Did humans descend from Apes?

[essentialsaltes]

You define (classify) that human is an ape. Then human, no matter what, is an ape. Then you can not use it in the reasoning which argued that human is not evolved from ape. To you, it is a definition, but people do not accept that definition.

No No No. How do you know his classification was wrong? How is it obvious?

 

[juvenissun]

humans use a language and walk on 2 (some apes can walk on 2 but its not their regular walking and they do it for several seconds).

The list is LOOONG.
But it does not have to. Only one or two items is enough to shut down the idea that human is an ape.
For example, no one can explain a simple character that human wears clothes, but animals (apes) don't.

 

[juvenissun]

When the task is to categorize creatures according to their anatomy, that is exactly what one should do.

Human should not be classified by its anatomy. That is the whole point.
May be many other animals should not either. For example, dog.

 

[juvenissun]

No No No. How do you know his classification was wrong? How is it obvious?

He is a human. He knows clearly that he is different from all animals, including apes. He was confused (like anyone would be) by the similarity of all the skeletons.

 

[juvenissun]

Since humans are biologically capable of mating at any time, and since we decide where, when and with whom to mate based on considerations other than biology, it has become an almost universal feature of human behavior to cover the genitals when not ready to have sex.

Why didn't this happen in apes?

 

[Brightmoon]

Bonobos do mate like that They aren’t tied to their fertility cycle. Only humans use clothing as status. Being naked means you’re of low status and that causes shame. That’s the reason people act embarrassed when seen naked. And among some immature people nudity is seen as immoral

 

[essentialsaltes]

He was confused (like anyone would be) by the similarity of all the skeletons.

But Linnaean classification is based on "structural similarities of the different organisms"!

You have unwittingly testified that he classified them correctly. Thanks!

 

[Halbhh]

Beg Your pardon Jimmy, I was only telling my belief and that is I do believe God created humans in His image not monkeys that evolved into humans. If I would believe that Adam and Eve were apes then I could not see that they were in the image of God. If God himself tell me I am in error on this when I meet Him after this life on earth I think He is testing me at first but I would ask Him how and what He means. Like I would ask how long is a day if it is not 24 hours. If God created the world on was it 6 days and rested on the seventh. A lot of christians I know do not believe in evolution.

We can guess God did not tell us how much time passed in verse 1, before that first special day in the vision, because a mere time quantity, like 513 hours or 5,000 days, or 9 billion years -- this is beside the point! (if it were thought to be 5,002 years, and then you found it was 8,058 years, should you no longer believe?) But instead the scripture is about truly important things (not trivial things like mere quanity of time). The vast wonder and awe of God's creation!

I think more, there is a reason we are not told such things as what time durations may have passed between the days and such -- because once we found evidence of an age for Earth, if it merely proved the Bible, then there would no longer be a chance for faith.

Faith isn't to simply have proof. I haven't faith I have a car. It's merely observable, and even a hard hearted person could easily know I have a car, needing zero faith.

Instead faith is to believe before there is proof.

So, easy proof, like the scripture saying 'the Earth was 4 and 1/2 billion years old' would pre-empt the crucial need we have to have faith. Once the proof was seen for 4.5 bn years, then any person would simply know, without any faith needed.

Instead, the Bible tells us to believe, to have faith.

Faith isn't an optional thing, but instead it's the very central goal, the thing we are meant to have, and what much of all the Bible is telling us is central. Hebrews chapter 11 is so helpful on this.

 

[juvenissun]

But Linnaean classification is based on "structural similarities of the different organisms"!

You have unwittingly testified that he classified them correctly. Thanks!

I knew in my undergraduate years. It is used because there is no other better one. But it does not say it is a good one. We do not care about the opposition from animals, but it failed miserably on human.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I knew in my undergraduate years. It is used because there is no other better one. But it does not say it is a good one.

You agree it's the best we have; no one has a better one. And yet your original claim was that it was obviously wrong.

 

[juvenissun]

You agree it's the best we have; no one has a better one. And yet your original claim was that it was obviously wrong.

I said it is "obviously" wrong when applied to human.
I might be wrong to some other animals too, but we do not know. They do not complain. This also shows human is different.

 

[Speedwell]

Why didn't this happen in apes?

Because they haven't the ability we have, which is to be able to contain our appetites for abstract reasons. We can decide not to have sex, even when we want to. We can create categories of right and wrong, and discern the difference. Honestly, you ought to sit down and actually read that story, instead of just combing through it for proof-texts.

 

[juvenissun]

Because they haven't the ability we have, which is to be able to contain our appetites for abstract reasons.

That is it. Why don't they have it?

Don't forget, God makes human by the same material as He makes animals. Do you know what did God do to make human special? Evolutionists would NEVER understand this trick. That is why they are all lost.

 

[USincognito]

How do You know evolution is not also another false teaching, just as another ones false god?

Because we've actually looked at the evidence. Actual, tangible evidence. It is no mere "teaching" and it certainly isn't false.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I said it is "obviously" wrong when applied to human.

And now we're back to my original question...

How do you know his classification was wrong? How is it obvious?

 

[PsychoSarah]

The list is LOOONG.
But it does not have to. Only one or two items is enough to shut down the idea that human is an ape.
For example, no one can explain a simple character that human wears clothes, but animals (apes) don't.

-_- what are you talking about? Chimps have fashion. In fact, in one group, it was popular to wear a blade of grass in their ear.

But hey, if I lived in African rainforests and had fur, I don't think I'd have much motivation to cover up in clothes.

Our designation as an ape has to do with physical features, such as our lack of a tail. Behaviors aren't accounted for in taxonomy because they are widely variable. Unless you want to claim that nudists aren't human?

 

[Aman777]

Do you mean how did I come to believe in Christ Jesus as more than just an idea or tradition, but totally real, risen, for real? Several steps, but one of the key was that as Paul wrote "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ." -- actually listening to Christ's words! Actually, not just being in a church, etc. (just merely professing or saying one is Christian, merely being raised in a church -- that is not faith). For me I wanted to know why did He say "love your enemy"; I really wanted to understand that, the why, so that tug made me read more, and more carefully, and then as Paul wrote -- this very listening, actually trying to hear -- this is what allowed me start to have real faith (not merely a tradition or thinking one has faith, but actual faith, the kind of which even a mustard seed amount is very potent). There was more, but that was one of the key things. Also this! --

7“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.

9“Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone?10Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!12So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."

This is for real. There is no subsitute. A person not having done this, where are they? They would be merely in their own stuff perhaps. Only what He says is the way, not some other stuff.

There is no other way, but Him.

Alone.

Not creationism -- that's "sand" as He told us in Matthew chapter 7, so far as being the basis for faith. Those building on merely a version of creationism are on sand, and will be destroyed unless they do instead what He said in Matthew chapter 7, verses 21-27.

Amen. Now that i know you are what you say, I will show you something you've never seen before. The first 34 verses of Genesis tell the entire History of God's 7 Days of Creation, including events which are yet future to 2018. From Gen 2:4 to the end of Revelation, we find the DETAILS of God's 7 Days/Ages. Amen?

 

[juvenissun]

And now we're back to my original question...

How do you know his classification was wrong? How is it obvious?

Because he only saw the skeleton, but not the real life.
We are much much much better than animals.

 

[juvenissun]

Our designation as an ape has to do with physical features, such as our lack of a tail. Behaviors aren't accounted for in taxonomy because they are widely variable. Unless you want to claim that nudists aren't human?

Exactly, that demonstrates the taxonomy is unable to address the origin problem. Do not use taxonomy to argue that human is an ape.

 

[Aman777]

move IN the water - Swim. and not made from water

Sorry, but the narrative states "created" and brought forth from water.

Apes (at least in this part of Genesis) were made with land animals
Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so. 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; Gen 1: 24-25

Sorry, but I use the KJV because it is less altered. Here are the verses:

Gen 1:20 ¶ And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after Their kind, and every winged fowl after His kind: and God saw that it was good.

Your version eliminates God the Trinity (Their kind) and Jesus (His kind) making your verse of no understanding.

Of course in this part of Genesis humans both male and female were created together "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.…" Gen 1:27

That is not when Adam was formed from the dust of the ground before the plants herbs and rain on the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4-7 Instead, it's the rebirth of both Adam and Eve, when they were born again Spiritually in Christ on the 6th Day. This event took place AFTER Cain killed Abel. Gen 5:1-2