Tag Archives: Biblical kinds

Biblical “Kinds”

Bible skeptics enjoy trumping the variety of species in our modern world as the main objection to Noah’s Ark being a factual occurrence.  The understanding of the “kinds” described in the beginning of the Bible is becoming clearer and clearer – thanks to modern science and the exploration of DNA.  It has been documented that polar bears and grizzly (Kodiak) bears have interbred, not only in zoos, but rarely in the wild. 

This wonderful article from the Institute for Creation Research gives glory to our Creator – and His perfect, preserved Word.

Zonkeys, Geeps, and Noah’s Ark

by Brian Thomas, M.S. *

zonkey_geep_wide

Zookeepers in Reynosa, Mexico, recently witnessed a female zebra give birth to a “zonkey.” So far, this rare hybrid animal appears to be in good health.1 Meanwhile, an Irish farmer’s sheep chases its baby “geep,” sired by a goat.2 What do zonkeys and geeps have to do with Noah’s Ark?

The zebra mother had grown familiar with a neighboring dwarf albino donkey. Although its father was colorless, the zonkey progeny has striped legs and a mostly brown torso.1 Zebras and donkeys actually have different numbers of chromosomes, making fertilization quite challenging, but cellular machinery sometimes somehow finds a way to form a viable offspring. It appears life was designed to do just that.

Similarly, the typical goat has 60 chromosomes, and most domestic sheep have but 54. Modern science has attached separate genus names for the two varieties, but the fact that they can interbreed demonstrates that they descended from a single kind. They both fall under a broader category: the subfamily called “Caprinae.”

Family names, or in this case the subfamily, for animals seems to best approximate the Genesis kind. Adding those of air-breathing, land-dwelling animals yields a population that would not even take up half the Ark’s calculated volume.3

Nevertheless, Bible skeptics discount the Ark, insisting that it could not possibly have carried all the required creatures. When asked to estimate how many creatures entered the vessel, they sometimes suggest millions—an unrealistic number by far. But they sometimes add sea creatures to their tallies, and they may also be counting various versions of sheep, goats, zebras, donkeys, and horses separately.

Noah and his sons only needed two of each kind, and if two creatures can interbreed, they essentially belong to the same kind. Noah’s family also only needed land-dwelling, air-breathing animals. The text says, “Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive.”4 That rules out fish and a host of other water creatures, which comprise the largest chunk of currently tallied animal names—Nemo and Flipper need not apply.

How did today’s animal varieties arise, anyway? Since creatures continue to diversify into newly named varieties as they pioneer new environments and breed with neighbors of their own general kind, it stands to reason that the few number of animals on the ark rapidly diversified after the Flood into the vastly diverse animal kingdom we see today. For example, over a thousand named species of finches and sparrows have been linked through breeding studies to a single, interbreeding kind.5 And that’s where rare animals like zonkeys and geeps come in, showing that today’s varieties trace back to basic kinds.

Were horses, zebras, donkeys, sheep and goats on the ark separately? Maybe, but based on these rare cross breeds, perhaps the two basic kinds were represented by animals that looked more like zonkeys and geeps.

As we learn more and more about chromosomes – it shouldn’t stretch any Bible believer’s understanding to know where the “giants” of Noah’s day came from.  “Kinds” are why all the animals were able to fit, comfortably, on  Noah’s Ark. 

The animals, and even the human beings of modern history (post-flood) have been closely interbreeding for thousands and thousands of years – mostly due to geographic isolation.  What went on the Ark – both animals and people – looked much different from what we see now. 

GENESIS 7:13-15

13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah’s wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;

14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.

15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.

You can have confidence that every Word of your Bible is true – despite the tenacious efforts of the wicked to prove otherwise.

Creation Week – Day 6 – Part 1

“The Cambrian Explosion occurred in a geological moment, and we have reason to think that all major anatomical designs may have made their evolutionary appearance at that time. …not only the phylum Chordata itself, but also all its major divisions, arose within the Cambrian Explosion. So much for chordate uniqueness… Contrary to Darwin’s expectation that new data would reveal gradualistic continuity with slow and steady expansion, all major discoveries of the past century have only heightened the massiveness and geological abruptness of this formative event…” (Gould, Stephen J., Nature, vol. 377, October 1995, p.682.) “

“And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.” Genesis 1: 24-25

The word kind is used five times in the above passage. It is translated from the Hebrew word miyn (pronounced meen) = to portion out; a sort; i.e. species. All fossils and life forms exhibit attributes that are fully functional. There is not one, not one, example of a transitional form anywhere – living – or in the fossil record.

The missing links are still missing. The current evolutionary theories include “gradualistic evolution,” “punctuated equilibrium,” and “panspermia.” The true believers of each of these beliefs have yet to provide any evidence.

When speaking of evolution – there are two viewpoints to consider. Macro-evolution requires the development of one kind or genus of animal, into another completely different kind. Case in point – the idea that reptiles evolved into birds. Scales into feathers, teeth into beaks, solid bones into hollow ones – and last but not least – front legs into wings!!

But the other view point – that of micro-evolution, is evidenced in every life form on earth today. Micro-evolution is the variation within specie, providing for distinct and separate qualities. This is natural selection – and it has never been documented to provide new genetic material. It demonstrates the loss of genetic material.

dogs

The most obvious example we can use here – is the astonishing variety of dog breeds, which have been artificially selected, as opposed to natural selection – but the same principle applies.

No other genus in the world has as much variation as the dog “kind.” Our loving Creator has used man’s best friend, to teach us a truth that can be so plainly seen by anyone.  A toy poodle will never turn into, or give birth to an African wild dog – yet they are both 100% dog kind.  The small poodle has had the ability to breed a wild dog – “selected out” of its gene pool.  The same goes for “Darwin’s finches.”  Variations in bill size and feather striation is due to micro evolution – they are all still 100% finch.   My husband has curly hair, mine is straight.  Two of our children have my hair, one has a combination – yet they are obviously our progeny.  Should the straight haired ones marry another straight haired person, their chance of producing a curly haired child would be 1 out of four.  If that same scenario plays out for 2-3 more generations, the gene for curly hair will be lost.  Natural selection does not produce new genetic material, but rather the loss of genetic material.

“All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.” 1 Corinthians 15: 39

sage