D
davidharper
Guest
I’m pretty sure the last dinosaur died 65 million years before the flood. But I’m just guessing.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
puer.dei
Guest
That’s odd, the more science I learn, the easier it is to believe. What we learn from science continually illuminates the beauty and complexity of His universe.The more science I learned the harder is was to believe.
No way I’m rejecting that.
P
puer.dei
Guest
And we’re still waiting for the evidence of that.I was pointing out Moses had compiled it from sources he had is his possession namely clay tablets passed on through the generations.
D
davidharper
Guest
I don’t think science denies the flood. It just seeks a plausible natural explanation for it.
There has been evidence of a flood found in ancient mesopotamia. In fact, more than one flood.
The “land between two rivers” was a flood plain. It probably flooded annually.
There was probably one really big flood and this is the one that inspired the story.
Ancient people didn’t know about science. They thought everything had a divine cause.
If the crops failed it was because God was angry with them.
And if there was a flood it was for the same reason.
There has been evidence of a flood found in ancient mesopotamia. In fact, more than one flood.
The “land between two rivers” was a flood plain. It probably flooded annually.
There was probably one really big flood and this is the one that inspired the story.
Ancient people didn’t know about science. They thought everything had a divine cause.
If the crops failed it was because God was angry with them.
And if there was a flood it was for the same reason.
U
umamibella
Guest
There is no evidence for the first 11 chapters of Genesis, yet there it is and yet so many believe the Old Testament as the divinely inspired Word of God. Christian and Jewish alikeIf they do so, one expects there to be evidence supporting their view that disproves the current field.
In other words, it’s not okay to reject science without valid evidence and process of reason.
You wont change opinions by argument
Last edited:
D
davidharper
Guest
IMHO this is what most likely took place; (all dates are approx.)
65 million years ago- the dinosaurs are wiped out by an asteroid strike(?)paving the way for the evolution of mammals.
4 million years ago- earliest human ancestors appear.
90,000 (?) years ago- first appearance of modern humans.
3500 b.c.- dawn of civilization in the middle east.
3000 b.c.- the invention of writing. 2500-1800 b.c.- the “Epic of Gilgamesh”(including a flood story) is written.
950 b.c.- beginning of the old kingdom of ancient Israel. Book of Genesis is written.
65 million years ago- the dinosaurs are wiped out by an asteroid strike(?)paving the way for the evolution of mammals.
4 million years ago- earliest human ancestors appear.
90,000 (?) years ago- first appearance of modern humans.
3500 b.c.- dawn of civilization in the middle east.
3000 b.c.- the invention of writing. 2500-1800 b.c.- the “Epic of Gilgamesh”(including a flood story) is written.
950 b.c.- beginning of the old kingdom of ancient Israel. Book of Genesis is written.
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
Uh no. This was put forward by Washington Irving. Catholics long held it but so did science.FWIW, scientists 100 years ago also believed the world was flat while the church maintained it to be a sphere.
B
buffalo
Guest
All the more reason why Noah’s flood was a big deal.It probably flooded annually.
There was probably one really big flood and this is the one that inspired the story.
Ancient people didn’t know about science. They thought everything had a divine cause.
If the crops failed it was because God was angry with them.
And if there was a flood it was for the same reason.
S
stoplooklisten
Guest
There could have been baby dinosaurs on the ark. Later, when the dinosaurs grew and became a threat, they would have become an attractive target for hunters and been killed. So, they could have become extinct within a short time after the flood.Does anyone else think that the Flood (with Noah) may have wiped out all the dinosaurs?
B
buffalo
Guest
The ark was pretty big - around 600 box cars…
S
stoplooklisten
Guest
Actually, one Almighty God made it all happen complies much better with Occam’s razor than the molecules to monkees to man cosmology with millions of years and random mutations as the only creative force.
S
stoplooklisten
Guest
There could have been baby dinosaurs on the ark. Later, when the dinosaurs grew and became a threat, they would have become an attractive target for hunters and been killed. So, they could have become extinct within a short time after the flood.
And Cush (grandson of Noah) begat Nimrod , who began to be mighty in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord. (Genesis 10:8-9).
Last edited:
N
Nicene
Guest
B
buffalo
Guest
Hehe - didn’t see this one coming…Actually, one Almighty God made it all happen complies much better with Occam’s razor than the molecules to monkees to man cosmology with millions of years and random mutations as the only creative force.
B
buffalo
Guest
And of course St George slaying the dragon had to be dispensed with because we just know dino’s were not around.And Cush (grandson of Noah) begat Nimrod , who began to be mighty in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord. (Genesis 10:8-9).
V
vsedriver
Guest
except that you don’t have to believe that evolution lacked a creative force.Actually, one Almighty God made it all happen complies much better with Occam’s razor than the molecules to monkees to man cosmology with millions of years and random mutations as the only creative force.
Personally, I believe that God would not have designed a natural world that conflicted with divinely inspired text. As we are part of the natural world then everything about the natural world is knowable to us. Knowing that the world is ancient and dinosaurs existed before man walked on the earth, doesn’t affect the truths taught in sacred scripture.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Occam’s razor isn’t about the simplest explanation, it’s about keeping your explanation as simple as possible - which is quite different.Actually, one Almighty God made it all happen complies much better with Occam’s razor than the molecules to monkees to man cosmology with millions of years and random mutations as the only creative force.
B
buffalo
Guest
Which force in bling unguided chance is creative?except that you don’t have to believe that evolution lacked a creative force
O
otjm
Guest
However, the Church would, in essence.
The church holds the position that science is restricted to science, not to proof or disproof concerning matters of faith.
Further, the Church holds that God created the world - which the Bible also tells us - but does not go looking at Bible passages as a scientific statement. It also holds that the Bible uses many means of telling us about faith and about God, including stories.
So - one is free to believe that a donkey talked; one is also free to believe that it is a story about a talking donkey to show a point of faith, not a point of scientific proof that donkeys can speak.
Likewise, the story of Jonah is a prefiguring of the Resurrection of Christ; which does not the same as saying that it is a scientifically reliable historical statement.
Perhaps Jonah was in the belly of a fish for three days; in that case I suspect that hygiene being somewhat less several thousands of years ago made a smelly man even more smelly. That aside, whether it is factually an accurate historical statement or an inspired story which prefigured the Resurrection doesn’t change my faith either way.
The church holds the position that science is restricted to science, not to proof or disproof concerning matters of faith.
Further, the Church holds that God created the world - which the Bible also tells us - but does not go looking at Bible passages as a scientific statement. It also holds that the Bible uses many means of telling us about faith and about God, including stories.
So - one is free to believe that a donkey talked; one is also free to believe that it is a story about a talking donkey to show a point of faith, not a point of scientific proof that donkeys can speak.
Likewise, the story of Jonah is a prefiguring of the Resurrection of Christ; which does not the same as saying that it is a scientifically reliable historical statement.
Perhaps Jonah was in the belly of a fish for three days; in that case I suspect that hygiene being somewhat less several thousands of years ago made a smelly man even more smelly. That aside, whether it is factually an accurate historical statement or an inspired story which prefigured the Resurrection doesn’t change my faith either way.
Last edited:
A
Anrakyr
Guest
There’s also the point nothing the size of the ark made of wood could float. It would break up under its own weight.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.