Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

Authored By  :
Published On :
Last Updated :

NOTE: This article or series has not been updated recently. As such, it may possibly contain some outdated information, and/or ideas and beliefs which I no longer embrace, or which have changed to some degree.



In light of the previous Scriptures and excerpts from both the Book of Jubilees and the Book of Enoch, it is easy to understand why God found it necessary to destroy both man and beast. The extent of the genetic corruption, as well as the level of evil and violence upon the Earth was so great, that there was no other remedial solution to consider. The previous verses make it rather clear that the Fallen Angels were responsible for these great evils. Before they arrived on the Earth, there were no giants to contend with. While it is true that humanity had already demonstrated it rebellious and evil nature since the time of Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel, what occurred once the Fallen Angels/Grigori arrived was so much worse.

Notice that in chapter seven of the Book of Enoch, we are informed that the giants "consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, the giants turned against them and devoured mankind. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood." The latter part of the verses is rather clear. As a result of their veracious appetites, the giants eventually turned on each other, and even began to consume each other and drink each other's blood.

However, what is not clear is what is meant by "they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish". Does this simply mean that they began to devour these animals as well, or is something else being implied? Exactly how did the giants sin against these various creatures? Considering the Nephilim's great size, it doesn't seem likely that they would be able to satisfy their appetites by eating birds and fish and such.

It is at this point where I will offer a bit of speculation for your consideration. What if what is really being stated in these verses is that just as the Fallen Angels manipulated the human gene pool when they chose to engage in sex with the women of Earth, either their evil offspring -- the giants -- or perhaps even the Fallen Angels themselves, also began to in some way manipulate the genes of the animals of the Earth? What if this is what actually resulted in the appearance of dinosaurs on the Earth in the distant past?

While this is just a personal theory which you are obviously free to accept or reject, I find it rather interesting that the previous verses specifically mention all four different animal groups, which according to science, were populated by various species of dinosaurs. What if the Fallen Angels or their Nephilim offspring took what God had already created, and manipulated and corrupted it, just as the Fallen Angels had corrupted humanity? As we have seen, Moses specifically wrote in Genesis, that all flesh had become corrupted; that is, marred, ruined and spoiled. That is why the Lord chose to take action by way of the Flood. He had to put a stop to it before no one was left. He had to stop the Fallen Angels in their tracks.

It just seems to me that if there was any time in Biblical history when violent, meat-eating dinosaurs would appear on the Earth, the centuries leading up to the Flood would most certainly be it. The Angelic Invasion had already occurred. The giant Nephilim were terrorizing humanity. It was a time of spiritual darkness, excessive wickedness and relentless violence. The original peaceful balance which God had made had been lost, and creation had really gone amuck. Dangerous dinosaurs would fit right into that scenario.

Now, if there is any truth to my personal speculation -- and I do emphasize that it is just a theory -- it makes a number of rather interesting statements regarding what we are being taught, and what is happening today in the world of science. For example, as I explain in the article entitled "The Earth Is Under 7,000 Years Old", according to my calculations, the worldwide Flood occurred when our planet was approximately 1,556 years old. If this genetic corruption in the gene pool of man and beast occurred several hundred years at best prior to the Flood -- thus resulting in giants and dinosaurs -- it means that contrary to the claims of modern science that man appeared on the Earth millions of years after the dinosaurs, not only did man and dinosaur exist together for a short span of a few hundred years, but man actually appeared on the Earth over a thousand years before the dinosaurs!

The second important statement, or observation, is this: If what I have stated here is even close to correct, stop and consider what is happening in the world of science today in the areas of the Human Genome Project, gene sequencing, stem cell research, in vitro fertilization, somatic cell nuclear transfer and genomic reprogramming, and related fields. In his desire to become his own creator god, is man tampering with technologies which belong to God alone? Is he about to open the proverbial Pandora's Box which no man will be able to shut once it is opened? In their foolish pride, will men of science accidentally release horrors into the world in a matter of a few decades or less? Frightful thoughts indeed!

Incidentally, with this new knowledge concerning the giants eating flesh of both man and beast, it makes it a lot easier to understand why God gave new commandments regarding killing animals and eating meat, immediately after the Flood in the ninth chapter of the Book of Genesis. In other words, aside from the fact that consuming protein would assist people in living longer, healthier lives, despite the negative effects which would result from ultraviolet rays and other sources of radiation from Outer Space, perhaps Noah and his three sons had caught whiffs of cooking meat, and the Lord knew that it was something which they just wouldn't be able to resist for very long. For those of you who are not vegetarians, how does your body react when you catch a whiff of steak being cooked on the flame, or when the smell of your neighbor's delicious barbecue happens to come your way?

So, maybe the Lord changed the rules in order to fit the new situation in which Noah and his family found themselves after the Flood had occurred. The fact that God made the new rules regarding man and beast, and eating meat, also suggests that prior to the Fall and the intervention by the Fallen Angels, beasts did not kill men, and men did not kill beasts in order to consume their meat.

While some of you may object to my speculation regarding the smell of meat, and how Noah and his family may have reacted to it, perhaps you will find it interesting to know that once Noah and his sons had released all of the animals from the Ark, Noah also offered a burnt sacrifice to the Lord. What is interesting about this is how the Lord Himself reacted to the smell of Noah's sacrifice. Consider the following verses:

"And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."


As you can see, the Lord seems to have enjoyed smelling the burnt sacrifice which Noah offered to Him. It is also rather interesting to note that this is the very first place in the King James Version of the Bible where building an altar, and offering a burnt sacrifice is mentioned. The only offering that is recorded as having taken place prior to that time was when Cain and Abel offered their gifts to the Lord. However, as you can see below, there is no mention of either of them actually killing an animal, or offering a burnt sacrifice on an altar:

"And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell."


While the word "fat" could possibly imply that Abel killed an animal, allow me to point out that in the original Hebrew text, the word used is "cheleb". This word not only refers to the fat of human or beast, but also to the choicest or the best part of something. Thus, personally, I am inclined to believe that Abel simply offered the very best part of his flock as a gift to the Lord, while it was Noah who built the very first altar, and then offered the very first burnt sacrifice in the Bible. To reiterate, the words "burnt" and "altar" are not used in the KJV Bible until Noah offers the aforementioned sacrifice. Furthermore, the word "sacrifice" is never used until the Patriarch Jacob offers one in Genesis chapter thirty-one, as we see here:

"Then Jacob offered sacrifice upon the mount, and called his brethren to eat bread: and they did eat bread, and tarried all night in the mount."


Returning to our discussion concerning ancient dinosaurs and the destruction of all flesh -- man and beast -- as a result of the Flood, allow me to remind you that the Book of Genesis seems to indicate that this only affected air-breathing life which was land-based. In other words, to my knowledge, marine species were not affected. This suggests that there are some ancient sea creatures which may still be roaming the depths of our oceans even in our present day. One prime example of this which has sometimes made the news is the coelacanth. As you may know, as late as the early Twentieth Century, modern scientists had erroneously assumed that the coelacanth had become extinct millions of years ago. However, in 1938, one was caught alive off of the east coast of South Africa. Since that time, other live specimens have been found in the region of the Indian Ocean, and around Indonesia as well. So much for the theories of men.

Many Christians are also familiar with the Bible's mention of two monsters named Leviathan and Behemoth. As I explain in the series entitled "Leviathan: An Ancient Dragon of the Sea?", the Scriptures seem to indicate that Leviathan was a real fire-breathing dragon which roamed the ancient seas, even during the time of men. Whether or not it still exists I honestly do not know. While we may be tempted to refer to Leviathan as a dinosaur, it was actually a marine reptile. As we have seen, dinosaurs and reptiles are very different in a taxonomic sense. Please refer to the aforementioned series for a detailed treatise regarding this ancient beast.

Behemoth, on the other hand, was a land-based creature of tremendous size, and apparently an herbivore. Its precise identity has been a source of discussion and debate for a number of centuries. Suggestions have included an elephant, a hippopotamus, a mammoth and a Diplodocus or Brachiosaurus. As occurred with Leviathan, the verses below indicate that the Behemoth was created at the same time as man:

"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. Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares."


According to the Book of Enoch, Leviathan and Behemoth seem to have been created together, and were later separated. In the Book that is named after him, Enoch also states that the Leviathan was a female monster, while Behemoth was a male. Consider the following excerpts:

"And on that day were two monsters parted, a female monster named Leviathan, to dwell in the abysses of the ocean over the fountains of the waters. But the male is named Behemoth, who occupied with his breast a waste wilderness named Duidain, on the east of the garden where the elect and righteous dwell, where my grandfather was taken up, the seventh from Adam, the first man whom the Lord of Spirits created. And I besought the other angel that he should show me the might of those monsters, how they were parted on one day and cast, the one into the abysses of the sea, and the other unto the dry land of the wilderness. And he said to me: 'Thou son of man, herein thou dost seek to know what is hidden.'"


Some of my readers will no doubt be wondering what my view is regarding the so-called Loch Ness monster. Does it really exist, or is it just the invention of fantasy-minded Scotts who have tourism in mind? Could it possibly be a modern-day survivor of the Leviathan? To both these questions, I have to provide an honest "I don't know". While I am no expert on the subject, I will say that according to what I have read, the high concentration of peat in the water, the high water temperature -- which results in a lower level of oxygen -- the low visibility level, and the scarcity of natural food, would seem to make Loch Ness less conducive to the survival of a large aquatic reptile such as the Loch Ness monster. More than that, I really cannot say.

The same answer applies to the other alleged aquatic monsters such as the Lake Van Monster of Turkey; the Mokele-mbembe of the Congo River basin; the Ogopogo which is said to dwell in the Okanagan Lake of British Columbia, Canada; Champ, which is purported to swim in the waters of Lake Champlain in the American states of New York and Vermont; and so many others which are too numerous to name here. Are they pranks and just silly attempts to draw tourists? Are they misidentifications of known objects or animals? Could some of them possibly be bona fide remnants of ancient creatures? In light of the small amount of real, verifiable evidence, it is difficult to say. So again, I just don't know what they are, if anything at all.

As I mentioned in part one, some New Age adherents embrace a number of strange beliefs of their own. One of them which is directly related to our current discussion, is a belief that an ancient upright-walking saurian race -- who they like to refer to as reptoids -- coexisted with early man. The people who accept this belief claim that the serpent in the Garden of Eden was actually one of these creatures which had become possessed by Satan. On a related note, it may interest you to know that according to the Book of Enoch, the actual Fallen Angel who deceived Eve was called Gadreel, as we see here:

"And the third was named Gadreel: he it is who showed the children of men all the blows of death, and he led astray Eve, and showed [the weapons of death to the sons of men] the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword for battle, and all the weapons of death to the children of men. And from his hand they have proceeded against those who dwell on the earth from that day and for evermore."


"Wait a minute!" some of you will no doubt protest. "That is a direct contradiction of the Bible. The Scriptures plainly state that it was Satan who tempted and deceived Eve." While that is what many of us have been taught -- and even what I have also taught for many years -- a close inspection of the Bible reveals that nowhere in the Book of Genesis is Satan directly named as the source of Eve's deception. It simply says "the serpent". Furthermore, when the Apostle Paul refers back to the incident in his second Epistle to the brethren at Corinth, neither does he use the name of "Satan" directly. He likewise writes "the serpent". Consider these verses:

"Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die . . . And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat."


"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."


It may surprise you to learn that nowhere in the entire KJV Bible is the name "Eve" used in the same verse as the words "Devil" or "Satan". The reason why we assume that Satan was the culprit in the Garden of Eden is because he is generally recognized as God's chief adversary -- such as in the Book of Job -- and also because of the following verses that we find in the Book of Revelation:

"And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."


"And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,"


So how do we find harmony between what we have long believed, what the Book of Enoch states, and what the Biblical Canon states? If we consider that the Book of Enoch describes how the Fallen Angels were divided into different companies and groups, each of which had their leader, and that Satan seems to have been the head of them all, it makes perfect sense to assume that Gadreel may have been operating directly under Satan's directions, which means that Satan deceived Eve by proxy. Consider these verses:

"And I asked the angel of peace who went with me, saying: 'For whom are these chains being prepared? 'And he said unto me: 'These are being prepared for the hosts of Azazel, so that they may take them and cast them into the abyss of complete condemnation, and they shall cover their jaws with rough stones as the Lord of Spirits commanded. And Michael, and Gabriel, and Raphael, and Phanuel shall take hold of them on that great day, and cast them on that day into the burning furnace, that the Lord of Spirits may take vengeance on them for their unrighteousness in becoming subject to Satan and leading astray those who dwell on the earth.'"


As you can see, Azazel and his bands actually became subject to Satan. This would obviously have included Gadreel. It is likewise important to realize that in the original Hebrew tongue, the word "satan" -- which is pronounced saw-tawn' -- literally means adversary or one who withstands. In the New Testament, the Greek form "satanas" is used. In other words, any Fallen Angel or evil spirit who resists God's Will is technically a satan. That is why in the Book of Enoch, the word "Satans" is used to refer to the Fallen Angels.

Returning to our discussion regarding the New Age advocates, In addition to believing that an ancient bipedal saurian race coexisted with early humans, in contradiction to God's Word, these people also propose that some of these alleged saurian creatures actually survived the Flood. According to this New Age myth, they accomplished this by escaping into underground tunnels and caverns of the Earth, where they are said to have evolved into highly intelligent beings.

As has been said of the alleged Atlanteans, the Greeks, the Hav-Musuvs of Paiute Indian legend, the Indians of India, and other ancient societies, these reptilian creatures are said to exist to this very day in their underground metropolises. Other New Age advocates also believe that some of the ancient races escaped from the Earth and traveled to the stars. The Grays -- who are also referred to as Dracos or Zeta Reticulans -- are likewise claimed to be reptilian in nature, possessing serpentine slitted eyes, and scaly skin of varying shades of gray, according to those people who espouse these beliefs.

Obviously, I do not accept any of this New Age psychobabble as being true. As I have already made clear, the possibility of underground civilizations which somehow survived the great Flood is totally contrary to what we are taught in the Bible. To reiterate, God's Word informs us that all land-based and air-breathing men and beasts died, with the exception of the ones which were offered protection in the Ark. As I mentioned in part one, there is no way around this, unless we choose to say that the Genesis Account is not true, and that God is a liar.

As I believe I mention in the series "Alien Life, Extrasolar Planets and Universal Atonement", if there is in fact life on other planets, the Biblical account does not support the idea that it originated on or migrated from the Earth in some ancient time. In my view, if life -- intelligent or otherwise -- exists on other planets, I am inclined to believe that it must have been a separate creation by the Lord. Naturally, I do not know this for a fact, and this is just speculation on my part.

But let us return now to the central theme of this series. While the fossil record convinces me that dinosaurs did exist in our ancient past for a brief period prior to the Flood, please note that this doesn't mean that I just blindly accept all of the claims which are made by modern scientists. While we can hope that most men of science are men of honesty and integrity, neither should we be ignorant of the fact that a fair number of hoaxes have been perpetrated over the decades. Not only that, but we also need to recognize that, while by nature science adheres to a very rigid system of rules, when it involves dinosaurs, particularly what they looked like, what their diet consisted of, whether they were bipedal and stood on their hind legs or crawled on all fours, whether they were capable of running quickly or moved slowly, whether they were warm-blooded or cold-blooded, etc., it has involved a certain degree of personal conjecture.

Even during my own lifetime, a number of long-held erroneous assumptions regarding dinosaurs have had to be corrected, to the great embarrassment of the scientific community. Some of my readers will no doubt respond that such is the nature of scientific inquiry and that it is an ongoing, self-correcting process to discover the truth. I obviously agree with this point. Nevertheless, my point still stands that we should not just blindly believe something just because a scientist with a Ph.D. states it, any more than we should believe everything that a preacher says just because he possesses a Th.D. We all should endeavor to verify the facts for ourselves, if it is within our means to do so. Sad to say, sometimes the desire for fame or financial profit will cause some men to distort the truth.

As I worked on the update to this series, I discovered that even at this current time, there are legal disputes going on regarding certain fossilized dinosaur remains. One example in particular involves a case where a skeleton of a relative of the Tyrannosaurus rex named Tarbosaurus bataar was apparently taken out of Mongolia illegally. Part of the legal battle is over the fact that a certain degree of deception has clouded the case. While the fossil dealer involved in the case made the claim that the fossils came from a seventy-five per cent complete specimen -- meaning from a single dinosaur -- claims are now being made that it is in reality what is referred to as a composite specimen. In other words, the skeleton may be actually comprised of fossilized bones from several different skeletons of the same species of dinosaur. Furthermore, these bones may have come from several different countries. It is for reasons like these that we should not just accept things at face value, because you never know what deception may be at work.

If we consider what a catastrophic event the Flood was, and what kind of condition it must have left the world in after the flood waters had receded, it makes it a lot easier for us to understand the challenge that scientists face whenever they do discover actual dinosaur bones; or more correctly stated, the fossilized, mineralized remains of what had once been dinosaur bones.

We need to realize that when the Flood arrived, and mighty currents began to rapidly fill up the lowlands and valleys, all living things -- both people and beasts, including the dinosaurs -- were suddenly swept off of their feet by flash floods and such. Many animals were probably carried great distances and eventually drowned. As the waters eventually receded off of the face of the Earth after the Lord stopped the rain, whatever remains the sharks and other garbagemen of the sea weren't able to eat, were probably carried by the swift-moving currents to the various lowlands of the Earth where they piled up in mighty ancient graveyards. They were then either partially or fully buried in thick layers of mud. That mud was eventually hardened by the Sun, time or pressure -- or possibly by a combination of the three -- and the slow process of mineralization began to occur.

When paleontologists and other scientists discover fossilized dinosaur skeletons today, quite often, the remains are mixed in with remains from other dinosaurs, as well as from other animals which died during the Flood. Furthermore, rarely are the bones from one dinosaur neatly in place. They can be very jumbled, scattered over a very wide area, or even completely missing some bones, such as tail bones. Some bones will also be severely damaged. So, as I said earlier, this presents a major challenge for the paleontologists, and it does force them to make a lot of educated guesses when it comes time to actually assemble the bones, which can later turn out to be wrong.

Consider, for example, that until recently, it was commonly believed that certain dinosaurs where slow, dumb, solitary creatures which lumbered about. Then one day some scientists discovered that they had placed the angle of the tail bones incorrectly. As a result, said dinosaurs are now viewed as having been swift-running, highly-intelligent pack killers. Such is the world of scientific theory and guesswork. It is very volatile and can change from day to day. Thank God that our faith as Christians is based on the "more sure word of prophecy", as we see by this verse:

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:"


It may interest you to know that based on the research that I conducted, there are only about 2,100 dinosaur skeletons on display in museums around the worldwide. Not only that, but to my knowledge, none of these models -- the real bones are not displayed for obvious reasons -- are based on one hundred per cent complete dinosaur skeletons. In fact, some dinosaurs which have been categorized are based on one single bone or tooth.

One of the most complete dinosaur skeletons that I am aware of is a display of a Tyrannosaurus rex named "Sue" that is located at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, Illinois, USA. Named after its discoverer, paleontologist Sue Hendrickson, this huge beast stands thirteen feet tall at the hips, and measures forty and a half feet from the tip of its snout to the end of its tail. "Sue" is based on a fossilized skeleton that is said to be eighty per cent complete, which is a record for completeness within paleontology.

More recently, the fossilized remains of a related theropod -- a carnivorous dinosaur of a group whose members are also bipedal -- was discovered in the state of Bavaria in southern Germany a few years ago. The newly named dinosaur Sciurumimus albersdoerferi -- which is believed to be a juvenile of its species -- measures about seventy-two centimeters from its snout to the tip of its tail, and is said to be ninety-eight per cent complete.

Please go to part four for the conclusion of this series.

⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .

Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

---

---

Please avail yourself of other areas of the Bill's Bible Basics website. There are many treasures for you to discover.