Welcome!


Join more than 151,000 members on FunAdvice to ask questions, share advice, photos and make new friends today.
FunAdvice RSS for this page:
Rss_feed

Were there dinosaurs in the bible?

Asked by themonster about 1 year ago, 20 answers.

Yes the qustion that might keep you awake all night wondering,the qustion that fuses Science with religion.For me there is enough proof to say that there was dinosaur's mentioned in the bible.The Behmoth mentioned in Job chapter 40 who'sstep's shook...

the earthand who's waslike a cedar tree.Now every evolutionest will try to tell you that this is most likely a hippo or an elephant but have you seen the tail of either lately?They look preaty flimsy to me.And I will leave the Lavithan(mentioned on Job 41:14) for you too read and think about.Until I write again this is goodbye.

me :) Answered by jax on Nov 02, 2008, 04:57PM
774 answers

I think Behemoth is a hippo!

1 person thought this was helpful
this is me and my dog Answered by blerggher on Nov 02, 2008, 02:38PM
1068 answers

dinosaurs and humans lived at completely different times

Answered by amblessed on Nov 02, 2008, 02:43PM
12243 answers

Behemoth means someone or some thing large and powerful - so it appears possible - the verse: Job 40:15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

The Fiance and Me at a Luau Answered by mandyloo on Nov 02, 2008, 02:45PM
7496 answers
Advisor-small

amblessed:

Your kidding me right. Dinosaurs and humans did not live in the same time period.

End of story.

In darkness and light the truth remains Answered by jester_x on Nov 02, 2008, 02:50PM
883 answers

no dinosaurs and humans didnt live togeher.
It says nowhere in the bible about real dinosaurs.
Lavithan was a demon supposily if you believe the bible.

hey Answered by winryrockbell14 on Nov 02, 2008, 03:11PM
75 answers

thats hard. I have always wondered that.

Comment for jester_x's profile Answered by thex13thxchild on Nov 02, 2008, 05:26PM
1381 answers

Uh, FOSSILS dude.
Dino's are far older than humans.
It could of been a gator or some such creature, but not a dino
there's no substantial evidence supporting that

IQ Answered by religionisgood on Nov 02, 2008, 08:54PM
480 answers

People back then also believed in dragons and sea monsters. I wouldn't rely on descriptions of behemoths and leviathans as being anything other than pure fantasy.

me and my boyfreind :] Answered by jazlovestoskate on Nov 02, 2008, 11:34PM
10500 answers
Advisor-small

no
by the time humans came around
every single dinosaur was dead
long, long before we came along
and then man wrote the bible
now, many years after man have been following it theyve contantly added to it
if there is anything about dinosaurs in it
it was pretty recently added too
seeing as though we didnt even discover dinosaurs that long ago

Me when I'm busy Answered by arachnid on Nov 03, 2008, 04:36AM
1770 answers

No. There's a couple of ambiguous mentions of 'behemoths' in the bible, but not only is there nothing explicit (don't you think giant man-eating reptiles walking the earth would merit a bit more of a mention, if not in the bible then in other contemporary texts?), but geological and archaeological evidence show clearly that we were never contemporaneous with dinosaurs.

Toadaly Answered by toadaly on Nov 03, 2008, 07:19AM
4232 answers

Behemoth and Leviathon are both MYTHICAL creatures. Even the writers of the Bible knew that.

lens flare Answered by captainassassin on Nov 03, 2008, 09:58AM
6184 answers

None of this proves dinosaurs were in the Bible...

Me when I'm busy Answered by arachnid on Nov 05, 2008, 01:12AM
1770 answers

Behemoth is a sauropod type dinosaur. These creatures actually lived in the Congo rain forests until at least the 1980s. [Citation Needed]

You have evidence of this, I take it? Preferably some fresh sauropod skeletons?

Leviathan is aquatic but is certainly no Croc. Crocs don't spit coals of fire out of their mouths and they can be killed by spears. Most likely a species of armoured mossasaur.

Again, evidence, or are you just asserting that it's true?

Dinos did coexist with man in ancient times. Most died off after the flood and the few that survived were mostly aquatic or swamp dwellers.

And another unfounded claim. Given that this contradicts enormous amounts of archaeological and biological evidence, I really hope you've got something pretty stunningly conclusive to back this up...

As far as the Coelecanth goes, yes the family has persisted a long time, but they're not the same as they were millions of years ago. As Wikipedia points out, It is often claimed that the coelacanth has remained unchanged for millions of years, but, in fact, the living species and even genus are unknown from the fossil record.

Evolution is foolishness. The so called 'science of evolution is faulty and they are brainwashing people to believe lies so they can deny the Creator.

Perhaps you can come up with an alternate theory that describes such everyday events as antibiotic resistance in bacteria, as well as development of entirely new abilities. Whatever you think of evolution, it's an essential everyday tool in medical and biological research, and it makes accurate predictions, which is the key test of any theory.

Me when I'm busy Answered by arachnid on Nov 05, 2008, 04:35AM
1770 answers

Ah, the micro evolution vs macro evolution canard.

First, you didn't say macro evolution is foolishness, you said evolution is foolishness.

The astounding evidence that macroevolution is false is simply the LACK OF EVIDENCE.

Lack of evidence is not the same as evidence against. And there certainly is no lack of evidence for evolution, on any timescale. Here's a good start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_for_evolution

Also note that evolution successfully predicts the forms of intermediate fossils we will find _before_ we find them. It matches up with genetic evidence in populations, and allows us to predict genetic drift. The list goes on...

There is not one fossil record of a creatures alleged transformation stage.

This claim is based on the mistaken assumption that one should find crocoducks or other badly-adapted transitional forms. This simply isn't the case, and it's not what evolution predicts. Evolution predicts gradual adaptation and enhancement from simpler forms to more complex ones, but the important fact is that every single intermediate species is also well suited to its environment. The designation 'intermediate' or 'transitional' is applied after the fact, when one's examining where it falls in the history of life. When it existed, it was no more 'transitional' than modern species are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

Mokèlé-mbèmbé: meaning one who stops the flow of rivers in the Lingala language,[1] is the name given to a large water dwelling cryptid found in the legends and folklore of the Congo River basin.

Note the legends and folklore. Further, the definition of cryptid: Cryptid is a term used in the study of cryptozoology to refer to a creature whose existence has been suggested but not demonstrated scientifically.

Pointing to this as 'evidence' of living dinosaurs is about as valid as pointing to the Loch Ness monster.

Finally, linking to a creationist-propaganda website doesn't constitute evidence either. Cave paintings that vaguely resemble modern views of dinosaurs are hardly conclusive evidence of anything except an imagination.

Three Days Grace Answered by matt18091 on Nov 05, 2008, 07:13AM
629 answers

Psalm 104:25-26

There is the sea, vast and spacious, teeming with creatures beyond number living things both large and small. There the ships go to and fro, and the leviathan, which you formed to frolic there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan

Job 40:15-24

It “eats grass like an ox.”
It “moves his tail like a cedar.” (In Hebrew, this literally reads, “he lets hang his tail like a cedar.”)
Its “bones are like beams of bronze,
His ribs like bars of iron.”
“He is the first of the ways of God.”
“He lies under the lotus trees,
In a covert of reeds and marsh.”

Me when I'm busy Answered by arachnid on Nov 05, 2008, 02:32PM
1770 answers

the reason more evidence has not been published is due to the conspiracy of the darwinian evolutionist science and education complex which would suppress any truth that might completely shatter their agenda, an agenda that denies God on any personal level and would have a hard time re-writing all the literature they have produced to promote their unfounded theories.

Ah, right, a CONSPIRACY! Of course. Never mind that the scientist who shatters a respected theory is the one who gets the recognition and the prizes, that the reason science works is because the people that prove existing theories wrong (with actual evidence, and preferably a new and better theory that describes the world better) are rewarded with recognition. No, it has to be a conspiracy of never-seen-before scope, encompassing virtually every scientist in the world in the fields of biology, archaeology, and probably a few other disciplines too.

Got any evidence? No, of course the conspiracy is suppressing it. Enjoy your sense of persecution.

Me when I'm busy Answered by arachnid on Nov 06, 2008, 12:39AM
1770 answers

Oh, now the conspiracy encompasses every educator on the planet? This must be the biggest conspiracy in the history of the world. And yes, I'm sure your layman's observation of a coelacanth outweighs those of trained zoologists, with tools such as genetic analysis.

Seriously, if you have to resort to a worldwide conspiracy of never-before-seen magnitude to back up your point, you've already lost. Welcome to the tinfoil hat brigade.

Toadaly Answered by toadaly on Nov 06, 2008, 09:31PM
4232 answers

*** Leviathan is aquatic but is certainly no Croc. Crocs don't spit coals of fire out of their mouths and they can be killed by spears. Most likely a species of armoured mossasaur.

Leviathan is a mythical anthropomorphization of a volcano.

Answered by futuremissionary101 on Jun 10, 2009, 10:48PM
30 answers

Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron

Answered by futuremissionary101 on Jun 10, 2009, 10:52PM
30 answers

Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. Job 40:15-19 (look it up!) BTW rinocerous and elephant tails aren't like cedar trees! They are more like small branches from the tree.

Answer this Question: "Were there dinosaurs in the Bible?"

Your Answer: HTML is not allowed.


Our members said the answers on this page also answer the following questions:


Why no dinosaurs in the bible, Bible predicts evolution, Why are there no dinosaurs in the bible, Mossasaur, Www.qustion and answer bible.com, Loch ness monster proves the bible, Evidence of dinosaurs in the bible, Evidence against biblical dinosaurs, Bible says about mythical creatures, Bible verse about dinosaur, Bible verses dinosaur, Children bible verses for dinosaurs, Where dinosaurs real the bible didnt say, Dinosaurs were in the bible, Were there dinosaurs in the bible, Does it say anything in the bible about mythical creatures?

Religion & Spirituality Photos

I love DINOSAURSthe bibleObama hand on BIBLE

Share this question

Copy and paste this code:
It will display on your blog or site like this:
Were there dinosaurs in the bible?