I was under the impression there was only the two taxon; if it’s not a synapsid (mammal), it’s the other.
But the point remains, the wave of animal life that eventually became birds started first, with the second wave that eventually became mammals overlapping it.
So, while chronologically it may seem off, it is only because it took quite a while for birds to come about through that first wave.
In other translations, instead of stating God created ‘great whales’, it sometimes says ‘great sea animals’ (CEB), or ‘giant sea monsters’ (CEV).
Point being, the original text didn’t say “whales”, a translator did.
I agree with mine.
Your impression is wrong.
Nope. There is no such thing as a “wave of anima life”. There’s a tree of animal life, and synapsids are not separate. It’s continuous. Birds are no more “first wave” than mammals, there being no such thing as a first wave, and in fact mammals pre-date birds. You’re making up events that don’t exist. Further, Genesis doesn’t talk about waves at all.
Yet that’s the text you quoted, the one that talks about whales. What “giant sea monsters” do you think were intended that make your claims sensible?
You mistake his point. That’s easy to do since his actual point makes no sense. Since you can’t see it, let me “help” you by quoting it completely:
"Day 5 - Life From the Sea Through Birds
Genesis 1: 20-23 - And God said, “Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.” And God created great whales and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind; and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply on the earth.” And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
Keeping in mind God’s spirit was on the surface, and that the point of view is from the land as evidenced by the sun, moon, and stars being positioned on day 4, it becomes obvious that God’s declaration to, “Let the waters bring forth…” means He called life to come from the sea onto the land.
Vertebrates first made their debut on land during the Carboniferous Period (359.2 to 299 mya). By this period there were already forests of plant life on land, including large primitive trees, and the continents were already well across the equator.
Beyond the point of view already established, the real clue here is God’s call for birds in the same verses as life from the sea. The assumption has always been that these verses are specifically talking about sea life. Here God calls for ‘moving creatures that hath life’ and birds. We know birds didn’t remain in the sea, so why would we assume everything else did? Only now do we really know better. Birds, along with everything else, did actually originate in the sea.
We’re all but certain birds evolved directly from dinosaurs. In fact, all amniotic creatures are categorized this way; sauropsids, which are reptiles and birds, and synapsids, which are mammals and mammal-like reptiles. There is a direct line of evolution that can be seen from the first land vertebrates, to reptiles, to dinosaurs, to birds.
And the evening and the morning were the fifth day, or age. The age of life on land and birds in the air."
and
" When the events of ‘day 5’ are read in this context something really interesting can be seen in verse 21. In the above translation it says, “God created great whales and every living creature that moveth…”. In other translations, instead of stating God created ‘great whales’, it sometimes says ‘great sea animals’ (CEB), or ‘giant sea monsters’ (CEV).
The actual Hebrew words used here that are translated so many different ways are ‘e-thninm’, which means ‘the monsters’, and ‘e-gdlim’, which means ‘the great ones’. We now know that between the debut of vertebrates on land and the appearance of birds there were numerous creatures that much more aptly fit these descriptions than ‘great whales’ … namely dinosaurs.
Considering the intended audience at the time Genesis was written would have no knowledge of dinosaurs it’s unlikely they are what it was speaking of. It’s more likely that these descriptions refer to large reptiles or other large non-mammal creatures familiar to people in this age. However, if there were to be any mention of dinosaurs anywhere in the bible, it would be right here."
and
"## Day 6 - Living Creatures from the Land
Genesis 1: 24-25 - And God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth after his kind”; and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind; and God saw that it was good.
Here that dividing line mentioned above between sauropsids and synapsids begins to take on a whole new context. In verse 24 God calls for the ‘earth’ to bring forth specific kinds of creatures. Knowing that life had already made its way onto land during ‘day 4’, there would be plenty of living material to use.
The first mammals appeared way back during the end of the Triassic Period (251 to 199.6 mya), most likely evolving from synapsid reptiles (see proto-mammals). All throughout the Jurassic Period (199.6 to 145.5 mya) mammals continued to etch out an existence in terrain dominated by dinosaurs, but grew no larger than a small rodent. But once the dinosaurs were out of the way by the end of the Cretaceous Period (145.5 to 65.5 mya) mammals really began to thrive as placental mammals, and then modern mammals, developed all throughout the Paleogene Period (65.5 to 23.03 mya)."
Thank you for the help… I appreciate that.
@Jeremy_Christian, the sentence I quote above makes no sense to me. And since I’m pressed for time, let me just stick with this one for a while.
I’m sure John and others have many other candidates for review and, ultimately, rejection!
Don’t say I didn’t warn you.
@Jeremy_Christian said:
That would be great if dinosaurs were marine animals. But of course they weren’t.
Your caviling answer to my complaint exemplifies exactly the thing I was complaining about. Time to end this little sub-discussion. I’ve moved on to other threads.
Ha! Your cavilling answer exemplifies exactly the thing I was complaining about. Flounce away.
Dinosaurs would not have been familiar to humanity. It’s describing how things known to humans came about.
It describes each as being commanded to “be fruitful/multiply/fill the earth”. This is not something that just happens. It takes time. A long time. Not just a day. It’s set in motion and then continues.
There’s the initial wave, and then there’s the branching off of placental animals. That’s the second.
God gives commands. Those commands are realized over time.
Using that logic, you can turn a pigs ear into a silk purse. There isn’t anything you can’t “explain away” … and you know it.
I think you should spend less time explaining the Bible into a crazy morass… and just say: forget the timeline… go out and help the poor!
You would make a far better “missionary to the wretched masses” than you do an expositor of what the Bible is really trying to say.
Look, the bottom line is this, like it or not. If the goal is to present Genealogical Adam as a view that aligns science and religion, then that’s going to have to apply across the board. Not just scientifically, not just genealogically, but also historically.
What I’m laying out here is cohesion across that board. If there’s places I’m wrong, I want them pointed out and addressed. But the end goal should really be along the same lines of scope. It’s all going to have to be worked out.
I’ve got a hypothesis that comes at it all from that angle. It’s ultimately going to have to be that or something like it.
No, you don’t. You don’t really want what you think you want.
Because the differences lead to you having to reformulate this whole Free Will fixation of yours. And you won’t change it. We’ve talked about this.
You won’t let go. So… you should probably start your own discourse group… and we’ll pickup the leftovers from your magnificent work to re-write the Bible.
That’s reproduction, not evolution.
That makes no sense. There is no separation into waves, nor does the 6th day refer to placental mammals.
Genealogical Adam didn’t happen in a vacuum.
One of the fundamental issues with this that I haven’t seen addressed satisfactorily is if Adam was created in an already populated world, why? What’s significant about Adam to warrant a whole second group of humans?
Free will is my answer to that. Do you have something better?
Reproduction is an important component of evolution. But the point here is that reproduction takes time. It’s not a ‘poof’ it’s all there “day 4” kind of thing. The command sets things in motion. Life becomes what God wills. But it takes many generations to achieve. So, it’s a wave, not an instant creation.