Dinosaurs and the Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter savedbygrace92
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
OTHER HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS REPORTS ON LIVE DRAGONS IN THE LAST 3000 YEARS
We are taught, that dragons don’t really exist, right? They say, no one has ever really seen one, right? And there’s no scientific proof, and all that? Where are the bodies? Well there are millions of bodies! All these “dinosaur” skeletons are Dragon bones! Like the following historic document recounts.

Greek account about Dragons in Gobi Desert
Year: c. 310 Originally appeared in: Piazza Armerina, Sicily
In the seventh century B.C., ancient Greeks made contact with Saka-Scythian nomads who prospected for gold in the Gobi Desert. One of the legends that the Greeks gleaned from this contact was of the griffin, a lion-sized, four-legged, winged animal with a “cruel sharp beak” that ferociously guarded its hoard of gold. (A more cautious account suggested that griffins didn’t guard gold but simply lived near it, and carefully protected their young from all intruders.) This Roman mosaic shows a griffin drawn to a trap whose unfortunate bait is a man. Where did this legend come from? Twentieth-century excavations in the Gobi have unearthed Protoceratops and Psittacosaurus skeletons, both beaked dinosaurs, from the same regions where the nomads prospected.

Greek Historian Herodotus described small flying reptiles in ancient Egypt and Arabia.

The dragon from the movie Shrek makes more sense than Hollywood wants us to believe!
These animals sound amazingly like the small Ramphorhynchus (RAM-foe-RING-kus). They had the same snake-like body and bat-like wings. Many had been killed near the city of Buto (Arabia). He was shown a canyon with many piles of their back-bones and ribs. Herodotus said that these animals could sometimes be found in the spice groves. They were “small in size and of various colors.” Large numbers would sometimes gather in the frankincense trees. When workers wanted to gather the trees’ valuable juices, they would use smelly smoke to drive the flying reptiles away. The well-respected Greek, Aristotle, said that in his time it was common knowledge that creatures like this also existed in Ethiopia. Similar animals (three feet long) were also described in India by the geographer Strabo. [Text courtesy Christiananswers.net] He was also told that “at the beginning of spring, winged serpents fly from Arabia towards Egypt; but that ibises, a sort of bird, meet them at the pass, and do not allow the serpents to go by, but kill them.”

JOSEPHUS ON FLYING SERPENTS OR DRAGONS
Josephus, the Jewish historian who wrote in the 1’st century A.D., had access to ancient written records; before the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. He provides the following account of Moses leading an army from ancient Egypt against the Nubians:
…he gave a wonderful demonstration of his sagacity; for when the ground was difficult to be passed over because of the multitude of serpents, (which it produces in vast numbers, and indeed is singular in some of those productions, … such as are worse than others in power and mischief, and an unusual fierceness of sight, some of which ascend out of the ground unseen, and also fly in the air, and so come upon men at unawares and do them mischief,) … he made baskets, like unto arks, of sedge, and filled them with ibes [ibises], and carried them along with them; which animal is the greatest enemy to serpents imaginable, for they fly from them when they come near them; and as they fly they are caught and devoured by them.

WHY VIKINGS HAD DRAGON-HEADED BOATS
with dinosaur heads.

DRAGON SIGHTINGS IN SWITZERLAND
A chapter on dragons appears in the fifth Iter, which details the 1706 voyage. In writing this chapter, Scheuchzer claims that his sole objective was to create a “historical description of the dragons of Switzerland.” He proceeds by accumulating eye - witness accounts, which he then groups into classifications based on canton: the dragons of Lucerne, of Zurich, of Schwytz, etc. He carefully details the circumstances surrounding these stories: the dates and times of the encounters as well as the names and professions of the witnesses. The latter were for the most part common people, often farmers or woodcutters who had come across the dragons during their work in the fields or the forest.
Sometimes, the monster surprised hikers, a soldier, or a traveling merchant at the entryway of a cave or at the turn of a road. These accounts are usually confirmed by a recognized authority, an officer for example, or the village pastor. The ample and detailed descriptions place explicit emphasis on the feelings of surprise, incredulity and terror experienced by the witnesses. This is evident in the following examples taken from chapter VI of Altmann’s work, which he faithfully transcribed from Scheuchzer. The first particularly spectacular case comes from an observation made by Christophe Scheurer, first magistrate of the canton:
On one particular night, when I was contemplating the serenity of the sky, I saw a brilliant dragon take to flight from a corner of the great rock of Mont Pilate; his wings moved with great speed. His torso was long as was his tail and neck. His head was that of a toothed serpent. As he flew, sparks, such as those that fly from a hot iron hit against an anvil by the blacksmith, flew from his body. At first, I believed that it was some meteor, but after some reflection, I was persuaded that it was truly a dragon, as much by its agitation as by the composition of its body .

godsaidmansaid.com/topic3.asp?Cat2=262&ItemID=1068

forbidden-history.com/marco-polo.html

Shalom.
 
OTHER HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS REPORTS ON LIVE DRAGONS IN THE LAST 3000 YEARS
You do realise that if your object is to disprove evolution, then you are going about it in the wrong way.

Consider Coelacanths. They were thought to have gone extinct in the late Cretaceous, just about the same time as the dinosaurs. Finding a live Coelacanth would be just like finding a live dinosaur. Guess what – live Coelacanths were found in 1938. Was there a great crisis in evolution? No. Scientists were interested, but evolution did not have to change.

Evolution says that living things are descended from earlier living things. We find live Coelacanths. That isn’t a problem because we have the fossils of earlier Coelacanths from which they descended. We have the ancestors, so finding some descendants is not a problem. Same for Ginkgo trees, Wollemi pines, Neopilina and others. All of those are from taxa previously thought extinct, but found to be surviving.

If you want to cause a problem, you need to find something before its ancestors. A Cambrian rabbit will do nicely.

And finally, we do have living dinosaurs today. I saw a descendant of a Coelurosaurian Theropod dinosaur flying past my window today.
We are taught, that dragons don’t really exist, right?
Dragons have six limbs, four legs and two wings. Can you show us any vertebrate, living or in the fossil record, with six limbs?
Where are the bodies? Well there are millions of bodies!
In the Karoo Supergroup. Estimates range up to 800 billion fossilised skeletons.

rossum
 
Dragons have six limbs, four legs and two wings. Can you show us any vertebrate, living or in the fossil record, with six limbs?
And breathed fire. Not to mention, I’ve still to receive some proof explaining why people in ancient times needed magical weapons just to kill one of the beasts or why some of their parts had powerful effects on the human body.
 
You do realise that if your object is to disprove evolution, then you are going about it in the wrong way.

Consider Coelacanths. They were thought to have gone extinct in the late Cretaceous, just about the same time as the dinosaurs. Finding a live Coelacanth would be just like finding a live dinosaur. Guess what – live Coelacanths were found in 1938. Was there a great crisis in evolution? No. Scientists were interested, but evolution did not have to change.

Evolution says that living things are descended from earlier living things. We find live Coelacanths. That isn’t a problem because we have the fossils of earlier Coelacanths from which they descended. We have the ancestors, so finding some descendants is not a problem. Same for Ginkgo trees, Wollemi pines, Neopilina and others. All of those are from taxa previously thought extinct, but found to be surviving.

If you want to cause a problem, you need to find something before its ancestors. A Cambrian rabbit will do nicely.

And finally, we do have living dinosaurs today. I saw a descendant of a Coelurosaurian Theropod dinosaur flying past my window today.

Dragons have six limbs, four legs and two wings. Can you show us any vertebrate, living or in the fossil record, with six limbs?

In the Karoo Supergroup. Estimates range up to 800 billion fossilised skeletons.

rossum
The point is that these “living fossils” show abrupt appearance, stasis with limited variation.
 
Greek account about Dragons in Gobi Desert
Year: c. 310 Originally appeared in: Piazza Armerina, Sicily
In the seventh century B.C., ancient Greeks made contact with Saka-Scythian nomads who prospected for gold in the Gobi Desert. One of the legends that the Greeks gleaned from this contact was of the griffin, a lion-sized, four-legged, winged animal with a “cruel sharp beak” that ferociously guarded its hoard of gold. (A more cautious account suggested that griffins didn’t guard gold but simply lived near it, and carefully protected their young from all intruders.) This Roman mosaic shows a griffin drawn to a trap whose unfortunate bait is a man. Where did this legend come from? Twentieth-century excavations in the Gobi have unearthed Protoceratops and Psittacosaurus skeletons, both beaked dinosaurs, from the same regions where the nomads prospected.
Hold it right there! See, this is what I meant about creationists having zero knowledge of basic mythology.

You do realize that the dinosaurs you’re comparing the Griffin to and are too small?

The griffin was a large creature, had feathers because of the eagle front, and the furry, mammalian behind of a lion. In other words, the thing’s not even a reptile!
The dragon from the movie Shrek makes more sense than Hollywood wants us to believe!
Except these ‘flying serpents’ are small compared to actual dragons.
WHY VIKINGS HAD DRAGON-HEADED BOATS
with dinosaur heads.
Norse mythology is one of my most favorites. I see what you’re doing. Please don’t go there. :mad:
As he flew, sparks, such as those that fly from a hot iron hit against an anvil by the blacksmith, flew from his body. At first, I believed that it was some meteor, but after some reflection, I was persuaded that it was truly a dragon, as much by its agitation as by the composition of its body.
And these things haven’t wiped out the human population because…? You’d think a dragon with that capability would’ve set fire to a whole village. :rolleyes:
 
The point is that these “living fossils” show abrupt appearance, stasis with limited variation.
Consider the first appearance of man in the Americas. It was abrupt because man travelled there, rather than originated there. A successful species usually originates in a relatively small area, where we can trace its development, and then spreads to other areas where it appears ‘abruptly’ and with no local ancestors.

We know about the evolution of whales because we found the area where much of the transition from land to water happened, in what is now Pakistan. If we hadn’t found those fossils then the initial appearance of whales would have looked a lot more abrupt than it does now.

You also need to read Darwin:

the periods, during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured by years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same form.
  • Origin, Chapter Eleven
Your ‘stasis’ has been in evolution since 1859. Why do you think it would be a problem?

rossum
 
Consider the first appearance of man in the Americas. It was abrupt because man travelled there, rather than originated there. A successful species usually originates in a relatively small area, where we can trace its development, and then spreads to other areas where it appears ‘abruptly’ and with no local ancestors.

We know about the evolution of whales because we found the area where much of the transition from land to water happened, in what is now Pakistan. If we hadn’t found those fossils then the initial appearance of whales would have looked a lot more abrupt than it does now.

You also need to read Darwin:
the periods, during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured by years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same form.
  • Origin, Chapter Eleven
    Your ‘stasis’ has been in evolution since 1859. Why do you think it would be a problem?
rossum
At least you rossum agree to stasis. 👍 As you have read in these threads this is denied flat out as well as what the fossil record shows about abrupt appearance.

To make any progress we must agree to at least these issues.

Have probably???:hmmm:

To convince me start by showing me the number of morphological changes a land animal needs to become a whale.
 
To convince me start by showing me the number of morphological changes a land animal needs to become a whale.
Tell me what Jesus had for breakfast ten days after his fourteenth birthday.

Anyone can ask for a level of detail that is not now available in either the historical or the fossil record…

For an overview of the changes, just look at the differences we can see now:
  • loss of hair
  • loss of external rear limbs
  • loss of sense of smell
  • changes to body fat distribution
  • ability to hold breath
  • modifications to female nipples
  • enlarged brain
  • development of webs/flippers on front limbs
There are probably more that a marine biologist could tell you.

rossum
 
Tell me what Jesus had for breakfast ten days after his fourteenth birthday.

Anyone can ask for a level of detail that is not now available in either the historical or the fossil record…

For an overview of the changes, just look at the differences we can see now:
  • loss of hair
  • loss of external rear limbs
  • loss of sense of smell
  • changes to body fat distribution
  • ability to hold breath
  • modifications to female nipples
  • enlarged brain
  • development of webs/flippers on front limbs
There are probably more that a marine biologist could tell you.

rossum
Eggs.🙂

Good start…

Dr. David Berlinski: What Does It Take for Change?

He stops at 50,000.
 
I would be interested to see that part where Dr Berlinksi sets out the complete genome, and physical structure of the land based whale ancestor he started from. You cannot count changes to that level of detail without having a very accurate idea of your starting point. You can never measure changes to a higher level of detail than the level of detail in your initial data.

Does Dr Berlinski have access to a reasonably complete genome of, for example, Pakicetus?

rossum
 
You do realise that if your object is to disprove evolution, then you are going about it in the wrong way.

Consider Coelacanths. They were thought to have gone extinct in the late Cretaceous, just about the same time as the dinosaurs. Finding a live Coelacanth would be just like finding a live dinosaur. Guess what – live Coelacanths were found in 1938. Was there a great crisis in evolution? No. Scientists were interested, but evolution did not have to change.

Evolution says that living things are descended from earlier living things. We find live Coelacanths. That isn’t a problem because we have the fossils of earlier Coelacanths from which they descended. We have the ancestors, so finding some descendants is not a problem. Same for Ginkgo trees, Wollemi pines, Neopilina and others. All of those are from taxa previously thought extinct, but found to be surviving.

If you want to cause a problem, you need to find something before its ancestors. A Cambrian rabbit will do nicely.

And finally, we do have living dinosaurs today. I saw a descendant of a Coelurosaurian Theropod dinosaur flying past my window today.

Dragons have six limbs, four legs and two wings. Can you show us any vertebrate, living or in the fossil record, with six limbs?

In the Karoo Supergroup. Estimates range up to 800 billion fossilised skeletons.

rossum
Aragonjohn1 points out correctly that *“Twentieth-century excavations in the Gobi Desert have unearthed Protoceratops and Psittacosaurus skeletons, both beaked dinosaurs, from the same regions where the nomads prospected.” *Maybe a “Griffin” is an embellishment with wings of the four legged critters, Protoceratops and Psittacosaurus the latter of which is more the size of a sheep with a long tail and a beak.

Of course Rossum, who claims that there is NO ultimate truth makes it very clear that dragons as noted in ancient literature are NOT dinosaurs - an ultimate truth as pontificated by Rossum! Now just hold that thought for a minute. Rossum is claiming that there is no ultimate truth yet he claims dragons are NOT dinosaurs because they have six limbs - four legs and two wings. He dares anyone to find such a winged creature with four legs. Prove my ultimate truth wrong by finding such a creature he implied. He may be right; I don’t think there was such a creature. “His” ultimate truth of course can be found in this children’s explanation of dragons whyzz.com/what-are-dragons. But what if what the ancients saw were really “wingless” dragons alias dinosaurs but who just jazzed up their description a bit with wings! That’s speculation I know but some scientists these days do it all the time in peer reviewed papers as to what they find in the fossil record and then proclaim it a fact that we have evolved over billions of years from star dust and the Big Bang.

But modern science is also discovering that there are many quality depictions of dinosaurs our ancestors described that have also been found in the sedimentary fossil record by the billions where they died in a watery catastrophe. **What Aragonjohn1 is arguing, I think is that what our ancestors saw were probably some of the survivors just like the coelacanth. **

Can C-14 dating help? A Psittacosaurus dinosaur tail bone was C-14 dated in 2011 along with a Rhinoceros skull bone from the Gobi and they were essentially the same age, 22,020 ± 50 and 22,830 ± 90 respectively; note that the Rhino was just a tad bit older - maybe it was an elder statesman of its species and the dino was a younger one of its species. No one can really know other than to say that the real ages could be much younger than C-14 ages for many very good scientific reasons. Reference: Carbon 14 dating on www.dinosaurc14ages.com - scroll down to last tabulation.

So what’s the problem? Coelacanths were found alive and well and were also in the fossil record in similar geologic formations with dinosaurs. So some of our more astute ancestors apparently described many different species of living dinosaurs called dragons in those days and their bones are also found in Cretaceous - Jurassic geologic formations from TX to Alaska, China and Europe. Direct C-14 dating of the fossils including Coelacanth bones world-wide will perhaps someday help us solve this problem of “Dinosaurs and the Bible” as it has with many other fossil record problems.:cool:

Thus perhaps Rossum’s ultimate truth of origins of dinosaurs into birds could also be a myth that his friends have developed for our kids - he even claims seeing them flying around his nest all the time. That’s just a polite suggestion of course based on modern scientific observations and lab studies. Thus the real question me thinks is: Did Moses along with Christ and the church fathers get it right or do we believe in the mythological speculations of Academia? 😊

Maybe Buffalo’s theory best describes what happened long before we came on the scene: IDvolution - God “breathed” the super language of DNA
into the “kinds” in the creative act. 👍
 
Aragonjohn1 points out correctly that *“Twentieth-century excavations in the Gobi Desert have unearthed Protoceratops and Psittacosaurus skeletons, both beaked dinosaurs, from the same regions where the nomads prospected.” *Maybe a “Griffin” is an embellishment with wings of the four legged critters, Protoceratops and Psittacosaurus the latter of which is more the size of a sheep with a long tail and a beak.
So, you agree that we do not have eye witness accounts of dinosaurs, but “embellishments” of fossils that were found in the past.

How is this supposed to impact on modern day biological science?
But modern science is also discovering that there are many quality depictions of dinosaurs our ancestors described
Please try to be consistent here. Above you had “embellishments”, while now you are claiming “quality depictions”. One or the other please. You can’t have both.
What Aragonjohn1 is arguing, I think is that what our ancestors saw were probably some of the survivors just like the coelacanth.
And as I have pointed out, unusual survivals are not a big issue. Interesting, but not significant in the larger picture. A branch that was thought to be dead puts out a new green shoot. That does not have a big effect on the whole tree.
Can C-14 dating help?
No. An insistence on the use of C-14 dating, to the exclusion of other methods, is often a good indicator of creationist nonsense.
A Psittacosaurus dinosaur tail bone was C-14 dated in 2011 along with a Rhinoceros skull bone from the Gobi and they were essentially the same age, 22,020 ± 50 and 22,830 ± 90 respectively; note that the Rhino was just a tad bit older - maybe it was an elder statesman of its species and the dino was a younger one of its species.
Do you think that the Earth is over 22,000 years old? A 22,000 year age of the Earth is contrary to the literal interpretation of Genesis, which Ussher calculated to give 6,000 years only. Do you reject the literal interpretation of Genesis?
No one can really know other than to say that the real ages could be much younger than C-14 ages for many very good scientific reasons.
Are those C-14 dates right or wrong? If they are right then a 6,000 year old Earth is wrong. If the C-14 dates are wrong, then they are bad data and you cannot draw any good conclusions from them. What you are not allowed to do is to treat those dates as correct in one paragraph and then treat them as incorrect in the next paragraph. Those dates are right or wrong. You can’t switch from one to the other as it suits your argument. That just destroys whatever argument you were trying to make.

Are your quoted C-14 dates of 22,000 ybp correct or incorrect?

rossum
 
So, you agree that we do not have eye witness accounts of dinosaurs, but “embellishments” of fossils that were found in the past.

How is this supposed to impact on modern day biological science?

Please try to be consistent here. Above you had “embellishments”, while now you are claiming “quality depictions”. One or the other please. You can’t have both.

And as I have pointed out, unusual survivals are not a big issue. Interesting, but not significant in the larger picture. A branch that was thought to be dead puts out a new green shoot. That does not have a big effect on the whole tree.

No. An insistence on the use of C-14 dating, to the exclusion of other methods, is often a good indicator of creationist nonsense.

Do you think that the Earth is over 22,000 years old? A 22,000 year age of the Earth is contrary to the literal interpretation of Genesis, which Ussher calculated to give 6,000 years only. Do you reject the literal interpretation of Genesis?

Are those C-14 dates right or wrong? If they are right then a 6,000 year old Earth is wrong. If the C-14 dates are wrong, then they are bad data and you cannot draw any good conclusions from them. What you are not allowed to do is to treat those dates as correct in one paragraph and then treat them as incorrect in the next paragraph. Those dates are right or wrong. You can’t switch from one to the other as it suits your argument. That just destroys whatever argument you were trying to make.

Are your quoted C-14 dates of 22,000 ybp correct or incorrect?

rossum
Ussher was not Catholic.
 
Ussher was not Catholic.
I am aware of that. However, most Young Earth Creationists seem to go for dates between Ussher’s 6,000 years and about 10,000 years. Ussher’s 6,000 years seems to be the most common, so I use it as a convenient default.

No doubt Philipp will tell us how old he thinks the Earth is.

rossum
 
A supernatural being cannot explain the origin of life, if that supernatural being is itself already alive. Psalm 42:2 “My soul thirsts for God, for the living God.” Your God cannot explain the origin of life, because He Himself is already alive.
rossum
I had to jump in. Excuse me, but that is beyond ludicrous. You put limits on the power of someone you don’t believe in. Besides, there is no logic in what you stated, none. God can’t explain the origin of life but he’s the one who orchestrated the origin of life from anywhere from 6000 (:)) to 4.5 billion years ago! Stick to science.
 
I had to jump in. Excuse me, but that is beyond ludicrous.
Psalm 42:2 “My soul thirsts for God, for the living God.” (emphasis added) Do you find the Bible “beyond ludicrous”?
You put limits on the power of someone you don’t believe in.
Buddhists believe in many gods, it is just that we do not find them important. YHWH is mentioned in Buddhist scripture:

“I am the Brahma, the great Brahma, the conqueror, the unconquered, the all-seeing, the subjector of all to his wishes, the omnipotent, the maker, the creator, the supreme, the controller, the one confirmed in the practice of jhana, and father to all that have been and shall be. I have created these other beings.”
  • Digha Nikaya 1, Brahmajala sutta
rossum
 
" sigh "

The Bible is not a science book.

The Bible (Genesis) is a science book.

While physics, chemistry and archaeology are all nice and good. The question is:

Did GOD actually do anything in Genesis? You know, like Jesus raising the dead without science and technology or telling the wind and waves to be quiet and still or literally walking on water? Does God need science to perform miracles?

As far as the dinosaurs in the Bible, I think there’s enough outside evidence that (a) the rock dates are wrong, (b) uniformity as opposed to catastrophism is wrong, and (c) people just do not do independent research.

What is that in the Palestrina Mosaic:

s8int.com/dinolit2.html

Peace,
Ed
It’s called inagination. The same stuff that drives fiction writers and children’s imaginary friends.
 
It’s called inagination. The same stuff that drives fiction writers and children’s imaginary friends.
Uh Huh. The more I encounter secular origins evangelism, the less likely the “facts” surrounding this debate are accurate.

Dinosaurs and the Bible? Life and death issue? I wouldn’t think so except for the constant preaching I see here against the idea. And what if I believe men saw and lived with dinosaurs? So what?

I am a fiction writer and professional researcher. My bet is on those who support this idea.

But, I sense the dead horse will continue to be beaten on a regular basis.

Peace,
Ed
 
I am a fiction writer and professional researcher. My bet is on those who support this idea.

Peace,
Ed
Well that’s an ironic statement. In any case, what kind of professional research are you involved in? Do you have a Ph.D.? Are you published?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top