when I accept evolution do i give up my faith?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, some organisms in the same kind can't interbreed. Kind isn't so much defined as the ability to reproduce, it is more about common ancestry.

That's handy. So... "kind" is a definition that's able to slide further and further back as you need it to. No matter to what extent you accept common descent, you can always make the claim that common descent beyond that point hasn't been demonstrated... but when it is demonstrated to your satisfaction, the idea of speciation only occurring within "kinds" is still safe, since the boundary of a "kind" has moved back as well to be just beyond this new point.

I hope for your sake that you can mount wheels on those goalposts, because otherwise you'll throw your back out from moving them all the time.

 

[Autodidact]

You are right that I have yet to answer that question.

I'm not sure which thread that is in either, at this point they are all jumbled up in my head.

Since I assume everyone will read this I'll just give my one and a half cents on the word "kind" here. I don't deny speciation, and I wouldn't deny populations evolving into different genus's if you can show it. As I'm sure most of you know, the concept of "species" in the evolutionary world view is the only significant taxonomic rank, all others are merely for our/scientists convenience. While taxonomy may be objective, it is only a human conception, and thus open for revisions. The word "kind" is seen in the Bible, states that kinds only produce their own kind. It used to be thought that a "kind" was equivalent to species, as species is the Latin for kind. Since then new data has emerged showing speciation, and so the term kind was revised. Unfortunately there has been no clear consensus where exactly kind falls on the taxonomic rank system, some snay genus while others say family and yet others want to say order or sub-order and so forth. The problem with this goes back to the fact all these taxonomic ranks are human conceptions, so saying that kind is equivalent to X taxonomic rank is superficial. For example, Chimps are a different genus than humans right now, but there is talk about changing it to homo. If kind is equal to genus, than that poses some problems. I'm not trying to say that change to models are bad, but to equate kind to a taxonomic rank is pointless. You can think of kind as a taxonomic rank, showing that each animal is descendant from their original ancestor, and all organisms from that ancestor belong to the same kind. Do I know exactly where each species falls? No, and as to date I don't think anyone does or ever has. I'm no taxonomist (big surprise, I know), but I see kind near the genus or family level, but I just don't know.

So you're not sure, but you're thinking somewhere around genus or family? So, for example, say bears are a family, so your hypothesis is that God created an ancestral bear kind, which has diverged into the various species of bears we have now? Or again, with say cats, same thing--that there was some kind of ur-cat, which has evolved into the 41 species of cat we have today, as well as the several extinct species? Would that all be about right? How about, say, beetles? About how many "kinds" of beetles are there, in your view.

If you can't provide a taxonomic equivalent, how about just a definition? It's your term, after all, they key to your entire hypothesis.

And again, would you set out your hypothesis please? Thanks.

 

[Autodidact]

No, some organisms in the same kind can't interbreed. Kind isn't so much defined as the ability to reproduce, it is more about common ancestry.



Ring species are in the same kind.



Again, it isn't about being able to reproduce, it is about common ancestry. In fruit fly speciation, both (or all three if you count the original) species are the same kind. Species and kind are definitely not interchangeable and as you concluded.

So what is a kind?

 

[gnostic]

Do I give up my Christian faith when I say I believe in evolution.

No. They are 2 separate things.

Religion is of course, about faith in some deities, which in your case about just one deity.

And Evolution is science about changing biological and genetic process or mechanism through generations.

Creationists mistakenly confuse evolution with cosmology, where life began, in another word, another form of creation. IT IS NOT. Through the studies of fossils, you can find that there are difference in bone structure or other features between modern human/animals/plants and that of earlier human/animals/plants, because they tried to adapt to changing environments.

Why do you find some camels have two humps, while other have only one?

Why do we have different varieties of grapes, olives, roses? They are growing new and different types of roses and other flowers.

The bible doesn't explain any of this.

Or you need to know is that evolution is real science, unlike Intelligent Design, which have real physical evidences to support evolution. ID has none (no evidences).

If you understand and believe in evolution, that should not change your life, like career or your social life, lifestyle, etc. In high school, you would only be given very basic information about evolution. Only if you go further into biological science or related science, such as medicine, that you would learn more about evolution. And unless you do, your life shouldn't change at all, including what you believe in.

Have medicine, mobile phones, computers, cars and trains changed your belief in God?

(Unless you're Amish, of course. Are you Amish?)

If no, then why should evolution change your belief in God?

 

[ShakeZula]

Wouldn't "evolution" be one of those rules?

I'm afraid I don't know what you mean. What rule are you referring to?

-S-

 

[ShakeZula]

Is it true that greater effort can sometimes win over greater ability? Is it true that overconfidence can sometime lead to defeat? Even if you don’t agree that these things are true, the point I am trying to make is that it would be ridiculous to conclude that these things are false because rabbits don’t speak.

Does “God” exist? Did “God” create the universe? Does “God” have a special relationship with humanity? My answer to these questions is no. But I would be an idiot to say that the reason that the answer is no is because snakes don’t speak.

Human being have always used stories to convey ideas that they believed were true. And those who created the stories we read in Genesis used these stories to convey their ideas about God, the universe and humanity. And even if these stories are no more true than stories of talking rabbits and turtles that does not mean that the ideas conveyed by these stories are not true. I am making a distinction here between the story and the idea that story is meant to convey. It is an important distinction and one that many people miss. And more to the point there is no logical contradiction between these ideas and the theory of evolution.

You have a point and I do agree with you on some of it. What would you call the truths in Aesop's? Moral truths, maybe? I'm not really sure. But there's a big difference between those fairy tales and Biblical stories. Primarily that no one worships a god called Aesop and people aren't killed over the interpretation. Too many people are willing to kill over the interpretation of the Bible. No one cares too much about Aesop's fables. When people are living and dying by those stories, it is our moral obligation to determine their truthfulness.

-S-

 

[ShakeZula]

sure thingy man ill see u tommorow, and yes im a little aware of them, but most that athiest give to me are pathetic attempts at best i assumed u had better

To quote Bart Ehrman, there are more contradictions in the Bible than there are words in the NT. Some of them are small and inconsequential, but some of them are rather large. But let's start with some of the contradictions of the Gospels.

How many generations were there between Abraham to David? Matthew 1:17 lists fourteen generations. Matthew 1:2 lists thirteen generations.

Is Paul lying? In Acts 20:35 Paul told people "to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'" Since Jesus never made such a biblical statement, isn’t Paul guilty of deception?

When did the leper become not a leper? (Matthew 8:13 & 8:14) Jesus healed the leper before visiting the house. (Mark 1:29-30 & 1:40-42) Jesus healed the leper after visiting Simon Peter’s house.

Who approached Jesus? (Matthew 8:5-7) The Centurion approached Jesus, beseeching help for a sick servant. (Luke 7:3 & 7:6-7) The Centurion did not approach Jesus. He sent friends and elders of the Jews.

Was she dead or just dying? (Matthew 9:18) He asked for help, saying his daughter was already dead. (Luke 8:41-42) Jairus approached Jesus for help, because his daughter was dying.

Just what did Jesus instruct them to take? (Matthew 10:10) Jesus instructed them not to take a staff, not to wear sandals. (Mark 6:8-9) Jesus instructed his disciples to wear sandals and take a staff on their journey.

When did John find out Jesus was the Messiah? (Matthew 11:2-3) While imprisoned. John the Baptist sent followers to Jesus to inquire if Jesus was the messiah. (Luke 7:18-22) While imprisoned. John the Baptist sent followers to Jesus to inquire if Jesus was the Messiah. (John 1 :29-34,36) John already knew Jesus was the Messiah.

Who made the request? (Matthew 20:20-21) Their mother requested that James and John, Zebedee’s children, should sit beside Jesus in his Kingdom. (Mark 10:35-37) James and John, Zebedee’s children, requested that they should sit beside Jesus in his Kingdom.

What animals were brought to Jesus? (Matthew 21:2-7) two of the disciples brought Jesus an *** and a colt from the village of Bethphage. (Mark 11:2-7) They brought him only a colt.

When did the fig tree hear of its doom? (Matthew 21:17-19) Jesus cursed the fig tree after purging the temple. (Mark 11:14-15 & 20) He cursed it before the purging.

When did the fig tree keel? (Matthew 21:9) The fig tree withered immediately. and the disciples registered surprise then and there. (Mark 11:12-14 & 20) The morning after Jesus cursed the fig tree, the disciples noticed it had withered and expressed astonishment.

Was John the Baptist Elias? "This is Elias which was to come." Matthew 11:14 "And they asked him, what then? Art thou Elias? And he said I am not." John l:21

Who was the father of Joseph? Matthew 1:16 The father of Joseph was Jacob. Luke 3 :23 The father of Joseph was Heli. Christians shall try to LIE and tell you that one is the heritage of Mary and the other Joseph. This is utter ********, the Hebrew and Greek cultures NEVER regarded the bloodline of the mother. They were patriarchal societies which only concerned themselves with paternal lineage.

How many generations were there from the Babylon captivity to Christ? Matthew 1:17 Fourteen generations, Matthew 1:12-16 Thirteen generations.

Matthew 2:15, 19 & 21-23 The infant Christ was taken into Egypt. Luke 2:22 & 39 The infant Christ was NOT taken to Egypt.

Matthew 5:1-2 Christ preached his first sermon on the mount. Luke 6:17 & 20 Christ preached his first sermon in the plain.

John was in prison when Jesus went into Galilee. Mark 1:14 John was not in prison when Jesus went into Galilee. John 1:43 & 3:22-24

What was the nationality of the woman who besought Jesus? Matthew 15:22 "And behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, Have mercy on me, 0 Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil." Mark 7:26 "The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation, and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter."

How many blind men besought Jesus? Matthew 20:30 Two blind men. Luke 18:35-38 Only one blind man.

Where did the devil take Jesus first? (Matthew 4:5-8) The Devil took Jesus first to the parapet of the temple, then to a high place to view all the Kingdoms of the world. (Luke 4:5-9) The Devil took Jesus first to a high place to view the kingdoms, then to the parapet of the temple.

Can one pray in public? (Matthew 6:5-6) Jesus condemned public prayer. (1 Timothy 2:8) Paul encouraged public prayer.

If we decide to do good works, should those works be seen? Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works." 1 Peter 2:12 "Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that ... they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation." This contradicts: Matthew 6:1-4 "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them…that thine alms may be in secret." Matthew 23:3-5 "Do not ye after their [Pharisees'] works ... all their works they do for to be seen of men."

Who did Jesus tell the Lord’s Prayer to? (Matthew 5:1, 6:9-13 & 7:28) Jesus delivered the Lord’s Prayer during the Sermon on the Mount before the multitudes. (Luke 11:1-4) He delivered it before the disciples alone, and not as part of the Sermon on the Mount.

When was Christ crucified? Mark 15:25 "And it was the third hour and they crucified him." John 19:14-15 "And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour; and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your king…Shall I crucify your king?" John 19:14-15.

The two thieves reviled Christ. (Matthew 27:44 & Mark 15:32) Only one of the thieves reviled Christ. Luke 23:39-40.

In 1 Corinthians 1:17 ("For Christ sent me [Paul] not to baptize but to preach the gospel") Paul said Jesus was wrong when he said in Matthew 28:19 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them…" Clearly one of these people is wrong, either way, it’s a contradiction.

When did Satan enter Judas? Satan entered into Judas while at the supper. John 13:27 Satan entered Judas before the supper. Luke 23:3-4 & 7

How many women came to the sepulcher? John 20:1 Only one woman went, Mary Magdalene. Matthew 28:1 Mary Magdalene and the "other Mary" (Jesus’ mother) went.

Mark 16:2 It was sunrise when the two women went to the sepulcher. John 20:1 It was still dark (before sunrise) when Mary Magdalene went alone to the sepulcher.

There were two angels seen by the women at the sepulcher and they were standing up. Luke 24:4 There was only one angel seen and he was sitting down. Mark 28:2-5

How many angels were within the sepulcher? John 20:11-12 two, Mark 16:5 one.

The Holy Ghost bestowed at Pentecost. Acts 1:5-8 & 2:1-4 The holy Ghost bestowed before Pentecost. John 20:22

Where did Jesus first appear to the eleven disciples? In a room in Jerusalem. Luke 24:32-37 On a mountain in Galilee. Matthew 28:15-17

Where did Christ ascend from? From Mount Olivet. Acts 1:9-12 From Bethany. Luke 24:50-51

Can all sins be forgiven? (Acts 13:39) All sins can be forgiven. Great, I’m happy to know God is so merciful, but wait (Mark 3:29) Cursing or blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unforgivable.

The Elijah mystery: (Malachi 4:5) Elijah must return before the final days of the world. (Matthew 11:12-14) Jesus said that John the Baptist was Elijah. (Matthew 17:12- 13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come, and everyone understood him to mean John the Baptist. (Mark 9:13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come. (John 1:21) John the Baptist maintained that he was not Elijah.

Who purchased the potter’s field? Acts 1:18 The field was purchased by Judas. John 20:1 The potter’s field was purchased by the chief priests.

Paul’s attendants heard the miraculous voice and stood speechless. Acts 9:7 Paul’s attendants did not hear the voice and were prostrate. Acts 22:9 & 26:14

Who bought the Sepulcher? Jacob, Josh 24:32 Abraham, Acts 7:16

Was it lawful for the Jews to put Christ to death? "The Jews answered him, we have a law, and by our law he ought to die." John 19:7 "The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." John 18:31

Has anyone ascended up to heaven? Elijah went up to heaven: "And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." 2 Kings 2:11 "No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man." John 3:13

Is scripture inspired by God? "all scripture is given by inspiration of God." 2 Timothy 3:16 compared to: "But I speak this by permission and not by commandment." 1 Corinthians 7:6 "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord." 1 Corinthians 7:12 "That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord" 2 Corinthians.

Those are a few.

hmmm that isnt so certian if u dig into the language of it, about the whole generation/race thing

Hmm... Examples?

-S-

 

[ShakeZula]

sure thingy man ill see u tommorow, and yes im a little aware of them, but most that athiest give to me are pathetic attempts at best i assumed u had better

Regarding the contradictions between Jesus and Paul: The gospel that Jesus and his disciples proclaimed to the Jews was in accordance with what the OT predicted about a human Messiah reigning over a restored kingdom of Israel, a kingdom of peace and righteousness. The people of Israel were to repent as personal righteousness was necessary to become a member of the kingdom.

In contrast to Jesus' gospel was the gospel preached to the Jews and gentiles by Paul, which Paul refers to as "my gospel" and "the gospel that I preach" to differentiate it from what was being proclaimed by the disciples. In Paul's gospel the human Jewish Messiah became a divine saviour of all nations, the restored kingdom of Israel became a heavenly kingdom, and admittance to the kingdom was based on faith rather than personal righteousness.

The two gospels caused a lot animosity between Paul and the original apostles, an animosity that is played down in the books of Acts and Galatians, but which still shows through in several places. When Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem were scattered or killed, and the opposition to the gospel of Paul was largely eliminated. The gospel of Paul was incorporated into the gospel of Jesus, in many cases supplanting it.

-S-

 

[tarasan]

Regarding the contradictions between Jesus and Paul: The gospel that Jesus and his disciples proclaimed to the Jews was in accordance with what the OT predicted about a human Messiah reigning over a restored kingdom of Israel, a kingdom of peace and righteousness. The people of Israel were to repent as personal righteousness was necessary to become a member of the kingdom.

In contrast to Jesus' gospel was the gospel preached to the Jews and gentiles by Paul, which Paul refers to as "my gospel" and "the gospel that I preach" to differentiate it from what was being proclaimed by the disciples. In Paul's gospel the human Jewish Messiah became a divine saviour of all nations, the restored kingdom of Israel became a heavenly kingdom, and admittance to the kingdom was based on faith rather than personal righteousness.

The two gospels caused a lot animosity between Paul and the original apostles, an animosity that is played down in the books of Acts and Galatians, but which still shows through in several places. When Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem were scattered or killed, and the opposition to the gospel of Paul was largely eliminated. The gospel of Paul was incorporated into the gospel of Jesus, in many cases supplanting it.

-S-

alot of those contradictions I could hold down to typos or human error, i really dont see how they interfere with the bible, BUT the paul/Jesus thing is an interesting one...

can you explain in Genesis how it says that the Jews were selected to be a blessing to all the nations of the world? So even if Jesus was sent just for the Jews, the Jews must in complaince with gensis, be light to the world. So even if I grant what you say, The Jews would still have an obligation to spread the word to other people. This isnt my view however.. but i can fall back to it if i have to

I am busy at work so if you still want me to expalin specific ones form the "long as your arm" verses I will, but i have a life I cant go though them all im sorry im too lazy:angel2:

 

[painted wolf]

Isn't admitting "typos" and "human error" the last thing you want in "the word of god"?

Opens up the "truth" to an awful lot of manipulation doesn't it... how does one tell the "human error" from "the true word of god"?

wa:do

 

[tarasan]

Isn't admitting "typos" and "human error" the last thing you want in "the word of god"?

Opens up the "truth" to an awful lot of manipulation doesn't it... how does one tell the "human error" from "the true word of god"?

wa:do

well I would say its insprired, not "god dictated and other wrote" firstly I guess i would say that factual errors such as say people missing out or causing slight mix up of times would be down to say that perhaps they couldnt recall the exact time of it happening, I mean when you are telling a story of what happened does it make it any less true to perhaps have not remebered every detial? does that somehow make the message of the stroy mute?

If that is true than what historical document can we trust? If they even could be slight error by they should not be trusted.

does that make sense?

 

[McBell]

Isn't admitting "typos" and "human error" the last thing you want in "the word of god"?

Opens up the "truth" to an awful lot of manipulation doesn't it... how does one tell the "human error" from "the true word of god"?

wa:do

It is a safety net.

I mean think about it, if you can say that anything you dislike or disagree with is nothing more than a typo or human error.....

 

[tarasan]

It is a safety net.

I mean think about it, if you can say that anything you dislike or disagree with is nothing more than a typo or human error.....

thats not true at all, thinks like which time the women went to the tomb are human errors that might have been forgotten or left out, because they were not the main attention of the story, but question about moral choices what is right or wrong or how we recieve salvation where the main things that those people were talking about, so they wouldnt have left anything out, they would have made sure that people understood what they were saying.

 

[Super Saiya Jinn]

thats not true at all, thinks like which time the women went to the tomb are human errors that might have been forgotten or left out, because they were not the main attention of the story, but question about moral choices what is right or wrong or how we recieve salvation where the main things that those people were talking about, so they wouldnt have left anything out, they would have made sure that people understood what they were saying.

I thought the Bible was supposed to be the inspired work of God, and you palm it off by saying "human error"? There is human error, and there is blatent contradictions, for which he gave you loads.

You accused Atheists before of coming up with poor answers, but these mental gymnastics you are doing now to defend ones beliefs are quite frankly pathetic. You are trying to make excuses to why there are errors in the book which is supposed to be the word of God??....Come on now.

 

[tarasan]

I thought the Bible was supposed to be the inspired work of God,

inspired yes, not dictacted, there is a difference, if it was dictated I would expect God to be writing through teh man therefore it would be perfect in every detail, but if man inspires man with a message I would expect the MESSAGE to be perfect and not the exact history ya get me?

and you palm it off by saying "human error"? There is human error, and there is blatent contradictions, for which he gave you loads.

yes loads that covered most errors that did not affect the meaning or relavance of the story, the others like Paul and Jesus scenario I am willing to debate.

You accused Atheists before of coming up with poor answers, but these mental gymnastics you are doing now to defend ones beliefs are quite frankly pathetic. You are trying to make excuses to why there are errors in the book which is supposed to be the word of God??....Come on now.

again inspired not dictated, I look at the stories meanign and what is said not at tiny errors that do not change the ultimate stroy that they were trying to convey, things like Paul vs Jesus if that proved under scrutiny to be correct, would disprove it, and say if phropechy was proven wrong that would disprove it, but not tiny little errors like forgetting to put in a generation which he clearly did in the same book or a tiny difference between a certain scenario.

 

[Super Saiya Jinn]

inspired yes, not dictacted, there is a difference, if it was dictated I would expect God to be writing through teh man therefore it would be perfect in every detail, but if man inspires man with a message I would expect the MESSAGE to be perfect and not the exact history ya get me?

I get you, but seeing as these guys were supposed to be followers of Christ, they must have have done a very lousy job of listening and observing most of the time, wouldn't you agree?

yes loads that covered most errors that did not affect the meaning or relavance of the story, the others like Paul and Jesus scenario I am willing to debate.

again inspired not dictated, I look at the stories meanign and what is said not at tiny errors that do not change the ultimate stroy that they were trying to convey, things like Paul vs Jesus if that proved under scrutiny to be correct, would disprove it, and say if phropechy was proven wrong that would disprove it, but not tiny little errors like forgetting to put in a generation which he clearly did in the same book or a tiny difference between a certain scenario.

Ok fair enough, i take your point so would you now like to scrutinise this Paul vs Jesus thing, or would you rather not tackle it, because you have not thus far?

 

[painted wolf]

well I would say its insprired, not "god dictated and other wrote" firstly I guess i would say that factual errors such as say people missing out or causing slight mix up of times would be down to say that perhaps they couldnt recall the exact time of it happening, I mean when you are telling a story of what happened does it make it any less true to perhaps have not remebered every detial? does that somehow make the message of the stroy mute?

If that is true than what historical document can we trust? If they even could be slight error by they should not be trusted.

We compare historical documents against one another to piece together an approximation of the truth of an event. Are you suggesting that the same should be done with the Bible? Compare it with say the Koran and figure out the facts about god that way?

does that make sense?

Not really... you are talking about a book that claims to be the divine law... if it is no more accurate than Roman graffiti or Pharoahnic propaganda what good is it?

wa:do

 

[ShakeZula]

alot of those contradictions I could hold down to typos or human error, i really dont see how they interfere with the bible, BUT the paul/Jesus thing is an interesting one...

can you explain in Genesis how it says that the Jews were selected to be a blessing to all the nations of the world? So even if Jesus was sent just for the Jews, the Jews must in complaince with gensis, be light to the world. So even if I grant what you say, The Jews would still have an obligation to spread the word to other people. This isnt my view however.. but i can fall back to it if i have to

Can I explain it? Sure. It's nothing more than propaganda designed to give the Jews a superiority complex.

I am busy at work so if you still want me to expalin specific ones form the "long as your arm" verses I will, but i have a life I cant go though them all im sorry im too lazy:angel2:

Those 40 or 50 ones I posted are just from a few books of the bible. There are literally thousands. You can say 'human error' as you've done since I first made the post, but if you admit it's fraught with errors, how do you know the part you choose to believe in is actually the correct part? The fact that there are so many completely undercuts the idea that this book is in any way crafted by god. Is he so incompetent that he can't control a few quills from some lowly scribes? The more you try to write it off as simple human error, the more you cast doubt on the idea of god being in any way all-powerful.

Does it make any sense that you, a lowly mortal, has to try and invent excuses for god's apparent inadequacy?

-S-

 

[fantome profane]

You have a point and I do agree with you on some of it. What would you call the truths in Aesop's? Moral truths, maybe? I'm not really sure. But there's a big difference between those fairy tales and Biblical stories. Primarily that no one worships a god called Aesop and people aren't killed over the interpretation. Too many people are willing to kill over the interpretation of the Bible. No one cares too much about Aesop's fables. When people are living and dying by those stories, it is our moral obligation to determine their truthfulness.

-S-

I agree but my point still stands. Yes people have been killing each other over these interpretations. I think it is more complicated than just that, but you are not wrong. But again this is not a reason to disregard the ideas that these stories are intended to convey.

I believe that we have a moral obligation to be intelligent. It is a moral imperative to be reasonable and to honestly search for the truth. Obvious people who kill over a biblical interpretation do not live up to this moral obligation.

Absolutely we should challenge these ideas. Absolutely we try to determine their truthfulness. And there might be good reasons for rejecting these ideas, but the fact that some people abuse religion is not a good enough reason to reject these ideas. Nor does it mean these ideas are in conflict with the theory of evolution.

 

[RedOne77]

So you're not sure, but you're thinking somewhere around genus or family? So, for example, say bears are a family, so your hypothesis is that God created an ancestral bear kind, which has diverged into the various species of bears we have now? Or again, with say cats, same thing--that there was some kind of ur-cat, which has evolved into the 41 species of cat we have today, as well as the several extinct species? Would that all be about right?

That is about right. Again I'm not a taxonomist or scientist, just a laymen.

If you can't provide a taxonomic equivalent, how about just a definition? It's your term, after all, they key to your entire hypothesis.

My term? No ma'am, not my term, the Bibles; which creation scientists have been trying to understand for centuries.

P.S. Like many of you, I only have 24 hours a day to eat, sleep, make a living, have a social life, converse with family, relax etc. So if I don't get to your specific post I'm not trying to avoid it, I just don't have the time. And since many of all y'all's questions/comments are so similar I may just choose one and respond to that.