Agreed, but the creator allowed animal and plant evolution in adaptation, or Micro-evolution. supportive scripture, Genesis 1:11 "And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and...
ok. the water, and Air animals was made on day 5, listen. Genesis 1:20 "And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven." Genesis1:21 "And God created great whales, and every living...
Sorry this doesn't work. All creatures have a soul too. So by your logic God is a bird, and a dog, and a moose too.
Of course, you'll need to look at the Hebrew to see it.
We'll start with Isaiah 1:14, here's the Hebrew:
חָדְשֵׁיכֶ֚ם וּמֽוֹעֲדֵיכֶם֙ שָֹֽנְאָ֣ה נַפְשִׁ֔י...
Sure it's at the bottom on the page you linked to. They're referencing the Brown-Driver-Briggs. Strong's says Proverbs 20:27 is "spirit of man" not "breath of man"
Here's the JW translation:
I still don't get how breath is a lamp, nor how breath searches. It just doesn't fit.
I'm not seeing that. Can you point out where JWs translation disagrees with Strong's?
For sure. As Hebrew words have more than one meaning.
Can you provide at least three of those verses?
You mean Proverbs 13:9.
Proverbs 13:7 does not mention light, or lamp.
Have you given consideration to the...
You believe the penguin's flipper is an adaptation of a bird's wing. I don't.
I can't prove that it isn't. You can't prove that it is.
God does not have to alter anything.
We know that no small wolf like creature evolved to a whale, but you believe it.
How many different kinds of cat's...
There is a stark contrast between what you think, and what Bible writers knew... as stated by them.
Job spoke about the work of God's hands (Job 14:15)
David wrote about creation being the work of God's hands.
(Psalm 19:1) The heavens are declaring the glory of God; The skies above proclaim the...
Was wondering if you were going to come back with that. Actually I made a thread that dealt with that here:
The Genesis Account
Here is a copy and paste of it:
So what about the Genesis Account? Can it be reconciled with science?
I wish to author this thread to explain not only that it can...
I would assume - based on the subject matter of the text - that the word "kind" would refer to those creations that could mate with each other or otherwise reproduce.
"And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in...
well, but if the first five or the "best" five quotes don't show the claim right, it's reasonable to assume that the rest won't either.
actually "out of the blue" would be a little exaggereated. However, they can't show their point, as I see it.
Let's compare it to another Bible verse.
Perhaps you are assuming the limits of "kind" after that particular time.
Regardless, few realize that the first statement of Genesis -In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth -refers to the initial creation/completion of the Earth... and the rest has to do with what happened...
Genesis1:21 "AND GOD CREATED...EVERY LIVING CREATURE...AFTER THEIR KIND..."
This means, no, to evolution.
Evolution that does not extend beyond kind, is real, and provable, but no other evolution is provable, merely extrapolated. There is a reason for that, see Genesis.
Haven't read the thread yet, but I agree.
The word "creationist" has been hijacked and / or superimposed upon a rather specific breed of "creationist" believers. Today, it virtually stands synonymous with science denier, evolution in particular.
A deist who believes a god sparked the big bang...
Sorry to say, if taken at the literalistic level, the Genesis account doesn't make much sense based on what we now do know. If taken as allegory, and I believe it was likely designed as such to counter the earlier and much more widespread Babylonian polytheistic account, then it very much can...
This is quite a nice way of viewing the Genesis allegory, save for what you say on Day 6 about fossils "suddenly" appearing. That looks to me like the entry point for the bacillus of bogus pseudoscience.
Maybe I'm unduly cynical after long years in internet science forums but, taking this in...