Kinds

[AV1611VET]

So you're proposing this classification scheme just to make miracles a little easier to swallow?

Understand.

I may be wrong, but I don't think anyone has ever come up with a solid picture of just how 'scarcely-populated' the Ark really was.

 

[AV1611VET]

Is it okay if I believe Wuzzles and Popples were on the ark too or is that too many kinds?

May I assume you've lost interest in the epistemological side of this thread, and now it's time to cross over to ridicule?

If so, okay if I just ignore you?

 

[Jro]

Understand.

I may be wrong, but I don't think anyone has ever come up with a solid picture of just how 'scarcely-populated' the Ark really was.

You're talking about an event that already defies our understanding of geology, genetics, evolution, etc., etc. Fitting and sustaining a large population of animals and plants doesn't seem any more difficult for an omnipotent being than making the water appear and reappear without what mainstream geology considers a trace. Where are you getting the notion that the ark was scarcely populated? If that notion makes the flood story easier to understand, what other extra-textual interpretations are you willing to make to make it even easier to understand?

 

[Nostromo]

Understand.

One could understand or swallow it, do both or neither.

 

[ReverendDG]

Understand.

I may be wrong, but I don't think anyone has ever come up with a solid picture of just how 'scarcely-populated' the Ark really was.

it was really scarce compared to the vast amount of animals that have ever existed.
but really that is what to expect from folks that have never seen a platypus

 

[Split Rock]

I'm hoping to show that not nearly -- (not even close to...) -- as many animals had to board the Ark as some think.

Picture this as an oversimplified example:

The Ark comes to rest with just the aforementioned animals (plus Noah and his family) aboard.

The unicorns disembark -- go out -- get pregnant and give birth to another unicorn, a horse, a cow, a lion and a tiger.

They get pregnant again and give birth to a hippopotamus, a platypus, an aardvark, etc.

See where I'm coming with this?

A kind is an animal with DNA specially encoded for punctuated equilibrium; and because of them, you don't need the Ark crammed full of every living creature in existence at the time, and you don't need long explanations as to how tree sloths got from the Ark to where they're found today, etc.

Sure. Unicorns came out of the ark and gave birth to hippos, aardvarks and lions. Just keep making stuff up and call it "God's Word."

The point of the passages in question was that pairs of all the animals that the writers knew of, went on the ark, and then came out and repopulated the land. Period. Done. Finished. It really isn't very complicated. Youa re just making a perfectly nice story seem ridiculous.

 

[AV1611VET]

Just keep making stuff up and call it "God's Word."

No, thanks.

I'll call it what I called it in my post: 'an oversimplified example'.

 

[Split Rock]

No, thanks.

I'll call it what I called it in my post: 'an oversimplified example'.

An oversimplified example of.... what? Based on...... what?

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Understand.

I may be wrong, but I don't think anyone has ever come up with a solid picture of just how 'scarcely-populated' the Ark really was.

What version of the Bible are you reading?

Oh, wait! I found a version that says this: "Gen 6: 5.5 : God shrunk each animal down into the size of a pinhead and then just threw them all in a bucket and gave them to Noah."

Now I UNDERSTAND. Your Bible must also have 0.5 verses inserted between the other verses as well.

Also, did the unicorns give birth to all the bacteria too? All the microbes? All the species of dust mites?

Don't you see how ridiculous this sounds? You're talking about UNICORNS giving birth to AARDVARKS?

I sometimes think that AV is just messing with us to be funny....but then I remember he's serious.

(Why is it not ok to see that the flood story could be an allegorical exaggeration with a spiritual or moral meaning but does not indeed have to be literal?...)

 

[AV1611VET]

(Why is it not ok to see that the flood story could be an allegorical exaggeration with a spiritual or moral meaning but does not indeed have to be literal?...)

Right -- that's what you want, isn't it?

Then what? Jonah in the whale's belly? Daniel in the lions' den? the virgin birth? the resurrection?

Where does it stop?

 

[Delphiki]

May I assume you've lost interest in the epistemological side of this thread, and now it's time to cross over to ridicule?

If so, okay if I just ignore you?

How is it unicorns and satyrs are not ridiculous but wuzzles and popples are?

 

[Delphiki]

Where are the unicorn and satyr fossils?

 

[Jro]

I'm kind of uncomfortable with the thought that god would perform several other miracles, which Noah and his company witnessed, yet did not record, only to explain science that we've discovered millenia later. If these 6 kinds did evolve into every sort of animal on the planet, wouldn't we see evidence of that radiation the same way we see evidence of adaptive radiation that occurs currently? Wouldn't there be recorded accounts of these organisms turning into other organisms in the Bible? I'd think that we'd get a great many "Watch yourself, Jebediah discovered that satyrs in Australia now have the ability to sting the living daylights out of you!" type remarks somewhere. Why do you think that none of these occurrences were recorded, especially in light of the fact that they would certainly rank up there on the miracle scale?

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm kind of uncomfortable with the thought that god would perform several other miracles, which Noah and his company witnessed, yet did not record, only to explain science that we've discovered millenia later. If these 6 kinds did evolve into every sort of animal on the planet, wouldn't we see evidence of that radiation the same way we see evidence of adaptive radiation that occurs currently? Wouldn't there be recorded accounts of these organisms turning into other organisms in the Bible? I'd think that we'd get a great many "Watch yourself, Jebediah discovered that satyrs in Australia now have the ability to sting the living daylights out of you!" type remarks somewhere. Why do you think that none of these occurrences were recorded, especially in light of the fact that they would certainly rank up there on the miracle scale?

Just how big do you want the Bible to be, anyway?

 

[Jro]

I'd say that, if the text is going to mention whether I should eat shellfish or not, this sort of evolution would be notable as well. I'm not aware of any passage that state such a thing happening being removed from the Bible in any councils or the like (not that I would be, so if you are please correct me).

If this evolution occurred over the entire course of 6,000 years, and we use a low end estimate of the total biodiversity of Earth (5 million total species) we'd see 833 new species a year, meaning at least 2 new species a day. If it occurred in bursts, why do we see no historical records (as far as I'm aware) of millions of new species being created? I'd say that these sorts of events would be miracles (as we have no other way of explaining them) on a magnitude far surpassing bringing the dead to life or turning water into wine or making a bush light on fire.

 

[AV1611VET]

If it occurred in bursts, why do we see no historical records (as far as I'm aware) of millions of new species being created?

I'm not talking about species, I'm talking about genera.

One kind can give birth to several different genera at once; then give birth to another "set" of different genera during the next gestation period.

After one or two or maybe three generations, the earth is completely repopulated -- horizontally, that is.

 

[Split Rock]

Where does it stop?

Where does your adding to scripture stop? How much do you have to add to scripture before it is no longer "The Documentation," and no longer "The Word of God?"

 

[Jro]

How is that not a miracle worth mentioning? Even in a single line. "Six kinds came upon the ark and gave birth to the multitude we see today."

 

[AV1611VET]

Where does your adding to scripture stop?

Ad lib questions deserve ad lib answers.

 

[Split Rock]

I'm not talking about species, I'm talking about genera.

One kind can give birth to several different genera at once; then give birth to another "set" of different genera during the next gestation period.

Wherever did you get the idea that "one kind can give birth to several genera at once?" Certainly not from "The Documentation."