Re: evolution-digest V1 #930

Ron Chitwood (chitw@flash.net)
Tue, 26 May 1998 16:46:39 -0500

>>>Let the LAND produce animals after their kind." Entirely different
meaning. REad the sentence!<<<

This makes me wonder why God had the animals enter the ark, both male and
female. HE could have let the 'land' take care of the animal population
problem.

Trust in the LORD with all your heart,
and do not rely on your own insight.. Pr. 3:5
Ron Chitwood
chitw@flash.net

----------
> From: John E. Rylander <rylander@prolexia.com>
> To: Calvin Evolution Reflector <evolution@calvin.edu>
> Subject: RE: evolution-digest V1 #930
> Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 9:48 PM
>
> Glenn,
>
> I think your position is a bit stronger even than you represent.
>
> Even if Scripture said or meant that animals reproduce after their kinds,
> unless that was an absolute claim (i.e., necessarily or at least
universally
> true) rather than just a practical (and, of course, obviously practically
> true) generalization, the point in question would not follow.
>
> Too often I think Christians confuse a Scriptural statement's -being
true-
> with its -being necessarily true-.
>
> (After all, even if one accepts the most hardcore version of inerrancy,
in
> which case NECESSARILY for all Scriptural propositions P, P is true, it
> doesn't follow that for all Scriptural propositions P, P is NECESSARILY
> true. [E.g., God could have named Adam "Ralph" instead. Adam was IN
FACT,
> but not NECESSARILY, named Adam.] To generalize: N(p->q) does not imply
> p->Nq)
>
> --John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: evolution-owner@udomo2.calvin.edu
> [mailto:evolution-owner@udomo2.calvin.edu]On Behalf Of Glenn R. Morton
> Sent: Monday, May 25, 1998 9:13 PM
> To: bpayne@voyageronline.net
> Cc: Stephen Jones; EVOLUTION@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: evolution-digest V1 #930
>
> ....
>
> You simply can't find a single verse in
> Scripture that has 'animal' as subject, reproduce or its equivalent as
> verb, and 'animal as object followed by after their kind. If the
sentence
> said,
>
> "Animals give rise to animals after their kind" I would grant you your
> point.
>
> But it doesn't say that, It says,
>
> "Let the LAND produce animals after their kind." Entirely different
> meaning. REad the sentence!
>
> ....
>
> glenn
>
> Adam, Apes and Anthropology
> Foundation, Fall and Flood
> & lots of creation/evolution information
> http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm
>
>
>