KIND of confused!

[Morallyangelic]

I have a question for people who believe in ID.

Who told YOU specifically what a ' kind ' was?

I ask for this reason ; If I had sat down and read " bring forth after their KIND " without any outside influence on what that word meant I probably wouldn't be so against the idea of evolution.

From what I have gathered evolution is not trying to eliminate God from anything. In fact, it's not TRYING to do anything I don't think.

I've realized that when it comes down to it this is not a debate over the flood, over the Big Bang or any other road we want to take it down. This is about something that is being observed in science ( evolution ) all over the place and I'm just starting to wonder how ignorant I actually have to be in order to ignore all that and I've realized that the only thing that gets me everytime is that word ... KIND.

So as if I'm not confused already, someone who actually knows about ID please tell me ... What is a kind? And why do you view the word that way?

 

[FreezBee]

I ask for this reason ; If I had sat down and read " bring forth after their KIND " without any outside influence on what that word meant I probably wouldn't be so against the idea of evolution.

Hi Morallyangelic;

I just happened to see your post here, and although I'm not an IDist, I may be able to help you out a bit. The word "kind" just as "kin" comes from the Indoeuropean root "gene", which means to "bring forth", so the expression "bring forth after their kind" is a bit circular, if you see, what I mean.

I did some searching on the Internet, and here's an ID page:

http://www.actionbioscience.org/biodiversity/wilson.html

where at least the definition of "species" is discussed.

Hope it helps


- FreezBee

 

[gluadys]

I have a question for people who believe in ID.

Who told YOU specifically what a ' kind ' was?

I ask for this reason ; If I had sat down and read " bring forth after their KIND " without any outside influence on what that word meant I probably wouldn't be so against the idea of evolution.

From what I have gathered evolution is not trying to eliminate God from anything. In fact, it's not TRYING to do anything I don't think.

I've realized that when it comes down to it this is not a debate over the flood, over the Big Bang or any other road we want to take it down. This is about something that is being observed in science ( evolution ) all over the place and I'm just starting to wonder how ignorant I actually have to be in order to ignore all that and I've realized that the only thing that gets me everytime is that word ... KIND.

So as if I'm not confused already, someone who actually knows about ID please tell me ... What is a kind? And why do you view the word that way?

I am not an ID proponent either, but I do have a background in languages that may assist.

When Genesis was first translated from Hebrew into Greek and Latin, the Hebrew term for "kind" was rendered as "species" (Latin) and whatever the equivalent Greek is. When it was translated into English, the English term "kind" was used. So originally kind=species.

When Karl von Linne (aka Linnaeus) complied his Systema Natura as a basis on which to classify different life forms, he wrote in Latin, and used "species" as the term for the smallest distinct unit of population. That is the way "species" is still used in science.

And until the mid-19th century that is also the way "kind" was used in English. On this basis, most theologians and even most scientists, held to the invariability of species. Each, they believed, was a separate and distinct creation which had not significantly changed beyond minor local variations since God created it.

When Darwin and his successors showed conclusively that species did change and gave rise to new species, the creationist movement delinked the term "kind" from the term "species" and claimed that "kind" referred to a range of species descended from the original created kind. This change in terminology took place somewhere in the late 19th century and was well established by the early 20th century.

What the range of a kind is---and whether it is the same for various kinds--has been a matter of controversy ever since. To judge from creationist/ID literature, a kind can be as small as a single species (Homo sapiens) to as broad as a whole order of thousands of species (e.g. frogs, beetles) or even a whole kingdom (bacteria). Furthermore, this judgment seems to be made intuitively, not on the basis of scientific criteria. (One observer has noted that the range of a kind tends to vary in proportion with its distance from humanity. Mammals tend to be divided into family groups, reptiles and amphibians at the level of order, and whole classes of invertebrates are often considered as one kind.)

No scientific investigation has shown any hard and fast dividing line between one population and another other than than of species. And in the case of recently separated species, even that is fuzzy, as hybrids and ring species demonstrate.

 

[KerrMetric]

Kind is whatever creationists want it to be I'm afraid.

They'll keep it undefined so that when what they seem to hint it means is falsified by an example they can then use the term again.

It's undefined so as to allow goalposts to be shifted when necessary.

 

[vossler]

I've realized that when it comes down to it this is not a debate over the flood, over the Big Bang or any other road we want to take it down.

Yes, ultimately this is about God's Word and what it says, nothing more nothing less.

 

[random_guy]

I have a question for people who believe in ID.

Who told YOU specifically what a ' kind ' was?

I ask for this reason ; If I had sat down and read " bring forth after their KIND " without any outside influence on what that word meant I probably wouldn't be so against the idea of evolution.

From what I have gathered evolution is not trying to eliminate God from anything. In fact, it's not TRYING to do anything I don't think.

I've realized that when it comes down to it this is not a debate over the flood, over the Big Bang or any other road we want to take it down. This is about something that is being observed in science ( evolution ) all over the place and I'm just starting to wonder how ignorant I actually have to be in order to ignore all that and I've realized that the only thing that gets me everytime is that word ... KIND.

So as if I'm not confused already, someone who actually knows about ID please tell me ... What is a kind? And why do you view the word that way?

While I'm also not an IDer, I think what you want to read about is baraminology, or the study and grouping of kinds.

Here's a site explaining what it is.
http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/37/37_2/baraminology.htm

Two problems arises with baraminology, however. It's very hard to separate species into disjoint or separate kinds since there's always animals that are closely related if you go back in the fossil records. For example, if you try separate the cat family and dog family into separate kinds, you'll find that in the fossil record, you'll see the two families converge into one family. Aron-Ra had an absolutely wonderful post displaying this.

http://www1.christianforums.com/t1958214-here-kitty-kitty-kitty.html&page=1&pp=40

Another example is that termites seem related to ants, and might be placed in the ant kinds, but genetically, they're closer related to cockroaches. Baraminology places humans in it's separate class, but humans are closer related to apes than termites related to cockroaches. Due to a literal reading of the Bible, baraminology is forced to separate humans into their own kind when many of the kinds it proposes has more variability than humans and apes.

The second problem is that if God created kinds 6000 years ago, it would require hyperevolution to get to have the diversity we see in life today. Again, look at the Aron-Ra link and look at the different kinds of cat kinds there are. Look at how different they are, and look at how much evolution would have to occur in a short timeperiod to create such diversity.

I hope this helps.

 

[The Lady Kate]

Yes, ultimately this is about God's Word and what it says, nothing more nothing less.

What about how we choose to interpret and act on it?

 

[random_guy]

I just realized something. Even in here, there's very few IDers. I guess you could try the Creationist only subforum. It might get a better response there. But again, I feel that kinds classification is an inferior science when our modern classification system works so well.

 

[billwald]

Seems obvious that all living things need to be reclassified in terms of DNA.

 

[Key]

Great Question.

People here have given some great answers, God Bless you all for your input.

What does it mean by Kind.
This is tricky, because, as nice as it might sound when we play word history and realize that the word "Species" in Latin was the same as the "Kind" in Hebrew, we need to realize that, this was written over 3 thousand years ago, so the Tec and Comprehension of the people was as big an issue as the word itself.
I am sure that Moses knew what "Kind" meant, but over the course of time, and the changes or "Evolution" of our language as a whole, the Term got distorted and then corrupted by an ever changing culture, as well as people using the word (Or similar words) for their own means.

What does “Kind” Mean in the biblical sense.
It means, “The Original Division of the Life Forms on this Planet as God has set Forth”

What the Limitations or requirements of "Kind" are, to that we are left without a means to ever know completely. For all that we do know when it comes to defining what was meant by "Kind" would be a Guess or an Assumption.

That is why it is currently mutable.

God Bless

Key.

 

[Key]

From what I have gathered evolution is not trying to eliminate God from anything. In fact, it's not TRYING to do anything I don't think.

Umm Evolution is trying to do something. Which may or may not effect your standing with God.

Let me explain in an Analogy kind of what exactly Evolution is trying to do.

People that have been supporting the “Evolution Theory” are presenting Reindeer, a sled, a fat guy, and a red suit and telling you “There really is a Santa” and then just to make matters worse, they follow up with “Everyone knows Santa is real, Didn’t you see the reindeer! What more do you need?”


Personally, I need the Reindeer to Fly at Mach3 (under their own power) and that Fat guy to fit down a standard masonry chimney, with a lit fire.

But that is just me.

God Bless

[font=&quot]Key.[/font]

 

[ebia]

[BIBLE=James Ch3] Wild animals and birds, reptiles, and fish of every kind can be tamed and have been tamed by humans[/BIBLE]
Clearly, whatever a kind is it, every kind must contain at least one domesticated example.