P.S. Other, of course, than natural hybrids like ligers.
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Isaac
To: asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 8:12 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Re: Cosmological vs. Biological Design
I'm still puzzled by the way in which "reproduce according to their kinds" could be read to be in opposition to any theory of evolution. No evolutionist I know has ever argued that an organism might give direct birth to another organism that isn't in exactly the same species. At most a mutation or two but it's the accumulation of mutations and the subsequent isolation of differing individuals that eventually gives rise to speciation. So wouldn't all evolutionists also agree that all plants and animals reproduce after their kind? Literally so. Or what am I missing?
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: David Opderbeck
To: SteamDoc@aol.com
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 9:25 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Re: Cosmological vs. Biological Design
An important thing to realize in making this distinction is that, whatever reasonable things might be said in some ID publications or by people like Dembski, *in actual practice* the ID movement is dominated by "God of the gaps" theology in this second sense.
Excellent points, I think. Here's why I think this is so: it has little to do with any theological problems with TE. All the theological problems could be overcome. The core issue is hermeneutical: do the "kinds" in Genesis 1 refer to a fixity of species, and do Gen. 1 and 2 require that Adam and Eve were separate creations? The NIV Archeological Study Bible, for example, in the note to Gen. 1:2, states
If ['evolution' is] taken in a historical sense (the theory that everything now existing has come into its present condition as a result of natural development, all of it having proceeded by natural causes from one rudimentary beginning), such a theory is sharply contradicted by the divine facts revealed in Genesis 1 and 2. It is explicitly stated several times that plants and animals are to reproduce 'according to their kinds.... Moreover, the creation of Adam is sharply distinguished from other aspects of creation, and the creation of Eve is descriged as a distinct act of God. Gen 2:7 (in the Hebrew) clearly teaches that Adam did not exist as an animate being before he was a man, created after the image of God."
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Oct 10 20:18:33 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Oct 10 2006 - 20:18:33 EDT