Species ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter twinc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

twinc

Guest
a species is a group of organisms that can interbreed and produce healthy offspring which can themselves interbreed.Wolves and dogs are okay but horses and donkeys are not - see www.bbc.co.uk/nature/species - twinc
 
And your point is…???

Just how does this relate to apologetics and scripture?
 
There are multiple definitions of the word.

thefreedictionary.com/species

Just as there is multiple defintions of the word light.

thefreedictionary.com/light

The word species is derived from the latin specere “to look at, to see, behold,”

IF you are referring to the Eucharist, what we see and behold is the bread and wine, but what it has become is the body and blood of our Lord. Hence the bread and wine are the species (What we see and behold) of the Eucharist.
 
twinc said:
a species is a group of organisms that can interbreed and produce healthy offspring which can themselves interbreed.Wolves and dogs are okay but horses and donkeys are not - see www.bbc.co.uk/nature/species - twinc
Click to expand...
Homo sapiens can’t successfully mate with any other species and have healthy offspring which can interbreed…at least not that I’m aware of.

Leviticus 18:23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.
 
Corki said:
What does this have to do with Sacred Scripture?
Click to expand...
Genesis.1[in scriptures]mentions each according to kind not species - so an attempt is being made to clarify kind and species etc - twinc
 
twinc said:
a species is a group of organisms that can interbreed and produce healthy offspring which can themselves interbreed.Wolves and dogs are okay but horses and donkeys are not - see www.bbc.co.uk/nature/species - twinc
Click to expand...
Different people define species in different ways. It used to be that a species was just what you said, a group of organisms that can breed and produce viable offspring. This definition doesn’t always work out. King Snakes and Milk Snakes can interbreed and produce viable offspring and they aren’t even in the same genera.

One thing to keep in mind, our taxonomic system was not “discovered” in nature but was laid over it. People decided what the important criteria were and divided up the natural world according to those artificial criteria. This includes our modern day scientists. A different group of people might have different criteria and divide up the living world differently. Their system would be no better or worse than ours.

For example, the Bible includes bats with the birds instead of the mammals. This is not an error in the Bible. In that time it was more of interest that bats had wings and flew than that they had hair and fed their young. We’ve decided the opposite is more important.

It’s like arguing which language is better. The best language is the one that meets the society’s needs the best is the best one.
 
John7 said:
Homo sapiens can’t successfully mate with any other species and have healthy offspring which can interbreed…at least not that I’m aware of.

Leviticus 18:23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.
Click to expand...
The differences between humans and animals are a lot more than just not being able to breed. We have immortal souls, animals do not.
 
twinc said:
Genesis.1[in scriptures]mentions each according to kind not species - so an attempt is being made to clarify kind and species etc - twinc
Click to expand...
Not surprising since the process of dividing living organisms into species came out of the 18th century. Still no connection to Sacred Scripture.
 
garysibio said:
Check this out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baraminology
Click to expand...
So in other words, the OP is saying that the classification system that uses “species” as one level of classification is not based in Scripture. I think we knew that. So this thread belongs in the Sacred Scripture forum because it discusses what is NOT in Sacred Scripture?

So, let’s talk about TVs, microwaves and airplanes too. They aren’t mentioned in Sacred Scripture either. 😉
 
Corki said:
So in other words, the OP is saying that the classification system that uses “species” as one level of classification is not based in Scripture. I think we knew that. So this thread belongs in the Sacred Scripture forum because it discusses what is NOT in Sacred Scripture?

So, let’s talk about TVs, microwaves and airplanes too. They aren’t mentioned in Sacred Scripture either. 😉
Click to expand...
Okay then is 1Cor.15:39 talking about species or kind or what !? - twinc
 
The reason that dogs and wolves can interbreed and produce fertile offspring is that they are in fact the same species, separated by only about 15,000 years of selective breeding. Genetics shows that they are so similar that dogs recently have been reclassified as Canis lupus familiaris, a subspecies of the gray wolf.

However, interbreeding/fertile offspring does not a species make. Coyotes and gray wolves are separated by about 2 million years of divergent evolution, but can produce fertile offspring (in fact, red wolves appear to have evolved from such an unlikely mating). However, the two species are behaviorally separated so that interbreeding will not normally occur and this keeps the two species on separate evolutionary paths.

Behavioral and geographic isolation can promote speciation with effects on the possibility of interbreeding coming later, after the populations have genetically diverged enough that this is no longer a possibility. For this reason, humans and chimps cannot interbreed and produce offspring (although they are obviously behaviorally separated enough that this would never happen), reflecting about 7-8 million years of divergent evolution.

I hope I explained this well! I’m a scientist so I know what I’m talking about 🙂
 
JValentinus said:
The reason that dogs and wolves can interbreed and produce fertile offspring is that they are in fact the same species, separated by only about 15,000 years of selective breeding. Genetics shows that they are so similar that dogs recently have been reclassified as Canis lupus familiaris, a subspecies of the gray wolf.

However, interbreeding/fertile offspring does not a species make. Coyotes and gray wolves are separated by about 2 million years of divergent evolution, but can produce fertile offspring (in fact, red wolves appear to have evolved from such an unlikely mating). However, the two species are behaviorally separated so that interbreeding will not normally occur and this keeps the two species on separate evolutionary paths.

Behavioral and geographic isolation can promote speciation with effects on the possibility of interbreeding coming later, after the populations have genetically diverged enough that this is no longer a possibility. For this reason, humans and chimps cannot interbreed and produce offspring (although they are obviously behaviorally separated enough that this would never happen), reflecting about 7-8 million years of divergent evolution.

I hope I explained this well! I’m a scientist so I know what I’m talking about 🙂
Click to expand...
exactly what have you explained - presumably all scientists know what they are talking about ! - twinc
 
I was explaining how some aspects of the OP’s definition needed clarification, because the OP was not entirely correct.

Also, this is an area of my expertise. It’s actually pretty fun stuff to study.
 
JValentinus said:
I was explaining how some aspects of the OP’s definition needed clarification, because the OP was not entirely correct.

Also, this is an area of my expertise. It’s actually pretty fun stuff to study.
Click to expand...
so is 1Cor.15:39 in your fun stuff study by someone who knows nothing at all abou the fun stuff you are studying - twinc
 
twinc said:
Okay then is 1Cor.15:39 talking about species or kind or what !? - twinc
Click to expand...
Well obviously, it wasn’t “species” since the use of that in categorization of organisms wasn’t used until the 19th Century - not just the word “species” but the whole concept of that kind of classification.

The passage in 1st Corinthians is speaking of kind. However, it is not “kind” in the taxonomic sense. Paul was not a biologist. He was speaking of the ontological identity of each of God’s creatures. This is a philosophical or theological construct, not a scientific one. He was speaking of the idea that God makes each organism what it is, unique but at the same time connected.
 
Corki said:
So in other words, the OP is saying that the classification system that uses “species” as one level of classification is not based in Scripture. I think we knew that. So this thread belongs in the Sacred Scripture forum because it discusses what is NOT in Sacred Scripture?

So, let’s talk about TVs, microwaves and airplanes too. They aren’t mentioned in Sacred Scripture either. 😉
Click to expand...
Huh?
 
Corki said:
Well obviously, it wasn’t “species” since the use of that in categorization of organisms wasn’t used until the 19th Century - not just the word “species” but the whole concept of that kind of classification.

The passage in 1st Corinthians is speaking of kind. However, it is not “kind” in the taxonomic sense. Paul was not a biologist. He was speaking of the ontological identity of each of God’s creatures. This is a philosophical or theological construct, not a scientific one. He was speaking of the idea that God makes each organism what it is, unique but at the same time connected.
Click to expand...
Paul’s info was checked out and verified by the great biologist who created biology and biologists - lest we forget - twinc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top