Where Do the Dinosaurs Fit?

Figuring out when the dinosaurs lived relative to man isn't really so difficult.

"I don't believe in the BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ. because dinosaurs lived a long time before man ever did."

Have you ever heard a statement like that? I certainly have—many times. In fact, this was one of the principal reasons Charles Darwin, the father of the theory of evolution, eventually rejected the BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ.. Many have followed suit.

Most people believe you can't reconcile dinosaurs and the BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ.—but they are wrong. This erroneous idea is based on the supposition that either you have to believe in the young-earth theory of a 6,000-year-old earth and dinosaurs living with Adam, or you can't believe in the creation week account of Genesis 1.

Yet many would be surprised to find that several centuries ago scientists did believe in dinosaurs, an ancient earth and in creation week.

In fact, many of the first geologists who established the basic geologic column were believers in both the BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ. and an ancient earth. British physicist Alan Hayward wrote about these premier geologists: "Among them were William Buckland and Adam Sedgwick. Buckland held the chair of geology at Oxford [University in England] in the early-nineteenth century, while Sedgwick was his counterpart at Cambridge. Both were leading churchmen, and both preached the plenary inspiration of ScriptureThe divinely inspired writings of both the Old and New Testaments. The term Scripture is used in the New Testament to refer to both the Hebrew Bible (Luke 24:44-45) and the new apostolic writings accepted as inspired (2 Peter 3:16; 1 Timothy 5:18). and argued in favor of special creation ...

"Buckland maintained close links with Sedgwick and the famous French geologist, Baron Cuvier ... They did much to persuade the early nineteenth-century church that the earth was extremely old and that such views could be harmonized with the teaching of Genesis" (Creation and Evolution, 1985, pp. 72-73).

Proper chronological sequence

It is interesting to note that two BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ. experts in the 1970s combined their skills to publish The Reese Chronological BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ., which supports an ancient earth and a creation week that actually involved a re-creation of a devastated earth.

Edward Reese was a professor of BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ., history and missions at Crown College in Powell, Tennessee, and spent 20 years putting biblical events in chronological order. Frank Klassen was an architect and engineer who spent 10 years writing The Chronology of the BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ.. They both agreed regarding the account in Genesis that important biblical events occurred between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

In fact, they felt the first verses of the BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ. chronologically would be John 1:1-2: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God."

This is the same way 20th-century Church of God leader Herbert W. Armstrong explained the real beginning of the biblical account. Before space, matter and energy were created, there existed the Word (who would later become Jesus Christ, see John 1:14) and God (who later would be identified as God the Father).

Next in The Reese Chronological BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ. comes a scripture that speaks of God existing before the creation of the earth, Psalm 90:2: "Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever You had formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God."

Then comes the traditional first scripture of Genesis 1:1: "In the beginning God created the -heavens and the earth." This marks the creation of the universe as we know it, including the galaxies, stars and planets.

But the most fascinating part of this BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ. is what follows—not Genesis 1:2, but Isaiah 14:12-17, where Lucifer's fall from heaven is recorded. Next comes the parallel account of Lucifer's fall in Ezekiel 28:13-18.

Devastation and renewal

Only then comes Genesis 1:2: "The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters" (emphasis added). In the New International Version (NIV) of the BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ., a footnote to the word "was" in this verse says, "Or possibly became."

Apparently, something happened to cause the earth to become, as the Hebrew denotes, "chaotic and in confusion." Since God is not the author of confusion or chaos (Isaiah 45:18; 1 Corinthians 14:33), it makes sense that the earth became that way due to Lucifer's rebellion and subsequent expulsion to the earth.

As Jesus Christ remarked, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven" (Luke 10:18). Other scriptures reveal it was not only Satan, but also the fallen angels that were cast down with him. We read in 2 Peter 2:4 that "God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell [from the Greek tartaroo , a place of confinement, in this case the earth] and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment ..."

RevelationThe disclosure of God's Word and plan to mankind. In the Bible this refers to making obscure things clear; bringing hidden matters to light; causing especially called individuals to see, hear, perceive, know and understand the things of God; the unveiling of biblical mysteries (Romans 16:25). 12:3-4 describes the dragon (Satan, verse 9) as having drawn a third of the stars of heaven to be cast down to the earth—these "stars" being symbolic of angels (compare 1:20).

What we don't know is how long it took Lucifer to rebel—and how long this was before the six-day renewal of the earth culminating in the creation of Adam and Eve, as described in the rest of Genesis 1. Satan's rebellion apparently happened after the earth had passed through the dinosaur age. Then, geologists agree, something dramatic occurred between the age of reptiles and the age of mammals.

As the famous paleontologist G.G. Simpson once remarked: "The most puzzling event in the history of life on the earth is the change from the Mesozoic Age of Reptiles, to the ... Age of Mammals. It is as if the curtain were rung down suddenly on a stage where all the leading roles were taken by reptiles, especially dinosaurs, in great numbers and bewildering variety, and rose again immediately to reveal the same setting but an entirely new cast, a cast in which the dinosaurs do not appear at all, other reptiles are supernumeraries and the leading parts are all played by mammals of sorts barely hinted at in the previous acts" ( Life Before Man, 1972, p. 42).

This apparently reflects the change from the pre-Adamic world to the world of man. Certainly there are smaller reptiles in our world, but they are insignificant in comparison to what existed in the previous age.

What has been presented here is not the only "ancient earth" explanation available, but it seems to make the most biblical sense. It is the only explanation I know of that accepts the literal 24-hour days of the creation (or re- creation) week and, at the same time, makes room for an indefinite period before the creation of mankind that could include the dinosaurs and previous eras.

Recent geological and astronomical discoveries, such as cosmic expansion and signs of meteor impacts at the geologic Cretaceous-Tertiary border, better known as the "K-T boundary," have only served to substantiate this view.

So, if anyone tells you he or she doesn't believe in the BibleThe books (Greek, "biblia" ) that are acknowledged as canonical (authoritative) by the early Christian Church. It includes both the books of the ancient Hebrew prophets and those of the apostolic witnesses to Jesus Christ. because of a dilemma with the dinosaurs, let that person know there is more than the young-earth explanation available—one that fits well, as best we know, with the biblical facts. GN

15 comments

Submitted on Jul 8, 2011, 9:36 am

0 like this

richard nellis

If God thought that it was necessary to explain where or how the dinosaurs fit in He would have done so. God can not lie! He explained the creation sequence as a 7 day event therefore it occured in 7 days. We must each make our own choices in life, but be forewarned each choice has its own destination. You can deliver only yourself by your righteousness(Eze 14:20). Joshua 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that [were] on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

Don’t trust what I or anyone else tells you. Always test it with the Bible. If there is not a Bible verse, then perhaps it is a tradition of man instead of one of God’s desires. Isaiah 45:9 “Woe unto him that strives with his Maker! [Let] the potsherd (clay pottery fragment) [strive] with the potsherds (clay pottery fragment) of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioned it, What do you make? or thy work, He hath no hands?” Isaiah 45:22 “Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I [am] God, and [there is] none else.”

Submitted on Jul 8, 2011, 11:33 am

1 like this

Steven Britt

It's true that the 7 days that are described in Genesis were in fact just 7 days. The point that I think you may have missed in reading this is that the heavens and the earth (and water) had already been created BEFORE that 7 day period began - Genesis 1:2 says that the Spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters before the 7 days began! Furthermore, if you look at the 7 days, it doesn't say that God created water during that 7 days - it clearly says that He separated the water that was already there (Genesis 1:6-9). If you read Genesis 1 carefully with an open mind, you will see the subtle difference.

Obviously, explaining the dinosaurs was not a high priority for God when He inspired the bible, but I do believe that the bible does clearly show that there was a period of time in which the earth existed before the 7 days of Genesis 1 began. In the society that we live in, people are constantly trying to discredit and cast doubt on the bible, and the purpose of this article is to show that the biblical time frame actually does account for a period during which dinosaurs could have existed on earth millions and billions of years before the 7 days.

Submitted on Jul 8, 2011, 10:45 pm

1 like this

bcerz811

I know the whole "pre-creation-creation" thing is a bit debated (however it always made perfect sense to me) but sometimes I think things like the Dinosaurs are just one of those questions that it's fun to ponder over and wonder about, but if we don't have a definitive answer in this life, God does not care--for lack of a better way to put it. Us having all the answers isn't really his concern, he has much bigger things in store for us in this life. I'm sure in the Kingdom everything will become clear, but in the meantime, if we are making something like this our deal breaker, our priorities are way off. Our faith has to come from God, not in carbon dating or timelines or theories. If someone is adament about not believing in God, the dinosaurs are probably just ONE of their reasons, not their ONLY reason anyway.

However, it is an interesting topic to think about, and I DO think the Bible gives some pretty good direction on what happened. But it is not necessarily satisfying for everyone, and I am afraid that it may have to stay that way for some.

Submitted on Aug 11, 2011, 12:36 pm

0 like this

richard nellis

Response to Steven Britt
That seems to be a theory, but where is the proof?
Give me a bible verse!
The dinosaurs live concurent with man.
There are pictures of the footprints of both in the same rack on the Creation Evidence Museum Online web site, there are also cave drawings, and pottery with drawings, and rocks with carvings all over the world all having dinosaur images on them.
see **Link removed to comply with comment policy**

Before Darwin the evidence was taken from the Bible, not from man. Now man is decieved and does not believe the truth. God can not lie. It is written that He created (Ge 1:21) every living creature that moves on the 5th day. If He did not then He lies. which is not possible.

Submitted on Aug 11, 2011, 4:31 pm

0 like this

Steven Britt

What exactly do you want scriptural proof of from what I said? I gave scriptures - I pointed out what it says concerning water in Genesis 1:1-9. It doesn't say anywhere in there when God created water - it does say that His Spirit hovered over them (Gen 1:2, before the 1st day), He divided the waters by creating the firmament (Gen 1:6-7, 2nd day), and gathered them to created land and the seas (Gen 1:9, 3rd day). I'm not denying that God created water - He created all things through Christ (Hebrews 2:10) - but we are not told when He did so, and carefully reading Genesis 1 leads us to conclude that He did so at some point before the 7 days.

The article gives plenty of other scriptural evidence to support this view.

Submitted on Aug 11, 2011, 10:59 pm

0 like this

Ken Graham

Hi Richard/Steven:

Gen. 1:21 refers to every LIVING creature. Perhaps the dinosaurs and creatures were all dead after Satan's rebellion before Adam and Eve were created. Therefore, God did create every living creature on the 5th day. The creatures, dinosaur and ape-like that exist in the fossil record could have existed side by side and left tracks side by side in the same rock formations - all pre-Adamic.

Best Regards,
Ken

Submitted on Aug 14, 2011, 6:52 pm

0 like this

richard nellis

Hi Steven
I ask you to show me the Bible verse that proves there is a gap between verse Gen 1:2 and Gen 1:3. It is not normal to talk about a weeks time, if it includes a gap between Sunday and Monday. Gen 1:1 through Gen 1:5 tells about the first day. If it tells of two separate days, then there are eight days in the week.

We are told in Ex 20:8, 9, 11 “8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: … 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” and in John 14:2 “In my Father’s house are many mansions: if [it were] not [so], I would have told you. ...”

God can not lie. A lie is when someone tells or does not tell you something with the intent to deceive. If there was a gap in the creation week and we were not told that would be a lie.

We are also told not to add to or diminish from God's word. De 12:32 “What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.”

The link that was removed from my comment was the “Creation Evidence Museum” which has photos of dinosaur foot prints which are superimposed on human footprints. You can also search for “out of place artifacts”, which might bring up some engraved burial stones showing the images of dinosaurs.

Evolution is a deception. Read Darwin's black box. Or just search the web for “evolution creation”. Evolution is a false religion.

Submitted on Aug 15, 2011, 9:54 am

0 like this

Steven Britt

Let me first clarify that I do believe that the 7 days are literal 24-hour days and that I don't believe in evolution.

You consider verses 1 and 2 to be part of the first day. That's an entirely possible biblical view! But it does require science to be wrong about several widely accepted "facts" - the age of the universe, for example. Scientific "facts" are really just an interpretation of observations based on the assumption that physical nature works - and has always worked - according to the same rules. It's entirely possible that God caused things to happen in ways that science doesn't account for. It's entirely possible that the foundational assumptions of scientific methods for dating fossils and rocks are wrong precisely because God did things differently at the time of creation than what scientists observe today. There is nothing wrong with believing this way since, as you stated, Genesis 1 does not say "and then, after a gap between creating heaven and earth and Spirit hovering over the face of the waters, God started the first day."

By the way, let me clarify that I'm not advocating that there was a gap between the first and second days, and I agree that any belief in a gap between the days is obviously wrong. With that said, the view that I (and the article) have been articulating is that the first day didn't start until verse 3. In reading the first few verses of Genesis 1, God doesn't institute the concepts of "day" and "night" until verse 5, after He had created light in verse 3 to base the definition on. Under this explanation, such scientific "facts" as a 13 billion year old universe and a 4 billion year old earth fit the biblical record, since "the beginning" in verse 1 was not necessarily 6000 years ago during the 7 days of the creation week. I'm not trying to twist the scriptures to fit man's understanding, but it's perfectly acceptable to read the bible with an open mind and evaluate whether man's understanding fits with what is said.

If Genesis 1:1 had said "On the first day, God created the heavens and the earth..." and so forth, then there would be a clear answer. The closest that the bible comes, as you pointed out, is found in the Sabbath commandment - "in six days God created the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them." On the other hand, as the article points out, Isaiah 45:18 says that God did not create the earth "in vain" (Hebrew "tohu"), whereas Genesis 1:2 states that the earth was "without form and void" (Hebrew "tohu wa bohu"). This discrepancy is the primary evidence for thinking that there may have been a gap between when the heavens and the earth were created (Gen 1:1) and when they became "without form and void" (Gen 1:2). Either way, we believe that all of the scriptures are true - whether we correctly understand how they fit together is an issue that we simply have to work out the best that we can.

Submitted on Aug 18, 2011, 10:00 am

0 like this

richard nellis

For Steven Britt
Hi Steven
I'm sorry to hear that you don't believe God.
It was God that said in Exodus 20:11 “For [in] six days the LORD made HEAVEN AND EARTH, THE SEA, AND ALL THAT IN THEM [IS], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”

If the first day of creation did not start until Ge 1:3, then there is a conflict with Ex 20:11; there can not be a conflict in the truth.

You are basing your doctrine on one verse (or the lack of a verse), that is a very slippery slope. We need to be like those of Berea (Acts 17:10-13) and search the scripture for the details. God does not spoon feed us, He provides the scriptures and it is up to us to find them. We are responsible for our own salvation. If we love God we will find His word and draw close to Him.

We need to consider all scripture. Isaiah 28:10 “For precept [must be] upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, [and] there a little” Isaiah 28:13 “But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, [and] there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.”

As for evolution it is a false religion. It requires more faith to believe it, than to believe the Bible. It violates the laws of science. It is a deception of man and his name was Darwin. I am not allowed to give you web sites, so you will have to look up the following subjects – Laws of thermodynamics, DNA codes toppling evolution, Darwin on trial, Creation Evidence Museum Online, Nonfossilized Soft Tissue found in Dinosaur Bones.

Think about how fossils are formed. Many have been found that show scales or soft tissue of the creature. We are told that the creatures died and were buried over time. But if that was true, they would not have soft tissue, it would have been eaten by other creatures. They must have been buried very soon after death, as would have happened in Noah's flood. Yes, the evidence is there, but it has been interpreted wrong.

The 13 billion year old universe and the 4 billion year old earth are theories, to be facts they must fulfill the requirements of science. One of which is observation.

Instead of questioning God's statements, I recommend that you question man's understanding. God knows more than man, and He was there to observe what happened. Nu 23:19 “God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?”

Submitted on Aug 18, 2011, 11:10 am

0 like this

Steven Britt

Richard, I've already given my analysis of the issue, and you haven't made any new points. It should be evident that I believe God - the issue here is understanding what God said. I also agree that there can be no conflict in the scriptures: any perceived conflict on our part means that we are misunderstanding. In light of this, you have not explained the apparent conflict of Isaiah 45:18 with the idea that Genesis 1:2 is part of the first day. I have already acknowledged your point about Exodus 20 - it's a great point! On the other hand, you haven't given a direct response to my points on Isaiah 45:18 or any of the other points of the article which support re-creation. I'm not saying that you have to - but you should not deride me for attempting to consider all relevant scriptures.

Also, I already told you what I think about evolution. Neither I nor the author of the article have supported it. Concerning scientific claims in general, I believe exactly what I stated before - that science is only as good as the assumptions it is founded on. The problem is that man's science is often founded on assumptions that seem reasonable to men but may not reflect what God has actually done.

Submitted on Sep 21, 2011, 8:10 am

0 like this

Fjord Prefect

You guys know that the Bible was written and organized by a community of people right? It didn't just drop out of the sky. You know that the Bible has been edited and re-edited several times and the version that you probably read now is not the same as what the founders of the Church and the council of Nicea had compiled? You know that many of the stories in the Old Testament have been found elsewhere in other historical and spiritual texts, and the account of these stories often differs in the details, right? Are you all so arrogant and self-righteous to believe that every word you read in your modern English-language Bible is exactly how God had intended? That no other version could possibly be right? If man can make mistakes about determining the real age of the world, can't he make mistakes about the validity of the version of the Bible he reads? I'm not saying it's all bunk, I'm just saying that it's OK to question words that man has printed upon paper in the name of God.

Submitted on Sep 22, 2011, 9:38 am

0 like this

mitchellmoss

Fjord,

That's where literary criticism comes in! Generally speaking, reading just the English is just fine. But yes, it is fruitful to study into what the original Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic text actually reads so as to gain understanding about what the original writers meant. And it would be foolish if you were only to ever reference English translations (even some that people consider "the most inspired" like the KJV), because just the very act of translating introduces errors and incomplete concepts—that's a fact of language differences. One could make arguments about the different texts that have been preserved through the centuries, and talk about the "textus receptus" and the Greek texts versus the Egyptian texts ad infinitum. But that's a really deep subject probably not able to be done justice in website comments :)

As for your comment about other ancient stories, the fact that Gilgamesh references the Flood, for example, really only *increases* my belief in the Bible. It corroborates the Biblical account of things. And yes, the details differ, but the difference is that the Bible is the account preserved by God and inspired by God. Utnapishtim has never answered prayers. But God has. That's the proof of God and the Bible.

As for arrogance and self-righteousness, I think you misread the motives of the author and commenters. Nobody here is trying to be arrogant or self-righteous, but to understand details that are misunderstood about the Bible and defend the faith from a Biblical viewpoint. To try and show that scientific understanding does not have to be pitted against the Bible, as if only science or the Bible can be correct but not both.

Submitted on Sep 22, 2011, 9:52 am

0 like this

Steven Britt

Fjord, it seems to me like you don't believe that the scriptures are actually God's Word verbatim, but rather some vague approximation of God's Word as recorded by men. Do you not think that a God capable of creating the universe is also capable of making sure that His only written communication with His creation is accurate? It is true that many things have been falsely written "in the name of God" (the Apocrypha and Gnostic gospels come to mind), but the falsehood of such writings is evident in their clear lack of consistency with God's Word. If we are going to believe in a God anything like what the bible describes, we simply must have faith that He has given us an accurate record of who He is.

Submitted on Sep 23, 2011, 3:29 pm

0 like this

richard nellis

It is a fact that the King James Bible has errors and deceptions in it, as do all versions. God allowed them to be in the bible for what ever reason He had, but they are there. If you do not believe that, then you are deceived. The word Easter in in the KJ Bible as a translation instead of Passover. That was not an error, it was demanded by King James himself, therefore it is a deception. He who teaches that there are no errors is a false prophet. I use the KJ on-line-bible which has Strong's concordance interleaved so that I can check when I question a verse.

The Rabbi's teach that there are four levels of knowledge in the Bible, these are the plain or as it is read, the spiritual, the symbolic, and one other that I don't remember. We, being human, think that the person we are talking to has the same understanding that we have, this is almost never true. If it is true one time, the next time we talk to the same person, it probably won't be true. Our attention span or our knowledge changes or may be one of us is tired. But in the regeneration we shall be known as we are known.

I have a list about 9 pages long of symbols that are found in the KJ Bible that I can send to the church for their approval if some one that knows my email address from my profile would send me an email asking for it. That way I would know it is from the church. The church can then correct any mistakes that I might have made and use it to teach the symbolic meanings of the scriptures.

Here is an example of how the symbols give meaning to the Bible. Isaiah 4:1 was one of those mysteries in the Bible that I could not understand. I thought it had some thing to do with one man having seven wives. Isaiah 4:1 “And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: Only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.”

Now that I have found the keys to prophecy, I read this verse as: Isaiah 4:1 “And in that day (The introduction to an end time prophecy) seven (a sign of worship) women (a church or the bride of Jesus) shall take hold of (Identify themselves with) one man, (Jesus is the son of man, therefore a man is Yah (God the father)) saying, (making a claim or request) We will eat our own bread, (Bread is made of dough {which is ground grain [word of God], water [man], and yeast [doctrine]} cooked with oil (holy spirit.)) and wear our own apparel: (Garments reflect ones righteousness) only let us be called by thy name, (Christian - of or after Christ) to take away our reproach. (Thinking that the name of Christ, by itself, can make them acceptable.)” The symbolic meaning is that in the end time there will many churches which will call themselves Christian, but will not want to follow God or be righteous. They don’t walk the walk, or talk the talk, but they still want the reward.

Submitted on Nov 15, 2011, 4:36 pm

0 like this

richard nellis

For Steven Britt

Sorry for the delay in answering Steven, Sometime it takes me longer to find a verse than I thought it would.

Here is my logic:

God (Jesus) can not lie. He spoke everything into existence. Everything was made by Him. If He were to try to lie He would create a new condition.

Mark 10:5-6 “ 5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. 6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.”

Matthew 19:4 “And he (Jesus) answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made [them] at the beginning made them male and female,”

John 1:1-3 “1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him(Jesus); and without him was not any thing made that was made.”

The genealogy of Jesus as stated in Luke 3:23-38 ends with Luke 3:38 “Which was [the son] of Enos, which was [the son] of Seth, which was [the son] of Adam, which was [the son] of God.”, telling us that Adam was the son (creation) of God.

Jesus stated that Adam and Eve were created at the beginning of creation, any gap, whether or not it is counted in the seven days of creation, would make Jesus a liar. Which would make our Bible and religion void.

Figuring out when the dinosaurs lived relative to man isn't really so difficult.

Proper chronological sequence

Devastation and renewal

Related Content

More Information

More From...

Related Booklet

Tagged with...

Connect with Good News