Expert: Marilyn - 1/17/2006

Question
Hi

Do you agree that Creationism is pernicious nonsense that belongs with such medievalism as 'flat earths and 'alchemy'? There is no scientific basis for this hoax- so how can those that choose to follow this theory argue against the scientific truth? The notion of a planet that is only thousands of years old is wrong and propagation of this is abusing the sanctity of education.

Steve

Steve

Answer
Steve

Article I thought you'd find interesting:

http://www.discover.com/issues/apr-06/features/dinosaur-dna/

Hope you're doing great,

Marilyn


Steve;

I wanted to add a few pieces of information to my earlier answer, just for your information.

Dinosaurs are mentioned in Genesis 1.  According to Gerald L. Schroeder in his book, "The Science of God," the words my NIV Bible translates, "great creatures," in Genesis 1:21 (and is translated as dragons and sea monsters in other Bibles) are "taninim gedolim" in Hebrew.  Gedolim means "large or great," but "taninim" puzzled translators.  Fortunately, the singular form of "taninim" shows up elsewhere in the Bible.  

In Exodus 4:3 Moses' rod becomes a snake or "nahash" in Hebrew; in Exodus 7:10 his rod becomes a "taneen" or reptile and in Exodus 7:15 it once again becomes a "nahash."  Therefore, we can deduce that "great creatures" are the Great Reptiles--the dinosaurs.

That places the creation of the dinosaurs before the creation of mammals which appear in Genesis 1:24 & 25.    

Genesis 1:2 describes the earth and "formless and empty" and throws readers for a loop.  Genesis 1:3-5 is clearly "the first day."  

At times the Bible uses what has been called "oriental" story telling--a non-linear method of telling a story.  This is especially evident in Revelation.  In a variation of this style, the book of Daniel tells the same story several times with different details in Daniel's dreams.  I believe something similar is happening here.

Isaiah 45:18 says (my paraphrase), God created the earth to be inhabited, He didn't create it "formless and empty."  Therefore, something must have happened which caused the earth to become "formless and empty."

In Isaiah 14:12- and Ezekiel 28:12- is the story of the fall of God's most favored angel (who walked on the "mount" of God, indicating he functioned in the highest levels of angelic government, the only anointed angel mentioned in the Bible), the being we call satan.  

In Ezekiel 28:16 God says He "expelled" satan, in verse 17 God says He threw satan to the earth.  (For a description of cherubim, see Ezekiel 1 and Revelation 4.)  Jesus says in Luke 10:18, "I saw satan fall like lightning from heaven."  In Revelation 12 (another example of "oriental" story telling) we find that when the dragon was cast out, he took 1/3 of all God's angels with him, "His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth."  (satan is called "morning star" in Isaiah 14:12 and angels are called stars in Job 38:7, while believers are called stars in Daniel 12:3 and Philippians 2:15.)

I believe this expulsion had a physical effect on the earth.  Science tells us that dinosaurs were made extinct by a catostrophic asteroid strike.  This would place Genesis 1:2, if added in chronological order, somewhere between Genesis 1:21 & 1:24.  

I believe God deliberately chose not to include Genesis 1:2 in its chronological time slot because it would have changed the entire focus of the creation story from satan having no significance to being the "star" of the show.  Moses says in Genesis 1:31, "God saw all that He had made, and it was very good."  

As Paul tells us, "...all things work together for good for those who love God and are called according to His purpose."  God takes this catastrophe of satan's rebellion and remakes the earth to be inhabited by mammals and finally His crowning creation:  man.

This should explain the high points of Genesis 1.  

Thank you for your kind rating of my answer,

Marilyn




Howdy Steve;

Creationism, defined as the belief God created the entire universe in six 24-hour days or six thousand-year days, is not defensible, not on spiritual grounds or, obviously, on scientific grounds.

Creationists have trouble with the concept of a "day" in Genesis.  They fall into the humanistic trap of thinking that "day" in Genesis 1 is defined in human terms.  In order to define a single day as 24 hours or as 1 thousand years (based on two scriptures, one found in Psalms and one found in Peter, which say (my paraphrase) "a thousand years is like a day to God") and retain that view, a person must then explain the geological evidence as "planted" by God--in other words false evidence.  Some even say the dinosaurs were killed in the flood...  Planting false evidence is lying and to adhere to this definition of a "day" one must then call God a liar!  If God is truly God, then He can't be a liar.

Yes, it is a case of cognitive dissonance.  Christians have exhibited this a few times previously until forced to change.  The church fathers of Galileo's day persecuted him for insisting the earth was not the center of the universe.  They were another group of Christians fallen prey to the humanistic view that man is the measure and center of all things.  Yet, Galileo was a devout Christian and believed in certain facts about God which led him to do the research he did and believe what he believed as a result.

1)  God commanded human beings to have dominion over the earth and by extension the universe in Genesis 1.  Dominion is more than hunting, farming and mining; in order to truly have dominion, human beings must come to understand their universe and manage its resources wisely.

2)  God is a truthful, rational Being.  His universe is created to function according to laws in a logical manner.  Thus, the evidence discovered in the universe is true.

Some Christians just can't get around the concept that a "day" in Genesis 1 is not meant to be defined in human terms.  The Hebrew word for "day" can be defined as:  the daylight hours, a 24-hour period or an era in which certain things happen.  For instance we might say, "the Roman day," when referring to the time when Rome ruled the western world.   

When the reader further understands that the words "evening and morning" can also be equally translated "disorder to order" then the verses ending with this alternately translated phrase, "disorder to order, the first era" take on an entirely different meaning!

God is describing the events to Moses who wrote them down using the simplest terms possible, yet at the same time, very accurate.  The first day consists of the "big bang" and the resulting creation of matter and so on.

When the reader notes that the sun doesn't even exist as an illuminating star until the fourth "day," the Creationist adherance to the idea that God is referring to six 24-hour days suffers yet another hit!  

However, using the alternate translation above, this description in Genesis matches the latest scientific evidence!  After the initial "big bang" the universe was dark for quite a long time until suddenly the stars lit up.  I'm sure you see my point, if the sun isn't even there until the fourth "day," then how can the previous days be 24-hour days?  Twenty-four hour days are called that because of the "rising and setting" of the sun.

The argument isn't for creation, but for intelligent design.  As you can see, I believe in intelligent design.  Now, whether some of the people who are proposing intelligent design are using logical arguments, or are idiots infected by humanism or normally intelligent persons suffering cognitive dissonance, I can't answer for.

Obviously, I'd rather all Christians used their brains and weren't locked into beliefs that cannot be supported.  My only consolation is, evolutionists who exclude an intelligent designer don't meet my criteria for brains either.  It takes just as much faith, if not MORE, to believe the entire universe and all the living things in it got here by chance than it does to believe God designed it and created it.

Sincerely,

Marilyn