Did the Neanderthals have Souls?
rjmil...@my-deja.com
Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
R Miller
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
Albert A. Arendsen
> Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
Ofcourse Genisis isn't accurate even within the mythology it is supposed
to convey, because Eve is only Adams second wife. His first wife, Lilith,
left him because she thought Adam and Paradise were just a huge bore.
Considering that Genisis conveniently forgets even that little bit of
rather important information - after all, how could a church deny the
right to divorce when according to their lore the first human had himself
a divorce? - could it also not equally conveniently have left out other
information?
--
(o- ((Albert Arendsen) || (Chakotay) || (Reyn Eaglestorm)) -o)
/\\ )O( http://voyager.student.utwente.nl/index.html )O( //\
\V/_ A thinking computer... You mean, like a swimming ship? _\V/
Adam Marczyk
news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
What I want to know is where Cain's wife came from. Maybe she was a
Neanderthal. ;)
--
When I am dreaming,
I don't know if I'm truly asleep, or if I'm awake.
When I get up,
I don't know if I'm truly awake, or if I'm still dreaming...
--Forest for the Trees, "Dream"
To send e-mail, change "excite" to "hotmail"
Floyd
rjmil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Did the Neanderthals have souls?
I'm not sure. Do I have one? How do you know? How does one know whether
or not one posesses an immeasurable essence at all? If we say that the
existence of the human soul is a matter of faith that can neither be
demonstrated, nor disproven, then the existence of neandertal souls is
equally a matter of faith. You either believe it, or you don't, and nobody
can offer you any evidence to demonstrate that you are right or wrong.
> Were they descended from Adam or not?
Well...they aren't mentioned in Genesis, we can say that much, at least. If
Adam was (as he's usually depicted) an anatomically modern human, then no,
because neandertals were around before the first anatomically modern humans
were.
> Why did God allow them to become extinct?
Fine question. Why would God allow anything to become extinct?
> Can Genesis really be regarded
> as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
>
> R Miller
Probably not. However, that is not the weakest point, as far as taking
Genesis literally is concerned. The sequence of plants and animals is all
wrong, for example. Genesis states that flowering plants existed before
animals, but angiosperms only date to the early or mid Cretaceous, long
after the earliest appearance of animals. The Noachian "global flood" was
probably also metaphorical, although perhaps inspired by large local
floods. That tale was meant to explain God's dominion over humans ("be good
or else!") rather than to explain the details of paleoclimatology or
meteorology. Basically, in light of modern science, Genesis really should
be taken as a series of metaphors or parables about the proper relations
between God and humans, coupled with some discussion of ancient Hebrew
geneology and history. The creation stuff in chapters 1 and 2 was probably
never meant to be taken literally. It's meant to teach ethics and morals,
not biology and cosmology. HTH
-Floyd
maff91
>Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
>Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
>as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
>mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
Science Uncovers Apes' Hidden Soul
http://www.foxnews.com/js_index.sml?content=/scitech/112399/times_souls.sml
http://www.caltech.edu/~media/Press_Releases/PR11976.html
>
>R Miller
--
Science Makes News (New York Times - November 1, 1999, Monday )
To the Editor: Your Oct. 29 news articles ''Biologists Find
Progenitors of Earth's Flowering Plants'' and ''Earliest Divorce Case:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/science/102999sci-flower-evolution.html
X and Y Chromosomes'' show the difference between science and
http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/science/102999sci-sex-chromosome.html
creationism. Evolutionary scientists make news through the
scientific process, while creationists make news through the political
process."
http://www.nytimes.com/99/11/01/letters/l01bio.html
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Adam Marczyk" <ebon...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:94n6ta$18b2$1...@node17.cwnet.frontiernet.net...
> <rjmil...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> > Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> > as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> > mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
>
> What I want to know is where Cain's wife came from. Maybe she was a
> Neanderthal. ;)
She was a relative of some sort, it was required when you are starting a new
population.
Aaron...
(Aaron) Bible believer
> Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
>
> R Miller
Why should it mention them? What sort of proof do you have of other kinds
of extinct humans? I'm looking for real proof, not an incomplete skeleton
where the person was deformed and hence he was an entire race of primitive
man. Or skeletons where parts of other skeletons are put together to make a
new race of people.
Aaron...
Ian Rohrbacher
Adam Marczyk wrote:
> <rjmil...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> > Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> > as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> > mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
>
> What I want to know is where Cain's wife came from. Maybe she was a
> Neanderthal. ;)
Cain's wife was his sister.
>
>
> --
> When I am dreaming,
> I don't know if I'm truly asleep, or if I'm awake.
> When I get up,
> I don't know if I'm truly awake, or if I'm still dreaming...
> --Forest for the Trees, "Dream"
>
> To send e-mail, change "excite" to "hotmail"
--
"How fair is thy love, my sister, my spouse! how much better is thy love than
wine!" [Song of Solomon 4:10]
Ronald Landheer
> In article <94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, rjmil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> > Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> > as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> > mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
> Ofcourse Genisis isn't accurate even within the mythology it is supposed
> to convey, because Eve is only Adams second wife. His first wife, Lilith,
> left him because she thought Adam and Paradise were just a huge bore.
Lilith?
Ik dacht dat ze Stephany heette.. [I thought her name was Stephany..]
(Adam & Steve?)
(sorry for the dutch, people, but this is ridiculous)
Sorry Albert, but this is a bit foolish..
mel turner
><rjmil...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>>Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
>>Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
>>as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
>>mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
>Why should it mention them? What sort of proof do you have of other kinds
>of extinct humans? I'm looking for real proof,
There's lots of real scientific evidence. Proof is for math.
>not an incomplete skeleton
>where the person was deformed and hence he was an entire race of primitive
>man. Or skeletons where parts of other skeletons are put together to make a
>new race of people.
No such examples exist, other than in creationist folklore. Try:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/
http://www.asu.edu/clas/iho/
http://www.handprint.com/LS/ANC/evol.html
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Atrium/1381/index.html
http://www.pitt.edu/~mattf/PaleoAnthro.html
http://hominid.webjump.com/
http://thunder.indstate.edu/~ramanank/index.html neands
http://www.wsu.edu:8001/vwsu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/overview/overvw1.html
http://www.wsu.edu:8001/vwsu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/timeline/timeline.html
http://www.wsu.edu:8001/vwsu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/lfopen-index.html
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/mammal/eutheria/primates.html
http://phylogeny.arizona.edu/tree/eukaryotes/animals/chordata/mammalia/primates/hominidae/hominidae.html
http://www.umanitoba.ca/anthropology/courses/121/index.html
http://www.dla.utexas.edu/depts/anthro/people/faculty/cbramblett/ant301/thirteen.html
http://www.dla.utexas.edu/depts/anthro/people/faculty/cbramblett/ant301/fourteen.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/apeman/index.shtml
http://cyberfair.gsn.org/adelaar/index.htm
http://kroeber.anthro.mankato.msus.edu/biology/humanevolution/hominids.html
http://www.humboldt.edu/~mrc1/main.shtml
http://www.indiana.edu/~origins/links/evolinks.html
http://ampere.scale.uiuc.edu/anth102/austims.html
http://daphne.palomar.edu/hominid/australo_2.htm
http://www.zstarr.com/iho/science.htm
http://www.emory.edu/LIVING_LINKS/
http://www.primate.wisc.edu/pin/taxon.html
http://www.oneonta.edu:80/~anthro/anth130/links.html
http://www.cruzio.com/~cscp/index.htm
http://cgi.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/tryit/evolution/#
http://users.hol.gr/~dilos/prehis.htm
http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/Courses/bionb420.07/mfreedman/Neuro/Phylogeny/phy.htm
cheers
sfougaras
That's a good question.
But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call SOUL?
Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is a game of our
mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that we can not understand?
Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our bodies?
Ο <rjmil...@my-deja.com> έγραψε στο μήνυμα συζήτησης:
94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
(Aaron) Bible believer
"sfougaras" <gy...@aias.gr> wrote in message
news:94nubo$12k$1...@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr...
>
> That's a good question.
> But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call SOUL?
> Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is a game of our
> mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that we can not
understand?
> Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our bodies?
Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are invisible
to the human eye. The soul is in the same likeness as your body, and it can
feel pain, apart from the body.
Aaron...
(Aaron) Bible believer
"mel turner" <mtu...@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote in message
news:94nu4u$b63$1...@news.duke.edu...
> In article <npKb6.13636$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>,
aar...@hawaii.rr.com wrote...
> ><rjmil...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> >>Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> >>Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> >>as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> >>mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
>
> >Why should it mention them? What sort of proof do you have of other
kinds
> >of extinct humans? I'm looking for real proof,
>
> There's lots of real scientific evidence. Proof is for math.
>
> >not an incomplete skeleton
> >where the person was deformed and hence he was an entire race of
primitive
> >man. Or skeletons where parts of other skeletons are put together to
make a
> >new race of people.
>
> No such examples exist, other than in creationist folklore. Try:
No, that is your proof, like Lucy and the rest. Bone pieces from hundreds
of feet away, claimed to be the same skeleton. Real science, huh!
Aaron...
(Aaron) Bible believer
> "How fair is thy love, my sister, my spouse! how much better is thy love
than
> wine!" [Song of Solomon 4:10]
Ian nails one of the proof texts for Cain. Got to love it man, scripture
with scripture, verse with verse.
Aaron...
James Doemer
(Aaron) Bible believer <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:npKb6.13636$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com...
You should really keep up on the most recent research. Try the Neader
Vally, Germany, National
Geographic article, around a year and a half ago. Entire cavern of intact
Neaderthal skeletons. I'll wait....
Albert A. Arendsen
<ronald....@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
Through all the Dutch and English I kinda lost track.
Why is it foolish?
Check the Torah. Lilith was indeed Adam's first wife. Within the Judaic
mythology, that is... :)
Robert Carroll
> Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
>
> R Miller
Yes, they had soles. Also heels. :>)
Bob
mel turner
aar...@hawaii.rr.com wrote...
>"mel turner" <mtu...@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote in message
news:94nu4u$b63$1...@news.duke.edu...
>> In article <npKb6.13636$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>,
aar...@hawaii.rr.com wrote...
>> >not an incomplete skeleton
>> >where the person was deformed and hence he was an entire race ofprimitive
>> >man. Or skeletons where parts of other skeletons are put together to make
a
>> >new race of people.
>>
>> No such examples exist, other than in creationist folklore. Try:
>
>No, that is your proof, like Lucy and the rest. Bone pieces from hundreds
>of feet away, claimed to be the same skeleton.
Sorry, but that's a lie. [Not saying it's yours, you're just
repeating falsehoods you've undoubtedly accepted in good faith].
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_piths.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint/johanson1.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/djohanson.html
http://www.eskimo.com/~pierres/lucy.html#theclaim
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/lucy.html
http://www.asu.edu/clas/iho/lucy.html
>Real science, huh!
Yes, exactly. Real science. So unlike "scientific creationism",
which often deals in false claims like the above.
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-creationists.html
cheers
Rodjk #613
"\(Aaron\) Bible believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>
> "sfougaras" <gy...@aias.gr> wrote in message
> news:94nubo$12k$1...@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr...
> >
> > That's a good question.
> > But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call
SOUL?
> > Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is a game
of our
> > mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that we can not
> understand?
> > Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our
bodies?
>
> Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are
invisible
> to the human eye. The soul is in the same likeness as your body, and
it can
> feel pain, apart from the body.
And you know this because?
Rod #613
Ian Rohrbacher
"Albert A. Arendsen" wrote:
> In article <3A6F9345...@libertysurf.fr>, "Ronald Landheer"
> <ronald....@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
>
> > "Albert A. Arendsen" schreef:
> >> In article <94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, rjmil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >> > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or
> >> > not? Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be
> >> > regarded as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it
> >> > does not mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
> >> Ofcourse Genisis isn't accurate even within the mythology it is
> >> supposed to convey, because Eve is only Adams second wife. His first
> >> wife, Lilith, left him because she thought Adam and Paradise were just
> >> a huge bore.
> > Jongen toch.. [patronizing remark in Dutch - no accurate translation]
> > Lilith? Ik dacht dat ze Stephany heette.. [I thought her name was
> > Stephany..]
> > (Adam & Steve?)
> >
> > (sorry for the dutch, people, but this is ridiculous)
> >
> > Sorry Albert, but this is a bit foolish..
>
> Through all the Dutch and English I kinda lost track.
>
> Why is it foolish?
>
> Check the Torah. Lilith was indeed Adam's first wife. Within the Judaic
> mythology, that is... :)
There's NOTHING in the Torah about any Lilith. The Torah is the 5 Books of
Moses. Do you mean Talmud instead? If that's the case, you ought to know
that Talmudic lore has NO bearing on Christianity. What various rabbis
HYPOTHESIZED hundreds of years after Jesus does not change the actual Word of
Yahweh.
>
>
> --
> (o- ((Albert Arendsen) || (Chakotay) || (Reyn Eaglestorm)) -o)
> /\\ )O( http://voyager.student.utwente.nl/index.html )O( //\
> \V/_ A thinking computer... You mean, like a swimming ship? _\V/
--
Ian Rohrbacher
"(Aaron) Bible believer" wrote:
I thought it _was_ a good signature, eh? ;-)
--
Rodjk #613
Uh, you do know this is false. Lucy was found in one place.
Creationist liars (but i repeat myself) tried to make it seem like lucy
was found in differnet places. But it lies.
See:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint/johanson1.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint.html
Want to show yourself to be different from most creationist?
Admit that you were wrong about the bones of Lucy.
Im not holding my breath.
Rod #613
Libertarius
===>Are you not the least ashamed of your ignorance???
Libertarius
===>Still flaunting your ignorance!
Libertarius
===>But you must know that the word DOES appear in the TANAKH.
Don't you?
Clayton Forno
"Adam Marczyk" <ebon...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:94n6ta$18b2$1...@node17.cwnet.frontiernet.net...
> news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> > Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> > as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> > mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
>
> What I want to know is where Cain's wife came from. Maybe she was a
> Neanderthal. ;)
He might have had a fetish for those big eyebrow ridges.
Marlene Capps
Rodjk #613 <ro...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:94o23q$bs5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <IbLb6.13644$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>,
> "\(Aaron\) Bible believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > "sfougaras" <gy...@aias.gr> wrote in message
> > news:94nubo$12k$1...@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr...
> > >
> > > That's a good question.
> > > But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call
> SOUL?
> > > Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is a game
> of our
> > > mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that we can not
> > understand?
> > > Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our
> bodies?
> >
> > Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are
> invisible
> > to the human eye. The soul is in the same likeness as your body, and
> it can
> > feel pain, apart from the body.
>
> And you know this because?
>
> Rod #613
Our soul resides in the sub-conscious mind, below the mind of God and above
the conscious mind of man. Every night as we sleep the soul presents lessons
to us in the form of dreams just as Joseph and others in the bible.
Learning to interpret the symbology and the language of the soul is the most
rewarding experience you will ever encounter.
God Blesses,
Marlene
(Aaron) Bible believer
I may have mixed up what I was talking about. Lucy however was a tree
dwelling primate, not a human.
Aaron...
(Aaron) Bible believer
Found it, it was Java man that I had meant.
Aaron...
<SNIP>
(Aaron) Bible believer
"James Doemer" <big...@provide.net> wrote in message
news:3a6f8...@news.provide.net...
Great, a whole bunch of deformed freaks. Interesting how the scientific
folks never took into account, deformities, radiation, or a different
atmosphere.
Aaron...
>
(Aaron) Bible believer
> In article <IbLb6.13644$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>,
> "\(Aaron\) Bible believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > "sfougaras" <gy...@aias.gr> wrote in message
> > news:94nubo$12k$1...@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr...
> > >
> > > That's a good question.
> > > But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call
> SOUL?
> > > Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is a game
> of our
> > > mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that we can not
> > understand?
> > > Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our
> bodies?
> >
> > Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are
> invisible
> > to the human eye. The soul is in the same likeness as your body, and
> it can
> > feel pain, apart from the body.
>
> And you know this because?
>
> Rod #613
It is what the Bible teaches.
Aaron...
GenNem
For the very good reason that there is no evidence of any of those preposterous
ideas. Please, please, make our day and claim that neanderthals were just
modern humans with arthritis or rickets or whatever version is doing the rounds
in creation science circles at present.
Are you a fan of "Dr" Kent Hovind?
--
GenNem
"Theology ... induces a dogmatic belief that we have knowledge when in fact we
have ignorance, and by doing so generates a kind of impertinent insolence
towards the universe" - Bertrand Russell
Eros
>
> "Adam Marczyk" <ebon...@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:94n6ta$18b2$1...@node17.cwnet.frontiernet.net...
> > news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> > > Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be
regarded
> > > as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> > > mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
> >
> > Neanderthal. ;)
>
new
> population.
So did God approve of incest back then, or just tolerate it a bit 'cause,
barring another miraculous creation event, there was no other way for the
human race to "go forth and multiply?"
EROS.
Eros
>
> <rjmil...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> > Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be regarded
> > as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> > mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
> >
>
> Why should it mention them? What sort of proof do you have of other kinds
> of extinct humans? I'm looking for real proof, not an incomplete skeleton
You wouldn't recognise proof if it jumped up and bit you! And while we're on
the subject of stupid, why does the Bible claim that bats are birds and that
the earth is a flat structure on pillars? I guess God wasn't very good at
biology or geology.
His present-day followers obviously aren't either!
EROS.
Eros
>
> "mel turner" <mtu...@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote in message
> news:94nu4u$b63$1...@news.duke.edu...
> > In article <npKb6.13636$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>,
> aar...@hawaii.rr.com wrote...
> > ><rjmil...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> >
> > >>Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> > >>Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be
regarded
> > >>as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> > >>mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
> >
> > >Why should it mention them? What sort of proof do you have of other
> kinds
> > >of extinct humans? I'm looking for real proof,
> >
> > There's lots of real scientific evidence. Proof is for math.
> >
> > >not an incomplete skeleton
> > >where the person was deformed and hence he was an entire race of
> primitive
> > >man. Or skeletons where parts of other skeletons are put together to
> make a
> > >new race of people.
> >
> > No such examples exist, other than in creationist folklore. Try:
>
> No, that is your proof, like Lucy and the rest. Bone pieces from hundreds
> of feet away, claimed to be the same skeleton. Real science, huh!
Real science, huh? You mean like this? ;-
"The only way we can determine the true age of the earth is
for God to tell us what it is. And since He has told us, very
plainly, in the Holy Scriptures that it is several thousand
years in age, and no more, that ought to settle all basic
questions of terrestrial chronology.
For those who believe in Creation, therefore, physical
processes and evidence that indicate an immense time scale
must be EXPLAINED AWAY. Only those processes or evidence
commensurate with a short (i.e. 6000 years) time scale can be
accepted for use in Creationism."
(Dr. H.M. Morris, 1974, "Scientific Creationism", Public
School Edition, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, p.136)
"...the main reason for insisting on the universal Flood as
a fact of history and as the primary vehicle for geological
interpretation is that God's Word plainly teaches it! No
geologic difficulties, real or imagined, can be allowed to
take precedence over the clear statements and necessary
inferences of Scripture."
(Henry Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science, 1970,
p.32-33)
"It is precisely because Biblical revelation is absolutely
authoritative and perspicuous that the scientific facts,
rightly interpreted, will give the same testimony as that of
Scripture. There is not the slightest possibility that the
"facts" of science can contradict the Bible."
(Henry Morris in the first paragraph of "Scientists Confront
Creationism", edited by Laurie R. Godfrey )
"As we have stressed repeatedly in our book, the real issue is
not the correctness of the interpretation of various details of
the geological data, but simply what God has revealed in His
Word concerning these matters"
(Henry Morris, "The Genesis Flood", pp xxvii: Preface to the
Sixth Printing)
"Creation ..... is inaccessible to the scientific method. It
is impossible to devise a scientific experiment to describe
the creation process, or even to ascertain whether such a
process can take place. The Creator does not create at the
whim of a Scientist."
(Henry Morris, "Scientific Creationism" as quoted in
"Origins" by Robert Shapiro p. 262)
"The data of geology, in our view, should be interpreted in light
of the Scripture, rather than distorting Scripture to accommodate
current geological philosophy." (Morris and Morris, 1989)
"Whenever Hades or Sheol is referred to in the Bible, it's always down
in the earth, the depths of the earth. So right there in the center of
the earth,
apparently there's a great opening that we can't really deal with in
terms
of our seismic instruments or other instrumentation. But apparently it
is there.
You can take the Bible to mean what it says."
(Creation/Evolution newsletter, 1986)
"Elsewhere Morris has written: '... we are completely limited to what
God has seen fit to tell us, and this information is in His written
Word. This is our textbook on the science of Creation!' "
(Professor Robert Shapiro, "Origins: A skeptic's guide to the
creation of life on earth" pp. 262-263)
ROFLMAO! Science indeed! To a Creationist, science is irrelevant 'cause
"Goddidit" It must be a nuisance to always have to carry around a Bible so
you can check up on how you should intrepret your "scientific" research!
EROS.
Pat James
(in message <94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>):
> Did the Neanderthals have souls?
Of course they do. Why, there are large numbers of them running around
Alabama, the Carolinas, Georgia, and Florida to this day. Some are even
Senators, and one is a Perfect Professor of Mathematics. To deny that they
have souls is to say that there are those in the southern United States who
would vote souless monstrosities and would allow other such embodiments of
pure evil to teach children.
> Were they descended from Adam or not?
What a question. Adam seems to have been the Bill Clinton of his day; he
boinked _everything_. Gawd had to find him a girlfriend right quickly before
he caught something.
> Why did God allow them to become extinct?
They're still around. See above.
> Can Genesis really be regarded
> as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
It can't, but then it ain't supposed to be taken literally in the first
place.
--
Scientific creationism: a religious dogma combining massive ignorance with
incredible arrogance.
Creationist: (1) One who follows creationism. (2) A moron. (3) A person
incapable of doing math. (4) A liar. (5) A very gullible true believer.
Pat James
(in message <M2Qb6.13923$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>):
>> Want to show yourself to be different from most creationist?
>> Admit that you were wrong about the bones of Lucy.
>> Im not holding my breath.
>> Rod #613
>
> I may have mixed up what I was talking about. Lucy however was a tree
> dwelling primate, not a human.
Not with those legs she wasn't.
Pat James
(in message <94ov85$4b0$1...@gnamma.connect.com.au>):
>> Great, a whole bunch of deformed freaks. Interesting how the scientific
>> folks never took into account, deformities, radiation, or a different
>> atmosphere.
>
> For the very good reason that there is no evidence of any of those
> preposterous ideas. Please, please, make our day and claim that
> neanderthals were just modern humans with arthritis or rickets or whatever
> version is doing the rounds in creation science circles at present.
He's probably just from deepest crackerland and has noticed the way some of
his neighbors look.
>
> Are you a fan of "Dr" Kent Hovind?
Now, _there's_ a neanderthal.
Dick C.
<XcLb6.13645$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>:
>
>"mel turner" <mtu...@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote in message
>>> >not an incomplete skeleton
>> >where the person was deformed and hence he was an entire race of
>primitive
>> >man. Or skeletons where parts of other skeletons are put together to
>make a
>> >new race of people.
>>
>> No such examples exist, other than in creationist folklore. Try:
>
>No, that is your proof, like Lucy and the rest. Bone pieces from
>hundreds of feet away, claimed to be the same skeleton. Real science,
>huh!
Why not learn about the real deal, instead of what the creationist
publications claim? Try reading the book by Johanson that tells about
the discovery of Lucy? Lucy, The Beginnings of Mankind by Donald
Johanson and Maitland Armstrong Edey. It puts to rest the silly
ideas like the one you mentioned above.
Lucy's skeleton was found in one small area. What you are referring
to is a knee joint from another skeleton of the same species.
--
Dick #1349
People think that libraries are safe places, but they're not,
they have ideas.
email: dic...@uswest.net
Homepage http://www.users.uswest.net/~dickcr/
Beowulf
>
> "(Aaron) Bible believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:omKb6.13634$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com...
> >
> > "Adam Marczyk" <ebon...@excite.com> wrote in message
> > news:94n6ta$18b2$1...@node17.cwnet.frontiernet.net...
> >
> > > she was a Neanderthal. ;)
> >
> > She was a relative of some sort, it was required when you are
> > starting a new population.
>
> So did God approve of incest back then, or just tolerate it a bit 'cause,
> barring another miraculous creation event, there was no other way for the
> human race to "go forth and multiply?"
Despite his protestations, apparently, god has no problem with
incest. He's let it slide so many times with his "saints" that
he can't be serious about it:
[Gen 9:21] Noah drank of the wine, and became drunk, and lay uncovered
in his tent. and Ham [his son] saw the NAKEDNESS of his father.
[Gen. 19:30] Lot went up out of Zo'ar and dwelt in the hills with his
two daughters. And the first-born said to the younger, "Our father is
old, and there is not a man
on earth to come to us after the manner of all the earth. COME LET US
MAKE OUR FATHER DRINK WINE AND WE WILL LIE WITH HIM, that we may
preserve offspring through our father. So they made their father drink
wine that night; AND THE FIRST BORN WENT IN AND LAY WITH HER FATHER; HE
DID NOT KNOW WHEN SHE LAY DOWN OR WHEN SHE AROSE.
[Gen. 38:15] When he [Judah] saw her [Tamar], he thought her to be a
harlot, for she had covered her face. He went over to her at the road
side and said "Come, LET ME COME
INTO YOU" for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-law.
[2.Sam. 13:1] Amnon the son of David fell in love with his sister
Ta'-mar. "Amnon was so tormented that he made himself ill because of his
sister Ta'-mar; for she
was a virgin, and it seemed impossible to Amnon to do anything to her.
Amnon had a friend who said to him, "Lie down on your bed and pretend to
be ill, and when
[your father] the king comes to see you, you say to him: let my sister
Ta'-mar come and give bread to eat from her hand. David sent Ta'-mar to
her brother and
ordered her to feed her brother by her hand.
Ta'-mar took the cakes she had made, and brought them into the chamber
to Amnon, but when she brought them near him to eat, he took hold of
her, and said to
her, "Come, lie with me, my sister", she said, "No my brother, do not
force me." But he would not listen to her; and being stronger than she,
he forced her, and lay
with her."
Beowulf
>
> > > No, that is your proof, like Lucy and the rest. Bone pieces
> > > from hundreds of feet away, claimed to be the same skeleton.
> > > Real science, huh!
> >
> > Uh, you do know this is false. Lucy was found in one place.
> > Creationist liars (but i repeat myself) tried to make it seem
> > like lucy was found in differnet places. But it lies.
> > See:
> > http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint/johanson1.html
> > http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint.html
> >
> > Want to show yourself to be different from most creationist?
> > Admit that you were wrong about the bones of Lucy.
> > Im not holding my breath.
> > Rod #613
>
> I may have mixed up what I was talking about. Lucy however was a
> tree dwelling primate, not a human.
>
> Aaron...
This Aaron fella has to be a bot or a troll. There's no way that a
thinking individual would spout off one creationist falsehood after
another like he was reading from a script.
I wonder if it hurts his head (assuming he's actually a person) to
make such blatant, bald assertions.
Beowulf
> "James Doemer" <big...@provide.net> wrote in message
> news:3a6f8...@news.provide.net...
> >
> > Try the Neader Vally, Germany, National Geographic article,
> > around a year and a half ago. Entire cavern of intact
> > Neaderthal skeletons. I'll wait....
>
> Great, a whole bunch of deformed freaks. Interesting how the
> scientific folks never took into account, deformities, radiation,
> or a different atmosphere.
Holy shit. Aaron, are you reading the talk.origins FAQ to find
out how to act like the stereotypical clueless creationist?
Because you are nailing the performance. This is hilarious.
As for your "insightful" "counterpoint", scientists have studied
those possibilities and concluded that the differences in Neandertal
skeletons cannot be accounted for by any of those items.
big_...@my-deja.com
If you find and read the article, you will find that they took a great
deal of things into account, including deformities, and radiation.
Read the article, you might find it interesting.
Beowulf
> "sfougaras" <gy...@aias.gr> wrote in message
> news:94nubo$12k$1...@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr...
> >
> > That's a good question.
> > But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call
> > SOUL? Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is
> > a game of our mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that
> > we can not understand?
> > Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our bodies?
>
> Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are
> invisible to the human eye. The soul is in the same likeness as
> your body, and it can feel pain, apart from the body.
>
You know what's really cool? This invisible pink unicorn I have
hidden under my chair meets all the same criteria. It must really
exist, too.
Ken Cox
> Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are invisible
> to the human eye.
This would seem to make answering the question of the Subject:
line difficult. Perhaps we should start with an easier one,
like, do chimpanzees have souls?
--
Ken Cox k...@research.bell-labs.com
Eby
message news:3A6F9645.95B573C4@Nothing_But_The.Truth...
And in Neil Gaiman's "The Sandman" series (told by Eve).
Libertarius
===>Who said she was a human?
Libertarius
===>Besides anthropology, you are also weak in geography.
As you can see, it helps to read more than just your Bible and
fundamentalist/creationist propaganda pamphlets. Then you would
find out that the reports on Java Man were also corrected.
Unlike stuff people write and claim to be "revelation", science is
an ongoing process, which includes the correction and refinement of
previous observations and conclusions.
Libertarius
>
>
> Aaron...
>
> <SNIP>
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Pat James" <patj...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:01HW.B69596220...@enews.newsguy.com...
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 5:30:38 -0500, GenNem wrote
> (in message <94ov85$4b0$1...@gnamma.connect.com.au>):
>
> >> Great, a whole bunch of deformed freaks. Interesting how the
scientific
> >> folks never took into account, deformities, radiation, or a different
> >> atmosphere.
> >
> > For the very good reason that there is no evidence of any of those
> > preposterous ideas. Please, please, make our day and claim that
> > neanderthals were just modern humans with arthritis or rickets or
whatever
> > version is doing the rounds in creation science circles at present.
>
> He's probably just from deepest crackerland and has noticed the way some
of
> his neighbors look.
>
> >
> > Are you a fan of "Dr" Kent Hovind?
A fan? Not really a fan, I do use SOME of his materials though.
>
> Now, _there's_ a neanderthal.
>
> --
> Scientific creationism: a religious dogma combining massive ignorance with
> incredible arrogance.
> Creationist: (1) One who follows creationism.
Amen.
(2) A moron.
Not me, must be you.
(3) A person
> incapable of doing math.
No proof, just sweeping statements.
(4) A liar.
Not me, not to mention the fact the numerous examples of the evolutionist
lying.
(5) A very gullible true believer.
Again, not true.
Aaron...
>
>
(Aaron) Bible believer
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Beowulf" <skr...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3A704F29...@attglobal.net...
Interesting that in searching the National Geographic Web site, nor the
internet I could find nothing about your pals claims of a cave full of
Neanderthals.
Aaron...
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Eros" <Er...@Mt.Olympus> wrote in message
news:jKUb6.670$6O3....@ozemail.com.au...
The bible never taught that the earth was flat, although all of your
scientific types in the past did.
Aaron...
Ian Rohrbacher
Libertarius wrote:
> Ian Rohrbacher wrote:
>
> > "Albert A. Arendsen" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <3A6F9345...@libertysurf.fr>, "Ronald Landheer"
> > > <ronald....@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Albert A. Arendsen" schreef:
> > > >> In article <94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, rjmil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > > >> > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or
> > > >> > not? Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be
> > > >> > regarded as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it
> > > >> > does not mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
> > > >> Ofcourse Genisis isn't accurate even within the mythology it is
> > > >> supposed to convey, because Eve is only Adams second wife. His first
> > > >> wife, Lilith, left him because she thought Adam and Paradise were just
> > > >> a huge bore.
> > > > Jongen toch.. [patronizing remark in Dutch - no accurate translation]
> > > > Lilith? Ik dacht dat ze Stephany heette.. [I thought her name was
> > > > Stephany..]
> > > > (Adam & Steve?)
> > > >
> > > > (sorry for the dutch, people, but this is ridiculous)
> > > >
> > > > Sorry Albert, but this is a bit foolish..
> > >
> > > Through all the Dutch and English I kinda lost track.
> > >
> > > Why is it foolish?
> > >
> > > Check the Torah. Lilith was indeed Adam's first wife. Within the Judaic
> > > mythology, that is... :)
> >
> > There's NOTHING in the Torah about any Lilith. The Torah is the 5 Books of
> > Moses. Do you mean Talmud instead? If that's the case, you ought to know
> > that Talmudic lore has NO bearing on Christianity. What various rabbis
> > HYPOTHESIZED hundreds of years after Jesus does not change the actual Word of
> > Yahweh.
>
> ===>But you must know that the word DOES appear in the TANAKH.
> Don't you?
Show me where Lilith appears in the Tanakh. That's the Old Testament, you know,
right? Just making sure since Albert misattributed texts. I searched and found no
reference in the Torah, Neviim, or Ketuvim of "Lilith." None whatsoever. Please
show where, else apologize for being wrong. If you are right, _I_ will apologize.
Pavil Natanovich
rjmil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be
regarded
> as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
>
The Neandertal were God's chosen people. He came again, and received
them unto himself, that where He was they might be also.
That explains why there are no more Neandertal. God took them home
with Him, to dwell eternally in heaven.
The Neandertal lived from a million years ago to about 50,000 years
ago. That is a very long span of time. Although our species came on
the scene prior to the Neandertal resurrection. This is where some of
our ancient myths originated--from the spiritual giants that inhabited
the earth while our species was yet very young.
We may think we're awfully damn special, but the evidence is both clear
and compelling. We are here, in this shit hole we call earth. The
Neandertal are all in heaven. Who are God's chosen people?
Homo sapiens are like the tape at the end of the film. The credits
have rolled, the music has stopped, the curtains are all drawn up. The
show is over--God just forgot to tell us. Before long He will turn off
that lights and that will be it--the stage will be cleared.
We may be puffed up with pride at our accomplishments in the last brief
seconds of geologic time, but really it means nothing.
--
"Useless laws weaken necessary laws" -Baron de Montesquieu
Libertarius
===>That is the kind of misinformation available to those
who apparently never went to school or did not pay attention,
and get all their MISinformation from the Bible and biblicist-
creationist pamphlets.
It is truly sad!
Libertarius
Pavil Natanovich
> news:94nubo$12k$1...@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr...
> >
> > That's a good question.
> > But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call
SOUL?
> > Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is a game
of our
> > mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that we can not
> understand?
> > Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our
bodies?
> Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are
invisible
> to the human eye. The soul is in the same likeness as your body, and
it can
> feel pain, apart from the body.
>
> Aaron...
Souls are invisible except to the spiritual eye. I painted a little
red dot in the center of my fourskin, and through it I can make out the
beautiful souls God created. Not all souls are of such scintelating
brightness, however. It is apparent that premarital sex tarnishes
souls, and other activities stain and abrade God's glorious work.
So if some comely young wench approaches you in a bar with the
line, "your place or mine," BEWARE! Your soul will end up tarnished,
and on the day of judgement it may need to pass through the fiery
furnace to be purified. The little earthly pleasures that will weaken
and tarnish your soul aren't worth the pain and sacrifice that will be
required to renew them and make them clean and whole once again.
I implore you, don't go home with her. Be clean. And stop burning
incense in the temple of God. God prefers the savory aroma of a burnt
offering of flesh--particularly a sheep or ox. Not tobacco leaves!
Uhm, that's all the messages I have from God today. I'll check back
with you again tomorrow after the LSD has worn off.
Libertarius
===>But that is exactly what he is doing. Reading and quoting
creationist
propaganda pamphlets.
> I wonder if it hurts his head (assuming he's actually a person) to
> make such blatant, bald assertions.
===>No. His head had been hurt long ago.
Pavil Natanovich
> news:3a6f8...@news.provide.net...
> >
> > (Aaron) Bible believer <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:npKb6.13636$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com...
> > >
> > > <rjmil...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > > news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam
or not?
> > > > Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be
> regarded
> > > > as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it
does not
> > > > mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
> > > >
> > > > R Miller
> > > Why should it mention them? What sort of proof do you have of
other
> kinds
> > > of extinct humans? I'm looking for real proof, not an incomplete
> skeleton
> > > where the person was deformed and hence he was an entire race of
> primitive
> > > man. Or skeletons where parts of other skeletons are put
together to
> make
> > a
> > > new race of people.
> > >
> > > Aaron...
> > You should really keep up on the most recent research. Try the
Neader
> > Vally, Germany, National
> > Geographic article, around a year and a half ago. Entire cavern of
> intact
> > Neaderthal skeletons. I'll wait....
> Great, a whole bunch of deformed freaks. Interesting how the
scientific
> folks never took into account, deformities, radiation, or a different
> atmosphere.
>
> Aaron...
Most recent research? We've had fully articulated neandertal skeletons
from various places throughout europe and the middle east for decades.
Aaron isn't being just behind the times, he is wandering clear out
beyond left field.
The neandertal skeletons are more robust, stronger, and thicker than
ours. There is little indication they suffered rickets (rachitis),
arthritis, or other crippling bone diseases. Entire groups of people
had skeletons all remarkably similar, yet vastly different from our
species. Radiation? How would radiation make bones stronger, thicker,
and in general, much better than those of Homo sapiens?
Atmospheric conditions? There is probably something to that.
Sometimes neandertals occupied areas formerly occupied by Homo sapiens,
and sometimes prior to sapien occupation. So far virtually no evidence
has been uncovered to show both groups cohabited any one area
simultaneously.
As for science dudes not taking deformities into account, that is
simple-minded balderdash. Great arguments followed the discovery of
the first neander skeleton in Germany in the late 1800s. A number of
scientists insisted the skeletons were simply deformed--analysis which
subsequent observations and discoveries have utterly demolished. These
skeletons (at last count I understood there were roughly 150 nearly
intact specimens) are clearly of a race of men unlike any alive today.
Aaron, you don't know what you're talking about, and you're not
articulating your ignorance very well.
Pavil Natanovich
> > In article <IbLb6.13644$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>,
> > > news:94nubo$12k$1...@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr...
> > > >
> > > > That's a good question.
> > > > But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call
> > SOUL?
> > > > Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is a
game
> > of our
> > > > mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that we can not
> > > understand?
> > > > Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our
> > bodies?
> > >
> > > Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are
> > invisible
> > > to the human eye. The soul is in the same likeness as your body,
and
> > it can
> > > feel pain, apart from the body.
> >
> >
> > Rod #613
>
> It is what the Bible teaches.
>
> Aaron...
No it isn't. You're just making it up as you go along.
Pat James
(in message <L%%b6.14456$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>):
>
> "Pat James" <patj...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
> news:01HW.B69596220...@enews.newsguy.com...
>> On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 5:30:38 -0500, GenNem wrote
>> (in message <94ov85$4b0$1...@gnamma.connect.com.au>):
>>
>>>> Great, a whole bunch of deformed freaks. Interesting how the
> scientific
>>>> folks never took into account, deformities, radiation, or a different
>>>> atmosphere.
>>>
>>> For the very good reason that there is no evidence of any of those
>>> preposterous ideas. Please, please, make our day and claim that
>>> neanderthals were just modern humans with arthritis or rickets or
> whatever
>>> version is doing the rounds in creation science circles at present.
>>
>> He's probably just from deepest crackerland and has noticed the way some
> of
>> his neighbors look.
>>
>>>
>>> Are you a fan of "Dr" Kent Hovind?
>
> A fan? Not really a fan, I do use SOME of his materials though.
No kidding.
>
>>
>> Now, _there's_ a neanderthal.
>>
>> --
>> Scientific creationism: a religious dogma combining massive ignorance with
>> incredible arrogance.
>> Creationist: (1) One who follows creationism.
> Amen.
>
> (2) A moron.
> Not me, must be you.
>
> (3) A person
>> incapable of doing math.
> No proof, just sweeping statements.
>
> (4) A liar.
> Not me, not to mention the fact the numerous examples of the evolutionist
> lying.
>
> (5) A very gullible true believer.
> Again, not true.
>
Congrats, Aaron, you're the first creationist cretin to object to my sig for
this year. You win a giant silver-plated no-prize.
--
Scientific creationism: a religious dogma combining massive ignorance with
incredible arrogance.
Creationist: (1) One who follows creationism. (2) A moron. (3) A person
incapable of doing math. (4) A liar. (5) A very gullible true believer.
Pat James
(in message <3A707A68...@research.bell-labs.com>):
> "(Aaron) Bible believer" wrote:
>> Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are invisible
>> to the human eye.
>
> This would seem to make answering the question of the Subject:
> line difficult. Perhaps we should start with an easier one,
> like, do chimpanzees have souls?
>
Yes.
Pavil Natanovich
Just a couple of years ago National Geographic ran a lenghty article on
Neandertal skeletons in one particular cave. In each of the last three
years Neandertals have been featured in more than one issue.
Are you magazines being censored? Notice any cut up pages as you leaf
through them?
(Aaron) Bible believer
How exciting for me, I never win anything. I guess if I had a cool
signature it would say, The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that
doeth good.
You're system of evolution results in death. This was proven in Communist
Russia, and is being seen in the classrooms around America today. Kids
beat, and kill each other on an increasingly frequent basis. When you teach
we evolved from nothing, and there is no one to be accountable to, then you
end up with tragedies like Columbine. More than likely you would never
admit to that though. You probably wouldn't even admit to the correlation
of death and torture in Russia where evolution was taught and creationism
rejected. Oh well, it is of no consequence for me. Wallow in your filth
and mire man, you deserve it. There is something better out there, I hope
you'll eventually get it.
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count
slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should
perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Aaron...
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Libertarius" <The_Truth_The_Whole_Truth@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
message news:3A709979.9EA13F2F@Nothing_But_The.Truth...
I've been over this before, I was raised in the best evolution has to offer,
THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. I was also raised by a "man came from ape"
father, the teachings of Carl Sagan, Nova, and all the other fanciful junk.
I did pay attention in school, and that is why I see that the definition of
science is not at all what you see in National Geographic, Time, or the
works of evolutionists.
Aaron...
Libertarius
===>He won't dare read such factual stuff. It might contradict his
"faith"!
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Pavil Natanovich" <crysan...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:94qcnn$d42$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
I just looked at all of your junk last night, and there were not anything
more than a handful of Neanderthal skeletons found! At least in what I saw
on the websites of the evolutionists.
That covered all the findings in France, Germany, and Croatia or somewhere
around there.
If you'd like to show me where these 150 skeletons are I'd really be
interested. As I've indicated earlier, I can't find what you all keep
claiming.
Aaron..
Albert A. Arendsen
<rabbi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Show me where Lilith appears in the Tanakh. That's the Old Testament,
> you know, right? Just making sure since Albert misattributed texts. I
> searched and found no reference in the Torah, Neviim, or Ketuvim of
> "Lilith." None whatsoever. Please show where, else apologize for being
> wrong. If you are right, _I_ will apologize.
You know, you all got me interested. After all, it's not _my_ mythology so
I had only some superficial knowledge about the whole Lilith deal, but by
the God's antlers, you've got me interested now... :)
Lets see...
The first recorded mention of Lilith is in the epic of Gilgamesh of around
2400 BCE, where she's mentioned and a fearsome creature associated with
Eden.
Dated 2000 BCE is a terra-cotta relief featuring Lilith as the primary
figure.
Isaiah 34:14 (900 BCE) mentions Lilith, though not quite directly.
Translations vary between "Lilith", "night hag" and "night demon".
Solomon's Testament (200 CE) mentions "Obizuth" who, by description, is
either Lilith's long lost identical twin, or Lilith herself.
The Talmud (400 CE) mentions Lilith incidentally four times, though never
in connection with Adam.
40 incantation bowls were found near the ancient colony of Nippur, dated
600 CE. 26 of them feature Lilith.
The Alphabet of Ben Sira, 800 CE, is a controversial text by an unknown
author that is believed to be the spawn of the present day Lilith myths.
It mentions Lilith as Adams insubordinate first wife, created from dust as
his equal, who fled Eden.
The Book of Raziel, 1100 CE, is based on Hebrew amuletic traditions
warding off Lilith during childbirth. Lilith is associated with Adam and
Eve.
The Zohar, 1200 CE, is the central work of Jewish mysticism. It mentions
Lilith in various forms: 1) the "female of Samael", seductive and
beautiful, she sleeps with men and then kills them. (Zohar I 148a-148b).
2) She sleeps with men, inflicts diseases upon them, and begets demons.
(Zohar I 19b). 3) Lilith as Adam's first wife (Zohar III 19a). 4) Lilith
as murderer of children (Zohar I 19b).
Ofcourse, Hebrew amuletic tradition between 900 and 1800 CE has numerous
amulets that focus on Lilith, or rather, on keeping her away during
childbirth.
More info can be found on http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/Garden/424
which is incidentally where I got the above info.
http://www.lilithmag.com/resources/lilithsources.shtml shows:
Lilith in the Talmud: The personality called "Lilith" in the Talmud shows
no connection with Adam at all. From the four specific references to
Lilith in the Babylonian Talmud, we learn only that she is a wild-haired
and winged creature with nymphomaniac tendencies (Erubin 100b, Niddah 24b,
Shabbat 151b); and the mother of demons (Bava Batra 73a ).
Such a characterization of Lilith may have been drawn from the single
Biblical mention of "lilith" (Isaiah 34:14):
The wild creatures of the desert shall meet with the jackals , the goat
demon shall call to his fellow, the lilith shall also repose there and
find for herself a place of rest.
Commentators have often translated "lilith" as "night-monster,"
associating the name with layil, the Hebrew word for night; thus, Rabbi
Hanina forbids men to sleep alone in a house at night lest they fall prey
to her (Shabbat 151b). (The Akadian "lilitu," a female spirit wind, is
probably a more accurate etymology, however.)
"First Eve": The midrash (legends) of Genesis Rabbah discusses a "first
Eve" but does not mention Lilith. According to Rabbi Hiya, she "returned
to dust" (22:7). Judah, son of Rabbi Hiya, states that in the beginning
God created Eve for Adam, but when Adam saw her being made with sinews and
blood, he grew disgusted and became alienated from her. Thereupon God
caused this first Eve to return to nothingness and proceeded to create a
second Eve for Adam (18.4).
Two separate and distinct beings-Lilith of the Talmud and Eve 1 of the
midrash-came together into one, to become Lilith, Adam's first mate. We
can see this process of integration in the Alphabet itself. In the
beginning of this account, Lilith is characterized as a woman (ishah). By
the end of the story, however, her children are called demons (sheydim)
and she herself has powers that can only be warded off by the mystical
means of an amulet. Thus, having equated his protagonist with Lilith of
the Talmud, the author was forced to assign her the characteristics
attributed to her by that work.
Generally, you'll probably have quite a lot of fun with the links
generated by: http://www.google.com/search?q=lilith+references
wf...@ptd.net
<aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>I've been over this before, I was raised in the best evolution has to offer,
>THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. I was also raised by a "man came from ape"
>father, the teachings of Carl Sagan, Nova, and all the other fanciful junk.
>I did pay attention in school, and that is why I see that the definition of
>science is not at all what you see in National Geographic, Time, or the
>works of evolutionists.
>
gee aint it wonderful he knows the entire world's scientific community
is a group of liars
thus does creationism breed paranoia.
wf...@ptd.net
<aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>
>The bible never taught that the earth was flat, although all of your
>scientific types in the past did.
>
>Aaron...
>
>
if they did, why did no one believe it?
wf...@ptd.net
<aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
><SNIP>
>How exciting for me, I never win anything. I guess if I had a cool
>signature it would say, The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
>Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that
>doeth good.
>
>You're system of evolution results in death. This was proven in Communist
>Russia, and is being seen in the classrooms around America today
this is, of course, nonsense. people were killing each other long
before evolution came on the scene. and one of the leading killers has
been religious wars.
.. Kids
>beat, and kill each other on an increasingly frequent basis. When you teach
>we evolved from nothing
who teaches this? answer: no one. no one at all. evolution is a fact
but you'd prefer we teach a lie?
(Aaron) Bible believer
Luke 16:19-31
This instance deals with a man in paradise, remember his physical body was
in the grave. Yet, there was recognition of who he was, and he could
recognize who others were. You'll also notice the other man was in torments
from the flames, he felt pain, and felt thirst.
Rev 6:9-11
You'll also notice the souls under the altar wearing robes. How? Because
the soul is in the same shape as the body.
You also have the literal circumcision of the soul from the body, where God
cuts the soul away from the body when a person gets saved. This allows the
Holy Spirit to permanently indwell that person, while that person continues
to physically sin in body. In the OT, the Holy Ghost would leave someone
who was living in sin, as it can't stand to touch sin.
Aaron...
Jason Spaceman
<aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
..
>
>You're system of evolution results in death. This was proven in Communist
>Russia, and is being seen in the classrooms around America today. Kids
>beat, and kill each other on an increasingly frequent basis. When you teach
>we evolved from nothing, and there is no one to be accountable to, then you
>end up with tragedies like Columbine. More than likely you would never
>admit to that though. You probably wouldn't even admit to the correlation
>of death and torture in Russia where evolution was taught and creationism
>rejected. Oh well, it is of no consequence for me. Wallow in your filth
>and mire man, you deserve it. There is something better out there, I hope
>you'll eventually get it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but they didn't teach Darwinian evolution in
communist Russia, they taught Lysenkoism. As for Columbine,
considering that many US states have such watered down science
standards I wonder if they even taught evolution in Colorado pre
Columbine. But it's irrelevant since murder, torture, etc. have been
around long before Charles Darwin and will, unfortunately, probably be
around for a long time to come.
I suppose one could cook up a correlation between the teaching of
chemistry and tragedies like Columbine, but it would be completely
pointless.
J. Spaceman
mel turner
aar...@hawaii.rr.com [\Aaron\ Bible believer] wrote...>news:94o2eu$c0i$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
[snip]
>> > No, that is your proof, like Lucy and the rest. Bone pieces from
>> hundreds
>> > of feet away, claimed to be the same skeleton. Real science, huh!
>>
>> Uh, you do know this is false. Lucy was found in one place.
>> Creationist liars (but i repeat myself) tried to make it seem like lucy
>> was found in differnet places. But it lies.
>> See:
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint/johanson1.html
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint.html
>>
>> Want to show yourself to be different from most creationist?
>> Admit that you were wrong about the bones of Lucy.
>> Im not holding my breath.
>> Rod #613
>
>I may have mixed up what I was talking about.
No, you repeated a frequent creationist claim about "Lucy".
It was a false story, not a mixed up one..
>Lucy however was a tree
>dwelling primate, not a human.
No, a terrestrial biped.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/pelvis.html
As for being human or not, it's a matter of defining
what a "human" is. _Australopithecus afarensis_
was clearly on the human side of the last
human/chimpanzee split.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_piths.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/species.html
cheers
mel turner
>I just looked at all of your junk last night, and there were not anything
>more than a handful of Neanderthal skeletons found!
Then you're probably not looking very well.
http://www.handprint.com/LS/ANC/evol.html#chart
indicates about 500 specimens of H. neanderthalensis are
known. It's a very well-known form. [from fossils of many
individuals, of all ages]
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/species.html
http://www.handprint.com/LS/ANC/hfs9.html
http://thunder.indstate.edu/~ramanank/index.html
http://sapphire.indstate.edu/~ramanank/references.html
http://sapphire.indstate.edu/~ramanank/links.html
>At least in what I saw
>on the websites of the evolutionists.
>That covered all the findings in France, Germany, and Croatia or somewhere
>around there.
>If you'd like to show me where these 150 skeletons are I'd really be
>interested. As I've indicated earlier, I can't find what you all keep
>claiming.
Anyway, what's the big deal about neandertals? They weren't
our direct ancestors, just our extinct cousins [a separate
type of advanced human, that coexisted for a time with modern
_Homo sapiens_]
cheers
Nervis
Your bible god appeared to be obsessed with the removal of the foreskin, I
wonder why he/she/it "created" man with a foreskin if it was unecessary?
(Aaron) Bible believer
<wf...@ptd.net> wrote in message news:3a70c373...@news.ptdprolog.net...
You do teach a lie. There is no evidence for evolution anywhere. That is
why Charley Darwin was dropped long ago, and no lies had to be made, such as
spontaneous generation. The entire earth screams young earth, so does the
moon.
Aaron...
>
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Libertarius" <The_Truth_The_Whole_Truth@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
message news:3A70C0A2.8C536CD9@Nothing_But_The.Truth...
You mean such as all the facts for a world wide flood.
Aaron...
Nervis
>
> "Libertarius" <The_Truth_The_Whole_Truth@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
> message news:3A709979.9EA13F2F@Nothing_But_The.Truth...
> > GenNem wrote:
> >
> > > "(Aaron) Bible believer" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "James Doemer" <big...@provide.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:3a6f8...@news.provide.net...
> > > > >
> > > > > (Aaron) Bible believer <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:npKb6.13636$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <rjmil...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> I've been over this before, I was raised in the best evolution has to
offer,
> THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. I was also raised by a "man came from ape"
> father, the teachings of Carl Sagan, Nova, and all the other fanciful
junk.
> I did pay attention in school, and that is why I see that the definition
of
> science is not at all what you see in National Geographic, Time, or the
> works of evolutionists.
>
> Aaron...
What traumatic experiece did you have that turned you to "worship" a
fictional character, namely the bible god?
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Jason Spaceman" <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in message
news:abh17t4fter4nkrr0...@4ax.com...
Did I say murder didn't predate evolutionary ideas? No. Have we seen an
escalation of violent crimes with our youth since the introduction of
evolution? Yes.
When a person believes they are only a glorified animal, that is how they
act. A modern college campus is testimony of this fact. Drunkenness, and
all the sex you can have is the greatest goal of young men around this
country. Why? Because they honestly don't believe they are going to be
held accountable for their actions. They are after all just a step above
the animals in the jungle.
Aaron...
>
>
>
> J. Spaceman
>
(Aaron) Bible believer
I searched the National Geographic website, found nothing. Perhaps you
could give me specific issues?
Aaron...
(Aaron) Bible believer
<wf...@ptd.net> wrote in message news:3a70c32e...@news.ptdprolog.net...
The child of God has always believed in a round earth, even while the
greatest secular minds of the day said it was flat.
Aaron...
>
(Aaron) Bible believer
<wf...@ptd.net> wrote in message news:3a70c280...@news.ptdprolog.net...
They are.
Piltdown man, Orce man, and Nebraska man, all hoaxes. Leakey was a liar.
No worries from me. God prophesied of these lying lovers of themselves
thousands of years ago.
1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding
profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
Aaron...
>
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Ken Cox" <k...@lucent.com> wrote in message
news:3A707A68...@research.bell-labs.com...
> "(Aaron) Bible believer" wrote:
> > Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are
invisible
> > to the human eye.
>
> line difficult. Perhaps we should start with an easier one,
> like, do chimpanzees have souls?
I don't recall anywhere where the bible teaches that animals have souls. So
for now I will say no, they don't.
Aaron...
>
> --
> Ken Cox k...@research.bell-labs.com
>
(Aaron) Bible believer
> "(Aaron) Bible believer" wrote:
> > "sfougaras" <gy...@aias.gr> wrote in message
> > news:94nubo$12k$1...@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr...
> > >
> > > That's a good question.
> > > But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call
> > > SOUL? Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is
> > > a game of our mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that
> > > we can not understand?
> > > Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our bodies?
> >
> > your body, and it can feel pain, apart from the body.
> >
>
> hidden under my chair meets all the same criteria. It must really
> exist, too.
You ought to take good care of it, as unicorns are now extinct.
Aaron...
(Aaron) Bible believer
> In article <IbLb6.13644$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>,
> "\(Aaron\) Bible believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > "sfougaras" <gy...@aias.gr> wrote in message
> > news:94nubo$12k$1...@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr...
> > >
> > > That's a good question.
> > > But unfortunately I cannot reply. I wonder: WHAT IS that we call
> SOUL?
> > > Can we define this word? Is something that exists, or it is a game
> of our
> > > mind for some mechanisms (molecular mechanisms) that we can not
> > understand?
> > > Is it something that exists after our death, or dies with our
> bodies?
>
> > Our souls are wonderfully, and intricately made by God. They are
> invisible
> > to the human eye. The soul is in the same likeness as your body, and
> it can
> > feel pain, apart from the body.
> >
>
> Souls are invisible except to the spiritual eye. I painted a little
> red dot in the center of my fourskin, and through it I can make out the
> beautiful souls God created. Not all souls are of such scintelating
> brightness, however. It is apparent that premarital sex tarnishes
> souls, and other activities stain and abrade God's glorious work.
>
> So if some comely young wench approaches you in a bar with the
> line, "your place or mine," BEWARE! Your soul will end up tarnished,
> and on the day of judgement it may need to pass through the fiery
> furnace to be purified. The little earthly pleasures that will weaken
> and tarnish your soul aren't worth the pain and sacrifice that will be
> required to renew them and make them clean and whole once again.
>
> I implore you, don't go home with her. Be clean. And stop burning
> incense in the temple of God. God prefers the savory aroma of a burnt
> offering of flesh--particularly a sheep or ox. Not tobacco leaves!
>
> Uhm, that's all the messages I have from God today. I'll check back
> with you again tomorrow after the LSD has worn off.
Other than being a mocker, are you Romanian?
(Aaron) Bible believer
> In article <94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> rjmil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > Did the Neanderthals have souls? Were they descended from Adam or not?
> > Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be
> regarded
> > as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> > mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
> >
> > R Miller
>
> them unto himself, that where He was they might be also.
>
> That explains why there are no more Neandertal. God took them home
> with Him, to dwell eternally in heaven.
>
> The Neandertal lived from a million years ago to about 50,000 years
> ago. That is a very long span of time. Although our species came on
> the scene prior to the Neandertal resurrection. This is where some of
> our ancient myths originated--from the spiritual giants that inhabited
> the earth while our species was yet very young.
>
> We may think we're awfully damn special, but the evidence is both clear
> and compelling. We are here, in this shit hole we call earth. The
> Neandertal are all in heaven. Who are God's chosen people?
>
> Homo sapiens are like the tape at the end of the film. The credits
> have rolled, the music has stopped, the curtains are all drawn up. The
> show is over--God just forgot to tell us. Before long He will turn off
> that lights and that will be it--the stage will be cleared.
>
> We may be puffed up with pride at our accomplishments in the last brief
> seconds of geologic time, but really it means nothing.
>
>
> --
> "Useless laws weaken necessary laws" -Baron de Montesquieu
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
>
You reminded me of something. If man were as old as you all claim, we would
be swimming in their fossils and bones. Of course we aren't, but fact has
never been the key element of the evolutionist.
Aaron...
"Better make those lander legs pretty long, the dust on the moon will be
pretty thick as old as it is."
Hmmm, not as thick as you thought. I guess the soundstage prop guys didn't
read their science books.
mel turner
[snip]
>
>why Charley Darwin was dropped long ago, and no lies had to be made, such as
>spontaneous generation. The entire earth screams young earth, so does the
>moon.
Screaming and howling at the moon? Sounds more
reminiscent of your stuff:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-mustread.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html
cheers
Jon Fleming
<aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Ooh! Ooh! Please tell me you're going to do the moon dust one.
That's my _favorite_ idiotic creationist argument!
>
>Aaron...
>
>>
--
Change "nospam" to "group" to email
GenNem
You are obviously one of Kent Hovind's clones. How do I know this? I have more
than just a passing knowledge of the bullshit spouted by Kent Hovind.
http://www.geocities.com/kenthovind/
Still a first draft site but if you dont understand why Kent Hovind is a fraud,
charlatan, liar, fool and generally ignorant then I have wasted a couple of
months of analysis.
GenNem
Aaron you are committing the logic fallacy of cum hoc, ergo propter hoc (with
this, therefore
because of this). Dont feel bad you are just spouting the bullshit of Kent
Hovind. Kent Hovind has not shown any causal correlation between evolution
theory and social statistics. Even some of his own statistics argue against his
position
Evolution Theory does not teach humans are just animals. We are a type of
organism with a history connected with the rest of the planet. Evolution Theory
says no more or less about morals or ethics than Quantum mechanics. Come to
think of it Quantum mechanics says that events are just based upon probability
so lets blame Quantum Mechanics for complex social issues and ban QM from
schools. Why or why not?
dlh
Bible believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> says...
> <SNIP>
> How exciting for me, I never win anything. I guess if I had a cool
> signature it would say, The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
> Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that
> doeth good.
>
> Russia, and is being seen in the classrooms around America today. Kids
> beat, and kill each other on an increasingly frequent basis.
projecting here. These are YOUR views on what it must be like not to
believe in god. What you would find if you COULD not believe is that it is
very much like not believing in Zeus, Santa or Venus. Your behavior would
not change. There are only a few who need a supernatural threat in order
to behave in a civil or moral manor. How many Christians have exemplary
morals. Many Atheists you will find are humanists and strive to improve
the world for the future. They don't waste their time trying to get to
heaven and pleasing anthropomorphic gods. They believe that all life is to
be respected and that the earth and animals were not created specifically
for their use.
dlh
> When you teach
> we evolved from nothing, and there is no one to be accountable to, then you
> end up with tragedies like Columbine. More than likely you would never
> admit to that though. You probably wouldn't even admit to the correlation
> of death and torture in Russia where evolution was taught and creationism
> rejected. Oh well, it is of no consequence for me. Wallow in your filth
> and mire man, you deserve it. There is something better out there, I hope
> you'll eventually get it.
Did you know that the news usually reports the bad things and ignores the
good. That there are 6 billion people in the world and 98% of them are
doing just fine except for the ones that are starving so that you can have
a computer to type on. (not really, I kind of got carried away here) but
you get my point don't you?
Most of us have got it. You seem to be the one that is upset. You sound
like you are 80 years old. If you are able I suggest you get out and meet
some new people or find another news group.
dlh
>
> 2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count
> slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should
> perish, but that all should come to repentance.
>
>
> Aaron...
>
>
mel turner
[snip]
>You reminded me of something. If man were as old as you all claim, we would
>be swimming in their fossils and bones.
Why? Most individual organisms don't make any fossils.
[And for that matter, most fossils will never be found and
studied]. There were herds of millions of bison on the N.
American plains [and there were thousands of generations of
such, even according to young-earth timetables]. Why aren't
we swimming in _their_ much more robust bones? Most bones
dissolve or weather away.
>Of course we aren't, but fact has
>never been the key element of the evolutionist.
Projecting, much?
>Aaron...
>
>"Better make those lander legs pretty long, the dust on the moon will be
>pretty thick as old as it is."
>Hmmm, not as thick as you thought. I guess the soundstage prop guys didn't
>read their science books.
Wow, a mix of the creationist moon-dust myth with the
"landing was faked" paranoia. You sure you're not Loki
trolling?
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html#dust
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-meritt/age.html#dust
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moonrec.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-youngearth.html
cheers
GenNem
ROFLMAO!!!!
GenNem
>
> "Eros" <Er...@Mt.Olympus> wrote in message
> news:jKUb6.670$6O3....@ozemail.com.au...
> >
> > "(Aaron) Bible believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:npKb6.13636$gi1.1...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com...
> > >
> > > <rjmil...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > > news:94mt47$7ur$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > > Why did God allow them to become extinct? Can Genesis really be
> regarded
> > > > as an accurate account of the origins of human beings if it does not
> > > > mention Neanderthals and other extinct kinds of humans?
> > > >
> > > > R Miller
> > >
> kinds
> > > of extinct humans? I'm looking for real proof, not an incomplete
> skeleton
> >
> on
> > the subject of stupid, why does the Bible claim that bats are birds and
> that
> > the earth is a flat structure on pillars? I guess God wasn't very good at
> > biology or geology.
> > His present-day followers obviously aren't either!
> >
> > EROS.
>
> The bible never taught that the earth was flat, although all of your
> scientific types in the past did.
>
> Aaron...
The earth is stable and does not move. 1 Sam.2:8, 1 Chr.16:30; Job 9:6, 38:4-6;
Ps.96:10, 104:5, Is.13:10, Mic.6:2 If so, then it must not spin on its axis or
travel about the sun.
God will gather up the people of Judea "from the four corners of the earth."
Is.11:12
The stone became "a great mountain" that "filled the whole earth." This could
only be possible on a flat, disc-shaped earth. Dan.2:35
Daniel's tree is tall enough to see "to the end of the earth." Dan.4:10-11
The devil kidnaps Jesus and takes him up to the top of the temple, and then to
the top of "an exceeding high mountain," high enough to see "all the kingdoms of
the world." Mt.4:5-8
The devil takes Jesus to the top of a mountain and shows him "all the kingdoms
of the world." I guess the world was flat in those days. Lk.4:5
In the book of Revelation (7:1), John "saw four angels standing on the four
corners of the earth." Well, I guess that settles it: the earth is flat and
square-shaped, or at least quadrilateral in shape.
Would you like some more scientific absurdities from the Bible?
WickedDyno
believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
> <wf...@ptd.net> wrote in message
> news:3a70c280...@news.ptdprolog.net...
> > On 25 Jan 2001 19:03:31 -0500, "\(Aaron\) Bible believer"
> > <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >I've been over this before, I was raised in the best evolution has to
> offer,
> > >THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. I was also raised by a "man came from ape"
> > >father, the teachings of Carl Sagan, Nova, and all the other fanciful
> junk.
> > >I did pay attention in school, and that is why I see that the
> > >definition
> of
> > >science is not at all what you see in National Geographic, Time, or
> > >the
> > >works of evolutionists.
> > >
> >
> > gee aint it wonderful he knows the entire world's scientific community
> > is a group of liars
> >
> > thus does creationism breed paranoia.
>
> They are.
>
> Piltdown man, Orce man, and Nebraska man, all hoaxes.
Piltdown man was, and exposed by scientists. I have no idea what Orce
man is. Nebraska man was an honest mistake, and revealed to be so by
its discoverer.
> Leakey was a liar.
Which Leakey, and what did he lie about?
--
| Andrew Glasgow <amg39(at)cornell.edu> |
| SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical |
| reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat |
| to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods |
WickedDyno
believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Yes, all of them... all none of them...
WickedDyno
believer" <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
There never were any unicorns. The word mistranslated as "unicorn" in
the KJV really means something closer to "wild ox".
(Aaron) Bible believer
"Jon Fleming" <jo...@fleming-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:41l17tg2189o03ef7...@4ax.com...
Its in this thread somewhere, go find it!
Aaron...
(Aaron) Bible believer
"mel turner" <mtu...@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote in message
news:94qkff$d1p$1...@news.duke.edu...
> In article <_04c6.2$d4....@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>, aar...@hawaii.rr.com
> [\Aaron\ Bible believer] wrote...
> [snip]
> >
> >You do teach a lie. There is no evidence for evolution anywhere. That
is
> >why Charley Darwin was dropped long ago, and no lies had to be made, such
as
> >spontaneous generation. The entire earth screams young earth, so does
the
> >moon.
>
> Screaming and howling at the moon? Sounds more
> reminiscent of your stuff:
Actually that reminds me of the ungodly humanist Ozzy Osborne who realizes
that God has more to offer then the world he indulged in, and sends his kids
to a private Christian school
in the UK. I guess even a burnt out mind has more sense then some...
Aaron...
GenNem
>
> <wf...@ptd.net> wrote in message news:3a70c280...@news.ptdprolog.net...
> > On 25 Jan 2001 19:03:31 -0500, "\(Aaron\) Bible believer"
> > <aar...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >I've been over this before, I was raised in the best evolution has to
> offer,
> > >THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. I was also raised by a "man came from ape"
> > >father, the teachings of Carl Sagan, Nova, and all the other fanciful
> junk.
> > >I did pay attention in school, and that is why I see that the definition
> of
> > >science is not at all what you see in National Geographic, Time, or the
> > >works of evolutionists.
> > >
> >
> > gee aint it wonderful he knows the entire world's scientific community
> > is a group of liars
> >
> > thus does creationism breed paranoia.
>
> They are.
>
> Piltdown man,
Correct. Exposed by science 50 years ago.
> Orce man,
Just a fossil fragment that no one is sure about. That didnt stop Duane Gish
from being his usual creationist self
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_orce.html
> and Nebraska man,
No a misidentification of a tooth
> all hoaxes.
Incorrect. One fraud (exposed by science), one unknown and one
misidentification.
> Leakey was a liar.
Oh please. I hope you are trying to dig up the Lucy Knee argument
http://www.geocities.com/kenthovind/evolution3.html#cavemen (scroll down a
little)
> No worries from me. God prophesied of these lying lovers of themselves
> thousands of years ago.
Oh how modest of you. When you are quite finished sticking your fingers in your
ears maybe we can talk about reality.
>
> 1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding
> profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
>
> Aaron...
The concept of skeptical inquiry is obviously beyond your religion so why are
you wasting our time by trying to use skepticism on everything except your own
position. Hypocrite.