Dionosaurs vs. The Bible

Satoshi · #11 6th May 2002, 02:47 AM

Originally posted by A Sheep
If you want to counter talkorigins with a bit of truth, try http://www.trueorigin.org/

The main author of that site doesn't even know what evolution (or even science!) is, yet he pretends to know more about it than every biologist put together. It would be funny if people didn't fall for his material.

elephanticity · #12 6th May 2002, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by A Sheep
If you want to counter talkorigins with a bit of truth, try http://www.trueorigin.org/

Ah, please.

Can you link to something a teeny bit more original? lots of straw man and loki argument stuff there.

Sinai · #13 6th May 2002, 02:22 PM

If you are interested in the major theories that have been advanced regarding the age of the universe and how that may or may not relate to the "days" of the Genesis account of creation, I suggest that you go to the thread that deals with that question (click here).

By the way, as to your question about whether the Bible mentions dinosaurs: It can be at least argued that it refers to them....but not necessarily at the places I've seen discussed on these threads. Those typically use some passages in Job that are dubious (based on the Hebrew usage) at best. A better place is in Genesis 1:21, where we are told that on day five God created various forms of animal life. Among the categories of animals listed is one named hattanninim haggedholim. Haggedholim is generally translated as "the great" or "the big." You'll find various translations for hattanninim, including creatures, alligators, monsters, whales, and even dragons. But tanninim is the plural of taneen, which is most commonly translated to mean "reptile." Thus, it can probably be argued that Genesis 1:21 refers to the big or great reptiles--and the biggest reptiles of all were the dinosaurs. It might also be noted that our term "dinosaur" was not coined for several thousand years after Genesis was written.

Billy the Kid · #14 6th May 2002, 05:57 PM

Also, there have been discoveries of old drawings in caves of Dinosaurs.
This has a major impact because the people back then did not have the technology to uncover bones and put them back together again. Below is an old painting of an unknown creature from Kuku Yanlanji people:

Starscream · #15 6th May 2002, 06:23 PM

30a2, where did you get that picture?

dkewatson · #16 6th May 2002, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by ZoneChaos
Another theory I have toyed with is this:

HOw much time elapsed between the creation of the Garden of Eden (Iand the rest of the universe), and the actual fall?

Only a theory, but:

Duirng the time of "pre-fall", the universe did not know, and was not affected by sin, and it associated affects: Carnivore behavior, entropy, etc...

Is it perhaps during this time that the dinosaurs lived?

Without sin, there would be no death or destruction of anykind. The universe, earth specifically, would not be "aging"...

For who knows how long, there may never have been any evidence of radioactive dacay, or at least no change in the apparent"age" of the earth.

And, nothing would have died, before the fall.

Couple this with the mature earth theory adn with the effects of the flood, I think you have a sage of a billiojn year old earth, that has only existed for roughly 6000 (from the time of the fall), and that allowed for man and dinosaur to co-exist for who knows how long...

Out of curiosity how do you get from the premise "no sin" to the conclusion "nothing ages"? I do not see how there is a connection between the two. That and your whole conclusion rests on everything opposite of what we observe. The laws of nature are constant, they do not change. Thus to claim they do, you need good proof and not just the Bible.

--Dan

Billy the Kid · #17 6th May 2002, 06:49 PM

The picture in my above post was taken from Drdino.com. Some people in these forums do not like him(dr. hovind) and that's ok, but please don't start debating on wether or not he's right or wrong in this thread.
Thanks

Sinai · #18 6th May 2002, 07:18 PM

Originally posted by 30a2 (in signature block)
If evolution happened, then death was widespread before man evolved. But if death preceded man and was not a result of Adam’s sin, then sin is a fiction. If sin is a fiction, then we do not need a Savior. ~CreationScience.com

Interesting picture you posted, 30a2--but the quotation from CreationScience.com appears to use faulty or at least questionable logic. There is plenty of evidence of microevolution, which the Bible also supports. Macroevolution has been theorized but lacks supporting evidence. I have seen nothing in either science or the Bible to show that death did not occur prior to man. Yes, I have read Paul's writings [that sin entered the world through Adam's sin but is overcome through Christ's sacrifice] that some attempt to use in an effort to bolster rather poor theories--and I have looked at it in both various English translations and in the Greek, and both the Greek and the English translations make it rather clear that those verses do not support such a conclusion.

The reality and validity of sin is not negated just because someone at some website uses faulty logic in setting up a premise. It also does not negate our need for a Savior.

elephanticity · #19 6th May 2002, 07:42 PM

On the other hand, the myth of the Griffin was probably originated by people finding the bones of protoceratops in Wales. A beaked face, talon-looking claws, long tail...they put together the parts and matched to animals more familiar to them

Squee · #20 7th May 2002, 12:50 AM

Have you ever noticed that in some pictures of a cyclops that you see two horns coming out of there mouth along with there teeth. Some people thought that an elephant skull was the skull of a cyclops. Because there is a socket in the skull where the trunk comes out of that looks like one huge eye socket.