Using Set terminology, religious knowledge and scientific knowledge are just intersecting sets. It's not necessary that one of them contains the other. As such, it's not surprising that there is no mention to Dinosauirs in religious textbooks.
Not really. If the Deity dictated a book, telling how the world come to be, and to guide all aspects of the life of their disciples...So much the participants of the religious group believe it comes directly from their creator...Would have been nice to mention this major change of mind, after letting these creatures roam free for 200 million years..And some mention of the real earth position and structure of the solar system would have been nice.
To my knowledge only the ten commandments are considered divinely dictated. The rest are written versions of oral histories, letters, and such by human authors.
> To my knowledge only the ten commandments are considered divinely dictated
Both the entire text and the composition into the canon are pretty universally (within Christianity) considered divinely inspired (even by groups that disagree on what the entire text of the canon is.) The exact meaning of that inspiration and the degree to which it admits human error is...variable across different interpretations of Christianity.
The text of the decalogue as recorded—in more than one place, and not identically—in the Bible generally isn't considered any differently than the rest of the text. The text as it was inscribed on the stone tablets may be, but it's pretty clear that the human authors of the relevant Scripture didn't all correct their text with the tablets.
Whether or not the text is "divinely inspired" is a different point than whether it is divinely dictated, which is what I was responding to. Of all the books of the Bible I can think of, none of them even claim to be divinely dictated - except for the ten commandments.
> Whether or not the text is "divinely inspired" is a different point than whether it is divinely dictated
Thar actually depends rather strongly on whose understanding of divine inspiration you accept. While the term used is consistent, the range of beliefs as to what that term means is broad and extends the whole way to divine dictation.
> Of all the books of the Bible I can think of, none of them even claim to be divinely dictated - except for the ten commandments.
The decalogue isn't the only piece that claims to be directly quoting material that came directly from one or another person of the Trinity. (There's bits of the Creation story, the burning bush, and some other things scattered in the OT directly quoting the Father beyond the decalogue, and a whole lot of the NT directly quotes the Son.)
The decalogue is the only reference to a separate external document which was not merely divinely dictated by but written by the Hand of God, but it doesn't have any special claim of divine authorship beyond that of any of the other places God’s words in any form are quoted.
