Fudging The Evidence

[William]

Q: Why did The Creator hide the evidence for The Flood while revealing the evidence for The Dinosaurs?

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #81]

Surely the whole story is allegorical and not meant to be literal fact.

WAS THE FLOOD ACCOUNT MERE ALLEGORY?

Opinions differ on this question but in my opinon the biblical account is very much presented as a literal factual event. Rather than present Noah and his family in vague mystical terms, Noahs lineage and decendants are specifically listed. Although his location is not presented, the events are documented within a specific timeframe, logging months and years to that effect. The record includes where and in what mannet the vessel came aground and more importantly for Christians, Jesus refered to the account in speaking of prophecy involving future real word events, indicating he believed it an actual historical event.

The universiality flood myths can also be seen as indicative that there was indeed some kind of global event that impacted mankinds historical "memory".

CONCLUSION : As one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I believe that the authour is not presenting allegory but rather was recording a real historical event.




RELATED POSTS

How does one determine what is or is not literal?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 95#p890395

Are Jehovah's Witnesses "biblical listeralists"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 28#p868428

Was the biblical flood story mere allegory?[this post]
viewtopic.php?p=1048372#p1048372

To learn more please go to other posts related to ...

THE FLOOD OF NOAH'S DAY , KILLING and ... BIBLICAL LITERALISM

And yet you try to pass off the guarantee uttered by Jesus that a prayer made with faith even as small as a mustard -seed (apparently the Disciples had less even than that) will enable one to relocate real -estate for land -reclamation as 'metaphor' (quote) and yet you want to present the Flood - nonsense as fact, with God faking the world up afterwards to look like it never happened (unless one denies the science). And you even seem to regard Job as factual and I'm pretty sure it's regarded more as a polemic poem.

[William]

I see no reason to think that large fossils were unknown to Humans back in those ancient times...

Perhaps because there is no evidence that humans had uncovered them in those ancient times? In any case, the eventual discovery of these fossils doesn't support the claims of the Bible in any way. That is the point that matters here.


Tcg

Yeah - I get your drift. We can accept that ancients did not dig deep enough to expose what was hidden in the Earth else we would have some biblical mention and explanation connected with that.

Further back, it appears that there is information the human form took shape and branched away from the mycelium branch as we share 50% of our DNA with 'srooms.

If that is true, it is an indication that nature may have been interested in experiencing being more individual and proactive in the design of the human form, as mycelium works more along the lines of being an individual mind with many interconnected branches rather than many minds without any apparent connections with other minds.

While this has had positive and negative outcomes, in general, I think of it as a good move for nature to make under the circumstances.

I speak of 'mind' in the context of viewing such natural processes as intelligent - or intelligence feeling its way around - whether in mycelium form or Human, the ongoing results are intelligently interesting...

The designs come and go - other designs coming into being to replace older or extinct ones.

The idea of a flood of such biblical proportions being able to destroy that process is obviously absurd. Lack of compelling evidence only underlines the absurdity.

[myth-one.com]

Paleontology is the science that primarily seeks to understand fossil evidence:

It would be quite a stretch to suggest that it supports biblical accounts.

The creation of Adam & Eve can be traced back to about 6,000 years ago. But the earth is about 4.55 billion years of age according to scientists.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. (Genesis 1:1-2)

From this point there are two possibilities: Either God created the earth originally without form, void, and dark; or God created the earth as "good" and over time it came to be without form, void, and dark.

Before making that choice, note that everything God created in Genesis beginning in verse 3 of chapter 1 was said to be "good" by God.

Also, other translations of the original Hebrew text indicate that something occurred and the earth had reached this state. For example, the New International Version® of the Bible renders the same verses as follows:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty; darkness was over the surface of the deep... (Genesis 1:1-2)

That is, God originally created the heavens and the earth good in verse one, and over a period of time the earth had become formless, void, and dark.

The Biblical evidence points to the idea that Genesis 1:1 describes the complete original creation of the heaven and the earth:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Genesis 1:1)

This verse is all the info we are given about the original creation of the heaven and the earth. We are not told more because it does not affect us. In fact, Adam and Eve do not appear until the re-creation of the decimated earth which does not occur until about 4.55 billion years later.

That re-creation begins in Genesis 1:3.

============== How Paleontology supports the biblical account above =============

Dinosaurs became extinct about 66 million years ago according to Paleontologists.

Adam and Eve were created about 6,000 years ago.

In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.

Since man was created in a six-earthly-day creation 6,000 years ago, and dinosaurs roamed the earth billions of years ago, then paleontology supports the biblical account that the earth was created billions of years ago and had come to be without form, void, and dark sometime prior to 6,000 years ago.

That is, Genesis 1:1 describes the original creation of the heaven and the earth, and Genesis 1:3 then begins the re-creation of a formless, void, and dark earth to it's original good condition.

The Bible and Paleontology are complementary on this accounting.

[Tcg]

Paleontology is the science that primarily seeks to understand fossil evidence:

It would be quite a stretch to suggest that it supports biblical accounts.

The creation of Adam & Eve can be traced back to about 6,000 years ago. But the earth is about 4.55 billion years of age according to scientists.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. (Genesis 1:1-2)

From this point there are two possibilities: Either God created the earth originally without form, void, and dark; or God created the earth as "good" and over time it came to be without form, void, and dark.

Before making that choice, note that everything God created in Genesis beginning in verse 3 of chapter 1 was said to be "good" by God.

Also, other translations of the original Hebrew text indicate that something occurred and the earth had reached this state. For example, the New International Version® of the Bible renders the same verses as follows:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty; darkness was over the surface of the deep... (Genesis 1:1-2)

That is, God originally created the heavens and the earth good in verse one, and over a period of time the earth had become formless, void, and dark.

The Biblical evidence points to the idea that Genesis 1:1 describes the complete original creation of the heaven and the earth:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Genesis 1:1)

This verse is all the info we are given about the original creation of the heaven and the earth. We are not told more because it does not affect us. In fact, Adam and Eve do not appear until the re-creation of the decimated earth which does not occur until about 4.55 billion years later.

That re-creation begins in Genesis 1:3.

============== How Paleontology supports the biblical account above =============

Dinosaurs became extinct about 66 million years ago according to Paleontologists.

Adam and Eve were created about 6,000 years ago.

In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.

Since man was created in a six-earthly-day creation 6,000 years ago, and dinosaurs roamed the earth billions of years ago, then paleontology supports the biblical account that the earth was created billions of years ago and had come to be without form, void, and dark sometime prior to 6,000 years ago.

That is, Genesis 1:1 describes the original creation of the heaven and the earth, and Genesis 1:3 then begins the re-creation of a formless, void, and dark earth to it's original good condition.

The Bible and Paleontology are complementary on this accounting.

Genesis 1:1 mentions nothing about any life much less a detailed account of specific dinosaurs. To claim that paleontology supports this verse is fallacious. The Gap theory was in fact developed as a result of paleontology and other fields of science that revealed the actual age of life on the earth. Theology was developed after the fact to support these findings.


Tcg

[JehovahsWitness]

There is nothing in the bible that negates the existence of dinasaurs walking the earth prior to the appearance of humans; that is unless one takes a literal reading of scripture leading to "a young earth" interprtation.

Jehovahs Witneses are not "young earth creationists" nor are we biblical literalists.







JEHOVAH'S WITNESS


WHAT was Jesus role in Creation?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 13#p864013

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

EVOLUTION, BIBLE HISTORY and ...THE 7 CREATIVE DAYS OF GENESIS

[Tcg]

I see no reason to think that large fossils were unknown to Humans back in those ancient times...

Perhaps because there is no evidence that humans had uncovered them in those ancient times? In any case, the eventual discovery of these fossils doesn't support the claims of the Bible in any way. That is the point that matters here.


Tcg

Yeah - I get your drift. We can accept that ancients did not dig deep enough to expose what was hidden in the Earth else we would have some biblical mention and explanation connected with that.

We can accept that "the ancients" had no knowledge of fossils, large or small, of any kind. To assume that they would have mentioned them in the bible, if they had discovered them, is to presume that the scripts were written in order to present reality. There is no evidence that this was their intention.


Tcg

[myth-one.com]

Genesis 1:1 mentions nothing about any life much less a detailed account of specific dinosaurs.

You're countering claims which I never made.

To claim that paleontology supports this verse is fallacious.

OK, you're claiming they do not support each other.

The Gap theory was in fact developed as a result of paleontology and other fields of science that revealed the actual age of life on the earth. Theology was developed after the fact to support these findings.

Now you're admitting that they do support each other.

==========================================

Paleontology discovered the bones and calculated the dates over which these creatures lived as long before the creation of man.

Understanding that the original creation was begun and completed in Genesis 1:1 provides the time period and place in which the dinosaurs lived. The biblical re-creation of the earth required six days. The original creation of the earth was about 4.55 billion years ago according to Paleontology.

Thus Paleontology supports the gap theory and the scriptures.

It also does a lot more to improve understanding of the scriptures. It proves that the earth was not originally created for mankind, as mankind (or at least "modern mankind") was not created until the re-creation of the earth which came to be without form, void, and dark. This re-creation begins in the third verse of the Bible as God turns the light back on:

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. (Genesis 1:3)

So Adam and Eve were not in the original plan.

They were created as Plan B.

Here is another verse which indicates that the Genesis six-day creation process was actually a re-creation:

Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they (mankind) are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth. (Psalm 104:30)

It appears that Paleontology and the scriptures do support each other.

[William]

[Replying to Tcg in post #35]

We can accept that "the ancients" had no knowledge of fossils, large or small, of any kind.

I don't see that as likely.

[nobspeople]

There is nothing in the bible that negates the existence of dinasaurs walking the earth prior to the appearance of humans; that is unless one takes a literal reading of scripture leading to "a young earth" interprtation.

Jehovahs Witneses are not "young earth creationists" nor are we biblical literalists.







JEHOVAH'S WITNESS


WHAT was Jesus role in Creation?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 13#p864013

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

EVOLUTION, BIBLE HISTORY and ...THE 7 CREATIVE DAYS OF GENESIS

Why do you think (assumingly) that you're right and you others aren't?

[William]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #34]

Is there anything in the bible that supports the existence of dinosaurs walking the earth prior to the appearance of humans?

And if not, why is the bible silent on that which the evidence has eventually supplied us?

[JehovahsWitness]

There is nothing in the bible that negates the existence of dinasaurs walking the earth prior to the appearance of humans; that is unless one takes a literal reading of scripture leading to "a young earth" interprtation.

Why do you think (assumingly) that you're right and you others aren't?

For the same reason (assumingly) you do. I have examined the available evidence, given it thought and come to the conclusion I personally find more convincing. Don't we all do the same?