Creationist Wisdom #885: Dinosaurs and the Bible

Today’s letter-to-the-editor (it’s actually a column) appears in the Morrow County Sentinel of Mount Gilead, Ohio. It’s titled Bible tells truth about dinosaurs, and the newspaper has a comments section.

Unless the letter-writer is a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name — but today we’ve got a preacher. It’s Stephen Howard, pastor of the Morrow Bible Church. This is the rev’s fourth appearance in our humble blog. The third was #859: Evolution and Death, and that links to the others. Here are some excerpts from his latest, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Dinosaur fossils are fascinating. They have been discovered on every continent of the Earth, and hundreds of different species of dinosaurs have been classified. Sadly, many today accept a lie about the origin of these incredible animals. God’s Word, the Bible, tells us the truth about dinosaurs.

The rev tells us the lie that many people accept:

Evolutionists teach that dinosaurs lived more than 200 million years ago. Their theory is that dinosaurs died off long before humans came on the scene. Some sudden catastrophe brought about their demise. Other evolutionists believe the dinosaurs eventually evolved into birds. But the Bible presents a far different perspective about dinosaurs.

Egad, our teachers lied to us! Here’s The Truth:

According to the Bible, dinosaurs must have been created by God on the sixth day of creation. Genesis 1:24 says, “And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.” The sixth day of creation was also the day when God created people (Genesis 1:26-27). Therefore, dinosaurs and people must have lived together on the earth at one time.

It makes perfect sense! Then he says:

Dinosaurs were also originally vegetarians. All animals were. [Scripture quote.] That’s a big difference from most modern portrayals of dinosaurs.

Yes, a big difference. After that he tells us:

When Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden by disobeying God’s command, death entered into the world. [Scripture quote.] Death affected everything including the plants and animals. [Scripture quote.] Therefore, dinosaurs could not have died off before humans came on the scene. Dinosaurs began to die after man sinned. There was no death before humans.

No death? How wonderful! The rev continues:

If we accept evolution’s explanation of dinosaurs, we are forced to believe that death is not the result of sin. The work of Jesus Christ on the cross to deal with sin and death becomes unnecessary.

Unnecessary? That’s absurd! Let’s read on:

As history went on, the Bible tells us that God judged the world with a world-wide flood. He instructed Noah to build and ark to save his family and some animals. [Scripture quote.] A few small dinosaurs would have been on the ark. The larger species of dinosaurs were probably young and smaller on the ark. The rest of dinosaurs on earth were destroyed in the flood. Many of the dinosaur fossils were likely formed during and just after the flood.

What happened to the dinosaurs Noah saved? The rev explains:

After the flood, dinosaurs on the ark likely reproduced in the earth, but life was not the same. Climate changed on the earth (Genesis 8:22). Animals also became fair game for man. [Scripture quote.] These factors along with disease and lack of food probably led to the extinction of dinosaurs.

They went extinct because of climate change? Hambo is always telling us about an ice age after the Flood, but we were unaware of the scriptural authority for it. Now the rev has cited a bible passage, so we looked up Genesis 8:22. Here’s what it says (King James version, of course):

While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.

Ah yes. Now we understand. Here’s another excerpt from the rev’s letter:

Yet extinction may not have happened as long ago as many think. There are later descriptions of creatures in the Bible that could be referring to dinosaurs. One example is the behemoth of Job 40:15-19. Even in fairly modern history there are reports of creatures which seem to fit the description of dinosaurs.

Yeah, some of them are probably still around. This is the end of the rev’s letter:

When it comes to dinosaurs, there are two sides in conflict: evolution and the Bible. If we accept what evolution says about dinosaurs, then the Bible cannot be our authority. It cannot be trusted. [Gasp!] It can be ignored as a moral standard as it is all across America today. We can’t blame dinosaurs for that. The blame rests on people that reject the truth of God’s Word.

He’s right, dear reader. It’s not the dinosaurs’ fault — it’s yours, and you will pay the penalty for eternity.

Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

30 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #885: Dinosaurs and the Bible

  1. Well darn! I guess that I should just tell my students in my dinosaurs course this fall that the Mesozoic never existed and that the Flintstones were real. NOT!!!

  2. I’m a long term follower of our esteemed Curmudgeon’s ruminations and I have, on occasion, been a contributor. Recently I have become concerned that the comments that we exchange among ourselves is just preaching to the choir.

    Some newspaper’s on-line comments sections can be accessed without actually being a subscriber or providing any personal information – the paper associated with this story fits that description. I want to encourage the followers of this site to answer these idiots where our responses can be seen by the people that the writer is trying to reach. This paper is easily accessible and I have made my thoughts known. I’d be pleased if some of you would do the same.

  3. Cynic says: “Recently I have become concerned that the comments that we exchange among ourselves is just preaching to the choir.”

    The effort isn’t wasted. Creationists are aware of this blog, but most of them realize that they won’t persuade anyone, so they rarely comment. Every now and then we get a wild one, and as long as they remain civil, I let them rant. But they don’t stay long.

  4. Laurettte McGovern

    Perhaps we are preaching to choir, but it is more than that. If we were to be quiet, to not comment, the creationists would see that as a victory. “See, scientists have no response.” We cannot let them take the initiative.

  5. Some of us (or at least this one reader) get beat up with creationist nonsense on a regular basis. This site serves as a sanity support and recharge station.

  6. Dave Luckett

    Alas, creationists like this imbecile do have the initiative, rather as the moles in a game of whack-a-mole do. We can only react. They can choose their spot, their time, and which particular lie they wish to tell. They don’t need no steenking evidence. They neither understand nor are even aware of the evidence – this idiot isn’t, and he’s happy not to be.

    Evidence simply causes his eyes to glaze over. If he were capable of noticing, he’d think that reaction was only right. But even so elementary an exercise in self-examination is probably beyond him. As for the reasons for the convictions of others, he’s no more able to parse those than he can flap his arms and fly. More, he is automatically, and by the same mechanism, insulated and protected against considering them.

    It is a strange reflection that the surest underpinning of creationism is its proponents’ incapacity. But his ignorance and lack of empathy does more. It is not only a sure shield. It has become a weapon. Weaponised ignorance. And armies of the dark are armed with it.

  7. I quote the rev “The work of Jesus Christ on the cross to deal with sin and death becomes unnecessary” and add that it also has a probability not distinguishable from zero.

  8. Mark Germano

    Who’s blaming the dinosaurs for anything? If you park your car under a tree and one poops all over it, you have no one to blame but yourself.

  9. The work of Jesus Christ on the cross to deal with sin and death becomes unnecessary.
    That is, to our poor, fallible, finite understanding of the ways of God. God is not bound by our thoughts about what is necessary. God works in mysterious ways, but for him, nothing is necessary. He acts out of love, not compulsion.

  10. Therefore, dinosaurs and people must have lived together on the earth at one time. … Dinosaurs were also originally vegetarians. All animals were.
    Yes, that’s why human bones are found along with dinosaur bones so frequently.
    But also, if all dinosaurs were veggies, then so were Adam & Eve.
    The preacher and his flock of sheepish animals might set a good example by spurning that nasty steak and instead become biblical veggies.

  11. When it comes to dinosaurs, there are two sides in conflict: evolution and the Bible. If we accept what evolution says about dinosaurs, then the Bible cannot be our authority. It cannot be trusted. [Gasp!] It can be ignored as a moral standard as it is all across America today. We can’t blame dinosaurs for that. The blame rests on people that reject the truth of God’s Word.

    No, the blame rests on idiots who insist that if a religious text’s account of the origins of life, the universe and everything can’t be assumed to be true, its moral message can’t be trusted either.

  12. Everyone ignores what the Bible has to say about microbes: nothing. So too, most people ignore what the Bible says about extinct life: nothing.

  13. “It can be ignored as a moral standard as it is all across America today.”
    Given the bigotry of people like pastor Stephen that can only be an improvement.

    @Cynic is concerned “that the comments that we exchange among ourselves is just preaching to the choir.”
    They are and have been since I found this nice blog. Reaching out to creacrappers is by far not the most important purpose. I’d say having fun is. Exchanging experiences with creacrappers and discussing strategies when debating creacrappers come second and third, I’d say. Occasionally some creacrappers passes by, but they never last long.

    “…..to answer these idiots…..”
    I have done so for almost ten years, but by now I think some other Don Quixotes should take over. I don’t enjoy it anymore as I used to do. Perhaps I’ll return to the arena some day, but after all those years, to use TomB’s wise words, I need a long recharge.
    But everyone interested can ask me for my advise (taking it over is another matter). Here is the first one, not asked for: don’t expect a rational, logical discussion. As I can’t stress enough, creacrappers (the IDiots from Seattle are probably the worst ones in this respect) are dishonest as they think everything and anything is permitted as long as it seems to support their predetermined conclusions. That’s why actual scientists are vulnerable. For laymen like me it’s easier to descend to their poor level (and it’s always lower than you’ll expect), but it does take considerable effort. I’ve learned it the hard way, as I became victim of their low, stupid tricks several times.

  14. I posted there as Cynic suggested: “If death came into the world only with human sin, then *all* extinct species must have coexisted with humans. Yet it is estimated that extinct species outnumber those still living by something like 100:1.

    Eden must have been a very crowded place.”

  15. “… the Flintstones were real.”
    And even if they were not real, you totally forgot about Alley Oop! Take That Evolutionists! For the younger readers:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alley_Oop

  16. “…Dinosaurs were also originally vegetarians. All animals were….” I love how all those meat eating creatards think that eating veggies is more moral than eating animals!!! What! Just cuz you can’t see their faces or hear their screams of pain, it is OK!!??

  17. And recall the Gospel of John 12:24 which speaks of the death of grain.
    BTW, consider the death of eggs, whether that is much different from the death of fruit. Or whether the perfect world before the Fall was designed to accommodate exponential increase in animal life without limit.

  18. Holding The Line In Florida

    What do you think the chances would be that the Reverend’s library is full of the Hamster’s drivel? And Ohio too? I would expect he has a life pass to both of Hambone’s monuments of foolishness.

  19. So let me transpose this: if we must admit that science has never shown a tortoise to challenge a hare to a running contest, then by extension there is no moral lesson to be learned from Aesop’s fable. Ok.

  20. Dinosaurs were also originally vegetarians.

    I dunno, 12inch serrated teeth seemed to be a bit of overkill for chewing plant and dang inefficient. Good thing man sinned so those teeth could be put to better use. Beyond moronic what people will believe in for a sense of security.

  21. Our Curmudgeon noted that some creationists do come to this site and that our comments aren’t wasted. I certainly didn’t mean to imply that they are wasted. My thoughts were that, by commenting on the site that carries the stories that are illuminated here we can show people, especially pastor’s congregants, how silly their leaders’ really are. As of this writing there are ten statements in rebuttal of the pastor’s views and, most importantly, they are on the site that he uses. I believe that to be an important contribution that we can easily make.

    I want to thank Paul Braterman for posting his thoughts to that site.

  22. Thanks, Cynic.

    More generally, I find this site very useful as a place for exchanging and, at times, modifying or sharpening ideas, and for helpful suggestions such as your own, that we comment where we can.

    One suggestion I would make is that when doing so, we stick to the issue. Some of us here enjoy attacking religion, but that is unlikely to be a useful tactic when defending science against creationists.

  23. I understand that different people have different interests. My interest is in understanding evolution in the face of attacks from the creationists. This requires, imho, religious motivations for the attacks, but I see no need to narrow the response to an atheist or anti-Christian or even just anti-fundamentalist basis. But others have different interests, for example, I know that some people support evolution because they feel that is a good way of attacking religion. Who am I do disagree with their desires?

  24. I’m with @Cynic, and have myself previously on occasion followed his example, and will continue to do so.

    @FrankB — you may have misunderstood @Cynic.

    They were not suggesting posting on a creationist blog or otherwise engaging with a creationist — a crazy-making (except for the trollish) waste of time — but rather in the public forums that publish Creationist Wisdoms, which presumably have a wider and more open-minded audience, one capable of being persuaded by reason.

    (Or I myself may have misunderstood.)

  25. ” I know that some people support evolution because they feel that is a good way of attacking religion. Who am I do disagree with their desires?”

    This. You are, like me, a defender of evolution, and more generally of science, in the public arena. This becomes much more difficult when prominent proponents of evolution go out of their way to say in effect, “Just stop believing in your silly God and then you’ll know I’m right”. This plays straight into the hands of the Hamites

  26. Michael Fugate

    Right it is very simplistic to claim that without a belief in gods the world would automatically be better.

  27. Michael Fugate says: “Right it is very simplistic to claim that without a belief in gods the world would automatically be better.”

    My position has never been anti-religion. I’m opposed to theocracy, of course, because I’m an advocate of individual rights, which includes intellectual freedom, because that’s vital to the enterprise of science. I often point out that the National Center for Science Education has a list of Statements from Religious Organizations that support evolution. I have no problem with them.

  28. @Random: “(Or I myself may have misunderstood.)”
    You did – my comment applies to public fora as well. I’ve there, done it, enjoyed myself tremendously and am tired now.

    @PaulB: I side with you on this topic.It’s totally possible to be deeply religious and accept evolution. A relatively early Dutch example:

    https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Lever_(bioloog)

    Without him this prominent Dutch university

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VU_University_Amsterdam

    might have found it much harder to accept Evolution Theory. Thanks to him this happened well before 1970.

    @MichaelF: it’s not difficult to find science rejectors among non-believers as well.

  29. Michael Fugate

    I have many problems with the NCSE position on religion and evolution. One can certainly report that some theists see no conflict between the two. One can even report on what their basis is for reconciling the two. One can’t say that this is the one correct position or even if it is correct for any one person. Religion is a personal matter, but it is also a social matter – tied up in family, and community and even vocation – accepting evolution may come at costs that outweigh the benefits. Accepting evolution can lead to a loss of faith entirely and most theists find this to be much more worrisome than the alternative. Theology is not a science – it has no methodology – it has no business on any site promoting science. I have equal concerns about forays in theology by AAAS’s DoSER project and NAS’s “Science, Evolution and Creationism” booklet. How does any one know what any god is thinking?

  30. bewilderbeast

    @Braterman “Eden must have been a very crowded place”
    Sweating in the one corner, the polar bear said to the penguin ‘What do you mean your place has more ice than mine?’ and shivering in the other corner the camel said to the kangaroo ‘Sand? You think YOU’VE seen sand?’