[__ Science __ ] Did Dinosaurs Actually Exist?

[AIG.com]

Answers to common objections to the existence of real dinosaurs: supposedly fabricated bones, scientific concerns, and theological issues.

Continue reading...

 

[Hopeful]

Answers to common objections to the existence of real dinosaurs: supposedly fabricated bones, scientific concerns, and theological issues.

Continue reading...

No they did not exist.
God created a completed earth with dinosaur bones in it, just as coal, oil, iron and diamonds, etc were in it.
God made Adam as a completed man, and made the earth a completed earth.

 

[Quantrill]

Of course they existed. How or why would anyone deny their existence?

Quantrill

 

[Hopeful]

Of course they existed. How or why would anyone deny their existence?

Quantrill

I've never seen one.
You?
God's earth was completed in six days.
The bones found now are part of that earth.
Just because the bones are here doesn't necessarily mean dinosaurs were here too.

 

[Quantrill]

I've never seen one.
You?
God's earth was completed in six days.
The bones found now are part of that earth.
Just because the bones are here doesn't necessarily mean dinosaurs were here too.

I believe the 6 day creation, or restoration, of the earth in (Genesis) also.

Why would there be bones if there were no dinosaurs?

Quantrill

 

[Barbarian]

No they did not exist.
God created a completed earth with dinosaur bones in it, just as coal, oil, iron and diamonds, etc were in it.
God made Adam as a completed man, and made the earth a completed earth.

Are you possibly thinking of the "Virtual History" theology of Gerald Aardsma? It's an ingenious way to maintain a YE belief, while acknowledging the evidence for long ages and evolution.

BC: Age of the Earth Collection

The Biblical Chronologist Age of the Earth Collection

www.biblicalchronologist.org

His idea is that the evidence in the Earth is a "virtual history", as if God was writing a novel and prepared a sort of backstory, that never really happened, but was essential to His purposes.

“The virtual history view never encounters this problem. It says that the people who are saying ‘creation with appearance of age’ donʼt understand properly what the word/idea ‘creation’ means. The virtual history view goes to the analogy of human creations to try to show what ‘creation’ means. It takes the creation of a story by a human author as (probably its best) analogy. It observes that in all such stories one always has a virtual history present—-grown characters wearing sewn garments and living in already built houses… right from page one of the story. What is implied from page one of the story is a cause-and-effect virtual history to the story, stretching back into the indefinite past. This virtual history in no way contradicts the actual date (in the story charactersʼ time) of creation of the story. (That ‘date’ we would fix at page one of the book, since that is when, in the story frame of reference, the story world comes into existence.) We find by such analogies that an ‘appearance of age’ is inherent in what ‘creation’ means.” (This is where the “redundancy” mentioned above comes from.)

“But this ‘appearance of age’ is not an add-on and is not arbitrary. Try to imagine writing a story which does not have an ‘appearance of age’. After you have completed that exercise, try to imagine writing a fiction story which has a false ‘appearance of age’. I find that it is intrinsically impossible to create such stories. I.e., you cannot have a ‘creation with an appearance of age’ if you mean by that anything other than a creation with its inherent virtual history. To ask for a creation with a false appearance of age (which includes the case of a creation having no appearance of age), is to ask for the impossible/ridiculous.” (This is where the ‘absurdity’ mentioned above comes from.)

“We are living in a ‘story’ God created. God is both author and reader of this story (e.g., ‘For in Him we both live and move and have our being.’ Acts 17:28.) (Note how this works. A story-world has no existence in the book; its existence is in the mind of the author and readers.) Page one opens about 7000 years ago our time, (the only time frame we have access to). This ‘story’ has a virtual history stretching back billions of years. We find this to be the case by computing the time it would take light to travel from remote galaxies we see in the sky, or by computing the time it would take radioactive elements, such as uranium dug from the earth in natural ores, to decay as much as they have. These great ages in no way negate the fact that page one opens 7000 years ago. Nor does our virtual history, with all its dinosaurs etc. negate the fact that we are created. All stories have virtual histories and no story yet has ever created itself—-all have had an author/creator. And the fact that our (fallen) virtual history shows eons of death and savagery and futility merely says ‘amen’ to what Romans teaches, that the whole creation has been subjected to futility by God as a consequence of the entrance of sin, in hopes of its eventual redemption (Romans 8:20). [And, if I may stray from the point a bit, the ‘story’ is still being written/read, and God allows us to take a real part in its unfolding by our prayers and actions—-so the Bible shows.]”

 

[D-D-W]

Well, if that history did not happen, or happen in the timeframe it was supposed to "virtually," then either that stuff was placed there by the devil (father of lies) or God Himself lied.

At least if you believe that God and the universe are enslaved to Aristotelian logic.

 

[Hopeful]

Are you possibly thinking of the "Virtual History" theology of Gerald Aardsma? It's an ingenious way to maintain a YE belief, while acknowledging the evidence for long ages and evolution.

BC: Age of the Earth Collection

The Biblical Chronologist Age of the Earth Collection

www.biblicalchronologist.org

His idea is that the evidence in the Earth is a "virtual history", as if God was writing a novel and prepared a sort of backstory, that never really happened, but was essential to His purposes.

“The virtual history view never encounters this problem. It says that the people who are saying ‘creation with appearance of age’ donʼt understand properly what the word/idea ‘creation’ means. The virtual history view goes to the analogy of human creations to try to show what ‘creation’ means. It takes the creation of a story by a human author as (probably its best) analogy. It observes that in all such stories one always has a virtual history present—-grown characters wearing sewn garments and living in already built houses… right from page one of the story. What is implied from page one of the story is a cause-and-effect virtual history to the story, stretching back into the indefinite past. This virtual history in no way contradicts the actual date (in the story charactersʼ time) of creation of the story. (That ‘date’ we would fix at page one of the book, since that is when, in the story frame of reference, the story world comes into existence.) We find by such analogies that an ‘appearance of age’ is inherent in what ‘creation’ means.” (This is where the “redundancy” mentioned above comes from.)

“But this ‘appearance of age’ is not an add-on and is not arbitrary. Try to imagine writing a story which does not have an ‘appearance of age’. After you have completed that exercise, try to imagine writing a fiction story which has a false ‘appearance of age’. I find that it is intrinsically impossible to create such stories. I.e., you cannot have a ‘creation with an appearance of age’ if you mean by that anything other than a creation with its inherent virtual history. To ask for a creation with a false appearance of age (which includes the case of a creation having no appearance of age), is to ask for the impossible/ridiculous.” (This is where the ‘absurdity’ mentioned above comes from.)

“We are living in a ‘story’ God created. God is both author and reader of this story (e.g., ‘For in Him we both live and move and have our being.’ Acts 17:28.) (Note how this works. A story-world has no existence in the book; its existence is in the mind of the author and readers.) Page one opens about 7000 years ago our time, (the only time frame we have access to). This ‘story’ has a virtual history stretching back billions of years. We find this to be the case by computing the time it would take light to travel from remote galaxies we see in the sky, or by computing the time it would take radioactive elements, such as uranium dug from the earth in natural ores, to decay as much as they have. These great ages in no way negate the fact that page one opens 7000 years ago. Nor does our virtual history, with all its dinosaurs etc. negate the fact that we are created. All stories have virtual histories and no story yet has ever created itself—-all have had an author/creator. And the fact that our (fallen) virtual history shows eons of death and savagery and futility merely says ‘amen’ to what Romans teaches, that the whole creation has been subjected to futility by God as a consequence of the entrance of sin, in hopes of its eventual redemption (Romans 8:20). [And, if I may stray from the point a bit, the ‘story’ is still being written/read, and God allows us to take a real part in its unfolding by our prayers and actions—-so the Bible shows.]”

Never heard of him.
But red is too hard for me to read so I didn't look at your entire enclosure.

 

[Hopeful]

Well, if that history did not happen, or happen in the timeframe it was supposed to "virtually," then either that stuff was placed there by the devil (father of lies) or God Himself lied.

At least if you believe that God and the universe are enslaved to Aristotelian logic.

Why would it be a lie?
He made it the way it is.
Just as Adam was made in complete form, so were the earth and heavens.

 

[Barbarian]

Well, if that history did not happen, or happen in the timeframe it was supposed to "virtually," then either that stuff was placed there by the devil (father of lies) or God Himself lied.

At least if you believe that God and the universe are enslaved to Aristotelian logic.

Aardsma's between a rock and a hard place. He's a YE creationist. But he's also familiar with the evidence. This is one way to reconcile those two things.

 

[D-D-W]

Aardsma's between a rock and a hard place. He's a YE creationist. But he's also familiar with the evidence. This is one way to reconcile those two things.

Pagan aristotelian logic requires them to be reconciled. Hebraic block logic (the logic of the bible) does not.

 

[Barbarian]

Pagan aristotelian logic requires them to be reconciled. Hebraic block logic (the logic of the bible) does not.

Assumptions are not logic. They are just unsupported ideas.