Dinosaurs

[Interplanner]

Why?

A plain reading of scripture declares it to be so.
Are you willing to admit you trust men rather than God?

If you mean a plain reading arrives at a 6000 year old earth, then here's a little news. The conservative evangelist F. Schaeffer, who taught at Westminster in Philadelphia back in the 40s, demonstrates how many times there are skips in the genealogies of the Bible. Given that and the preponderance of evidence with an ice age ending 9000 years back (connected with a worldwide deluge in most cultures), the segment from Adam to Noah would then take us back to under 15,000 back. This is the near end of where most anthropologists put the arrival of homo sapiens.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

If you mean a plain reading arrives at a 6000 year old earth, then here's a little news. The conservative evangelist F. Schaeffer, who taught at Westminster in Philadelphia back in the 40s, demonstrates how many times there are skips in the genealogies of the Bible. Given that and the preponderance of evidence with an ice age ending 9000 years back (connected with a worldwide deluge in most cultures), the segment from Adam to Noah would then take us back to under 15,000 back. This is the near end of where most anthropologists put the arrival of homo sapiens.

There is no gap in genealogies.

:blabla::blabla::blabla:

 

[Interplanner]

Sorry, but as I recall he demonstrated it from skips in Luke and Matthew that omitted certain figures, yet ended at the same time. Also, the extensions were built on the phrase 'in his generation' or 'and their generations'.

If it is not in NO FINAL CONFLICT, I'll try to find it in GENESIS IN SPACE AND TIME. It is p122 "Genealogy and Chronology" and p150, "Genealogy not Chronology". He illustrates that the greatest gap is found elsewhere in I Chron 26, being 400 years omitted to get on to the item that mattered. A case of advancing 2 generation is found in Mt 1:8, and then there is the question of contemporaries. Were Adam, Enoch and Methusaleh all contemporaries? They would have to be, yet the accounts are completely independent. Noah would have been living when Abraham was 50. Shem would have outlived Abraham; how come there is no interaction in the account?

"When the Bible itself reaches back and picks up events and genealogies in the time before Abraham, it never uses these early genealogies as a chronology. It never adds up these numbers for dating." p124

 

[George Affleck]

Is a zygote a person?

Is a zygote an unborn child?

And I still dont have a response to my question about your Holy Book and whether or not plants are living things.

You were answered on this.

 

[6days]

Sorry, but as I recall he demonstrated it from skips in Luke and Matthew that omitted certain figures, yet ended at the same time. Also, the extensions were built on the phrase 'in his generation' or 'and their generations'.

If it is not in NO FINAL CONFLICT, I'll try to find it in GENESIS IN SPACE AND TIME. It is p122 "Genealogy and Chronology" and p150, "Genealogy not Chronology". He illustrates that the greatest gap is found elsewhere in I Chron 26, being 400 years omitted to get on to the item that mattered. A case of advancing 2 generation is found in Mt 1:8, and then there is the question of contemporaries. Were Adam, Enoch and Methusaleh all contemporaries? They would have to be, yet the accounts are completely independent. Noah would have been living when Abraham was 50. Shem would have outlived Abraham; how come there is no interaction in the account?

"When the Bible itself reaches back and picks up events and genealogies in the time before Abraham, it never uses these early genealogies as a chronology. It never adds up these numbers for dating." p124

There is no gap in genealogies.
Its amazing ... baffling why you can't accept God's Word as it is plainly written.
I thought the atheist comment to you the other day was perfect ... he called you out on how scripture is supposed to simple, but you make it complicated. (Not his exact words but I can find them if you wish)

 

[Stuu]

Wow! What a complete put-down! You certainly put me in my place.

Unbelievers need look no further than themselves for proof that original sin has damaged every facet of their lives. Unbelief is one of the symptoms.

'Unbeliever' sounds like something out of a vampire movie.

Do you believe in vampires as well as recent changes in oxygen levels? Do you have any clue about timescale?

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

If you mean a plain reading arrives at a 6000 year old earth, then here's a little news. The conservative evangelist F. Schaeffer, who taught at Westminster in Philadelphia back in the 40s, demonstrates how many times there are skips in the genealogies of the Bible. Given that and the preponderance of evidence with an ice age ending 9000 years back (connected with a worldwide deluge in most cultures), the segment from Adam to Noah would then take us back to under 15,000 back. This is the near end of where most anthropologists put the arrival of homo sapiens.

You YECs are here for our amusement, right?

So, please amuse then. You say that an ice age was connected with a worldwide deluge in most cultures. Are you suggesting a causal relationship between those phenomena? How would that work?

How do you know that 9000 years ago 'most cultures' described a worldwide deluge?

Can you name some proper anthropologists who would place the most recent end of the 'arrival of homo sapiens' at 15,000 years ago?

Thanks in advance for the entertainment.

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

There is no gap in genealogies.

And no problem with living 930 years, either.

You even write as if you really think it is all true.

Stuart

 

[Interplanner]

You YECs are here for our amusement, right?

So, please amuse then. You say that an ice age was connected with a worldwide deluge in most cultures. Are you suggesting a causal relationship between those phenomena? How would that work?

How do you know that 9000 years ago 'most cultures' described a worldwide deluge?

Can you name some proper anthropologists who would place the most recent end of the 'arrival of homo sapiens' at 15,000 years ago?

Thanks in advance for the entertainment.



The collection of sources on the near end of homo sapiens is in Ross (astrophysics, U of Toronto) CREATION AND TIME.

There two parts to the flood accounts statement. 1 is that most cultures have one. The other is from previous lines about the date of a deluge or ice event from several sources 9000 ago. It was me putting them together. Both north American Indians and pre-Columian S American Indians have flood legends and they crossed the Bering Straight after 20,000 BC. I don't know how the critics settle whether they are referring to things that happened before they left Asia or more recently.

If you're just speaking of the mechanics of an event, something happened to alter temperatures abruptly. Among examples are tropical plants trapped under Sahara sands, and temperate-climate plants in the mouths of quickly frozen mammoths in Siberia. The Genesis narrative goes to its unique detail of waters above the sky at creation and then their collapse in Noah's flood--"the floodgates of the heavens were opened" in addition to subterranean water surfacing.

Primitive people may express themselves primitively, but that is totally different from being utterly fantasy-based. The native American account of a flood says the water was higher than mountains as Genesis does, but its only way of describing a rescue vessel was to say that a skilled archer wove together spears and arrows.

 

[Interplanner]

There is no gap in genealogies.
Its amazing ... baffling why you can't accept God's Word as it is plainly written.
I thought the atheist comment to you the other day was perfect ... he called you out on how scripture is supposed to simple, but you make it complicated. (Not his exact words but I can find them if you wish)

Sure go ahead. I'm referring to Dr. Schaeffer on these things, who was a professor at Westminster in Philadelphia before his L'Abri ministry. I see what he is saying as perfectly clear. What you do is look at his examples and say they are not there. That, to me, is "being complicated." You end up with your facts and the rest of the world with theirs.

 

[Interplanner]

What I said was that Christ physically died and was resurrected to defeat the curse of physical death.

After Adam sinned, God pronounced a curse upon His creation. Part of that curse was death to humans and vertebrates (nepesh chayyah 'living creatures')

But Hugh Ross and other theistic evolutionists seem to think that physical death already existed before sin.
The following comment from another thread, a TOL member reasons..."The "death" God spoke of was not a physical death. He tells Adam that he will die the day he eats from the tree, but Adam does so, and lives on physically for many years after. If God is always truthful, the death that the Fall brought to us, was not physical.
However..... If you believe physical death was part of God's "very good" creation (Gen.1:31), then I would argue the Gospel is compromised, if not destroyed. Or...is there merit in the above comment from a TOL member?

I will start with reasons why physical death was part of the curse... and why the comment from a TOLer is unbiblical.
1. Genesis 2:17 in the KJV reads "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die"

Well... Adam did eat of the tree, and he did not physical die that day. So is the verse only referring to spiritual death / separation from God? No... The Hebrew actually suggests a dying process. A more literal translation would be "dying you shall die" or less literally "for as soon as you eat of it, you shall be doomed to die". http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/die.html

A few examples from other translations...
Young's Literal Translation
and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die.'

New International Version
but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."
New Living Translation
except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die."

2. The Bible attributes physical death to sin...specifically referring to Adam. And here is the Gospel....

1Cor. 15: 21 "For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive"Also see Rom. 5:12-19


3. The Bible refers to death as evil... it is the enemy.

1 Cor. 15:26 "The last enemy to be destroyed is death."

So... if physical death is evil... its hard to rationalize that with Genesis 1:31 where God calls His creation " very good". Obviously physical death did not exist until sin entered the world.

(Sad side note... The story of Charles Templeton...amazing evangelist...but he compromised on the matter death before sin, and he eventually turned away from God)


4. If physical death already existed before sin... then why did Christ need to physically die and be resurrected? If the curse in Genesis 2 was only a spiritual death to Adam, then Christ only need to rise, or defeat, spiritual death. Clearly, in 1 Cor. 15:26, physical death was part of the curse which Christ conquers.


5. To imagine that Genesis 2:17 is not referring to physical death, is refuted in Genesis 3:19 (Using KJV again) "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

Physical death ...returning to dust, IS part of the curse. It is something that Christ has defeated and we can join Him in the resurrection. "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death' or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." Rev. 21:4

Yes, it is the process of dying that starts at sin. I don't know why you spend so many lines on something so simple. Are you trying to be, need to be hostile?

My understanding of Ross etc is that plants and animals were eaten before death came. Are you saying that everything alive from creation stayed alive because of 'miraculous' food sources from God so that nothing died even as food for others?

 

[Interplanner]

Why?

A plain reading of scripture declares it to be so.
Are you willing to admit you trust men rather than God?

A plain reading does not. If it is as plain as 6days, it is not accounting for 'formless and void' and is saying that genealogies were chronologies, which they are not.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

A plain reading does not. If it is as plain as 6days, it is not accounting for 'formless and void' and is saying that genealogies were chronologies, which they are not.

What, you cant operate a calculator?

:kookoo:

 

[Interplanner]

What, you cant operate a calculator?

:kookoo:

Go ahead through Dr. Schaeffer's examples and get back to me. They are in posts up above. He was a professor at Westminster Seminary, Phila., before his L'Abri ministry.

 

[Interplanner]

If it is not in NO FINAL CONFLICT, I'll try to find it in GENESIS IN SPACE AND TIME. It is p122 "Genealogy and Chronology" and p150, "Genealogy not Chronology". He illustrates that the greatest gap is found elsewhere in I Chron 26, being 400 years omitted to get on to the item that mattered. A case of advancing 2 generation is found in Mt 1:8, and then there is the question of contemporaries. Were Adam, Enoch and Methusaleh all contemporaries? They would have to be, yet the accounts are completely independent. Noah would have been living when Abraham was 50. Shem would have outlived Abraham; how come there is no interaction in the account?

"When the Bible itself reaches back and picks up events and genealogies in the time before Abraham, it never uses these early genealogies as a chronology. It never adds up these numbers for dating." p124

[Just fyi, Dr. Schaeffer was the foremost exposer of naturalistic agnosticism in culture and theology in his time; his ministry was from the 40s to the 80s. He read the Bible on his own as an agnostic college student (because he couldn't stand the pain of reading Ovid) and the rest is history.]

 

[Interplanner]

What, you cant operate a calculator?

:kookoo:

Matthew's 14 x 3 generations are handy for organizing Israel's history, but there are several missing. The intention was not an exact rendering, but showing the pattern of rise and decline, at which point Messiah's age would take over.

 

[Stuu]

The collection of sources on the near end of homo sapiens is in Ross (astrophysics, U of Toronto) CREATION AND TIME.

Reference please, for my entertainment. Thanks.

There two parts to the flood accounts statement. 1 is that most cultures have one.

Mythology as physical evidence, right?

The other is from previous lines about the date of a deluge or ice event from several sources 9000 ago.

And what sources would those be?

It was me putting them together. Both north American Indians and pre-Columian S American Indians have flood legends and they crossed the Bering Straight after 20,000 BC. I don't know how the critics settle whether they are referring to things that happened before they left Asia or more recently.

So from the point of view of cultural legend the 9000 years thing is irrelevant.

If you're just speaking of the mechanics of an event, something happened

Something, eh? Wow.

to alter temperatures abruptly. Among examples are tropical plants trapped under Sahara sands,

Reference please.

and temperate-climate plants in the mouths of quickly frozen mammoths in Siberia.

Reference please.

The Genesis narrative goes to its unique detail of waters above the sky at creation and then their collapse in Noah's flood--"the floodgates of the heavens were opened" in addition to subterranean water surfacing.

Are you giving Genesis as evidence? Brilliant.

Primitive people may express themselves primitively, but that is totally different from being utterly fantasy-based. The native American account of a flood says the water was higher than mountains as Genesis does, but its only way of describing a rescue vessel was to say that a skilled archer wove together spears and arrows.

Yep, you've earned your keep with that one. Did you know that 'gullible' isn't actually in the dictionary?

Stuart

 

[Interplanner]

Reference please, for my entertainment. Thanks.


Mythology as physical evidence, right?


And what sources would those be?


So from the point of view of cultural legend the 9000 years thing is irrelevant.


Something, eh? Wow.


Reference please.


Reference please.


Are you giving Genesis as evidence? Brilliant.


Yep, you've earned your keep with that one. Did you know that 'gullible' isn't actually in the dictionary?

Stuart

If a title and author is not a reference, what is?

re myth as evidence.
Not mythology per se, but mythology from extremely diverse sources echoing each other. Given their ability to travel, it is as likely as us finding an account of the American Revolution on the moon when we got there. See Lewis "The Myth that Became Fact" on the relative provenance of myths.

Enuma Elish.
LEGENDS OF THE NORTHWEST AMERICAN NATIVE PEOPLES.
Tlingit cosmology, City of Juneau, Alaska
Pre-Columbian Indians in S. America as referenced in Schaeffer, GENESIS IN SPACE AND TIME (so commonly known to audiences in 1970 that there is no footnote). P134.
Wakefield. GOD'S BATTLE WITH THE SEA-MONSTER covers most of the ancient near east on both cosmology and deluge because of overlapping themes.
Waltke. CREATION AND CHAOS. Pretty much ditto above by a Hebrew professor at Regent/UBC, Vancouver Canada

On ice age, about 9000 ago.
TracerBullet actually corrected me to 11,700 ago for the most recent ice event.
History Channel doc on the striations on granite on the Hudson River.
Olympic National Park, WA, data on Lake Morse.
Documentaries on Niagara Falls regarding setting the time at which it started to undermine its foundation in regular units and 'migrate' upstream. That one is set 9000 ago.

If a culture 8000 miles from another has a major flood legend similar to the distant one, how is that irrelevant? If you are a physical scientist, what qualifies you to comment on it?

I have not seen the Siberian mammoth item lately, but I did notice the one about tropical plants under the Sahara recently. I don't know why this is such a surprise when there are also various theories flying around about tectonic plates, which is also not outside the description of things in Gen 9, "in his days, the earth was divided".

The intention of the native American legend was to account for how the tribe or 'nation' arrived at a certain place, Klamath region, Oregon. Given that criterion, it is more believable that the description is primitive than that it is fantasy. The same account includes descriptions of the eruptions of Crater Lake, Lassen and Shasta. So I suppose those are fantasy as well. The Tuolumne describe Yosemite as the earth opening its mouth, and no one for a moment thinks it is credible that the earth has a mouth or digestive system. But to recall something a skilled builder could have made to survive a flood is not in that category at all.

 

[Stuu]

If a title and author is not a reference, what is?

A reference is to the published work, specific enough for anyone to find it, and if you are making a claim about a scientific finding then ideally it is to the paper as it was published.

re myth as evidence.
Not mythology per se, but mythology from extremely diverse sources echoing each other. Given their ability to travel, it is as likely as us finding an account of the American Revolution on the moon when we got there. See Lewis "The Myth that Became Fact" on the relative provenance of myths.

Enuma Elish.
LEGENDS OF THE NORTHWEST AMERICAN NATIVE PEOPLES.
Tlingit cosmology, City of Juneau, Alaska

Pre-Columbian Indians in S. America as referenced in Schaeffer, GENESIS IN SPACE AND TIME (so commonly known to audiences in 1970 that there is no footnote). P134.

So you do know how to reference.

Wakefield. GOD'S BATTLE WITH THE SEA-MONSTER covers most of the ancient near east on both cosmology and deluge because of overlapping themes.

Do you mean God's Battle with the Monster: A Study in Biblical Imagery by Mary Wakeman? Does she show how imagery leads to some conclusion about the history of planet earth?

Waltke. CREATION AND CHAOS. Pretty much ditto above by a Hebrew professor at Regent/UBC, Vancouver Canada

Pretty much ditto with Wakeman.

Are you saying that, because lots of different cultures have held flood myths, that therefore we should believe there was a global flood?

I can see your expertise doesn't lie in geology or the physical sciences.

On ice age, about 9000 ago.
TracerBullet actually corrected me to 11,700 ago for the most recent ice event.
History Channel doc on the striations on granite on the Hudson River.
Olympic National Park, WA, data on Lake Morse.
Documentaries on Niagara Falls regarding setting the time at which it started to undermine its foundation in regular units and 'migrate' upstream. That one is set 9000 ago.

If a culture 8000 miles from another has a major flood legend similar to the distant one, how is that irrelevant? If you are a physical scientist, what qualifies you to comment on it?

I have not seen the Siberian mammoth item lately, but I did notice the one about tropical plants under the Sahara recently. I don't know why this is such a surprise when there are also various theories flying around about tectonic plates, which is also not outside the description of things in Gen 9, "in his days, the earth was divided".

The intention of the native American legend was to account for how the tribe or 'nation' arrived at a certain place, Klamath region, Oregon. Given that criterion, it is more believable that the description is primitive than that it is fantasy. The same account includes descriptions of the eruptions of Crater Lake, Lassen and Shasta. So I suppose those are fantasy as well. The Tuolumne describe Yosemite as the earth opening its mouth, and no one for a moment thinks it is credible that the earth has a mouth or digestive system. But to recall something a skilled builder could have made to survive a flood is not in that category at all.

This is incoherent nonsense. You have built a case for you having waved your arms around and perhaps howled at the full moon.

As mentioned by alwight, where are the specifics? Where is your tight argument? Above all, you haven't yet explained how you could possibly know that a legend was believed as long as 9000 years ago.

Stuart

 

[6days]

*

Yes, it is the process of dying that starts at sin. I don't know why you spend so many lines on something so simple.

Correct... physical death entered our world when Adam and Eve sinned.

*My understanding of Ross etc is that plants*
and animals were eaten before death came.

Rather than get your info from someone who is a known compromiser. ...you can get your info straight from the Bible.
Gen. 1:29 "Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so."

Are you saying that everything alive from creation stayed alive because of 'miraculous' food sources from God so that nothing died even as food for others?

That sounds like an argument that you got from Ross?

Plants in Gen. 1 are not described as living beings.. 'nepesh'.*