Riding the Dinos
At a certain Christian "Museum" I had heard rumors that the picture below was attainable...to ride a dinosaur. I was skeptical. Could this be true? I had to check it out for myself. So, my boss and I took a tour (while we were in the area) to find this dinosaur, which would, day in and day out, await new visitors (mostly kids) a chance to do what no human has done before. I wanted in on that...and so did my boss.
But, in this "Museum" this was not a joke. While I found it to be amusing, I also realized how confused children would be as they go out into the real world of Christian or secular education and become disillusioned. I understood, because I was and am still working through many of those things.
Labels: Fun With Science
posted by Kay @ 10:52 AM
19 Comments
19 Comments:
What was it about the museum that you felt might disillusion children?
Maybe a more appropriate statement would be that it would ILLUSION children.
Jesse, where to begin. First of all Museum defined:
a building or place where works of art, scientific specimens, or other objects of permanent value are kept and displayed.
It is not a museum. It is more like Disneyland.
Secondly, it puts a really small box around what a Christian could and should believe. And it paints a picture of scientists looking really dumb. (That's not a great way to create dialog).
Thirdly, if I were to tell anyone who has studied biology (or anything related), that humans rode dinosaurs, there probably would not be much dialog after that.
There is so much more, but I still like engaging with people who think that it is a museum, because they let me ride their dinos.
Where was this place? Is it close enough for a quick road trip during our Thanksgiving adventures?
A Christian dinosaur museum - unreal. It sounds like you had a hayday there. As much as I like to bag on scientists, I agree, that isn't the way to create dialogue. What a cool experience! Only the Palpants.
Sorry Jared, it's in Northern Kentucky, just south of Cincinnati. My boss and I took a personal day when we had some meetings and events in the area.
Wow.
Nice to see you guys bag on Christians. Did you know that the word "dinosaur" wasn't even invented until 1841? Before that people called them "dragons" which could explain all the "tales" we hear of knights and dragons, etc.
Archaeologists have also found many pieces of pottery, engravings, etc. of people riding 'dragons" (aka dinosaurs) all over the world.
There are many stories form all over the world that tell of men interacting, killing, seeing, and capturing, and using "dragons."
For example (a few): After Alexander the Great invaded India he brought back reports of great hissing monsters in caves. Marco Polo reported in 1271 that on special occasions the royal chariot was pulled by "dragons" and in 1611 the emperor appointed the post of a "Royal Dragon Feeder." and why would the Chinese include one "fake" animal (the dragon) with eleven real animals on their calendar?
All this to say (there is soooo much more info/data as well) that there are many, many stories, books, etc. written and many archaeological findings with "dragons" (now known as dinosaurs) and humans interacting from all over the world.
Dinosaurs are even mentioned in the bible in Job 40:15-24, and 41:1-34...at the same time that humans lived.
So don't dismiss the human riding a dinosaur thing so quickly, it's more plausible than you think.
Hannah. That picture kicks ass.
Dear St. Brianstine,
Yes, we do bag on Christians, because if we can't laugh at ourselves, then I believe we're taking ourselves too seriously. :)
There is a problem with the dinosaurs and humankind living at the same time. What you call dinosaurs (dragons), I have not seen or heard evidence that ever showed dinosaurs and humans ever living even remotely at the same time.
The interpretation that those animals in Job were dinosaurs, is a large assumption. They could have been a hippopotamus and a crodocile...like these stories of the dragon (which could also be a large reptile still present on earth today), which were not the same thing as what we know of dinosaurs of the past. I believe the dinosaurs were gone a really long time before humans appeared on the seen. And there was a reason to benefit humanity for that.
I did not dismiss this idea very quickly though. In fact, I used to be of the same opinion as you. I have been trying to understand this for the past 10 years now through careful reading and thinking. Not that I believe you have to agree with me, I just have a different perspective.
"his tail like a cedar" (v. 17), hippos have tails like a twig. Crocs also fall short. "Behold, your expectation is false; will you be laid low even at the sight of him?" (Job 41:9). A croc or hippo has never had this effect on me...ever. Nothing in scripture suggests that these could be either crocs or hippos...nothing. The descriptions do no match up. "When he raises himself up the mighty are afraid; because of his crashings they are beside themselves" (Job 41:25). Crocs and hippos don't raise themselves sup and cause people to be afraid.
"His undersides are like sharp potsherds; He spreads pointed marks in the mire" (Job 41:30)." Neither hippos or crocs have sharp undersides.
"Out of his mouth go burning lights; sparks of fire shoot out. Smoke goes out of his nostrils, as from a boiling pot and burning rushes. His breath kindles coals and a flame goes out of his mouth" (Job 41:19-21). I have never seen a croc or hippo do this. Shoot flames? Wow.
God even says in Isaiah, "In that day the Lord with His severe sword, great and strong, will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan that twisted serpent; and He will slay the reptile that is in the sea" (Isa. 27:1) as if it is impossible for man to do. This is a huge animal.
Point": These passages in no way describe anything that we have seen today. Hence, dinosaurs. Read the descriptions, no way a croc or hippo matches up.
And you say, "I have not seen or heard evidence that ever showed dinosaurs and humans ever living even remotely at the same time..." Please re-read my first post. Peopel have written about these things since creation! Look into it. How else would you describe these types of things?
Cheers.
Context is very important to me. I am not saying that they had to be hippos or crocodiles, but each of these creatures would have had the capacity to do major damage and thus be feared in these times. I've heard stories from Africa how hippos are one of the most feared creatures. Of course they are not scary when they are in a zoo, behind fences and bars, but in their own context and in story telling these things could have been exaggerated or mythologized. I'm not going to try to convince someone that this is what the Bible is speaking of in these verses, but I do not believe they are dinosaurs. Dinosaurs are called prehistoric, and I believe that is because I doubt that there has ever been anything written about them. Why do we have to believe that everything that ever existed was written or spoken about? But, I don't think it is a fair argument to try to pull things into our own context today without first trying to understand how the culture and the times of the writer of Job would have affected his writings.
Hippos don't breathe fire.
Crap, I guess I need to sell my saddle and bridle for my dilophasaurus. I wonder if it will fit on a komodo dragon?
St. Brianstine,
Are you stating that you honestly believe there was once an animal of some kind on this earth (I don't even care what you want to say it was - a hippo, dinosaur, dragon, gremlin, leprechaun, whatever!) that breathed fire... full on fire??!!! Because, if so, I've very concerned.
That either means:
1. You read the Bible so literally it is void of any capacity for metaphor (not to mention that Job is poetic and not written in any way shape or form as historical narrative).
#2. Or if the Bible can contain metaphor, you have some hybrid sense of fantasy and reality blended to make you believe that such an animal ever could exist.
#3. Or you simply like picking at small insignificant details that pertain little to the point of an argument just to try and make someone else look foolish (If this is true, then I'm disappointed in your approach and ask you to refrain from commenting further on this site).
The point was, and still is, that such a "museum" (in quotes for a reason) is illusioning to so many young Christians. It promotes absolutes that don't exist or are indeterminate. And it sets them up for a rejection of their faith when they learn (usually in high school or college) that such ideas are almost a joke outside the conservative-evangelical-American conviction.
Biblical and historical ambiguities (Job and the Chinese zoo) are insignificant when natural evidence weighs overwhelmingly against such a speculative interpretation.
But if the argument that Biblical ambiguity still holds higher weight than any natural evidence (because it is the "inerrant and infallible Word of God" vs "errant and fallible human science"), then you fail to recognize general revelation as a means by which to know God. If a study of our earth and our universe (by more than just a small group of biased American, Christian, pseudo-scientists) can't bring us closer to an understanding of the way in which our Creator worked, then we truly have a deceptive God. And that is one sad day for the whole of humanity.
We need to be educating ourselves and our young people that we DON'T have it all figured out and that we WON'T have it all figured out (because it's done and gone and we can't go back to be absolutely sure). We need to be teaching them that there are many different theories, and that each of those theories have varying degrees of functional correlation with Christianity. Then they are prepared to dialog (as opposed to defensive apologetics demanding "I'm right and you're wrong!")and relate with anyone of a different worldview rather than be caught looking foolish and uninformed.
-Pierre Staples Lewis
Micah,
Your concern is with this passage, not me:
“His sneezings flash forth light, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the dawn. Out of his mouth go flaming torches; sparks of fire leap forth. Out of his nostrils comes forth smoke, as from a boiling pot and burning rushes. His breath kindles coals, and a flame comes forth from his mouth.”
(Job 41:18-21)
Are you stating that you honestly believe there was once an animal of some kind on this earth (I don't even care what you want to say it was - a hippo, dinosaur, dragon, gremlin, leprechaun, whatever!) that breathed fire... full on fire??!!!
-Yes, it is pretty clear in Job.
Because, if so, I've very concerned.
-Ooooooooooooooook….are concerned that I believe Job chapter 1 as well? Or chapter 2? Where does this end?
That either means:
1. You read the Bible so literally it is void of any capacity for metaphor (not to mention that Job is poetic and not written in any way shape or form as historical narrative).
-Nope
#2. Or if the Bible can contain metaphor, you have some hybrid sense of fantasy and reality blended to make you believe that such an animal ever could exist.
-This is absurd. A hybrid sense of fantasy? How about….I believe the text. That’ll work. Fantasy? That’s what happens when you view the bible as mythology.
#3. Or you simply like picking at small insignificant details that pertain little to the point of an argument just to try and make someone else look foolish (If this is true, then I'm disappointed in your approach and ask you to refrain from commenting further on this site).
-Nope. By the way, your “concern” mounts up to a faulty dilemma. Those aren’t the only 3 options.
The point was, and still is, that such a "museum" (in quotes for a reason) is illusioning to so many young Christians.
-Just like the evolution “museums” are illusioning real science.
It promotes absolutes that don't exist or are indeterminate.
-aka it displays a different viewpoint than evolution which iis also indeterminate.
And it sets them up for a rejection of their faith when they learn (usually in high school or college) that such ideas are almost a joke outside the conservative-evangelical-American conviction.
- That is simply not true. It’s a sweeping generalization, and a lie. It’s also a genetic fallacy. Just because an idea is a joke outside of Christendom means it’s false? Jesus is also a joke outside of Christendom, and so is the bible. Should we dismiss those?
Biblical and historical ambiguities (Job and the Chinese zoo) are insignificant when natural evidence weighs overwhelmingly against such a speculative interpretation.
-Evidence such as?
But if the argument that Biblical ambiguity still holds higher weight than any natural evidence (because it is the "inerrant and infallible Word of God" vs "errant and fallible human science"), then you fail to recognize general revelation as a means by which to know God.
-Straw man. I never said that.
If a study of our earth and our universe (by more than just a small group of biased American, Christian, pseudo-scientists) can't bring us closer to an understanding of the way in which our Creator worked, then we truly have a deceptive God.
-Non-Sequitir
And that is one sad day for the whole of humanity. We need to be educating ourselves and our young people that we DON'T have it all figured out and that we WON'T have it all figured out (because it's done and gone and we can't go back to be absolutely sure). We need to be teaching them that there are many different theories, and that each of those theories have varying degrees of functional correlation with Christianity.
-Including the young earth theory or no?
Then they are prepared to dialog (as opposed to defensive apologetics demanding "I'm right and you're wrong!") and relate with anyone of a different worldview rather than be caught looking foolish and uninformed.
-Ad hominem argument. You say all young earthers are foolish and uninformed? Wow.
“His sneezings flash forth light, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the dawn. Out of his mouth go flaming torches; sparks of fire leap forth. Out of his nostrils comes forth smoke, as from a boiling pot and burning rushes. His breath kindles coals, and a flame comes forth from his mouth.”
(Job 41:18-21)
RE: “…I believe the dinosaurs were gone a really long time before humans appeared on the seen. And there was a reason to benefit humanity for that…”
I would like to respond to this comment because if this is true (dinosaurs being gone before humans appeared) than the Bible is false. And if the Bible contains lies or falsehoods than we have bigger problems than where dinosaurs fall in the historical record.
LIE from God #1
Paul says in Romans 5:12 that “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—“ If dinosaurs were gone (i.e. dead) before man then death also came before man sinned.
LIE from God #2
The book of Genesis says that God made all the animals on the fifth day. Why would the Holy Spirit write in His own book that all the animals were created on the fifth day if they weren’t? I think this falls better into the picture of a, “…truly...deceptive God” (to quote Pierre).
Again, I will reiterate that if the Bible contains falsehoods then we have bigger problems than dinosaurs. I for one believe the Bible wholeheartedly.
uh oh. We deffinitely don't want to find any problems or errors in the Bible that would throw everything off!
Guess what, you can still find discrepancies in the text and find the WHOLE Bible true! Why would small things make the whole thing wrong, that seems so insignificant?
N.T. Wright states, (paraphrase) If the Old Testament was fine for Jesus with all of its narrative stories (i.e. Job), and poetry, then its good enough for me.
What your doing is trying to twist scripture to fit your view, instead of changing your pre-conceived view....drew...you. The issues raised about death before sin and whatnot are valid. Respond to those, don't dodge em.
Anonymous: You ask some good questions, but you also make some pretty big assumptions. I would caution you from oversimplifying a modern day English reading of the text. Like Kay said, context is key. Make sure you properly understand the frame of reference and the allowances in the Hebrew before you draw hard-fast conclusions (I'd also caution against drawing hard-fast conclusions).
Unfortunately, this forum is hardly the time or the place for adequate study of those questions. Oh, and don't be afraid to sign off. Hiding in anonymity won't protect you from the conflict (generally speaking - not here specifically).
Brianstine of Hippo (ironic wordplay, huh?): Someone sure is an eager beaver. Sorry it took so long to respond. Success to you on finding our common ground. You're absolutely correct that my concern is not with you. My concern is with the approach to interpretation that you seem to take. I'm not too worried about the passage you keep repeating. I allow for figures of speech (which take nothing away from historicity or inerrancy) in all biblical writings, though again careful of the context. Repetition, while good for the memory, doesn't change the literary technique.
And while I'm sure you'd love to continue to banter on inserting one liner's after each paragraph (coming across more like jabs than they do authentic questions), you're going to have to accept the obvious tension in your approach and ours. While we try to keep an open mind to all matters of biblical understanding, your arguments are unconvincing to us.
-Pierre S. Lewis (of the Inklings... I had Tolkein proof this before I posted it)
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home