• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Just for final clarification yes, we evolved from monkeys.

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,053
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
hmmmm on reptiles, I think that one actually is fair to say were not reptiles, could be wrong, but the one evolutionary tree I saw had humans splitting off from reptiles, before they became reptiles, as in they were still more amphibian end of the spectrum or such.

and yeah, I do think we still are monkeys it's like you said how you use labels, there is some push to dislike using the term monkey. I'm just saying if old world and new world monkeys are both monkeys so are we :> Least claditisticly speaking. Just as birds are still dinosaurs.
Not reptiles in any modern sense.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

truthpls

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2023
2,576
542
68
victoria
✟75,765.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
and I'm saying I don't thin thats right, it's wrong to treat children as already sinners, sin is something you do, not something you inherit.
That is not what the bible teaches. We should believe you...why?
 
Upvote 0

Dan2255

Active Member
Nov 1, 2023
73
30
73
Toledo
✟18,943.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You need to define "sin". If you mean the mythical Adam and Eve nature of "sin" then the answer is no. You do realize that that version of "sin" makes the God that made it extremely immoral, don't you? If your God is not immoral then the Adam and Eve story is a myth for you too.
Let me show you how the Father defines SIN. It is different than the sins of the flesh which is our nature to do while in this flesh. The leaders of Israel taught sin was many things. Such as doing work on the sabbath or not washing your hands before eating. But the father said he would reprove man. Reprove is to teach us what Sin was that keeps us from his righteousness. It is define as those who have not put their trust in Christ. Read the following scripture.
John 16 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. 8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9 Of sin, because they believe not on me; 10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; 11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
The Lord plainly tell us the definition of sin. Where people get confused is recognizing the difference of Sin and sins of the flesh. Once you Severn the difference then you will see.
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Site Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,070
16,821
Dallas
✟896,391.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
lol the thread title: "Just for final clarification" it would be amazing if adding that line to a thread meant it was actually true. Sadly truth works out to need more than just someone say "Just for final clarification"
There is a LOT more than just someone saying something. There are numerous lines of evidence, showing that humans are part of the Catarrhine branch of Simiformes.
 
Upvote 0

SeventhFisherofMen

You cannot fool Jesus
Site Supporter
Jan 9, 2013
3,441
1,717
33
CA
✟484,990.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Separated
Politics
US-Republican
There is a LOT more than just someone saying something. There are numerous lines of evidence, showing that humans are part of the Catarrhine branch of Simiformes.
sadly there is not one shred of evidence of in-between humans and monkeys, or in-between of any animal. Oh and adapting finches don't count lol that is just a beak length change to help with eating, not an entire species shift. Nice try tho.
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
14,711
7,265
30
Wales
✟407,356.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
sadly there is not one shred of evidence of in-between humans and monkeys, or in-between of any animal. Oh and adapting finches don't count lol that is just a beak length change to help with eating, not an entire species shift. Nice try tho.

Except that we have evidence of humans evolving from ealier hominids and even more basal ape-like creatures. It's been well studied and documented.

Or are you one of these people who want to find something like croco-duck, a half and half creature, and think that's a slam dunk against evolution.
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Site Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,070
16,821
Dallas
✟896,391.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
sadly there is not one shred of evidence of in-between humans and monkeys, or in-between of any animal.
That is an absolute falsehood. There's a great number of transitional fossils in Hominidae, but there's also numerous lines of genetic evidence like shared ERVs and shared pseudogenes. Every single Haplorrhine including humans, shares the same broken GULOp gene inherited from a common Haplorrhine ancestor.
Oh and adapting finches don't count lol that is just a beak length change to help with eating, not an entire species shift.
I didn't mention finches or beaks, so I don't know why you're bringing them up. The topic is human ancestry so let's try sticking to that.
Nice try tho.
You might be in over your head with me and I'm just a dumb layman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,053
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
sadly there is not one shred of evidence of in-between humans and monkeys, or in-between of any animal. Oh and adapting finches don't count lol that is just a beak length change to help with eating, not an entire species shift. Nice try tho.
Sadly your "not one shred" and reference to
Finches w or w.o. the "lol" are nothing but
very low info talking.
 
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,794
7,817
65
Massachusetts
✟385,944.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
sadly there is not one shred of evidence of in-between humans and monkeys, or in-between of any animal.
As others have pointed out, there's actually a great deal of evidence for the common ancestry of humans and other primates. Your post suggests either that you're unaware of that evidence or that you think there's a better explanation for it than common ancestry. Which is it?
 
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,053
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
As others have pointed out, there's actually a great deal of evidence for the common ancestry of humans and other primates. Your post suggests either that you're unaware of that evidence or that you think there's a better explanation for it than common ancestry. Which is it?
Keeping in mind that an explanation must
be fully consistent with all of the data.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,500
8,284
Dallas
✟1,060,595.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I see this all the time, it's become one of those knee jerk responses, but we did infact evolve from monkeys if evolution is true.

This may seem pedantic, but by definition the common ancestor between monkeys and humans was infact a monkey, we would call it a monkey if we saw it today, it would fit all the criteria for being a monkey. it wasn't a modern one, but it was still a monkey.

The split from monkeys happened after new world and old world monkeys split, so humans are descended from old world monkeys wich would make our ancestors monkeys.
That is completely contradictory to the scriptures.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,500
8,284
Dallas
✟1,060,595.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Are you saying the evidence for our evolution doesn't exist, or was it planted somehow, or what?
Evidence and proof are two completely different things. Just because some think we evolved from monkeys doesn’t make them right. The idea is still largely based on assumption.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,500
8,284
Dallas
✟1,060,595.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
There is a LOT more than just someone saying something. There are numerous lines of evidence, showing that humans are part of the Catarrhine branch of Simiformes.
No there are not, there is evidence that humans COULD POSSIBLY be descendants of apes. There is absolutely zero evidence showing that humans ACTUALLY ARE descendants of apes. There’s a big difference there.
 
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,794
7,817
65
Massachusetts
✟385,944.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Evidence and proof are two completely different things. Just because some think we evolved from monkeys doesn’t make them right. The idea is still largely based on assumption.
What assumption? I'll ask you, too: are you not aware of the evidence or do you think there's another explanation for it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,794
7,817
65
Massachusetts
✟385,944.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No there are not, there is evidence that humans COULD POSSIBLY be descendants of apes. There is absolutely zero evidence showing that humans ACTUALLY ARE descendants of apes. There’s a big difference there.
There are many pieces of evidence that only make sense if we actually are the descendants of apes, or at least no one to date has offered any alternative explanation that makes sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,500
8,284
Dallas
✟1,060,595.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
What assumption? I'll ask you, too: are you not aware of the evidence or do you think there's another explanation for it?
Are you familiar with the definition of the word “evidence”? Evidence isn’t proof of anything, evidence is merely information that can support a proposition or idea, but can also be false.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,500
8,284
Dallas
✟1,060,595.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
There are many pieces of evidence that only make sense if we actually are the descendants of apes, or at least no one to date has offered any alternative explanation that makes sense.
It’s doesn’t matter it’s contradictory to scripture therefore it cannot be true. The only thing science has proven is there are similarities, they can’t actually prove that we are descendants.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0