Please Explain the Existence of Dinasour Fossils - Page 6

RandyWayne · #51 02-23-2008, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OP_Carl

Sort of like the DULL GLOW on the faces of people discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

A bit of a nonsensical comment huh?

RandyWayne · #52 02-23-2008, 09:15 AM

Of course we all know that the answer to "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" is 8.......

"indeed"

OP_Carl · #53 02-23-2008, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

A bit of a nonsensical comment huh?

You ain't seen NUTHIN!

smurfette · #54 02-23-2008, 09:25 AM

I think I'm forming a fossil right now! Oh, wait - It's just my imprint on the couch from being on the computer all morning!

OneAccord · #55 02-23-2008, 09:43 AM

Dinosaurs existed. Thats a fact. Another fact is, some still do exist. Not the Jaurassic Park variety, but, some are still around. True, they have evolved, become smaller due to changes in their envioment, but they are around.

Now, don't shoot me for using the word evolve. Evolutiuon is also a fact, when it is used in the strictest since of its difinition. To "evolve" is to "adapt to the enviorment". Our bodies evolve all the time. A pale person spends time at the beach, they get a sun burn. But, over time, their skin darkens (tans) to protect itself from the sun. A person uses a shovel for the first time. Their hands blister. But, over time, the hands develop extra layers of skin (callous) to protect their hands from injury. Thats evolution. ( Man did not evolve from one species to another, however).

The problem (in my uneducated opinion), is that when we try to nail the first few Chapters of Genesis as fact (It happened exactly like that), we encounter difficulties. In our quest for answers, we only dig up more questions. The light someone talked about earlier. Where did it come from prior to the 4th day? And, the time line. The belief the earth is 6000 years old is from those who take the Creation story literally.

I think, and again, this is just my opinion, the Creation story is a poem or song that sums up the story of how the world was made. It isn't to be taken as a literal fact. It leaves too many unanswered question to be a factual account of the Creation. Does that mean I believe it is inaccurate? No, any more than Jesus' parable of Lazurus and the Rich Man is inaccurate. Not literal fact but an illustration to make a point. The Creation story of Genesis is simply that. A parable that makes the point that it was God that created the universe. The first 4 words of Genesis tell us what we need to know. That it is God who is the Creator. Everything else, how long it took, how it happened, the sequence of events, and so on, is open for speculation and conjecture. But to nail it down and say "This is how it happened. Period." only genders questions like "What about the Dinosaurs?" It really answers no questions at all.

smurfette · #56 02-23-2008, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneAccord

Dinosaurs existed. Thats a fact. Another fact is, some still do exist. Not the Jaurassic Park variety, but, some are still around. True, they have evolved, become smaller due to changes in their envioment, but they are around.

Now, don't shoot me for using the word evolve. Evolutiuon is also a fact, when it is used in the strictest since of its difinition. To "evolve" is to "adapt to the enviorment". Our bodies evolve all the time. A pale person spends time at the beach, they get a sun burn. But, over time, their skin darkens (tans) to protect itself from the sun. A person uses a shovel for the first time. Their hands blister. But, over time, the hands develop extra layers of skin (callous) to protect their hands from injury. Thats evolution. ( Man did not evolve from one species to another, however).

The problem (in my uneducated opinion), is that when we try to nail the first few Chapters of Genesis as fact (It happened exactly like that), we encounter difficulties. In our quest for answers, we only dig up more questions. The light someone talked about earlier. Where did it come from prior to the 4th day? And, the time line. The belief the earth is 6000 years old is from those who take the Creation story literally.

I think, and again, this is just my opinion, the Creation story is a poem or song that sums up the story of how the world was made. It isn't to be taken as a literal fact. It leaves too many unanswered question to be a factual account of the Creation. Does that mean I believe it is inaccurate? No, any more than Jesus' parable of Lazurus and the Rich Man is inaccurate. Not literal fact but an illustration to make a point. The Creation story of Genesis is simply that. A parable that makes the point that it was God that created the universe. The first 4 words of Genesis tell us what we need to know. That it is God who is the Creator. Everything else, how long it took, how it happened, the sequence of events, and so on, is open for speculation and conjecture. But to nail it down and say "This is how it happened. Period." only genders questions like "What about the Dinosaurs?" It really answers no questions at all.

Sounds good to me!

Michael The Disciple · #57 02-23-2008, 09:52 AM

Ok they have found Dinasour BONES. No one has ever seen one. So how can they make pictures of what they looked like? Those are pure speculation.

Although they have bones they do not know what the flesh that covered the bones looked like. Having that as a foundation thought what about this for a theory?

The Dinasours are actually fossils of THE NEPHILLIM. The GIANTS spoken of in Genesis 5. Why not?

RandyWayne · #58 02-23-2008, 10:07 AM

Of course we all know the TRUE king of the dinosaurs. (It is NOT T-Rex.)

OneAccord · #59 02-23-2008, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alter Ego

I read an article once that stated that God had wiped out a previous creation here on this earth before us. Supposedly, that is why the earth was "without form" and "void."

Does anyone know anything about that teaching and/or where it originates from?

Is that a prominent doctrine in Christianity?

Yes, I have heard that. Some believe there was a creation before Adam and Eve. There are some verses in the Bible that could be used to support the theory, but its a stretch, at best. Some believe that when Jesus said "Before Abraham was, I AM", he was referring to the belief that a "perfect creation" was on earth and was ruled by Jesus prior to the creation story. But God "moved" that creation to heaven when it was created to make a "new earth" where people would have a "freewill". That "experiment "(as they call it) failed, prompting this verse: Gen 6:6: And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. The problem is that this implies God made a mistake. He made another attempt to "recreate" man after the Flood but this too failed. Thats the reason Jesus came to earth, to redeem mankind from his own "freewill". The sin in the garden was not eating the fruit, but yielding to our own freewill. Thats their theory not mine. They believe many visions are a result of seeing the past and not the future. Nahums vision of chariots jostling and running like lightning, which is commonly interpreted as a vision of cars in the future, was a vision of the past creation and not of the future at all. ( Of course, one of the many flaws there is this: If they had cars and planes, wouldn't they also have pollution which makes that "perfect creation" not so perfect afterall?) I think they also teach that we, people of this creation, were apart of that "perfect creation". But, in that creation, we were angelic beings, hence the Scripture: Hbr 2:7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: In this creation we are mortal human beings. This component of the belief implies that "re-incarnation" is fact. That each time God "creates a new world" (which, according to them, this is God's last time in "experimenting" with the human race), we are a part of that creation. Dreams, visions, prophecy, even "deja vu" are glimpses into our past lives.

Like all theories, there may be some tiny bits of truth thrown through this belief. But most of it is just another attempt at trying to understand things that just can't be understood. Its speculation and conjecture at best. At worst, its plain old false teaching. Some say Bro. William Branham "secretly" held these views, but, in studying much of his teaching, I find no evidence of it (I think this was an attempt to validate this theory by attaching "celebrity status" to it.)

If I am not mistaken (and I may be), it was Therodore Fitch who taught this. I do know of a group in NC that followed his teaching that believed this.

ChristopherHall · #60 02-23-2008, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chseeads

Dunno about the immortal part...

But I take it that God made the herb and fruit of the ground as meat for man and beast to start out with...

Hence the Scriptures that talk about the lion lying with the lamb, and the cow and the bear and the lion eating straw like an ox....restored back to original vegetarian state.

If one takes that literally it might give that implication.

"24And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear.
25The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD." ~ Isaiah 65:24-25

I think it may be speaking of God's presence among men, world peace, and the defeat of Satan.

Just a thought.

God bless.