bible-truths.com/forums
=> Off Topic Discussions => Topic started by: Imabeliever on August 29, 2008, 05:15:49 AM
-
I was channel surfing one day, about a week ago, and came across a program on tbn about creation vs. evolution. (keep in mind that I dont watch tbn on a regular basis for obvious reasons!) To make this as short as possible, we all know evolution says we came from tiny amoebas. According to God, He created us human, like we are right now! Anyway the host says he was going to show some artifacts on the program never shown before! (on tv) So I wont lie, my interests were a little peaked! He unveils a slab of rock, millions of years old and it has a human footprint on it! He shows another ancient rock with yet another footprint in it! Now heres the kicker! He unveils one last ancient slab of rock found by the bank of some creek or river and it has a dinosaur footprint that is overlapping a human footprint! Now God forgive me if I'm wrong on this, but to me, that blows evolution out of the water! :o I've never been one to believe in evolution bye-the-way! I'd love to see ray do some papers on this, if he hasn't already! Comments and criticism welcome! Does anyone understand the implications of something like this? It would blow science out of the water, and I dont believe it would alter God's word in any way!
-
I see it as a possibility.
Scientists recover T. rex soft tissue
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/)
But I agree with Ray when he said that both evolutionists and creationists have it wrong. I've believed that long before I ever heard of this site.
Something else is going on here. What it is, I don't know. I just know that what we have all been taught is wrong.
-
From the home page:
ANNUAL NASHVILLE BIBLE CONFERENCE, Sept. 20-21, 2008
Subjects: *Orthodoxy & Evolutionists are both wrong on Genesis! *Was it "The Big Bang" or "The God Awesome Blast?" *Is matter an illusion? *Why was the earth "without form" (Gen. 1:2)? *How long were the 6 creation days? *What does "evening & morning" mean? *How old is the Earth & Universe? *Dinosaurs are found in Genesis not Job. *Was Noah's flood global? *Did Noah take dinosaurs? *Where did God get patience (Rom. 9:22)? *Was the creation really hard for God? How hard (Jer. 32:17)? I have found Scriptures that will blow you away.
Having a Geology background (Petroleum Engineer), I'm really looking forward to the conference.
-
Hi Imabeliever,
Your question is very timely. In harmony with Patrick's post, Ray will be discussing this very subject at the upcoming bible conference in Nashville. The audio from this conference will be posted shortly after the conference. I'm sure you will be delighted by what is revealed. :)
René
-
I can't wait to listen or watch! ;D ;D I believe both sides have missed it also...
Patrick,...what is your take then on fossil fuel coming from fossils/Dinosaurs, or some other process?
Thanks,
Brenda
-
I am not able to go to the conference so I can't wait for the audio. I only have this to say about man and dinosaurs coexisting together..... God made man so couldn't he have made dinosaurs too? He did have Adam name ALLL the animals in the garden so why couldn't there be dinosaurs too?
-
Hi Imabeliever,
As we can look forward to what Ray will bring out about this matter at the up coming conference, he has already discredited a number of those who say they have found proof. At the Nashville conference ( http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,4472.0.html )last year, he had read about some of these claims and he actually called them up, there was always some falsehood in their story.
The way I look at these proofs that religious groups find, if there was any validity to what they had, then the science community would validate it or at least know about it. I'm anxious to see what Ray has for the up coming conference :)
mercy, peace and love
Kat
-
I have been reading and discussing a lot on creation / evolution..i for one also am very very curious to Ray's teachings on this subject.
-
I don't believe that evolution and old earth are the same theory. There are many who believe that the age of the earth was manufacured to accomodate evolution. I personally, don't believe so. I think the scientific evidence blows that guy on tbn right out of the water. I don't find his guests to be credible and regardless of whether some dinosaur like creatures lived during the reign of man-like creatures, the reign of dinosaurs was several million years ago. There's plenty of evidence to show that macro-evolution is false without insisting on a literal 6 day creation 6000 years ago. That show is pseudo science and is very misleading.
-
I agree musicman, I've seen those shows before and they are not good science or scripture.
-
Patrick,...what is your take then on fossil fuel coming from fossils/Dinosaurs, or some other process?
Thanks,
Brenda
Brenda, I can only parrot what I was taught in college, which is "During the past 600 million years incompletely decayed plant and animal remains have become buried under thick layers of rock. It is believed that petroleum consists of the remains of these organisms but it is the small microscopic plankton organism remains that are largely responsible for the relatively high organic carbon content".
I will say, as mentioned by another member, it's hard to comprehend how so many plants and animals all collectively died in certain areas (zones) to later become "hydrocarbons" from the pressures and temperatures exerted upon them by thousands of feet of earth.
There are several studies going on about crude not being finite and I believe the Russian's found some interesting data.
In 1956, Prof. Vladimir Porfir’yev announced their conclusions: ‘Crude oil and natural petroleum gas have no intrinsic connection with biological matter originating near the surface of the earth. They are primordial materials which have been erupted from great depths.’ They called their theory of oil origin the ‘a-biotic’ theory—non-biological—to distinguish from the Western biological theory of origins
They argued that oil is formed deep in the earth, formed in conditions of very high temperature and very high pressure, like that required for diamonds to form. ‘Oil is a primordial material of deep origin which is transported at high pressure via ‘cold’ eruptive processes into the crust of the earth'. They dismissed the idea that oil is biological residue of plant and animal fossil remains as a hoax designed to perpetuate the myth of limited supply (Peak Oil). Of course the Russian's kept this data "secret" for many years.
-
About the oil, I dont think its biological material at all. I believe It is a by product of processes deep within the earth but who am I to assume I know, Only God knows for sure! here is a link to what I saw, if anyone is interested I am not trying to give a plug for tbn or anything, as I said before I am no supporter of televangelists I just thought it was an interesting off topic subject!http://75.125.60.6/~creatio1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=48&Itemid=24 (http://75.125.60.6/~creatio1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=48&Itemid=24)
-
Hi Imabeliever......such an interesting topic. Wonder what caused the dinosaurs to disappear or at least shrink??? ;) (birds, iguanas etc look like mini-dino's)
-
The problem is that we are always at the mercy of others information. Most everyone talks about things like we have all done every study ourself. But actually a lot of what we know has been feed to us. You look at the sun in the morning and you don't question what it is. You assume you know. Most of the things in our house no one could reproduce and most people can only describe in basic detail how things work. But in actually making or real understanding it is rare to say the least. I love to read and think of all sort of subjects like ancient times etc. But I always know my opinion is only bias on what others have been feeding me. Kids are a great reminder on how peers and those who are supposedly in the know can influence them. It is tricky, the same people who teach us in eternal hell, tell us man lived with dinosaurs. It's like people who have interviewed serial killers, they always remark how nice and pleasent they are but yet they can't stop killing people. I don't mean any offense but I have told people before that our God is surely much different than we can believe.
-
Ray has spoken on this very thing at the 2007 Nashville Conference. Here is the excerpt of what he said about it.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,4472.0.html -------
There is a thing on TBN, he’s got this Creation Evidence Museum, Dr Carl Baugh. Well he has some things about these footprints, so I wanted to check on him. He’s the one that I think who originally brought out this malikite man, and it’s this discovery and the man behind this is Dr Carl Baugh.
There is this paper researching his doctorate degree, but that man has no degree. He got a doctorate like I got a doctorate. This guy is a phony and has no doctorate degree. The only doctorate degree that he says he has is from a Bible correspondence course, from Jerry Farwell.
So I found this in his book, about this malikite man, here shows a man digging bones and these bones are suppose to be in solid sandstone, it’s the same strata that runs through Utah and Dakotas. That’s where they find dinosaurs bones. So in the same rock that you find dinosaurs, they found this skeleton of modern man, and these bones are articulated, that mean they are still joined together and you can actually move them. I said wow, this is amazing stuff.
I learned about this in this beautiful little book here, ‘Unlocking The Mysteries Of Creation.’ It’s such a pretty book, got pictures and all kinds of stuff. So I’m reading and he exposes the Piltdown hoax. You all heard about the Piltdown man? Well it’s a hoax, there never was a Piltdown man, that was half human and half ape or whatever. Total hoax, he exposes that. He shows that they just drummed that whole thing up.
And over here he has this evidence of humans buried by the great flood, human skeletons found in dinosaur rock layers. This is the hard sandstone of Utah, where these rock formations are confirmed to be some 140 million year old of sandstone, containing dinosaur bones, not too far away from the famous Dinosaur National Park in Utah. And they took these human bones, and sent them off, and no scientists reported back. Because they said scientist were afraid of them and didn’t want to say anything, because sure enough here is modern man buried with dinosaurs.
I thought wow, I had to call somebody, this is amazing stuff. I never heard of this, modern man buried with dinosaurs, 140 million years ago? So I’m thinking this proves that dinosaurs didn’t live 140 million years ago, because they are buried with modern man. And this is a modern man, yet it says here, ‘the perfect modern human jaw.’ So this looks absolutely perfect, just like a modern man from New York city, you know, walking down Madison Ave. A perfect human jaw bone and teeth, and they are replaced by turquoise. It’s now solid turquoise, but this is a modern man, wow. How about that, that’s too much to believe, how come this is not world news?
So I start studying and checking internet sites on this malikite man. Then there’s this, the University of Nebraska found 2 years later that these bones were only 200 yrs old, maybe only 150. They were buried in the 1800’s. But they said they were buried 50 ft. down, in solid sandstone rock, the same that runs through Dinosaur Park? They said these were modern man?
Well, here’s this jaw bone that had turned to solid turquoise. It was a farce! The jawbone, it’s stained with copper oxide, it’s not solid turquoise. These bones were buried in the 1800’s, they’re Indian. Well what about the sandstone, it’s sandblow! Sandblow is when sand blows into the crevices of rocks and packs and it stays that way for hundreds of years and it gets firm. Now you can chip away at it with your fingernails, because it’s not rock, it’s really tight packed sand, sandblow. And then I see this picture of this little child, he dug all that sand away with a little shovel, that was suppose to be solid rock.
But it said that this one here is different, this one was found years later at a different location. They said this is not the same one dated at 150 years, oh no these are old, these are real old here. And so I’m looking at this picture of him with these real old bones, in his plaid shirt. Then I find a picture of the original guy, with the 150 year old bones. It’s the same picture, for crying out loud, same plaid shirt! It the identical photograph, they are suppose to be taken years apart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercy, peace and love
Kat
-
Have any of you seen "Expelled, no intelligence allowed" ? By Ben Stein ?
-
surley God knew we would need oil, how did he prepare it for us ;D
surley the wisdom of man is foolishness.
i look forward to what ray has to say about it.
chuckt
-
Sirach,
I forgot all about that movie!! Ive been wanting to see it. Is it out on video yet?
Anthony
-
I saw that movie. We thought it was well done. It shows just how far man will go to keep their side of the story in the forefront. I am very interested in what Ray will teach about this as I have studied evolution in school and then Creationism as an adult.
Creation science is very interesting. I spent 3 days sitting in lectures with some of the most influencial Creationists. I was mezmerized.
From what I know so far, evolution believes that life was created out of death and they use circular dating procedures. They decided what lived when and now when they find a bone, etc., they look on the chart and tell us how old it is. The pictures still in science books of pre-man have all been "proven" to be false. Creation Science is man's attempt to use science to prove a Creator made it all. I am sure that all I have learned from them is not necessarily truth as well but they have done a great job at explaining away a lot of evolutionary stuff in my mind.
Again, having Ray teach what he has found in Scripture will be so interesting and I cannot wait.
Always willing to have my mind changed for the better.... ;D
-
AK...i dont know. Here in Holland it wasnt in the theaters...sadly. I am looking foreward very much to this movie, so if any in the USA can buy and send me a copy if it is on dvd, then you make me very happy.
Offcourse i will pay for all expences
Linny...I have had a discussion with evolutionists and atheists wich lasted for over 18 months. I have read so many information about it that it made my head spin. In Ray's announcement i allready see that i supposedly was not correct....and becos i want to learn biblical thruths...im very curious to his teachings.
kind regards
Robin
-
IMO the simple answer to this question is no, if indeed we're talking about dinosours as most people think of them. There are many species still around today that have been on the earth since the time of the great dinosour periods. Simple bacteria that has existed since the dawn of life on the planet still exists today.
I agree with Ray in that creationists have it all wrong, very very wrong, and so do evolutionists. Richard Dawkins has been debated by people in his own field and had his theories severely put to the test. Ironically he's described as a "dinosour" in his field by some of his contempries, simply because he hangs on to Dawinist evolution with the same fanatical religious ferver that some of the creationist heretics do that he despises so much.
There was so much that Darwin didn't know that science does know now that totally disproves evolution by natural selection of mutations. Darwin knew nothing about mutation. Darwin believed in adaptation and he based his theory on the Lamarckian theory of acquired characteristics which preceded Darwin's theory. Most modern secular biologists refute evolution by mutation and natural selection. HJ Muller, the worlds leading expert on cell mutation, a Nobel prize winner wrote "Mutations in species are of a random nature, over 99% are harmful to a species. Mutations occur when DNA makes a mistake in replicating itself. For nature to select a mutation in order to evolve and benefit a species, the mutation would have to be beneficial. To suggest the evolution of all species has come about through random mutations would mean that the universe would have to be quadrillions of years old."
Ernst Myor, also Nobel prize winner "It is a considerable strain on ones credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as sensory organs could be improved by random mutations. Imagine the eye mutating? Would it make it better? Science has yet to document a single mutation in any living species that made an improvement. Every single mutant in nature is invariably so damaged by the mutation, as to conclude it is impossible for such and organism or species to reproduce and achieve further complexity."
Julian Huxley, regarded in the science community as the worlds leading expert on evolutionary development wrote when giving an analogy on how mutation would have to work in order to achieve improved complexity in a species. "In horses one would have to breed 1 million strains in order to get two favorable mutations. Up to 1000 to the millionth power to produce just two mutations. That number becomes 1 with 3 million zeros written after it. No rational thinker could ever conceive of anything so remote happening, and yet through the god of time, Darwinian evolutionists believe not only that it could happen, but that it has. If given enough time, the impossible becomes possible, the possible probable, the probable a certainty. However, we now know something which Darwin did not. We know that the universe is finite. We know it had a beginning. We know its only just under 16 billion years old, and so quadrillions of generations of mutated species simply could not have existed. Its interesting that the more complexity biologists discover in life forms, the more they wait with baited breath for the cosmologists to come up with a new older age for the universe. The truth is that species have evolved through punctuated equilibrium, a theory expounded by one of the greatest scientists of our time, Steven J Gould."
Steven J Gould said in his debate with Richard Dawkins at Oxford "The fossil record simply does not support Darwin's theories, nor does it support your theories Professor. In order for random mutation to evolve via natural selection, there would have to be trillions of failed organisms of varying complexity and size in the fossil record. We've found most of the earths Coal, Gas, Oil, Gold and other precious metals, we have millions of successful fully formed, fully functioning examples of extinct species in the fossil record, yet the trillions of mutated species are missing. Factor into the time required the mass extinctions this planet has undergone several times during its life time because of cataclysmic events. The evidence is at best thin, at worst none existent. No professor, the facts point to huge inexplicable jumps in species development and complexity, most often than not with no overlap between one species becoming extinct, and another seemingly related more complex species appearing on earth."
Anyway, enough about evolution, and I'm sure Ray will expound on this issue during the conference.
According to palientologists there hasn't been a dinosour on the earth for at least one hundred million years. According to anthropologists the modern human species is no older than 100,000 years.
Personally I get tired of being told by both religious people and scientists alike that the two have to be mutually exclusive to one another. I am greatly interested in the earths history, cosmology, astro physics etc, I find these sciences fascinating. I've yet to see or hear any scientific discovery that would either contradict or challenge my faith. Actually most of whats been discovered and proven strengthens my belief in God, makes God even more awe inspiring to me than I could have imagined. I see no conflict of interest in proven scientific discovery and being a Christian.
I believe that God created in six days, the Bible says He did. However its not clear whether those "days" were 24 hour days, or whether they were consecutive days. Thats what I see in scripture, I may be flat out wrong and Ray will cover this stiff at the conference.
To all the "6000 year young earth" creationists I would say this. There is only one way they have reached their conclusion that the earth is 6000 years old, and thats by tracing the genealogies in the Bible. There is not s shred of credible scientific evidence to support their claim. They've traced the Biblical genealogies and invented a science to fit 6000 years. Well Paul says its useless, causes disputes and division, foolish, unprofitable.
1 Tim 1:4 Neither give heed to fables (G3454 μῦθος muthos moo'-thos Perhaps from the same as G3453 (through the idea of tuition); a tale, that is, fiction (“myth”): - fable). and endless genealogies (G1076 γενεαλογία genealogia ghen-eh-al-og-ee'-ah From the same as G1075; tracing by generations, that is, “genealogy”: - genealogy.), which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless.
Paul goes on in the next verse as part of the very same admonition to say; Titus 3:10-11 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.
According to Paul, disputes over genealogies along with the law etc is not only useless, foolish, unprofitable, devisive, but heresy. I would contend that the Gentile churches were having the same debates using Biblical genealogy from the OT, along with disputes over law etc.
So thats where I stand, determining the age of Gods creation through Biblical genealogy is a waste of time. Far too much energy and emotion is wasted on when God created, yet Paul suggests its unimportant at best, heresy at its worst.
-
Great responses you all! :) I believe that science, although sometimes very flawed, describes the processes and tools of God, but scientists are so full of their research and themselves that they dont realize it or dont want to realize it!