• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Biblical 'Kinds'

DeitySlayer

President of Chindia
Addressed to Creationists:

Can I please have a definition of the Biblical 'kind'. Where are the genetic limits drawn, so to speak?
 

Noaidi

slow walker
I think you may be on to a losing battle here, DeitySlayer.

Many creationists today try to fit the biblical notion of kinds into modern science and conveniently blur the boundaries. 'Kind' can be whatever they determine it to be. Taxonomy and the bible don't really concur. 'Whale' comes under the classification of 'fish' to some.

The bible mentions 'kinds', but to the authors, they would have been in terms of 'fish', 'lizard' etc. They would have had no notion of concepts such as species, genus, family and so on.
In the creationist literature I've read, 'kinds' is an elastic category touted by those who have no understanding of biology.

However, are there any biology-oriented creationists out there willing to nail this one for us?
 

DeitySlayer

President of Chindia
I was kind of hoping that ChristianDoc would have a definition for this. He seems to be quite above the usual YEC ********. Still incorrect, IMO, but more fluently argued.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
This is all you are going to get.
I agree. However, so as to not leave the thread entirely without creationist comment here is what Creationwiki has to say, in part.
Created kind

Created kinds are organisms that are defined by creation biology as sharing a common ancestry.

The phrase refers to the Genesis account of the creation week during which God created many kinds of plants and animals. They are also referred to as "original kinds," "Genesis kinds," and more formally by creation scientists as baramin. The term barmin was coined in 1941 by Frank Marsh from the Hebrew words bara (create) and min (kind). The study of baramin (known as Baraminology) is a rapidly growing field of creation science involved with the identification of the created kinds.

In contrast to the evolutionary principle of common ancestry, creation biologists argue that organisms were created in a finite number of discrete forms as described in the Bible, which subsequently diversified through speciation and microevolution. There is much uncertainty about what exactly the Bible means when it talks of "kinds". The original Hebrew word min is used to describe a variety of organisms. Nevertheless, creationists are in agreement that the phrase refers to a distinct barrier between different types or organisms and a limitation on variation.

It is very important not to confuse the "created kind" with species. Although animals like the fox and coyote might be considered different taxonomic species, they are still the same "kind" of animal. The created kind is thought to be more often synonymous with the "Family" level of classification in the taxonomic hierarchy; at least in mammals; and occasionally it can extend as high as the order level. Here are some examples:
• Felidae — Scientists from Creation Ministries International and the Institute for Creation Research have proposed that the original feline kind was comparable to the Liger and the Tigon.
• Canidae — Including Wolves, Foxes, Jackals, Coyotes, and Domestic dogs.
• Camelidae — Including both the Camel and the Llama, which are reproductively compatible, their hybrid offspring being known as "Camas."
• Bovidae — Including Cattle, Buffalo, Bison, and Yaks.
• Equidae — Including Horses, Zebras, and *****.
• Caprinae — Including Sheep, Goats, and Ibex.
• Crocodilia — Including all the varieties of Alligators, Crocodiles, and Gharials.
• Elephantidae — Including African and Asian elephants, Mammoths, Mastodons, and Gomphotheres.
source

For the present I'll leave it to others to pick apart this rather amusing explanation; although' I do find the following remarks interesting.
"There is much uncertainty about what exactly the Bible means when it talks of 'kinds' ."

"The created kind is thought to be more often synonymous with the "Family" level of classification in the taxonomic hierarchy; "
Oh yes, almost forgot. Here is a little unexplained diagram taken from Answers in Genesis showing how "gene pools"---whatever that means to them---arise from an "Original Created Kind."
Createdkinds.jpg

 

Noaidi

slow walker
Well, if they've got diagrams of that quality, then it must be true. What would clinch it for me is to see some really hard-looking equations and numbers and stuff. Oh yeah, and loads of graphs too. Gotta have graphs.
 
Last edited:

evolved yet?

A Young Evolutionist
They like to say that as kinds divide into separate species the gene pool will have less and less diversity, in other words there is less diversity in dogs (Chihuahua to Great Danes) have less diversity than wolves.
 

Noaidi

slow walker
I'd say 'kind' is how God named all His creatures in the sacred book of Genesis.

Come on, Biblestudent - give us a proper argument. This is what I said earlier. 'Kinds' is such an elastic term used by creationists that it can be applied to anything and everything. Saying that 'god deemed it to be so' and leaving it at that is not explaining anything.

What does a 'kind' actually mean in biological terms?
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
What I find amusing is when creationist stretch the idea of "reproductively compatibility" to included artificially created hybrids such as camas, that also have not been shown to be fertile. Seems it doesn't matter if a hybrid can't reproduce, as long as it exists its proof of . . . hmmm . . . just what is it proof of anyway? Ah yes, it's proof creationists expect the reader to fall for their bogus implications.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
So ultimately it is wishful thinking seeking respectability by way of being talked about as if it were a fact?
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
What does a 'kind' actually mean in biological terms?

In biological terms isn't there a limit where things stop reproducing?

Biblical kinds end when they reach the point that they can no longer intermingle to reproduce according to its kind.
 

Noaidi

slow walker
In biological terms isn't there a limit where things stop reproducing?

Biblical kinds end when they reach the point that they can no longer intermingle to reproduce according to its kind.

So are you talking about species here?
 

Biblestudent_007

Active Member
Come on, Biblestudent - give us a proper argument. This is what I said earlier. 'Kinds' is such an elastic term used by creationists that it can be applied to anything and everything. Saying that 'god deemed it to be so' and leaving it at that is not explaining anything.

What does a 'kind' actually mean in biological terms?

As God being the source and origin of all biological life.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Yes, and biblically, they are called 'kinds' in the book Genesis.

So if kind = species and there are about 1.8 million species that have been described since Linnaeus initiated the modern systems for naming plants and animals in the 18th century, AND Noah took at least two of each kind (species) on board then he would have taken on at least 3 million individuals, which he and the family would have had to feed, water, and looked after for about a year. Seem plausible to you?
 
Top