metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Probably because it is deeply embarrassing to the hairy apes.
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Humans did NOT evolve from the common ancestor of Apes
- Thread starter Aman777
- Start date
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Probably because it is deeply embarrassing to the hairy apes.
and the angelic won't like it either!
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
If I see any of them around, I'll be sure to ask them.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Thief
Rogue Theologian
oh...I thought you knew the reference point....
It was written....and God created Man a little less than the angels.
That one item fueled a lot of thought and belief.
I have posted so much commentary about the angelic because of it.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Even though I've often been referred to as an "angel"
, I don't actually believe in them, which is not to go as far as to say they don't exist. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but either way I don't lose much sleep over this. Or maybe we're all angels? Nah.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Even though I've often been referred to as an "angel"
Or maybe we're all angels? Nah.
I believe in God....and the hierarchy between heaven and Man.
We have hierarchy in this life.
I suspect something similar in the next.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Instead of trying to respond in a piece-meal series of gives-and-takes, let me post what I did when discussing where I'm coming from with a rabbi over at Judaism DIR on the issue of Jewish Renewal, which he is not fond of:
Even though I leave myself wide open for criticism, which is all fine and dandy as I've been married for 47 years and gotten used to it, let me tell you why I really like the general direction that Renewal is taking.
As you're probably aware of, I'm a retired anthropologist. I was raised in a fundamentalist Protestant church that taught about the "evil" of believing in evolution, and I left that church in my mid-20's. To shorten the story, I eventually found my way into Judaism and converted about 20 years ago.
The issue of faith has always been difficult sledding for me because I'm a scientist at heart, and we tend to question just about anything and everything. The basis of science is to search for objective evidence, which tends not to be the same approach used in religious circles-- not to say that they two are somehow incompatible though.
Religion is considered to be one of the "five basic institutions" found in all societies both historically (as far back as we can tell from written records and/or artifacts), and currently. Therefore, I have studied religions found all over the world for many years, but I'm an expert in none.
Each religion tends to teach that it is the more correct one, has a better grasp on what God or Gods is/are, and also better knows what God(s) really expect from us. Now imagine going through roughly 50 years of studying this. Have an effect on me, with strong emphasis on the word "skeptical"? I never met a fellow anthropologist that said it didn't.
So, I struggled, and still struggle to an extent, to make heads and tails of this. Over the last 15 or so years, I've leaned pretty much in the direction of Spinoza, largely because I tend to think that God not only probably goes well beyond our ability to understand Him, but also that there must be something that ties Him into "Nature" (Spinoza's other name for God) itself, with that name being all-inclusive to the point whereas they're inseparable (pantheistic/panentheistic). Maybe we even have a "God gene", as some within my field have hypothesized.
Therefore, I tend to view "God" as more being a question than an answer, thus you've probably on different occasions seen me post "I don't know" a lot, and also "Whatever created our universe/multiverse I'll call 'God', and pretty much leave it at that".
How is this "Judaism" to me? Two reasons. One, is that I feel halacha is important enough to at least try and follow because it does make sense to me and, two, that Judaism is open enough, especially Jewish Renewal, whereas even a heretic and skeptic like me can at least somewhat fit in.
OK, now I'm getting as long winded as a rabbi I know, so I'll stop at this point-- plus dinners ready, and as important as you are to me...
Thief
Rogue Theologian
ok....and if I can be thorough enough in the brief version......
I believe in God because of science.
The dogmatic, nod your head, congregational routine doesn't work for me.
I consider a creation to be a reflection of it's Creator.
Science then takes me in search of that Entity.
I always did excel in my science studies and would rather listen to science documentaries than anything else.
I am also real keen on quiet meditation.
The 'beginning' is not the mystery other people struggle with.
Sure, I don't know the hands on power of creation.
But unless we learn the mind and heart of God....none of us will.
The Carpenter is my Inspiration.
His parables are the form and pattern of mind and heart.
Without the disciplines contained therein....the rest of our spiritual liberty will never form.
He did mention angels now and then.
I believe in God because of science.
The dogmatic, nod your head, congregational routine doesn't work for me.
I consider a creation to be a reflection of it's Creator.
Science then takes me in search of that Entity.
I always did excel in my science studies and would rather listen to science documentaries than anything else.
I am also real keen on quiet meditation.
The 'beginning' is not the mystery other people struggle with.
Sure, I don't know the hands on power of creation.
But unless we learn the mind and heart of God....none of us will.
The Carpenter is my Inspiration.
His parables are the form and pattern of mind and heart.
Without the disciplines contained therein....the rest of our spiritual liberty will never form.
He did mention angels now and then.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Caught you......
McBell
Admiral Obvious
do you even know what you are talking about?
Or have you run yourself in circles for so long you lost track?
Mycroft
Ministry of Serendipity
What folly is this? You say you believe in god because of science, but you completely ignore the spirit of what science is: arriving at conclusions based on evidence.
Now science isn't the antithesis of god, it simply finds no evidence for a god. It does, however, find plenty of evidence behind intelligent creation within nature's mechanisms. Starting with human beings.
Ben West
Member
Dear shawn, Just to set the record straight. Jesus, the Light of the First Day appeared in the physical world. Gen 1:3 Jesus took some of the heaven/air, dust (ground without form) and water, which came from the air, and InFlated it at the Big Bang. This was on the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4
Several hundreds of Millions of years later, on the FOURTH DAY, the First Stars began to put forth their Light. Gen 1:16 Hubble and other Space telescopes recently discovered this. Can you tell us HOW ancient men, who you THINK wrote the Bible, knew this. God Bless you
Midnight Rain
Well-Known Member
Except exponential functions.
Sapiens
Polymathematician
Even they can be linearized by using a log scale.
Midnight Rain
Well-Known Member
This actually serves to help us understand and calculate the curves as they defy our normal mathematical structure. Being able to use straight lines to measure cured ones seems to be the only way that we can make sense of such measurements. Its like that gif where a straight line turned on an axis fits through a curved hole.