In light of the distinctions made in #Ge 1, such as the distinction between herbs and grasses which are, however, members of the same class (Angiosperms), it is possible that in some cases the biblical term mîn may indicate a broader group, such as an order. Some have argued that when God created mîn, he thereby fixed the “species.” This is a gratuitous assumption because a link between the word mîn with the biologist’s descriptive term species cannot be substantiated, and because there are as many definitions of species as there are biologists. The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament says of the word kind ( min in Hebrew), Currently, secular scientists have added several new categories in light of their ancestral “tree-based” taxonomy, but use the old system for convenience. The biblical kind would be closer to the family level in many instances, but sometimes genus or even species level for others. To be fair, Linnaeus intended his system to be used only as a means of identification via physical characteristics, and did not have some of the modern study tools we have today. This system was a good start, but Linnaeus failed to use the Bible as the absolute starting point for each classification. Swedish creationist Carl Linnaeus was the founder of the modern classification system in the 1700s. From a big picture, it boils down to a difference of how things are viewed:īut first, let’s jump back to a time when taxonomy (classifying living things) really developed. The field is very much in its infancy, and we strive to encourage the research. In modern creationists’ studies, there is a field called baraminology that works to find the boundaries of the created kinds.
In the Bible, God created all animals after their kinds. It is assumed, on the secular side, that life evolved from a single-celled organism, and this does not mesh with the biblical view. Part of the problem with the current secular classification system is the heavy influence of evolution and evolutionary relationships. You hit the nail on the head when it comes to taxonomy. Information is left out in most sites and books on these topics, and so these areas are made out to be “fuzzy” So my question is there a credible place I can go to get concrete info on this topic? For example the difference between dromeosaurs and birds, or where exactly ambulocetus should be placed, or where the line should be between therapsids and mammals. . . . but because of this evolutionary bias, it’s getting harder to decypher the facts versus their opinions. I know absolutely that every animal can easily be placed into a specific group of animals. I’ve been studying taxonomy lately, just as a hobby, and I am outraged at the amount of evolutionary bias that’s infiltrated this field! Birds classified as a subclass of reptiles, fossilized pig-like animals called ceteceans, fossilized reptiles called mammals based only on their teeth! It’s incredible! (literally - not credible)
0 kommentar(er)
