Re: Bias in Science, Part 3

Hi Dick,

In response to my question, you write:

" The Hebrew word 'op that has been translated "fowl," is a "flying creature," the same basic word for "insect" which probably would have been a better translation. Flying insects date to 300 million years ago in the Carboniferous period, and were useful for pollinating some of the vegetation springing forth at about that time. Also, why would "fowls" be mentioned three times in three consecutive passages (Gen.1:20-22)? If birds had been intended in all three instances it would be a curious redundancy."

I can confirm that the Hebrew word 'oph' is fairly translated 'flying creature' and must therefore - in the absence of any further qualification - include birds, bats and flying insects. Your suggestion that 'insect' alone would have been a better translation is IMO merely wishful thinking, for I find no evidence to support that view. And regarding what you describe as 'a curious redundacy', I fail to see its relevance to the matter in hand.

You will no doubt have observed that the same Hebrew word occurs again in Gen.1:26 and 1:28 - now in the context of the 'flying creatures' being subject to man's dominion. I suggest that there can be little doubt here that 'oph' really must refer to birds, bats and flying insects. Thus, to follow your line of reasoning we have a word which means one thing in day 5, but another in day 6! Such inconsistency hardly makes for a convincing case - and it is little wonder that I, as a Christian, remain highly skeptical of the whole evolutionary enterprise. Yet you go on to say:

" Many of us on this list have proved the entire YEC scenario dead wrong, and any one who advocates for it is dead wrong. But you have persisted in maintaining an indefensible position in spite of having been availed of some of the best minds and information accumulated in one place. You have been presented evidence in abundance, and yet persist when you should long
ago have seen your errors and done what all YECs should do - reflect, recoil, recant and repent."

In view of your failure to find a convincing response to my question I have little reason or desire to follow your suggested programme. However, there may be others on the list prepared to 'pick up the baton' and share more substantial ideas.

By the way, before I close I must briefly comment on a remark with which you concluded your email of 13 June. I quote: " Let them (implacable YECs) wither on the vine, twist in the wind, or prepare to answer their Maker face to face..." I suggest that such imprecations are completely out of place in this forum.

Vernon
www.otherbiblecode.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Fischer" <dickfischer@earthlink.net>
To: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 2:24 AM
Subject: Re: Bias in Science, Part 3

> Vernion wrote:
>
>> Having mentioned me by name in one of your recent postings I was hoping
> to
>> find there an answer to the question I posed a week or so ago, viz "As a
>> campaigning evolutionst, how have you, personally, come to terms with the
>> biblical assertion that birds were created before reptiles?" Am I
> therefore
>> to infer that you have no answer?
>
> Infer you haven't read my book.
>
> "The Hebrew word 'op that has been translated "fowl," is a "flying
> creature," the same basic word for "insect" which probably would have been
> a better translation. Flying insects date to 300 million years ago in the
> Carboniferous period, and were useful for pollinating some of the
> vegetation springing forth at about that time. Also, why would "fowls" be
> mentioned three times in three consecutive passages (Gen.1:20-22)? If
> birds had been intended in all three instances it would be a curious
> redundancy."
>
>> By the way, when have you ever proved me "dead wrong"?
>
> Many of us on this list have proved the entire YEC scenario dead wrong, and
> any one who advocates for it is dead wrong. But you have persisted in
> maintaining an indefensible position in spite of having been availed of
> some of the best minds and information accumulated in one place. You have
> been presented evidence in abundance, and yet persist when you should long
> ago have seen your errors and done what all YECs should do - reflect,
> recoil, recant and repent.
>
>>And as for my "imitating a Timex watch" - that really can't be a bad
> thing, can it?
>
> You are surrounded by Rolex's.
>
> Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
> Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
> www.genesisproclaimed.org
>
>
>
Received on Thu Jun 16 17:09:47 2005