Are You an Animal?

[Lilandra]

Please provide your definition of an animal with your reply.

The poll is for lurker participation. If you have a different option please post it.

 

[variant]

Please provide your definition of an animal with your reply.

The poll is for lurker participation. If you have a different option please post it.

Yes.

–noun 1.any member of the kingdom Animalia, comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli: some classification schemes also include protozoa and certain other single-celled eukaryotes that have motility and animallike nutritional modes.

 

[JohnR7]

Please provide your definition of an animal with your reply.

I was under the impression that you thought all men were animals Evolutionists seem to think that we are all monkeys or apes or something like that.

From a Christian perspective: Yes, if your not born again, if your do not belong to God, then you are not any better then the animals. But if your born again and a new creation in Christ, then you have taken on a new divine nature and you are raised up above the animals.

2 Peter 2:12
But these, like natural brute beasts made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption,

 

[Lilandra]

I was under the impression that you thought all men were animals Evolutionists seem to think that we are all monkeys or apes or something like that.

If you are using the term "men" in general like "mankind". then yes I do think we are all animals.

From a Christian perspective: Yes, if your not born again, if your do not belong to God, then you are not any better then the animals. But if your born again and a new creation in Christ, then you have taken on a new divine nature and you are raised up above the animals.

2 Peter 2:12
But these, like natural brute beasts made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption,

if they could, animals might take exception to being thought of as more brutal than men.

 

[JohnR7]

if they could, animals might take exception to being thought of as more brutal than men.

I did not say they were more brutal, I said they were AS brutal.

Brutal is a interesting word: "alogos" is a negative particle of the word "Logos". Logos means "word" and it is used in referance to Jesus.

John 1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [2] The same was in the beginning with God. [3] All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. [4] In him was life; and the life was the light of men. [5] And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

 

[Lilandra]

I did not say they were more brutal, I said they were AS brutal.

Still, if they could animals would take exception to being thought of as "as" brutal as men.

So from your reply, all people were once animals except for the ones who chose to be Christians?

 

[Tomk80]

I selected all four yesses, as they all apply. And what Variant said.

 

[Hydra009]

I selected all four yesses, as they all apply.

I chose all of the first four except #2, because part of that statement is non-applicable in my case.

 

[JohnR7]

Still, if they could animals would take exception to being thought of as "as" brutal as men.

That is just a quote from Peter in the Bible. So I guess you will have to take it up with him.

So from your reply, all people were once animals except for the ones who chose to be Christians?

Something like that. To be more exact though, Peter is saying that those who do not convert will in the end be destroyed like the animals. Science does not disagree with that. They says that everyone will die, just like the animals and perish like the animals.

They of course do not know about the soul and the spirit. There is no scientific evidence for any sort of life after death. So science does not say anything about that one way or the other. The Bible says we can know the way to eternal life.

Proverbs 12:28
In the way of righteousness is life,
And in its pathway there is no death.

 

[Lilandra]

That is just a quote from Peter in the Bible. So I guess you will have to take it up with him.

correct me if I am wrong, but you endorse every word of the Bible as inerrant?

I am not talking to Peter, I am talking to you.

Something like that. To be more exact though, Peter is saying that those who do not convert will in the end be destroyed like the animals. Science does not disagree with that. They says that everyone will die, just like the animals and perish like the animals.

They of course do not know about the soul and the spirit. There is no scientific evidence for any sort of life after death. So science does not say anything about that one way or the other. The Bible says we can know the way to eternal life.

Proverbs 12:28
In the way of righteousness is life,
And in its pathway there is no death.

Okay then, why do you disagree with evolution? You say the Bible says we are all animals. (except for converts according to you)

 

[pantsman52]

Variant has it spot on.

 

[JohnR7]

correct me if I am wrong, but you endorse every word of the Bible as inerrant?

Yes, in the origional language the Bible is inerrant.
There are no errors, there are no erasers in Heaven.
God is diligent to watch over His word to perform it.

Isaiah 55:11
So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth;
It shall not return to Me void,
But it shall accomplish what I please,
And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

 

[Lilandra]

Yes, in the origional language the Bible is inerrant.
There are no errors, there are no erasers in Heaven.
God is diligent to watch over His word to perform it.

Are you able to read it, in all of its original languages?

 

[variant]

Variant has it spot on.

My dictionary gives a scientifically accurate definition of the word Animal.

 

[JohnR7]

Are you able to read it, in all of its original languages?

I use strongs dictionary and look up all the words in the origional langage. Then I look at all the different passages to see the context of how the word is used.

In the Hebrew there are maybe 5,000 words used. In the Greek I think there are about 20,000 words used.

 

[JohnR7]

My dictionary gives a scientifically accurate definition of the word Animal.

Does your dictionary give a scientificially accurate definition of the word "evolution"?

 

[variant]

Does your dictionary give a scientificially accurate definition of the word "evolution"?

Seems about right, I guess it could be better.

3.Biology. change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.

 

[Lilandra]

I use strongs dictionary and look up all the words in the origional langage. Then I look at all the different passages to see the context of how the word is used.

In the Hebrew there are maybe 5,000 words used. In the Greek I think there are about 20,000 words used.

Not being a native ancient Greek or Hebrew reader, how are you able to judge the context of a passage?

Not to mention how far removed you are by time and culture from these peoples.

Let's take a less pronounced difference, try reading Hamlet and see if you get all of the puns.

 

[USincognito]

The first "yes" seemed suffucient so I chose it.

 

[Tiphereth]

Greetings and Salutations,

I voted for options #1, #3, and #4. #2 is not applicable as I do not possess religious beliefs.

The definition Variant supplied is excellent:

–noun 1.any member of the kingdom Animalia, comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli: some classification schemes also include protozoa and certain other single-celled eukaryotes that have motility and animallike nutritional modes.