I just wanted to see what people think about this: This thought is taken from my reading of Anne McCaffrey's Pern books(some of the best dragons in sci-fi/fantasy, for those that care), which are based on a colony world cut off from the rest of the galaxy. From a space-faring people, their tech devolves to Midieval-type stuff, because when records are recorded people don't mention certain things. For example, someone who takes plastic, and the fact that something is made out of it and everybody knows that for granted, isn't going to go into detail in a historical record about that technological aspect. 2,000 years later, you have a building that has plastic structural members, and it's a big mystery. Let's go to the Bible. Written as a religous record, Almost everything in it is somehow related to religion. Since the writers weren't focusing on historical and technological records that they assumed would also be preserved, would they include alot of it in the text? Take the dinosaur thing for instance. If the author doesn't think a detailed discussion is needed because it has little relevance in the story, and they are recorded in detail elsewhere(this record since lost), they don't say much. People condemn the Bible for such things, but perhaps if that dissertation on "giant lizards with tails the size of tree trunks" was lost, what can we say? Just a thought.
<i>What of the Leviathan...not only told of in the Bible but described in very specific detail?</i> Very vague detail, actually.
Hello James...Well I guess it's in the point of context. It was detailed enough to give the distinct impresion of a lizard like creature...and i thought that many verses in the Bible to one creature was quite a coo. After all the man recorded to have lived the longest of any man only got like 2 sentences.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
YOu also have different authors. Some things one person might think are important are little more than trivia. Most likely two different sections written by two different people, right?
Unless Moses was dictating the story of Leviathan ver batem as the 1st person told it...yes 2 different authors. It is nice to point out though, for all those who discount the bible due to the lack of dinosaurs that the story does in fact exist in the bible...just isnt taught much in sunday school. Id also like to point out that although one would say that men even in the last days of dinasours could little more than grunt...that science itself has now found reason to believe they were wrong about the cognitive ability of pre historic man by way of archiological findings in recent years. They now believe he was in fact a far more intelligent creature than they presumed...possibly even as advanced in his thinking ability as us. There is a link to this info in an old old post...if anyone wants it Ill be glad to go searching for it...just let me know.
We've been through the whole "Leviathan" thing before on sciforums. The Leviathan could be an ox, a hippopotamus or several other creatures which were around when that portion of the bible was written. Reading it as a dinosaur is wishful thinking.
I always thought the Leviathan was a crocodile. Since the Bible authors don't presume to say anything about dinosaurs, I don't think we should read it into the Bible if we can help it. Where dragons and strange creatures are mentioned (eg. Revelation), they are almost certainly symbolic. Personally I think we can learn more about people and dinosaurs from Chinese and Norse mythology. They must have gotten the idea somewhere. I think that dinosaurs and neanderthals were a nice little part of the process of creation. After all, the result was the same... whether it happened over millions of years, or over thousands. (BTW. Who else liked Jean Auel's 'Earth's children' series?)
