Status
Not open for further replies.

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
8,521
9,489
✟236,303.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Thank you, my love. But we can be 100 sure, that there was a time, when there was no Spanish. Thus, the start of Spanish has certain borders in time.
So, contrary your claim, your brain is not perfect since you are unable to understand:
1) The nature of a continuum.
2) The artificial nature of a classification system applied to a continuum.

When your understanding has come up to par I shall be happy to continue the discussion. In the meantime if you simply intend to keep making your assertion based upon inadequate understanding and are unwilling to recognise that lack of understanding then I have no interest in wasting my time further.
 
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,200
3,821
45
✟917,256.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
Tell me about the very first human. Suppose, his name was also Adam. Was this human a monkey?
There wouldn't be a sharp line between the earliest humans and the population they came from. The separate group who would be the ancestors would seem pretty much like other Homo erectus,but if you found more of their descendants you'd see more and more human like traits until it was unambiguously human.

But, based on evidence in the physical world, there is no reason to believe that a singular first human ever existed.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Does that "law" preclude cats from being felines, carnivorans and mammals?
Does that "law" preclude deer from being even toed ungulates, mammals and cordates?
Does that "law" preclude squid from being cephalopods, mollusks, and bilaterians?
One thing you are missing on this (and your post #4) is that Genesis lists human creation as being entirely separate from that of the other animals and plants.

"the Lord God formed man (Heb: adam) of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." Gen 2.7

Either you believe that or you don't.
 
Upvote 0

joinfree

Well-Known Member
Nov 3, 2016
1,009
191
87
EU
✟36,708.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There wouldn't be a sharp line between the earliest humans and the population they came from. The separate group who would be the ancestors would seem pretty much like other Homo erectus,but if you found more of their descendants you'd see more and more human like traits until it was unambiguously human.

But, based on evidence in the physical world, there is no reason to believe that a singular first human ever existed.
My love, but look at the title of the thread. The answer in Darwinism is: "No, Y-Adam was not a monkey." Why? Because semi-human is not an ape and not a human.
 
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
8,521
9,489
✟236,303.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Wait! Somebody, hold my love! I have something to add!
Then speaking about Darwinism: humans are not animals, and animals are not humans. Do you agree?
I disagree. Humans are demonstrably animals and some animals are humans. I am an ape and feel more in common with some chimpanzees and orangs than I do with some humans.

And let's not speak about Darwinism. Darwinism has long been supplanted by the Modern Synthesis and derivatives thereof. You seem unaware of how foolish you appear by publicly displaying your ignorance of these matters as if you were proud of it. You do your religion a great disservice by such an approach.

Finally, please desist with the "Theists love atheists" approach. It is a passive-aggressive style that is most distasteful.
 
Upvote 0

joinfree

Well-Known Member
Nov 3, 2016
1,009
191
87
EU
✟36,708.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Finally, please desist with the "Theists love atheists" approach. It is a passive-aggressive style that is most distasteful.
My love, do you prefer the hell-therapy? Must I say "you will be burn in hell, if you will not repent"??? In these times the Church says: "Jesus loves you!"
 
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,200
3,821
45
✟917,256.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
My love, but look at the title of the thread. The answer in Darwinism is: "No, Y-Adam was not a monkey." Why? Because semi-human is not an ape and not a human.
No, Y-Adam was a man who's existence we can infer from evidence. He was as human as you and me.

While he wasn't anything we would call a monkey, he was a Simiiform, like all humans.
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,058
16,810
Dallas
✟870,741.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
One thing you are missing on this (and your post #4) is that Genesis lists human creation as being entirely separate from that of the other animals and plants.

"the Lord God formed man (Heb: adam) of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." Gen 2.7

Either you believe that or you don't.

I'm not missing that because I'm taking the evidence into account, not a literalist interpretation of Genesis. The evidence for all the things I listed is exactly the same as humans being hominids, being simians, being primates, being euarchontoglires, being mammals, being chorates, being bilaterians and yes, being animals.
 
Upvote 0

joinfree

Well-Known Member
Nov 3, 2016
1,009
191
87
EU
✟36,708.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
No, Y-Adam was a man who's existence we can infer from evidence. He was as human as you and me.

While he wasn't anything we would call a monkey, he was a Simiiform, like all humans.
No! Semi-human is not human! Why? Because of Aristotle logic.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm not missing that because I'm taking the evidence into account, not a literalist interpretation of Genesis. The evidence for all the things I listed is exactly the same as humans being hominids, being simians, being primates, being euarchontoglires, being mammals, being chorates, being bilaterians and yes, being animals.
Does that preclude a designer/builder following a very similar design on an entirely different creative act?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: joinfree
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
8,521
9,489
✟236,303.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
My love, do you prefer the hell-therapy? Must I say "you will be burn in hell, if you will not repent"??? In these times the Church says: "Jesus loves you!"
I would prefer, in a sub-forum that is dedicated to the discussion of creation and evolution, that you focus on scientific evidence or theological arguments, rather than indulge in trite phraseology seemingly lacking in sincerity and apparently designed to annoy.

Reviewing your last few posts. You appear to be the one who is trolling. Post something of substance or relevance or just stop. Your choice and an opportunity to show your true colours.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No! Semi-human is not human! Why? Because of Aristotle logic.
Aristotle's logic is pagan in origin.
He worshiped the Greek pantheon.
 
Upvote 0

joinfree

Well-Known Member
Nov 3, 2016
1,009
191
87
EU
✟36,708.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I would prefer, in a sub-forum that is dedicated to the discussion of creation and evolution, that you focus on scientific evidence or theological arguments, rather than indulge in trite phraseology seemingly lacking in sincerity and apparently designed to annoy.

Reviewing your last few posts. You appear to be the one who is trolling. Post something of substance or relevance or just stop. Your choice and an opportunity to show your true colours.
I am a sincere! I am not a liar! My God of Love demands the Love! I love all!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

devin553344

I believe in the Resurrection
Nov 10, 2015
3,607
2,249
Unkown
✟93,810.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Darwin and the Bible. If there were no people before the very first person in history, then Darwinism is not right in front of the Church. And if Adam's dad was a monkey, then Adam must be a monkey. And he is the first person. We have come to a contradiction, therefore Darwin is not right.


OK now I'm not saying Darwin is correct or incorrect. But logically if you're saying that Darwin is incorrect then you will have to explain why they found ape-like humans all over the place. Is it some species of ape that went extinct? It could be fun to conjecture the idea.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TagliatelliMonster

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2016
4,292
3,373
44
Brugge
✟66,672.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Why? Doesn't spanish has distinctive roots?

No latin speaking mother has ever raised a spanish speaking child.
No human was ever raised speaking a new and different language then those who raised him/her. There never was a "first" spanish speaking person.

Spanish developed over time, gradually, over generations.
Latin slowly and gradually evolved into spanish, in much the same way as speciation happens in nature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USincognito
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.