Where do the dinosaurs fit into the Bible?

Certainly, but ... Clearly less dedicated people may not care to investigate the subtle nuances of scripture, and hence not come to a full understanding of them. However, I don't think God intentionally would "hold back" on people based on faith; rather, I think the power of scripture could be one path toward faith.

What I think is pretty amazing about teachings of Jesus is that, while other scriptures can be a bit interpretable, Jesus' teachings are fairly straightforward and timeless. He'd use "Truly I say to you ... " to indicate what he was about to say was not any kind of prophesy or allegory, but something he wanted you to know. I think even if a person are non-Christian, there is a lot to learn from a person who chooses non-violence despite opposition.

I know I wish I could closer live up to his ideals in behavior.


It's an interesting perspective, but you view it from a universal perspective.

The parable of the coins teaches us that wealth is relative, and in a large scale, irrelevent in a spiritual life. To the poor woman who gave one coin, that is very much - to her. It's not that any more is asked from the rich, because they have so much money that it means less to them.

Jesus is presenting a post-modern philosophical view almost 2 thousand years before the philosophy became widely established. The concept that a poor person could be on same terms - or better - with God, as a rich person, would be inconceivable in that time of history.


I still come to the same conclusion as you - that people outside the direct knowledge of Christianity may be saved - but I come to it in a different way. As for you getting flak, there is most certainly precedent for your belief - take, for example, the obligation of nuns in the Catholic church to pray for souls in Purgatory - ye ole "waiting room" for those not damnable but not saved. (Personally, I don't believe in a a Purgatory, but I think Earth is much like one!)

Where do dinosaurs fit into the bible? Well if you start cutting out at Exodus and stop near Revelations, they tend to fit quite snugly. That is, of course, you use a sharp razor blade and cut carefully. Open your copybook and write that down...

Very true (I find this even in my own church more often than not). It makes you wonder if this was not why the Catholic church started the "don't read the Bible yourself, but listen to your priest instead."

Well, to some degree yes, but certainly not as whole...

Matthew 17:20 (AMP)
20 He said to them, Because of the littleness of your faith [that is, your lack of firmly relying trust]. For truly I say to you, if you have faith [that is living] like a grain of mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, Move from here to yonder place, and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.

Most would have a hard time thinking Jesus really meant this.

Mark 6:11 (AMP)
11 And if any community will not receive and accept and welcome you, and they refuse to listen to you, when you depart, shake off the dust that is on your feet, for a testimony against them.Truly I tell you, it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the judgment day than for that town.

Many can not stand the thought that Jesus gave credence to the Sodom and Gamorrah story.

Luke 18:17-22 (AMP)
17 Truly I say to you, whoever does not accept and receive and welcome the kingdom of God like a little child [does] shall not in any way enter it [at all].
18 And a certain ruler asked Him, Good Teacher [You who are essentially and perfectly morally good], what shall I do to inherit eternal life [to partake of eternal salvation in the Messiah's kingdom]?
19 Jesus said to him, Why do you call Me [essentially and perfectly morally] good? No one is [essentially and perfectly morally] good — except God only.
20 You know the commandments: Do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not witness falsely, honor your father and your mother. [Exodus 20:12-16; Deuteronomy 5:16-20.]
21 And he replied, All these I have kept from my youth.
22 And when Jesus heard it, He said to him, One thing you still lack. Sell everything that you have and divide [the money] among the poor, and you will have [rich] treasure in heaven; and come back [and] follow Me [become My disciple, join My party, and accompany Me].

Can you think that any non-Christian will not be incensed by these verses?

John 6:47-53 (AMP)
47 I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, he who believes in Me [who adheres to, trusts in, relies on, and has faith in Me] has (now possesses) eternal life.
48 I am the Bread of Life [that gives life — the Living Bread].
49 Your forefathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and [yet] they died.
50[But] this is the Bread that comes down from heaven, so that [any]one may eat of it and never die.
51 I [Myself] am this Living Bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this Bread, he will live forever; and also the Bread that I shall give for the life of the world is My flesh (body).
52 Then the Jews angrily contended with one another, saying, How is He able to give us His flesh to eat?
53 And Jesus said to them, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, you cannot have any life in you unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood [unless you appropriate His life and the saving merit of His blood].

Firstly, we will have Ulrika and others point to the cannibalism, but get past that, and you have Jesus saying come through me or don't come at all. I don't know whether you have read these parts before, but they do not lend themselves to my guess that God will let anyone in who He deems fit. Maybe it is all metaphorical, but it still gives me pause in regards to my suppositions.


Agreed, and me too...

Can you further define what you mean by 'universal perspective'?

Well, precedence does not make it untouchable, or even correct. This is something I am still searching for...

Size matters not. Judge me by my size, do you, mmmmm? Believe in the force ... feel it flow through your veins...


He didn't actually say it was good or bad - he just said that when Judgement comes, people in towns that don't accept missionaries will be worse that Sodom and Gamorroh.


Well, this is less of a commandment for everyone, and meant more specifically for his upcoming disciples; he doesn't tell everyone to do this.

Note also that with the original translation, Jesus is saying that he is not a perfectly moral person - only God. A really interesting distinction.


As in literally, one person gives money than another. From an outsider's perspective a rich person is giving more money, but from a personal level, we see that the poor person is giving up much more.

Actually, I think Jesus was saying 'why are you calling me good, unless you accept the premise I am God.'

Several times Jesus suggests He is God, and in those verses He again states that by calling Him good, the man sees Jesus as God.

Well, at least that's how I read the verses.

That is one of my 6 year old son's favorite lines.

By inference to the judgement exacted against Sodom and Gomorrah, He certainly is saying it was bad.

It really had nothing to do with disciples per se. It had more to do with what humans put their trust in, whether it be money, power, other humans, or the dragon in Ulrika's garage.

He is actually pointing to Himself since He had already spoken of Himself as being God. It was more like a clarification to those around listening that this person was in fact acknowledging that Jesus was God.

Gotcha.

Again, lest any one get confused, these are all MY opinions...

By "it" I was referring to its destruction, rather than ultimate judgement.

In any event, those two towns sounded pretty bad.

And, in any event, I think we've just about talked this topic to death for now.

Congrats ... I think this may be the first forum post on religion that ended this way rather than being locked.

This is your friendly neighborhood atheist reminding you that
god does not exist.

~Ulrika~

And a reminder from your local agnostic, whether god exists or not, it doesn't really seem to matter either way. Nuclear reactors work and Neil Armstrong didn't bump into any angels on the way to the moon.

Funny, I always thought I had a pretty good grasp of the parables and I'm not a believer. What an odd idea that you have to be a Christian to understand stories Jesus told to Jews. Did they understand them? Why would he tell stories to people who couldn't understand them?

One common thing I have found with all the great religious leaders, the Buddha, Muhammad, Lao-Tse, Moses, Jesus, was that they spoke plainly and clearly to people. They didn't speak in riddles or use secret code. They told stories in the common vernacular and tried to enlighten the people they were speaking to. The idea that some one must first become an adherent of a religion to truly understand the stories that the founder told to gain adherents is contradictory.

Are you putting your trust in the dragon in your garage again?

I have the Jewish Publication Society's Tanakh, called the Old Testament by Christians. It is in Hebrew (and Aramaic in parts) with an English translation. The interesting thing is the number of words that we know longer know the meaning of. In the JPS Tanakh you'll find occasionally a note saying that a certain word's meaning is no longer known, but it was translated thus in Latin or thus in Greek. You don't find this in the King James Version. You do find errors, especially the translations of animal and plant names not found in the British Isles. I particularly remember the term polecat. The original Hebrew meant something else entirely. Odd that god would let mistakes like that happen isn't it? Especially since the whole thing has to be taken literally....

Man, I thought we had hashed this one out already...

Matthew 13:10-13 (AMP)
10 Then the disciples came to Him and said, Why do You speak to them in parables?
11 And He replied to them, To you it has been given to know the secrets and mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.
12 For whoever has [spiritual knowledge], to him will more be given and he will be furnished richly so that he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away.
13 This is the reason that I speak to them in parables: because having the power of seeing, they do not see; and having the power of hearing, they do not hear, nor do they grasp and understand.

I see we're up to 330+ posts now. I can't possibly read all that. So can anyone who has been following along summarise? Like, in a few paragraphs?

What conclusions have we reached? Did we come to any concensus on how the dinosaurs fit into the Bible? Since I'm guessing not, what were the basic arguments and explanations for each side?

Not that I want to drag this all up again, you understand.

Does that mean anything? What does sin have to do with genetics?



You believe it's god's word and you call it so. I believe it's mythology and I say so. That's called freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I don't say you belittle my beliefs by calling it "God's Word" and not mythology.



No it WOULD be the same after the fourth or fifth generation. It would be incestuous for many many generations. Think about it. There are no outside sources of DNA. Relationship terms we use today wouldn't even apply. What do you call the child of your sister and your cousin? Your nephew or your second cousin? If your daughter married your nephew/cousin what would her children be to you? Third Cousin, Grand Nephew or Grand Son? It would be tangled for many generations. And it's not about the terminology, it's to show that just because in the fourth generation you could have 2nd cousins, the chances of those 2nd cousins also being cousins or siblings is great.

This is what happens when you believe before you understand. You accept things that aren't necessary or central to your religion and have to defend the absurd. All you have to do is simply say "I don't know." Christianity doesn't rest on what Genesis said. You can believe parts of the Bible and not other parts. You can, occasionally not know the answer to something. I respect religious belief, I'm often awed by it. I don't respect blind faith.

You proved my point. He spoke plainly to the masses in order to bring them to understanding. You don't have to believe in order to understand the parables. And, if the disciples were given esoteric knowledge, it's a stretch to assume that you were too. It says that whoever has [spiritual knowledge] more will be given. It doesn't say whoever has BELIEF more will be given. Do you have [spiritual knowledge]? Did Jesus tell you the secrets and mysteries of the kingdom of heaven?

Interesting that you point this out, but I am not sure how Jewish viewers will appreciate it. I will, however, throw it out just the same...

This page describes one such 'no longer known':

3 translations:

NASB "...so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced..."
JSPT "...and they shall lament to me about those who are slain..."
SET "...They will look toward me because of those whom they have stabbed..."

Literal Translation of above verse snippet:
Vehibbiytu - And they will look
elay - unto me
et asher-daqaru - whom they pierced

The Jewish Publication Society at least offers some explanation as to why they have departed from the Hebrew. A footnote reads, "Meaning of Heb. uncertain". But there is no uncertainty about the Hebrew of this passage.

The first verb, vehibbiytu, occurs some 69 times in the Hebrew Bible, and twice in this exact same form. Its other occurrence in this exact form is in Exodus 33:8, which the Jewish Publication Society has no problem translating "and gaze". The second word is simply a preposition with an object suffix, elay, which occurs extremely frequently and means "unto me". The next word, et, is an object marker, which is untranslatable and occurs thousands of times. The word asher is also an everyday word in biblical Hebrew meaning "which" or "whom". The final word, daqaru, is less common, but is by no means a rare word by Hebrew standards. It is used 11 times in the Hebrew Bible and is in a form so simple that a first semester Hebrew student easily recognizes it. The verb is a third person plural, meaning "they pierced". In a similar form, a third person singular, this word occurs in Numbers 25:8, and the Jewish Publication Society translates it quite simply "and stabbed", referring to Phinehas stabbing the Israelite who had brought the curse onto Israel.

So where is the "uncertain" Hebrew? The Jewish Publication Society understood this Hebrew in other verses. Quite simply, the problem for the Jewish Publication Society is one of theology, not translation. The problem is that the speaker in this passage is clearly God, who says he will fill Jerusalem and the House of David with a spirit of favor. Then God says that he will be pierced by the inhabitants of Jerusalem and the House of David. How can Jewish people, or any people, pierce God?

Well, yes. It has to do with derailing God's plan for humans. It has to do with Him creating something that is perfect, and it being altered and made imperfect by the free will that He gave us.

That being said, you know that it is a sacred thing to Christians, and that mythology is not sacred to you. Am I correct?

I certainly don't know, and I have said as much about this particular subject earlier in the thread. What I did say is this is my best guess. And, it would not have to be the same after the fourth and fifth generation. You are assuming that it is, because it is possible.

Take a look at the numbers and tell me it is impossible to get away from incest in a short order...

Generation   Families   Males produced
1st          1          2         
2nd          2          4      (Brothers and sisters)
3rd          4          8      (First cousins)
4th          8          16     (Sixteen families to choose from)
5th          16         32     (Thirty two families to choose from)

This of course is assuming all 'families' had 2 (yes, most had more than 2 males, but for the sake of simplicity...) male children (yes, for the most part, they only counted male children in genealogies)...

Edit ---
Changed my deranged math...It was late, what can I say?
Edit 2 --
Changed my deranged math (again)...It was early, what can I say?

Why, yes, I believe I do. It is not some special knowledge to Kurgan, but to all believers in Jesus the Christ. He will hand it out freely to whomever may ask and seek Him as their Lord and Savior.

Ephesians 1:17 (AMP)
[For I always pray to] the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, that He may grant you a spirit of wisdom and revelation [of insight into mysteries and secrets] in the [deep and intimate] knowledge of Him,

Ephesians 3:14-19 (AMP)
14 For this reason [seeing the greatness of this plan by which you are built together in Christ], I bow my knees before the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
15 For Whom every family in heaven and on earth is named [that Father from Whom all fatherhood takes its title and derives its name].
16 May He grant you out of the rich treasury of His glory to be strengthened and reinforced with mighty power in the inner man by the [Holy] Spirit [Himself indwelling your innermost being and personality].
17 May Christ through your faith [actually] dwell (settle down, abide, make His permanent home) in your hearts! May you be rooted deep in love and founded securely on love,
18 That you may have the power and be strong to apprehend and grasp with all the saints [God's devoted people, the experience of that love] what is the breadth and length and height and depth [of it];
19[That you may really come] to know [practically, through experience for yourselves] the love of Christ, which far surpasses mere knowledge [without experience]; that you may be filled [through all your being] unto all the fullness of God [may have the richest measure of the divine Presence, and become a body wholly filled and flooded with God Himself]!

Most atheists I know (myself included) hold rationalism and logic "sacred" (so to speak), and get just as offeneded as you do when subjected to other people's irrationalism. Your insistance about the truth of your religion is no less belittling to non-believers than their insistance that your belief is based on mythology and nothing more. if you believe you have more right to assert your beliefs than non-believers, and that it is in any way less of an offense against others, that is the great hypocricy of religion.

Nothing is sacred. No ideas or beliefs are above critical analysis or the application of reason, and none should be protected from it. The social taboos against political and religious discourse do nothing but keep people myopic and ignorant.

Well Chip, Michael, and anyone else who was offended, I am truly sorry if I have offended you. It was never my intent. How do I speak of these things that will not offend you?

I haven't seen anyone ridicule atheists or their beliefs. If discussing religion or atheism is upsetting, we can avoid the topics by avoiding the threads.

It's one thing to discuss one's belief system, it's another thing to ridicule a belief system. Also, I haven't seen anyone insist others must believe as they do, although I have seen atheists belittle the belief system of those who believe in God, comparing them to people who believe in the tooth fairy.

Here are a few rules we used in debates concerning religion/atheism or politics.

1. State your opinions and beliefs without belittling other's beliefs.
2. Question other's opinions respectfully.
3. Talk about ideas, not about other people.

edit: to make sure we agree on terms, belittle means..

be·lit·tle ( P ) Pronunciation Key (b-ltl)
tr.v. be·lit·tled, be·lit·tling, be·lit·tles
To represent or speak of as contemptibly small or unimportant; disparage: a person who belittled our efforts to do the job right.

Discussion of these things never offends me, Kurgan. I am in no way afraid of ideas and find nothing at all insensitive about the expression of ideas that are contrary to my own, no matter how they're expressed. My point is that religious people are always quick to play the victim card as if their views are somehow more "sacred" than anyone else's. It's a socially conditioned guilt trip that has no validity.

To be honest Chip, I do not think that I have offended anyone so far.

Christianity DOES mean something to me, and to try to degrade it to a myth is a problem for me and many other people as well (including non-Christians from comments I have seen). It does not mean anything to you or Michael, so it is no problem for comments of the like. I have stated no where that your beliefs are made up myths, even if I felt they were.

I am not trying to make a martyr of myself (or any other Christians). If someone were to say that Allah was a myth, I would have a problem with that too. There are polite ways to discuss things and there are rude ways, and in this thread, thoughts have often been expressed rudely when there was absolutely no need of it.

The only place that I can think of that I came close was when replying to Hiro's comment about the chimpanzee's (for which I do apologize Hiro). If I had been called on it before, I would have done so then. But, I had not re-read my post for some time, and did not realize how I was coming across (to myself if no one else).

I really do try not to 'step on others toes' if it does not need to be done. The whole point of following Jesus is to emulate what He did, and spreading the gospel that is His in a loving manner.

Revalation mentions Leviathan and Behemoth, and they seem to me to be dinosaurs by their description...http://www.ldolphin.org/3550.html though they are most likely entirely metaphorical, though I wonder where such descriptions might have arisen from.