What Evolutionists Deny

[Strivax]

You're being difficult. You can't confuse Hunan in with the other classes sir
And you know we aren't discussing the other classes

So, this how the ancients seemed to see it:

Rocks and stuff: mineral.
Plants and stuff: mineral+life.
Animals and things: mineral+life+consciousness = plant+consciousness.
Humans (most of them, anyway): = mineral+life+consciousness+self-awareness = plant+consciousness+self-awareness = animal+self-awareness.

Thus, humans are seen as part of a hierarchy, often referred to as the 'Great Chain of Being'. We are to be considered as at one end of a spectrum of existence, and not distinct or separate from it. Nevertheless, the differences in levels of being (ontological discontinuities, in the jargon) are critical. 'To call a man a naked ape', EF Schumacher* once observed, 'is as useful as calling a dog a running cabbage'.

Best wishes, Strivax.

*EF Schumacher, A Guide for the Perplexed, 1977, Harper & Row, New York.
A highly recommended, readable, faith sympathetic introduction to philosophy that matters.

 

[miknik5]

So, this how the ancients seemed to see it:

Rocks and stuff: mineral.
Plants and stuff: mineral+life.
Animals and things: mineral+life+consciousness = plant+consciousness.
Humans (most of them, anyway) = mineral+life+consciousness+self-awareness = plant+consciousness+ self-awareness = animal+self-awareness.

Thus, humans are part of a hierarchy, often referred to as the 'Great Chain of Being'. We are at one end of a continuum of existence, and not separate from it.

Best wishes, Strivax.

We aren't the others and they aren't us

Thst should be clear
You want to break down what you assume is within all the classes, that is an invisible opinion

You know (and according to Genesis) every other living thing did naturally what it was naturally created to do...the end product of what was in them


The lower created things that is

No false confusing conflicting misrepresentations of that design

Except for man

 

[miknik5]

So, this how the ancients seemed to see it:

Rocks and stuff: mineral.
Plants and stuff: mineral+life.
Animals and things: mineral+life+consciousness = plant+consciousness.
Humans (most of them, anyway): = mineral+life+consciousness+self-awareness = plant+consciousness+ self-awareness = animal+self-awareness.

Thus, humans are seen as part of a hierarchy, often referred to as the 'Great Chain of Being'. We are to be considered as at one end of a continuum of existence, and not distinct or separate from it.

Best wishes, Strivax.

Sorry. I thought you were the other poster

 

[AV1611VET]

Sounds about right, if by "deny" you mean "doesn't by into".

[grammar nazi] "doesn't buy into" [grammar nazi]

 

[AV1611VET]

So, AV, are we vegetables or minerals?

We are hu...

We are humans.

What miknik5 said.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, we're either animal, vegetable or mineral. Take your choice.

No, thanks.

Science is myopic.

We are human.

What is God? what are the angels?

 

[miknik5]

[grammar nazi] "doesn't buy into" [grammar nazi]

LOL
I know
I'm sure he knew the correct buy to use too

But I didn't want to correct it and offend

 

[AV1611VET]

LOL
I know
I'm sure he knew the correct buy to use too

But I didn't want to correct it and offend

I thought you did!

 

[miknik5]

We are hu...What miknik5 said.

Speedwell

I'm waiting for a response before we can discuss bullet 1

I was wondering what your faith is in since you understand that we (humans) have immortal souls

 

[miknik5]

I thought you did!

I didn't I left it "by into" when I responded to speedwell's post

 

[Speedwell]

Speedwell

I'm waiting for a response before we can discuss bullet 1

I was wondering what your faith is in since you understand that we (humans) have immortal souls

My faith is in Christ. I see no point in discussing bullet 1 as it will put an occasion of sin before you, the temptation to deny that faith.

 

[miknik5]

My faith is in Christ. I see no point in discussing bullet 1 as it will put an occasion of sin before you, the temptation to deny that faith.

NEVER!
In fact it will further strengthen it

What did you think I would say?

 

[miknik5]

Everything from GOD covering Adam and Eve and blocking THE WAY points to CHRIST

 

[miknik5]

Did you think I was an unbeliever in the TRUTH of GOD?

I didn't think you were so I questioned what your faith was in thinking you would say yourself or that the world is going just the way it was supposed to and those who are "better humans" are the ones who will survive

I didn't know that you believe THE TRUTH

Forgive me for testing your spirit and if you think discussing bullet 1 will cause you to question your faith than I will not discuss with you

But I can't see how that could be

 

[Speedwell]

NEVER!
In fact it will further strengthen it

What did you think I would say?

I meant that, as a creationist, you would be tempted to deny my faith. But in a way you are right--the hostility of creationists towards Christians like me who are not "Bible-believing" has indeed strengthened my faith.

 

[miknik5]

The whole pattern pointed us to CHRIST
Wven that we should have dominion and "subdue" all things

We had dominion yes and we pushed that dominion even on one another

But subdued all things?

No we didn't and we couldn't

Revelation is a testament to the truth that we couldn't and didn't

 

[miknik5]

I meant that, as a creationist, you would be tempted to deny my faith. But in a way you are right--the hostility of creationists towards Christians like me who are not "Bible-believing" has indeed strengthened my faith.

You don't believe the WORD of GOD

Please explain to me what is the difference between us

 

[Speedwell]

You don't believe the WORD of GOD

Please explain to me what is the difference between us

I believe the word of God, I just don't believe it is the literal, inerrant, perspicuous and self-interpreting product of plenary verbal inspiration.

 

[sfs]

[grammar nazi] "doesn't buy into" [grammar nazi]

[pedant]That was spelling, not grammar.[/pedant]

 

[Ophiolite]

'To call a man a naked ape', EF Schumacher* once observed, 'is as useful as calling a dog a running cabbage'.

Excellent observation. It brings to the fore the close connection between dogs, cabbages and other eukaryotes. Pertinent, powerful and pleasing. It's a shame Schumacher did not understand its potency.

As for me, I am proud to be an ape, a primate, a mammal, a vertebrate, a eukaryote and a living organism. I delight in the shared ancestry of the biosphere.