I thought a dragon was considered a ravenous beast?
Isaiah 35:9 - No lion shall be there, nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon, it shall not be found there; but the redeemed shall walk there:
In verse 7, it says that it will become a habitation of dragons, but in verse 9, it says that "nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon..."
Isn't a dragon a ravenous beast?
By posting these verses side by side, we are to assume that there is a contradiction because verse 7 states that there will be a "habitation of dragons," and that this habitation will have "grass with reeds and rushes" where each dragon lays. And then we we move over to verse 9, which states specifically that there shall be "no lion" there, "nor any ravenous beast."
But wait a second! You completely skipped verse 8:
"And an highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for those: the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein." - Isa. 35:8
So then, verse 7 is a reference to the parched ground in the desert becoming a pool of water and dragons inhabiting it, but verse 9 is referring to the highway that will also be there. On the HIGHWAY, there will not be any lions, or ravenous beasts.
Notice the wording of verse 9, "nor any ravenous beast SHALL GO UP THEREON". Up on what? The HIGHWAY!!!