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.
changes in state can't really be likened to evolution,
so a person sleeping can't change into a person awake, running, jumping, playing? A person doesn't age? Yes? No?
Not really from my understanding of evolution, probably more accurately evolution is defined as the change in allele frequency in a population.But Darwinian evolution is the changing of germ cells, no?
but it's still the same object in both of the states and I think this is missing your original point in that cars and planes are in fact different and distinct objects and trying to apply that to the idea that animals are different and distinct is in some ways confusing. Where your analogy breaks down I think can be likened to this:Yep, eyes closed can change into "eyes open." Legs bent changed into Legs extended.
Not really from my understanding of evolution, probably more accurately evolution is defined as the change in allele frequency in a population.
but it's still the same object in both of the states and I think this is
missing your original point in that cars and planes are in fact different and distinct objects and trying to apply that to the idea that animals are different and distinct is in some ways confusing. Where your analogy breaks down I think can be likened to this:
So mutations have no part to play?
But that's what we're talking about- one type of germ cells turning into other types of germ cells
Mutations generate variations.
No, we are not talking about one type of germ cell turning into other types. We are not talking about germ cells at all. We are talking about genes.
Well we're not talking about cars but gears.
Well then here's the problem with that analogy then, there is a clear way to move from one gear to another, heck I could even move from 1st to 5th or vice versa, ie we can move from one state to another state and there is no fundamentally necessary transition from one to the other. ie. the relationship between the gears and moving one to another is the full set of pairs that can exist rather than some subset of the pairs.
So we have our set of gears:
{1..5, R, N}
the relationship and changes we can make are as follows
(1,1),(1,2),(1,3),(1,4),(1,5),(1,N),(1,R),(2,1),(2,2),(2,3),(2,4),(2,5),(2,N),(2,R),(3,1),(3,2),(3,3),(3,4),(3,5),(3,N),(3,R),(4,1),(4,2),(4,3),(4,4),(4,5),(4,N),(4,R),(5,1),(5,2),(5,3),(5,4),(5,5),(5,N),(5,R),(N,1),(N,2),(N,3),(N,4),(N,5),(N,N),(N,R),(R,1),(R,2),(R,3),(R,4),(R,5),(R,N),(R,R)
Notice that we have transitions one way and not the other, in contrast evolution must be thought of sequential changes that can't always be reversed as the reversal process generally concerns interactions between two divergent groups before they are sexually divergent.
Well then here's the problem with that analogy then, there is a clear way to move from one gear to another,
Well the gears could actually move in any direction it can be forced in. But then we would consider it broken in some cases, or it could simply be beneficial in circumstances where being gearless is advantageous.
The problem is, this is a misreading of verses 10 and 11 that has to be forced into the other verses, even though there is nothing in these verses to support it and it isn't the meaning of the Hebrew word kind. There is a simple and consistent use of 'according to their kind' in Genesis 1 and it does fit the meaning of the Hebrew 'kind', but you need to look at how the phrase is used in the other verses as well.It doesn't say that? You must have a different Bible than every one I have ever read.Genesis 1:11 Then God said, Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds. And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.The very first passage I quoted demonstrates the model which the other verses follow. In the first passage it says that plants shall produce seed according to their kind and fruits will produce seed according to their kind for the furtherance of each different type of fruit or grain or vegetable or other plant. With each following passage about animals, whether it be marine life, avian, or land animal, why do you think the Bible would go to the length to mention that each were "after their own kind" if it was not to infer that fish will produce more fish, birds will produce more birds, cattle will produce more cattle, etc, etc...
Genesis 1:20 And God said, Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky. 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.
Genesis 1:24 And God said, Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind. And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 8:15 Then God said to Noah, 16 Come out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and their wives. 17 Bring out every kind of living creature that is with youthe birds, the animals, and all the creatures that move along the groundso they can multiply on the earth and be fruitful and increase in number on it.
So, maybe the Bible doesn't say exactly that wording I had, it certainly supports that thinking.
In Christ, GB
God certainly wanted the different species to reproduce and fill the earth, that does not mean the phrase 'according to their kind' means 'reproduce the same variety'. We see 'according to their kind' used in Lev 11 and Deut 14 the lists of kosher and non kosher animals. It has nothing to do how the animals reproduce, it is talking about what food the Israelites could put on their dinner plates. The word kind simply means the different varieties or sorts of animals. That is how it is used consistently throughout the bible. That is how it is used in Genesis too.In fact, in the 1:20 and the 8:15 passages it has God saying "increase" "multiply" and "fill". An animal could not increase in number if it was diverging so greatly as to become vastly different from it's ancestor. Likewise, a kind of animal could not fill the earth if it was not perpetuating descendants similar to that kind.
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?