• 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

Runewolf1973

Materialism/Animism
And on the opposite end of the spectrum some valiantly defend scientific theories that cannot be physically proven (yet). For instance Darwin himself said that he was unsure if evolution could be applied to humans.


Evolution, including human evolution, has long since been physically proven.



---
 
Last edited:

Runewolf1973

Materialism/Animism
I agree.


@vskipper, Don't forget that Harry Potter has 'truth' in it too, London does exist! Doesn't mean that wizards are real, and likewise just because the Bible does contain archaeological truths doesn't mean that its god is any more credible.

Agreed!
 

vskipper

Active Member
I agree.


@vskipper, Don't forget that Harry Potter has 'truth' in it too, London does exist! Doesn't mean that wizards are real, and likewise just because the Bible does contain archaeological truths doesn't mean that its god is any more credible.

One man skips a stone across the pond with a slight flicker. Looking to outdo the man another man grabs a bigger stone & throws it but it sinks.

As for wizards they do exist & you probably have visited one. Heres a hint they usually wear white coats. Try looking up the history of alchemy, sorcerors, magicians & modern medicine.
 

Delta-9

Member
:facepalm:

Modern medicine isn't wizardry, alchemy and medicine men have been replaced by science. Unless you think chemical reactions is wizardry, in which case I am a high level wizard around the beginning of July.
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
:facepalm:

Modern medicine isn't wizardry, alchemy and medicine men have been replaced by science. Unless you think chemical reactions is wizardry, in which case I am a high level wizard around the beginning of July.
Ah, but to the ignorant or uninformed it would appear to be wizardry. Their perception would be very real to them. Wrong, but very real, nonetheless.
 

Sapiens

Polymathematician
Dear Sapiens, Sure they are:

1. Adam's Heaven was made the 2nd Day. Gen 1:6-8 A Day is 4.5 Billion years in man's time. Other HeavenS were made Billions of years later on the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4 One of these is our 2nd Heaven and the other is the Third Heaven of ll Corinthians 12:2. Physicists are currently trying to confirm that we live in a Multiverse with some eleven other Universes. Parallel universes. [VIDEO] The old LiSA project is scheduled for launch this year by the Europeans.
That's a claim not a proof, an unsupported and unsupportable claim at at that. And how did we get from a claim of a three part to one of an eleven part multiverse?
2. The Beginning or Big Bang of our cosmos was on the 3rd Day, as Gen 2:4 shows. Do you have better data on this? or must you admit the backward thinking of today's scientists who REJECT God's Truth in Genesis?
God's Truth in Genesis is also an unsupported and unsupportable claim. Yes I reject it
3. Not to those who THINK they know what Genesis is actually teaching us.

Gen 1:21And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after Their (Trinity) kind, and every winged fowl after His (Jesus) kind: and God saw that it was good.
Bible quotes demonstrate nothing, except to the already brain washed.
Whether from drying on a rock in a hot spring or coming from a black smoker at the bottom of the Ocean, God's command produced life in Adam's world AND on our 2nd Heaven. This is important since we will find Life, as we know it on Planet Earth, all over our Cosmos. Science agrees and knows that without liquid water, there is No Life. God's Truth MUST agree with the discoveries of Science and History, and it does.
Since your version of God's Truth does not agree with either the discoveries of Science or History, well ... you're got a problem.
IF you don't agree, then please tell us HOW ancient men, who lived thousands of years BEFORE Science, knew this? They could NOT have known this. It's PROOF of God, in these last days. 2Pe 3:3-7. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman
Knew what?
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Dear Riverwolf, Don't you know that Humans are destined to have dominion or rule over every other creature when Jesus returns?

No, we're not. And if we are, screw that.

Apes are INNOCENT animals because they don't know good and evil,

Actually, since apes are also a Tribal species, they are likely aware of basic Tribal concepts of good and evil: that is, good is what benefits the Tribe, and evil is what harms the Tribe.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Dear Riverwolf, Name one.

Right here.

I keep waiting to destroy the False Assumptions of the DNA folks, but none seems to be knowledgable enough to discuss it. What God did, which has fooled the all knowing Evols, was to have two creations. "Natural" beings (prehistoric people) came forth from the water, (5th Day-Gen 1:21) and Humans were formed from the dust of the ground. (3rd Day-Gen 2:7)

Their BONES are identical, but the sons of God (prehistoric people) were NOT Humans and became Humans ONLY after they married and produced today's Humans with Noah's descendants. Gen 6:1-4 Prehistoric people INHERITED Adam's Human intelligence, and did NOT evolve from any Ape, as the False ToE wildly speculates. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
And on the opposite end of the spectrum some valiantly defend scientific theories that cannot be physically proven (yet).

They never will be, because there's no such thing as "proof" in the sciences.

Theory is as high as it can possibly get. Something becomes a theory, and remains a theory, so long as all the evidence and experimentation consistently points to it.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
As for wizards they do exist & you probably have visited one. Heres a hint they usually wear white coats.

Nah.

Usually, they're dressed in weeks-old clothes, have glasses, and live in Mom's basement, typing away at a keyboard to get the computer to do exactly their will.

Far as I'm concerned, the closest real-life modern equivalent to the modern conception of wizard is the Assembly programmer.

The closest ancient pseudo-magical role to modern doctors would have been Shamans, not wizards.
 

Sapiens

Polymathematician
Nah.

Usually, they're dressed in weeks-old clothes, have glasses, and live in Mom's basement, typing away at a keyboard to get the computer to do exactly their will.

Far as I'm concerned, the closest real-life modern equivalent to the modern conception of wizard is the Assembly programmer.

The closest ancient pseudo-magical role to modern doctors would have been Shamans, not wizards.
Most all of my clothes are years, or even decades, old. I only wear glasses to read, and that only began last year. My Mom has never had a basement. Assemby is for wimps, I used to program on the "bare metal" in Machine Language. I hope you mean physicians rather than doctors.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Most all of my clothes are years, or even decades, old. I only wear glasses to read, and that only began last year. My Mom has never had a basement. Assemby is for wimps, I used to program on the "bare metal" in Machine Language. I hope you mean physicians rather than doctors.

1. I meant as is wearing the same clothes for weeks without washing them, or even taking them off.
2. You, sir, are one of the Arch-Wizards, for being able to program directly in Machine Language. I take it modern scripted languages just wrinkle your brow?
3. I meant "doctor" in the common sense of "Go to the doctor to get better from sickness", so if that's technically supposed to be "physician", then yes.
 

Sapiens

Polymathematician
1. I meant as is wearing the same clothes for weeks without washing them, or even taking them off.
2. You, sir, are one of the Arch-Wizards, for being able to program directly in Machine Language. I take it modern scripted languages just wrinkle your brow?
3. I meant "doctor" in the common sense of "Go to the doctor to get better from sickness", so if that's technically supposed to be "physician", then yes.
I take them off daily, washing ... depends on the garment and the wear.

Machine Language is great if you want compact code, higher level languages are better if all you want to do is get the job over quickly.

My parents at both physicians, lots of folks have asked me, "don't you want to be a real doctor like your folks?" so I am a little sensitive to the definitions.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
I take them off daily, washing ... depends on the garment and the wear.

Machine Language is great if you want compact code, higher level languages are better if all you want to do is get the job over quickly.

My parents at both physicians, lots of folks have asked me, "don't you want to be a real doctor like your folks?" so I am a little sensitive to the definitions.

Okay, then. ^_^
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
For instance Darwin himself said that he was unsure if evolution could be applied to humans.

Evolutionary theories have moved on since Darwin. Never understand why people say things like 'even Darwin' or 'Darwin himself' to be honest.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Evolutionary theories have moved on since Darwin. Never understand why people say things like 'even Darwin' or 'Darwin himself' to be honest.

It is odd. I couldn't care less about Darwin except as an important historical figure. I've never read Origin of Species, and I have absolutely no plans to.
 

Sapiens

Polymathematician
For instance Darwin himself said that he was unsure if evolution could be applied to humans.
Horse puckey! In his book The Descent of Man, a major theme in the book is detailing evidence to support the conclusion that all human races are from a single species, descended from a single ape-like ancestor.
 

Runewolf1973

Materialism/Animism
....there's no such thing as "proof" in the sciences.

Good point. I should know better. I just have a tendency to try addressing people in ways they will hopefully understand. It seems that Aman777 doesn't know what evidence is, so I used the term "proof" instead.
 

vskipper

Active Member
:facepalm:

Modern medicine isn't wizardry, alchemy and medicine men have been replaced by science. Unless you think chemical reactions is wizardry, in which case I am a high level wizard around the beginning of July.

Exhibit A.

The word pharmacy is derived from its root word pharma which was a term used since the 15th–17th centuries. However, the original Greek roots from pharmakos imply sorcery or even poison.
source:Pharmacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Exhibit B.
Alchemy is alive and well today, but it existed before chemistry was a science. Alchemists discovered many of the chemical elements and developed the systematic way of examining matter that came to be known as chemistry.
source:Learn About the History of Chemistry

Most "magicians" & "sorcerors" didnt concern themself with divination and casting dark spells. They found varying plants that were useful for different ailments.

Fun fact: Isaac Newton was a practitioner of Alchemy ;)
 

vskipper

Active Member
Horse puckey! In his book The Descent of Man, a major theme in the book is detailing evidence to support the conclusion that all human races are from a single species, descended from a single ape-like ancestor.

I was refering to Origin of Species. But, that is intriguing though. I also have thought that man did not come from apes or monkeys but rather was a singular species (perhaps similar to) that could have evolved. Although by looking at varying skeletal remains it really doesn't look like we evolved all that much in terms of physical appearance.

Also as I was pointing out before if someone did believe in the Bible it would be impossible for man to be physically like God. Rather it was most likely a reference to having a soul. (I have a theory on the soul too but I wont post that now or here as the thread topic is wrong for it & I dont feel like having the conformist thinkers slam me presently)

Finally I would like to know just which translation was being used by the one that started this thread because I have read a few different Bibles & never seen Genesis written like that before.
 
Last edited:
Top