Is the Bible the Word of God?

"Picky I know, but dinosaurs WERE NOT lizards. They're not even
reptiles .... they are dinosaura ... an extinct order of animals,
and possible antecedants of the modern day birds and/or mammals."
--They (dinosaurs) are currently identified as reptiles, to say that they aren't on the basis that they are decendents of modern birds or mammals isn't the best way to conclude non-reptilian phylum."There is even discussion that dinsosaurs may have been warm
blooded ... not cold-blooded like reptiles. It's to do
with size and bodies constructed for high speed."
--I am aware a bit of this debate, tell me how would you capitulate warm and cold bloodedness on extinct dinosaurs? What is it exactly is it that is making them question whether they were cold/warm blooded?------------------

Redstang,i dont know what Bible you read but mine makes absolutely no mention of Noah taking BABIES with him on the ark. It does mention that animals came with their MATES,which means they had reached sexual maturity WHEN THEY BOARDED THE ARK. Now YOU may choose to re-interpret these words to mean something different but i dont see why you would want to.
--The thing we need to notice, is that the literal translation ( YLT ) is:
Genesis 7:2 - "of all the clean beasts thou dost take to thee seven pairs, a male and its female; and of the beasts which are not clean two, a male and its female;"--The chapter continues to use this wording as to the male and its female. You do not have to re-interperet anything really, I look at the literal wording for literal words for adjectives and verbs and nouns and the like, the KJV or NIV and so on are for easier reading and easier understanding for our day and age."You clearly believe in a supernatural God with all sort of magical powers so why not simply believe that God made a magical trick to fit adult animals on the boat and magicaly protected them and fed them AFTER they got off the boat so they wouldn't eat each other like they were supposed to?"
--Actually I already showed you that they were not carnivores, they didn't need to be and there is evidence that they could easilly live this way."That would be concistant with what the Bible teaches and with its exact wording."
--Interesting you bring up 'exact wording' in which this is what we should be looking for, not jumping all over the the different bible for the best translation."Why are you so desperate to interpret these passages in the Bible in a scientific way when its clear they were meant to describe a miracle?"
--Not even close."And BTW,is it just dinos that came as babies or was it all animals,in your opinion..."
--No doubt they were young, very few could have been full grown, such as small various birds or something like that. Whether they were babies could have varied, like I explained earlier, Noah didn't throw them in the ark as soon as the thing popped out of the birth canal."because i hope you do know that many animals,such as lions,bears and so forth are observed today as caring for their children for years..."
--Yes, and some of the various bears and cats, don't. But whether they did or didn't, they had to get on that ark. Noah could have taken care of, or even it could have taken care of itself a couple month old bear or lion."Animals who have tons of babies like frogs and turtles do abandon their children because the sheer number insures that at least some will survive to reach maturity but most dinosaures had no more than a few(1-6) cubs per birthings. The best exemples of large lizards we have today are alligators and komodo dragons and by observing their behaviour,and the fact that their youngs remain in their care until they reached adulthood,we can infer how large dinosaures behaved with their progeny."
--So, just grab 2."The word christian in relation with hitler is not mentionned anywhere during his seminar. This was clearly meant to induce the listeners into believing that Hitler was trying to use evolution to destroy religious belief,which is the message Hovind tries to pass along in his seminars...that evolutionists are devil worshippers."
--Not really, you overstate it a bit, Hovind was trying to get accross a point that said, evolution+a mind like hitler=disaster. He has stated through his debates that there is a positive and negative action in the ToE, Hitler took the negative.------------------