<It’s not eggs in general versus chickens, it’s the chicken egg versus the chicken.

It’s really an example of what Dawkins calls the discontinuous mind. There were birds, laying eggs, which we would not call chickens. Many generations later, there were descendant birds, also laying eggs, which we would call chickens. In between, there’s a continuum of bird generations, in which no two adjacent samples would be considered of distinct species. Where do you draw the line between pre-chicken and chicken? The real answer is that you don’t. Given perfect sampling, there is no line at all. Only via the extinction of intermediates can there be species at all.

If you insisted on drawing a line, it would be one demarcated by DNA, and that DNA would be inside an egg, building the world’s first chicken.>

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress...

But I was informed that one should give Man a unlimited amount of time to fill in the blanks and find the evidence, as after all it took -Nature- Billions of years to accomplish the current diversity.

This statement is of course a wink to a friend of mine who also posted on this thread (Life from non-life) in similar terms many months ago, and in no way do I wish to ridicule him, as he deserves, and still does, my utmost respect. Yet I disagree and am convinced that this very construction is at odds with the scientific method, the MINDSET, and principle, and therefore too vulnerable, and in the very end, unscientific. But if one is convinced to be on the right track, then unlimited time to provide all necessary evidence is a bonus. The counter evidence that there is an information source is overwhelming and should result in a revolutionary approach regarding the naturalist methodology.

And yet the arrogance of those affirming that position is striking. They whisper "give us more time, we'll fill in the blanks even though we're really not making any progress" while shouting <"THOSE STUPID CHRISTIANS BELIEVING THAT BOOK THAT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS! <<<WE>>> HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS!> (back to whispering) "except the ones we haven't found yet, but they're out there."

It's a battle for souls and I don't think there's any point in pretending otherwise. Like you, I won't bring a butter knife to a gunfight.

<Yet I disagree and am convinced that this very construction is at odds with the scientific method, the MINDSET, and principle, and therefore too vulnerable, and in the very end, unscientific.>

I agree 100%.

<But if one is convinced to be on the right track, then unlimited time to provide all necessary evidence is a bonus.>

<Ohio> - I just posted at the Rogoff thread, and said I was going to contact you here, so here we go:

First, I'd like to know how you interpret chapter 8 of proverbs, notably verses 22-31.

And second, in all my years and hours of studying the bible, and just reading it, flipping back- and foreward to check for consistency and canonicity, I really never in any way could convince myself that the 6 days as described in Genesis 1, were to be taken literally and down to the precise minute and second.

One being the concept of "[being from] Antiquity" with regards to Jesus' "prior" spiritual existence. See eg. John 8:58

<Ohio> I will do some research now, was obviously too pressed for time this morning, and re-acqaint myself with the very first few Genesis 1 verses, and the hebrew word used for both the state the earth was in, as well the meaning translated by the word day, prior to God moving his forces over the great waters and divided his creationary task as described in 6 parts of consecutive "days."

I have at this moment absolutely no reason to infer from the text 6x24 hrs days, but as I already was curious following the Apologetics folk's principle Young Earth tenets, I will dovetail that and compare it to my own views sofar.

Meanwhile it would be great if you can give me your interpretations of the timeline and expected moment of creation of the "not-yet-fallen" angels and related angelic entities. Not to mention his Firstborn, and the words used to indicate imo times in the distant past, beyond our comprehension. See the Proverbs text from my previous post.

As far as the earth is concerned, let alone the galaxies, it was my view that they were already in "unprepared for human habitation"-existence, right from the 2nd verse chapter one, upon which God went about preparing the earth as described in the bible through use of the 6 days, imo undefined periods of time, unlikely of being 24 hours each, but more on that, as I promised, later.

2 He was in the beginning with God.

1In the beginning of God's <preparing> the heavens and the earth --

2the earth <hath> existed waste and void, and darkness [is] on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters,

3and God saith {AHA! here we go then], `Let light be;' and light is.

4And God seeth the light that [it is] good, and God separateth between the light and the darkness,

5and God calleth to the light `Day,' and to the darkness He hath called `Night;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day one. [so obviously the Earth was in an Orbit around the Sun -- WHEN was that accomplished]

6And God saith, `Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be separating between waters and waters.'

7And God maketh the expanse, and it separateth between the waters which [are] under the expanse, and the waters which [are] above the expanse: and it is so.

8And God calleth to the expanse `Heavens;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day second.

<[...] the meanings of Yom;

The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (1980, Moody Press)

"It can denote: 1. the period of light (as contrasted with the period of darkness), 2. the period of twenty-four hours, 3. a general vague "time," 4. a point of time, 5. a year (in the plural; I Sam 27:7; Ex 13:10, etc.)."

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (symbols omitted)

from an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literal (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), [often used adv.]:--age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, end, evening, (for)ever(lasting), ever(more), full, life, as long as (...live), even now, old, outlived, perpetually, presently, remaineth, required, season, since, space, then, (process of) time, as at other times, in trouble, weather (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), whole (age), (full) year (-ly), younger

As you can see, Hebrew dictionaries attest to the fact that the word Yom is used for anywhere from 12 hours up to a year, and even a vague "time period" of unspecified length.

[...]

<< Evening/Morning Construction >>

In Genesis 1 Moses says "and there was evening and morning the xx day". Does the use of evening and morning indicate a sunrise and sunset for each creative day? First, let's look at what evening and morning are not. They are not actual evening and mornings, as this requires a sunrise and sunset. << According to young earth theory, the Sun was not created until Day Four >>, thus there could be no sunrise or sunset for the first three days of creation. However, God uses the terms evening and morning for those first three days. Therefore, they cannot be actual evenings and mornings.

We are left with only one option. The words for Evening and Morning can only represent the beginning and ending of the creative period, and not actual sunrise and sunsets. Scripture itself sets this pattern for us. Morning and evening are used figuratively in Psalm 30:5, Psalm 49:14,15, Psalm 90:6. Thus, the evening and morning of creation can mean the start and end of the creative process that is attributed to that creation period.> -- http://www.answersincreation.org/wo...

This website is managed by Old Earth creationists, but believe me I wasn't aware of this prior to clicking the link and starting out reviewing the material.. ;)

But it mostly is congruent with my views as I developed them first some 20 years back, when I didn't take the literal interpretation of the six day creation seriously.

But in the present "day" I will consider and review the YE argumentation for their beliefs.