Biological Taxonomy - Kinds vs. Species (Linnaean taxonomy)
- Thread starter Alate_One
- Start date
Greg Jennings
New member
I did. It's a very interesting story, but Tyke did not survive on plants alone. She ate milk and eggs for protein. Chicken eggs given time will become chicks. That seems to fall under your definition of nepesh.
Of course mutations and adaptation can change things. But here's the problem: we have no skulls of lions or crocodiles or other modern carnivores that show large molars for grinding plants or a lack of sharp teeth for meat eating. Not a one. So there is no reason at all to suspect that these creatures were ever vegetarians from a scientific standpoint. Wouldn't you agree? And if you would, please tell me what animals aren't considered nepesh
Last edited:
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
My view doesn't matter. What matters is what God says and, thankfully, He will be the judge of who is faithful to Him.
Ps 33:6KJV John 1:3KJV Ex 31:17KJV Psalm 1:1KJV
"Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."
How did these scoffers that Peter is talking about understand creation? Did they think that all things continued as they were from the beginning of creation according to evolution, the gap theory or the YEC theory? And how does God deal with scoffers?
6days
New member
????????. Your point?JoseFly said:
Yes, I sometimes use evolutionist terminology when I'm talking *to them. Stripe does not like or use rubbery terms such as speciation, because of evolutionary bias often involved in the words. I sometimes will use the term showing how observable science requires interpretation. What you call speciation fits the Biblical model of rapid adaptation.*
(We have explained this to you many times).*
6days
New member
Greg Jennings said:
The 'problem' is in some of the assumptions you make...not in God's Word. *For example.... diet can not always be determined by the teeth. Also, you admit mutations and adaptation can change things.*
[/quote]
And if you would, please tell me what animals aren't considered nepesh[/quote]
I did suggest a few posts back that 'nepesh' may refer to vertebrates. *
From scripture we know that God originally gave a vegetarian diet to man and the animals. Much later, and after creation had been cursed, God gave the ok to eat animals.*
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
Greg Jennings
New member
Assuming there is a God then I would say things continue now as they always have from the beginning of creation with the process involved being evolution. Contrary to many creationists' views evolution in no way destroys faith.
If you consider scientists 'scoffers' then you have a warped view of reality my friend. They are simply people who seek to understand the natural world by evaluating and studying that which is around them. It is contrary to the scientific method (basically the Ten Commandments of science) to be anything but objective when evaluating the natural world
Greg Jennings
New member
Yes. We have thousands of prehistoric crocodilian skeletons. Some from species as long as 40 feet and some of those specimens found with dinosaur remains in their stomachs. That's about as close to a selfie as is physically possible
Last edited:
Greg Jennings
New member
There aren't assumptions when it comes to dental structure. We can easily identify what teeth are designed to do what based on the modern day examples. For example we can determine that sauropod dinosaurs used their conical teeth to strip pine needles from trees based on similar structures in modern animals and also the finding of stones in the stomachs of these dinosaurs which were used to grind up plant material. Would you like to offer a reason as to why crocodiles would have teeth clearly designed for meat eating if they were meant to only eat plants?
If nepesh only refers to vertebrates, does that mean that all insects, arachnids, worms, and non-bony fish aren't nepesh?
Last edited:
:darwinsm:
You should really learn to read what it is you want the Bible to say before you make it up. :chuckle:
It was the unbelievers who said things have always been the same.
Agreed. Evolution requires massive leaps of faith.
The No. 1 role of a scientist is to overturn established ideas.
Last edited:
You're not very clued up, are you? Man fell before death entered the world; before fossils.
. Are a Pandas sharp teeth used for ripping meat? Stories are created based on evolutionists assumptions. Often science helps us see through the false assumptions.*
Jose Fly
New member
Come on man, you can't be this thick.
You posted that "rapid speciation" is a part of the "Biblical model of creation", and soon thereafter chastise me for using the term "speciation".
If you need this explained to you even further, then I truly pity you.
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
There is no such thing as prehistoric.
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
1 Cor 1:26KJV
Jose Fly
New member
Every Christian church across the country should put that on their church signs. :up:
Wick Stick
Well-known member
Oh, there definitely is. Anything earlier than the late Bronze Age seems to be told in a style that is more muthos than history.
If that doesn't convince you, just look at the Republican party. Positively prehistoric! :chuckle:
Jarrod
Greg Jennings
New member
I've examined many of your posts and threads Stripe. You just don't offer anything to conversation and as such I won't be responding to anything you say. I look forward to your foolish mockery attempts that you use in substitution of real knowledge