Talk:List of Animals in the Bible
 | This page was proposed for deletion by Moriwen (talk · contribs) on 29 September 2023. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Four kinds?
[edit]The text of Genesis cited is not clear. It is often said that the "kind" is a species. Some creationists say that there is something called a "kind" which is something like a taxonomic family. The Hebrew word is used in such a limited context that it is impossible to say what, if anything, it references. Myself, I don't recall anyone saying that there are four kinds as this article says, and I would really like to hear of anyone saying that - or any other suggestion for the use of the word in Biblical Hebrew. TomS TDotO (talk) 15:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Assessment comment
[edit]The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:List of Animals in the Bible/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
| Comment(s) | Press [show] to view → |
|---|---|
| site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animals_in_the_Bible
Incredibly biased. Biased claim 1: "The Bible names over 120 species of animals but, as it is not a book of science, does not offer any kind of biological classification." "does not offer any kid of biological classification"???? "Although no regular classification is to be sought for in the Bible, animal creation is there practically divided into four classes, according to the four different modes of locomotion." THUTH: Modern "scientists" have chosen meaningless characteristics such as hair versus feathers to classify animals. The bible classifies based on the defining characteristic of animals, their locomotion. The bible's classification is far more scientific than the one used by modern "scientists". The most scientific approach for classifying anything is to start with whatever defines that thing. For example, a musical instrument is defined by the fact that is makes musical notes, thus classification should be based on the sound made; type of sound made, or how the sound is made. This is the biblical approach to animals. Animals' defining characteristic is the fact that they are animate (move), thus the bible's classifation based on HOW they move is the most logical approach there is. Modern "scientists" choose to focus on things such as hair versus feathers, this is like classifying musical insruments first based on painted instruments versus non-painted, ignoring the defining charactertic of sound producing. It shows incredible bias to say that the bible "does not offer any kind of biological classification" then to go on about the biological classification found in the bible. This statement is an absolute which, in the article itself, is shown to be untrue. I can go into great detail about each of the following biased statements in the article, showing how they are not true: "The Bible ... is not a book of science, ", "The Bible ... does not offer any kind of biological classification. ", "Although no regular classification is to be sought for in the Bible", "This classification, more empiric than logical, " If you wish, I could write an article showing in great detail the scientific classification of animals found in the bible and explaining how it is the most "logical" way that one could possibly classify animals. Also, I could write a detailed article showing how the bible is also a book of science. I do hope you fix or remove this incredibly biased article from what is otherwise a very well done unbiased site. Please respond to: phinehas_priest_daniel@yahoo.com | |
Last edited at 10:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 07:51, 29 April 2016 (UTC)