Many think Genesis says that God restricted plants and animals to reproducing within their designated “kinds.” This turns out to be false, as we will see.
This interpretation may have roots in a KJV mistranslation, which was written before evolution was proposed (e.g. of Gen 1:24). You can see many versions here https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Genesis%201:25
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.
Likewise in NASB,
God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good.
Likewise in NIV,
God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
But is made more explicit in, e.g. the VOICE translation,
God made earth-creatures in a vast variety of species: wild animals, domesticated animals of all sizes, and small creeping creatures, each able to reproduce its own kind. God saw that His new creation was beautiful and good. And God paused.
Note here that the “reproduce” statement is not in italics, which indicates the version author thinks this is in the original Hebrew.
A plain reading of the text infers that plants and animals were created to reproduce within the boundaries of their kind.
That makes it quite stunning to realize that there is no such statement in the hebrew.
The word for kind is “min”, and it is only used in a few places. Where it is used outside genesis, it is being used in a way like “many kinds of” or “all sorts of”. Nothing at all is said about reproduction. The word for reproduction does not appear in the text.
This article by a Seventh Day Adventist (a YEC) is really excellent. A YEC Hebrew Scholar explains that there is no statements about the limits of reproduction to Kinds in Genesis. The article is a really good read, especially because its source should be impeccable to YECs, and the textual analysis clearly demonstrates an error in translation.
What are your thoughts? This is a different case than typical, where it seems a mistranslation has lead to a horribly mistaken plain reading of the passage. A better translation would have been…
“The land gave forth animals of many kinds.”