Bible timeline literalists

I do have a couple questions to answer that readers have sent me but first I want to talk about an upfront question someone handed me. This person was a believer in the "Young Earth" theory. You know those folks that think that the Earth is only six thousand or so years old, give or take four or five thousand years for mathematical inaccuracies. They do not believe in carbon dating. They don't believe that dinosaurs lived millions of years before man. They believe that the bible is the word of God, no questions and, if you trace back the generations of the bible you get, roughly, six thousand to ten thousand years of planetary existence. No Pangaea, no Triassic, Jurassic or Cretaceous periods, just a handful of measly millennia between Adam and us. The important point about the beliefs of this, rather large, group of people is this. The bible is literal, there are no allegories or falsehoods in it. That is important to remember.

After a short debate wherein I realized that there was no way for logic to smash past the rock hard shell of ignorance that had been placed between this guy and reality. I gave up and turned to my beer, oping he would go away. Instead he asked me a question, thinking he had won the battle through the clever use of stupidity. The question I got from the Young Earther was this and it was in a very cocky tone.

" So, you give up, are you willing admit that I am right and the bible is the literal word of God?"

Now I hate people that think quiet thought and reflection is a sign of quiting and I really hate people that think just because they are louder than you, they are somehow, smarter than you. So I turned to him and I said "No". I also told him that if he was willing to give me a day to think about it that I would give him an answer that he could not argue against. I also gave him this site and said I would write it since talking face to face with him again would involve me breaking his jaw. So I sat down and did some research and then some reading and I decided that I would take a few of his ideas and pick them apart.

First, dinosaurs. He said that there is evidence of dinosaurs and man walking together so that proves that the periods were not separate and that dinosaurs died out during the great flood. Bad logic anyway you look at it. Sure maybe a flood would wipe out the land mammals but then the great water creatures would thrive with all that roaming room and food everywhere. The likelyhood of the ocean having several Nessy's would definitely be higher. That is just one simple observance of mine. I checked out the King James Version of the bible to see what it said about dragons or monsters. The English had a crazy history with dragons and the KJV has the most references pound for pound of monsters and dragons of any of the more than 50 separate bibles you can find. The most famous monster may be the Leviathan which many have considered to be one of the great ocean dinosaurs that lived among man. That is proof enough for a Young Earther. Well it is an ancient creature to be sure and a descendant of dinosaurs, it is called a Crocodile and the Nile river is swarming with them. You can also imagine that they were kinda big back then when man didn't have the technology, weaponry or the balls of Mr. Dundee, to go into that murky water and fight them. People were just a wee bit superstitious back then and tended to blow things out of proportion. Look at my ancestors, the Vikings, Whales and fog were sea monsters and dragons, that is , until someone found out that you could power a lamp with sea monster fat and use it to scare away the glow worm from the hills. Young Earth folk also do not believe in the fossil record. Yes it makes more sense to them that God would put all those little fossils in the ground to test human faith then to think that maybe God is like a home brewer and lets nature take its time for a more well balanced product. I can't even begin to argue Carbon dating with these people because they absolutely refuse to believe that carbon atoms break down at a distinctly measurable rate. Proof you could burn into their retinas and they still wouldn't see it.

that argument aside, I realize that that is just my own way of seeing things and not anything that can fight the "literal vs. allegory" issue. I found one thing though and I will share it with you now. It is from the KJV of the bible. I checked several others and the basic wording is pretty much the same. It has to do with Adam in the Garden of Eden, God is telling him about the tree of knowledge and it goes like this.

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

That's it, it's that simple. He ate it and didn't die that day. instead, the story goes, his innocence died. His favor in God's eye died and he was relegated to a life of poor white trashery. See, if you are a biblical literalist then you do not actually exist because the human race was cut down and destroyed by God on that day when Adam ate the apple. The bible starts and ends at Genesis Now, on the other hand, if you can handle allegory, then perhaps you still exist.

I have had several disagreements in my lifetime, with people like this guy and every time I ask them if they have read the bible. Every time I get the same answer. A resounding "no". Usually followed by the words, "My pastor tells me what to believe". That scares me. This guy I speak of said the same damn thing. I hope you read this man and feel free to respond, I am not a big fan of being overly serious but I will trade jab for jab with you if you want and will not back down from printing both sides of the argument. As for my loyal readers, I am sorry for all the recent seriousness and promise to get funny again soon.

I will leave you with the word, titfart. Late.