[_ Old Earth _] The Flood & Dinosaurs

[Lewis]

This is the best link that I have read in a long time on Dino's and the Flood.
It's called' Jesus Christ Creator.
http://www.parentcompany.com/jesus_chri ... /jcc-4.htm

 

[ikester7579]

This is the best link that I have read in a long time on Dino's and the Flood.
It's called' Jesus Christ Creator.
http://www.parentcompany.com/jesus_chri ... /jcc-4.htm

I like literal word reading. To bad not many believe that God tells the truth and find all kinds of excuses to justify it.

 

[Slevin]

This is the best link that I have read in a long time on Dino's and the Flood.
It's called' Jesus Christ Creator.
http://www.parentcompany.com/jesus_chri ... /jcc-4.htm

I like literal word reading. To bad not many believe that God tells the truth and find all kinds of excuses to justify it.

Like what?

 

[ikester7579]

This is the best link that I have read in a long time on Dino's and the Flood.
It's called' Jesus Christ Creator.
http://www.parentcompany.com/jesus_chri ... /jcc-4.htm

I like literal word reading. To bad not many believe that God tells the truth and find all kinds of excuses to justify it.

Like what?

Do you believe the account of the flood to be literal, or fable?

 

[Slevin]

This is the best link that I have read in a long time on Dino's and the Flood.
It's called' Jesus Christ Creator.
http://www.parentcompany.com/jesus_chri ... /jcc-4.htm

I like literal word reading. To bad not many believe that God tells the truth and find all kinds of excuses to justify it.

Like what?

Do you believe the account of the flood to be literal, or fable?

I think it's a mythological story that probably has some historical merit to it like any other mythological story.

 

[LittleNipper]

I believe the LORD's account as presented in the book of Moses completely.

 

[Slevin]

I believe the LORD's account as presented in the book of Moses completely.

Why?

 

[LittleNipper]

I believe the LORD's account as presented in the book of Moses completely.

Why?

I believe the LORD JESUS CHRIST and have trust and faith in what HE says to be true-----since HE is GOD in the flesh and would NEVER lie or tell a falsehood even in error. John 14:1-4

See Luke 17:26-29 and Matthew 24:35-42 Also read Hebrews 11:1-7, I Peter 3:18-21, and II Peter 3:1-7.

Am I to place my faith and trust in man's education and abilities to understand everything?

 

[Quath]

Am I to place my faith and trust in man's education and abilities to understand everything?

Men said the Earth moved. They showed it with telescopes and with models. However, many Christians would not believe in man's education and abilities to understand the universe over what the Bible said. They quoted the following to support the Biblical view that the Earth does not move:

1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.â€Â

Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ...â€Â

Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ...â€Â

Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.â€Â

Isaiah 45:18: “...who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast...â€Â

Eventually, man's ability won out. Christians tried to reinterpret these passages as meaning something else that did not contradict nature in such an easy to see manner.

If history is a guide, the same will happen for evolution and young earth creation. If you don't see this, you could be in the same boat as the Christians that believed in the Bible verses that support an immovable Earth.

 

[ikester7579]

This is the best link that I have read in a long time on Dino's and the Flood.
It's called' Jesus Christ Creator.
http://www.parentcompany.com/jesus_chri ... /jcc-4.htm

I like literal word reading. To bad not many believe that God tells the truth and find all kinds of excuses to justify it.

Like what?

Do you believe the account of the flood to be literal, or fable?

I think it's a mythological story that probably has some historical merit to it like any other mythological story.

Round about way of saying it's a lie. Why not just say what you mean, and believe?

 

[jwu]

Myths and lies are not the same.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Here is a sample of the evidence offered by the article...

"People claiming to have seen the ark of Noah resting on the mountain of Ararat report there is a catwalk several feet wide down the center of the top with a row of windows under it..."

:

 

[LittleNipper]

Am I to place my faith and trust in man's education and abilities to understand everything?

Men said the Earth moved. They showed it with telescopes and with models. However, many Christians would not believe in man's education and abilities to understand the universe over what the Bible said. They quoted the following to support the Biblical view that the Earth does not move:

1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.â€Â

Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ...â€Â

Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ...â€Â

Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.â€Â

Isaiah 45:18: “...who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast...â€Â

Eventually, man's ability won out. Christians tried to reinterpret these passages as meaning something else that did not contradict nature in such an easy to see manner.

If history is a guide, the same will happen for evolution and young earth creation. If you don't see this, you could be in the same boat as the Christians that believed in the Bible verses that support an immovable Earth.

Well, does the Earth circle our Sun in measurable time and over a measurable distance? Do the seasons follow one after another, or does the Earth wonder all over the Universe? The earth is fixed in its rotation and in its orbit. This is what GOD means by fixed. The planet Earth does not jump about on its own. Clearly, Earth has been hit by meteors & asteroids --- did
this planet rocket off into space? I believe GOD will not allow it to move off it foundation course....
Clearly, we have earthquakes, so GOD was not speaking of specific locations on the planet. GOD was providing the general understanding that the earth is fixed in it's orbit. We may count on certain generalities over the course of a year, and anyone who reads more into it than that is only trying to cheat GOD of HIS CREATIVE abilities.

 

[cyberjosh]

I believe the LORD's account as presented in the book of Moses completely.

Why?

Peter quoted the event in the NT for one...

 

[hopefulcynic]

Well, does the Earth circle our Sun in measurable time and over a measurable distance? Do the seasons follow one after another, or does the Earth wonder all over the Universe?

Actually, yes the earth is "wandering" about the universe. The earth orbits the sun, which is orbiting the center of our galaxy. Meanwhile, our galaxy is crashing towards the Andromeda galaxy at about 600 km/s, as measured relative to other galaxies.

The earth is fixed in its rotation and in its orbit. This is what GOD means by fixed. The planet Earth does not jump about on its own. Clearly, Earth has been hit by meteors & asteroids --- did
this planet rocket off into space? I believe GOD will not allow it to move off it foundation course....
Clearly, we have earthquakes, so GOD was not speaking of specific locations on the planet. GOD was providing the general understanding that the earth is fixed in it's orbit. We may count on certain generalities over the course of a year, and anyone who reads more into it than that is only trying to cheat GOD of HIS CREATIVE abilities.

It seems to me like you are taking a very liberal interpretation here. I think we can both agree that a completely literal translation implies that the earth is not moving at all. Yet, you are arguing that what the Bible really means is that the earth is moving. How can you justify such an interpretation with the verse itself?

IMHO, the only possible way to obtain such an interpretation is to look at the actual facts, and see what they say, and then compare those facts with what the Bible says. There is no way you can arrive at your viewpoint without having some idea of what is really going on with the earth's movement, or lack thereof. Without that knowledge you would have adopted the completely literal viewpoint.

If I am not mistaken, I believe that Slevin was using exactly this method when he said that Noah's Flood was mythological in origin. Yet, you accused him of taking a liberal reading, and not taking God at his word. Are you not doing the same thing with God's words about the earth?

 

[Slevin]

Round about way of saying it's a lie. Why not just say what you mean, and believe?

Because it's not a roundabout way of saying it's a lie. I did say what I mean and believe.

 

[LittleNipper]

It seems to me like you are taking a very liberal interpretation here. I think we can both agree that a completely literal translation implies that the earth is not moving at all. Yet, you are arguing that what the Bible really means is that the earth is moving. How can you justify such an interpretation with the verse itself?

IMHO, the only possible way to obtain such an interpretation is to look at the actual facts, and see what they say, and then compare those facts with what the Bible says. There is no way you can arrive at your viewpoint without having some idea of what is really going on with the earth's movement, or lack thereof. Without that knowledge you would have adopted the completely literal viewpoint.

If I am not mistaken, I believe that Slevin was using exactly this method when he said that Noah's Flood was mythological in origin. Yet, you accused him of taking a liberal reading, and not taking God at his word. Are you not doing the same thing with God's words about the earth?

I accuse him of ignoring the FLOOD and making excuses for evolution. I've seen book after book starting off with the PREMISE that the Earth is billions of years old without any logic or explanation and then proceed to concoct fabrications about how everything evolved over time and calling that "science"..... Now if you are suggesting that the earth is part of a Cosmic Clock, I would agree; however, it you are suggesting that the future projectory of the planet earth is somehow in question, I would disagree --- it is fixed.

 

[dancing queen]

Slightly off topic but when i read your comment about the premise that the earth is billions of years old i remembered reading that a load of scientists researching evolution have discovered that even if the earth is as old as they think it is then we haven't had time to evolve yet. Even if it is billions of years old, if evolution exsists we should only be on about a cell by now, not even basic creatures.

Well i think it interesting!

On the flood topic, isn't there some geological evidence for the flood? I have a distance memory of someone saying something bout rocks and stuff was evidence of the flood, but i can't remember the source (or the actual fact), anyone know if this is true?

 

[LittleNipper]

Slightly off topic but when i read your comment about the premise that the earth is billions of years old i remembered reading that a load of scientists researching evolution have discovered that even if the earth is as old as they think it is then we haven't had time to evolve yet. Even if it is billions of years old, if evolution exsists we should only be on about a cell by now, not even basic creatures.

Well i think it interesting!

On the flood topic, isn't there some geological evidence for the flood? I have a distance memory of someone saying something bout rocks and stuff was evidence of the flood, but i can't remember the source (or the actual fact), anyone know if this is true?

There is lots of odd ball evidence that calls into question both a world billions of years old and evolution. The difference between the Theory of Evolution and Creation theories is that one is funded by the Federal government and the other is not. Otherwise they are both RELIGIOUS theories of one sort or another....

 

[jwu]

Slightly off topic but when i read your comment about the premise that the earth is billions of years old i remembered reading that a load of scientists researching evolution have discovered that even if the earth is as old as they think it is then we haven't had time to evolve yet. Even if it is billions of years old, if evolution exsists we should only be on about a cell by now, not even basic creatures.

i'd like to see that math ;) Based on my experience it's usually some straw man version of abiogenesis, of a cell of today's configuration popping into existence fully formed in a puddle of chemicals.

On the flood topic, isn't there some geological evidence for the flood? I have a distance memory of someone saying something bout rocks and stuff was evidence of the flood, but i can't remember the source (or the actual fact), anyone know if this is true?

There are some things which are sometimes claimed to be evidence for the noachian flood, but these don't stand up to scrutiny. On the contrary, there are tons of things which falsify a recent global flood, things like residues of volcanic eruptions which could not have happened underwater in that way, evaporites (mineral residues of lakes that dried out...quite unlikely to happen when the whole earth is covered by water) and many other things.

The difference between the Theory of Evolution and Creation theories is that one is funded by the Federal government and the other is not.

Evolutionary theory is also funded by companies, because it actually produces results. E.g. when developing new medicines. And old earth geology is used by mineral oil companies to locate oil deposits.

So...question to YECs: Why is that so? Why isn't creation science commercially applied?