So... the dinosaurs.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

PopClick

Senior Member
Aug 12, 2011
4,055
136
63
#21
Lizards and crocodiles and alligators have their legs at their sides. Dinosaurs, on the other hand, had their legs beneath them. Not worded the best, but that's the gist of the differences between the two.
And yet some of them had wings :p

I realize that taxonomy is more complicated than it appears, but still.
 
T

Tintin

Guest
#22
And yet some of them had wings :p

I realize that taxonomy is more complicated than it appears, but still.
Wings? Dinosaurs gave rise to dragon legends, but wings were an imaginative addition, not a reality. :)
Yes, dear sister. Human prescribed taxonomy is rather complicated. I prefer to go by God's taxonomy of kinds. It's much simpler and makes more sense. But I still think, under those definitions, dinosaurs and crocodiles/alligators/lizards would be in separate categories.
 

PopClick

Senior Member
Aug 12, 2011
4,055
136
63
#23
Wings? Dinosaurs gave rise to dragon legends, but wings were an imaginative addition, not a reality. :)
Yes, dear sister. Human prescribed taxonomy is rather complicated. I prefer to go by God's taxonomy of kinds. It's much simpler and makes more sense. But I still think, under those definitions, dinosaurs and crocodiles/alligators/lizards would be in separate categories.
Some of them had wings (and feathers too), like Archaeopteryx, and it's still considered a dinosaur.

It's not really something I'm planning to argue, because I'm no expert on the matter. But the more I do know about it, the less I'm convinced that the various animals (extinct and otherwise) fit into all the boxes that humans have constructed for them.
 

Nautilus

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2012
6,488
53
48
#24
Wings? Dinosaurs gave rise to dragon legends, but wings were an imaginative addition, not a reality. :)
Yes, dear sister. Human prescribed taxonomy is rather complicated. I prefer to go by God's taxonomy of kinds. It's much simpler and makes more sense. But I still think, under those definitions, dinosaurs and crocodiles/alligators/lizards would be in separate categories.
There is plenty of evidence for 'winged dinosaurs' like the pterosaur/pteranodon, the pterodactyl, and the aforementioned Arcaheopteryx which while technically not considered true dinosaurs are accepted by most of the public as flying dinosaurs, not many people know the difference.

As far as when dinosaurs where on the Earth I'm an Old-Earth creationist so I couldnt give you an exact time.
 
T

Tintin

Guest
#25
Oh, yes. I don't class pterosaurs/pteranodons etc. as dinosaurs, but I get what you're saying.
 

PopClick

Senior Member
Aug 12, 2011
4,055
136
63
#26
There is plenty of evidence for 'winged dinosaurs' like the pterosaur/pteranodon, the pterodactyl, and the aforementioned Arcaheopteryx which while technically not considered true dinosaurs are accepted by most of the public as flying dinosaurs, not many people know the difference.
Ha! You're right; apparently it's a bird again. It was reclassified as a dinosaur in 2011 and I didn't realize they had decided to rebird it since then. Though some places still list it as a dinosaur.

Doesn't that kind of make my point about taxonomy not being as cut-and-dried as some would have us think? :p
 
T

Tintin

Guest
#27
Ha! You're right; apparently it's a bird again. It was reclassified as a dinosaur in 2011 and I didn't realize they had decided to rebird it since then. Though some places still list it as a dinosaur.

Doesn't that kind of make my point about taxonomy not being as cut-and-dried as some would have us think? :p
True, but differing presuppositions lead to different conclusions, even given the same physical evidence. For example: evolutionists believe emus are the closest-living relatives to the T-Rex. The rest of us just go 'huh?' and point and laugh.
 
G

GaryA

Guest
#28
Dinosaurs gave rise to dragon legends...
Do all of you remember hearing the stories about the "fire-breathing dragons", et al - that the 'knights' ( "dragon-slayers" ) of the middle-ages battled with?

Those were dinosaurs. ;)

( The word 'dinosaur' was not coined until more recent times... )

:)
 
T

tanach

Guest
#29
Ideas and theories regarding one of the longest standing controversies in history? Where do YOU think they fit into God's design?
This puzzled me for years until I came across an apocryphal book called Jubilees, which was written in the time between the testaments. In chapter four it says that before the flood creation was corrupted by fallen Angels. They not only produced the Giants but corrupted animals as well by mixing and corrupting different species. I believe Dinosaurs are freaks and that is why God destroyed everything instead of just wiping out people. If you take a look at Dinosaurs with this in mind you can see that they are not 'normal' Also think of Genetics and cloning. In the Bible you see mentions of Giants after the flood. This is because the corrupted Genes were passed on through one of the wives of Noahs Sons.
 
Last edited:
B

breakup

Guest
#30
well Im more in line with the evidence of carbon dating...so dinosaurs were pre human development. To me its no controversy tho - to me it doesn't affect ur faith one way or the other
There is no carbon in a fossil, except as contamination.
 
G

GaryA

Guest
#31
Some of them had wings (and feathers too), like Archaeopteryx, and it's still considered a dinosaur.

It's not really something I'm planning to argue, because I'm no expert on the matter. But the more I do know about it, the less I'm convinced that the various animals (extinct and otherwise) fit into all the boxes that humans have constructed for them.
"I'm with you on this!" :D

:)