|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,488 Year: 3,745/9,624 Month: 616/974 Week: 229/276 Day: 5/64 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: When did Homo Sapiens become 'in the image of God' ? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4910 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
Huh... I've never thought about this. Blue and RADZ do have a point. If any evolutionist Christian says that humans are spiritually different than animals, then where, along the chain of evolution did we get that relationship with God? Of course, they could just say that all organisms have it and it showed up in Man through evolution... but then why not treat all animals (and protists!!!!) as equals? Oh yes, the whole "dominion" thing..........
Or, maybe, it's a mutation!!! No-wait-not testable. (mutter, mutter) I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in- Dan Foutes "In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4663 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
Of course, this was a question intended for theistic evolutionists.
From an atheist point of view, the answer is easy: Humans are not any different then any other animal. I think everyone agrees that this is the correct answer from an atheist. (Thus why I said it maybe won't interest atheist, since they don't have the dilemna theistic evolutionist have)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Meddle Member (Idle past 1293 days) Posts: 179 From: Scotland Joined: |
Of course, this was a question intended for theistic evolutionists. Why is the whole 'image of god' thing just a problem for theistic evolutionists? As I understand it, the bible makes the creation of man out to be a unique event separate from the rest of the animals. Yet that being the case, why are apes so much like us both physically and especially genetically? Those who argue against the evidence for evolution suggest genetic similarities result from god creating closely related species from 'the same mould', so why use a primate 'mould' to create humans? As for those in this thread suggesting that the 'image of god' is not describing a physical appearance but is instead relating to some aspects of our nature, what exactly is about our nature that is 'godlike', since in other threads (such as the thread 'Many Christians Lack Responsibility') these same people insinuate that our nature is naturally fallen/sinful? Anyway, if a 'god' does exist, I always tend to think of it along the lines of the monoliths in 2001
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4663 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
Are you suggesting that the Genesis account indicates that God created man as totally different from the rest of creation ? I don't have this impression when reading it, although it mark a difference between humans and the animals. But it isn't that much of a separate event from the rest of the animals, making man on the 6th day with the rest of the mammals etc.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2720 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Malcolm.
Malcolm writes: As for those in this thread suggesting that the 'image of god' is not describing a physical appearance but is instead relating to some aspects of our nature, what exactly is about our nature that is 'godlike', since in other threads (such as the thread 'Many Christians Lack Responsibility') these same people insinuate that our nature is naturally fallen/sinful? Brilliant question! Most would probably consider the "fallen/sinful" state to be a corruption of our original "good" nature. In short, we maintain some of God's qualities (intelligence, knowledge of good and evil, etc.), but not all of them. This is not necessarily my personal opinion, though. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4910 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
Most would probably consider the "fallen/sinful" state to be a corruption of our original "good" nature. In short, we maintain some of God's qualities (intelligence, knowledge of good and evil, etc.), but not all of them. How are you looking at this question? Is it from a creationist point of view or evolutionist? Because this topic is mainly useless in the eyes of IDers, it is (I'm guessing) mainly directed at theistic evolutionists. Also, are you talking about fallen/sinful "animals" here? I'm not sure I understand your response......... I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in- Dan Foutes "In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 3.8 |
Hi Malcolm,
Anyway, if a 'god' does exist, I always tend to think of it along the lines of the monoliths in 2001 Aaaah, you're a Scientologist! Mutate and Survive "The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4910 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
Aaaah, you're a Scientologist! No, just one of those excommunicated sects. (They prefer to imagine God as Darth Vader)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Meddle Member (Idle past 1293 days) Posts: 179 From: Scotland Joined: |
Noooo! This is more along the lines of wild musings of a lazy agnostic
Anyway isn't scientology the one with all those folk coming to earth, lining up at volcanoes, and getting blown up by nuclear bombs by Ming the Merciless, or whoever? Yes the scifi references just keep on coming
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4910 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
Anyway isn't scientology the one with all those folk coming to earth, lining up at volcanoes, and getting blown up by nuclear bombs by Ming the Merciless, or whoever? Yes the scifi references just keep on coming Actually, I think it's the Galactic Lord Xenu. LOL.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2720 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Teapots&Unicorns.
T&U writes: Blue and RADZ do have a point. Who's "Blue"? There are three members named "Blue____" active on this website (and I think a couple more inactive members), two of whom have posted on this thread. I tried changing my name a couple of times because of this (my aliases are listed in my signature), but I am too attached to the name "Bluejay" to abandon it, so I keep coming back to it. Edited by Bluejay, : fixed subtitle -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4910 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
Sorry Bluejay. I meant you and bluecat.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in- Dan Foutes "In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 307 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
From an atheist point of view, the answer is easy: Humans are not any different then any other animal. I think everyone agrees that this is the correct answer from an atheist. No, I think you'll find that atheists can tell the difference ...
(Thus why I said it maybe won't interest atheist, since they don't have the dilemna theistic evolutionist have) I don't see that they have more of a dilemma than you do: as I have pointed out, the intermediate forms exist whether or not you admit that they are evidence of descent. And why can't they get out of it the same way you did, by saying: "I also think his whole creation is somewhat also 'in God's image'"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
greentwiga Member (Idle past 3449 days) Posts: 213 From: Santa Joined: |
I found this in Wikipedia:
Until about 50,000—40,000 years ago the use of stone tools seems to have progressed stepwise. Each phase (H. habilis, H. ergaster, H. neanderthalensis) started at a higher level than the previous one, but once that phase started further development was slow. These Homo species were culturally conservative, but after 50,000 BP modern human culture started to change at a much greater speed. Jared Diamond, author of The Third Chimpanzee, and other anthropologists characterize this as a "Great Leap Forward." Modern humans started burying their dead, making clothing out of hides, developing sophisticated hunting techniques (such as using trapping pits or driving animals off cliffs), and engaging in cave painting.[39] As human culture advanced, different populations of humans introduced novelty to existing technologies: artifacts such as fish hooks, buttons and bone needles show signs of variation among different populations of humans, something that had not been seen in human cultures prior to 50,000 BP. Typically, H. neanderthalensis populations do not vary in their technologies. Modern human behavior includes four apects: abstract thinking (concepts free from specific examples), planning (taking steps to achieve a further goal), innovation (finding new solutions), and symbolic behaviour (such as images and rituals). Among concrete examples of modern human behavior, anthropologists include specialization of tools, use of jewellery and images (such as cave drawings), organization of living space, rituals (for example, burials with grave gifts), specialized hunting techniques, exploration of less hospitable geographical areas, and barter trade networks. Debate continues as to whether a "revolution" led to modern humans ("the big bang of human consciousness"), or whether the evolution was more gradual.[40]Human evolution - Wikipedia It sounds like some scientists think that there was a relatively quick change. There is nothing to say that there was not some sudden brain change and then use of the new brain to invent new tools etc over a relatively short period. As for the Image of God, I once heard a pastor quote a verse that God will hide us under his pinions. He then said, "So God is a giant chicken." Then he said that God is a spirit and that he uses these images that we can picture. We are not in his physical image (If we were would we have to have feathers?) The image of God is explained in other ways. God breathed his spirit into us (Gen 2) He cut out the heart of stone and put in a heart of flesh. (Isaiah?) We sin, and we die in that day (spiritually - God removes his spirit) We repent, and we are made into his image (and grow in that likeness) As Ecclesiastes ponders, at death the human spirit goes up and the animal spirit does not. He also indicates that many men do not know that and must think that both fates are the same.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
slevesque OP writes: 1- Biblically, is there a difference between animals and humans ? 2- If there are no differences, then why would God regard humans as anymore special than other animals ? 3- If there is a difference, what is it ? 4- If this difference is that humans are thelogically in God's image, then at what point along their evolutionnary progression did they become 'in God's image' ?
G'day Slevesque, I couldn't help myself from responding to your topic, sorry. Man was made in the image of God from the beginning of Creation. Any Christian must agree with Jesus who says "6 But from the beginning of creation he made them male and female. "(Mark 10:6 NJB) He made man in the beginning. Man didn't evolve from any ape. Evolutionists are clawing onto a theory which is laughable. If they don't like a God then they have to find some other theory because evolution just doesn't cut it. I can't believe we are still having this debate. You can lead an athiest to water but you can't make him think. There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything. blz paskal
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024