Replies

" The biblical texts do not specifically address fixity of species except with the words "according to their kind."

But YEC says that there is a built in limit to variation. Evolution says there isn't.

" Science has a hard time defining what constitutes a "species" let alone a "kind." "

There is no way to define a *kind* scientifically, as it has no real world meaning. The biological species concept, while not exact, does describe a real biological population.

"I figure there will be some latitude amidst kinds, much as the human race as observed today contains everything from dwarfs to giants; white to black, and much in between."

Are they all different *kinds*?

"The biblical texts would not propose any kind of "magical barriers."

Then why do YEC's say there is?

" Not really. A Common Creator will quite obviously produce a result that could be construed as common descent. "

I didn't say construed, I said is. Universal common descent goes against YEC.

"As for the history involved, yes, I disagree."

Then you are not an evolutionist, of any type.

"The best evidence is always in fossils and bones for some reason, but never in written records by those who themselves conduct science, namely humans."

Why would hominid evolution be in written records when writing is a recent human invention?
BTW, the best evidence is in the genes, not the bones.

" While that assertion resides within the hearts of many, it has not been empirically proven."

But the evidence for it is overwhelming. It is also an important corollary to evolutionary theory, and is anathema to YEC. You reject an old earth, you are not an evolutionist.

" Take some time to study the nature and concept of time, and put it together with quantum mechanics. "

And? What does quantum mechanics and the study of time say about the age of the Earth?

"What we are faced with in this life is too tentative to make an assertion such as yours as if it were a hard boiled fact."

Nonsense. Why is your assertion any better?

" At bottom, I fit the definition of theistic evolutionist,"

Except that you reject evolution.

" but if you care to strip me of that title I will not be ashamed in the least."

The title was never yours to begin with. Your attempt to redefine words is not convincing anybody.

But YEC says that there is a built in limit to variation. Evolution says there isn't.

If evolution by definition entails no limits on what matter can or cannot do I reckon it is no more scientific than Joe Christian who comes along and says "God did it."

There is no way to define a *kind* scientifically, as it has no real world meaning.

The language of biology categorizes life in to kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species. The real world meaning of "kind" might be gathered from the biblical texts if you care to take a look. Hint: Trees and humans are not of the same kind.

I didn't say construed, I said is.

Fine. God is the Creator of all life. Therefore all life is of common descent.

Why would hominid evolution be in written records when writing is a recent human invention?

Why should I consider something as "scientific" if it has no human records to attest to the accuracy of its assertions?

But the evidence for [a 4.5 billion year old earth] is overwhelming.

BS. You're just a parrot. You don't even know for sure the earth rotates, let alone how old it is. Moreover, you haven't taken time to study time and compare it with quantum mechanics. The evidence in that regard points to an intersection between time and eternity which in turn, is reason to believe anything goes when it comes to history.

Why is your assertion any better?

Because it is based upon a source outside of myself, namely a text which has enjoyed wide acceptance for thousands of years and attests quite pointedly to God's involvement in creation, and preservation of this creation. All you have for a source is your own opinion and the opinion of those who happen to agree with you.

Your attempt to redefine words is not convincing anybody.

Apparently Fester has written his own dictionary. He should provide his definitions up front. That way the discussion, such as it is, can swiftly move on to what the definition of the terms is, which is where it usually ends up with Fester. All of time wasted verbally circling into that point can be saved.