nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 13:
Line 13: − + − AiG is cautious about comparing this fossil snake to the serpent in [[Genesis]] 3:14. First, we really don’t know much about the serpent’s anatomy anyway. Yet we can offer a reasonable guess that it apparently was once able to crawl or walk; after the serpent was cursed, it was pronounced that “on thy belly shalt thou go,” suggesting that it previously moved using appendages.5 Also, this fossil probably resulted during Noah’s Flood, an event that took place about 1,500 years after the serpent was cursed to crawl on its belly.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4250news3-20-2000.asp</ref>}} − − [[Bible]] commentator Keith Krell states regarding the serpent in Genesis chapter 3 the following: "The text says the snake had to move on its belly. Some commentators take this literally and conclude that the snake had legs before God cursed it. Others take it figuratively, as a reference to the resultant despised condition of the snake."<ref>http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=4476#P30_15164</ref>
Remove part of quote not found at reference, and next paragraph, both not relevant to this article.
[[Creation Science|Creation scientists]] dispute that snakes with legs are evidence for the theory of evolution:
[[Creation Science|Creation scientists]] dispute that snakes with legs are evidence for the theory of evolution:
{{cquote|Even assuming it could be established that the ancestor of snakes today had legs, creationists have no problem in principle with loss of features through natural processes. Development of leglessness is not evidence for molecules-to-man evolution, which requires addition of new genetic information. Loss of legs could be achieved through degeneration of the DNA information sequences that specify leg development.<ref>Anon, 2000</ref>...
{{cquote|Even assuming it could be established that the ancestor of snakes today had legs, creationists have no problem in principle with loss of features through natural processes. Development of leglessness is not evidence for molecules-to-man evolution, which requires addition of new genetic information. Loss of legs could be achieved through degeneration of the DNA information sequences that specify leg development.<ref>Anon, 2000</ref>}}
== Different views ==
== Different views ==