Please Explain the Existence of Dinasour Fossils

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Ferd

Cooper, not that I believe the Young Earth theory, but land itself was created before day 4. everything that happened in Days 1 thru 4 happened in eternity. there is no way to determine who old something is if its existance predates the creation of time (which was created on day 4)

so how long did it take to create the Grand Canyon? or Mt. Everest?

it is impossible to fix a time, because those things were created before time was created.

Isochron dating is accurate within its various ranges when you have good samples. There are uraniumite crystals found in Australia that date to 3.4 to 3.6 billion years ago.

The way radiometric dating works is you measure the daughter isotopes from the decay of a radioactive element. These daughter elements are produced at a predictable rate and can be compared to the remainder of the radioactive element to find the date.

Now this method could obviously only work with material that has not be subject to contamination. That is why the crystals are such a good source of data. Everything, the parent element, the daughter element and everything else that was formed with it are locked into a crystaline matrix.

From the evidence of radiometric dating we can see that the earth is aproximately 4.5 billion years old. This figure corresponds with the more recent dating of lunar rocks and meteorites. That means that "time" has been going on for at least 4.5 billion years. If we look out into space, the farthest galaxies that we can see are about 12 -13 billion light years away. And, using a spectroscope we can see that the same sorts of chemical reactions are going on (that is were going on) back then.

Our universe has been moving through time for at least 12 billion years. Things have been moved around, stars have blown up and new ones formed. We observe this process and can see 13 billions years of it.

I suppose a thread on the days of Genesis might be a cool thing. One point that I would make is that Exodus 20:11 was spoken long before Genesis 1 was ever written.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by pelathais

One point that I would make is that Exodus 20:11 was spoken long before Genesis 1 was ever written.

What's your point mean?

God spoke Exo 20:11 and Moses is believed to have written both Genesis 1 and Exo 20.

Originally Posted by RevDWW

Job also mentions the behemoth with a tail like a cedar tree.......sounds like a dinosaur to me. Still doesn't negate the Gospel, even if a alien is in a backpack harness on a bigfoot, riding the lochness monster.......

ET, phone home!!!

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

What's your point mean?

God spoke Exo 20:11 and Moses is believed to have written both Genesis 1 and Exo 20.

Moses wrote the Law, the "Pentateuch" was the work of others who supplied addition historical material and devotional commentary. If you actually read the Pentateuch without the traditional mindset you will see that there is no reason to think that Moses wrote that material.

Read Deuteronomy 34:5-6 which tells us of the death and burial of Moses. Are we to respond by saying "Amen" to the notion that Moses wrote the account of his own death and burial? And what about the statement "unto this day...?" Nobody knows the burial place of Moses all the way up until the day he died and was buried? Tradition makes the Bible say nonsense.

Getting back to Genesis, the writer here appears to be the same writer who wrote of Moses' death. See Gen 26:33; Gen. 32:32; Gen. 35:20; Gen. 47:26.

Then turn to and read that last short chapter of Deuteronomy again (Deut. 34) but don't stop reading! Quickly turn the page and begin Joshua 1. Notice the continuity? The fact that Joshua and Deuteronomy were written by the same hand (and that hand could not have been Moses) is not something that the Bible is trying to hide.

And don't stop with Joshua. Joshua 24:29-33 closes out that book, and without even pausing for a breath Judges 1:1 opens up. And so it goes all the way through to the end of 2 Kings. The hand that wrote Genesis also had a hand in writing 2 Kings and that could not have been Moses.

Back to Genesis again, check out Genesis 14:14 - "he pursued them unto Dan." But wait a minute; Abraham was Dan's great-grandfather and Dan had not even been born yet. For that matter, Abraham was Abram in chapter 14 and had not children at all yet. How could Abraham have pursued his enemy all the way to a city named after his unborn great-grandson?

Well, Moses wrote it, right? Moses knew that Dan would eventually be born. Moses in fact lived over 400 years later. But that's where the real problem comes up. Moses died before the children of Israel moved into the Promised Land. Moreover, the tribe of Dan was given its inheritance in southern Israel near Reuben (Joshua 19:40-48). The southern coastal area was given to Dan by lot. Then notice Joshua 19:47. These are events that are described in detail in Judges 18.

So Abram pursued his enemies to a city named after his great-grandson and this is written by Moses even though that city never was known as "Dan" until more than 100 years after the death and burial of Moses- which Moses also wrote about?

The Bible itself almost screams for us to lay down our traditions and to actually pay attention to its message.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Read Deuteronomy 34:5-6 which tells us of the death and burial of Moses. Are we to respond by saying "Amen" to the notion that Moses wrote the account of his own death and burial? And what about the statement "unto this day...?" Nobody knows the burial place of Moses all the way up until the day he died and was buried? Tradition makes the Bible say nonsense.

I've heard the argument, that sounds good to me, that Moses heard from God about the future as much as he heard from God about Genesis' creation.

But I do consider your thoughts. But the MESSAGE is the most important thing, as you say. Who cares who wrote it? It is God's Word, anyway.

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Moses wrote the Law, the "Pentateuch" was the work of others who supplied addition historical material and devotional commentary. If you actually read the Pentateuch without the traditional mindset you will see that there is no reason to think that Moses wrote that material.

Read Deuteronomy 34:5-6 which tells us of the death and burial of Moses. Are we to respond by saying "Amen" to the notion that Moses wrote the account of his own death and burial? And what about the statement "unto this day...?" Nobody knows the burial place of Moses all the way up until the day he died and was buried? Tradition makes the Bible say nonsense.

Getting back to Genesis, the writer here appears to be the same writer who wrote of Moses' death. See Gen 26:33; Gen. 32:32; Gen. 35:20; Gen. 47:26.

Then turn to and read that last short chapter of Deuteronomy again (Deut. 34) but don't stop reading! Quickly turn the page and begin Joshua 1. Notice the continuity? The fact that Joshua and Deuteronomy were written by the same hand (and that hand could not have been Moses) is not something that the Bible is trying to hide.

And don't stop with Joshua. Joshua 24:29-33 closes out that book, and without even pausing for a breath Judges 1:1 opens up. And so it goes all the way through to the end of 2 Kings. The hand that wrote Genesis also had a hand in writing 2 Kings and that could not have been Moses.

Back to Genesis again, check out Genesis 14:14 - "he pursued them unto Dan." But wait a minute; Abraham was Dan's great-grandfather and Dan had not even been born yet. For that matter, Abraham was Abram in chapter 14 and had not children at all yet. How could Abraham have pursued his enemy all the way to a city named after his unborn great-grandson?

Well, Moses wrote it, right? Moses knew that Dan would eventually be born. Moses in fact lived over 400 years later. But that's where the real problem comes up. Moses died before the children of Israel moved into the Promised Land. Moreover, the tribe of Dan was given its inheritance in southern Israel near Reuben (Joshua 19:40-48). The southern coastal area was given to Dan by lot. Then notice Joshua 19:47. These are events that are described in detail in Judges 18.

So Abram pursued his enemies to a city named after his great-grandson and this is written by Moses even though that city never was known as "Dan" until more than 100 years after the death and burial of Moses- which Moses also wrote about?

The Bible itself almost screams for us to lay down our traditions and to actually pay attention to its message.

VERY thought provoking.

I have not read all of the posts I have missed over the last few days so you may have already touched on this...

Do you have any thoughts as to who, outside of Moses, may be the writer of Genesis?

[mfblume]

Pel,

"Unto this day" is a powerful point!

[COOPER]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Moses wrote the Law, the "Pentateuch" was the work of others who supplied addition historical material and devotional commentary. If you actually read the Pentateuch without the traditional mindset you will see that there is no reason to think that Moses wrote that material.

Read Deuteronomy 34:5-6 which tells us of the death and burial of Moses. Are we to respond by saying "Amen" to the notion that Moses wrote the account of his own death and burial? And what about the statement "unto this day...?" Nobody knows the burial place of Moses all the way up until the day he died and was buried? Tradition makes the Bible say nonsense.

Getting back to Genesis, the writer here appears to be the same writer who wrote of Moses' death. See Gen 26:33; Gen. 32:32; Gen. 35:20; Gen. 47:26.

Then turn to and read that last short chapter of Deuteronomy again (Deut. 34) but don't stop reading! Quickly turn the page and begin Joshua 1. Notice the continuity? The fact that Joshua and Deuteronomy were written by the same hand (and that hand could not have been Moses) is not something that the Bible is trying to hide.

And don't stop with Joshua. Joshua 24:29-33 closes out that book, and without even pausing for a breath Judges 1:1 opens up. And so it goes all the way through to the end of 2 Kings. The hand that wrote Genesis also had a hand in writing 2 Kings and that could not have been Moses.

Back to Genesis again, check out Genesis 14:14 - "he pursued them unto Dan." But wait a minute; Abraham was Dan's great-grandfather and Dan had not even been born yet. For that matter, Abraham was Abram in chapter 14 and had not children at all yet. How could Abraham have pursued his enemy all the way to a city named after his unborn great-grandson?

Well, Moses wrote it, right? Moses knew that Dan would eventually be born. Moses in fact lived over 400 years later. But that's where the real problem comes up. Moses died before the children of Israel moved into the Promised Land. Moreover, the tribe of Dan was given its inheritance in southern Israel near Reuben (Joshua 19:40-48). The southern coastal area was given to Dan by lot. Then notice Joshua 19:47. These are events that are described in detail in Judges 18.

So Abram pursued his enemies to a city named after his great-grandson and this is written by Moses even though that city never was known as "Dan" until more than 100 years after the death and burial of Moses- which Moses also wrote about?

The Bible itself almost screams for us to lay down our traditions and to actually pay attention to its message.

WOW!!! I NEVER REALIZED THAT !!!

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

VERY thought provoking.

I have not read all of the posts I have missed over the last few days so you may have already touched on this...

Do you have any thoughts as to who, outside of Moses, may be the writer of Genesis?

Originally Posted by mfblume

Pel,

"Unto this day" is a powerful point!

I think Mike has it here. First of all, my belief: I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. I believe it to be accurate when properly understood but that there are also a lot of literary passages and even figures of speech that we should be careful not to over literalize. Insisting upon an overly rigid fundamentalism causes people to lose faith.

The Bible is clearly a composite work. For example Judges 4 tells the story of Deborah and Barak. However, Judges 5, tells the same story but here it is composed as a song that is attributed to Deborah. Most Hebrew linguists agree that the "song" in Judges 5 is written in a form of Hebrew that is far older than the rest of the book. It's sort of like a modern English student trying to read Beowulf in its original form.

I note that the Bible has carried this seeming anachronism for centuries, even millenia without changing it. This tells me that whoever was involved in putting the Bible together actually wanted the reader (at least the Hebrew readers) to appreciate the fact that the text has a history. There was no "slip up" by scribes trying to hide anything here- the older version of Hebrew in song form was (and is!) an important part of the Bible's story.

There are many other "seams" in which it becomes apparent that different source material was "stiched" together with a contempory narrative. The "Yahweh versus Elohim" passages in Genesis, though difficult to completely seperate, may represent a similar clue that the Bible gives us as to its own "history."

Following the "unto this day" statement from Genesis through the book of Nehemiah would seem to place "this day" sometime during the life of Ezra the Scribe. And again, even though some unbelievers relish finding these passages and saying, "Aha!" I feel that this is in fact an important part of the Bible's message and even a pillar of the polemic arguments that it's trying to make (Ezra 9:7 and Nehemiah 9:32).

When the writer said, "...unto this day..." he was obviously making a strong appeal to his audience's sense of history and the customs and monuments that still existed which bore witness to that history. The Bible isn't trying to "hide" anything here, it's actively seeking converts with the "... unto this day..." references.