Bible Questions: Genesis 1:24-25?

Question

24 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.

25 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.

What does it mean "after his kind?" Whose kind? God had some cows? And what is "the beast of the earth" that it's different then cows and creeping thing?

Answer 1

Cattle - cows, horses, sheep, goats, pigs, deer, etc.
Creeping things - insects, lizards, snakes, spiders, etc.
Beasts - lions, tigers, & bears "Oh, my"

After his kind means that cows reproduce cows, lions reproduce lions, etc. Each after it's own kind.

Answer 2

You need to use more than one translation! The KJV is very old! Try the American Standard. It is quite good. The NJB is good, the NW, many others.

Here is your quote from ACV -(A Conservative Version):

24And God said, Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kind, cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth according to their kind. And it was so.

25And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kind, and the cattle according to their kind, and everything that creeps upon the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

If you have any serious question, contact me.
Also the creation page here may be fun:
http://bythebible.page.tl/Creation.htm

Answer 3

Great question, I've never noticed that. Grammatically or linguistically speaking, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind" seems to imply that it's the earth's creatures. That is, the earth is being referred to in the masculine form--the earth is the subject in the sentence, and that is what "his" refers to. It's kind of interesting, because it almost seems to point to evolution. Great question, but I'm not sure what it means, exactly.

P.S. ferrets are fantastic! They are the best pets ever for responsible, loving people.

Answer 4

this is one of my favorite verses in support of creationism and against evolution.

After its own kind, means just that, God had the earth bring forth , lets say a dog, now
The rest of the dog family would be "its own kind"
lets say a cat was next, the rest that came forth would be the rest of the cat family.

Now these two different kinds do not interbreed with one another, because they are of different kinds.

Evolution cannot support, nor show how different kinds and why we cannot interbreed with each other. For evolution to be true, we would have to be able to interbreed with one another, not that we would want to, but we would be able to.

Thankfully, we cannot interbreed. God is very good!!

Answer 5

The "his" refers to "beast" (actually "beasts" in most versions. Evidently, back when the KJV was written, "beast" could be both plural and singular, just like "fish" is), not God.

It would appear that "kind" has no exact equivalent in current scientific terminology, although "species" would be close. The problem is that there are animals of different "species" that can and have interbred, such as dolphins and false killer whales, horses and donkeys, and lions and tigers.

Answer 6

I think it means - as I looked at a few different versions of this verse - that there were different kinds of the same animal (like species). The beasts of the earth are things like lions and tigers.

Answer 7

--Good question!
--USUALLY WHAT is meant in the Bible account is a certain range of animal kind that can only reproduce with its type of animal:
*** it-2 p. 152 Kind **
--The creation record found in the first chapter of Genesis reveals that Jehovah God created earth’s living things “according to their kinds.” (Ge 1:11, ftn) Toward the end of the sixth creative day the earth was supplied with a great variety of basic created “kinds,” which included very complex forms of life. These were endowed with the capacity for reproducing offspring “according to their kind(s)” in a fixed, orderly manner.—Ge 1:12, 21, 22, 24, 25; 1Co 14:33.
--The Biblical “kinds” seem to constitute divisions of life-forms wherein each division allows for cross-fertility within its limits. If so, then the boundary between “kinds” is to be drawn at the point where fertilization ceases to occur.
--In recent years, the term “species” has been applied in such a manner as to cause confusion when it is compared with the word “kind.” The basic meaning of “species” is “a sort; kind; variety.” In biologic terminology, however, it applies to any group of interfertile animals or plants mutually possessing one or more distinctive characteristics. Thus, there could be many such species or varieties within a single division of the Genesis “kinds.”
--Although the Bible creation record and the physical laws implanted in created things by Jehovah God allow for great diversity within the created “kinds,” there is no support for theories maintaining that new “kinds” have been formed since the creation period. The unchangeable rule that “kinds” cannot cross is a biologic principle that has never been successfully challenged. Even with the aid of modern laboratory techniques and manipulation, no new “kinds” have been formed. Besides, the crossing of created “kinds” would interfere with God’s purpose for a separation between family groups and would destroy the individuality of the various kinds of living creatures and things.
-Hence, because of the distinct discontinuity apparent between the created “kinds,” each basic group stands as an isolated unit apart from other “kinds.”......
****......"ALTHOUGH HYBRIDIZATION(my caps) was once hoped to be the best means of bringing about a new “kind,” in every investigated case of hybridization the mates were always easily identified as being of the same “kind,” such as in the crossing of the horse and the donkey, both of which are members of the horse family. Except in rare instances, the mule thus produced is sterile and unable to continue the variation in a natural way. EVEN CHARLES DARWIN was forced by the facts to admit: “The distinctness of specific forms and their not being blended together by innumerable transitional links, is a very obvious difficulty.” (Origin of Species, 1902, Part 2, p. 54) This still remains true.

--ON THE MATTER of Beast, it would seem what is referred to in the Genesis account would be the larger of the animals(lions, rhino, hippo, crocodile etc., not the ferociousisnous , for all the animals were at peace with one another an with Adam!
--Please note what all the animals ate:
(Genesis 1:29-30) “ 29 And God went on to say: “Here I have given to YOU all vegetation bearing seed which is on the surface of the whole earth and every tree on which there is the fruit of a tree bearing seed. To YOU let it serve as food. 30 And to every wild beast of the earth and to every flying creature of the heavens and to everything moving upon the earth in which there is life as a soul I have given all green vegetation for food.” And it came to be so.”
--THIS TRANSLATION might make it somewhat clearer:
(Genesis 1:24-26) .New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures . ."And God went on to say: “Let the earth put forth living souls according to their kinds, domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth according to its kind.” And it came to be so. 25 And God proceeded to make the wild beast of the earth according to its kind and the domestic animal according to its kind and every moving animal of the ground according to its kind. And God got to see that [it was] good. 26 . . .”

Answer 8

Genesis:1:24-27
And God said,"let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: live stock, creatures that that move along the ground, and wild animals, each acording to it's kind." I think you need to go back and read that again get it right this time!=)

Answer 9

Kind was defined as the generic animal group.

A dog "kind" could vary into a jackal, chihuahua, great Dane and a wolf, but it is still a dog kind.

Variation of a species is not evolution.

Answer 10

Since living creatures all have genetic code, I think we can assume god is the seed of life from which we evolved, and that's what it means. That or it's just archaic language who's meaning is lost to the eons.