/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/

>>832950

Ok, first things first, fossil fuel is vastly composed of plant matter.

>I know it shouldn't bug me as much as it does but it's something I just can't shake.

I understand. While we surely can't find an explanation for every little thing, there should be space for explaining this. Fortunately we find there is plenty of room to explain these remains if we avoid manmade explanations of the Biblical account of creation. Of course, there is no Biblical doctrine to explain all these things directly and your ability to explain them is of no consequent, I'm simply arguing there is room for it to have happened without retreating into a fetal position of reactive denial against these findings, generally speaking.

Here is how I understand scripture to accord literally with the geology and cosmology. There was a literal six days of creation starting at Genesis 1:2, but in the time window between the first two verses you have an undefined amount of time. There is no reason to think a previous world could not have existed after God created the heaven and the earth in Genesis 1:1, but before the earth became without form and void in Genesis 1:2, and in fact I find two primary reasons to think that it did, although the details are admittedly obscure and little talked about.

In Isaiah 45:18, it says

>For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

Notice where I underlined it says that he created it not in vain. The underlying word here is the exact same word used to describe the state of the earth in Genesis 1:2, "without form and void." The grammar of these first two verses leaves the possibility that the earth was created perfect, experienced a judgement and was completely flooded with water where we find it a lifeless ruin in Genesis 1:2. This is supported by Isaiah 45:18 because it says God created the earth not in vain. He didn't create it that way, it must have only become that way later due to some judgement that was passed on it where all life was destroyed.

Supporting this first point is the scripture in the Revelation 21:5 which also says "And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new." This echoes what Isaiah 45:18 says, something God had just created wouldn't immediately be without form and void.

The second support to this is in 2 Peter 3:5-7, which says

>For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

>6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

>7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Some think this is referring to Noah's flood, but is it really? It describes the whole world perishing. No mention of eight people and a bunch of animals surviving. It even says that the heavens afterward were created, suggesting that this judgement on the earth even destroyed the old atmosphere and it had to be created again during the six days.

"The heaven" or "firmament" that is mentioned in Genesis 1 is the same thing as the atmosphere. Surely nothing would survive if the atmosphere were destroyed and the whole earth were flooded. And that's how we find a possibility of explaining the remains that we find today. If someone brings up Exodus 20:11, recall what Nehemiah 9:6 says. It describes more things than included in Exodus 20:11 and it does not mention six days.

I think people who try to use flood geology, or especially day-age theories, are trying to stretch the words in the Bible beyond their reasonable meaning to explain their popular theories, but neither one fits Scripture. But I try not to make a big deal out of this unless someone brings up the subject first, because it isn't immediate to the Gospel.

>>832950

Judging by their deposition environments, it can be surmised that dinosaurs preferred tropic and subtropic conditions. The animals would have immediately started making their way south from Mt. Ararat, escaping to tropical climes that don't really allow preservation of animal matter due to the humidity and heat. Whichever ones didn't get wiped out in the ensuing ice age would have been hunted to extinction like other megafaunas ted to be once people show up.

>>832953

>Some think this is referring to Noah's flood, but is it really?

Yes. Gap theory is terrible.

Ezekiel 28:15 emphasizes that Lucifer is a created being, and in Genesis 1:31 claims

“Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good.”

So at the point of Genesis 1:31, Lucifer *cannot* be said to have fallen.

There was no Luciferian Flood; this interpretation arises from the change of the meaning of the word "replenish" in the English language in the time since the KJV was published. It is also worth noting that the word translated as "replenish" in the KJV as "fill" in earlier translations that don't use the Masoretic text.

>>832953

>I think people who try to use flood geology, or especially day-age theories, are trying to stretch the words in the Bible beyond their reasonable meaning to explain their popular theories, but neither one fits Scripture. But I try not to make a big deal out of this unless someone brings up the subject first, because it isn't immediate to the Gospel.

Gap theorists just straight-up ignore scripture to support their Luciferian fanfiction.

Attributing the fossil layers to Lucifer’s Fall creates another problem. The fossil record is filled with signs of disease, thorns, and death, including cancer in some dinosaur fossils. Yet God claimed that the world before Adam’s sin was “very good”, and explicitly states that death only later entered the world *after* the creation of Man.

Gap theory is a compromise of the truth of Genesis, which arose when Christian leaders tried to accommodate the millions of years claimed for fossil layers. The gap theory not only compromises the Bible but also fails to satisfy secular geologists, who no more accept a Luciferian Flood than the global Flood of Noah’s day.

Proverbs 30:6 warns, “Do not add to his words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.” The gap theory was created when Protestants tried to squeeze their ideas into the Bible.

>>832950

Where do dolphins born with vestigial hooves fit in to it. I saw a jewtube video one day reliable source I know that showed a photo of a dolphin with a vestigial hoof or foot. I'm not sure what to think about that

I know some interpretations of genesis permit evolution, but I'm interest to here the perspective of someone who doesn't believe in evolution regarding dolphin feet. Was the photo fake? If so can you prove it or at least provide a solid argument for why it would be.

>>832961

>>832962

Here's the problem with your response, it doesn't address a single thing raised in my post. Please point out where I said anything about Lucifer? Forget that. You're responding to a complete straw man and attributing false motives to me such as wanting to please secular geologists. Tell me where I said this. Otherwise you are being uncharitable and a false accuser as I know perfectly well secular geologists insist on their false theories. Maybe you are the one who wants to please them by giving false theory?

I never said a single thing about Lucifer and it's completely besides the point. I also never said a single thing about the word replenish. It is completely besides my point. Try responding to my actual argument please. Otherwise please go away. You are the one who is compromising the Bible. And your failure to make a single relevant point helps to support my point that you have no response. Please try actually reading my post maybe?

>>832962

>Yet God claimed that the world before Adam’s sin was “very good”, and explicitly states that death only later entered the world *after* the creation of Man.

And with regards to this one sentence, of course the world was very good because it had just been constructed and death had not entered into it yet. Remember where God said "behold, I make all things new". When the new earth is created in the end times, it will also be accurate to say death never entered into it either. You would agree, unless you deny that perhaps.

I'm not really interested in hearing the regurgitated theories of Henry Morris that he got from SDA leader George M. Price regarding flood geology. What you're preaching here isn't from the Bible. It's apologism for flood geology taken from George Price and Ellen G. White and nowadays spread by Ken Ham. You have not addressed Isaiah 45:18 or 2 Peter 3:5-7 which says that the atmosphere was destroyed.

>Gospels dated to the 1st century aren't reliable but the first remnants being recorded from the mid 19th century is somehow scientific

It's mythology invented prior to the discovery of DNA, much like evolution. The fact the world accepts evolution and DNA simultaneously shows their hubris

>>832971

>Here's the problem with your response, it doesn't address a single thing raised in my post.

Yes it does. I fully explain the reasoning behind gap theory, and what’s wrong with it.

>Please point out where I said anything about Lucifer

By believing gap theory. The driving force behind Gap Theory is the belief that the world was NOT very good in Genesis 1:31, because Lucifer had already fallen, necessitating the world being destroyed in Genesis 1:2 (without form and void). Bible it’s believe that the earth was very good in Genesis 1:31 because Lucifer had not yet fallen, and we don’t insert an entire narrative between two verses.

Now get your Scofield Bible POISON out of here.

Biblical literalism is embarrassing, and dangerous because it makes Christianity as a whole look so bad and insane it makes it weaker as a position. I would say creationism is one of the biggest enemies the faith has.

OP, dinosaurs lives millions of years before humans walked out of Africa. You are reducing Genesis to a vulgar story with your nonsensical literalism. Is the Devil behind creationism? I don't know, but I am sure he is enjoying it, even if he didn't start it.

>>832981

Literally nobody in the church thought that way until the liberal movement of the 19th century

I wondered the same thing. The only explanation I could come up with that satisfied me is comparable to setting up a new aquarium. You have to allow the ammonia and nitrate levels to stabilize before adding the fish you want to keep or you'll likely lose a lot of fish. This usually takes weeks. In order to speed the process, some people add goldfish because they are hardy and inexpensive. Once the cycle is complete, the goldfish are disposed of and the tank is ready for your desired fish population. Long story short, dinosaurs were God's goldfish.

>>832983

God can create the world however He wants to, anon. There is no time requirement. The miracle of the six waterpots being turned to wine, the beginning of Jesus' miracles, symbolizes the six day creation.

>>832980

>I fully explain the reasoning behind gap theory, and what’s wrong with it.

No, you just explained Henry Morris' regurgitated apologetics against a viewpoint nobody holds. You didn't answer a single thing I said. You didn't answer Isaiah 45:18. You didn't answer 2 Peter 3:5-7. You simply regurgitated some pasta from another site.

>the belief that the world was NOT very good in Genesis 1:31

You think that? If you think the world was not very good in Genesis 1:31 that means you don't believe every word of Scripture. I don't understand why you are here trying to argue me if you don't even believe every word.

>>832992

I guess it shouldn't surprise me that someone who thinks the received text is false (don't think I missed that little sidecomment in your post) someone who thinks the received word of God is false would also not care about what Isaiah said in Isaiah 45:18, nor would he care what the Levites said in Nehemiah 9:6. He would not care what God says in the book of Revelation 21:5. He also would not care what the Apostle Peter said in 2 Peter chapter 3.

For him, It would all be regurgitating bizarre apologetics that are totally irrelevant to this (because answering Scripture doesn't matter to him) for a viewpoint he knows is not Biblical but promotes it anyway since he doesn't even believe the received text. Just as we see Ben Stein and other subverted cathojudaists who are trying so hard to promote this false dichotomy so that nobody will believe the Bible. It falls apart under the slightest scrutiny.

Easy: God wanted to see the limits of creation, so he created dinosaurs. He made the first life and said, "this is good." He kept using similar blueprints for every animal which is why we have similar DNA. He also made them so we could enjoy them, that's why we find fossils and are amazed at what once lived, like when we see the stars and are amazed.

And they didn't live along side man.

I don't know if hydrocarbons are entirely from dinosaurs because we've found that on other planets.

I think God made animals, dinosaurs, and it all for us to be amazed at His creation and enjoy it with Him.

>>832982

Liar.

>>833019

Prove me wrong

Maybe I’m lucky but I just don’t consider this something worth thinking about. There’s several possible explanations, and just because I don’t know which one is true doesn’t mean I should be worried. It’s possible that God created dinosaurs and then killed them off before creating humans. Just because this isn’t written in the Bible doesn’t exclude it as a possibility. Also, it might be the case that dinosaurs aren’t even real. I wouldn’t put that out of mind. Some say that evolution is real and go with the Old Earth Creation argument, and I won’t say that this isn’t true, but personally I believe in an exact, literal interpretation of Genesis, because it teaches that humans died through sin. If we believe that humans evolved, then that means sin always existed, which contradicts the whole story of Adam and Eve. So until you can come up with a perfect explanation of the meaning of the story, I won’t take you seriously if you say that humans evolved.

>>833022

>Also, it might be the case that dinosaurs aren’t even real.

You'd think that if that were the case, it'd be revealed by now. Mankind has known of the dinosaurs for almost 200 years now.

You'd have to get paleontologists in on the plot. And they aren't exactly paid a whole lot so it's not likely they're in some secret cabal of elites. There was one on Joe Rogan that stated he had to work part time as a bartender to make ends meet.

I'll give you the faked moon landing and 9/11 being an inside job but dinosaurs being faked just seems like too much of a stretch to me.

Thousands of years ago, God explained things in a way that simple minded ignorant people could understand.

Get over it. You can't take the Bible literally as some protestants believe they can.

The Earth is not flat, the earth moves about the sun, and it's 4.5 billion years old.

>>833054

You mentioned evolution earlier. That does not accord with Scripture, which says that death first entered the world because of the Fall in Genesis chapter 3. This is affirmed in the New Testament. You cannot afford to be this ignorant of Scripture.

St. Paul wrote the Corinthians:

For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Romans 5:12 even says:

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned

>>833024

I didn’t say dinosaurs are being faked, only that they might not be real. Maybe the fossil bones are misleading. It doesn’t have to be a conspiracy

>>833054

K modernist

>>833054

>If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

>>833070

>Einstein had to retract his hateful, bigoted and ignorant "Big Bang is Catholic science" lie.

Einstein should be honored to stand with a real scientist.

>>833063

>You mentioned evolution earlier. That does not accord with Scripture,

Sure it does! You just can't understand scripture without the Church, and you're confused.

>>833024

>200 years

See

>>833139

Why can't protestants come up with a single reasonable argument to explain the existence of dinosaurs? Even I could find one if I tried. They literally have to cover their ears and screech "dinos aren't real reee". I guess gravity and all the rest must be a hoax too.

>>832950

God made all things with his goodness and in perfect harmony, but Satan corrupted it by having his false Elohim corrupt creation and brought into regressive bondage with degraded hominids(the Nephilim). God later brought judgement with the flood and limited man's lifespan, but Satan kept bringing even more regression with the Tower of Babel with himself as Enki and Utu; and Enmerkar ordering the false Satanic Elohim(with the false logos of the mes) to bring about more temporal regression into this imperfect postflood timeline. Finally, God just decided to declare judgement on the wicked serpent by making the dinosaurs and other species go extinct and confusing man's tongue and scattering them.

>>833158

>his false Elohim

Gnostic dualism.

>>832950

>I still can't put my fingers on how dinosaurs fit into creation.

Quite easy. One day to God isn't one day to us. In the time period between that of which he made the animals that roam the Earth and the first man, Adam, could have been millions of years to us.

To more or less support this, I think I remember reading somewhere that the translation of the word "day" from the Hebrew could also have been translated to mean "segment of time" instead of the word "day". In other words, the word in the Hebrew that means "day" in this circumstance actually has numerous meanings depending on its context. And that, it's usually just translated to "day" in English for convenience and proper storytelling. Do not quote me on this. My memory might very well be faulty…probably is.

But going back to my original point, look at the theory of evolution. It states that animal life first arose underwater which then migrated to land. This doesn't deviate too far from the Bible as God created fish and fowl first. Then on the next day, he created land animals and then man after that. Evolution could be a way to explain the way in which God created life. We can't say for sure. Evolution itself is just a theory and has never been observed on a macro scale.

As an aside, isn't there some passages in Isaiah or something that denote and mention the existence of large beasts that used to roam the Earth?

Anyways, it's important to note that much of the Bible was never meant to be taken 100% literally as there many parables throughout it. Jesus himself used parables to spread the Word of God. People who take everything literally in the Bible are binary-thinking brainlets that're too autistic to accept that most things aren't black and white as they'd like it to be. 100% literalism is how we get idiots like Ken Ham making himself and all of us look bad.

>>833167

I did not do any sort of spiritual-material gnostic dualism, I'm just extrapolating on Mark 23:30, where Jesus says of the desire of the pharisees to fix/corrupt the past and applying it to the POV of the devil and his angels, and how they wished to twist scripture to their own purposes back in Genesis by bringing all creation, the heavens and the earth into the bondage of decay. The devil sinned in the heavens by rebelling against God, making Adam and Eve wise in their own eyes through the forbidden fruit, and later by co-opting the Holy Trinity(which was referred to as plural) to bring the creation into bondage.

Evolutionary theory requires cycles of procreation and death, which is a part of the bondage to decay. The bible has everything created as perfect, but later has creation becoming more and more imperfect. Both paradigms are complete opposites.

The devil is the god of the world(and of this age) who has corrupted creation which was originally good, as in God has made all things as good. The fallen angels were the ones who made the protohominids after the world was corrupted through Adam and Eve's fall in the post-fruit timeline, and Cain did have a fear of being murdered by humans despite no other humans being around him. The Nephilim could be a reference to the degraded proto-hominids, of which the Elohim(The Trinity and the heavenly host, including the devil and his angels) stated "Let us make man in our own image". Adam and Eve were made in the image of God, who is Jesus Christ. The proto-hominids were a degraded creation of Elohim(specifically the devil and his angels to form the inverted paradigm of Evolution, but under God's permission) that were part of the bondage to decay, of which creation became more and more corrupted until the tower of babel when God confused their speech and scattered the nations.

>>833170

>And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Why would it say this if figurative?

When in the creation narrative does it stop being figurative in your view, and how can you say so without being arbitrary?

>>832963

It's disappointing that no one has replied to this.

>>832963

>>833179

Is it really a vestigial hoof or foot? Or do they simply claim that it is? What evidence do they have to say that it truly is just vestigial? Do you remember when it was common knowledge that the apendix was just a useless vestigial organ? Same with the supposed vestigial "hindlegs" of the whale, turns out they are actually an anchor point for muscles that are nessecary for reproduction, or the ostrich's wings helping it to regulate its bodyheat.

A lot of these claims come from people jumping to conclussions because they assume evolution is the correct startingpoint.

>>833201

Well, it wasn't something dolphins usually have

>>833067

Nothing modernist about it. It's even in the catechisms before Vatican 2. Catholics have faith and believe science will circle back to point to God, and it did!

The Big Bang and Quantum mechanics can only be explained by the supernatural and the divine Finger of God.

>>833063

>That does not accord with Scripture, which says that death first entered the world because of the Fall in Genesis chapter 3

The Lord Christ died for us so that we may once again have eternal life. Some folks, outside the Holy Mother Church established by the Lord Christ, can't understand the Bible.

bottom line

If some fossils and scientific hypothesis cause you to question your faith, you probably didn't have faith to begin with.

Those in a state of mortal sin can pray for Grace to resist sin and for faith. As a dog myself, I found that such prayers, sincerely and humbly asking for faith and grace, work. If they would work for me, praying to the Patron Saint of Dogs, then they'll work for you.

>>833226

>It's even in the catechisms before Vatican 2.

Old earth creationism?

Metaphorical hermeneutic of the creation account?

I'd like to see those in pre vat 2 catechisms

>>832950

Consider the access to knowledge the people had in the time of writing. For example in the medieval period, when people saw flint arrowheads from the stone age, they thought those were made by Faeries who could not use stone because they were allergic to iron.

Something that belied a familiar lack of awareness of history or a blinkered approach to reality that did not allow for the emergence of new and contradictory data,

People with mental illnesses were often thought to be possessed by malign spirits at the time (or venerated as shamans in others) and deformed cripples were thought to be changelings at best or the result of some dalliance with the Enemy at worst.

Also consider the idea the Torah and the subsequent teachings of Jesus may have been specific to the people of Israel at that moment in history.

Extrapolate from the latter that this knowledge was intended to be added to in subsequent centuries.

It is not contradictory in my mind. Just look at all the extinction events that happened prior, for example the Permean Triassic event, and consider creation as an iterative process.

View God in the same way as the Masons do- as the Divine Architect and craftsman by who's hand we are all are made. Study the arts and sciences like they do.

https://freemasonrymatters.co.uk/knowledge/belief-great-architect-universe/

>>833243

>View God in the same way as the Masons do- as the Divine Architect and craftsman by who's hand we are all are made. Study the arts and sciences like they do.

Why?

>>833243

>freemasons

They're satanic.

Lucifer's sin was that he wanted the power of creation.

>>833007

at first i thought this sounded like the most simple and reasonable response and was disappointed that it hadn't got a reply, but then realised that by virtue of stating that dinos did not live along side man it's implied they died before man i.e. death was in the world before man i.e. death did not enter the world following the fall i.e. your view is contrary to scripture so am not willing to subscribe to it. But otherwise, I do like the sentiment of 'seeing the limits of creation' and God doing stuff for our discovery and amazement, the pre-fall death issue notwithstanding.

To confirm though, I'm reading, and assuming you're meaning with your use of 'to see the limits of creation' as in 'to actually witness the limits' rather than 'to test the limits (as if he needed to come up with a hypothesis ['i reckon the biggest dino i can create is x tonnes'], undertake experiments to test that hypothesis [creates biggest dino that is x tonnes] and observe the results of the experiment [biggest dino is too big to be able to support itself so dies pretty much immediately] to obtain knowledge of his creation ['i now know sustaining dinos of x tonnes is not possible in my creation']

>>833048

this thread is near 250 posts long, is it really worth reading?

>>833158

>>833172

based Heiser

>>833243

what has happened to this place that anons can openly shill free masonry barely rustling anyones jimmies and be subject to pretty much zero rebuke? anon you need to listen to >>833248 this x1000

>>833342

Thanks for the response. I'm just not me Genesis 1:30 which says And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

This then implies that animals could be killed because they are subdued. They were given life in a previous verse and then there implication was that death could follow then.

And yes, I did mean as to witness. God knew what the limits were, just like we do when we play various simulators, but we like to see what can come about. It's one thing to know it, it's another thing entirely to experience it.

>>833346

I'm just gonna quote*

>>833346

>This then implies that animals could be killed because they are subdued.

Where does it imply that? It says he gave them plants for food. Nothing about animals being killed in that verse.

>They were given life in a previous verse and then there implication was that death could follow then.

Romans 5:12 says:

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.

What you are saying contradicts the statement from Romans. It says that death entered the world because sin entered, and sin entered the world by one man. The implication is that there is no death in the world before that sin. There is no implication that they had died before this.

>>833248

>>833229

I'm still interested in seeing your claim supported

>>833360

That says men, not for all living creatures. As there was death for angels who rebelled against God, there was death for animals also.

>>833366

We're clear that the Scripture you cited does not say what you claim and that there is no Scripture to support what you claimed either.

>>833368

Nah, but your scripture does support my assertion "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." Are animals "men"? No? Then why do they experience death? Did they sin? No? So, they likely died before because they were subdued by us. Death entered for mankind, but it existed prior for animals.

>>833366

There was no death for fallen angels. They are imprisoned.

"For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment.." - 2 Pet 2:4

"And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day." - Jude 1:6

Nor did death come into the world before Adam. All that God created was declared "good". Death reflects flaw and decay and destruction. Yet you would declare it the work of God and in your haste would say it's "good" as well. You might as well be a Hindu and worship Shiva, the God of Destruction.

And as Paul said, the redemption of humanity results in the redemption of the whole Creation, where Christ's work has universal significance and sets all creation back to order. We are merely the beginning of this redemptive work of material reality.

"We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies." - Romans 8:22-23

Watch this. They were just animals that went extinct due to man or other factors.