Dinosaurs and Man
Two articles appeared recently in the Orlando Sentinel that were critical of Florida s vo: while there may be some legitimate issues with some of those schools, those writing the articles did not gain any credibility in their attacks. The one published on June 9, 2018 has as its title, "$1B a Year to "Teach" Kids Religious Fringe Drivel" (B1). Lauren Ritchie says the voucher schools teach "fake science." She laments many of those schools "claim people lived with dinosaurs" and that "Noah had a couple on the ark."
Along with charging that voucher schools hire "high school dropouts and felons as teachers," she unloads on fundamentalists who want their children "to learn a bunch of hillbilly science." Really? When people do not have a valid argument or any evidence, they frequently resort to insults and make ad hominem attacks.
But she is not the only one. Scott Maxwell s column was published on June 10, the next day. He also decries "books that tell kids that dinosaurs frolicked alongside man" (B1). Obviously Maxwell and Ritchie received thorough educations in evolution : so much so that they were either never presented scientific facts, or they simply refuse to believe the proof.
Was Werner Von Braun a "hillbilly" scientist? Lord Kelvin (who also refuted evolution) held a record 21 honorary doctorates; von Braun surpassed him with 25. Yet he wrote to the school board in the state of California, saying they should be teaching the scientific evidences for Creation in their public school science classes. He affirmed:
It is as difficult for me to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science. Far from being independent or opposing forces, science and religion are sisters.
Does Lauren Ritchie want to try to make him look like an idiot with no brains? In fact, quite a lengthy list of famous scientists (ones who contributed tremendously to scientific advancement) could be provided : all of whom believed in the God of the Bible. Would it surprise some folks to learn some actual facts about Isaac Newton : namely, that his personal papers showed that he wrote about 1.3 million words on Biblical subjects (about 20 standard size text books)? He wrote 2 books: Prophecies of Daniel and History of Ancient Kingdoms as defenses or proofs for the Bible. He wrote strong papers refuting atheism and defending creation and the Bible. He said, "I find more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history whatsoever." Oh, and this one will really hurt. Newton also said: "All my discoveries have been made in answer to prayer." Ouch!
What About Dinosaurs?
Much more could be said regarding legitimate, world-recognized scientists, but these are sufficient to rebuff the ad hominem attacks. Now what about dinosaurs? According to evolutionary theory, the dinosaurs died out more than 65 million years ago. Man, in his modern form, has only been around for 50,000 years. So, obviously the two were never on earth at the same time. Evolutionists will attack any evidence to the contrary as false and suspicious because : well, there goes their theory.
On the other hand, the Bible does not seem to leave any room for God to have created us more than 10,000 years ago. Since God created the flying animals on the fifth day and land animals and man on the sixth, then they both existed at the same time. So, there are two different ideologies. Which one does the known evidence support?
Some would argue that it is foolish to think that man and dinosaurs dwelt together because these beasts would have killed man and made him extinct. But those who make this argument may be unaware that the relationship between man and animals changed after the flood. God did not authorize man to eat animals for food in the beginning. God gave man only food from the plant kingdom at the outset:
And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food" (Gen. 1:29).
Men and animals got along well during this time period. No animosity existed. In fact when God formed all of the animals, He "brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called them, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19). When God determined to destroy the world He had made with a flood, He brought the animals to Noah, and they entered the ark (Gen. 6:20; 7:1-4). Once again, the relationship between man and animals was amicable.
But after the flood, all of that changed. Unlike at the beginning with Adam, God told Noah:
"And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, and on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand. Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs" (Gen. 9:2-3).
Since harmony existed prior to the flood, it is logical that man and dinosaurs could have been together on the ark : especially the younger ones.
The Bible and Dinosaurs
Does the Bible mention dinosaurs? Not by that name. The word dinosaur was not coined until the 1840s : more than two centuries after the King James Version of the Bible was translated. It is no mystery why they did not use the term. However, we ought to consider the description found in Job 40:15-19:
Look now at the behemoth, which I made along with you. He eats grass like an ox.
See now, His strength is in his hips.
And his power is in his stomach muscles.
He moves his tail like a cedar;
the sinews of his thighs are tightly knit.
His bones are like beams of bronze,
his ribs like bars of iron.
He is the first of the ways of God; only He who made him can bring near His sword.
This behemoth has strength in his hips, power in his stomach muscles, and a tail like a cedar. If this is not a description of a dinosaur, what is it? And what better a representation of the might of God could be found? But there is much more.
Discoveries
Dr. Samuel Hubbard in the fall of 1924 found some interesting drawings on the walls of a canyon. There was an elephant, several other beasts, and a dinosaur! The drawing of the dinosaur shows him standing on his hind legs, balancing himself with his long tail. If men and dinosaurs did not dwell together on Earth with each other at the same time, how could a man draw such a beast so accurately?
In Acambaro, Mexico, which is about 100 miles northwest of Mexico City, on the Lerma River, is the location of a great find of ceramic figurines. More than 32,000 have been discovered, and about one-third of them involved dinosaur depictions. Some scientists have tried to downplay the find or have claimed that they are frauds, but, in testing them, they found that they were ancient. Other artifacts, which are quite old, were also discovered, but scientists who believe in evolution acknowledge that these masks, idols, and musical instruments are genuine. They do not, however, want to admit that the dinosaur figurines are genuine because it demonstrates that the Bible is right when it says that both man and dinosaurs lived at the same time. A true scientist, like a good Bible student, wants to find out the truth. It is always the right thing to do to buy the truth and refuse to sell it (Pr. 23:23).
In Peru, more than 11,000 stones have been found that the Inca Indians placed with their dead when they buried them. Upon these stones were carvings of several things : including various types of dinosaurs. Other drawings also exist that show that men once lived with these gigantic creatures. These burial stones, which have been found at Ica, Peru, have become so popular that some dishonest people started making fakes of these stones to sell to tourists. Yet the original finds are known to be authentic.
Now if these finds were the only evidence that contradicted evolution, would they not be sufficient? But evolution lacks viable explanations for a great many things, such as polystrate fossils. In fact, problems for the evolutionist exist at every step of the way in the alleged process. The theory survives because it remains the prevailing view, and those who disagree are marginalized and not taken seriously. Creationism is referred to as hillbilly science : despite the tremendous number of scientists who believed that God created this universe. Yet the public is seldom taught that most scientific disciplines were begun by Bible believers.
The Silent Champion
Those who continue to insult Creationists might want to tone down their rhetoric because evolutionists are the ones who have failed to answer the challenge. Consider a true tale of two men.
Brother Thomas B. Warren debated one of the most prominent atheists in the world in 1976 : Antony G. N. Flew. In 1978 he engaged Wallace I. Matson on the polemic platform. Two years later he debated Dr. Joe Barnhart from the Philosophy Department at North Texas State University. Warren held a Ph. D. from Vanderbilt University and acquitted himself superbly in all three debates, which remain in print and are well worth studying. After his third debate, Warren was invited in October of 1980 to debate Carl Sagan. He accepted.
Carl Sagan was a well-known evolutionist due to his Cosmos series, which had begun airing on PBS in September of 1980. Furthermore, Time published an article on October 20, 1980 in which they wrote: "Sagan also issues open challenges. To creationists, who argue for a biblical interpretation of life's beginnings, he states that evolution is not a theory, it is a fact" (63). Sagan was invited to debate Thomas Warren. Warren would defend Creation, and Sagan would defend evolution. Sagan, who "issues open challenges," did not respond.
Warren then wrote to Sagan, encouraging him to accept; he remained silent. This is somewhat comparable to Goliath of the Philistines boasting every day for an opponent and then slinking away when David stepped forth. Warren wrote to the editor of Time to see if he had misunderstood what Sagan had said in the article. He was reassured that Sagan had indeed issued the challenges. Time, however, never ran the story of Sagan's silence concerning the proposed debate; so, for all their readers knew, no creationist ever wanted to take on Carl Sagan. Stephen J. Gould likewise chose not to debate. Shall we call evolution "Ivy League Science"? It's fine for students in a classroom but cannot stand actual scrutiny from someone with a different perspective.
Those who do not know what they are saying shouldn't be: