Theory of Evolution

[Job]

Yes, humans evolved from an ancestor we hold in common with the other great apes.

How do you know that?

 

[Dcopymope]

How do you know that?

Isn't it obvious? He is in effect saying that the likeness of God is that of a primate. When we see God sitting on his throne, he will look dark and hairy with big fat lips.............yep............

 

[101G]

If you don't accept the pshat reading, nor the tense of the verbs, is there anything I can say?

va-yitzer : he had formed

no, but your choice......:cool:

 

[bbyrd009]

If dogs came from wolves, why do wolves not bark?

And yapping is not barking.

i was gonna say they did up til about a year old; and i guess plenty of Doctorates of Wolfology have already answered why. Seems legit; a bark is just giving yourself away, basically. i guess strictly speaking they share an ancestor, and it isn't exactly correct to say dogs descended from wolves anyway

 

[bbyrd009]

Crossbreeding is not evolution.

so you say, but you do not know.

 

[bbyrd009]

"Do you believe man has evovled from primates?"

No, because I don't recall the word saying God made man in the image of any poop slinging animal, but in the image of God. Unless you want to conclude that Gods likeness is like that of an ape, then that's going to be between you and God.

lol. personally i would avoid concluding anything not proven, myself. As to the image of God, a circle with a dot in the middle might be perfectly acceptable; they're certainly ubiquitous

 

[bbyrd009]

Isn't it obvious? He is in effect saying that the likeness of God is that of a primate. When we see God sitting on his throne, he will look dark and hairy with big fat lips.............yep............

a have no proof here ok, but you might be seeking a more literal understanding than a mythology can provide. And i know that considering Genesis "mythology" is prolly anathema for you right now...so, ya.
I understand 'God sitting on His throne' in a different light; imo you should be able to "see" God sitting on His throne right now, a la Job.

 

[Dcopymope]

lol. personally i would avoid concluding anything not proven, myself. As to the image of God, a circle with a dot in the middle might be perfectly acceptable; they're certainly ubiquitous

Ezekiel stating that God had "the appearence of a man" is all the proof anyone claiming to be a believer should need. He didn't say he had the appearence of an primate, or of a circle with a dot in the middle. My faith isn't built on stupid metaphors. When it says we were made after the likeness of God, it means exactly what it says.

 

[bbyrd009]

Ezekiel stating that God had "the appearence of a man" is all the proof anyone claiming to be a believer should need. He didn't say he had the appearence of an primate, or of a circle with a dot in the middle. My faith isn't built on stupid metaphors. When it says we were made after the likeness of God, it means exactly what it says.

yes, i doubt God could just take any form He wants, huh. prolly you're right i guess

i mean c'mon, you gonna be looking for a lamb with seven eyes and horns, too?
where does the literalness end? See that it ends arbitrarily, ok. nothing wrong with that, but just see what it is saying to you, the statement that makes.

but at least you have freed me to now agree that you will see Him come down in the same way you saw Him go up! Ha!

 

[Dcopymope]

yes, i doubt God could just take any form He wants, huh. prolly you're right i guess

i mean c'mon, you gonna be looking for a lamb with seven eyes and horns, too?
where does the literalness end? See that it ends arbitrarily, ok. nothing wrong with that, but just see what it is saying to you, the statement that makes.

but at least you have freed me to now agree that you will see Him come down in the same way you saw Him go up! Ha!

We don't need to guess when something is meant to be taken literally and when its not. Even with with the seven eyes and horns, we are told both in the old and new testament that they are symbolic of his dominion and power, his omnipresence. Yet when it comes to Ezekiel's vision of the throne and the angels surrounding it, no further explanation is given of any of it being symbolic in any way. This is how you can know when a verse is meant to be literal or symbolic, because it will always tell you, its never left in ambiguity.

 

[bbyrd009]

We don't need to guess when something is meant to be taken literally and when its not

ha i suggest that that is all we can do

Yet when it comes to Ezekiel's vision of the throne and the angels surrounding it, no further explanation is given of any of it being symbolic in any way. This is how you can know when a verse is meant to be literal or symbolic, because it will always tell you, its never left in ambiguity.

ya, sounds good anyway. "Hidden from the wise" might need a hearing here i guess tho

 

[Job]

i was gonna say they did up til about a year old; and i guess plenty of Doctorates of Wolfology have already answered why. Seems legit; a bark is just giving yourself away, basically. i guess strictly speaking they share an ancestor, and it isn't exactly correct to say dogs descended from wolves anyway

And what would that ancestor be?

 

[Job]

so you say, but you do not know.

I don't say it, the evolutionist does.

And I do know...

 

[bbyrd009]

And what would that ancestor be?

well, that is still being resolved, proto-wolf or ancient wolf,
Ancient Wolf DNA Could Solve Dog Origin Mystery
but a point there is that knowledge has advanced to the point where we can now say that
"dogs descended from wolves as we know them" is not really correct now.

 

[bbyrd009]

I don't say it, the evolutionist does.

And I do know...

and you are both entitled to your opinions, sure.

 

[Job]

and you are both entitled to your opinions, sure.

I would think scientists would have more of a handle on this than you or I, but what do I know..............right?

 

[Job]

well, that is still being resolved, proto-wolf or ancient wolf,
Ancient Wolf DNA Could Solve Dog Origin Mystery
but a point there is that knowledge has advanced to the point where we can now say that
"dogs descended from wolves as we know them" is not really correct now.

If it's a mystery than it can't really be said they share an ancestor....because nobody knows.

 

[bbyrd009]

I would think scientists would have more of a handle on this than you or I, but what do I know..............right?

well, you espoused one theory held by evolutionists, but i guess as many believe that hybridization is evolution, too, as believe it is not? We enjoy the enviable position of not needing to postulate a hypothesis, i guess, lol--and i for one plan to take full advantage of that, myself :)

 

[bbyrd009]

If it's a mystery than it can't really be said they share an ancestor....because nobody knows.

ha well some ppl still dispute that the earth revolves around the sun, too. i have no proof

 

[kiwimac]

How do you know that?

The fact that we share more than 95% of DNA with Bonobos helps.