Mon, 10 Nov 1997 07:36:34 -0600 you wrote:
>The point of what I wrote is that one cannot use a verse to rule out the
>morphological change from one form to another. The Bible doesn't rule it
>out. And I might add, animals do not produce animals EXACTLY like
>themselves. Otherwise I would look exactly like my father or mother.
Right. Living organisms are endowed with variability which enables them to
adapt, besides making life interesting.
>>Do you see in Scripture any verse saying that animals reproduce and change
>>into other kinds of animals?
>Maybe not exactly that, but I do see a Biblical description of exactly what
>evolutionists said happened.
>Genesis 1:11 (NIV) Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation:
>seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it,
>according to their various kinds." And it was so.
>Genesis 1:12 (NIV) The land produced vegetation:
>Notice that Genesis 1:12 does NOT say GOD produced vegetation. The LAND
>produced vegetation. When one considers that ultimately evolution teaches
>that evolution teaches that the inorganic chemicals in the land produced
>organic plants, I would say that this verse does a good job of describing
On the other hand, when God said "Let the earth sprout sprouts" (same root
word for both noun and verb), He was releasing some of the life-giving
power which His Holy Spirit imparted to the earth while hovering over it
This is deep! It's like birth, bursting forth because of seed sown by God:
"Let the waters swarm with swarmers...." (1:20)
...and God created the great sea animals...and every bird...(1:21)
"Let the earth bring fourth the living soul...." (1:24)
...and God made the animals... (1:25)
"Let us make man...." (1:26)
...and God created the man... (1:27)
>One could interpret Genesis 1:22 and other statements like it as being
>consistent with evolution.
>Genesis 1:22 (NIV) God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in
>number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the
>What exactly is supposed to increase here? One could say that each species
>was supposed to increase its population, or one could interpret that as
>meaning that the TYPES of birds were supposed to increase in number.
That is an interesting possibility. Maybe it means both increase in number
and explore all possible variations.
>Now before you rule this latter interpretation out because it is
>inconsistent with the traditional interpretation of scripture, I would like
>to point out that the traditional interpretation of scripture was generated
>at a time prior to the consideration of evolution. So to rule out this
>interpretation on that grounds begs the question.
The idea of evolution was considered long before Darwin. Before Erasmus
Darwin. Before Buffon, Bonnet, De Maupertis and other 18th century French
philosophers, and before the Ionian Greek writings they were studying....
even before Moses wrote Genesis. But that's another subject.
>I would also like to note that when Genesis 1:28 says,
>Genesis 1:28 (NIV) God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and
>increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.
>That it too can be interpreted in the above manner. There have been at
>least 3 different types of men on the earth, Homo erectus, Homo sapiens
>neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens sapiens. One could throw int Homo
>Heidelbergensis if they wanted. And the first man to subdue the old world
>was Homo erectus who lived from Africa to Europe to SE Asia by 1.6 million
>years ago. H. erectus crossed the ocean 700,000+ years ago
Surely man has increased in number(!) and also has blossomed in many
Your point is that as you see it the Bible does not rule out the change of
one morphological type to another. And present day populations and
biogeography do show that types change through time. Fossil assemblages
also show variation.
So you entertain the idea of infinite change by natural processes -- inert
to living, reptile to mammal, animal to man. Is this what the Bible says?
Is this what nature data really says? Actually, only by _extension_ of
the observable changes can infinite change look plausible.
But you are entitled to your thoughts.
May you be richly blessed by the One Whose thoughts
are higher than our thoughts, and His ways higher than our ways.