1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Contradiction: Unicorns, and Chickens with 4 feet!

Discussion in 'Scriptural Debates' started by SA Huguenot, Sep 16, 2019.

  1. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    1,179
    Ratings:
    +239
    Religion:
    Protestant
    1. The Bible describes Animals that never existed.
    (Leviticus 11:6) A hare is not a cud chewer.

    (Leviticus 11:20) A foul does not have 4 feet.

    (Isaiah 34:7) The Bible speaks of a Unicorn.


    Answer:

    This accusation against the Biblical description of animals in contradiction to zoology was one of the numerous contradictions’ Dr Zakir Naik made to disprove the validity of the Bible as a Muslim during the debate he had with Dr William Campbell at the University of Chicago in 2000. This argument was further taken up by a lot of Atheists in their quest to disrupt the Christian belief in the Bible. Upon investigation to validate these claims, I learned the following. Please take note that this is not an attempt by me to try to prove the Bible correct, but an attempt to show some information not relayed by the Atheist and Muslim which should be taken into account.


    The Bible is of opinion that the Creation of the Universe is much older than 6 000 years, contrary to what many Atheist and Christian want it to claim. However, the Bible is very clear, “Life” was created only 6 000 years ago according to the chronological count within its pages.

    This would render a version of humans walking with Dinosaurs. A topic endlessly discussed between Creationists and palaeontologists, with the discoveries of human footprints in rock as old as 90 million years, some even next to dinosaur footprints. I will not venture into these claims, but will rely only on the assumption that through the Biblical point of view, man and dinosaurs lived together.


    Now we can think about the following:

    Every hour 17 species of animal go extinct. Are we sure there were not some animal looking like a huge horse that had a single horn that died out?

    What about a foul with 4 legs?


    Taking the above in consideration, I opened my books on dinosaurs and other animals, and found the “Archaeopteryx” discovered in Germany in chalk layers. Well, its wings had claws on the front. Is this not 4 legs? In China, the discovery of “Claudipteryx Zoui” confirms the same bird-reptile had four claws with wings that enabled it to fly short distances. Even more interesting is “Sinosauropteryx”. This reptile had feather filaments covering it in the same manner as the Kiwi, but had no flight feathers on its front legs. These legs look like reptilian claws! Scientists describes it as a foul that crawls. The feather prints within the rock is clearly visible to the observer. Even today you will find that the normal chicken has a thumb and a nail on their wings.

    As I paged through my books, by accident I found an article on the fossils of a one horned Rhinoceros discovered in Siberia! “Elasmotherium sibiricum”, or the Siberian one horned rhino was believed to have died out 350 000 years ago. Carbon dating on the fossil bones gave a very recent date of 29 000 years. Ignore the fact that this animal’s bone was 29 000 years old, it is sure that there must have been other survivors elsewhere in the world living with humans 6 000 years ago. I agree, this might not be a “Unicorn” such as the mythological description, but it is close indeed. Who says there were no other animals with a horn and an appearance like a horse or antelope?

    Then I also discovered a living bird with claws!
    Whos chicks have fully developed claws on its front tips of the wings.
    The Hoatzin lives in the Amazon, and any Atheist that might like to claim the animals described in the Bible never existed, will have to retract their words and will have to agree that the Bible knew of such animals 3400BC. 12393.ngsversion.1422035755612.adapt.1900.1.jpg archaeopterix.jpg hoatzin-nestling-cropped.jpg

    Anyway, looking at extinctions of animals, a claim that these “Mythological animals” never existed, is at best simply hoping no one will think about the above to allow leniency to the Atheist’s claim.
     
    #1 SA Huguenot, Sep 16, 2019
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2019
  2. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,176
    Ratings:
    +1,413
    Religion:
    Baha'i inspired liberal
    ROFL
     
  3. SomeRandom

    SomeRandom Still learning to be wise

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2014
    Messages:
    6,335
    Ratings:
    +4,713
    Look it’s okay to be like
    “People who were writing the bible at the time were a bit ignorant.”
    You might cop some flak from militant atheists or anti theists, but that’s whatever.

    And I thought general consensus was that “mythical creatures” usually had some element of truth. I have entire books dedicated to the origins of mythical beasts and all of them attribute some real life phenomenon when explaining where they possibly came from. Hell I remember learning about that back in primary school. Like rhinos were possibly mistaken for unicorns by early man or that sea monsters may have just been either remnants of a subspecies of dinosaur or merely terrifying sea life just in general. And sea life can be pretty terrifying to be fair.
    Hell the Loch Ness might have been just giant eels this whole time. *shrugs*
     
    #3 SomeRandom, Sep 16, 2019
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2019
  4. Nimos

    Nimos Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    764
    Ratings:
    +306
    I think there is as much of an endless discussion about this between creationist and paleontologists as there are discussions between people that believe the earth is flat and the scientific community, which is probably close to none. :) Those footprints you talk about are they considered from modern humans (Homo sapiens) or some of our ancestors? As far as I know the oldest footprint found of modern human is approx. 120000 years old.

    No it have two legs and two wings, it could fly. I don't think there is any support for it walking around on all four, Besides that it went extinct like 120+ million years ago, so not sure how that would fit with humans anyway?
     
  5. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    1,179
    Ratings:
    +239
    Religion:
    Protestant
    With reference to the Animal with 4 legs, I spoke about Sinosauropteryx. In Time magazine, the scientists named this animal a bird that walks on all 4's.
    I dont want to debate on the age of human footprints in rock now.
    But I would like to know how paleontologists came to that dating.

    What I did in this thread is to show the Atheist that they somehow take a small description from the Bible, cloak it in some explanation of sillyness, and think they destroyed the Bible.
    Here we have, not only fossils, but living examples of animals that lives with people now!
    As for the one horned rhino, well, no one thought they were in existance with human timescales, but now paleontologists are not so certain about previous claims anymore.
    As for the Hoazin chick, does it fly or crawl?
    fact is, this is not a "contradiction as evidence that the Bible is wrong".
     
  6. Nimos

    Nimos Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    764
    Ratings:
    +306
    Ok, but the Sinosauropteryx is classified as a bipedal theropod like that of an ostrich.
    [​IMG]

    This is a skeletal overview, how on Earth is this going to walk on all four? Its would bump its head into every rock and tree branch, completely unable to locate its prey? The only thing that would support this, is that it could explain why it went extinct I guess. :)

    My guess is that they use some of the known dating methods on the soil in which the footprint is found. How long it would take for the print to set in such material etc. If the soil date to 5000 years, then it would be weird if the footprint were older than that. But looked it up and just quickly looked it over and they also date some ancient tools they have found in that area. Obviously this doesn't give a 100% accurate year or month for which the footprint were made, but it gets us closer to an accurate estimate. But I guess you can find a good explanation of how they date footprints if you search a bit around the internet.
     
    #6 Nimos, Sep 16, 2019
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2019
  7. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,647
    Ratings:
    +8,837
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    You can't argue 'walking' fowls when the strata where the fossils were found clearly show a different timeline and even different era altogether. If anything is silly it would be the mixing in of two completely different timelines as evidenced by the layers of strata.

    Like already mentioned earlier , they are wings and not feet, no more than our two hands are functioning as feet for walking in comparison. Bats are probably the closest to walking on all fours and they are clearly not birds or any kind of fowl as the Bible alludes to.
     
  8. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,516
    Ratings:
    +15,281
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I do believe that the OP is confused about how long Homo sapiens have been here. For quite a while it was thought to be 200,000 years and not just based upon footprints.
     
  9. Tumah

    Tumah Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2013
    Messages:
    11,059
    Ratings:
    +7,357
    Religion:
    Mega-Super-Ultra-Orthodox Judaism

    Probably not a hare then... It wouldn't be the first animal we can no longer identify by it's original Hebrew name...


    It's not speaking about birds, it's talking about flying insects.


    You mean aurochs?
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    1,179
    Ratings:
    +239
    Religion:
    Protestant
    Just goes to show how artistic impressions can differ from each other.
    Look at this one. 12393.ngsversion.1422035755612.adapt.1900.1.jpg
    Does this mean that there was never a foul that used its wings with claws to walk?
    No it doesnt.
    And obviously this animal lived in vegitation, and would have used its front claws to clear grass and foilage to pass through.

    And there are many footprints of Humans in rock around the world.
     
  11. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    41,539
    Ratings:
    +3,351
    currently chickens are bred for the breast meat

    but if the public should change it's mind about that

    chickens with four legs will happen
     
  12. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    1,179
    Ratings:
    +239
    Religion:
    Protestant
    laetoli-footprints.jpg
    Laetoli footprints 3.6 million years old, and the only difference between an hominid and modern human is the Atheists explanations on why it must be non human.

    trachilos-footprint.jpg
    Trachilos footprint 6 milion years old.
    Explanation:
    There must have been other animals that evolved feet the same as humans.
    foot4.jpg
    And Meister discovered a sandal print in a rock that crushed a trilobite.
    Age 300 million to 600 million years.

    Now, how do we date these rocks?
     
  13. Nimos

    Nimos Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    764
    Ratings:
    +306
    No, it suggest that the Sinosauropteryx were no such creature, there might have been others, have no clue about that. And im definitely not an expert in dinosaurs. But I will put my head on the block here without knowing anything about this animal. That from my very limited understanding about it, that this looks like it is a predator build for speed and agility. It have big legs compared to it body and a long tail, which is most likely used for balance, which could indicate that it used it much as modern day predators do, which allow them to change direction faster when they hunt.

    Do you just make up things? :D

    Those people that know something about this animal reach the exact opposite conclusion. Look at the size of its hands, how on Earth and why would it clear grass and foliage? What other predator on Earth have you heard off that would do that and spend energy doing something like that. If this animal had problems getting through grass etc. How would it ever catch something to eat, the prey would just go into grass and it would be done for... Im sorry but that is just a ridiculous claim. :D Try to watch these short videos about the Sinosauropteryx and compare it to what you are saying:


     
    #13 Nimos, Sep 16, 2019
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2019
  14. Nimos

    Nimos Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    764
    Ratings:
    +306
    Sorry to jump in on this one as well. This have nothing to do with modern humans, but our relatives, the only thing this proofs is that evolution is correct :)

    The footprints are believed to be from the Australopithecus afarensis, which looked something like this:

    [​IMG]

    Australopithecus afarensis is one of the longest-lived and best-known early human species—paleoanthropologists have uncovered remains from more than 300 individuals! Found between 3.85 and 2.95 million years ago in Eastern Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania), this species survived for more than 900,000 years, which is over four times as long as our own species has been around. It is best known from the sites of Hadar, Ethiopia (‘Lucy’, AL 288-1 and the 'First Family', AL 333); Dikika, Ethiopia (Dikika ‘child’ skeleton); and Laetoli (fossils of this species plus the oldest documented bipedal footprint trails).
    Australopithecus afarensis


    Not going to check this one in details. But this could suggest that these are either from the Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Orrorin tugenensis or Ardipithecus kadabba. Which one of them or what exactly the story is regarding the footprints you can probably figure out by examine it in more depth. But pretty sure that when you do, that you will find out that these are not homo sapiens footprints.
    Species

    Meister is a known creationist, so will just leave it at that and if there is any validity to his findings, it will be picked up and accepted by the scientific community at some point. (Not saying that he tried to do something intentionally wrong, but there have been cases from the creationist to fiddle with things. So better save than sorry)

    But lets see how long that takes:
    In short, the trilobites in the specimen are real enough, but the "print" itself appears to be due solely to inorganic, geologic phenomena. After mainstream rebuttals of this find were published in the 1980's (Conrad, 1981; Stokes, 1986; Strahler, 1987), only a few creationists continued to suggest this was a real print, while most former advocates of the specimen have quietly abandoned the case.

    The "Meister Print"
     
    #14 Nimos, Sep 16, 2019
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2019
  15. Nimos

    Nimos Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    764
    Ratings:
    +306
    Well why not make a chicken with 8 breasts and no legs instead? :D
     
  16. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    41,539
    Ratings:
    +3,351
    ssssshhhhhh…….

    don't give the GMO guys anymore ideas
     
  17. IndigoChild5559

    IndigoChild5559 Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,645
    Ratings:
    +932
    Religion:
    Judaism
    The problem is not that the text describes animals that never existed. The problem is that you are working from a bad translation. Go back to the original hebrew.
     
  18. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    1,179
    Ratings:
    +239
    Religion:
    Protestant
    But of corse you dont want to look at Meister.
    You will definately wait untill the scientific community pick it up at some point.
    It will be damaging to all of evolution if you were to look into the Meister fossil.
    Funny that since 1968 not a single "Scientist" wants to speak about the Meister fossil.
    If you look at the instances where scientists did get involved, their answer is that Humans did not exist when trilobites lived.
    Flippit, they have an actual picture taken "500 million YA", with a human shoe print on a trillobite, but they know they should not say what they see!
    500 Million-Year-Old Human Footprint Fossil Baffles Scientists
    Do you know that Meister changed his Atheist view and knew he was lied too, and became a bible believer?
    Oh, then you can go here to talk the fossil away with talk that the foot print is a geological patern found all over the place where "creationists" found more such prints, but because there are not more such prints, it is clearly just a geological process.
    The "Meister Print"
    Oh, and all the creationists are somehow dissappearing and dont use this fossil as evidence anymore.
    Jee whizz, just another evolutionist telling himself more stories hoping everyone will believe him.
     
  19. Nimos

    Nimos Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    764
    Ratings:
    +306
    I tried looking for information about it, but can't seem to find anything other than creationists view of this. However one can wonder why, if this are such a compelling evidence, that they didn't present it and won the Dover trial? That would have been the perfect place to have dropped such a bomb in favor of Intelligent design...?

    The reason, I say that I wait for the scientific community to pick it up, is due to several reasons. First because I do not believe in a huge global conspiracy among the evil atheists scientists to hide the truth from the world, comparable to that of the flat earth conspiracy. The amount of people that are expected to play along with this, is ridiculous. Secondly, Im not an expert in fossils, so my personal opinion in regards to what he found is of no value and is not going to change anyone's mind anyway and I wouldn't even know what position to take on it. I have looked at pictures of it and it looks strange. But also assuming that humans ran around in sandals such a long time ago, one would expect to find millions of ancient tools and objects from such period or later, being far more advanced than a mere sandal. We are talking about humans that would have lived at least 250 millions years ago long before the times of dinosaurs. And yet they, creationists, want us to believe that the only remains from a potential million years old human civilization, is a footprint of a sandal? Look at what humans today have developed since the first sandal was made? Yet a former human race, didn't manage to make anything in the million of years or even 1000s of years that they must have existed? or do you suggest that the one making the sandals are the same humans as today?

    What exactly is the theory? Despite already having said that I know close to nothing about fossils, one would still have to account for where a civilization even capable of making something as simple as a sandal went, assume that they didn't went extinct the moment they invented it?

    Even if scientists agreed that this is a sandal, it would change nothing. It still doesn't proof a creator, but merely that evolution is more complex than they thought. So what exactly should they get out of hiding it?

    The amount of evidence and numbers of times evolution have been tested and passed every single time, makes it one, if not the most solid scientific theory to date. It would probably be easier to proof Einstein wrong. So im sorry, a single fossil, claiming to contain a 250+ million old sandal footprint is not going to convince me. And if it is as you say, that there are lots and lots of evidence, it should be easy to convince people.
     
  20. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    1,179
    Ratings:
    +239
    Religion:
    Protestant
    The fact are as such.
    More and more footprints are discovered in rocks of footprints of "Modern humans" through out the world.
    https://www.sapiens.org/archaeology/ancient-footprints/
    And this has been going on for years since the Laeotoli footprints were found.
    Look at this artistic presentation.
    Ancient footprints in Crete challenge theory of human evolution – but what actually made them?
    The Evolution theory now has it that the Human footprint belonged to an apelike creature.
    Do you see how ridicilous such a picture is from my point of view?
    Look at the wild hominoid's foot on the rock.
    100% modern humen.
    Now the evolutionist took the footprint of a Modern human, and painted a wild ape as the owner?
    Now how the hell can anyone see how the face of this creature looked like from the footprint?

    Do you see how I will observe only bias from the Evolutionist's part?
    Do you think this is good solid science?

    I think it is BS at best!
    This evolutionist took a Human footprint, and tries to tell me, No man, it was an ape!
    Do you agree with my observation?
     
Loading...