Thanks to Objective Ministries for the artist's depiction:
http://objectiveministries.org/kidz/art/kidzart-jesus-saurus.png
2007-11-11 17:40:44 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yes they were. And some were even given as pets by the priests to the kids in the town. They'd give the choir boys a Nowyougottasaurarse!
2007-11-11 17:52:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
i did no longer watch the completed element, yet you have neglected the initiating, the place he presented the two adult males on the remarkable (those i assume you're calling the religious reps) as teachers - one is an archaeologist, the different replaced into some type of theologian. So the theologian could be seen as a non secular rep, yet no longer the archaeologist. From the little I observed, it looked like Ted Koppel replaced into commencing the controversy with the foregone end that the documentary's line of reasoning replaced into specious, yet it is via the fact it replaced into. i did no longer desire a debate to tell me that. The archaeologist in fee of the dig that got here approximately 27 years in the past has already stated that there's no way that those bones are Jesus et al. The movie-maker twisted the words of the DNA experts, who stated only that there's no maternal relation between the Jesus bones and the Mariamne bones. The filmmaker, interior the controversy, stated that the DNA adult males have been asserting this replaced into information that the two have been husband and spouse. this is not information. They even confirmed a movie clip of the DNA adult males making a public assertion that a husband-spouse courting is just one danger of many. an excellent after that the filmmaker insisted that they have been husband and spouse. So... what I observed replaced into Ted Koppel posing some logical, blunt questions to a guy making archaeo-porn. Or greater helpful, tabloid archaeology. Sorry in case you do in contrast to those words, yet as an archaeologist, one attentive to how archaeological learn is particularly completed, it is glaring that the documentary is all approximately getting headlines with the flashiest information accessible. no longer real technological information. Sorry.
2016-10-16 05:16:58 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The word "dinosaur" doesn't appear in the Bible. The term dinosaur wasnt even invented until 1842.
Some people would argue, that dinosaurs are mentioned in the bible Job 40 and 41.
2007-11-11 18:10:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, they are confusing Jesus with Fred Flintstone.
2007-11-11 20:09:18 · answer #4 · answered by lilagrubb 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no. dinosaurs were a very angry bunch, because once they died they had to turn themselves into fossils and pretend to be millions of years old just to fool modern day humans and make us question god. Those jokers! boy, did they fool us! I feel so dumb, believing evidence and what not! jeez, it was obviously gods doing, cause that makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside, so it must be true.
2007-11-11 17:59:37 · answer #5 · answered by Ralishev 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
In the multiverse of all possible worlds, could dinosaurs and humans co-exist on some of those timelines?
It is possible ;)
2007-11-11 17:52:22 · answer #6 · answered by khan.2012 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Humans and dinosaurs never met.
2007-11-11 17:46:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, they were all like Barney and sung happy songs.
2007-11-11 17:44:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Is there a sincere request for knowledge here, or did you waste my time?
2007-11-11 17:45:23 · answer #9 · answered by TexasTrev38 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dinosaurs died before Jesus was made up...
2007-11-11 17:44:14 · answer #10 · answered by Meatwad 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋