A Question for Biblical Literalists

[msmcneal]

I've been seeing on several other boards lately some pretty strange things that are being taught and believed by those who hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible, and I was curious as to how many Christans here believe in these things, and if they do, then why.

Are there any Christians here who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible and believe any of the following:

1. geocentrism
2. flat earth
3. dinosaurs and man co-existed

If you do believe in these things, then why? I realize that if you do believe in them, then your main reason would be because it's in the Bible, but I want scientific reasoning why you would believe these things. I'm also curious as to how Christians who don't believe in these things, yet still hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible, explain their being found in the Bible.

[micatala]

These are valid questions, but they are not really debate questions. I am going to move this to the "questions for groups" forum, but leave a marker here. msmcneal can PM me if this is unsatisfactory and why.

[msmcneal]

These are valid questions, but they are not really debate questions. I am going to move this to the "questions for groups" forum, but leave a marker here. msmcneal can PM me if this is unsatisfactory and why.

This is fine. When I made this post, I actually wasn't quite sure where to post it. I just went with C & A because I thought it would be an apolgetics issue. But I don't really care where it is, as long as I get some resonses.

[Skyler]

Are there any Christians here who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible and believe any of the following:

1. geocentrism
2. flat earth
3. dinosaurs and man co-existed

If you do believe in these things, then why? I realize that if you do believe in them, then your main reason would be because it's in the Bible, but I want scientific reasoning why you would believe these things. I'm also curious as to how Christians who don't believe in these things, yet still hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible, explain their being found in the Bible.

1. No
2. No
3. Yes

Why? Scientifically, two main reasons I know of: because of all the dragon legends in most cultures, and because of cave paintings bearing a striking resemblance to known sauropods.

I don't hold to a universally literal interpretation of the Bible. I recognize that the Bible frequently uses metaphorical and/or poetic language, and that we must take this into account when interpreting such passages.

The metaphorical content of a passage can usually be determined from context.

[scottlittlefield17]

No, no, yes. I think Skyler said it well. For info purposes could you list the verses you get the first two ideas.

[kayky]

If humans and dinosaurs co-existed, why are their remains never found together?

[Coyotero]

If humans and dinosaurs co-existed, why are their remains never found together?

And why weren't we all killed by raptors? I saw the movie... No way we'd have a chance.

[GentleDove]

Are there any Christians here who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible and believe any of the following:

1. geocentrism
2. flat earth
3. dinosaurs and man co-existed

If you do believe in these things, then why? I realize that if you do believe in them, then your main reason would be because it's in the Bible, but I want scientific reasoning why you would believe these things. I'm also curious as to how Christians who don't believe in these things, yet still hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible, explain their being found in the Bible.

1. No
2. No
3. Yes

Why? Scientifically, two main reasons I know of: because of all the dragon legends in most cultures, and because of cave paintings bearing a striking resemblance to known sauropods.

I don't hold to a universally literal interpretation of the Bible. I recognize that the Bible frequently uses metaphorical and/or poetic language, and that we must take this into account when interpreting such passages.

The metaphorical content of a passage can usually be determined from context.

I also agree with Skyler.

If humans and dinosaurs co-existed, why are their remains never found together?

I believe dinosaurs and humans co-existed; however, I don't believe that it was common for them to co-habitate, ala "The Flintstones."

[Coyotero]

I believe dinosaurs and humans co-existed; however, I don't believe that it was common for them to co-habitate, ala "The Flintstones."

I don't mean to be insulting, but how can anyone believe this?There is so much proof that the dinosaurs ceased to exist around 65,000,000 years ago (the K-T event). And absolutely ZERO evidence that they lived contemporary to humans.

Saying they existed because some cultures have dragon myths is totally off-base. Primitive people invent all kinds of crazy beasts... Most cultures have some sort of vampire mythology- Doesn't make it real.

[McCulloch]

If humans and dinosaurs co-existed, why are their remains never found together?

I believe dinosaurs and humans co-existed; however, I don't believe that it was common for them to co-habitate, ala "The Flintstones."

Clearly they did not cohabitate. But if they lived in the same environment, close enough that the humans made graphic representations of them and had myths about them, then one would expect that their remains would be found in the same geological layers. What evidence do you have that the biologists are wrong?