What is a kind as used in YEC appologetics?

[HumanisticJones]

I'm posting this here in hopes of actually getting an answer to this. I know that if I post it in GA or CrEvo, it will erupt in a debate before the Creation side can put forth a solid definition (I've seen it happen already). I figured that since all Biblical creationists are Christian, that a place where only Christians can respond would not exclude the people that could answer this.

The term Kind comes up in a few types of debates.

I first saw it when attempting to debate the Ark story, those of use on the evolution side often ask how Noah could have fit all the millions of species on earth into the ark. We are usually met with the answer that he only required 2 of each "kind" of animal.

The second place it pops up is in evolution debates. The creation stand point is that adaptation can occur, but it will never cause and organism to change its "kind".

I'm wondering if Christians have actually put together a working definition for what kinds actually are. If it has been I have yet to hear it, though I would assume it gets drowned out in the usually ensuing debates on slightly related issues. If anyone could help me understand this Creationist position, I'd be greatly appreciative.

 

[tapero]

I'm posting this here in hopes of actually getting an answer to this. I know that if I post it in GA or CrEvo, it will erupt in a debate before the Creation side can put forth a solid definition (I've seen it happen already). I figured that since all Biblical creationists are Christian, that a place where only Christians can respond would not exclude the people that could answer this.

The term Kind comes up in a few types of debates.

I first saw it when attempting to debate the Ark story, those of use on the evolution side often ask how Noah could have fit all the millions of species on earth into the ark. We are usually met with the answer that he only required 2 of each "kind" of animal.

The second place it pops up is in evolution debates. The creation stand point is that adaptation can occur, but it will never cause and organism to change its "kind".

I'm wondering if Christians have actually put together a working definition for what kinds actually are. If it has been I have yet to hear it, though I would assume it gets drowned out in the usually ensuing debates on slightly related issues. If anyone could help me understand this Creationist position, I'd be greatly appreciative.

Hi there,

CF has a few places on this issue.

Please note that while you can't post in the forum I'm about to give you, you can ask me or pm someone to make an [open] thread, which you then can post your questions and can keep posting in that thread.

http://www1.christianforums.com/f143-origins-theology.html

If you go to this url, look up, see creationism. Sounds like this will be the best source for you.

Again, just drop me a pm or any staffer to make it an [open] thread. That's what needs to be in title of thread. A member in those forums can also make it open, but they may not know that. All they need do is show title and put [open] at the end. In this brackets no spaces just as shown.

Anytime you want to discuss something that is in Nicene agreeing Christian only forums, you can ask for someone to make it [open]. Don't know if debate is allowed there, I am fairly sure it is. Might want to check on that with team which is theology. Here's staff's url in theology. Write to someone if wish to who has green light next to their name, however green light doesn't assure they are there, could be away and left pc on and in cf.

http://www.christianforums.com/staff.php?act=ViewTeam&cid=6&cname=Theology%20Team

Again, can also write me also.

God bless,
tapero

 

[ContentInHim]

In this day and age, "kinds" means those animals with the ability to produce offspring together. Like dogs and wolves; cats and lions (ouch);buffalo and cows, etc. Not elephants and zebras!

The current biological identification was developed by using visual differences. Currently it probably should be updated by genetic material. Then see how different the DNA can get before no reproduction occurs. That would be the demarcation line for "kinds" I would imagine! Now that would be an interesting study, but I bet PETA would complain!

This is just my YEC opinion!

 

[Digit]

I'm posting this here in hopes of actually getting an answer to this. I know that if I post it in GA or CrEvo, it will erupt in a debate before the Creation side can put forth a solid definition (I've seen it happen already). I figured that since all Biblical creationists are Christian, that a place where only Christians can respond would not exclude the people that could answer this.

The term Kind comes up in a few types of debates.

I first saw it when attempting to debate the Ark story, those of use on the evolution side often ask how Noah could have fit all the millions of species on earth into the ark. We are usually met with the answer that he only required 2 of each "kind" of animal.

The second place it pops up is in evolution debates. The creation stand point is that adaptation can occur, but it will never cause and organism to change its "kind".

I'm wondering if Christians have actually put together a working definition for what kinds actually are. If it has been I have yet to hear it, though I would assume it gets drowned out in the usually ensuing debates on slightly related issues. If anyone could help me understand this Creationist position, I'd be greatly appreciative.

Heya Humanistic Jones,

I will admit I've never really thought on this, but it seems to me that ContentInHim has it down. That synchs with Creationism and the Biblical accounts of things, and also allows for micro-evolution.

Digit

 

[HumanisticJones]

In this day and age, "kinds" means those animals with the ability to produce offspring together. Like dogs and wolves; cats and lions (ouch);buffalo and cows, etc. Not elephants and zebras!

This is a better definition than I've received before. However, I've been told by some that birds are of the same kind, with very little notable moments of hybridizations. It would seem that by this definition that birds are of a vast number of kinds.

 

[ebia]

The answer tends to depend on the context of the question. In a discussion of evolution "kind" tends to mean "can breed with each other" (roughly equivalent to species), but in a debate over the flood it has to change since you can't fit that many kinds into the ark. No-one wants to give a clear definition since any clear definition breaks down in one or more contexts.

 

[ebia]

People have already started studying that - it's called speciation.

 

[ContentInHim]

That's cool, Ebia - I'll do a google on it!