N
Nest
Guest
Where dinosaurs on Noahs ark? If so when where they really extinct, Did the book of Job describe 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.
J
jimmydiggs
Guest
A
AgapeSpiritEyes
Guest
Before Adam and before Genesis 1:2 preadam in age of angels before Lucifers fall, lucifer had long time fallen before adam was formed
S
Spenney7
Guest
Yes Job talks about an animal that most likely describes a dinosaur. The Bible doesn't really mention them anywhere else. I don't think they were really a huge part of God's plan, or at least His plan was fulfilled for them many years ago, which is why they are extinct. I assume they were on Noah's ark since the book of Job comes after Gennesis.
Another interesting fact... Did you know that reptiless never stop growing? So, when man used to live an average of over 900 years, we can only assume reptiles lived much longer, too. These creatures would have grown very large. What I'm saying is "dinosaurs" may not even be extinct, but their lifespan is more than 90% shorter, so they grow to less than one-tenth of the size they did thousands of years ago.
Job 40
15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength [is] in his loins, and his force [is] in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones [are as] strong pieces of brass; his bones [are] like bars of iron.
19 He [is] the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his
sword to approach [unto him].
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him [with] their shadow; the willows of the brook
compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, [and] hasteth not: he trusteth that he
can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes: [his] nose pierceth through snares.
Another interesting fact... Did you know that reptiless never stop growing? So, when man used to live an average of over 900 years, we can only assume reptiles lived much longer, too. These creatures would have grown very large. What I'm saying is "dinosaurs" may not even be extinct, but their lifespan is more than 90% shorter, so they grow to less than one-tenth of the size they did thousands of years ago.
Job 40
15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength [is] in his loins, and his force [is] in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones [are as] strong pieces of brass; his bones [are] like bars of iron.
19 He [is] the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his
sword to approach [unto him].
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him [with] their shadow; the willows of the brook
compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, [and] hasteth not: he trusteth that he
can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes: [his] nose pierceth through snares.
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
Umm... the Flinstones is a cartoon as in yabadabadoo. Dinosaurs were long gone before the flood engulfed the area mankind lived in at that period of history (people weren't spread around the world like they are today but rather were congretated in a general location). In addition to a global flood being unnecessary, the total water content of the earth is only 22 percent of what would be needed for a global flood making it unlikely that the Genesis flood was global.
Of course, you may disagree but I think Reasons To Believe has the right interpretation of Behemoth" (Job 40:15-24) and "Leviathan" (Job 41:1-34) found in the Book of Job which you can view here:
Reasons To Believe : Leviathan and Behemoth - Dinosaurs Episode 2
But hey, this is not a salvation issue and I respect your right to believe any creation explanation you wish.
Of course, you may disagree but I think Reasons To Believe has the right interpretation of Behemoth" (Job 40:15-24) and "Leviathan" (Job 41:1-34) found in the Book of Job which you can view here:
Reasons To Believe : Leviathan and Behemoth - Dinosaurs Episode 2
But hey, this is not a salvation issue and I respect your right to believe any creation explanation you wish.
C
Caleb222
Guest
Science has shown that before the time of the flood, the atmosphere was under hyperbaric conditions. This means that animals would grow larger and live longer. After the flood these conditions dissapeared. Therefore the "dinosaurs" that Noah took on the ark were probably babies and left the ark to give us some of the modern day lizards we see around us.
K
kenisyes
Guest
In ancient times, some scholars considered dinosaurs manufactured. I know this will raise the question of how, and I don't know, but assuming the giants were manufactured (the Egyptian and Mayan terms imply this), the dinosaurs could have been early experiments on birds and reptiles. According to this theory, the experimental period would have lasted a few centuries, all before Noah, and they would have died in a couple generations, as being genetic misfits. They were not God's animals, so none would have been passengers anyway.
I think there are only like three whole ones ever been found. Most are conjectural reconstructions from various bones found here and there. One is mentioned by Pliny as having been found in Judea about 20 years after Jesus rose.
Many people try to assign dinosaurs to unknown Hebrew words in Job. That's all guesswork. Behemoth almost certainly means "mammals".
A
AgapeSpiritEyes
Guest
They were here in pre-adamite world that Lucifer ruled on this planet before his rebellion and the deluge Gen.1:1 compare Gen 1:2 in between these two verses is the age of Angels ruling planets prehistoric to us adamites, fill in Lucifer his rebellion and the judgment of this earth renovating starts in Gen. 1:2 God did not create from nothing in verse 2 see the Hebrew word for create it was already here. God renovated the planet that Lucifer ruled God destroyed most of the surface and all that was renovated even the sun but did not renovate the other planets in our solar system as you can see. God create man to rule the planets and the universe with Him this was His response to Lucifer’s Fall along with 1/3 of all the angels that were in the universe. The reason 1/3 is connected to Lucifer is because there are three heavens, Lucifer Has 3 heads one for each heaven that is why He was greater than all and adorned and wisest. Also this is why he was successful to lure 1/3 of all the angels in this heaven (universe).
K
kenisyes
Guest
I have heard about this hyperbaric pressure idea, but I don't see how they could possibly prove this, since they were not around to measure the pressure. Can you enlighten me as to how the evidence was produced?
The big problem is explaining why the "man in the ice" is the same size and bone density we are. And also the physical sizes of the dolmens and other pre-flood archeology. If the pressure was lower, everything would be bigger, so the doorways would all be bigger, too. Or does it require departing from the Biblical date of the flood, so that these artifacts become "post flood"? Remember that date is confirmed in the archeological layers at Ur and by the Chinese annals.
K
kenisyes
Guest
I have heard this theory many times. Are there any Scriptures supporting the chronology? I agree there are none contradicting it. However, there is a human footprint embedded in rock that evidently cooled just as the person walked through it in Texas, and this print is covered by a dinosaur footprint. It would be interesting to hear how this can be lined up with with this chronology. It is also interesting, that when God was renovating the earth, He didn't clean up a little better. Dinosaur bones are sometimes found on the surface of the ground just lying there.
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths.
The Paluxy River
Also when looking at authentic bipedal footprints which do exist, we need to accurately differentiate between bipedal animal, hominids, and finally modern humans.
This is NOT a human: http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/MSNBC/...10720-FootprintsPhoto-hmed-1055a.grid-6x2.jpg
The Paluxy River
Also when looking at authentic bipedal footprints which do exist, we need to accurately differentiate between bipedal animal, hominids, and finally modern humans.
This is NOT a human: http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/MSNBC/...10720-FootprintsPhoto-hmed-1055a.grid-6x2.jpg
A
AgapeSpiritEyes
Guest
Well the theory is more than a theory, First blunt question Why did Lucifer and the third of the angels become imprisioned on this planet? Also why did satan roam around the earth going up and down from the abyss to the surface watch God make adam and then deguise himself in the serpent causing man to fall or separate man from God so he could spiritually usurp and dominate man?
Ezekiel 28 verses 1-6 is a reflection of Satan and partial dual refrence of the prince of Tyre ( Ithobalas II having the same pride of Lucifer before His fall. The prince of Tyre Ithobalas II meet his judgement by the hands of Babylon verses 7-10. Verses 11 start the lamentation of the spiritual King over the prince of Tyre that being satan. His casting out of the Mountian of God (Access to the Spiritual Kingdom of God) God's declaration to destroy Lucifer to satan from the mist of the stomes of fire begining infant planets cooling off (natural universe first heaven the solar system the universe, the casting of Satan to the ground of the earth or this planet. Satan will be terrible to the other third of the angels that fell with him and terrible to look upon from the removal of all his power and beauty after his fall,, God's removal of him forever. Once Lucifer and then his fall to satan is the major being of these prophecies. verses 11-19 could not ever be a natural human being.
Time of Lucifers fall Ezek. 28:15. This is the time of his iniquity and rebellion against God to exhault his throne and kingdom from earth to heaven (Ish. 14:12-14. This was the time of his corrupption and sin was surely before the forming of adam, for Lucifer was already a fallen angel at the time he watched and lured adam and eve to fall in the garden Gen 2:2 2 Corth 11:4.
K
kenisyes
Guest
Just to cover all the bases, I have heard that some prints were counterfeited in recent years to discredit the originals. Are we discussing the original prints?
K
kenisyes
Guest
The traditional answer for Lucifer's imprisonment is that he disagreed with God over the creation of man. He chose this planet so he could prove God wrong. That's also why he watched God make Adam; he wanted to know Adam's weaknesses. This planet is what Lucifer wanted, God imprisoned him here.
Traditionally The Prince of Tyre is a symbol of Satan not the other way around. Verse by verse: 2-3 sarcastic references to what the Prince has said of himself (proved in vs. 6). 4-5 apply to many human kings. 7-9 is God's judgment on the prince. 10 satan cannot be killed by strangers. 12 refers to his actions to acquire wisdom. 13 Eden is thought to have been in this part of the world even today. If I recall, Sadam Hussein said the same thing about himself. Possessing stones applies to any king. Having had musical instruments prepared for him as a birth gift likewise applies to many kings. 14 the cherub is the emblem of Akkadian culture, as the eagle in America. He covers his country as its headship. Mount Sinai has been located, and it is in his part of the world, and is burned on top. 15 Refers to the fact that his country used to follow God, but no longer does. 16-19 can apply to any human king. satan will not be destroyed within human history (if he will be at all). The passage applies to the King of Tyre, and obnly symbolically of Satan as Jewish tradition has always held.
The date in 28:15 is the founding of Tyre, not of Satan. Is 14:12-14 does not say when it happened. Tradition says Lucifer fell just after God announced to the angels that He would create Adam. This could all have happened in the first 5 days of creation. No one ever thought the planets were stones of fire cooling off at the time the Bible was written. That's a new idea that came in with Galileo. It is unlikely God would have had Ezekiel use a word that no one understood correctly.
A
AgapeSpiritEyes
Guest
My reference in Ekek is not the founding of Lucifer or the creation of the founding of satan but a parentheses of a being and the cause and effect of its segment of events.
Just giving me tradition what do you really want in reply to thought and traditions, just not persuasive enough to give me others vivid thoughts and traditions started by whom? When does God announce to the angels He is or was going to create man or anything else seems kind of week hinges on conceit? No substance to that. “Chose the planet”, so the planet was here already flooded void? Question does God create voided flooded dark lifeless planets or does God create "Bara" perfectly? What can be said about tradition? Tradition no empirical evidence tradition is suspect to skeptical persuasion willy nilly reaching for what one does not have. Sorry i cannot believe Lucifers fall could happen in 5 days that is a more fairy tale conjured story.Look were are taking about 1/3rd of all the angels and a war and casting out and down to this planets prisions and maybe other planets that other angels were over. I cannot take that serious no need to for ALL traditional ideas to collect them aggregately to make truth so as to believe? They are not necessary and all the explaining away of Lucifer and the dual references of Prince of Tyre are also unnecessary if you accept that the angels were here way before adam they fell obviously before adam that the earth in the angelic age accounts for the, universe, planets and this planet (why are planets desolate) age by the small evidence yet evidence none the less of science compared to any tradition, that the only record of God saying anything when and to whom He would create adam was when He was on this earth and conversed among the Father the Logos and the Holy Spirit to create them in their Likeness and image.Satans destruction is and simply written destruction by God on His own defined word to the "Lake of fire." If you do not accept the refrences and of the chrono of Lucifer to satan then reconstruction it seems you are asking me to believe opriori tradition and ideas instead of the comparision of one scripture to another. I just can do that.
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
I'm discussing all known prints. Young earth creationist organizations like Answers In Genesis assert that the human and dino footprints appear at the same time and places and that the earth is only about six thousand years old but I've spent years looking at the evidence and different arguments and there is no way I can agree with their position.
You can if you like. The right to hold an opinion is a human right that should be respected... even if you're wrong.
You can if you like. The right to hold an opinion is a human right that should be respected... even if you're wrong.