Creationist and extinct species

[sanctus]

I was just wondering how do creationists explain the extinct species?

[Southtown]

Which ones?

[InfiniteNow]

I was just wondering how do creationists explain the extinct species?

 

God did it.

[Turtle]

God did it.

 

'nuff said. :cheer:

[InfiniteNow]

More seriously, I looked at wiki, which seems to imply that it is a "curse."

 

Creationist perspectives on dinosaurs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Young Earth creationism is another position based on a literal interpretation of scripture accounts. Young Earth creationists believe that the Earth is only 6,000 to 10,000 years old. Based on this assumption, they argue that the scientific dating of dinosaur fossils must be flawed. They advance the alternate explanation that dinosaur fossils date from the Noachian flood, and argue that humans and dinosaurs must have coexisted. Some Young Earth creationists contend that dinosaurs were present on board Noah's Ark, but became extinct because of the Flood or soon after the flood.

 

One view proposed by some is that the serpent in the Garden of Eden may have actually been a dinosaur. The serpent was cursed to "crawl on its belly." This curse, according to this view, is the reason of the extinction of the dinosaurs and the now prevalent modern day reptiles. Some people who follow Young Earth Creationism point out that, according to Christian interpretation, God was speaking to the Devil when he cursed the serpent, not an ordinary snake. Some Young Earth creationists claim that dinosaurs survived in Australia, and that Aboriginal legends of reptilian monsters are evidence of this.

 

Some Christians who also adopt a literalist position with regard to the Bible believe the Earth was created "with age"; in the same way that Adam was created as a fully grown being, God created the Earth as a fully-developed planet (Omphalos). In this view, Earth was called into being in an already ancient state, with the geological formations, oil deposits, fossils, etc, also known as Ex nihilo.

 

Others also state that if an intelligent designer were involved, it clearly made a mistake when designing those species which went extinct. This causes problems though since it introduces fallibility to the omnipotent being.

[sanctus]

Sothtown, it was more general.

 

That they have an explication for dinosaurs is not surprising (thanks for the research infinite), but what for all the others not so known ones?

[Southtown]

I was just wondering how do creationists explain the extinct species?

First they were alive, and then they were not. :evil:

[sanctus]

But but why did god "create" them and then let them die? They have to have an explication for that,no?

[ughaibu]

The Perry Bible Fellowship

[Queso]

I love that guy!

He's awesome!

[Southtown]

But but why did god "create" them and then let them die? They have to have an explication for that,no?

Death came after sin, the eating of fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, according to Genesis 2:17. See also Genesis 3:17.

[sanctus]

I thought this was only for humans...but I never studied it enough

[Southtown]

Well it isn't explicitly stated in the Hebrew canon that animals did not die before sin. It's just a popular assumption. The fact that humans ate only fruit prior to committing the first no-no lends credence to that line of thinking. Of course, it could be argued that animals ate each other, but some respond by saying they were all herbivores before the fall of man. Go figure. I find it hard to concieve of a world with reproduction but not death.

 

Why do you ask, specifically? Are you trying to imply that the fossil record defies creationist explanations? Or just that God would never let any species perish that he bothered to invent?

[sanctus]

Sorry for the late reply.

 

I was just wondering with what explanantion they would come up, because even if they say the carbon based system of determinig the age of a fossil is wrong they still have to explain why there are fossils.

Actually, your explication are quite nice, because at least it is not an attempt of pseudo-science.

 

Sorry, there was nothing more profound then curiosity making me ask.

[iguana]

i am not a devotee, but one story says that the souls in those (extinct) bodies had no longer need for those bodies and therefore advanced into a human form ~ another story (mebbe not so creationist) is that the beings wanted a different form, like the bearlike creature that chose to adapt to the sea ~ as with many things that i don't understand, i find both of these stories tantalizing...

[Southtown]

No prob, Sanctus. Also, if you're wondering specifically about how fossils ended up in the geologic record, you might try going over my thread on the 9972, especially post #42.

[Glotesqyphon]

I personally believe in guided evolution.

 

On the one hand, Evolution HAD to have happened, unless an intelligent creator decided to create the illusion of age inherent in the cosmos-just to deceive us.

 

...But that's a completely absurd idea.

 

On the other hand, a good argument made by creationists is that we have never observed macroevolution-the evolution of a completely new complex body organ. how would this occur by chance and natural selection? Take the eyeball, for example. there are hundreds of thousands of chemical reactions that happen every moment in the eye which result in sight. Take a single reaction out of the equation, and then you are blind. How did the eye evolve gradually, by chance?