(March 18, 2018 at 7:46 am)Khemikal Wrote: Should've just taken the kinds survey, Hugs. In any case, if you posit that things evolve "after their own kind" then kind is not synonymous with species after all. For example, earlier, you mentioned cats. Let;s call that "cat-kind". All cats evolved after their own "cat-kind".
Well, you're talking felidae,..then. "Cat-kind" is a family, not a species. Now, I bet we'd have seen that, simply, when you answered "cat-kind" to tigers and housecats..right? Or "dog kind" to wolves and beagles. Or "ape-kind" to man and orangutans.
The bible clearly defines a 'kind' as that which is able to produce fertile offspring, every "seed" must bring forth after it's "kind".
Modern biological definition of species is the same, but they consider geography (these animals don't meet in the wild and therefore don't mate and produce offspring) and physical limitations (a tiger and houscat).
Now if you can artificially inseminate a house cat / Tiger and it produces fertile offspring then according to the biblical definition, they are of the same "species".
Dogs and wolves CAN produce fertile offspring, and therefore are the same "species" biblically.
