[_ Old Earth _] Were Dinosaurs a deception from Satan to make the world look older ?

[Barbarian]

By your understanding. Question then is if sin entered into the world through Adam and Eve which is follow by death. Then why and what was the reason for dinos to die.

Extinction happens to all species eventually. A number of things seem to have contributed to the end of almost all dinosaurs (except, most likely, birds). Changing climate may have had a role, while a large meteorite and the catastrophe of the Deccan traps probably put the coup de grace to them as a group.

If they existed before Adam and yet it was by Adam's sin that started the count down to death.

You're confusing physical and spiritual death. Physical death had always been part of life.

 

[Deavonreye]

It is possible that it just got lost in cyberspace as there is no record of a post having been deleted from this thread.

Yes, . . . very possible. :yes Thanks for this post. ;)

 

[Deavonreye]

I to believe in what is testable, but I also have faith. The latter came harder and at times still struggle. Yes there are many things that can’t be disproven. But then again youcan say the earth is billions of years old. Which I used to. I guess its what glasses you have on to see what you want to see. As a yec I see thing alot different now than in the past. It’s not that I just woke up one day and said everything I thought was true is now untrue.

Not to get technical, but if something is in fact testable [with repeatability], it must move beyond mere "belief" to knowledge. For example, I don't believe that gravity will affect this pen when I drop it. I know it will.

As for belief/faith, it is fine for a person to have such things, but for the sake of science and making observations about our universe, they can only be a beginning point [for example, the belief that there could be a black hole at the center of our galaxy].

As for your YEC viewpoint, I would be interested in hearing what made you change to that.

The earth being old is of course you wanting to see it that way. Many Many things can not be explained by old earther’s. As far as silly notions, I think that can be said about each group. I don’t believe the devil created dino’s to trick man. But that man has tricked himself into explaining away God.

I am not "wanting to see" anything other than what is true. Therefore, I rely on those who took the time and money to become experts in various areas of study [astrophysics, geology, anthropology, paleontology, etc] testing with repeatability that which became/becomes scientific facts. What has been discovered IS an extremely old universe. And THIS is why Barbarian can state that "god would have been deceptive" IF the universe IS only ~6-10 thousand years old.

Deavonreye I have a question for you? Not trying to be a wise guy, but where you there to wittiness the beginning of all things. Something being created by nothing. Or, where did all matter come from. did it just pop into existence. If you weren't there then how can you be 100% that God was not there to create it all. how?

Nobody was present for any "creation story" either. In many faiths, a creation story is offered. Some more unbelievable than others. . . . but the same could be said for the Biblical account. That's the problem. Though science doesn't have all the answers [like "where all matter came from"] what it CAN do is test what they can and make assumptions based upon facts. However, the Big Bang theory doesn't state that "everything was created out of nothing". That is a misunderstanding promoted by those who are unfamiliar with the theory, usually given at 'creation science" seminars [from those like Hovind or Behe].

 

[Jam]

"Only in the sense that things in nature may not be what they seem"? Do you recognize the severity of that statement? It would undermine all scientific inquiry into origins and life. It would make us not able to truly trust God.

The fathers of modern science began their inquiries precisely because they believed that God had created the universe and all it's order, and that through science they would be able to discover and show this to be the case. And I would agree. I think that God has given man not only the inquiring mind which wants to look at the minute details of creation, but also the ability and knowledge to discover his handiwork so that we may know just how powerful and incredible he is.

However, if God created everything so that our methods of inquiry would only provide us with false information, then we cannot really know anything about how he created the universe. It would be deceptive if God created the universe to appear old when it isn't, and if that is the case, what else has he been deceptive about regarding other areas of scientific inquiry? It really undermines all scientific inquiry into the origins and diversity of life.

I meant only to say that many things in nature are not as they seem at first glance- hence the constant revision and development of science. The premises upon which we base our evaluations of the age of the universe/earth may simply be wrong: indeed, a literal interpretation of Genesis would lead us to believe that God created the earth fully formed in six days. Why should we then assume that the amounts of radiaoctive substances (for example) that existed then were not the same as the amounts that would have existed at the same stage of development of the earth if it had come about as an entirely natural phenomenon?

Essentially, I'm saying that it is not the case that God has been deceptive; rather, we simply base our calculations of the age of the universe/earth upon premises that are not quite justified. I don't think my last post explained what I meant very well at all- for that I apologise.

 

[Jam]

No. In fact, the "death" God spoke of to Adam was a spiritual, not a physical one. He told Adam he would die the day he ate from the tree, and yet Adam lived on physically for many years after. So physical death was not a consequence. And no where does God say it was for other living things.

Genesis 2:17 (NET)
"...you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die."

Now I know you might consider this too "fiddly", but God did not necessarily specify here that Adam would die as soon as he ate the fruit; simply that he would die*. And, of course, Adam does die (Genesis 5:5).


*I'm aware that YLT specifies "in the day of thine eating it", but we must still remember the ambiguity of the Hebrew term... it could mean anything from 12 hours to an "extended period of time" or an age. And we do not even have numbering coupled with yom here to help us claim that it is definitely a literal day;)

 

[Free]

Ok, how long would you say. and please list proof. or what you believe to be true.
As for me its the list from Adam to Jesus found in our bible's genealogical record. and I said around 6000 years..I don't know how long Adam and Eve living before the fall, millions of years???
Oh and can you list some of the reason the dinos would have die before the fall of man?

I don't know how long man has been around. The genealogies are not accurate and should not be used to determine the age of the earth or how long humans have been around. They were never meant for such use.

The premises upon which we base our evaluations of the age of the universe/earth may simply be wrong: indeed, a literal interpretation of Genesis would lead us to believe that God created the earth fully formed in six days.

On the contrary, if the writer of Genesis meant "a period of time" by the use of yom, then a literal interpretation would be that God created the universe over six periods of time, six ages, not six 24-hour days. So we must first figure out what was meant by the word "day," otherwise we are putting our own meaning into the text. It just so happens that the use of yom as an undetermined period of time, agrees with what science tells us.

Genesis 2:17 (NET)
"...you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die."

Now I know you might consider this too "fiddly", but God did not necessarily specify here that Adam would die as soon as he ate the fruit; simply that he would die*. And, of course, Adam does die (Genesis 5:5).

And yet:

Gen 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"— (ESV)

It is quite plausible that man was not necessarily created to live forever, as is commonly believed. This would mean that the death Adam and Eve were to experience was indeed spiritual, the separation from God's presence.

It would be quite odd to say that nothing had died until then, considering all the carnivores that exist. Of course, many do believe this and then argue that after the fall, suddenly certain animals became carnivorous. But that seems highly unlikely.

 

[Deavonreye]

I meant only to say that many things in nature are not as they seem at first glance- hence the constant revision and development of science. The premises upon which we base our evaluations of the age of the universe/earth may simply be wrong: indeed, a literal interpretation of Genesis would lead us to believe that God created the earth fully formed in six days. Why should we then assume that the amounts of radiaoctive substances (for example) that existed then were not the same as the amounts that would have existed at the same stage of development of the earth if it had come about as an entirely natural phenomenon?

Please expound on what you mean here. This still sounds like an "appearance of age" thing.

 

[Jam]

On the contrary, if the writer of Genesis meant "a period of time" by the use of yom, then a literal interpretation would be that God created the universe over six periods of time, six ages, not six 24-hour days. So we must first figure out what was meant by the word "day," otherwise we are putting our own meaning into the text. It just so happens that the use of yom as an undetermined period of time, agrees with what science tells us.

This is true.

Gen 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"— (ESV)

It is quite plausible that man was not necessarily created to live forever, as is commonly believed. This would mean that the death Adam and Eve were to experience was indeed spiritual, the separation from God's presence.

It would be quite odd to say that nothing had died until then, considering all the carnivores that exist. Of course, many do believe this and then argue that after the fall, suddenly certain animals became carnivorous. But that seems highly unlikely.

This is also true. I am not arguing that YEC is correct; I am simply making the point that it can be considered consistent i.e. it is plausible. I'm not sure if it was on this thread, but I mentioned the other day that I remain agnostic to the question of the universe/earth's age: I simply do not know.

 

[Jam]

Please expound on what you mean here. This still sounds like an "appearance of age" thing.

Essentially I am saying this: The assumption that God created the Earth at effective age "0" is not an indisputable one. Thus, arguments using in this as a premise may be valid without providing conclusions that are consistent with reality.

 

[Free]

This is also true. I am not arguing that YEC is correct; I am simply making the point that it can be considered consistent i.e. it is plausible. I'm not sure if it was on this thread, but I mentioned the other day that I remain agnostic to the question of the universe/earth's age: I simply do not know.

Ah, so we're the same then, only I'm arguing for the plausibility of the other side.

 

[Deavonreye]

Essentially I am saying this: The assumption that God created the Earth at effective age "0" is not an indisputable one. Thus, arguments using in this as a premise may be valid without providing conclusions that are consistent with reality.

So, . . . "made with the appearance of age".

 

[EricTheBaptist]

There's only three explanations for dinosaurs.

1. They were killed in the flood.
2. They died millions of years ago.
3. God killed them right after the Ark opened.

It is agreed that the dinosaurs lasted about 1,500,000 years after their supposed end. The Bible says that God told Noah to load up two of each animal on the Earth.

With this in mind only one of the three scenarios above can be true, because they should be around today. Assuming dinosaurs were around during the Flood and were loaded on the Ark. For this to be true they would haft to have been killed by God after the Flood. They couldn't of been around in the Flood because God said to load up EVERY animal.

So there's two scenarios left.

1. Dinosaurs were alive before Noah's time.
2. Dinosaurs were killed after the Flood by God. (Let's face it, old stone age people and even Neolithic people would have no technology to kill a dinosaur"

I'm leaning more towards the fact they were killed million of years ago, as the Bible states no clear message that the Earth is 6,000 years old and for this to be true God would have had to blow up some stars, because we can observe Supernovas which take BILLIONS of years to happen. Yet A LOT have happened in "6,000" years.

 

[Roof]

On the contrary, if the writer of Genesis meant "a period of time" by the use of yom, then a literal interpretation would be that God created the universe over six periods of time, six ages, not six 24-hour days. So we must first figure out what was meant by the word "day," otherwise we are putting our own meaning into the text. It just so happens that the use of yom as an undetermined period of time, agrees with what science tells us.

What word was used in the Septaguant? Perhaps the greek speaking jews had a more precise word in greek.

 

[Free]

What word was used in the Septaguant? Perhaps the greek speaking jews had a more precise word in greek.

It would appear that it is essentially the same in meaning, whatever that meaning is. The phrase in the LXX is "ἡμέρα μία," "day one." The word for day, ἡμέρα, can mean a literal day, a part of a day, time, or even years.

http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/hemera.html