| Author | Message | ||
| Goose Registered user Username: Goose Post Number: 37 Registered: 11-2011  |
Recent films like Jurasic Park depict how horrible of a creature the T-Rex was. Who is Responsible For the T-Rex, God or Satan? We read "The Lion will lay down and eat straw with the lamb." What will the T-Rex do? I guess you see where I am going with this question. How could a loving God have created such a horrible monster? Of course Ellen Whites explanation for this was that in Noah's day, there had been "amalgamation of man and beast." It is conceivable that people in Noah's day had been as, or even more advanced, scientifically that today, and that through some form of cloning these beasts were created as war animals, or something. And then of course we have all the questions about diseases, plagues, mosquitoes, etc. | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 2011 Registered: 6-2006  |
"We read "The Lion will lay down and eat straw with the lamb." What will the T-Rex do?" Answer: The T-Rex will eat both the lion and the lamb. At any rate, who the heck cares about the T-Rex! What I want to know is who created the cockroach I stepped on barefoot in the dark at 3:00 in the morning when I was 21? Had to have been the devil. (And I'm sure he was in cahoots with Ellen White for dating my SDA boyfriend). | ||
| Goose Registered user Username: Goose Post Number: 38 Registered: 11-2011 |
Too funny, Grace! You have a healthy wit. Sure glad God saved us from the very, very dysfunctional Adventists. Nevertheless, the question remains,...where did all these nasty creatures come from? | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 2012 Registered: 6-2006 |
I'm sure God created them too ~ they may be beautiful in His eyes! Thanks for the compliment. I'm not actually a former. I just married into a very active SDA family. Hubby would now be considered a "badventist" though. (That might be my fault...)  Leigh Anne | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 1716 Registered: 12-2007  |
They probably were not "nasty creatures" when they were created. Just because they can fit together some bones why does that give them the right to assume so much about their "personalities" ? I have heard that sometimes they have found just a couple of actual bones, and then they use their imaginations to "build" a prehistoric creature in the way they imagine that they probably looked. I dont know if that is true or not... but would not be surprised. | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 615 Registered: 5-2009  |
I'm sure dinosaurs were real and that they were created by God. The book of Job mentions dinosaur-like creatures and dragons. When Adam sinned, all creation came under a curse. See Romans 1 and Genesis 3. I don't think dinosaurs were a result of the curse, but came under the curse. | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1387 Registered: 7-2004  |
Attributing creative power to Satan is simply not supported by the Bible. It would be a natural conclusion for the SDA God v. Satan understanding, where Satan is so nearly God's equal that there could be a Great Controversy and Satan could prevail over God. | ||
| Kelleigh Registered user Username: Kelleigh Post Number: 295 Registered: 7-2011  |
This side of eternity, we don't know why God created dinosaurs. All we can do really is speculate. After the fall God said to Adam, "The fear and dread of you will fall upon all the beasts of the earth...they are given into your hands" Maybe T-Rex was more scared of man, than man of him? Or maybe he was more afraid of woman... | ||
| Free2dance Registered user Username: Free2dance Post Number: 519 Registered: 2-2010 |
I recommend this website: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/1999/11/05/dinosaurs-and-the-bible My kids were given books and a DVD all about Dinosaurs by Ken Ham and Buddy Davis (I'll link it to the bottom). It is sooo interesting. My husband and I sat watching it with my son and we were shooshing him so we could hear, lol. I will give you a link to the DVD. http://www.answersingenesis.org/kids/videos Scroll down to, Dinosaurs: Genesis and the Gospel. Start with 1A. I think you will find it interesting. | ||
| Free2dance Registered user Username: Free2dance Post Number: 520 Registered: 2-2010 |
BTW, I haven't been on in a while. Welcome, Goose. | ||
| Free2dance Registered user Username: Free2dance Post Number: 521 Registered: 2-2010 |
Ok, one more thing. For you parents on here, the Kids Answers section is great: http://www.answersingenesis.org/kids | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1656 Registered: 7-2003  |
I personally find it problematic to attribute carnivorous animal activity to Satan. I think such a position fails to take into account the incredible, mind-blowing balance and fine-tuning in the earth's ecosystem. Carnivorous activity at all levels is essential to maintaining that fine balance in nature. The "Circle of Life" is real, complex, and exquisitely designed. Satan would have to possess vast creative power to create such a fine tuned system. In addition to the problem of ascribing huge creative powers to Satan, it would also be difficult to understand his motives in creating such a well designed, self-sustaining biological system. I just don't see anything in scripture that would lead me to think we can attribute our ecosystem to Satan. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1657 Registered: 7-2003 |
Here's a question to ponder: Why do we tend to think that the whole earth was a beautiful, safe, paradise, garden when Adam and Eve were created? To put it another way, why do we think the Garden of Eden and the rest of the earth were essentially the same? The Bible clearly indicates that the garden had boundaries (albeit large ones), that Adam and Eve were put out of the garden, and that an Angel was posted to keep them out. This seems to at least imply that the rest of the earth was not a garden. I would suggest that the Fall did not come as a surprise to God and that He created a world designed to accommodate it. It seems to me that the implication of the text is that the garden was just that, a bordered garden, distinct from a world where existence was tougher. A bit speculative, but something to think about. | ||
| Bskillet Registered user Username: Bskillet Post Number: 898 Registered: 8-2008 |
When Adam and Even fell, God subjected the world to "frustration," as it is in some translations. This is also called "corruption" later in v. 19. What we can observe in animals post-fall is an imperfect and incomplete reflection of what they were like before sin. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1658 Registered: 7-2003 |
Bskillet, While the interpretation you've put forth certainly might be correct, I personally don't think we can be dogmatic in saying so for two reasons: 1. The text does not actually say that the world was subjected to futility or corruption *AFTER* the fall. That is an assumption. It is entirely possible (I would say probable) that this universe was designed with entropy as an integral part of the design of how everything works. Again, the Fall didn't take God by surprise. It's just as possible that God subjected the creation to the laws of physics that we observe (which must include decay) from the very beginning so that creation would be self sustaining through the millennia of sin until such a time that all is redeemed and made new. We just can't say for sure from this text. 2. The context of this passage is not dealing with animals and plants, but primarily with our (human) hope in Christ. While we might make some inferences to the rest of creation, they're just that, inferences, which makes it hard to be dogmatic. Again, just food for thought. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1659 Registered: 7-2003 |
I want to clarify my meaning on #2 because I don't want to make it sound as if I think animals and plants are excluded from the redemption of creation. I do not mean to imply that. Here's how I might have said that better: 2. The context of this passage is not primarily about animals and plants, but it primarily dealing with our (human) hope in Christ. While we might make some inferences from the human condition before and after the fall to the rest of creation before and after the fall, they're just that, inferences, which makes it hard to be dogmatic. | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1388 Registered: 7-2004 |
Chris, I have often pondered the same point you have made about the nature of the Garden as compared to the rest of the world. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3838 Registered: 10-2004  |
Chris, How do you reconcile things like "subjected to futility" and "slavery to corruption" with "God saw that it was good"? Where is there even a hint of "subjected to futility" and "slavery to corruption" in Genesis 1-2? Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on December 13, 2011) | ||
| Kelleigh Registered user Username: Kelleigh Post Number: 298 Registered: 7-2011 |
And all these years I've imagined the newly created earth as illustrated in Arthur Maxwell's The Bible Story :-) | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 2013 Registered: 6-2006 |
Kelleigh, I sure wish we had a "like" button I could use for your last post. Tee hee!! Leigh Anne The title "The Bible Story" should have been followed with "(according to Ellen G. White)". |
