Plants

[DogmaHunter]

No , according to Bible you are dead alredy if you don't believe but you can bleed .

That sounds like a very evasive response.
You didn't actually ask the question.

Nore was I looking for some kind of poetic religious concept of "life".
You made a specific clear claim concerning how life should be defined. I'm asking you to confirm if what you seem to have said, is actually what you are saying.

For clarity, I'm refering to the "no blood = no life" statement.

 

[Chinchilla]

That sounds like a very evasive response.
You didn't actually ask the question.

Nore was I looking for some kind of poetic religious concept of "life".
You made a specific clear claim concerning how life should be defined. I'm asking you to confirm if what you seem to have said, is actually what you are saying.

For clarity, I'm refering to the "no blood = no life" statement.

Depends how you define life , I define it the way it's defined for us in Scriptures that the life of creature is in the Blood that's why we should not eat the blood but take it out of the flesh .

 

[DogmaHunter]

Depends how you define life , I define it the way it's defined for us in Scriptures that the life of creature is in the Blood that's why we should not eat the blood but take it out of the flesh .

Ok. So things that don't bleed, aren't alive?

 

[Chinchilla]

Ok. So things that don't bleed, aren't alive?

My cat does not bleed and is alive .

Leviticus 17:11 King James Version (KJV)
11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

Genesis 9:4-6 King James Version (KJV)
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.

6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

 

[46AND2]

My experience is different. I have seen the other side manipulate information, keep known falsehoods in textbooks and even those in charge of certain things and part of certain organizations admit that lies in the textbooks are needed. They kept/keep stuff like Haeckel's embryo pictures knowing they are false. They staged photos of the peppered moths as one of their pillars, knowing it was false. They lie about what Creationists believe and trick people like you. They lie about stuff like Piltdown Man with eloquently drawn pictures when they only find things like a tooth or a small bone, etc. etc. Edited to add: These four examples are a very small list.

If these are only 4 of a very long list, why is it these 4 that I hear repeated over and over and over again for decades? In case you aren't familiar with the acronym that Brightmoon used, PRATT, it stands for Points Refuted A Thousand Times.

If scientists still make the same "mistake" as Piltdown Man as you claim, why is Piltdown always the goto example with creationists; something that happened nearly a century ago, and has already been admitted to being a mistake since 2 years after it occurred? Where are the recent examples of scientists describing a whole new species with only one tooth as the lone fossil from that species?

On the contrary, with virtually every piece of current apologist literature, dishonesty and/or the use of PRATTs can be shown. Even arguments that other creationist sources admit shouldn't be used, can be found in many pieces of creationist propaganda.

Don't believe me? Try it. Name a recent book by a creationist which argues against evolution, I'll buy it, or otherwise obtain a copy of it, and show you.

 

[46AND2]

My cat does not bleed and is alive .

 

[DogmaHunter]

My cat does not bleed and is alive .

It is insane how you keep evading giving a straight answer.
So, cats don't have blood now?

You're a joke, sorry.

 

[Chinchilla]

It is insane how you keep evading giving a straight answer.
So, cats don't have blood now?

You're a joke, sorry.

Having blood and bleeding are two different things , maybe I was too precise for you
Still , insulting is not funny nor is it mature

 

[DogmaHunter]

Having blood and bleeding are two different things , maybe I was too precise for you
Still , insulting is not funny nor is it mature

Let me remind you of your comment that I originally asked about and which you still haven't answered after 4-5 evasive responses:

Plants don't have blood , that's why for example when Cain gave fruit of his work ( plants ) for offering it was rejected by God . Plants have no blood = no life .

I asked you, 4 times now, if you are actually saying that only things that have BLOOD can be considered living.

It's a simple yes/no question.

Go back over the posts since my first question and look how you addressed this simple yes/no question with nothing but vagueness and dodging.

And then you wonder why I call you a joke.....

So, I'll repeat once more, for like the 5th time or so:
​

Are you saying that only things that have BLOOD can be considered alive? Yes or No?​

 

[Chinchilla]

Let me remind you of your comment that I originally asked about and which you still haven't answered after 4-5 evasive responses:

I asked you, 4 times now, if you are actually saying that only things that have BLOOD can be considered living.

It's a simple yes/no question.

Go back over the posts since my first question and look how you addressed this simple yes/no question with nothing but vagueness and dodging.

And then you wonder why I call you a joke.....

So, I'll repeat once more, for like the 5th time or so:

Are you saying that only things that have BLOOD can be considered alive? Yes or No?​

Physicall things which have no blood aren't alive according to Scriptures .

Cutting plant in half would not be considered murder likewise eating a fruit from a tree . Killing an animal is not murder aswell but the animal is considered to be alive being , while murdering a Man would be considered as sin and the man itself is living being .

 

[Brightmoon]

Plants react to being damaged by sending pheromones to alert other plants to start producing toxic chemicals to prevent them being eaten . Some also call for insect predators to eat the eater. The Bible is simply wrong about plants not being alive and about them being passive to damage. I do not get my information about natural phenomena from the Bible, I get it from the natural phenomenon im investigating at the time

 

[AV1611VET]

The Bible is simply wrong about plants not being alive ...

John 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

 

[Brightmoon]

But wheat seeds DONT die. If you take that literally then your understanding of natural phenomena is WRONG.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Physicall things which have no blood aren't alive according to Scriptures .

So, is that a "yes - things that don't have blood aren't alive"?

Enough with the vagueness and the indirect "answers".

Cutting plant in half would not be considered murder likewise eating a fruit from a tree . Killing an animal is not murder aswell but the animal is considered to be alive being , while murdering a Man would be considered as sin and the man itself is living being .

None of this is answering the question.

I repeat: Are you saying that things that don't have blood, aren't "alive"????? Yes or No?

(6th time I ask the yes/no question..... still haven't gotten a yes or no........)

 

[Chinchilla]

So, is that a "yes - things that don't have blood aren't alive"?

Enough with the vagueness and the indirect "answers".



None of this is answering the question.

I repeat: Are you saying that things that don't have blood, aren't "alive"????? Yes or No?

(6th time I ask the yes/no question..... still haven't gotten a yes or no........)

I answered , I cannot answer more directly because you do not believe in supernatural world or spirituall world . There are alive beings , not physicall without blood . I even gave you three examples . Take it or leave it .

 

[AV1611VET]

But wheat seeds DONT die.

Bible says otherwise.

 

[Chinchilla]

Bible says otherwise.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I answered , I cannot answer more directly because you do not believe in supernatural world or spirituall world . There are alive beings , not physicall without blood . I even gave you three examples . Take it or leave it .

You are incapable of typing the word "yes" or the word "no", in response to a yes/no question, because .... I am not a theist?

This is getting more bizarre with every post.

Ok, I'll go ahead and assume that your extremely elaborate game of vagueness during 6 or 7 posts can be summarized as "yes - that is what I'm saying. things that don't have blood, aren't alive". If I'm wrong by assuming that as your answer, just say so. But actually just say so - I don't need another 7 posts of vague dodging.

In any case, assuming "yes" as your answer....

So you are saying that insects aren't alive?
And also jellyfish, flatworms, etc.... These animals aren't alive?

After all, neither of them have any blood.

Please confirm.

 

[Chinchilla]

You are incapable of typing the word "yes" or the word "no", in response to a yes/no question, because .... I am not a theist?

This is getting more bizarre with every post.

Ok, I'll go ahead and assume that your extremely elaborate game of vagueness during 6 or 7 posts can be summarized as "yes - that is what I'm saying. things that don't have blood, aren't alive". If I'm wrong by assuming that as your answer, just say so. But actually just say so - I don't need another 7 posts of vague dodging.

In any case, assuming "yes" as your answer....

So you are saying that insects aren't alive?
And also jellyfish, flatworms, etc.... These animals aren't alive?

After all, neither of them have any blood.

Please confirm.

I all know is the oryginal creation was different from what is now . You have strange things like viruses which seem to be alive but they are not according to science.
I don't know that's why I made a thread once asking such question but nobody knows what were the animals prior to fall of men. We are told in Scriptures Lion ate straw but we are not told what prayer mantis did prior to the fall , currently it's eating her husband's face alive after mating .

Let me know if you figure this out . Dunno , for me viruses seem like living beings if not what are they ?

 

[A_Thinker]

Physicall things which have no blood aren't alive according to Scriptures .

Cutting plant in half would not be considered murder likewise eating a fruit from a tree . Killing an animal is not murder aswell but the animal is considered to be alive being , while murdering a Man would be considered as sin and the man itself is living being .

Actually, scripture says that the life of the FLESH is in the blood ...

Leviticus 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

Paul discusses different types of FLESH in 1 Corinthians 15

39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds ...

ALL of these have BLOOD ...

Plants are not FLESH, therefore have no BLOOD, yet are alive ...