|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,461 Year: 3,718/9,624 Month: 589/974 Week: 202/276 Day: 42/34 Hour: 5/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Manzer Guest |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Dinosaurs explained biblically | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ddg Inactive Member |
quote: I received a similar story in Sunday school as a child. The difference: God shrunk the dinosaurs so they could fit on the ark and and not hurt anyone. He decided not to make them big again.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nos482 Inactive Member |
quote: I'm surprised that they haven't use the cartoon "The Flintstones" as proof that humans and dinos lived side by side at the same time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NimLore Inactive Member |
As a creationist I will give this opinion...
Look at the size of eggs of the dinosaurs that we have found in the fossil record.. and the baby dinosaurs.. now I certainly believe that Noah took them either by the egg or by the baby.. which would totally work out.. come on the math would even work... If you look at the amber deposits we have found that have air locked within, the oxygen level in those deposist are 30% higher than we currently have.. to me that states that air was more pure at that time(preflood), hence the reason why they have small lung capacities.. Have you heard about the Ica Stones found in Peru? If not than I recommend you searching them out and giving them a good read... ancient stone carvings of dinosaurs... not uncovered till current times.. come on.. look at the legends all over earth concerning "dragons", seeing that the word dinosaur did not even exist prior to the 1800s I am led to ask what would mankind have called dinosaurs prior to that? Dragons is a very good description.. What about the lockness monster? What about the reported sightings even up to the 1600s and beyond of terradactuls and other dinos? We need to take our head out of the texts and evaluate the truth of of the legends that are out there... Now biblically I believe dinos are in Genesis chapter 6 verse 4... My reasoning for believing that these "Nephilim" are dinosaurs as as follows; the meaning of Nephilim is something along the lines of the fallen ones.. well who are the fallen ones? the serpent in the garden rings in my ears to this.. in the same verse it talks of the children of God comeing down and essentially having sex with the daughters of men.. this makes me think of the supposed "common ancestor" of man and apes.. the neanderthals and the other bones... they obviously would have similarities to humans but there would be definitie physical differences between them and us... the verse goes on to say that these children were mighty men, men of reknown... well this to me rings a bell of Dragon Slayers and the like(again to appreciate this we must give some credit to the great legends past down through time)... and we must know that there would be active legends past down from Noahs sons and even the evil practices talked about in the next verses, because his sons were not righteous.. it was Noah credited with righteousness but that is another story. Are there any studies that conclude the age ranges of the dinosaurs? as how old the average of them were when they died? what is the longest living one? Is it not interesting to that it only takes a decade to make a fossil?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
Out of all the YECist 'evangelists' out there, why do the worst ones always become known? *Sniff Sniff* Me smell Hovind.
------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NimLore Inactive Member |
well for one thing.. I have never realy read any Hovind articles.
Correct a fool and he will hate you, correct a wise man and he will love you. The begininning of knowledge is the fear of the Lord, but fools despise wisdom and instruction. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. [This message has been edited by NimLore, 11-02-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"well for one thing.. I have never realy read any Hovind articles."
--Hovind doesn't write scientific articles. He only has his little 'seminars' and his bogus 'thesis'. ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nos482 Inactive Member |
Originally posted by NimLore:
The begininning of knowledge is the fear of the Lord, but fools despise wisdom and instruction. With knowledge there is no need for such nonsense as god. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. For love to have any real meaning it must be unconditional, otherwise it is nothing more than slavery of the worse sort. So, if your god does love us all than he/she/it will allow all into heaven without question of any sort. A parent loves their child enough to allow them to make their own choices in life, even if those are the wrong ones and yet will welcome them back home without a word against them. If not than that parent never truly loved their child. If you say otherwise than you believe in a lie. [This message has been edited by nos482, 11-02-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NimLore Inactive Member |
With your last statement I see hope in you yet.
If you are interested in seeing what I believe love to be than look up 1 Corinthians 13:4 to 8and compare it with 1 John 4:8 I recommend you read the whole chapter of 13 and give it a serious thought session. [This message has been edited by NimLore, 11-02-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gene90 Member (Idle past 3845 days) Posts: 1610 Joined: |
[QUOTE][B]With your last statement I see hope in you yet.[/QUOTE]
[/B] There is none, give it up. This fellow just makes inflammatory remarks. Most non-theists have logical and consistent reasons for their worldviews and will happily debate you in good faith. He's not one of them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NimLore Inactive Member |
Than I will take that as a challenge... It is my duty to pray for this man than that his attitude changes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gene90 Member (Idle past 3845 days) Posts: 1610 Joined: |
[QUOTE][B]come on the math would even work...[/QUOTE]
[/B] No it wouldn't. Too many species requiring too much food. And this isn't just about raising them, it is about rebuilding every ecosystem on the planet after a global catastrophe, using only biota contained on the Ark.
[QUOTE][B]Have you heard about the Ica Stones found in Peru? If not than I recommend you searching them out and giving them a good read... ancient stone carvings of dinosaurs... not uncovered till current times.. come on[/QUOTE] [/B] Yes, but they are a hoax. One guy makes money of them with a museum and selling them to tourists. The cave where they supposedly came from has never been announced. Ica Stones - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com
[QUOTE][B]Dragons is a very good description..[/QUOTE] [/B] Yes. Of fossil dinosaurs. There is no reason to think that people have ever been in the presence of living dinosaurs at any time in history. Plus no dinosaur remains have ever been found at archeaological sites and no human remains have ever been found occuring with dinosaur remains. Same with modern mammals. If dinosaurs and man coexisted then it is inevitable that people would have used dinosaur bones and skins in much the same way that they used mammoth tusks and hide, and it is also inevitable that a carnvirous dinosaur would have occasionally had an antelope or a bison for dinner. But no such overlap exists despite more than a hundred years of fossil searches all over the world.
[QUOTE][B]this makes me think of the supposed "common ancestor" of man and apes.. the neanderthals and the other bones[/QUOTE] [/B] Neanderthals are not a human ancestor.
[QUOTE][B]What about the lockness monster?[/QUOTE] [/B] There is not a single credible photograph since the surgeon's photo was admitted to be a hoax. Plus there is no way that the lake could support a population of large predators. And it is impossible for such a small population to survive over hundreds of years. Nessie hasn't been found and there's a reason for that.
[QUOTE][B]Is it not interesting to that it only takes a decade to make a fossil?[/QUOTE] [/B] But most fossils don't form in a decade. And by the way, pteradactyls are not dinosaurs. [This message has been edited by gene90, 11-02-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by gene90:
[B] Neanderthals are not a human ancestor. [QUOTE][B] NimLore, It is commonly believed that Neanderthals are our anscestors. This common belief seems to be wrong, though some scientist still debate it. Neandarthals were inititally assumed by early researchers to be ancestral modern humans and that belief has never really died out, despite the evidence to the contrary. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gene90 Member (Idle past 3845 days) Posts: 1610 Joined: |
[QUOTE][B]Neandarthals were inititally assumed by early researchers to be ancestral modern humans and that belief has never really died out, despite the evidence to the contrary.[/QUOTE]
[/B] This is a convenient example of how science works; new facts come to light and sometimes cause old ideas to be changed. I think most of the evidence regarding Neanderthals not being our ancestors is from mtDNA extracted from remains. In recent years there has also been a contention about the ultimate demise of the Neanderthals, whether they merely went extinct or whether they interbred with the invading H. sapiens. Again, the evidence is against interbreeding but the issue is still kind of controversal and will continue to be until much more information is collected.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nos482 Inactive Member |
quote: Like you just did?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gene90 Member (Idle past 3845 days) Posts: 1610 Joined: |
Yes. I suppose you're a bad influence.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024