After Their Kind

pdd@gcc.cc.md.us
16 Jul 1996 23:33:28 EDT

Glenn sent out a post regarding my thoughts on the biblical usage of
"kinds" which unfortuantely I lost. I've responded to the best of my
recollection of that post.

The use of the word "kinds" in Genesis 1 has always intrigued me. I
developed a knowledge of the use of taxonomy in my university days, and
my scientific sense of "kinds", i.e species, genera, etc.. As I began to
study the creation - evolution debate, I quickly learned that the word
"kinds" means different things to different people. Many mistakenly
think it is limited to taxonomic species. Even among evolutionists,
there are some who would argue that the term "species" should extend
outside of taxonomy and include all organisms within a group who are not
reproductively isolated. I have seen this often referred to as a "kind"
as well.

I call this a "mixed lexicon". When an evolutionist says "kinds" it may
mean something completely different to another evolutionist or to a
creationist. The other pitfall that we face is that we often frame
another school's argument in our own terms. I am a strong proponent for
each side developing its own lexicon, or specialized vocabulary, of
terms.

I believe that the Bible speaks to us in a very general way with respect
to "kinds".

First, it does not use the term as we use taxonomic terms. It speaks to
individual groups of organisms as belonging to a "kind" or grouping (
possessively, i.e. "their kind"). This represents a direct link between
the organism and the "kind" that it belongs to. Strong's defines the
Hebrew word for "kind" as meaning to portion out; a sort, i.e.- a
species (although in a general sense and not taxanomically).

As a creationist, I think that this sorting represents a planned
separate biologic unit. As has been clearly seen on many occasions,
there are surprising examples of taxonomically separate species capable
of reproduction. It is quite possible that these species possess a
common, ancestral, biblical "kind" or grouping that scientific taxonomy
has not yet been capable of duplicating.

Second, and with that idea in mind, it plainly appears that the Bible
has linked the concept of "kinds" with reproduction. The use of the
phrases "yielding fruit after his kind" and "herb yielding seed after
his kind" in Genesis 1 are examples. But until we reach a common
understanding of the Biblical grouping, or "kinds", of organisms the
details of the linkage to reproduction will remain elusive and
troublesome.

establishment of various "kinds" infers limits to possible biological
change within a "kind" and that within those limits variation and
speciation are possible. This may be evidenced in part by the perceived
evolutionary dead-ends and in the "sudden appearance" of the higher taxa
that was recently discussed on this list. These organisms fall somewhere
within the elusive biblical "kinds". The original organisms within the
kinds may not be clearly evident today, although Genesis 1 mentions
several groupings... e.g. winged fowl.

I personally take Morris's thoughts a bit further and believe that God's
creation of these biologic units, or "kinds", also infers a beginning, a
starting point as it were, to that change.

This would be an interesting arm of research and it is hopefully already
occurring. What were the created "kinds" in Genesis 1 and can we improve
our existing taxonomy based on them?

Paul Durham
pdd@gcc.cc.md.us