dinosaurs and man

[MCA]

Ive posted a good deal on this forum and am still looking for something to save me so i am giving it all ive got. In case anyone doesnt know about me, im a former christian turned agnostic who wants to return to the faith,

My question is.

Through research i am willing to bet that man has seen dinosaurs in his life, whether it was 300 years ago or 3000 years ago, thru the many artifacts and drawings found in history of dinosaurs.

Please help me understand how important this is, How does this bring a big blow to evolution and age of the earth. I am doing all i can to disprove evolution and an old earth, although i know an old earth and evolution do not technically disprove God, they do make it harder at least for me to believe in him,

Thanks your time everyone i appreciate it.

 

[Ursus scientia]

Please help me understand how important this is, How does this bring a big blow to evolution and age of the earth. I am doing all i can to disprove evolution and an old earth, although i know an old earth and evolution do not technically disprove God, they do make it harder at least for me to believe in him

This is a bad way of thinking.

You should believe things are true because you have reasons to believe that they are true, not because you want them to be true. If you're happier being wrong about some things because it makes you feel better, then that's your business, but I don't understand it at all. I prefer being justified in my knowledge and actions. :/

But to answer your question, you'd have to falsify evolution and somehow show that the age of the earth is different from the age given to it by experts who have spent their lives studying such things. It will be very very difficult indeed. Let me know if you get anywhere. ; )

 

[MCA]

This is a bad way of thinking.

You should believe things are true because you have reasons to believe that they are true, not because you want them to be true. If you're happier being wrong about some things because it makes you feel better, then that's your business, but I don't understand it at all. I prefer being justified in my knowledge and actions. :/

But to answer your question, you'd have to falsify evolution and somehow show that the age of the earth is different from the age given to it by experts who have spent their lives studying such things. It will be very very difficult indeed. Let me know if you get anywhere. ; )

You make a very good point. See the thing is I do believe in evolution and also an old earth, but i also want to believe in God. And these 2 things are keeping me from doing that. I have seen artifacts in Peru and ancient drawings across the world of dinosaurs that man has drawn. Im trying to combat an old earth and evolution with these findings.

 

[seashale76]

I'm really confused as to why the idea of evolution and an old earth and whether or not men and dinosaurs existed simultaneously is a concern/impediment to faith for you and others. These are not important issues. The scriptures mention nothing one way or the other about them. Accepting evolution, an old earth, and the existence of dinosaurs shouldn't automatically equate to the non-existence of God to anyone.

 

[Sedoy]

You are on the right track to begin your way to God by disproving evolution. One must realize that he is not just some upright walking, talking monkey. If you believe that you are monkey you will think like one.

Once you realize that you are a created being then there has to be Creator and there has to be a purpose for which He created you. He does not create just for creating sake.

You seek knowledge of Creator, love Creator and seek to understand that purpose for which He created you.

Evidence against evolution is plentiful, for evolution – non-existent. Evolution is a religious system requiring totally blind belief in it. At the same time Christianity is not a religion at all. Christianity did not save one person, Jesus saved many. Christianity is simply a guide to that personal Savior Jesus. Personal and real Savior who is, once found, can be experienced. Yes, Jesus can be experienced. In which way? Different for everybody. In the way that He knows that you need. He knows what you need better then you.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Ive posted a good deal on this forum and am still looking for something to save me so i am giving it all ive got. In case anyone doesnt know about me, im a former christian turned agnostic who wants to return to the faith,

My question is.

Through research i am willing to bet that man has seen dinosaurs in his life, whether it was 300 years ago or 3000 years ago, thru the many artifacts and drawings found in history of dinosaurs.

Please help me understand how important this is, How does this bring a big blow to evolution and age of the earth. I am doing all i can to disprove evolution and an old earth, although i know an old earth and evolution do not technically disprove God, they do make it harder at least for me to believe in him,

Thanks your time everyone i appreciate it.

Hello again MCA,

I just replied to your other post. I didn't realize this was your difficulty. I recognized in your story (on the other thread) some parallels to mine. Now I see there are even more.

My first degree was in biology, emphasis in zoology. I studied a LOT of evolutionary theory. Well, in truth, studies went so quickly that what I did was learn what they told me, not much time to investigate it, because there were always exams and labs and more courses and it all went by very quickly. But yes, it shook the faith I didn't really have at that time (the one I thought I had because my mother thought she had because ... somewhere back there, my great-grandmother really WAS a Christian).

I came to Christ in another way, through desperation, a cry of help sent into the universe, no longer being able to go on in life. The response and the change in me was immediate and dramatic, and THAT provided me with "proof" enough. There's quite a bit more, but this is enough.

Later, because I held the sciences in high regard, I was in the process of developing a curriculum that would "demonstrate evolution". I had been told what to believe, but I realized there were holes in the idea, and I set about to fill them and produce a fine proof for evolution. (At the time, I didn't have any trouble reconciling it with my new faith and indeed, as one poster here said, there are Christians who never have a problem.)

Now, DISPROVING evolution is just as difficult as PROVING evolution. Neither is likely to be possible, frankly. One can find evidence on both sides, and one can fit that evidence into the story in their mind. Along the way, one tends to ALWAYS interpret the evidence according to their beliefs. This is, in my opinion, one of the main reasons both sides tend to ridicule the other.

Perhaps I should stop there. But I will tell you ... as I sought out to PROVE evolution, I realized that the whole thing really was a construct that fit what evidences had been found and interpreted facts according to a preconceived set of ideas. I found it impossible to prove. I ALSO discovered that there really had been failure to correct textbooks in some cases, allowing previous "evidence" that didn't really fit to stand. And I started checking out the other side, and I found (to my chagrin) that some of the creation scientists were not being intellectually honest either.

Yes, I think perhaps I will leave it by saying that both sides have been dishonest, both sides interpret things as they wish, and both sides employ faulty reasoning without even being able to see it (seemingly). You could study this for YEARS, assuming you already have the necessary scientific background, and not make a complete review of all the ideas. That may not help you. But if you simply want to prove that men may have seen dinosaurs? Well, reviewing a small amount of information is easier than a large amount.

You are asking how important it is? Well, I suppose if you find the continued existence of supposedly extinct forms that were supposed to have evolved into current creatures, then that would make evolution harder to support. Theoretically, if the old form evolved, the new form must have been superior, and would have likely pushed the old form into extinction. The problem is, there is no real fossil record that I am aware of that shows definitively the steps of one creature evolving to a present form. This has been addressed by saying that the changes must not have happened gradually, but instead there were big leaps of change. Again, this is not demonstrated.

The problem with "proof" from a scientific standpoint, is that you must be able to recreate the event and observe it. It is impossible, by scientific standards, to either prove or disprove evolution.

People say things like "that's why it's called the 'Theory of Evolution' ... it's just a theory" but those people are either being disingenuous or are failing to understand what "theory" means from a scientific standpoint. We have the Theory of Gravity. It's NOT a theory (meaning an idea or best guess) and it CAN be proven. We can drop things, see them fall, demonstrate it over and over.

But it is completely impossible to recreate evolution or make it happen, because if it did happen, it is a historical event. It is thus impossible to prove, and also difficult to disprove.

Hmmm .... hope this helps. I pray I'm not making things worse for you.

 

[paul1149]

I don't have a lot of answers, but I do believe that man thinks he knows more than he actually does know. For instance, the Bible supports a water canopy over the earth until the great Flood. That protective canopy would have skewed the rates of radioactive decay, and subsequent dating based on it, in a major way.

I am not as trained as Kylissa, but I also have seen dishonesty on the evo side. And I know enough about human nature not to trust the Creationist side implicitly either. If your faith rests on who is making the most cogent argument at any given time, you are going to be in for a very bumpy ride. These things are not provable scientifically because they cannot be replicated.

What can be of value, though, is to reach a point where you can sincerely say that neither side can speak with absolute authority. It is freeing to divorce your faith from man's limited intellectual capabilities. The Lord did tell us that we must enter the Kingdom as a child. So often He would cut through the superficial issues to get to the heart. Knowledge and wisdom are good when used right, but basically they are value-added.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I also have seen dishonesty on the evo side. And I know enough about human nature not to trust the Creationist side implicitly either. If your faith rests on who is making the most cogent argument at any given time, you are going to be in for a very bumpy ride. These things are not provable scientifically because they cannot be replicated.

What can be of value, though, is to reach a point where you can sincerely say that neither side can speak with absolute authority. It is freeing to divorce your faith from man's limited intellectual capabilities. The Lord did tell us that we must enter the Kingdom as a child. So often He would cut through the superficial issues to get to the heart. Knowledge and wisdom are good when used right, but basically they are value-added.

Just revisited this, and I wanted to say you make an EXCELLENT point here.

I see so very many people who are basically led by the intellect/debate ability of others, which boils down to which side currently has the best "star player(s)". Thus is a very dangerous thing on which to gamble your eternal future.

I'm not saying you are doing this (to the OP), only that I have seen it MANY times over the years. And I'm certainly not saying to throw one's intellect out the window. But ... If you are going to use your intellect to arrive at some answer, you MUST be able and willing to be intellectually honest enough to return to square one.

You MUST be willing to fully reject such things as the reasons why the dating methods are said to be accurate, until they can prove to you that every assumption those methods rest upon are unshakeable. (And I am sorry, but in fact they are not.) At the same time, in being "fair" I'm sure there are assumptions on the "other side" that would have to be discarded as well, but I am not really qualified to say what they might be, since I approached this question from a background in science rather than a theological one. Ironically, that might have made my journey easier, as one is better equipped to evaluate the claims of something that is more clearly understood.

It is certainly not easy to reject ALL of the premises and start from the very beginning. It took me a while to tease them all apart and honestly and critically examine them one by one, all the while realizing that each discovery devalued the years and thousands of dollars I'd invested in my education. It's much easier to smugly sit back and rest upon what you "know" based on what you've been told. But essentially that is all most of one's education is - a simple amassing of ideas and facts (sometimes true and sometimes perhaps not) passed down from someone else.

And making your decision based solely on the eloquence of another is not a wise course, IMO.

(Btw Paul, I found your second paragraph in the quote above to be even more important, and you're absolutely right. I don't mean to devalue it by what I said, which is why I left it intact - it's only that I wanted to comment on the part I bolded. Great post btw!)

 

[dhh712]

although i know an old earth and evolution do not technically disprove God, they do make it harder at least for me to believe in him

Why would it make it more difficult for you to believe in God if you see worldly rationalization of old earth and evolution to be more provable according to the scientific standards which have been adopted than the idea of a young earth? Our understanding of everything in the world will always be skewed by sin which has corrupted everything on this earth.

Personally and from my own experience, I don't feel it is possible to base one's belief in God off of somehow rationalizing Him so that He fits into something we can understand based on cultural and/or scientific standards. I feel that such a thing will only fall away in time from further excursions in rationalizing and reasoning.

 

[dazed]

Ive posted a good deal on this forum and am still looking for something to save me so i am giving it all ive got. In case anyone doesnt know about me, im a former christian turned agnostic who wants to return to the faith,

My question is.

Through research i am willing to bet that man has seen dinosaurs in his life, whether it was 300 years ago or 3000 years ago, thru the many artifacts and drawings found in history of dinosaurs.

Please help me understand how important this is, How does this bring a big blow to evolution and age of the earth. I am doing all i can to disprove evolution and an old earth, although i know an old earth and evolution do not technically disprove God, they do make it harder at least for me to believe in him,

Thanks your time everyone i appreciate it.

When my daughter asked her Sunday school teacher why the Bible didn't mention the dinosaurs, she pointed to the "great beasts" in Genesis.

 

[RCF]

Good googaly moogaly MCA,
Your mind is in a constant state of thoughtful flux!

I love that you talk about this stuff. I don't have much insight beyond what has already been brought up, but I would like you to know something about turtles. I learned this in herpetology.

Turtles are an evolutionary enigma. They are in the fossil records for a really long time...as in dinosaur old. Strangely, they are more or less, evolutionarily, the same today as they were millions of years ago. So I guess you could say that anyone that has seen a turtle has seen a dinosaur. I know, not really. But why haven't they evolved into something super turtlistic by now? Why doesn't this evidence contradict the Theory of Evolution? Because this particular theory is not mathematically, systematically reliable or predictable.

If you were trying to make something believable, but not provable, this is one way to do it. Not saying Darwin was trying to do this, but this is the result of having an unprovable theory as the basis of a belief system. It takes a lot of faith to believe Darwin as well.

A turtle is only one piece in an amazing environmental tapestry we have here on earth. You can't just look at one piece of a thing to understand the whole. With science, proof is required to support a theory and decide if it is probable or not. In our lifetime, we will probably not get the level of probability you are searching for. No way to show why the big bang banged. Where did that first paramecium come from? How can life come from non life?
To me, this is where I had to look to find my justification, my resolve. Science can't show me how time can start at one point, but not before. I realized that intelligence is not dependent on knowing and understanding everything, but understanding and realizing the limitations to what we can know.

It's actually quiet scientific, really. The only logical answer is that something outside of the known equation for life must exist and was required to act upon a dead system to make it live...insert your favorite Michael Angelo painting of God here.

Ok, I haven't really talked a lot about dinosaurs, but my point is this. That will be a good question to ask God later. "How did you do that? Were those dinosaur skeletons demon remains that you purified during or after the flood?" Just sayin'. It only seems magical or mystical when we don't understand the functionality of the equation. If it were all spelled right out for us, no faith would be required. And then there would still be reasons to question if this one was put to rest.

I'm still with you brother MCA,
keep that evolving brain of yours active and evolving. And apparently I did have some insight. Just didn't realize what would flow from my fingertips when I started this response.

RCF

 

[parsley]

Personally I don't think evolution is a big deal, or was ever intended to be a big topic in the realm of our faith and relationship with God.

I do find the topic fascinating though, and have run across many first-hand documents in every continent and era.

One of the larger controversies is the authenticity of the Ica Stones. What is it-- ten or fifteen thousand hand-carved stones. That would be quite an expense of time and labor for someone trying to scam the world.

The stories I find most fascinating are early American reports of things appearing while people are walking on a familiar trail or along a river.

There were teams of sonographers who did recent studies of some of the contemporary lake monster legends, and found high-pitched calls similar to beluga whales, that had not been previously records.

Whole boats of people reported seeing lake creatures at once, and in one case a boat tipped over. So... dinosaurs and man, that could be a current situation. Depending on the definition of dinosaur. They're just reptiles. (And amphibians, birds, insects.)

But back to your reason for asking, I would encourage you to get off the logistics topics and seek God Himself. Walking in faith has very little to do with the typical debate topics. We don't approach Native Americans and say, "Hey I like your spirit journeys but that turtle creation story is a little past my comfort zone."

There are times I need to step back from listening to sermons, because I get caught up in the social aspects of the religion -- who said what, whether a teaching is off base or worthwhile, too many teachings on submitting to one person or another. I need to clear my head of the many voices about the faith, and just do the walk. Get out of the ABOUT zone.

 

[parsley]

And then there are studies on RNA lining itself up on its own.
New Study Brings Scientists Closer to the Origin of RNA - Astrobiology
But where does RNA come from? If another planet, where did that life come from? There are no easy answers.

If our planet is billions of years old, it certainly went through a lot of change internally and externally. Was it larger, smaller, lumpier, in a more lopsided orbit, super-magnetized... it couldn't possibly have looked the same for 4.5 billion years.

 

[paul1149]

Now it's my turn for a revisit.

We have a faith that claims to be historically grounded. When you come across a lead in like this:

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, while Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Iturea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, God’s word came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. -Luke 3:1-2​

... you know that our faith rests not in myth, but on reality.

For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,”
we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. -2Pet 1:16-18​

So it is important to get the basis right. When Karl Marx wrote his Manifesto he dedicated it to Charles Darwin, because he realized what Darwin didn't: that Darwin's work was a direct attack on the historicity of the Judeo-Christian faith - or at least would be used that way. And it has, to great tragic effect.

After I came to Christ I still had some very big questions. The main one concerned the deity of Christ. I had studied with the JWs, and while I never joined, their teaching had made a deep impression on me. The question of Christ being LORD, as in "divine", drove me to distraction. I counseled with my pastor about it, and he wisely didn't bury me with proof texts. He knew I had to find out for myself.

Two weeks later I came to an inflection point. I told the Lord that I was going to place the issue on the shelf for now, and serve Him as best I could where I was, with what I knew. I told Him that I trusted Him to show me what I needed to know when I needed to know it. With that peace rushed in and I had a release - "ahead of time" as it were, in the spirit, as these things often must happen.

It took about nine months as I recall, before I got the revelation that Jesus is indeed LORD. It was delivered directly through my spirit. No man can affect my knowledge and understanding of it. It is settled.

I went through a similar process concerning the Roman Catholic Church. To this day I can't listen to back and forth debates on the subject. They are mere noise. But I have a certain understanding about it, which while perhaps not complete, gives me peace and cannot be shaken.

The evo thing is important - though more so to some than others. Search it out as best you can, and I hope you find the answer that resonates in your heart. But if you don't come to a satisfactory conclusion, and if you find your search increasingly places you at the mercy of man's flawed opinions and robs you of peace that Christ offers, then it may be time to place it on the altar for a while, and in humility tell God that while you don't have all the answers, you will serve Him as best you can as you are, with what you do know.

 

[Lopez 15721]

Ive posted a good deal on this forum and am still looking for something to save me so i am giving it all ive got. In case anyone doesnt know about me, im a former christian turned agnostic who wants to return to the faith,

My question is.

Through research i am willing to bet that man has seen dinosaurs in his life, whether it was 300 years ago or 3000 years ago, thru the many artifacts and drawings found in history of dinosaurs.

Please help me understand how important this is, How does this bring a big blow to evolution and age of the earth. I am doing all i can to disprove evolution and an old earth, although i know an old earth and evolution do not technically disprove God, they do make it harder at least for me to believe in him,

Thanks your time everyone i appreciate it.

Through what research exactly do you find that man Co exited with dinosaurs? What artifacts and drawings are you referring to?

Dinosaurs existed roughly 65 million years ago. Not 300 or 3000. That is the first part of anything in relation to this issue you'd have to disprove for anything else to make sense. However, the evidence is overwhelming and inexcusable. The only instance of man and dinosaurs Co existing is in cartoons like the Flintstones.

 

[rubyinprogress]

Here's a website that you can type in search criteria and get creation related answers. Try typing in "dinosaurs" and see if you find anything that helps in your search.

creation.com

Also Feb 4th there will be a debate between Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis and Bill Nye the Science Guy. It will be available via live webcast.

Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham | Answers in Genesis

Blessings!

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Ive posted a good deal on this forum and am still looking for something to save me so i am giving it all ive got. In case anyone doesnt know about me, im a former christian turned agnostic who wants to return to the faith,

My question is.

Through research i am willing to bet that man has seen dinosaurs in his life, whether it was 300 years ago or 3000 years ago, thru the many artifacts and drawings found in history of dinosaurs.

Please help me understand how important this is, How does this bring a big blow to evolution and age of the earth. I am doing all i can to disprove evolution and an old earth, although i know an old earth and evolution do not technically disprove God, they do make it harder at least for me to believe in him,

Thanks your time everyone i appreciate it.

Dinosaurs, age of the earth, and evolution are just distractions. Study the bible personally and pray for understanding of what you are studying. Like the Prego ad says ....."It's in there!"

 

[lesliedellow]

Don't waste your time trying to disprove evolution. If you are going to believe in God, then that belief has got to encompass the fact that he brought us into being through a process of evolution.

What you really need, I suspect, is to read somebody who accepts the fact of evolution, but who also takes the Bible very seriously, and defends (for example) the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, and the truth of the Exodus account (contra many modern theologians). One such might be Tremper Longman.

 

[Radagast]

dinosaurs and man

The Christian faith is not about dinosaurs.

It's about Jesus.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The only dinosaurs human beings have encountered are the sort with beaks and feathers. If you've ever eaten chicken or turkey, you've eaten a dinosaur.

Non-avian dinosaurs died out around 65 million years ago, the evidence for this is overwhelming.

It's also not a problem for Christianity, as Christianity has no "official" position on such matters, and the Scriptures don't speak on such things; though some would like to create a conflict where none exists.

Christians of all sorts are quite capable of being Christian and embrace the natural sciences, many in fact have the study of those sciences as their very vocation in life. They don't have to compromise anything in their faith to be good scientists, and they don't have to compromise their scientific integrity to be faithful Christians.

-CryptoLutheran