Life From Dirt?

[Sgt. Pepper]

In brief do you accept the sciences as the basis of our knowledge of nature of our physical existence including the sciences of abiogenesis and evolution?

I believe the theory of evolution is a more reasonable explanation for the origin of mankind than believing that a god created a man from dirt, breathed air into him and made him alive, created a woman from this man's rib, and that a talking serpent cunningly deceived both the man and the woman into disobeying the god by taking a bite of a forbidden fruit from a magical tree of life, or that the rest of mankind is supposedly descended from these two individuals. In comparison to these stories, believing that human beings evolved from an ancient primate ancestor doesn't seem so unreasonable to me.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

If you want to mention me in your arguments with skeptical members, please do me the courtesy of tagging me

I'm guilty of that as well. Sorry. I see you found one of these already:
Life From Dirt?
Humans are not alive and don't feel anything .

But the eternal nature of God does have a reasonable answer… In the eternal nature of energy.

How do you get from energy is eternal to gods existing? Is a god synonymous with energy to you? Energy is always in flux and transformation. What forces arranged this energy into a potent, volitional, sentient mind? What forces keep it structured such that it is the same god forever?

Just because I disagree with her on the identity of these beings, that in no way implies I deny she is having these encounters with invisible entities. That’s your stance, not mine.

Didn't you advise me and others to believer her based in her reports? Now, you're telling us to what extent to believe her.

I believe God made the building blocks for life and the ideal natural environment and was necessary for the design also.

Of course you do, but look at how this is a god of the gaps argument, which is the result of science continuing to explain observable reality without needing gods, leaving gods fewer and fewer jobs to do. Gods are limited to origins problems (origin of the universe and origin of the life in it), since we have naturalistic explanations for how the universe assembled itself (apart from life) and how it operates day to day both without any apparent intelligent oversight. This is the effect that the humanist influence has had on Christianity, which is gradually conforming to its scientific vision. It is also conforming to the humanist political vision - democracy and the abolition of slavery seem to be OK with Christianity, although it seems that there are still problems with women's rights, LGBTQ+ tolerance, and church-state separation (freedom of and from religion) in the States and in the Vatican.

IMO our bodies were made by God through evolution, with all the problems that leaves us. But that does not mean that the universe and life is not designed to be as it is.

Here's more of that humanist influence, pushing the god's role back further. This is essentially the deist god, but one that unlike the deist god, also intervenes with revelation, miracles, and answering prayer, and which judges and damns. All of these are also undergoing transformation. Revelation is decreasingly often called literal or infallible. Instead, we see the word inspired a lot. Myth is called allegory, miracles aren't expected by many any more, being called a thing of the past, and hell theology is softening. I've heard both that God doesn't send us to hell; we send ourselves, and that there is no literal hell or that separation from God without torture is hell.

The building blocks are the atoms and molecules, the natural environment is the hot underwater springs. God made those and caused amino acids to synthesise. That is a belief by faith and if you believe God had nothing to do with it, then that is by faith.

You don't seem to understand that the critical thinker doesn't accept a proposition without sufficient supporting evidence, but also doesn't call it false without sufficient supporting evidence. There is a place between believing that something is true and believing is false. I call these two belief and disbelief, reserving unbelief for the agnostic position, which is neither. Incidentally, these are not standard definitions for unbelief and disbelief, which most people use as synonyms.

The critical thinker doesn't say that "God had nothing to do with it," which is a faith-based statement of disbelief (as I've defined it here). He says that he finds no evidence that a god was involved, and therefore do not believe that one did, but this is unbelief, because he also doesn't say none did. He's agnostic.

If you don't believe they were involved then you believe they weren't involved.

No. This is incorrect. There's a middle ground between belief and disbelief: unbelief, which is neither, and is synonymous with agnosticism as I use the terms.

But you don't know so it is a belief that no gods or pixies did it. It's a belief that it just happened naturally.

And here it is again. This failure to acknowledge the possibility of unbelief is very common on these threads. It would be more accurate reworded, "You don't know, so you neither believe that pixies were involved, nor that they weren't, but lacking evidence pixies, you remain agnostic (unbelief)."

And to go from there to say that no God was needed is a statement of faith.

Agreed, but once again, this is not the position of the agnostic atheist.

Why do so many believers keep doing this however many times he is corrected? It's so common, that I'm coining a new term for it using my preferred definitions: unbelief/disbelief conflation. I wonder why it's so common? I think that most people doing this - transforming not believing to believing not (unbelief to disbelief) - are not aware that they do. The alternative is that they are and are deliberately and knowingly making straw man arguments in bad faith, and I feel like that's the minority. I don't see you in those terms. I see you as having the inability to make the distinction between these two things, but that confuses me.

Why should so many believers do this, and apparently only believers? Atheists don't seem to have trouble making the distinction, even the strong atheists who deny the existence of gods in an unjustified and unnecessary leap of faith. The know that they are not unbelievers like their agnostic atheist cohorts. They know that their disbelief is different from the agnostic atheist's unbelief.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

There are a ton of stories about Zeus taking human or animal form and umm .... mating with mortal women. That's how Perseus came to be, according to the story.

Some Christians argue that the Bible is accurate because it includes actual locations that exist today. They will use this as one of their reasons to believe in the biblical God. However, Greek mythology predates the Bible and contains references to factual places in Greece as well as references to a variety of deities. Like the Bible, which cites several actual places, Greek mythology cites several actual locations in Greece, including Athens, Crete, Delphi, Thebes, and Mount Olympus. I've never met a Christian who believes Zeus, Hera, Ares, and Athena (as well as the other deities) are real deities, despite the fact that there are references to actual sites in Greece that they could visit today, just as there are actual sites referenced in the Bible that they could visit today.

6 Famous Greek Mythology Locations

Greek Mythological Sites You Can Still Visit Today

Where should I go to see sites from Greek mythology?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Some Christians argue that the Bible is accurate because it includes actual locations that exist today. They will use this as one of their reasons to believe in the biblical God. However, Greek mythology predates the Bible and contains references to factual places in Greece as well as references to a variety of deities. Like the Bible, which cites several actual places, Greek mythology cites several actual locations in Greece, including Athens, Crete, Delphi, Thebes, and Mount Olympus. I've never met a Christian who believes Zeus, Hera, Ares, and Athena (as well as the other deities) are real deities, despite the fact that there are references to actual sites in Greece that they could visit today, just as there are actual sites referenced in the Bible that they could visit today.

6 Famous Greek Mythology Locations

Greek Mythological Sites You Can Still Visit Today

Where should I go to see sites from Greek mythology?

Yep! I have pointed this out before as well. I haven't really received a satisfactory answer so far.

 

[Heyo]

I find it very interesting that evolution supposedly jumped from non recognition (supposedly, unless someone wants to say it happened to gorillas but they ain't talking about it) to mankind's experience.

I'm pretty sure that my cats are superstitious. Many animals show behaviour that can be interpreted as agenticity. It's a good survival strategy.

Again, I wonder if there are any records besides the Biblical account of men and gods conversing. I mean Ishtar, Zeus and others are or were supposedly gods but is there any account of an author stating these gods spoke to them?

As I said, gods came into play relatively late. It seems about the time when writing was invented, the first city cultures arose and people stopped the nomadic lifestyle. And the gods conversed with the humans. Athena spoke to Odysseus, three goddesses asked Paris for judgement, Odin visited the humans he created (incognito), Jaguar (the god) brought fire to the humans and YHVH communicated through angels or disguised as a burning bush.

 

[shunyadragon]

I answered the pertinent questions.
It seems you don’t like the answers.
(With your other questions, the answers are obvious.)


Amazing, how you wish to ignore @Sgt. Pepper ’s findings.

Why do you think she’s “mistaken”?
She’s very forthcoming. And thorough, apparently.

Just because I disagree with her on the identity of these beings, that in no way implies I deny she is having these encounters with invisible entities. That’s your stance, not mine.

See post #2561 for actually what @Sgt. Pepper believes concerning science, abiogenesis and evolution, which is the subject of the thread.

 

[YoursTrue]

I'm pretty sure that my cats are superstitious. Many animals show behaviour that can be interpreted as agenticity. It's a good survival strategy.

As I said, gods came into play relatively late. It seems about the time when writing was invented, the first city cultures arose and people stopped the nomadic lifestyle. And the gods conversed with the humans. Athena spoke to Odysseus, three goddesses asked Paris for judgement, Odin visited the humans he created (incognito), Jaguar (the god) brought fire to the humans and YHVH communicated through angels or disguised as a burning bush.

You're sure your cats are superstitious. Hmm. Too bad they can't communicate with spirit mediums, or maybe you think they can. And who knows? Maybe they see things we don't see and that's why they stand up frightened at whatever.

 

[YoursTrue]

I'm pretty sure that my cats are superstitious. Many animals show behaviour that can be interpreted as agenticity. It's a good survival strategy.

As I said, gods came into play relatively late. It seems about the time when writing was invented, the first city cultures arose and people stopped the nomadic lifestyle. And the gods conversed with the humans. Athena spoke to Odysseus, three goddesses asked Paris for judgement, Odin visited the humans he created (incognito), Jaguar (the god) brought fire to the humans and YHVH communicated through angels or disguised as a burning bush.

Who wrote that about Athena speaking to Odysseus, etc. ? if you have a link I'll try to make heads or tails of it. And you did say it was kind of late(ly) on the history of mankind...which I definitely find very interesting.

 

[shunyadragon]

I'm pretty sure that my cats are superstitious. Many animals show behaviour that can be interpreted as agenticity. It's a good survival strategy.

As I said, gods came into play relatively late. It seems about the time when writing was invented, the first city cultures arose and people stopped the nomadic lifestyle. And the gods conversed with the humans. Athena spoke to Odysseus, three goddesses asked Paris for judgement, Odin visited the humans he created (incognito), Jaguar (the god) brought fire to the humans and YHVH communicated through angels or disguised as a burning bush.

I disagree as to when God(s) came into human history, because ritual burial, alters and symbolic offering to the dead go back human ancestors possibly 78000 years ago. I do not believe the nature of being human has not changed since human have been human and possibly before.

An even older possible ritual burial found next.

.https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/scientists-discover-oldest-known-human-grave-africa-180977659/

Scientists Discover Oldest Known Human Grave in Africa​

The unearthing of a tiny child suggests Africa’s Stone Age humans sometimes practiced funerary rites and had symbolic thoughts about death

Brian Handwerk
Science Correspondent
May 5, 2021

---

A virtual reconstruction of the child’s remains found in Panga ya Saidi cave in Kenya Jorge González / Elena Santos
Modern humans might share little in common with the Stone Age hunter gatherers who, 78,000 years ago, curled a dead child into the fetal position and buried it in a shallow grave in a Kenyan cave. But the humanity of their grief, and the care they demonstrated for the child, can still be felt by looking at those tiny human remains, arrayed as if still sleeping. Scientists don’t know whether the child’s family or community connected its burial with thoughts of the afterlife. In a way, though, their actions guaranteed the child would have another life. Unimaginably far into their future, the child is not forgotten and it offers a fascinating glimpse into how some past humans coped with death.
The 2-and-a-half to 3-year-old toddler now dubbed Mtoto (‘child’ in Swahili) was found in a specially dug grave now recognized as the oldest known human burial in Africa. The team that discovered and analyzed the child published their findings in this week’s issue of Nature. Extensive forensic and microscopic analysis of the remains and grave suggest that the child was buried soon after death, likely wrapped tightly in a shroud, laid in a fetal position and even provided with some type of pillow. The care humans took in burying this child suggests that they attached some deeper meaning to the event beyond the need to dispose of a lifeless body.
Report this ad

“When we start seeing behaviors where there is real interest in the dead, and they exceed the time and investment of resources needed for practical reasons, that’s when we start to see the symbolic mind,” says María Martinón-Torres, a co-author of the study and director of the National Research Centre on Human Evolution (CENIEH) in Burgos, Spain. “That’s what makes this so special. We’re looking [at] a behavior that we consider ourselves so typical of humans—and unique—which is establishing a relationship with the dead.”
Panga ya Saidi cave, in the tropical uplands along the Kenyan coast, is a key site for delving into the lives of ancient humans. In 2013, excavations there revealed the side edge of a small pit, and researchers used a tube to retrieve a sediment sample for dating. The sample immediately revealed the presence of some degraded and unidentified bones. It wasn’t until four years later that scientists began to suspect they’d found more than a few random remains. They dug about ten feet below the cave floor and found a circular, shallow pit tightly filled with an array of bones. But this surprise was shortly followed by another—the bones were in such a state of decomposition that any attempts to touch or move them turned them to dust.
So the team extracted the entire pit, protected it with a plaster encasement and moved it to the National Museums of Kenya in Nairobi, and later to a specialized laboratory at CENIEH.
In the lab, scientists unleashed a toolbox of techniques and technologies to peer inside and analyze the bones and soils of the sediment block. Carefully excavating a bit of the block revealed two teeth whose familiar shape provided the first clue that the remains might represent a hominin burial. As the scientists delved further into the block they encountered more surprises. They found much of the well-preserved skull and face of the child, including some unerupted teeth still found within the mandible. These remains helped to ascertain that the team was exploring the remains of a very young member of our own species—Homo sapiens.

 

[Heyo]

Who wrote that about Athena speaking to Odysseus, etc. ?

Homer. I read the Iliad and the Odyssey as a kid so my memory is a bit hazy but the Greek gods definitely spoke to humans, often in disguise.

if you have a link I'll try to make heads or tails of it. And you did say it was kind of late(ly) on the history of mankind...which I definitely find very interesting.

We can't know for sure but from anthropological studies it seems that pre civilised tribes almost all have some form of animism or shamanism (and one who have no god concept at all). The only sign against that is Göbekli Tepe which might have been a kind of temple structure and temples are usually connected to deity worship. That would put the first gods to around 9000 BC, which is still recent in the 300.000 year history of homo sapiens.

 

[YoursTrue]

@Brian2 doesn't believe that reason and logic do work. You do.
No system of thought can work without some axioms (or be utterly circular). You and I believe some things we can't prove, law of identity, law of the excluded middle, an orderly universe. We call them axioms but they are un-provable assumption, beliefs.

It isn't known is it if animals like cats and dogs have evolved superstition passing that on genetically. That theory is... ridiculous.

 

[shunyadragon]

An older alter site discovered:

Ancient site older than Gobeklitepe unearthed in Turkey​

Discoveries at Boncuklu Tarla in southeastern Mardin are around 1,000 years older than those in Gobeklitepe, says professor​

Muhammed Furkan Gunes |04.12.2019 - Update : 05.12.2019

Ancient site older than Gobeklitepe unearthed in Turkey

Discoveries at Boncuklu Tarla in southeastern Mardin are around 1,000 years older than those in Gobeklitepe, says professor - Anadolu Ajansı

www.aa.com.tr

MARDIN, Turkey
The latest archeologic excavations in southeastern Turkey discovered an ancient site older than Gobeklitepe, known as the oldest temple in the world, according to a Turkish university rector.
Ibrahim Ozcosar, the rector of Mardin Artuklu University, told Anadolu Agency that the discoveries at Boncuklu Tarla (Beaded Field) in Mardin province resemble to those unearthed in Gobeklitepe, an archeological site located in Turkey's southeastern Sanliurfa province, and even 1,000 years older.
The excavation work began in 2012 at the Boncuklu Tarla in Dargecit district that goes back to the Neolithic period.
The area is known to have been home throughout history to Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Hittites, Assyrians, Romans, Seljuks, and Ottomans, among others.
“It is possible to consider this as a finding that prove the first settlers [in the area] were believers,” Ozcosar said.
“This area is important in terms of being one of the first settled areas of humanity and shows that the first people settling here were believers,” he added, pointing to the similar discoveries in Gobeklitepe and Boncuklu Tarla.
Ergul Kodas, an archaeologist at Artuklu University and advisor to the excavation area, told Anadolu Agency that the history of the Boncuklu Tarla is estimated to be around 12,000-years old.
“Several special structures which we can call temples and special buildings were unearthed in the settlement, in addition to many houses and dwellings,” Kodas said.
“This is a new key point to inform us on many topics such as how the [people] in northern Mesopotamia and the upper Tigris began to settle, how the transition from hunter-gatherer life to food production happened and how cultural and religious structures changed,” he added.
According to Kodas, there are buildings in the area similar to those in Gobeklitepe.
Boncuklu Tarla is almost 300 kilometers east of Gobeklitepe.
“We have identified examples of buildings which we call public area, temples, religious places in Boncuklu Tarla that are older compared to discoveries in Gobeklitepe,” he added.
Gobeklitepe, declared an official UNESCO World Heritage Site last year, was discovered in 1963 by researchers from the universities of Istanbul and Chicago.
The German Archaeological Institute and Sanliurfa Museum have been carrying out joint excavations at the site since 1995. They found T-shaped obelisks from the Neolithic era towering 10-20 feet (3-6 meters) high and weighing 40-60 tons.
During excavations, various historical artifacts, including a 26-inch (65-centimeter) long human statue dating back 12,000 years, have also been discovered.

 

[YoursTrue]

Homer. I read the Iliad and the Odyssey as a kid so my memory is a bit hazy but the Greek gods definitely spoke to humans, often in disguise.

We can't know for sure but from anthropological studies it seems that pre civilised tribes almost all have some form of animism or shamanism (and one who have no god concept at all). The only sign against that is Göbekli Tepe which might have been a kind of temple structure and temples are usually connected to deity worship. That would put the first gods to around 9000 BC, which is still recent in the 300.000 year history of homo sapiens.

So Homer said Zeus spoke to him. Did he say much if you remember? Were there others Zeus supposedly spoke to in history? Do you think it was fiction or true that a god named Zeus spoke to Homer. I remember reading about it but considered it junk even before I studied the Bible. I am pretty sure some consider the Bible as junk, so I'll just say that before some do

 

[Heyo]

It isn't known is it if animals like cats and dogs have evolved superstition passing that on genetically. That theory is... ridiculous.

Have you watched the video? What Shermer identifies as superstition (agenticity) is clearly seen in the behaviour of animals, e.g. when they react to machines as if they were living beings.

 

[YoursTrue]

@Heyo I will say that the Bible has an account of a donkey that saw an unseen person. And then the spirit person was seen by the one accompanying the donkey. So it is certainly possible for animals to see angels because the Bible brings that out. But nothing to suggest they are superstitious as a continuing evolution. Maybe beetles you think see spirits too? Maybe they're not so evolved as far as you're concerned in the scope of evolution. Who knows in science? Maybe as I've seen answers, science will find out maybe. Cockroaches are pretty fast to react though.

 

[YoursTrue]

Have you watched the video? What Shermer identifies as superstition (agenticity) is clearly seen in the behaviour of animals, e.g. when they react to machines as if they were living beings.

I saw some of it and I think the point is bunk. Some claim to communicate with spirits, even dead ones. Yet you don't question them, maybe you believe them...

 

[Heyo]

So Homer said Zeus spoke to him. Did he say much if you remember? Were there others Zeus supposedly spoke to in history? Do you think it was fiction or true that a god named Zeus spoke to Homer. I remember reading about it but considered it junk even before I studied the Bible. I am pretty sure some consider the Bible as junk, so I'll just say that before some do

Nope, Homer doesn't say that Zeus (or any other god or goddess) spoke to him. But neither does any Bible author. And contrary to Homer almost all authors of the bible are anonymous and don't reveal how they came to their knowledge. A tradition that is also seen in other religions and denominations. Mohammed was allegedly visited by the angel Gabriel and had a scribe put it down as the Qur'an (that's now fourth hand information if you read the Qur'an in Arabic), similarly Joseph Smith was visited by the angel Moroni.

 

[Heyo]

I saw some of it and I think the point is bunk.

Did you see the part with the Skinner pigeons?

 

[YoursTrue]

I believe the theory of evolution is a more reasonable explanation for the origin of mankind than believing that a god created a man from dirt, breathed air into him and made him alive, created a woman from this man's rib, and that a talking serpent cunningly deceived both the man and the woman into disobeying the god by taking a bite of a forbidden fruit from a magical tree of life, or that the rest of mankind is supposedly descended from these two individuals. In comparison to these stories, believing that human beings evolved from an ancient primate ancestor doesn't seem so unreasonable to me.

I know the Bible says God created man from the soil...however it works, soil to soil, ashes to ashes. So until I learn more about it, I'm sticking with the concept that living matter came from soil and God put life (spirit) in his creation as He desired. "By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.” (Gen 3:19)

 

[YoursTrue]

Did you see the part with the Skinner pigeons?

No. I don't have time for the whole thing but I'll look for it.