[_ Old Earth _] Dinosaurs and man coexisted

[reznwerks]

huh

How did the topic of this thread go from dinosaurs to the geneology of Jesus?

Good question. The answer lies several long boring posts back so forgive me if I have forgotten as well. Rez seems to think he has gotten his teeth into something he can't let go of but I think it's just his own tail.

I think if you go back and spend some time it was unred that swerved into the subject.

 

[unred typo]

OK for the record:
Barbarian wrote: Since it makes no claims about the age of the Earth, there is no changing required.

Then UT wrote: Strange that the Bible goes to all the trouble to list names and ages of sons and fathers in all those genealogies as if God wanted us to be aware of the time frame we are working with and there is absolutely no mention of vast expanses of time having passed before, during or after the factual day by day account of creation.

Barbarian wrote back: In fact, the geneologies not complete histories, and scholars have known this for a long time. Some of them are even contradictory. There are two contradictory geneologies for Jesus, for example. Nothing in the Bible says that the Earth is only a few thousand years old. That is something people added because the ancient pagans imagined it to be fairly young.

It went down hill and side ways from there. You’re right. I took the thread astray from dinosaur tails and cedar trees to genealogies. My fault. Apologies. I just can’t leave a glaring accusation like that alone. :

 

[unred typo]

Reznwerks wrote:

Yea thats why Matthew and Luke went to the trouble of ONLY documenting the lineage of Jospeph. LOL As I said if God was truly involved in fullfilling prophecy WHY would he go about it in such a convuluted way. As for it being common knowledge I think that unless you were there you need to provide a little more substantial evidence than your opinion. Even in your response you stated you "believe" which is not fact nor evidence of fact. I have no dilemma as I don't believe and I nor anyone else has any reason to believe the evidence or rather claims that you have put forth. No serious theologian takes what you have put forth with any grain of truth.

That’s right. No one was keeping track of the mother’s blood lines back then except God. God said the messiah would be born from the blood line of David and because Mary was Joseph’s cousin, and they both were of the house and lineage of David, Mary is the fulfillment of God‘s promise. By having Joseph take Mary as his wife, God gave us a record of the official genealogy back to David. If Mary had married another man, not her cousin, and he was a descendant of another tribe, i.e. of Simeon, we would not have a record of Mary’s heritage. That is not to say that God didn’t fulfill the prophesy, just that we wouldn’t know it except to believe that we could trust him to keep his word.

I don’t really care what theologians put forth. If one totally contradicts another, they both can't be right so what good is their theologian status? You don’t have to be a theologian to read the Bible and understand it. In fact, it would probably be easier if you weren’t.

So, how about those dinosaurs. What, besides the erroneous dates, do you base your insistence on that they could not possibly have co-existed with man? Reptiles like the Kimono dragon, alligators and crocodiles all exist in the same world with man. Is there some compelling reason why you don’t want them to co-exist?

p.s. I corrected this sentence in the second paragraph to read: "If one totally contradicts another, they both can't be right so what good is their theologian status?". Interesting what a amall typo will do to change the whole meaning of the sentence. You knew what I meant though, didn't you? :wink: