Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Its obvious u cant answer the question!
please get a real education, your severe lack of knowledge at hand is evident.
This is exactly the kind of example that shows how religion is dragging down humanity.
do a google search for your petty question
The whole point of this question "the chicken and the egg" is to prove no human baby can rear themselves!
Its obvious ur just evading the question....uve not got the answer and ur too stubborn to admit there might be a GOD.....and u (out of ur ignorance) just try to hurl insults!
Its obvious this site proves nothing....U athiests just hurl insults when u cant answer threads....
Im being run off the site now....Losing ur heads guys!!
), but everyone else here is right about you. Your statement as it stands now is so far off as to be considered "not even wrong" (Not even wrong - RationalWiki).I never mentioned Hebrew characters or the Bible....ur just evading the question...How could human babies rear themselves.....this is obviously what athiests must believe out of their ignorance....THERE IS A GOD!you base creation from a mythical charactor written by ancient hebrews who knew nothing about anything.
Distribution of materials of Jahwist, Elohist and Priestly sources, as well as Redactor's contribution in the first four books, following Richard Friedman.
For much of the 20th century Wellhausen's hypothesis formed the framework within which the origins of the Pentateuch were discussed, and even the Vatican came to urge that "light derived from recent research" not be neglected by Catholic scholars, urging them especially to pay attention to "the sources written or oral" and "the forms of expression" used by the "sacred writer".[41] Some important modifications were introduced, notably by Albrecht Alt and Martin Noth, who argued for the oral transmission of ancient core beliefsguidance out of Egypt, conquest of the Promised Land, covenants, revelation at Sinai/Horeb, etc.[42] Simultaneously, the work of the American Biblical archaeology school under William F. Albright seemed to confirm that even if Genesis and Exodus were only given their final form in the first millennium BC, they were still firmly grounded in the material reality of the second millennium.[43] The overall effect of such refinements was to aid the wider acceptance of the basic hypothesis by reassuring believers that even if the final form of the Pentateuch was late and not due to Moses himself, it was nevertheless possible to recover a credible picture of the period of Moses and of the patriarchal age. Hence, although challenged by scholars such as Umberto Cassuto, opposition to the documentary hypothesis gradually waned, and by the mid-twentieth century it was almost universally accepted.[44]
Documentary hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
make no mistake,, ,moses work is a patchwork of wishfull thinking and want
Educated people, scholars and historians came up with this information
Can you refute these with something other then your imagination????? or a question???
LOOK you can go about this educated or not, here is both sides of the story so that your not so ignorant to the facts at hand
The Straight Dope: Who wrote the Bible? (Part 1)
Timeline of Old Testament History
Uh, yeah, I hate to say this (well I don't, really
Lemme state this bluntly for you:
You said that babies cannot rear themselves, which is true.
You conclude from this that there must be a creator god.
A = "human babies cannot rear themselves... "
B = ?
C = "... thus a creator."
A -> B -> C
Fill in B. Without B, C is never reached.
), and I want to see your reasoning. I want to come back seeing a good answer that, unlike many of your other posts, is NOT a blatant personal attack, and I want an answer that is at least wrong, instead of "not even wrong."Firstly I dont attack people but have been insulted by others rather.Don't ignore my post.
I'm going to be back in a few hours (off to take a Physics Exam
You just said that someone was "being stupid" in another thread.
Prove it.
Somebody was being stupid in another thread.....he denied that the chicken and the egg was about human babies not being able to rear themselves.
That's not stupid. The chicken and the egg has absolutely nothing to do with anything "rearing itself". That makes no sense.
You're right, no baby can rear itself. Where does evolution claim otherwise? Also, how does that prove a God exists? Again, this makes no sense.
Where in evolutionary biology have you ever seen it posited that a "human baby" must rear itself?
