You can date back the genealogies of Christ all the way back to adam. I'm pretty sure all the dates are available.

When I was young, my parents owned a biblical atlas, with the lineage from adam all the way to Christ. that was something like 2000 years (from now till Christ) plus some 4k years up until adam for a total of some 6 or 6.5k years.

The dinos would have been made during day 5 I believe, so that would mean that dinos and men co-existed. There was a lot of exponential procreation of all species early on due to a more rich gene pool, allowing for inbreeding (that's the theory), so dinos and humans could easily inbreed and create more humans and dinos respectively.

Then, in terms of the bible, dsgrue already gave you job's recounting of God's description of his mighty beasts.

Is it surprising to you that dinos and humans co-existed? If so, that's understandable. But the co-existence is in line with the obviously glorified accounts of human-dragon encounters, which are likely human-dino encounters.

1.  Atheists do not believe in hell.  If they believe in hell, they're not atheists.

2.  Which religion do you choose?  Even within Christianity, there are tons of different sects each professing their own way to get into heaven. 

3.  Many atheists don't believe in an afterlife what so ever.  All we have is this life right here, so why would we spend it in an attempt to please a being that we don't actually believe in?  Just to hedge our bets?

4.  Most importantly, it's not a matter of choice.  As an atheist, religion simply doesn't make sense to me.  It's not like I made a choice based on afterlife possibilities.  I simply developed a world view that makes sense to me.  If I chose to follow a religion as a shot in the dark, it would simply be going through the motions and faking it, and I suppose that if there was an omniscient being he would see through my ruse.

No, it's not "glorified accounts", it's (mostly bad) Hollywood movies about dragons and dinosaurs (the Ringo Starr movie is sort of cool, though, in it' own way...)

The one thing I don't understand is why do religious people feel the urge to convince the science community that the bible is also science? "The Origin of Species" is a science book, the bible isn't. You can easily find scientific errors and misconceptions all abound in the bible, because it is a moral codex, not a science text (and the cooler stories in it are mostly taken from older sources, like the Gilgamesh epos for example). Again, no amount of imaginative fudging bible verses makes them science because that has never been the intent of the bible.

And please, people, stop "carbon dating" rocks or dinosaur remains. there is no f*cking carbon in it...

Yes! If you find a good, godly church you will most definatly be accepted.  There is much pain and sorrow in the world, and while God doesn't always take away our pain right away, he will help us through it.

Didn't scan through the other replies, but I can field this one pretty well.

In Genesis, it talks about the world being created, and later talks about God creating man/woman. It never names them at that point. The story of Adam and Eve is its own story. For some reason, Judaism and Christianity have linked the two together, when in fact, there were people outside of Eden. The entire world wasn't Eden, never claims it was. After the story of Cain and Abel, Cain later marries. Where'd this woman come from? Yup, she was there one of the descendants of the people that lived outside Eden.

So basically, there was a whole world of things, before Adam and Eve and outside Eden. I've often heard the Big Bang referenced to God bringing light to the world. Evolution/Big Bang were taught in science class alongside creationism in catholic school, never was a problem for anyone back then.

If there's no carbon, then there shouldn't be any soft tissue, right?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/03/0324_050324_trexsofttissue.html