Dinosaurs and the Bible

[NuRelic]

Several believers and non-believers have questioned the validity of the Bible because there is no reference to Dinosaurs. I'd like to run a theory past someone that in that group by asking you to answer a few questions. So I'll start with the most obvious, Do you believe in God but have a problem with the Bible because it has no reference to Dinosaurs?

Nu

 

[General Mung Beans]

That is a ridiculous argument against the validity of the Bible. The Bible doesn't mention American Indians either. The Bible wasn't meant to be a biology textbook thus not mentioning the dinosaurs is unsurprising.

 

[Tim Myers]

You can force the Bible to have references to dinosaurs, if you want to, by quoting Job 40:15+16 and Job 41:1-3............

Many, many people do............

 

[NuRelic]

That is a ridiculous argument against the validity of the Bible. The Bible doesn't mention American Indians either. The Bible wasn't meant to be a biology textbook thus not mentioning the dinosaurs is unsurprising.

I'm not making an argument against the validity of the Bible, just the opposite.

You can force the Bible to have references to dinosaurs, if you want to, by quoting Job 40:15+16 and Job 41:1-3............

Many, many people do............

Don't need to force the Bible to do anything. There's a better way to explain it the is seemingly always overlooked. But it's my thread, my rules.
I'm still looking for someone who to answer my original question - Do you believe in God but have a problem with the Bible because it has no reference to Dinosaurs?

Nu

 

[Resha Caner]

I'm still looking for someone who to answer my original question - Do you believe in God but have a problem with the Bible because it has no reference to Dinosaurs?

I think General Mung did answer your question, and Tim did in a way as well. Both have good points.

First, as Tim points out, there are verses that could be taken as a reference to dinosuars. If so, then your question is irrelevant. At the same time, one must be careful not to read one's desires into scripture. (I know that wasn't quite Tim's point. I put my own spin on it. But there it is.)

That's where the General's comment comes into play. Suppose those aforesaid verses don't refer to dinosaurs. So what? It doesn't mean anything about the validity of scripture. So, the answer to your question would be: no.

Why did you ask the question?

 

[Tim Myers]

"Why did you ask the question?"

And what does believing in God have to do with getting all bent out of shape just because T-Rex doesn't have his own chapter in the Bible??.......

 

[miamited]

Hi Nu,

The bible doesn't mention elephants either. It doesn't mention porpoises or turtles or probably some several thousand other animal creatures. It does however mention the leviathan and some animal with a tail like a cedar which has strength beyond any man. What animal might that be?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[NuRelic]

Okay ... clarification. This is largely me fault because it appears I didn't make my opening statement clear. I have NO PROBLEM with the Bible not mentioning Dinosaurs. Moreover, I have had conversations with fellow Christians and Athiest alike that question the validity of the Bible because the Bible omits any reference to Dinosaurs. I think that holding that kind of position is a little childish (for my own personal reasons) but I was not adaquetly able to answer their questions at the time so I came up with my own theory.

It is that theory I wanted to discuss with someone here whi has a problem with the Bible notmentioning Dinosaurs. If you reread my opening post with that in mind I think you see that. The reason I don't just type it out here is because I want the debate to see what and how the person(s) who replies to certain questions and answer I give in response to their own.

My appologies if I upset someone if the thread came across the wrong way.

Nu

 

[Tim Myers]

It's all good, NuRelic....no one is upset (well, at least not me, that is).........

You are okay.........

 

[BondiHarry]

The Bible isn't meant to be the all inclusive book on all things that are or have been. It is meant to teach us something of God, of ourselves, our fall and how we can be reconciled to God. God could have included the science behind creation in the Bible instead of wording it like He did but to what point as it is likely far beyond even the greatest scientists to understand.

 

[Resha Caner]

I didn't get the impression that anyone was upset. I'm not either. You have to realize that since the Internet only uses the written word, you're missing the body language that would tell you people's mood as they reply. That's the reason for those (very annoying - yes, I despise them) emoticons.

So, you may not get the exact person you were hoping to debate, but I'm still curious to here your idea. Just be prepared for people to disagree.

 

[kql314]

Ken Ham has 2 excellent books about this topic- in his Answers in Genesis collection. Good reading....
Best,
Ken

 

[NuRelic]

The Bible isn't meant to be the all inclusive book on all things that are or have been. It is meant to teach us something of God, of ourselves, our fall and how we can be reconciled to God. God could have included the science behind creation in the Bible instead of wording it like He did but to what point as it is likely far beyond even the greatest scientists to understand.

Agreed ... and your missing my point. Read my previous post please.

Nu

I didn't get the impression that anyone was upset. I'm not either. You have to realize that since the Internet only uses the written word, you're missing the body language that would tell you people's mood as they reply. That's the reason for those (very annoying - yes, I despise them) emoticons.

So, you may not get the exact person you were hoping to debate, but I'm still curious to here your idea. Just be prepared for people to disagree.

I didn't figure anyone was "mad", but I wanted to quell any motion towards angering anyone as soon as possible since I want to make it clear that is not my intent.

As far as the theory (or idea) I will lay it out here in a few days or so, whether the someone(s) I'm looking for post in here or not. Thanks for being curious, I think it's fairly basic as well as a logical and straight forward answer to that particular question. I guess we'll see.

Nu

 

[dustinthewind]

My answer to your original question would be "yes". I'd like to hear your theory, NuRelic.

 

[NuRelic]

I would like to play this out as if we're having a conversation if you don't mind so that I can explain myself as I go. But I'll start with a seemingly simple question, how long is a day?

Nu

 

[dustinthewind]

I would like to play this out as if we're having a conversation if you don't mind so that I can explain myself as I go. But I'll start with a seemingly simple question, how long is a day?

Nu

I feel like this is somehow a trick question, but I'm gonna go with the obvious "24 hours".

 

[Randy_R]

One of Adam's grandkids was going to write a book on dinosaurs until he found that t-rex's could run faster than he could.

 

[NuRelic]

Okay 24 hours equals one day, the time it takes the Earth to rotate on its axis one time. Second question, how long is a day on Jupiter or Saturn or the moon? (There is a point to this, please trust me).

Nu

 

[dustinthewind]

Okay 24 hours equals one day, the time it takes the Earth to rotate on its axis one time. Second question, how long is a day on Jupiter or Saturn or the moon? (There is a point to this, please trust me).

Nu

Had to google this...

Jupiter day = 9.9 hours
Saturn day = 10-11 hours
Moon day = 27 days 7 hours 43.2 minutes (earth time)

 

[mmmtacos]

OK Ill chime in.

Your question, "How long is a day?", really depends on what you mean. Literally it would be about 24 hours for one day on earth.

But..............

My Granddad used to say something like, "...Back in my day..." meaning and era of an un-designated length of time.

Then.........................

You have the "Day of the Lord" that doesn't mean a 24 hour period either......

Daniel's weeks refer to 7s of years.........

So there is all sorts of meanings for the terms we use to mark time.

You really need to provide some context to define what you are driving at. (I think a debate about the age of the earth is coming though)