The Long Ager Dichotomy!

[Musicmaster]

I've been watching a two+ hour video discussing the NAMB and a popular SBC church organization in Florida currently going down the path of embracing egalitarianism, perverse doctrines and lifestyles, and something they mentioned in the video is that theistic evolution is but only one of a number of doors that, once opened, inevitably lead to a complete departure from the authority and sufficiency of scripture.

Interestingly, the one battle that is now recognized by many as the most ferocious battle happening with theological circles is the very sufficiency of scripture. More and more people are gravitating more and more in the direction that they have and are hearing God speak in addition to the Bible, giving personal direction and inspiration for doctrines found nowhere in scripture.

For those who are not aware, theistic evolution is exactly the majority of the long ages system of thought.

MM

 

[Major]

My thoughts are in relation to the many, many assumptions we sometimes tend to try and force into the biblical texts on the basis of our personal experiences. We are living in the finished work right now, which is that the sun existed long before we did, and so we are seeing the finished work.

In the creation days, however, the Lord creating a distinction between day and night, even before our sun was set in its place, that doesn't create any textual nor logical crisis within the claims of the text.

In my past experiences on this topic, many tried to force conjecturized meaning into the text in an attempt to force their contrived dichotomies into the narrative as a means for bolstering their own beliefs about the topic. A planet without a star (sun) is still bound by the laws of nature, meaning that even without a sun, the lawful boundary between morning and evening is still intact and meaningful throughout the entire universe. This is what BibleLover stated earlier in this thread...maybe not in so many words, but with the meaning still intact.

MM

Good thoughts...all. Young Earthers believe that the earth is about 6000 years old and that the fossil record was laid down during and after Noah’s flood. The stratification of the layers is thought to have occurred due to hydrologic sorting and liquefaction. This puts the fossil record and the death and carnage it describes hundreds of years after Adam’s sin.

That opens the door to a varity of problems that need to be answered.

One was that Adam and Eve lived along side of those dinosaurs. IF that is the case.........
1. why is there NO Biblical record?
2. If humans and dinosaurs were coexisting at the time of the flood, why haven’t we found their remains fossilized together?
3. And if dinosaurs did get off the ark afterward, shouldn’t there be Bible descriptions of humans interacting with them?
4. Furthermore, what happened to the dinosaurs?
If they were on the Ark, Why did they go extinct if they were around after the flood just a few thousand years ago?

These are questions that college students ask and want to know.

 

[Major]

I've been watching a two+ hour video discussing the NAMB and a popular SBC church organization in Florida currently going down the path of embracing egalitarianism, perverse doctrines and lifestyles, and something they mentioned in the video is that theistic evolution is but only one of a number of doors that, once opened, inevitably lead to a complete departure from the authority and sufficiency of scripture.

Interestingly, the one battle that is now recognized by many as the most ferocious battle happening with theological circles is the very sufficiency of scripture. More and more people are gravitating more and more in the direction that they have and are hearing God speak in addition to the Bible, giving personal direction and inspiration for doctrines found nowhere in scripture.

For those who are not aware, theistic evolution is exactly the majority of the long ages system of thought.

MM

Now the question must be............why would anyone even argue that dinosaurs must have been on Noah’s ark.

There is only one answer! And the answer is simply: because it’s a logical deduction to answer the question of where did all those bones come from?

It is NOT found in the Scriptures therefore it is an assumption!

 

[Musicmaster]

One was that Adam and Eve lived along side of those dinosaurs. IF that is the case.........

I don't find it strange that dinosaurs were contemporaneous with Adam. Some might say that such could not be the case on the basis of the hostility of the animals, which begs the question as an assumption. The thought of that hostility is an injected assumption, strengthened by Bollywood movies like Jurassic Park and such. The effects of the fall, and thus introduction of sin into creation, was slow, as is evidenced by many phenomenon...namely the slow decline in the longevity of the earlier people's lifespans, etc.

1. why is there NO Biblical record?

There is no biblical record of many things in existence in those ancient days, and I'm sure we can all agree that the silence doesn't disprove anything that truly did exist at the time.

2. If humans and dinosaurs were coexisting at the time of the flood, why haven’t we found their remains fossilized together?

A number of fossilized footprints of both dinosaurs and human in the same rock layer, of which I have seen and handled personally, have been authenticated...although still rejected by evolutionists who have an obvious axe to grind. Additionally, if we point only to discovered, fossilized remains, we would have to claim that we have scratched deeply enough into the surface of the sheer number of fossils of all the life from that era to say that there is a legitimate indicator of disparity. don't buy that as a verifiable assumption. We have no way of knowing one way or the other at this time.

3. And if dinosaurs did get off the ark afterward, shouldn’t there be Bible descriptions of humans interacting with them?

Why? We aren't told of the ark people back then interacting with dolphins, and we know they existed. We aren't told of Noah interacting with venomous snakes, and we know they existed because of having been on the ark. When we point at silence as the sole indicator for something we generally end up in a bigger ditch than what we can climb up out of.

4. Furthermore, what happened to the dinosaurs?

Well, some still existed up to recent times, given that missionaries have testified of having seen Pterodactyls still living in the mostly uninhabited sections of the jungles on the island of New Guinea. Now, of course, one can huff at the idea of such testimony...after all, none of us saw those creatures personally, and it can therefore be easily discounted in our own minds by assuming those missionaries are suspect for trying to gain notoriety for themselves with such fantastic tales...or were they...

If they were on the Ark, Why did they go extinct if they were around after the flood just a few thousand years ago?

How many animals overall have gone extinct these past 4000 years? They are still discovering species they had not ever seen before, and they are finding species that they thought had gone extinct long ago. Do we know everything there is to know about this earth and its creatures?

These are questions that college students ask and want to know.

I very much appreciate the inquisitiveness of college students. I also am well aware that many of them harbor pragmatic disregard for possibilities that they are not willing to accept because of such strong bias many carry with them from their public school days. When they get stars in their eyes because of some professors in their university classes with more letters attached to his name than his shoe size, it's a tough hill to climb.

What it all comes down to is which authority they or anyone else accepts as authoritative. Most see science as a higher authority than scripture. Isaac Newton and many other great Christian minds in the field of science didn't see things as do so many researches today. There are many modern researchers today who see scripture as the higher authority than science, even though most do not. I personally refuse to gravitate in the direction of bandwagoneering. Those types of bandwagons tend to be on that broad path Jesus spoke of, and those are not the wagons I choose to ride. I guess that's an admission to my being a weirdo...an outcast...of which I humbly accept without reservation.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Oops. I meant for Post #61 to be placed in the "False Teachers In The World" thread. My boo-boo.

MM

 

[Major]

I don't find it strange that dinosaurs were contemporaneous with Adam. Some might say that such could not be the case on the basis of the hostility of the animals, which begs the question as an assumption. The thought of that hostility is an injected assumption, strengthened by Bollywood movies like Jurassic Park and such. The effects of the fall, and thus introduction of sin into creation, was slow, as is evidenced by many phenomenon...namely the slow decline in the longevity of the earlier people's lifespans, etc.



There is no biblical record of many things in existence in those ancient days, and I'm sure we can all agree that the silence doesn't disprove anything that truly did exist at the time.



A number of fossilized footprints of both dinosaurs and human in the same rock layer, of which I have seen and handled personally, have been authenticated...although still rejected by evolutionists who have an obvious axe to grind. Additionally, if we point only to discovered, fossilized remains, we would have to claim that we have scratched deeply enough into the surface of the sheer number of fossils of all the life from that era to say that there is a legitimate indicator of disparity. don't buy that as a verifiable assumption. We have no way of knowing one way or the other at this time.



Why? We aren't told of the ark people back then interacting with dolphins, and we know they existed. We aren't told of Noah interacting with venomous snakes, and we know they existed because of having been on the ark. When we point at silence as the sole indicator for something we generally end up in a bigger ditch than what we can climb up out of.



Well, some still existed up to recent times, given that missionaries have testified of having seen Pterodactyls still living in the mostly uninhabited sections of the jungles on the island of New Guinea. Now, of course, one can huff at the idea of such testimony...after all, none of us saw those creatures personally, and it can therefore be easily discounted in our own minds by assuming those missionaries are suspect for trying to gain notoriety for themselves with such fantastic tales...or were they...



How many animals overall have gone extinct these past 4000 years? They are still discovering species they had not ever seen before, and they are finding species that they thought had gone extinct long ago. Do we know everything there is to know about this earth and its creatures?



I very much appreciate the inquisitiveness of college students. I also am well aware that many of them harbor pragmatic disregard for possibilities that they are not willing to accept because of such strong bias many carry with them from their public school days. When they get stars in their eyes because of some professors in their university classes with more letters attached to his name than his shoe size, it's a tough hill to climb.

What it all comes down to is which authority they or anyone else accepts as authoritative. Most see science as a higher authority than scripture. Isaac Newton and many other great Christian minds in the field of science didn't see things as do so many researches today. There are many modern researchers today who see scripture as the higher authority than science, even though most do not. I personally refuse to gravitate in the direction of bandwagoneering. Those types of bandwagons tend to be on that broad path Jesus spoke of, and those are not the wagons I choose to ride. I guess that's an admission to my being a weirdo...an outcast...of which I humbly accept without reservation.

MM

Wow..........a long post!

#1. I would argue that it is an "assumption" to say that Adam and dinosaurs lived together at the same time.
There are millions of dino bones found but not one single human remain found among them. That says a million words.

#2. Agree. And there is NO biblical support of humans living with dino either. Goose and gander applies.

#3. The footprints in Texas IN a new analysis of giant fossil footprints in a Texas riverbed, paleontologists have concluded that there is no evidence of human prints mingled with those of dinosaurs. A movie incorporating the disputed tracks, ''Footprints in Stone,'' produced by the Films for Christ Association, has been withdrawn from circulation as a document in support of divine creation. 5-Year Investigation What specialists in dinosaur studies have reported finding are clear traces of dinosaur toes associated with the so-called ''man tracks'' along the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Tex., southwest of Fort Worth.
Source.........https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/17/science/fossils-of-man-tracks-shown-to-be-dinosaurian.html

#4. We are not told about mosquitos or fly's or ticks either. I do not find that as a relevant position. So the question remains unanswered.

#5. Brother......I know you want to believe such stories, however, there is NO record anywhere of dinos being seen, or observed anywhere. So the question remains unanswered.

#6. That answer is called "rationalization". The question remains unanswered.

The questions asked are not about the authority of the Scriptures. You are missing the point. When someone askes............
"I would like to believe and accept Jesus but I have a problem believing that those dinos lived along with Adam and Eve when the same Bible you use to tell me about Jesus does not say that".

Can you give me an understandable answer?????

 

[Musicmaster]

Wow..........a long post!

#1. I would argue that it is an "assumption" to say that Adam and dinosaurs lived together at the same time.
There are millions of dino bones found but not one single human remain found among them. That says a million words.

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, the absence of human remains at the sites of dino remains seems to only point to the fact that they did not seek dino remains as the burial sites for their human dead. Additionally, humans were able to swim far better than most of the land dwelling dinos, so I'm not capturing what's so remarkable in the separation between the vast majority of humanity from dinos.

#2. Agree. And there is NO biblical support of humans living with dino either. Goose and gander applies.

Like I also stated, I have personally beheld evidence for the contemporaneous existence of dinos with humans in rock layers that prove the prints were made when those rocks were still mud. Both sets of prints have been proven to be genuine rather than carved into the rock as was claimed by the evolutionists with an axe to grind. I have also personally seen the fossilized remains of Trilobites that a human child had stepped on, preserved in rock layers, and also proven to be genuine. Trilobites were supposed to have been extinct millions of years before humanity allegedly evolved. So, we can assume a magical volume of evidence that we might think should exist, even though a very, very small portion of the earth's surface has been scowered through in order to find even a hundredth of of the likely existent fossils.

#3. The footprints in Texas IN a new analysis of giant fossil footprints in a Texas riverbed, paleontologists have concluded that there is no evidence of human prints mingled with those of dinosaurs. A movie incorporating the disputed tracks, ''Footprints in Stone,'' produced by the Films for Christ Association, has been withdrawn from circulation as a document in support of divine creation. 5-Year Investigation What specialists in dinosaur studies have reported finding are clear traces of dinosaur toes associated with the so-called ''man tracks'' along the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Tex., southwest of Fort Worth.
Source.........https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/17/science/fossils-of-man-tracks-shown-to-be-dinosaurian.html

Yes, evolutionists only scoffed at the laboratory proofs that counter their claims. The lamination lines in the crystalline mud that became rock under the compressions clearly proved the prints to be legitimate. Although I find it somewhat strange that you would side with atheistic evolutionists and their irrational doubts, but to each his own. I defend your right to believe them.

#4. We are not told about mosquitos or fly's or ticks either. I do not find that as a relevant position. So the question remains unanswered.

I'm sure we will find out what happened to them. Currently, however, it seems reasonable that the majority having been destroyed through the Flood is ample explanation to me, and the ability for them to have replenished their numbers in a world that had been destroyed can also lend considerable understanding as to why they did not become as plentiful as they had been before the flood.

#5. Brother......I know you want to believe such stories, however, there is NO record anywhere of dinos being seen, or observed anywhere. So the question remains unanswered.

Like I said, anyone can discount another's eyewitness accounts, or we can accept the missionaries as having told the truth. I personally can't figure out what they would have to gain by lying. If they are brothers in the Lord, then I would lean on the side of believing them until proven otherwise. Granted, they didn't all go out and write volumes of books on the subject, and even if they had, there would still be pragmatic doubters, so this too ranks right up there with the insatiable desire evolutionists have in defending their timeline demands for long ages...people who believe in the Geologic Column that still to this day has never been observed anywhere in the fossil records on this earth.

#6. That answer is called "rationalization". The question remains unanswered.

The questions asked are not about the authority of the Scriptures. You are missing the point. When someone askes............
"I would like to believe and accept Jesus but I have a problem believing that those dinos lived along with Adam and Eve when the same Bible you use to tell me about Jesus does not say that".

Can you give me an understandable answer?????

Are you saying that those college students have said that they are basing their acceptance of Christ on the foundation of dinos having existed with Adam and the Patriarchs?

This may classify as a rationalization to others here, but it does remain a fact that the enemy of our souls has much to gain in casting doubts upon any belief in the voracity of scripture, regardless of the topic...including any in acceptance for what is stated about the six day creation story, all because of secular, atheistic disbelief in God and an intelligent Designer behind creation.

The long agers have yet to explain how the chemistry ever formed any functional, organic cell, and yet those people are believed far too much in their doubts and criticisms. Dr. James Tours has an entire series on this topic. Yes, you do agree that God directed things as they are today, but this really is more of a compromised middle ground between the creation week, and outright evolution from an atheistic bent.

So, if anyone is to believe in dinosaurs having existed millions of years begore Adam, then they are a long ager who stands on the ambiguous middle ground between atheistic evolution, and a literal six days of creation. This is the playground of cosmologists like Dr. Hugh Ross. I get a kick out of him trying to play the part of a biology expert, which he is NOT.

Thanks for the conversation, Major. It's cool talking about these things.

MM

 

[Major]

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, the absence of human remains at the sites of dino remains seems to only point to the fact that they did not seek dino remains as the burial sites for their human dead. Additionally, humans were able to swim far better than most of the land dwelling dinos, so I'm not capturing what's so remarkable in the separation between the vast majority of humanity from dinos.



Like I also stated, I have personally beheld evidence for the contemporaneous existence of dinos with humans in rock layers that prove the prints were made when those rocks were still mud. Both sets of prints have been proven to be genuine rather than carved into the rock as was claimed by the evolutionists with an axe to grind. I have also personally seen the fossilized remains of Trilobites that a human child had stepped on, preserved in rock layers, and also proven to be genuine. Trilobites were supposed to have been extinct millions of years before humanity allegedly evolved. So, we can assume a magical volume of evidence that we might think should exist, even though a very, very small portion of the earth's surface has been scowered through in order to find even a hundredth of of the likely existent fossils.



Yes, evolutionists only scoffed at the laboratory proofs that counter their claims. The lamination lines in the crystalline mud that became rock under the compressions clearly proved the prints to be legitimate. Although I find it somewhat strange that you would side with atheistic evolutionists and their irrational doubts, but to each his own. I defend your right to believe them.



I'm sure we will find out what happened to them. Currently, however, it seems reasonable that the majority having been destroyed through the Flood is ample explanation to me, and the ability for them to have replenished their numbers in a world that had been destroyed can also lend considerable understanding as to why they did not become as plentiful as they had been before the flood.



Like I said, anyone can discount another's eyewitness accounts, or we can accept the missionaries as having told the truth. I personally can't figure out what they would have to gain by lying. If they are brothers in the Lord, then I would lean on the side of believing them until proven otherwise. Granted, they didn't all go out and write volumes of books on the subject, and even if they had, there would still be pragmatic doubters, so this too ranks right up there with the insatiable desire evolutionists have in defending their timeline demands for long ages...people who believe in the Geologic Column that still to this day has never been observed anywhere in the fossil records on this earth.



Are you saying that those college students have said that they are basing their acceptance of Christ on the foundation of dinos having existed with Adam and the Patriarchs?

This may classify as a rationalization to others here, but it does remain a fact that the enemy of our souls has much to gain in casting doubts upon any belief in the voracity of scripture, regardless of the topic...including any in acceptance for what is stated about the six day creation story, all because of secular, atheistic disbelief in God and an intelligent Designer behind creation.

The long agers have yet to explain how the chemistry ever formed any functional, organic cell, and yet those people are believed far too much in their doubts and criticisms. Dr. James Tours has an entire series on this topic. Yes, you do agree that God directed things as they are today, but this really is more of a compromised middle ground between the creation week, and outright evolution from an atheistic bent.

So, if anyone is to believe in dinosaurs having existed millions of years begore Adam, then they are a long ager who stands on the ambiguous middle ground between atheistic evolution, and a literal six days of creation. This is the playground of cosmologists like Dr. Hugh Ross. I get a kick out of him trying to play the part of a biology expert, which he is NOT.

Thanks for the conversation, Major. It's cool talking about these things.

MM

#1. No. I am not saying that they were not sought out.....I am saying that there were none found when the dinosauer bones were found.

#2. Those prints have been proven beyond a doubt to be a small dinosaur print. There were some found in Montana but have now been proven to be faked by someone.

#3. Now I have never said I believed any theistic evolutionary positions. I am simply stating what is found out and asked by many.

#4. No. I did not say that. I am saying that it is virtually impossible to ask people to believe and accept the gospel if we can not prove how Dinosaur bones could have lived only 6000 years ago with absolutely NO Bible support. You see, they are both belief by faith but if one is in question by observable facts, it questions the other one.

All I am saying is......the answer that fossilized dinosaurs bones are more than 6000 years old and they could not have lived along side of Adam and Eve.

What I am saying is that Genesis chapter one is not written as a comprehensive scientific document. In fact, it is a theological statement intended to explain God to his people.

I would also say that to summarize Genesis chapter one extremely briefly:
1. God created the universe.
2. God created the earth and the heavenly objects, the sea, and dry land.
3. God then created life in the sea, the land and the air.
4. Last of all God created people.

Now this description leaves out a massive amount of detail for obvious reasons, but it is generally concordant with what we know from science. Creatures such as bacteria, trilobytes, dinosaurs and so forth which the Jews had no experience whatsoever of, are not mentioned, both because they did not have vocabulary for these things and because it would have been confusing to unnecessarily mention creatures which they did not even know about. Look at what the topic has caused in the last few years of Christianity!!!!

So, the Bible does not help us at all with the question of when the dinosaurs lived, for obvious reasons, but scientific data tells us that they lived 240-65 million years ago. We
Genesis chapter one is not written as a comprehensive scientific document. In fact, it is a theological statement intended to explain God to his people. To summarize Genesis chapter one extremely briefly: God created the universe. God created the earth and the heavenly objects, the sea, and dry land. God then created life in the sea, the land and the air. Last of all God created people. This description leaves out a massive amount of detail for obvious reasons, but it is generally concordant with what we know from science. Creatures such as bacteria, trilobytes, dinosaurs and so forth which the Jews had no experience whatsoever of are not mentioned, both because they did not have vocabulary for these things and because it would have been confusing to unnecessarily mention creatures which they did not even know about.

So, the Bible does not help us at all with the question of when the dinosaurs lived, for obvious reasons, but scientific data tells us that they lived 240-65 million years ago.

Genesis chapter one is not written as a comprehensive scientific document. In fact, it is a theological statement intended to explain God to his people. To summarize Genesis chapter one extremely briefly: God created the universe. God created the earth and the heavenly objects, the sea, and dry land. God then created life in the sea, the land and the air. Last of all God created people. This description leaves out a massive amount of detail for obvious reasons, but it is generally concordant with what we know from science. Creatures such as bacteria, trilobytes, dinosaurs and so forth which the Jews had no experience whatsoever of are not mentioned, both because they did not have vocabulary for these things and because it would have been confusing to unnecessarily mention creatures which they did not even know about.

So, the Bible does not help us at all with the question of when the dinosaurs lived, for obvious reasons, but scientific data tells us that they lived 240-65 million years ago.

I can tell you with total observational experience that when someone is told......"accept by faith that dinos lived with Adam or reject it"!
They 100% reject it.

 

[Musicmaster]

#1. No. I am not saying that they were not sought out.....I am saying that there were none found when the dinosauer bones were found.

There have been human remains among the same layers of rocks as dinosaurs, but I don't have the article references at my fingertips at the moment. Generally, it will be a human finger bone, or a femur, or some other part of human anatomy.

#2. Those prints have been proven beyond a doubt to be a small dinosaur print. There were some found in Montana but have now been proven to be faked by someone.

Ah, I see. We're talking about two different regions. I was referring to Glenn Rose, TX. I didn't see the artifacts from Montana. The dino tracks in Texas were authenticated by the same lab that also authenticated the human footprints. Even then, the evolutionists still demand they are fakes, and have been proven fakes in spite of the micro-photogrammetry and spectral analysis that showed the clear lamination lines in the hardened silt.

Do you see what I'm saying here? I will repeat this again...evolutionists simply refuse to accept anything that goes against their narrative. The Big Bang has now been disproven by the JWTS, and evolutionists to this day still refuse to accept that from the cosmologists who say otherwise. It's all about group-think, not evidence.

So I'm wondering why you want to believe evolutionists so completely, if you don't mind my asking?

#4. No. I did not say that. I am saying that it is virtually impossible to ask people to believe and accept the gospel if we can not prove how Dinosaur bones could have lived only 6000 years ago with absolutely NO Bible support. You see, they are both belief by faith but if one is in question by observable facts, it questions the other one.

It can just as legitimately be asked how anyone could blindly believe that it allegedly takes millions of years to fossilize bones when that has never been proven by any lab, anywhere. You see, it can go both ways, so if we err on the side of the unknown for now, any remaining crisis rests only in the minds of the pragmatically indifferent mindset that many students tend to rely upon when encountering the unknown. Them demanding answers where there are no clear-cut answers that can be lobbed high enough to get over the bar of their acceptance that they tend to set so high that no amount of evidence will suffice.

Have you ever given to them Romans 1? The evidence is all around them, and if that's not enough when faced with what cannot be proven to their satisfaction, one must be willing to walk away, just as Jesus did to so many.

What I am saying is that Genesis chapter one is not written as a comprehensive scientific document. In fact, it is a theological statement intended to explain God to his people.

Personally, I've never laid down upon the scriptures any requirement for the ancient texts to be so intensely scientific. In reality, the Bible, in its simplicity, is more scientific than our greatest scientists can possibly imagine. These people who have all those letters attached to their names, yammering about "dark matter" and such, they have no clue that they have in fact bumped up against the very staying power of Christ. The scriptures make this abundantly clear in its simplicity. Were you aware of that?

Now this description leaves out a massive amount of detail for obvious reasons, but it is generally concordant with what we know from science.

Unfortunately, there is also pseudo science sprinkled throughout as well.

Creatures such as bacteria, trilobytes, dinosaurs and so forth which the Jews had no experience whatsoever of, are not mentioned, both because they did not have vocabulary for these things and because it would have been confusing to unnecessarily mention creatures which they did not even know about. Look at what the topic has caused in the last few years of Christianity!!!!

Arguments from silence are not always credible arguments...

I don't buy the millions of years stuff. They have never proven that because they have never observed it, reproduced it in a lab, and have certainly lever applied scientific methods in order to prove that theory. How can they? They don't have a time machine, so they are left with their petty theories, teaching them as if they were scientific fact.

So, when it comes down to it, you and I both are left with a whole bunch of stuff we can't prove through scientific means regardless of how many of those people with letters attached to their name put sparkles in the eyes of their gullible students who don't know any better because they are no longer trained to think critically.

So, the Bible does not help us at all with the question of when the dinosaurs lived, for obvious reasons, but scientific data tells us that they lived 240-65 million years ago.

Actually, it helps us far better than what many realize.

I can tell you with total observational experience that when someone is told......"accept by faith that dinos lived with Adam or reject it"!
They 100% reject it.

Not me. If I say that, it simply means that this is a peripheral issue rather than central to the faith. If that's not good enough for some college kids, then they weren't going to come over to the side of Christ to begin with; in that Holy Spirit has not yet prepared their hearts to receive Christ through the haze of their preconceived notions about creation. None of us will ever win all the students. Most will perish by their own choices.

Jesus operated much like Amway did...some will, some won't; next?

MM

 

[Major]

There have been human remains among the same layers of rocks as dinosaurs, but I don't have the article references at my fingertips at the moment. Generally, it will be a human finger bone, or a femur, or some other part of human anatomy.



Ah, I see. We're talking about two different regions. I was referring to Glenn Rose, TX. I didn't see the artifacts from Montana. The dino tracks in Texas were authenticated by the same lab that also authenticated the human footprints. Even then, the evolutionists still demand they are fakes, and have been proven fakes in spite of the micro-photogrammetry and spectral analysis that showed the clear lamination lines in the hardened silt.

Do you see what I'm saying here? I will repeat this again...evolutionists simply refuse to accept anything that goes against their narrative. The Big Bang has now been disproven by the JWTS, and evolutionists to this day still refuse to accept that from the cosmologists who say otherwise. It's all about group-think, not evidence.

So I'm wondering why you want to believe evolutionists so completely, if you don't mind my asking?



It can just as legitimately be asked how anyone could blindly believe that it allegedly takes millions of years to fossilize bones when that has never been proven by any lab, anywhere. You see, it can go both ways, so if we err on the side of the unknown for now, any remaining crisis rests only in the minds of the pragmatically indifferent mindset that many students tend to rely upon when encountering the unknown. Them demanding answers where there are no clear-cut answers that can be lobbed high enough to get over the bar of their acceptance that they tend to set so high that no amount of evidence will suffice.

Have you ever given to them Romans 1? The evidence is all around them, and if that's not enough when faced with what cannot be proven to their satisfaction, one must be willing to walk away, just as Jesus did to so many.



Personally, I've never laid down upon the scriptures any requirement for the ancient texts to be so intensely scientific. In reality, the Bible, in its simplicity, is more scientific than our greatest scientists can possibly imagine. These people who have all those letters attached to their names, yammering about "dark matter" and such, they have no clue that they have in fact bumped up against the very staying power of Christ. The scriptures make this abundantly clear in its simplicity. Were you aware of that?



Unfortunately, there is also pseudo science sprinkled throughout as well.



Arguments from silence are not always credible arguments...

I don't buy the millions of years stuff. They have never proven that because they have never observed it, reproduced it in a lab, and have certainly lever applied scientific methods in order to prove that theory. How can they? They don't have a time machine, so they are left with their petty theories, teaching them as if they were scientific fact.

So, when it comes down to it, you and I both are left with a whole bunch of stuff we can't prove through scientific means regardless of how many of those people with letters attached to their name put sparkles in the eyes of their gullible students who don't know any better because they are no longer trained to think critically.



Actually, it helps us far better than what many realize.



Not me. If I say that, it simply means that this is a peripheral issue rather than central to the faith. If that's not good enough for some college kids, then they weren't going to come over to the side of Christ to begin with; in that Holy Spirit has not yet prepared their hearts to receive Christ through the haze of their preconceived notions about creation. None of us will ever win all the students. Most will perish by their own choices.

Jesus operated much like Amway did...some will, some won't; next?

MM

We have to shorten these responces!!!!!!

#1. I know you need to believe that human bones have been found amomg Dino bones. However, a Fact Check at.........
https://checkyourfact.com/2023/09/29/fact-check-human-skeletons-36-feet/......says.
Verdict: False
This claim is baseless. There are no credible news reports to suggest that human remains of these extraordinary heights have been found.

#2. That is just not the case brother.
"The tracks in question were more likely poorly formed dinosaur tracks, random erosion marks, or deliberate alterations to the original tracks."
Source: https://www.icr.org/article/paluxy-river-tale-trails

#3. Again, I am not believing........I am asking!!!! As I have said, I do not accept evolution.

Jere. 4:23-26........
"I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger."

Do you believe that Genesis 2 and Jeremiah 4:23-27 refer to the creation of our present earth or our present human race ?

Why were the mountains trembling (earthquakes)?
What cities is Jeremiah referencing?
And, why were they broken down or destroyed?
Where did man go?
Why did the birds flee?
Why was the Lord angry?

 

[Musicmaster]

We have to shorten these responces!!!!!!

#1. I know you need to believe that human bones have been found amomg Dino bones. However, a Fact Check at.........
https://checkyourfact.com/2023/09/29/fact-check-human-skeletons-36-feet/......says.
Verdict: False
This claim is baseless. There are no credible news reports to suggest that human remains of these extraordinary heights have been found.

Fact check sites have long since been seen to possess massive amounts of bias of their own, so I don't buy that.

#2. That is just not the case brother.
"The tracks in question were more likely poorly formed dinosaur tracks, random erosion marks, or deliberate alterations to the original tracks."
Source: https://www.icr.org/article/paluxy-river-tale-trails

Random erosion marks? That's like walking along the beach and seeing "BillyBob Loves BillySue" written in the sand, and claiming that the wording was the result of random wave action! Come on! Really?

Major, please keep in mind at least this one question: How can anyone carve stone, and in the process create pressure lamination lines in the solidified silt beneath the print, implanted in what is now solid stone? The lamination lines are too evident, and nobody has the skill to have created such features down through solid rock. If those biased evolutionists who wrote that stuff can explain the process for forcing laminations lines in solid rock thousands of years after they were made and the silt solidified into rock, then I would definitely cast that into my box of doubts against those prints.

I've seen them myself, and have seen the microscopic and spectroscopic scans that betray features that could not have been carved into solid stone as seen by a cross-cut through solid rock. I simply don't buy into the evolutionary bias against evidence I've seen for myself.

Look at the the Smithsonian museum in NY. They took a small amount of skull fragments, reconstructed the other 95% of the skull purely from their imaginations, intentionally incorporating ape-like features, pulled purely from parts of the anatomy best not talked about. Now, maybe others don't see a severe, pseudoscientific bias there, but it's quite evident to me when I see such disregard for any scientific methodology in their personal creations.

Brother, these websites claiming otherwise on the basis of their own nonsensical bias under the guise of "fact checking" are beneath contempt when they fail to address ALL the observations made that provide for a well-rounded examination that lists all the defining features. That would be akin to those sites calling into doubt YOUR own eye witness of a murder to which you testify in court, under oath, and they claim you're a dabbler in perjury on the basis of a manic love for lying because you once lied about drinking the last of the Cool-Aid your mom asked you about when you were five. Unrelated, undefining...in other words, you are not defined by your past sins, which is true of us all.

Keeping posts like this small simply doesn't allow for a holistic overview of the topic. It leaves holes too easy for pot shots to be taken by others.

#3. Again, I am not believing........I am asking!!!! As I have said, I do not accept evolution.

And yet you stand firmly on the side of evolutionary-based doubts for evidences that are contrary to that system of bias. I hear what your saying in that you don't believe their narratives for human evolution, but when you stand within the other 98% of the realm of their beliefs, that's close enough to being far enough into their oven that you still get burned by their other 2% that you say is not defining of your beliefs.

Please don't mistake my words in the sense that I'm saying that there's guilt on your part on the basis of proximity, but I do question your lending to them any measure of credible belief in that their claim of long ages is absolutely legitimate.

Do you believe that Genesis 2 and Jeremiah 4:23-27 refer to the creation of our present earth or our present human race ?

Context:

Jeremiah 4:23-27
23 I beheld the earth, and indeed [it was] without form, and void; And the heavens, they [had] no light. [All past tense.]
24 I beheld the mountains, and indeed they trembled, And all the hills moved back and forth.
25 I beheld, and indeed [there was] no man, And all the birds of the heavens had fled.
26 I beheld, and indeed the fruitful land [was] a wilderness, And all its cities were broken down At the presence of the LORD, By His fierce anger.
27 For thus says the LORD: "The whole land shall be desolate; Yet I will not make a full end.

See that? There's a seeming contradiction in the above verses you cited, and yet there is also a seeming continuity in that there's no mention of long ages of millions of years between the forming of the earth and the existence of cities.

What cities is Jeremiah referencing?

I'm not sure I understand why it matters. It appears that there is a panoramic view being described. As to mountains trembling, what are you wanting to see in that?

And, why were they broken down or destroyed?
Where did man go?
Why did the birds flee?
Why was the Lord angry?

I have not ever looked deeply into the allegoric, realistic, and prophetic aspects of that section of scripture, so I cannot immediately answer your questions about it at this time. But I do wonder, what exactly is your point?

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Upon further study, this is what became apparent to me of this section in Jeremiah:

What I'm seeing is that Jeremiah brought forth language that is more akin to poetic imagery when describing the horrors that would come upon Judah in the Babylonian invasion that is clearly identified in the more expansive context. What eventually came upon Judah was brought to bear against Jesus, given that He was crucified and judged as our substitute. That section drips of the richness of prophesy rather than rehashing the creation week. It speaks of His wrath in the face of disobedience and disregard against the Lord because of their pride in self.

So, brother, I don't see your conjuring up of that section of Jeremiah as being at all congruent with the topic at hand. It's apples to oranges.

MM

 

[Major]

Fact check sites have long since been seen to possess massive amounts of bias of their own, so I don't buy that.



Random erosion marks? That's like walking along the beach and seeing "BillyBob Loves BillySue" written in the sand, and claiming that the wording was the result of random wave action! Come on! Really?

Major, please keep in mind at least this one question: How can anyone carve stone, and in the process create pressure lamination lines in the solidified silt beneath the print, implanted in what is now solid stone? The lamination lines are too evident, and nobody has the skill to have created such features down through solid rock. If those biased evolutionists who wrote that stuff can explain the process for forcing laminations lines in solid rock thousands of years after they were made and the silt solidified into rock, then I would definitely cast that into my box of doubts against those prints.

I've seen them myself, and have seen the microscopic and spectroscopic scans that betray features that could not have been carved into solid stone as seen by a cross-cut through solid rock. I simply don't buy into the evolutionary bias against evidence I've seen for myself.

Look at the the Smithsonian museum in NY. They took a small amount of skull fragments, reconstructed the other 95% of the skull purely from their imaginations, intentionally incorporating ape-like features, pulled purely from parts of the anatomy best not talked about. Now, maybe others don't see a severe, pseudoscientific bias there, but it's quite evident to me when I see such disregard for any scientific methodology in their personal creations.

Brother, these websites claiming otherwise on the basis of their own nonsensical bias under the guise of "fact checking" are beneath contempt when they fail to address ALL the observations made that provide for a well-rounded examination that lists all the defining features. That would be akin to those sites calling into doubt YOUR own eye witness of a murder to which you testify in court, under oath, and they claim you're a dabbler in perjury on the basis of a manic love for lying because you once lied about drinking the last of the Cool-Aid your mom asked you about when you were five. Unrelated, undefining...in other words, you are not defined by your past sins, which is true of us all.

Keeping posts like this small simply doesn't allow for a holistic overview of the topic. It leaves holes too easy for pot shots to be taken by others.



And yet you stand firmly on the side of evolutionary-based doubts for evidences that are contrary to that system of bias. I hear what your saying in that you don't believe their narratives for human evolution, but when you stand within the other 98% of the realm of their beliefs, that's close enough to being far enough into their oven that you still get burned by their other 2% that you say is not defining of your beliefs.

Please don't mistake my words in the sense that I'm saying that there's guilt on your part on the basis of proximity, but I do question your lending to them any measure of credible belief in that their claim of long ages is absolutely legitimate.



Context:

Jeremiah 4:23-27
23 I beheld the earth, and indeed [it was] without form, and void; And the heavens, they [had] no light. [All past tense.]
24 I beheld the mountains, and indeed they trembled, And all the hills moved back and forth.
25 I beheld, and indeed [there was] no man, And all the birds of the heavens had fled.
26 I beheld, and indeed the fruitful land [was] a wilderness, And all its cities were broken down At the presence of the LORD, By His fierce anger.
27 For thus says the LORD: "The whole land shall be desolate; Yet I will not make a full end.

See that? There's a seeming contradiction in the above verses you cited, and yet there is also a seeming continuity in that there's no mention of long ages of millions of years between the forming of the earth and the existence of cities.




I'm not sure I understand why it matters. It appears that there is a panoramic view being described. As to mountains trembling, what are you wanting to see in that?



I have not ever looked deeply into the allegoric, realistic, and prophetic aspects of that section of scripture, so I cannot immediately answer your questions about it at this time. But I do wonder, what exactly is your point?

MM

You said.......
"Please don't mistake my words in the sense that I'm saying that there's guilt on your part on the basis of proximity, but I do question your lending to them any measure of credible belief in that their claim of long ages is absolutely legitimate."

I have NO guilt!

I just do not accept the idea that the earth is only 6000 years old. I also do not subscribe to the claim that believing in a universe that is anything more than a few thousand years old is a threat to the entire faith system.

I suppose it goes like this: The Bible dates the earth at 6000 years = if you can’t trust the Bible on that one point, you can’t trust any of it = all Christian faith hinges on a young earth.

There’s only one, massive, glaring problem with that: The Bible doesn’t date the creation of the Universe.

Dating the age of the universe isn’t a question the Bible deals with. It wasn’t even on the radar of the people who wrote it.

The Bible does give detailed genealogies of the ancestors of Jesus, which include how long an individual was reported to have lived. When you add up the life spans of all those listed in the biblical genealogies, add 2,000 years since Christ, you get somewhere around 6,000 or so. And that is the entire argument of young-earth creationism.!!!

 

[Major]

Upon further study, this is what became apparent to me of this section in Jeremiah:

What I'm seeing is that Jeremiah brought forth language that is more akin to poetic imagery when describing the horrors that would come upon Judah in the Babylonian invasion that is clearly identified in the more expansive context. What eventually came upon Judah was brought to bear against Jesus, given that He was crucified and judged as our substitute. That section drips of the richness of prophesy rather than rehashing the creation week. It speaks of His wrath in the face of disobedience and disregard against the Lord because of their pride in self.

So, brother, I don't see your conjuring up of that section of Jeremiah as being at all congruent with the topic at hand. It's apples to oranges.

MM

There are a few things to consider here .........Lets assume that the earth is as you say, 6000 years old. Here are some things that do not work.....
1. Plate Techtonics do not apply. Therefore seismology is based on the wrong premise.
2. The speed of light can not be a constant.
3. Paleontology is a fraud and does not even exist.
4. General relativity does not work.
5. Quantum Mechanics does not apply and has to be rethought.
6. Astronomy has to be completely re-thought and re-applied.
7. If General Relativity does not apply, then GPS systems will not work.
8. If Quantum mechanics does not apply, then computers and electronics can not operate.
9. If Paleontology is incorrect and a fraud, then then biology is based on a wrong premise and modern medicine cannot be working.

 

[crossnote]

There are a few things to consider here .........Lets assume that the earth is as you say, 6000 years old. Here are some things that do not work.....
1. Plate Techtonics do not apply. Therefore seismology is based on the wrong premise.
2. The speed of light can not be a constant.
3. Paleontology is a fraud and does not even exist.
4. General relativity does not work.
5. Quantum Mechanics does not apply and has to be rethought.
6. Astronomy has to be completely re-thought and re-applied.
7. If General Relativity does not apply, then GPS systems will not work.
8. If Quantum mechanics does not apply, then computers and electronics can not operate.
9. If Paleontology is incorrect and a fraud, then then biology is based on a wrong premise and modern medicine cannot be working.

Am I hearing you correctly, that our knowledge of the events of creation are dependent on the creation itself, rather the Word of the Creator? Or do the findings of man trump God's Word? Or?

Hebrews 11:3 NKJV
By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

 

[Musicmaster]

You said.......
"Please don't mistake my words in the sense that I'm saying that there's guilt on your part on the basis of proximity, but I do question your lending to them any measure of credible belief in that their claim of long ages is absolutely legitimate."

I have NO guilt!

I just do not accept the idea that the earth is only 6000 years old. I also do not subscribe to the claim that believing in a universe that is anything more than a few thousand years old is a threat to the entire faith system.

Well, actually, I don't know that it's 6000 years old either. We don't know how long they were in the garden, so it could be 8000, or some such. I don't rightfully know of an exact number.

I suppose it goes like this: The Bible dates the earth at 6000 years = if you can’t trust the Bible on that one point, you can’t trust any of it = all Christian faith hinges on a young earth.

I've seen the debates over the result for non-acceptance of the 6000 years thingy, but I'm not necessarily of that mindset.

There’s only one, massive, glaring problem with that: The Bible doesn’t date the creation of the Universe.

It is fascinating, however, that the year designation date the Jews understood, even back in the time of Christ, as their timeline from creation, is something Jesus never, at any time, berated them for believing. So, if you're going open the can of worms of an appeal to silence like that, as a basis for defending what you believe, then Jesus' not addressing such an alleged falsehood becomes a glaring dichotomy you will have to try and overcome.

Got milk?

Dating the age of the universe isn’t a question the Bible deals with. It wasn’t even on the radar of the people who wrote it.

The Bible does give detailed genealogies of the ancestors of Jesus, which include how long an individual was reported to have lived. When you add up the life spans of all those listed in the biblical genealogies, add 2,000 years since Christ, you get somewhere around 6,000 or so. And that is the entire argument of young-earth creationism.!!!

That's not at all the entire argument, but I'm content with discussing the items you and I have found of interest to us.

MM

 

[Major]

Am I hearing you correctly, that our knowledge of the events of creation are dependent on the creation itself, rather the Word of the Creator? Or do the findings of man trump God's Word? Or?

Hebrews 11:3 NKJV
By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

My dear brother, I am not saying anything to contradict the Word of God! I have said nothing to even challenge that. Nothing I have said has anything to do with creation being dependant on what we know about creation.

It is being said the dinosaurs lived along side of Adam and Eve since the earth is only 6000 years old. The Bible does not say one single word about dinosaurs! My 1st question in this topic was......"Then where did all of those bones come from".

The answer given was that they were dinosaur bones and they lived along side of Adam and Eve and were in fact on the Ark.

I said, and am saying, there is not one single Scripture to validate that and I am a literalist!!!
I Simply stated, The Bible doesn’t date the creation of the Universe.

I have NO desire to be argumenitive in any way but it seems to me that we all have the same right and ability to share our thoughts without our faith of God or the Scriptures being questioned.

 

[Musicmaster]

There are a few things to consider here .........Lets assume that the earth is as you say, 6000 years old. Here are some things that do not work.....
1. Plate Techtonics do not apply. Therefore seismology is based on the wrong premise.

If we are to assume all the continents were one, then perhaps, but I'm not a stickler on that point either way.

2. The speed of light can not be a constant.

I've been observing this debate among physicists in the discipline of cosmology, and it is an interesting thing to watch them all struggle with that.

3. Paleontology is a fraud and does not even exist.

The university where I attended had an entire department dedicated to the adult fairy tales of Paleontology. They love to think that their field is absolute in all its observations and assumptions about cultures they have never observed personally.

4. General relativity does not work.

That too is beginning to crumble down around the ears of mathematicians, cosmologists and other fields of study. Looks like Frankenstein...Einstein or whatever his name was, is flipping over in his grave!

5. Quantum Mechanics does not apply and has to be rethought.

Of course. Quantum means that it's purely theory since they have no way of studying up close and personal the things too small to see, and things too far removed from their ability to measure and comprehend, such as the power of Christ utilized in all things consisting by Him.

6. Astronomy has to be completely re-thought and re-applied.

It was actually astronomers who shattered the Big Bang, Hog Bong, or whatever one may want to call it, theory, and are now criticized for daring to gainsay that theory on the basis of actual observations of the most distant galaxies the new telescope in space is now seeing.

7. If General Relativity does not apply, then GPS systems will not work.

GR only has some elements that are consistent with observed reality.

8. If Quantum mechanics does not apply, then computers and electronics can not operate.

Actually, no. Quantum mechanics, as I stated, relies heavily on mathematical models that they believe is the absolute basis upon which to rest their case for describing such things as what they erroneously call "dark matter." That just another adult fairy tail under the guise of quantum mechanics and force theories that they like to THINK that they understand.

This is an area where the Bible is FAR more scientific than what most people credit it for being.

9. If Paleontology is incorrect and a fraud, then then biology is based on a wrong premise and modern medicine cannot be working.

Um, no. Modern biology has for many years been laying claim to many things that are clearly pseudo scientific, and downright fraudulent. There are biologists out there who think that they are qualified to study Origins of Life, and they are woefully inept and downright liars for pretending that they know things that they absolutely do not and cannot know!

MM

 

[Major]

Well, actually, I don't know that it's 6000 years old either. We don't know how long they were in the garden, so it could be 8000, or some such. I don't rightfully know of an exact number.



I've seen the debates over the result for non-acceptance of the 6000 years thingy, but I'm not necessarily of that mindset.



It is fascinating, however, that the year designation date the Jews understood, even back in the time of Christ, as their timeline from creation, is something Jesus never, at any time, berated them for believing. So, if you're going open the can of worms of an appeal to silence like that, as a basis for defending what you believe, then Jesus' not addressing such an alleged falsehood becomes a glaring dichotomy you will have to try and overcome.

Got milk?



That's not at all the entire argument, but I'm content with discussing the items you and I have found of interest to us.

MM

A couple of things to note.

1. The Bible, no where speaks of dinosauers.

2. Above and beyound what ever we say, there’s one, massive, fact-- The Bible doesn’t date the creation of the Universe.

 

[Musicmaster]

A couple of things to note.

1. The Bible, no where speaks of dinosauers.

The Bible also doesn't speak of "rapture," but that is understood to be a reality at some point in all of time that is still under debate by most, and is not a topic of debate here.

2. Above and beyound what ever we say, there’s one, massive, fact-- The Bible doesn’t date the creation of the Universe.

You avoided my calling you, a brother I love, onto the carpet for your use of this fallacy in your reasoning, but that's ok. I wasn't expecting that you would change your mind upon consideration. We all are empirical (stiff necked) on some things in our belief systems. When it comes to being hard-headed, they could use my head to break up the concrete the entire length of any highway...

MM