Were Dinosaur bones planted there by satan?

[Caliban]

Does anyone go along with this theology? this was taught at our Sunday School, not necessarily my belief but just curious what you think?.

 

[Remus]

No, there's no reason to believe this. Was this taught recently?

 

[Caliban]

No it was taught about 20yrs ago but wondered if anyone actually still thought it was true as with all the arguments of the earth being 6000yrs old and that the bones must have been planted there to corrupt christian beliefs

 

[Remus]

I'm sure you could find someone that believes this, but hopefully they aren't teaching in church

 

[Dannager]

That seems like a rather silly belief to hold, in my opinion.

 

[chaoschristian]

Does anyone go along with this theology? this was taught at our Sunday School, not necessarily my belief but just curious what you think?.

This is funny, because I've been thinking about this today.

It's been a long, long time since I've heard mention of this, but I certainly do remember being 'exposed' to this way of thinking when I was younger, and encountering it when I was just beginning my first inquiries into evolution and creation.

I wonder, was this part of mainline creationist thinking back then? Or was this a fringe view?

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

I wonder, was this part of mainline creationist thinking back then?

I seriously doubt it. Actually, until the '60's, when Henry Morris (who by the way passed on last Saturday, God rest his soul) wrote The Genesis Flood, YEC was as almost much a fringe view as geocentrism is today.

 

[Pats]

I wonder, was this part of mainline creationist thinking back then?

I seriously hope not!

Satan is guilty of a great many things... but burrying dinosaur bones? That's laughable to me. I think there are better explinations behind marrying together the fossil record and YEC view than this one.

 

[ebia]

Presumably by the same logic Satan is responsible for the stars in the sky, the construction of the earth, the sun, ... the twin nested heirarchy in living creations, and all the other evidence against a literal YEC understanding. I.e. Satan is responsible for the whole of creation.

 

[Pats]

Presumably by the same logic Satan is responsible for the stars in the sky, the construction of the earth, the sun, ... the twin nested heirarchy in living creations, and all the other evidence against a literal YEC understanding. I.e. Satan is responsible for the whole of creation.

Blaming Satan or crediting Satan with such things has got to come from some serious misunderstanding of scripture, if it is even Christians spreading such things.

It is not difficult to accept the YEC POV and understand that God did not create things in a state as if they were newborn. Adam was a man, not an infant, and neither was the universe created in infancy, it was created as if it had already been there, in my understanding and view point.

 

[ebia]

it was created as if it had already been there

With history that never happened?

 

[Pats]

With history that never happened?

No. When I said that, I was not refering to bones in the ground, so perhaps we are straying off topic. I was responding to :

Presumably by the same logic Satan is responsible for the stars in the sky, the construction of the earth, the sun, ... the twin nested heirarchy in living creations, and all the other evidence against a literal YEC understanding. I.e. Satan is responsible for the whole of creation.

Adam was a man, not an infant. There were trees that stood as very mature trees and sapplings, there were newborn stars and stars on the verge of super nova. The universe nor the earth nor the animals and people on it were created in infancy. This thinking does not conflict with the YEC POV nor the Scriptures. And it is a very valid explination.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

If the universe is only 6000 years old, and is only supposed to exist for another 1000 years or so - then why would stars "appear" to have lifespans of billions of years? Why would the earth "appear" to be billions of years old too?

 

[ebia]

No. When I said that, I was not refering to bones in the ground, so perhaps we are straying off topic. I was responding to :



Adam was a man, not an infant. There were trees that stood as very mature trees and sapplings, there were newborn stars and stars on the verge of super nova. The universe nor the earth nor the animals and people on it were created in infancy. This thinking does not conflict with the YEC POV nor the Scriptures. And it is a very valid explination.

And all those things have a history we can read - the light from stars tells us about the past. The tree rings inside a tree tell a detailed story of the life of that tree so a tree created mature is created with a history that never happened.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

And all those things have a history we can read - the light from stars tells us about the past. The tree rings inside a tree tell a detailed story of the life of that tree so a tree created mature is created with a history that never happened.

Thats right, the tree might show years of drought or mild winters that never ever happened.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Adam was a man, not an infant. There were trees that stood as very mature trees and sapplings, there were newborn stars and stars on the verge of super nova. The universe nor the earth nor the animals and people on it were created in infancy. This thinking does not conflict with the YEC POV nor the Scriptures. And it is a very valid explination.

so did Adam have memories of growing up?
could he have had a scar on his knee from a childhood fall from a tree and the memories of his mom consoling him?

we call them false memories for a reason.
can God lie? is it reasonable from what God has revealed about Himself to build a YECist science on appearances when you know that they are false, are faked, are not real? or at least everything more than 10K years ago, what is that 1-(10k/15B)=99.99993 % of history is faked????
really?
is that a wise way to start building a Christian science, say a theistic alternative geology?

 

[Pats]

so did Adam have memories of growing up?
could he have had a scar on his knee from a childhood fall from a tree and the memories of his mom consoling him?

we call them false memories for a reason.
can God lie? is it reasonable from what God has revealed about Himself to build a YECist science on appearances when you know that they are false, are faked, are not real? or at least everything more than 10K years ago, what is that 1-(10k/15B)=99.99993 % of history is faked????
really?
is that a wise way to start building a Christian science, say a theistic alternative geology?

I do not believe that the Bible ever infers Adams had false memories.

It seems odd to me that you'd call a tree created as an adult a "false history," but what of the geneolagies in Genesis? How do they fit into the theory that the creation story is allegorical?

 

[ebia]

I do not believe that the Bible ever infers Adams had false memories.

implies not infers. If you or I infer something from what the bible says then the bible implies that. The bible is not a thinking being so it can't infer anything - inference is making the deduction. (Sorry, but one of my pet annoyances is people mixing up imply and infer).

But back to the point, do you think Adam was created with memories or not? Please consider the implications of your answer, whichever way you go.

It seems odd to me that you'd call a tree created as an adult a "false history," but what of the geneolagies in Genesis? How do they fit into the theory that the creation story is allegorical?

Ancient genealogies exist to make theological and political points, not be be historically accurate. Hence kings like Alexander traced his line back to the "gods". The biblical geneologies make a point about the nature and significance of the people involved - imposing historical accuracy upon them misses their point.

But all this is you avoiding the question - if trees were created with tree rings that tell a history then how do you deal with that? How do you deal with the fact that the universe tells us about a history far older than 6,000 years through tree rings, ice cores, the light from distant stars, and a million and one other ways if that story never happened? Christ spoke this universe and hence that story - did he lie?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

I do not believe that the Bible ever infers Adams had false memories.

It seems odd to me that you'd call a tree created as an adult a "false history," but what of the geneolagies in Genesis? How do they fit into the theory that the creation story is allegorical?

i have no idea how things in Gen1-5 fits into an allegorical theory, i believe it is historical.

the geneologies follow Adam, therefore they are not in the category of false memories, those would precede Adam's special creation.

but to address what is the omphalos question, if the universe is 10K years old, and we can put together tree rings that apparently go back 12K years. then those before the creation of the universe are equivalent to false memories.

plus the whole problem of how they all lived through a global flood. and didn't even have extra wide growth rings because of all the water.

now could God have created with apparent age?
of course. however it does lead to the extraordinary problems of the "brains in a vat", last thursdayism, decartes demon, morton's demon, etc (terms to google if you wish to follow up)
but most of all, creation with apparent age seems to contradict important revealed attributes of God.
and it doesn't matter to science, it simply is looking at the apparent age, not being able to detect the creation with methodologically naturalistic tools.

so it is bad theology trying to trump good science......

 

[The Lady Kate]

I do not believe that the Bible ever infers Adams had false memories.

But YEC "Science" claims that all of creation has false memories... falsely planted by God.

You see the analogy?

It seems odd to me that you'd call a tree created as an adult a "false history,"

Because that's exactly what it has. If we were to cut down one of these created trees, how many rings would it have?

If it had any rings at all, then it has a false history... falsely planted by God.

but what of the geneolagies in Genesis? How do they fit into the theory that the creation story is allegorical?

Are the geneologies factual, complete, and accurate? Is nothing left out?