How does a Christian reconcile Creation with fossils?

Hello Big E. I wanted to share with you how I as a so-called “Creationist” have been taught to reconcile the Genesis creation account with the proven existence of dinosaurs millions of years before the existence of Man.

Not trying to convert here, just answering your query from another angle. Also, any quoted research is credited at the end of this post. :slight_smile:

Gen. 1:1-2 “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth. And the Earth was without form and void.”
The English *{ “without form and void” has been translated from the Hebrew ‘tohu and bohu,’ which could also be translated ‘waste and empty,’ or ‘chaotic, in confusion and in a state of decay.’}

Please note two other passages of Scripture that seemingly clash with Gen 1:2:

a) 1 Cor 14:33—“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace….”
b) Job 38:4,7—“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the Earth….When the morning stars sang and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”
Note: “Morning stars” and “sons of God” believed to be speaking of angels.

If God “isn’t the author of confusion,” why would He create something “chaotic?” And would the angels “shout for joy” at the creation of something “in a state of decay?”

Ps. 104:30—“Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the Earth.”

What if we were to separate Gen. 1:1 and 1:2 by millions-- perhaps billions–of years, during which dinosaurs could have been created and then later become extinct? Could there be Scriptural evidence to suggest that *{the word “was” in Gen.1:2 should be translated instead as “became” as it is in Gen. 19:26 (i.e. “The Earth BECAME without form and void”)}? And could the remainder of the Genesis account be referring to a RE-creation—a RENEWAL of the Earth?

The first biblical account of the beginning of the universe is found, not in Gen. 1:1, but in John 1:1-3

John 1:1—“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH God, and the Word WAS God.”
Note: I was taught that this means there were two Beings, both called God–as though you were speaking of members of the same family that are two separate people with the same last name [i.e. There was John (the son), and John was WITH Smith (the father), and John WAS Smith].

Vs 2-3—“The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him, was not any thing made that WAS made.”

Somewhere between this time and the creation of the material universe, God created the angels. We know this because the angels “shouted for joy” at Earth’s creation. (Job 38:7) The angels were created perfect in their beauty, as can be seen from the description of one of the only three angels mentioned by name in the entire Bible.

  • {The name Lucifer is translated as “Shining star of the dawn” or “Bringer of Light.”}

Ezek. 28:13-15—"Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, the topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald and the carbuncle and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
"Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
“Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.”

What iniquity?

Isa. 14:12-14—"How art thou fallen, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which did weaken the nations!
"For thou hast said in thine heart, ‘I will ascend unto heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
"I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High.’ "

So we see that Lucifer rebelled and attempted to overthrow God. It has been speculated that perhaps about 1/3 of the angelic population joined him:
Rev 12:4—“And his tail drew a third part of the stars of heaven and did cast them to
the EARTH.”

At the rebellion of Lucifer and his forces, a “great war” is spoken of:

Rev. 12:7-9—"And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against
the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels
"And prevailed not; neither was their place found ANY MORE in heaven.
"And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan,
which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the EARTH and his angels
were cast out with him."

Jesus—the “Word” that “became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14)” said that He actually witnessed this happening in Luke 10:18, which says, “And He said unto them, ‘I beheld Satan as lightning FALL FROM HEAVEN.’”

I have heard many scientists speculate over the years that the dinosaurs, whose existence is PROVEN by fossil evidence, were killed by a cataclysmic event that changed their whole environment. Some have even suggested that a huge asteroid might have struck the Earth’s surface, causing a multitude to die on impact and countless others by the sheer choking out of any livable atmospheric conditions. Couldn’t a “great war in heaven”—the ULTIMATE battle between Good and Evil—be classified at such a cataclysmic event?

It has been shown through fossil research that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. Common sense tells us that Man and dinosaurs are incompatible. There is a huge time period BETWEEN their existence. We know that the rebellion of Lucifer happened BEFORE the creation of Man because Satan was already there to tempt Mother Eve in the Garden of Eden. Also, if Man and dinosaur lived at the same time, would not Man have become extinct right along with them? As I see it, Scripture and Science are in AGREEMENT–not conflict–on this matter! :slight_smile:

So, in conclusion, I reconcile Genesis and fossils this way:

Gen. 1:1 = The FIRST creation of Earth along with the rest of the material universe, including dinosaurs (though not specifically mentioned).
Gen. 1:2 = The resultant chaos—perhaps millions of years later–after the rebellion of Lucifer and his demons, at which point the dinosaurs could have been snuffed out of existence.
Gen. 1:3-31 = The RE-creation or RENEWAL of Earth and the material universe, including Man (which due to the repeating of the phrase “The evening and the morning were the first [second, third, etc.] day” throughout the account, I am convinced ACTUALLY occurred in 6 literal 24 hr time periods).

<<<* All research and quotes in braces{} are from “Mystery of the Ages” by Herbert W. Armstrong. Published 1985 by the Worldwide Church of God. (No longer in publication.) Scriptural accounts taken from the KJV of the Bible.>>>

I guess I’m a creationist. I don’t believe the Earth was created in 6 24-hour periods (and I have yet to see a reasonable argument that the “days” in Genesis should be interpreted in such a literal way), but I believe God did in fact create it.

There are two primary points about the creation story in Genesis that I find to be utterly important: that God did create the world, and that the Fall of Adam was a real event. The details of how God created the world aren’t that important to me. They might be interesting, but they really don’t impact my faith.

My education is in Physics and Computer Science–I believe that the rational thing for people to do is pursue the Scientific Method in the study of objective proof, while at the same time pursuing an understanding of God by reading scriptures, prayer, etc. While I personally believe that it has been about 6000 years since the Fall of Adam, I don’t see it as necessary to my faith. While some in my church have interpreted some scriptures to indicate that there was no death at all before Adam fell (which would oppose the idea of dinosaurs living and dying millions of years before men), I don’t see that as necessary either.

I’ll note that some point to 2 Peter 3-4 to suggest that perhaps the assumptions we make in science (half-life of elemnts remaining constant, etc.) for dating and other purposes may not hold. Of course that doesn’t mean that geologists are wrong when they give the age of the Earth at about 4.5 billion years. In fact, I have no problem accepting two opposing views arrived at by two different axioms. No biggie.

In the end (that is when we have access to it all), all truth will be coherent and in agreement. That likely will mean that some of my personal beliefs and deductions will be wrong. It also means that some of what we accept as objective truth in science will be wrong.

[hijack]
I still haven’t seen a major issue in Astronomy addressed. One that I find to be one of the most remarkable discoveries of the second half of the 20[sup]th[/sup] century. Specifically that the rate of expansion of the Universe is apparently increasing, instead of decreasing. I don’t know why I’m bringing this up except that it’s an example of a formerly very-strongly-held deduction in science (hey, I believed the rate of expansion was slowing too!) being surprisingly proved wrong.
[/hijack]

[hijack of a hijack] And who made that discovery? My very own former astronomy professor, that’s who! :slight_smile: [/hijack]

One of the reasons that I like my husband (emarkp) is that he’s so much more articulate than I am.

Jeez, where’s the fun in that? :slight_smile:

I believe that green elves made my new shoes overnight by faith, not proof.

Purple elves made my socks.

Especially when you consider that it just may be this bunch of Christians who are the liars.* Here on Talk Origins is a page that explains that the entire geologic column does exist in nature, exactly as described in the good geology textbooks, in 26 different locations around the world. This information is well-known to the oil and gas industry; their own geologists found these columns looking for deposits.

*This is another way that a small number of Christians reconcile Creation with fossils: They tell lies.

And Stephen Hawking would tell you that there was never nothing. Creation ex nihlo would violate the First Law of Thermodynamics, which says that neither matter nor energy can be created from nothing.

JAB Very true. But the First Law of Thermodynamics describes, and exists in, a world of matter and energy. It is as powerless to describe the event in which such a world originated, as our abortive discussion about “the cause of the Big Bang” – since as you correctly noted, causality itself originated with the BB.

If dinosaurs supposedly died out and vanished or were buried for millions of years how come man in all is smallness survived?

Humans didn’t exist when the dinosaurs walked the earth. The conditions that lead to the extinction of the dinosaurs (and not all died off quickly) didn’t kill off all animals. Some survived due to being able to adapt or because the change of climate didn’t affect them as greatly.

The small mammals that were around during the reign of the dinosaurs survived then exploited and adapted to all the newly opened niches. As time went on, some evolved into our human ancestors.

Size is not a measure of survivability. In fact, it’s most likely a detriment to long term existance. There are plenty of insects, very few large mammals.

Ummm, Humans and dinosaurs weren’t around at the same time, so humans didn’t have to survive the extinction event that killed off the dinos.

Not to get too sidetracked, but if, as many have suggested here, the story of Genesis is allegorical in nature, what reason is there to believe that the story of the Resurrection could not possibly be allegorical as well? Or in other words, how do Christians who are not biblical-literalists justify dismissing some parts of the Bible as allegory, while believing other parts of the Bible to be the literal truth?

Though Big E didn’t want to debate, doesn’t mean I can’t. I’m not sure I’d call what Armstrong made up research, but then I kind of respect peer reviewed scientific journals more than a preacher’s ramblings.

<snip>

Umm, no. First of all, why did this event form an iridium layer? Second, why did it form a crater where the Gulf of Mexico is now? Third, recent discoveries have found the effects of the asteroid hit, with a debris scatter pattern supporting the asteroid impact. So there is good solid evidence for it. If this really killed off the dinosaurs, or helped their extinction along, is still a matter of debate.

How exactly are we incompatible? Yes, we never lived alongside each other, a matter of evolution not incompatibility. Anyhow, how come god waited 65 million years before creating man? A nap?

Sorry. You imply no dry land before this. No plants. No sun moon and stars, and even no animals. Though there was indeed a mass extinction, not all life was destroyed. In fact, the Cambrian extinction was much more severe than the extinction 65 million years ago. What’s your explanation for that one? (And it was before the dinosaurs, remember.)

I must admit that your approach is better than the typical creationist approach of sticking their fingers in their ears and yelling “nah nah nah” - but not by much.

The thing to ask yourself is: is there any evidence that we can find that would make your hypothesis right and the standard scientific one wrong? Do that and you’re talking science, not myth making.

Because Man hasn’t been smacked by a big asteroid yet. Every land critter weighing over about 50kg was wiped out at the end of the Cretaceous, not just dinosaurs. If we were around then, we wouldn’t be around today.

To go back to the OP; there is really no need to reconcile anything:

If you dig up a fossil, anything that you cannot determine about that fossil by examining it, or the situation in which it was found (etc.) is irrelevant; what OJ Simpson says about it is irrelevant, what David Beckham says about it is irrelevant.

Once you start to invoke phrases like ‘but the Bible says…’ then you might as well just throw away the fossil because you already have the answer you want; what use is examining dusty old rocks?.

“how can I coerce the evidence to agree with the theory that I refuse to modify/dismiss” is pretty much the antithesis of scientific method.

Among other things, the Genesis creation story explicitly states in the original Hebrew that it is a myth. Chapter 2, verse 4. It is usually mistranslated. NIV uses the word “account” when Hebrew scholars I know insist that the word is the equivilent of “myth”. I believe King James. This may also explain why there is no uproar among the various Jewish demoninations about evolution.

I believe King James translates the word as “generations”. Not so.

  1. towledah, to-led-aw’; or toledah, to-led-aw’; from H3205; (plur. only) descent, i.e. family; (fig.) history:–birth, generations.

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

I am Sparticus, I am not sure where exactly you get that it is saying it’s a myth. Could you show me please?
Sam Stone, what gives you the idea that there is no evidence of a global flood?

Look here,

and here,

and here.

scoff,

**

scoff,

**

and scoff

Those sites contain nothing more than a load of inaccuracies, miscomprehensions, leaps of logic, and the standard assortment of so-often-debunked-it’s-not-funny “arguments”.

The truth is the “global flood” idea must be adhered to purely on the basis of faith. Trying to “prove” that the flood occurred using allegedly scientific means only highlights the ad hoc nature of the arguments being used. Miracle after miracle must be invoked in order to “explain” all of the problems inherent in the idea of the Noachian Deluge. And miracles, of course, are not subject to scientific inquiry, nor are they prone to leaving any evidence of their occurance.

I once had a Jehovah’s Witness girl friend ,and I asked her how do you explain all them there fossils. Her answer : “The devil put them there to lead us astray” ! Come to your own conclusions .