If biblical creationism is true and all animals were created in their present form over a few days... [Spirituality & Religion]
...why do fossil beds keep showing us stratification of organisms? Why are certain animals found in only certain layers instead of all mixed together as they would be if they all lived at the same time?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Dinosaurs are not really in the bible. Liberal interpretation can be used to interpret leviathan and behemoth as dinosaurs but it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.
[quote] 7 could in the original translation mean 7 million[/quote]
I'm no expert but i don't think that is born out by the translation. Although i know it is argued that "day" doesn't necessarily mean a literal 24 hour day.
But of course we're still left with awkward things like birds being created before reptiles according to the order of creation.
[quote]And dinausoucs have been in the Bible[/quote]
Not very convincingly.
[quote]Also as far as time frame science gets it wrong all the time.[/quote]
If you like. But they also get it right all the time. Either way, it's irrelevant because biblical creation has all land animals being created on the 6th day while birds were created on the 5th. What we see in the fossil record are layers and layers and layers of land animals occurring before any birds show up.
Occam's razor. Are all the scientists all misinterpreting thousands of fossil beds or is biblical creation incoherent with real world evidence?
Yes but who’s to say the earth wasn’t shifte. The reality of it is science doesn’t have any more answers than Christians do. Both take a degree of faith. As far as dinosaurs more original translations are far more accurate
[quote]Yes but who’s to say the earth wasn’t shifte.[/quote]
Geologists. Unless on a global scale, fossil layers were seamlessly lifted, shuffled and re-buried. Again, application of occam's razor may be useful here.
[quote] science doesn’t have any more answers than Christians do[/quote]
I have to disagree with you there. Christians have no answers. Or if you like, they have ONE answer which has no explanatory or predictive power. Science on the other hand can tell us things about the world which are not in the bible. It can be used to make [i]predictions[/i] about what we will find in the world. No christian doctrine has ever been able to do that.
[quote]As far as dinosaurs more original translations are far more accurate[/quote]
Agreed. But my understanding is that these more accurate translations make it less likely that behemoth was a dinosaur. For example, it is described as having a tail like a cedar which modern translations seem to take as having a large tree-like tail. But more accurate translations and an understanding of the trees of the region indicate that when they say tail like a cedar, they may be referring to its whip-like nature rather than its size.
@Soramarie Dinosaurs are not in the Bible. There is mention of Leviathan and Behemoth (one being a land animal and one a water animal), but by all measure neither was a dinosaur as they were living in the time frame of Biblical account. Biblical purists claim the earth is some 6000 years old...and no more. Therefore either Biblical purists would have to be wrong on the age of the earth...or Carbon 14 dating would be a scam........because Carbon 14 shows dinosaurs went extinct some 65 million years ago. Both cannot be true at once.
The oldest Biblical writings ever found...do not include any mention of specie after specie of huge land creatures. It would be very hard to imagine those same early writings are laced with mention of sheep, goats, donkeys, camels and horses and yet not once in early Biblical writings do we find the mention of creatures that we know were early ancestors of all of those animals. Animals that weighed hundreds of tons, stood dozens of feet tall and roamed the earth.
Point of clarification, carbon dating is only accurate for dating things up to around 50,000 years. Other radiometric dating isotopes can be used to date things much older. I just thought i'd mention that before some creationist starts talking about the inaccuracy of C14
@Pikachu If one buys into Creation being just 6000 years old, (using your 50,000 year reference for Carbon 14 accuracy) then that method of testing age would be more than accurate for dating artifacts, bones, fossil remains in the relatively recent 6000 year time frame.
Biblical scholars have no problem whatsoever buying into the accuracy of Carbon 14 dating of wood fragments of what they think is the Ark........nor do they have a problem with the dating of the spike that was found driven thru a heel bone in what was most likely an early crucifixion of a Christian by Romans. Biblical villages....etc. The only time Carbon 14 becomes weird science to a Biblical scholar is when it is used to date something older than 6000 years ago---because that contradicts the Biblical Creationists' timelines of Earth.
The problem with that contradictions is....we can find and accurately date remains of animals, trees, the remains of entire cultures that are 6000 years old by using Carbon 14 dating and yet none of that is fossilized into stone...while all remains we find of dinosaurs are completely fossilized into stone.
For Creationists---How can we find remains of animals (dinosaurs), fish, birds and plants that have become fossilized into stone in what you claim could not have lived no longer ago than 6000 years...yet we find no fossilized sheep, goats, burros....animals described in the Bible that we are certain lived 6000 years ago? Why did some things fossilize into stone in 6000 years---yet other creatures didn't? My guess? Denial of the time frames of both of those scenarios as either overlapping or simultaneous.
[quote]If one buys into Creation being just 6000 years old, (using your 50,000 year reference for Carbon 14 accuracy) then that method of testing age would be more than accurate for dating artifacts, bones, fossil remains in the relatively recent 6000 year time frame. [/quote]
Quite true.
[quote] The only time Carbon 14 becomes weird science to a Biblical scholar is when it is used to date something older than 6000 years ago--[/quote]
There certainly seems to be some cherry picking going on.
[quote]yet we find no fossilized sheep, goats, burros....animals described in the Bible that we are certain lived 6000 years ago?[/quote]
@Pikachu It is true. It's not that something cannot be fossilized in 6000 years, it presumably can be under the right conditions....submerged without oxygen in a mineral rich environment for instance.....yet no fossilized skeletons of Biblical era humans or Biblical animals have ever been found. There have been tombs found....with bones in them them....(not bones turned to stone)...that date to the early Christian timeframe--and prior--in Egypt. The mummies of Egypt (and other cultures) that are known to predate Christianity are not fossilized..into stone. They are still comprised of DNA obtainable soft tissue and bone. Even humans and animals found in the aftermath of volcanoes such as Pompeii are not "fossilized" into stone. Yet the bones we find "of a prehistoric nature" is now bone replaced with minerals...i.e. stone. Not so difficult to grasp that we are discussing two far removed timeframes in regards to fossils vs remains---unless we're discussing the idea that the earth is no older than 6000 years with someone with a Biblical agenda. To them NOTHING could possibly be older than 6000 years old--including this entire planet.
But that begs the question of why are there no Biblical stone fossils of human and animal bones in the past 6000 year timeframe...and yet there seems to be millions of prehistoric fossils that time has turned to stone--presumably in the much more distant past?
First off, let's clarify a few things. The term dinosaur was not used at all until the 1800s. Prior to that, the creatures in question were called dragons, and there is plenty of mention of dragons in the Bible.
@Pikachu Simply stating that, of course dinosaurs aren't mentioned in the Bible, since that term did not exist until the 1800s. However, they are found repeatedly throughout the Bible under the original term dragons.
@BiblicalWarrior You seem to think the word "dragon" in the Bible means some kind of dinosaur.........but you clearly miss the verses that describe the context of how dragon is used. The context is very clearly said in Revelation 12:9 "And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him."
Yeah....i was a little confused by his argument that since dinosaur is a recent word, we are justified in assuming any dragons in the bible are dinosaurs...
@Pikachu Are those the dragons on which prostitutes will be flying around?
This is the sort of problem that arises when people use a book of myths to refer to myths and use that to refer to mythical events centred around other myths
@canusernamebemyusername So it takes just 6000 years to be 100% petrified. But 5999 years it's not. Wow. Who told you that? Love to read the thesis on that.
