Define "Kind"

This whole thing kind of reminds me of a joke I once heard. I won’t name names, but nonetheless, this joke reminds me of someone here.There was this nice little old lady down in New Orleans. She had the utmost belief in the bible and a deep faith in God. Well, it seems that a hurricane was predicted to hit New Orleans and the local weather station advised people to evacuate. The little old lady . let’s call her Wilma . said: “No, I think I’ll stay, I have faith in God and he will protect me”. The storm hits and water levels began to rise. A nice police officer knocked on Wilma’s door and informed her that the flood waters would continue to rise and that she should evacuate. “No”, she said, “I have faith in God and he will protect me”. Soon the water was lapping at her front door. A neighbor, in a nice pair of neoprene waders knocked on her door. She answered and he told her that the water was getting pretty deep and that maybe she should leave. “No” she told him, God will protect me, I have faith in that”. A while later a boat pulled up to her second story window. A lady in Coast Guard boat rapped on the window and when Wilma opened it up, she told her to hop in the boat so she could be taken to safety. “No thank you”, Wilma told her, “I have faith in God and he’ll protect me”. Eventually she was sitting on her roof when from out of the heavens a wonderful sight appeared. It was, of course . a helicopter . from which a man was lowered in an attempt to rescue poor old Wilma from her roof before it was too late. As the man tried to help her slip on the vest and collar so she could be hoisted to safety, she politely told him “Thanks, but no, God will surely save me, I have faith”.Well, she died. She drowned when the flood waters washed her from the roof and carried her off. She indeed was a lady of deep faith and upon arrival at the pearly gates she was immediately welcomed. She was granted a meeting with God himself and after a bit of small talk she said to God: “God, may I ask you a question?” God, told her "Sure, ask me anything you wish”. “Well”, she asks, “As you well know, I am a women of deep faith and I tried to do your bidding throughout my life . why did you not save me but instead allow me to drown?” God sets back and says “What more could I do Wilma . I had a weather man tell you to evacuate, I sent you a police officer, I sent you your neighbor, I sent you the Coast Guard, and I sent you a helicopter?”Anyway . a terrible telling of the joke, but it does seem to make a valid point. For some, nothing will shake their belief.

Genesis is pretty clear that "kinds" got on the Ark, and not species. Unless you are adding hierarchical "kinds" classification schemes, with "original kinds" and "secondary kinds", then I don't know how you can differentiate one "kind" from another.Gen 7:3 actually says "...and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth."So apparantly there are multiple "kinds" of birds that get onto the Ark, with two being named specifically (dove and raven).So if the Bible is God's word, is God using two different meanings for "kind" for Eden and the Flood?~clpMINI

[qs] Genesis is pretty clear that "kinds" got on the Ark, and not species. Unless you are adding hierarchical "kinds" classification schemes, with "original kinds" and "secondary kinds", then I don't know how you can differentiate one "kind" from another. [qs] Yes, the differentiation is not possible from the Bible; it will come from science. The word "kind" is used in many ways. The most we can say is that we know DIFFERENT kinds are designated by it and that evolution of all life from microscopic beginnings did not happen. It's not a formal category in the Bible. It may be referring to different groupings in Eden versus the ark, yes.This message has been edited by Faith, 02-21-2006 05:27 PM

But her belief was not based on the Bible but on some kind of personal revelation. There are no guarantees about that kind of faith. What the Bible says, God's word, comes with a guarantee that faith in it will be rewarded.

I'm starting to think that "kinds" is nothing more than what the people back then thought everything was, there arn't classified "kinds", theres the limited understanding of animals, such as: dog,cat,cow,wolf,bear,etc
being that we understand life much better than people back then we can split them into more uniform groups that have more meaning.As for people using "kinds" as some sort of classifier, its a meaningless gesture of someone trying to deny that science is correct. i mean if you can't define what "kinds" are why should you beable to use it to define other things?I think people use it to obscure things and change the subject so they have something to argue when they really don't, if a word you use has no definition to be checked then you shouldn't be able to use it

It's important to remember, I think, that "species" is the latin word for "kind". So, as much as creationists like to pretend that species and kind are two different things, the word used in the Bible would very likely have been translated as both "species" and "kind". So it doesn't really seem possible to me to make the statement made above; in Latin Bibles, I imagine, Genesis does say that "species" got on the ark.

Humans and chimps hemoglobin (the oxygen carrying protein) is identical in all 287 units.How would the fall leave us similar in that regard? Why wouldn't this degeneration make us more unlike genetically?(Feel free to not respond to this post as it isn't about 'kinds' but I'd appreciate it if you would think about it.)But would you mind taking a gander at my previous reply to you. It is pertinent to the question of 'kinds' and just asks for your input (when you have time.) Msg 57

Fascinating. We can look it up easily: and becomes furthermore: Very interesting.

I was kinda hoping that you would have had an epiphany about why Fliesonly posted that little tidbit. While I will try not to put words into his mouth, I believe he was making the point about your continued assertion that eventually "science" will discover the truth behind what constitutes a kind while discounting what it has found(replace the analogy of fliesonly with science instead of the weather).In other words, why would all these different fields of biological science tend to agree with the relatedness of organisms to each other if they didn't have multiple lines of evidence? As you stated before, the answer is not in the bible, and perhaps science holds the key.You profess that God discounts the idea that science can determine genetic relatedness yet the bible has no answer. Then you turn around and say science holds the key to answering the question.Maybe, perhaps, dontchathink it might be possible that science is God's way of telling us the answer?

I agree. You can't expect the people who wrote these stories to have the understanding that we have about animals and nature in general. What you should be able to expect is for people today to take things in context and not abandon science for ancient generalities.The less precise and less accurate you are on your terms, the more wiggle room you have.And you can't ever be wrong if no one can even define what you're talking about.~clpMINI

Interesting indeed. Thanks!

Yes, I understand that Faith and the joke was just that...a joke. The appropriateness of it, however, was meant to be more along the lines of refusing to accept factual information because it conflicts with a 2000 year old book. It seems that absolutely no evidence, no matter how well supported it may be, will make you question the validity of the Bible. While I think your rock solid faith is admirable, I also find it somewhat sad. You gladly accept science (you are after all using a computer and I assume you live in a house, drive a car, and utilize modern medicine) on a daily basis but I have a feeling that even if God himself came down from the heavens and told you to stop literally interpreting the Bible, you would not be able to do so. God has provided us with copious amounts of data that do nothing but support the theory of evolution, and we, in turn have provided it to you. Yet you just brush it all aside and cover your ears and eyes, and instead blissfully accept as factual information, an interpretation (written by men) of some stories from long ago.Even when, by your own admission, the Bible cannot (or does not) supply you with answers (what is a ”kind”), you refuse to question its authority. Instead, you ignore science (when convienent) and make a broad claim that the science has to be wrong because your Bible (written by man) says “this, that, and the other thing”.You ask questions . science supply answers. Most you accept. Those that deal with evolution however .

The Latin "Species" would work for creationists just fine in place of the English "Kind" except for the fact that evolutionists already use it, and in a way that confuses what creationists would want to use it for. Creationists avoid "species" like the plague for this very practical reason, and not out of some aversion to the word itself. Consulting a dictionary does not help with this problem.This message has been edited by Faith, 02-21-2006 05:58 PM

They DON'T have multiple lines of evidence. They all merely subscribe to the evolutionist view and ASSUME that there is an unending line of descent and they simply read their data into that assumption.

That is not the reason they avoid it. They used to deny speciation. The evidence backed most of them into a corner so they moved off that term onto something undefined.