossil records.
An urn from Caria, which was located in Asia Minor has been discovered with artwork depecting mosasaurus and several known sea creatures.
Many petroglyph (carved rock drawing) has been found depecting what appears to be dinosaurs,
Old Egyptian seals depecting dinosaur like creatures have been found.
Cave painting found throught the word have been found with what appears to be pictures of dinosaurs painted on the walls.
Many clay figurines of dinosaurs buried at the foot of El Toro Mountain on the outskirts of Acambaro, Mexico have been found.
Depictions of dinosaurs on ancient Ican stones have been found
Just thought you'd like to know. Of course the "scientifically correct" answer has to be they were depictions of mythical creatures or re-creations or artist interpretations of dinosaur bones....despite the evidence.
Kacey
I've read the end of the bible....the Christians win. |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 21:25:00 [Permalink]
|
First, I bet the depiction of these "dragons" varies quite a bit from culture to culture whether by temperment or physically or both. If they were truly dinosaurs then they would resemble actual dinosaurs. Some ancient peoples had excellent artistic techniques.
There is also the most important missing item. That is any physical evidence at all. All of the remains of dinosaurs thus far date from millions of years ago. None have been dated in a way that would allow for humans and dinosaurs to coexist.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 21:25:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Just thought you'd like to know. Of course the "scientifically correct" answer has to be they were depictions of mythical creatures or re-creations or artist interpretations of dinosaur bones....despite the evidence.
Actually, the "scientifically correct" evidence would be dinosaur fossils in young strata. Something that hasn't been found. Honestly, that's all you need to make your case.
Now, your case as it stands is that anecdotal occurences in ancient hominid artwork of creatures that resemble our theoretical recreations of dinosaurs are evidence that 1) dinosaurs and hominids co-existed despite the total paucity of actual evidence of that fact and 2) there is a conspiracy within the scientific community to cover up (1).
Is this really what you are trying to defend or do you have actual evidence?
Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous.
-D. Hume |
|
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 21:57:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Besides this case for the biological existance of dragons as dinosaurs there are many others. Here are 10.
There is other cultures outside of China that have dragons and dragon slayers in their history. This could have been the real demise of the dinosaurs.
There are ancient depictions of dinosaur like creatures etched in stones. For example one look very much like a picture of a dinosaur fighting a mammoth.
The ancient Sumatrans produced multiple pieces of art depicting long-tailed, long-necked creatures with a headcrest. Some of these animals resemble hadrosaurs.
A Mesopotamian cylinder seal dated at 3300 BC. has depictions of a saurapod on it. Some of the details could not have been seen or determined from the fossil records.
An urn from Caria, which was located in Asia Minor has been discovered with artwork depecting mosasaurus and several known sea creatures.
Many petroglyph (carved rock drawing) has been found depecting what appears to be dinosaurs,
Old Egyptian seals depecting dinosaur like creatures have been found.
Cave painting found throught the word have been found with what appears to be pictures of dinosaurs painted on the walls.
Many clay figurines of dinosaurs buried at the foot of El Toro Mountain on the outskirts of Acambaro, Mexico have been found.
Depictions of dinosaurs on ancient Ican stones have been found
Just thought you'd like to know. Of course the "scientifically correct" answer has to be they were depictions of mythical creatures or re-creations or artist interpretations of dinosaur bones....despite the evidence.
Kacey
I've read the end of the bible....the Christians win.
More "could have been" arguments. "Resemble", "appear to be", "look very much like" don't quite cut it as having value as direct evidence of the physical existence of the animals you claim to be depicted. Neither does "depicts", unless and until you prove that the label you attach to the depiction is truly what the artist intended to represent and that it isn't the product of the artist's imagination.
Can you, for example, provide examples of these depictions and demonstrate that they conform to what is known about the anatomy of the creatures you claim that they represent? Can you provide examples of congruence in multiple features, so as to make a case for more than coincidence? If the ancient artists were truly working from life, they should have gotten some of the details right. Some of those people were highly skilled.
I've changed my mind about the argument to ignorance. This seems more like a variation on the affirmed consequent:
If dinosaur and men lived at the same time, ancient art could contain images of dinosaurs.
Ancient art contains images that could be dinosaur.
Therefore dinosaur and men existed at the same time.
That's an If A, then B. B, therefore A argument, which doesn't work. A is not the inevitable antecedent of B; the depictions of dino-like images can have other explanations. Therefore, unless it's established that A and only A can result in B, we can't conclude A given B.
I do believe I detect the odor of one of the classic fallacies here. Also a strong whiff of someone who's been reading a young-earth cretinist Web site and bopped over here to try out their newfound debating skillz on some evilutionists. Not to mention a bit of eau de troll.
Aqui huele mal.
Ford, there's an infinite number of monkeys outside who want to talk to us about this script for Hamlet they've worked out. |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 22:22:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Besides this case for the biological existance of dragons as dinosaurs there are many others. Here are 10. . .
I've read the end of the bible....the Christians win.
Oh Kacey, Kacey ,Kacey whatever happened to 'Thou shalt not bear false witness?'
These are 10 blatant lies.
Please prove me wrong by supplying references as to where we might find any of these fairy tales. Websites, textbooks, scholarly papers -- anything will do.
I've read the end of the bible too, and the begining and the middle and frankly I find it hard to believe that anyone could possibly fall for such B.S.
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2002 : 23:59:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Why is the dragon listed among currently extant animals?
Could the dragon really be some extinct species of dinosaur?
The only comment I can say to that is, in literature of the Far East, snakes, dragons and serpents were interchangeable. And not the evil creatures as in the West. Guess that doesn't have much to do with the Chinese zodiac exactly but perhaps the Dragon as depicted there is not a dragon as you are thinking of but only a symbolic representation of something else (the meaning of which has been lost in the ancient culture we don't understand now).
* * * * * *
*Carabao forever.
-----------------
Blessed are they who can laugh at themselves for they shall never cease
to be amused. |
|
|
|
Kacey
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2002 : 03:23:18 [Permalink]
|
There is also the most important missing item. That is any physical evidence at all. All of the remains of dinosaurs thus
far date from millions of years ago. None have been dated in a way that would allow for humans and dinosaurs to
coexist.
@tomic
Now come on, a skeptic like you really doesn't believe in those dates, right?
Kacey
I've read the end of the bible....the Christians win. |
|
|
|
Kacey
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2002 : 03:25:33 [Permalink]
|
phDreamer:
Actually, the "scientifically correct" evidence would be dinosaur fossils in young strata. Something that hasn't been
found. Honestly, that's all you need to make your case.
Actually most of the strata was laid down by the flood waters of Noah......think about it, a quick burial is needed to start a fossil.
Kacey
I've read the end of the bible....the Christians win. |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
