Split Rock
Conflation of Blathers
Doesn't seem like we missed anything. Calling "Kind" a "type" is hardly helpful. Also, can you tell us why we cannot or should not claim all birds are one "Kind?"
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The Bible gives no "clear" definition of the term KIND. I see kind as type. Humans are one kind, cows are another kind, hippopotamas are another kind. dogs are another kind, doves are one, and ravens are another. The Bible is specific in stating that one "kind" will not beget another "kind." The Bible doesn't; however, demonstrate a limit to variety WITHIN kinds.
How do you know doves and ravens are two different "Kinds?" How do you know that "birds" are not all one "Kind?" You're not just guessing are you?
Doesn't seem like we missed anything. Calling "Kind" a "type" is hardly helpful. Also, can you tell us why we cannot or should not claim all birds are one "Kind?"Well here it is. My guess is that a few conveniently missed it
LOL! There was no anti-Semitism in my post. In terms of technology and knowledge of the world around them, Bronze-Age Hebrews were primitive.Wow --- anti-Semitism is alive and well, isn't it?
Well here it is. My guess is that a few conveniently missed it
Paint yourselves into a corner then --- throw out the Documentation that can (and does) falsify it.
How about this. Use whatever definition of kind, or whatever common sense you wish, or throw in the word type, and answer these questions.
Are foxes and dogs the same kind?
Are lions and tigers the same kind?
how about a tigon? or a tiliger? i believe thats a name of a tigon mated to a tiger i believeAnd where does a "liger" fit in?
It's pretty much my favorite animal.
i don't know if you are being ironic or not.. but i find it ironic.. this quote is exactly what creationists do pretty much all the time!Paint yourselves into a corner then --- throw out the Documentation that can (and does) falsify it.
the term "kind" is a made up term. there is no official definition of the word kind.I know we've tried this before, but it seems to have cropped up in quite a few threads lately, so I thought I might give the creationists another chance.
Creationists, can you please give a clear and concise definition of a "kind". In order to be complete, any person using the definition needs to be able to tell from the definition which "kind" any living thing (whether currently alive or extinct) would be part of. The classification must be the same for every user of the definition, so you can't appeal to "common sense", which isn't common and is frequently not good sense.
In order for the definition to be of any use to creationists, of course, nothing from one "kind" must have evolved from something of another "kind".
Once we have this definition, we'll all be overjoyed - scientists because we won't have to keep asking for this definition, creationists because they will now have a falsifiable prediction of creationism - that nothing can evolve out of its own "kind".
AV has absolutely no sense of irony. He often accuses others of faults that he himself is guilty of.i don't know if you are being ironic or not.. but i find it ironic.. this quote is exactly what creationists do pretty much all the time!
32 posts, a lot of hot air, accusations, and peripheral replies, and still no clear-cut definition of the term "kind", as used in the Bible.
This question should be an easy one for those well studied in the Bible.....especially for those who refer almost exclusively to the Bible, in just about every one of their thousands of posts.
What's the problem?
I don't need a "falsifiable prediction of creationism" in order to be overjoyed.
Evolution can't occur because God is a god of boundaries, and has set boundaries that [alleles, DNA, genes, whatever] cannot cross.
I find that lots of creationists do that. They usually accuse me of things I'm not guilty of and they are. Its like they're trying to project their faults onto me. I refer to it as "the pot calling the silverware black."AV has absolutely no sense of irony. He often accuses others of faults that he himself is guilty of.
Would that we could have something equivilent to a national TV show wherein the general public could see these debates. After seeing "AV" and FoeHammer and Dad in action, how many Americans could seriously still be creationists anymore? Americans generally won't read anything with big words, and we want each reply to be researched rather than on-the-fly. So it would have to be a series of video blogs. I'd love to find myself pitted against Ken Hamm or anyone else like him in a situation like that.this is a Christian forum. One would think here of all places, creationists could thrive. Its just sad. pathetically sad, how they cant even answer their definitions to words they themselves make up. This is why you lost at dover creationists. because you have nothing in the way of science. nothing.
Exactly, no one can define 'kind'.32 posts, a lot of hot air, accusations, and peripheral replies, and still no clear-cut definition of the term "kind", as used in the Bible.
This question should be an easy one for those well studied in the Bible.....especially for those who refer almost exclusively to the Bible, in just about every one of their thousands of posts.
What's the problem?
Evolution is a form of self-worship in the name of science....i don't know if you are being ironic or not.. but i find it ironic.. this quote is exactly what creationists do pretty much all the time!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?