-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Q
- Thread starter Anastasia
- Start date
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
It surely comes down to whether "bat" or "each of the 1,240 species of bat now existing" fits the description "kind" in the sense Genesis 1.24 uses that word.
Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind"; and it was so.
I believe the former, but I'll leave it there in view of your "long debate" comment.
"long debate" comment.
Thanks. There was another thread I meant to get back to that has just kept expanding so much, and I work two jobs and take a class atm.
Last edited by a moderator:
I believe that there was one species or many fewer than we have today. Just like there are many dog breeds that descended from just a few, I really think that the great number of species we have today came from microevolution - adaptation to the environment and mutations being carried on though the generations.
But God still created every single one.
But God still created every single one.
Just curious about your own thoughts.... <grin>
menageriekeeper
Active Member
How about this:
God created within the first few bats of creation the ability to adapt to their environment as needed in order for the species to survive (as a whole) as long as it was needed to continue the cycle of life on this planet.
God created within the first few bats of creation the ability to adapt to their environment as needed in order for the species to survive (as a whole) as long as it was needed to continue the cycle of life on this planet.
This does not answer the question.
Interesting; I, too, think it possible; but as was stated by others, think it more probable that He created them with the capability of adapting as needed.
Why is that?
Off the top of my head:
Creation in Genesis was written as a poem telling the story of creation (ref. a well known international theological scholar who teaches at a local university). For an example of this, we are told that Adam named the animals, but there are things in this world that he could not have seen with his eyes. It builds up to the greatest part of creation, Adam and Eve, from whom we are all descended. What is important is Adam and Eve's roles, the orderliness that God created with, and that God created the us and the world. The time that creation took is rarely mentioned outside of Genesis, unlike other aspects of our faith. I have to look up the Romans reference to creation, but as I recall, this reference did not seem to require a literal 7 day creation. God is the master of time. A day with Him is like a thousand years and a thousand years as a day. The sun and moon by which we measure time were not yet set into place at the first day. Whether we were created in one literal week as we know a week or in a longer period of time does not change the fact, to me, that God formed us humans specially or the fall or consequences of the fall, or the gift of our savior-who is mentioned far, far more in scripture. This is what is important. The each reproducing after its own kind demonstrates the order that God set in creation and the pattern of life, as He set order also for human life in other texts. Though to the extent that it does matter, I believe God used micro evolution, the earth may be old/not made in days the way that some believe. I also believe that the conflict that I have with others is based more on science in this perspective than it is of theology.
Last edited by a moderator:
You are the only one who has talked about breeds here.
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
(When I first clicked on here, I was expecting to see a discussion about the hypothetical 'Q' source document which has been proposed to lie behind material of Matthew/Luke which is not found in Mark)
About the bat, perhaps God made a male/female of the bat 'kind' and over the years speciation took place when the subpopulations split off and became isolated from each other.
About the bat, perhaps God made a male/female of the bat 'kind' and over the years speciation took place when the subpopulations split off and became isolated from each other.
The only thing that I'd point out here is Adam's naming of the animals occurred before the Flood. Taking a literal view of creation, the point you should be making about the kinds of bats should be considered after the Flood, not with Adam.
...Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years....And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
You are correct in saying God's measure of time is not like ours, only because time is ours. There was no need for a day, season, or year before God invented it, for our purpose.. And when his judgement comes, "time no longer can be" will be the alarm. Then, again, there will be no reason for days, seasons, or years.
You are correct in saying God's measure of time is not like ours, only because time is ours. There was no need for a day, season, or year before God invented it, for our purpose.. And when his judgement comes, "time no longer can be" will be the alarm. Then, again, there will be no reason for days, seasons, or years.
SolaSaint
Well-Known Member
I also thought the thread was going to be about the hypothetical document named "Q", and I which is was. Anyone want to start a Q thread?
BTW if God is omnipotent enough to creat the Universe out of nothing then why do we even doubt He could do it in 6 days? O' we of little faith.
BTW if God is omnipotent enough to creat the Universe out of nothing then why do we even doubt He could do it in 6 days? O' we of little faith.