Fun question about the Fall of Adam and dinosaurs

[DesertBrother]

Hope this doesn’t start any eyes rolling. I’ve just been pondering this and it’s really fascinating to me as a believer. I think it’s really amazing to consider the possibility of a young earth.

Before the Fall, there was no such thing as death, no chaos, no suffering. I’m pretty sure the Church teaches that all of Creation (including the entire Universe) was in a state of incorruption, and that the Fall caused it to be subject to death and suffering. If 500 million years ago there were enormous, horrifying reptiles killing one another like crazy on this planet, wouldn’t the Church also have to assume that man’s state of justice pre-existed the dinosaurs?

Whether this means that man is much older than we think, or the earth/universe is much younger than we think; would it also mean that the Church would necessarily believe that man and dinosaur walked the earth at the same time?

How do those scientists measure all these 500 million year time spans anyway? Carbon dating?

I’m serious!

 

[Atreyu]

Hope this doesn’t start any eyes rolling. I’ve just been pondering this and it’s really fascinating to me as a believer. I think it’s really amazing to consider the possibility of a young earth.

Before the Fall, there was no such thing as death, no chaos, no suffering. I’m pretty sure the Church teaches that all of Creation (including the entire Universe) was in a state of incorruption, and that the Fall caused it to be subject to death and suffering. If 500 million years ago there were enormous, horrifying reptiles killing one another like crazy on this planet, wouldn’t the Church also have to assume that man’s state of justice pre-existed the dinosaurs?

Whether this means that man is much older than we think, or the earth/universe is much younger than we think; would it also mean that the Church would necessarily believe that man and dinosaur walked the earth at the same time?

How do those scientists measure all these 500 million year time spans anyway? Carbon dating?

I’m serious!

Well there’s more than just carbon dating. The existence of other stars for billions of years is easy to prove: as the stars are so far away, it takes billions of years for the light to reach us!

 

[zian]

For this forum, teh “Search” feature could be your friend. You might try looking at PhilVaz’s posts for starters, which would perhaps lead you to threads where there have also been other helpful posters.

For questions about age of the earth, etc, try here, and here, or just go here, enter “age of the earth” or whatever as your search criterion, and click around and read what you find. Lots of referenced material there

 

[DesertBrother]

Well there’s more than just carbon dating. The existence of other stars for billions of years is easy to prove: as the stars are so far away, it takes billions of years for the light to reach us!

You’re right, forgot about that! My brain is not scientifically inclined, so go easy on me. By the way, I didn’t intend for this to be a debate with atheists. I’m merely trying to incorporate what the Church teaches into what science has revealed to us.

So I guess that’s proof that the physical universe is ancient beyond comprehension. So the Church would believe that either the planet earth is young, or that man is profoundly more ancient than we think?

 

[DesertBrother]

For this forum, teh “Search” feature could be your friend. You might try looking at PhilVaz’s posts for starters, which would perhaps lead you to threads where there have also been other helpful posters.

For questions about age of the earth, etc, try here, and here, or just go here, enter “age of the earth” or whatever as your search criterion, and click around and read what you find. Lots of referenced material there

Thanks for the tip. I’ve been busted once already for bringing up exhausted topics. I’ll do some searching.
:tiphat:

 

[PhilVaz]

zian << For this forum, the “Search” feature could be your friend. You might try looking at PhilVaz’s posts for starters >>

Yeah I have basically typed Dalrymple’s entire book in here at some time or other. The technique is radiometric dating of which carbon is a form (sometimes called radiocarbon dating). Carbon-14 dating takes us back 50000 years, the other techniques can date rocks and minerals in the hundreds of millions and billions of years. Well tested for 100 years, we’ve known the precise age of the earth since the 1950s. Homo sapiens are about 150,000 to 200,000 years old (with hominids dating several million years ago), and the dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago. That too is well established. So yes, things indeed died long before mankind appeared. 99%+ of all species on this planet have gone extinct.

One more time, a summary of Dalrymple’s book
And more in my response to Sungenis

We’ve had the discussion about the “death before sin” theological objection, plenty of links were provided in response. That is still one article I need on my site dealing with the specific Catholic teaching and theology on that. Like “when” did the Fall occur and “where.” Actually come to think of it, Catholic philosopher Dennis Bonnette probably covers that but I’ll need to check his book again.

Phil P

 

[Liberian]

Hope this doesn’t start any eyes rolling. I’ve just been pondering this and it’s really fascinating to me as a believer. I think it’s really amazing to consider the possibility of a young earth.

Desert Brother,

While it is amazing to consider the possibility of a young earth, this possibility must be rejected after examining the evidence at hand. Simply put, there are features on the surface of the earth that cannot have existed for less than a certain length of time. One such feature is Stone Mountain in Georgia, which is a giant magmatic intrusion. Molten rock got squeezed in between two other layers of rock (there had to have been an upper layer to prevent the top of the mountain from being completely flat) and cooled, and the upper layers of rock then got eroded away. If you do the math with the temperature at which this type of rock melts, the present temperature, the size of Stone Mountain, and the thermal conductivity of the rock, you come up with a rather old age.

Before the Fall, there was no such thing as death, no chaos, no suffering. I’m pretty sure the Church teaches that all of Creation (including the entire Universe) was in a state of incorruption, and that the Fall caused it to be subject to death and suffering. If 500 million years ago there were enormous, horrifying reptiles killing one another like crazy on this planet, wouldn’t the Church also have to assume that man’s state of justice pre-existed the dinosaurs?

My personal explanation is “reverse temporal engineering”–that the effects of the Fall worked their way backwards in time as well as forwards.

• Liberian

 

[DesertBrother]

zian << For this forum, the “Search” feature could be your friend. You might try looking at PhilVaz’s posts for starters >>

Yeah I have basically typed Dalrymple’s entire book in here at some time or other. The technique is radiometric dating of which carbon is a form (sometimes called radiocarbon dating). Carbon-14 dating takes us back 50000 years, the other techniques can date rocks and minerals in the hundreds of millions and billions of years. Well tested for 100 years, we’ve known the precise age of the earth since the 1950s. Homo sapiens are about 150,000 to 200,000 years old (with hominids dating several million years ago), and the dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago. That too is well established. So yes, things indeed died long before mankind appeared. 99%+ of all species on this planet have gone extinct.

One more time, a summary of Dalrymple’s book
And more in my response to Sungenis

We’ve had the discussion about the “death before sin” theological objection, plenty of links were provided in response. That is still one article I need on my site dealing with the specific Catholic teaching and theology on that. Like “when” did the Fall occur and “where.” Actually come to think of it, Catholic philosopher Dennis Bonnette probably covers that but I’ll need to check his book again.

Phil P

THanks for the links. Looks way over my head though. It’s just good to know there are solid Catholic scientific minds who know that science and faith are not incompatible. Your site looks impressive as well.

 

[mark_a]

Hope this doesn’t start any eyes rolling. I’ve just been pondering this and it’s really fascinating to me as a believer. I think it’s really amazing to consider the possibility of a young earth.

Before the Fall, there was no such thing as death, no chaos, no suffering. I’m pretty sure the Church teaches that all of Creation (including the entire Universe) was in a state of incorruption, and that the Fall caused it to be subject to death and suffering. If 500 million years ago there were enormous, horrifying reptiles killing one another like crazy on this planet, wouldn’t the Church also have to assume that man’s state of justice pre-existed the dinosaurs?

Whether this means that man is much older than we think, or the earth/universe is much younger than we think; would it also mean that the Church would necessarily believe that man and dinosaur walked the earth at the same time?

How do those scientists measure all these 500 million year time spans anyway? Carbon dating?

I’m serious!

I don’t know about all that, but one of my son’s 5th grade sience book depicted a man standing with a dinosaur. It was a Bob Jones science book. Even at ten years old, my son thought it was hillarious.

 

[DesertBrother]

My personal explanation is “reverse temporal engineering”–that the effects of the Fall worked their way backwards in time as well as forwards.

I like that. Maybe because from God’s view all of time and space is eternally present. Therefore all of time and space just turned rotten at once, regardless of when we might have witnessed it. Is that what you mean?

 

[Atreyu]

You’re right, forgot about that! My brain is not scientifically inclined, so go easy on me. By the way, I didn’t intend for this to be a debate with atheists. I’m merely trying to incorporate what the Church teaches into what science has revealed to us.

No worries!

So I guess that’s proof that the physical universe is ancient beyond comprehension. So the Church would believe that either the planet earth is young, or that man is profoundly more ancient than we think?

I think the counter-argument is that the Earth and the Universe was created with that light already in transit or something like that.

 

[setitstraight]

You’re right, forgot about that! My brain is not scientifically inclined, so go easy on me. By the way, I didn’t intend for this to be a debate with atheists. I’m merely trying to incorporate what the Church teaches into what science has revealed to us.

So I guess that’s proof that the physical universe is ancient beyond comprehension. So the Church would believe that either the planet earth is young, or that man is profoundly more ancient than we think?

I’m not a scholar, but I’m pretty sure that the Church teaches that science is Truth and the Catholic faith is Truth. Two truths cannot cancel each other out. The Church does not fear science and whatever has happened in creation, was the will of God.

I believe that what God willed, was and that is that.

 

[Liberian]

I like that. Maybe because from God’s view all of time and space is eternally present. Therefore all of time and space just turned rotten at once, regardless of when we might have witnessed it. Is that what you mean?

Desert Brother,

Yes, that pretty much sums it up. I will confess that I have not worked through all the details or consequences of such an idea, but it seems sound to me.

• Liberian

 

[joeganshert]

Why couldn’t God have created humans in the midst of “time”. Like when you have a generic greeting card and write in your own message, or when writing a program starting with a pre-existing code. Whatever God willed.

 

[mapleoak]

No worries!

I think the counter-argument is that the Earth and the Universe was created with that light already in transit or something like that.

I think that is entirely possible that God may have created the universe in a state of existence or state of being that would make it appear from a scientific viewpoint to have existed much longer than it actually did. For example, when the trees were made, there were probably shoots and saplings as well as mature fully grown trees. The older trees however, would have been just created and the same age as the saplings. The same could be true for baby animals, mature animals, and those just conceived. All the same age when first created. Just in a state of being.
The universe itself may have been created in a state of existence. The ‘light already in transit’ could be from stars that really never even existed. This is because since a state of existence would be that it would appear that the universe has been in continual motion, however in reality it may have just started. By the same logic, we could say that Adam was a newborn created as a fully grown adult human being, rather than having to grow up from a baby. He would appear to have existed and be much older than he really was.

In Christ, J.M.J.
mapleoak

 

[steveandersen]

well I suppose He could have

but why would He?

Nature is part of general revelation

He wouldn’t have it contradicitng itself. an newly-born adult tree is a very unnatural thing

why should God be compressed to a human time scale? A few billion years shuold make no difference to Him but is obviously important for the natural functioning of the universe

 

[DesertBrother]

I think that is entirely possible that God may have created the universe in a state of existence or state of being that would make it appear from a scientific viewpoint to have existed much longer than it actually did. For example, when the trees were made, there were probably shoots and saplings as well as mature fully grown trees. The older trees however, would have been just created and the same age as the saplings. The same could be true for baby animals, mature animals, and those just conceived. All the same age when first created. Just in a state of being.
The universe itself may have been created in a state of existence. The ‘light already in transit’ could be from stars that really never even existed. This is because since a state of existence would be that it would appear that the universe has been in continual motion, however in reality it may have just started. By the same logic, we could say that Adam was a newborn created as a fully grown adult human being, rather than having to grow up from a baby. He would appear to have existed and be much older than he really was.

In Christ, J.M.J.
mapleoak

What came first, the chicken or the egg? The man or the fetus? If man was originally made immortal and fully grown, would he have aged past that state? Because aging is actually gradual decay of cells toward death. Maybe his children would still somehow grow to maturity, but then remain in a perfect state. Maybe the Garden of Eden was actually a physically eternal realm (similar to the Resurrection) where the concept of aging didn’t even exist.

Why do we so often try to explain the Garden of Eden in terms of our current understanding of biology and earth science? It could be that after the Fall, when everything was subject to decay is when the dimension of time came into existence. Imagine if man’s fallen state became that of the “neanderthals”, and since then we’ve been evolving from that state? There have never been sets of bones discovered from a prior “monkey man” state. Perhaps we are only able to date man back to 200,000 years because before that, he didn’t have a mortal body with bones to be discovered?

I do agree that science has proven a lot of facts about our current universe of space and time, and the way life has developed in it. But the Garden of Eden could have been a universe of completely different laws in an eternal dimension beyond our comprehension. Maybe we’ve become too rational in our explanation of Genesis by trying to reconcile it with evolutionary theory and earth sciences.

We do know one thing: with God, ANYTHING is possible. And I hope in the next life (if I make it), God will show us how it all began!

 

[DesertBrother]

well I suppose He could have

but why would He?

Nature is part of general revelation

He wouldn’t have it contradicitng itself. an newly-born adult tree is a very unnatural thing

why should God be compressed to a human time scale? A few billion years shuold make no difference to Him but is obviously important for the natural functioning of the universe

Maybe because the natural functioning of the universe, as beautiful as it seems to us, is only a shadow of its former self. A newly born adult in our current fallen condition wouldn’t make sense, but a newly born immortal creature in an eternal dimension might. What seems “unnatural” to us in this world doesn’t mean it isn’t true. The Ressurrection seems pretty unnatural to our rational minds, but it’s a reality.

 

[CarlosG]

The earth is not young. People shouldnt even ponder this anymore. I have a pretty fervent YEC guy at work and theres really no reasoning with him. I tell him roughly 20 major dating methods IN DIFFERENT FIELDS all point to an earth much much older than 10000 years. I tell him that not one tyrannosaurus herbivore has ever been found. I ask him what spiders and whales were supposed to eat before the fall.

All he comes back with is that “If all thats true then the bible is false, and there was death before the fall”. Then he proceeds to try to lump me in with mormons…yawn.

anyone have any advice on dealing with people like this?

 

[DesertBrother]

The earth is not young. People shouldnt even ponder this anymore. I have a pretty fervent YEC guy at work and theres really no reasoning with him. I tell him roughly 20 major dating methods IN DIFFERENT FIELDS all point to an earth much much older than 10000 years. I tell him that not one tyrannosaurus herbivore has ever been found. I ask him what spiders and whales were supposed to eat before the fall.

All he comes back with is that “If all thats true then the bible is false, and there was death before the fall”. Then he proceeds to try to lump me in with mormons…yawn.

anyone have any advice on dealing with people like this?

As I just said above, the universe, the earth, and all its creatures might be millions of years old in their current form, but what if life before the fall was a world similar to that of the Resurrection to come and was eternal? This seems to answer both the fundamentalist view without ruling out all the ways our universe and planet have evolved in their current state.

I have to disagree that people shouldn’t ponder things like this anymore. It’s what God created us to do, isn’t it? He loves it when we wonder about His creation. I’ll never submit in blind obedience to what men of science claim to know for certain about our universe, nor to what fundamentalists claim to know for certain about the book of Genesis! It seems like both could be limiting themselves, by only seeing things with the eyes of “the flesh”. They both refuse to open their hearts to the infinite possiblities. :getholy: