:banana: :banana:Quote:
Originally Posted by okmit
I do think that too!!! Maybe I can't express myself freely and expound more on my ideas but youhave said it right. I support you there!!! :banana:
Printable View
:banana: :banana:Quote:
Originally Posted by okmit
I do think that too!!! Maybe I can't express myself freely and expound more on my ideas but youhave said it right. I support you there!!! :banana:
AimusSage,a mimmick is a copy and can never be original.Granted when you add something of your own it would be original but it would no longer be a copy.So tell me,what magical animal feats have I missed?CoCo didnt add any new,or original signs or begin teaching other primates her new skills has she?
It has been said,"God is knowledge,and evil is ignorance."You have no need to become offensive.
Ancestor,I am familiar with that nasty looking creature (Lucy.)I'm certain that had that species had the adaptation skills God gave us they would learn sign language much quicker than CoCo.
There is nothing scary about the thought of evolving from an ape...its just wrong!
tiny explorer,I thank You.I have enjoyed reading your posts also...particularly the last one!
If Great Spirit had made it that we did actually in fact evolve from a ape how then is it wrong? I am trying to understand your way of thinking here. Chimpazee's who have learned sign language has passed it down to their children without humans encouragment. You cannot judge intelligence based on communication skills that humans use. Animals have a totally different communication skills on their own. You cannot base what we look like today to what we looked like hundreds of thousands of years ago. Iceman that was found a decade ago has been proven to be human and he does not look like the humans of today. Without science backing us up one way or the other how can you stand by your convictions. Mine are always opened to being proven wrong because I do not know for sure if I am correct. I would not be a insult to me if someone to prove me wrong it would be a learning stone I gladly step on. Nothing is written in stone as you go through life for tomorrow is always unwritten. Besides as someone who has learned some sign language I can tell you that is not simple to learn and in fact has more then one dialect.Quote:
Originally Posted by okmit
Great Spirit...Hmmm.
In my second post I stated I was a Christian.We believe God made man in his own image.We dont believe the Great Spirit looks like CoCo,or even Lucy.I'm not seeking converts,only dialogue.I also believe we all have a God given right to be wrong.
On the animal intellect,I am truly amazed by their God given survival instinct.It is a shame they were never able to sharpen those skills to survive the terror of humans.
On not looking now like we looked hundreds of thousands of years ago.I'm affraid your preaching to the choir on that point! I'm 57 years old and every time I shave I wonder where the good looking young guy went that use to look back?
I still look the same as I did when I was in my twenties and now I am in my late thirties. I do not believe in trying to convert anyone to my beliefs or way of thinking and I am looking to be converted either. That for me is morally wrong especially if some is happy with their own faith. Great Spirit is how I choose to call God by and I have no problems you being Christian. Do you know what the Great Spirit looks like? Knowing that humans skeletal remains have shown several different structal changes for humans over a thousands of years. How can we say for sure that the first human being truly looked like the Great Spirit? Do we today look like the Great Spirit? Was it meant to be taken so literal? I am not doubting the Bible only man's interpretation of the Bible. Great Spirit's words may be true but humans are not always so. I meant no disrespect but merely trying to point out that without hard scienfic proof we cannot say what we truly looked like all those years ago. The true question is what does the Great Spirit truly look like. Did he also not creat all life on Earth? I believe that he did create all life and we all are truly different and I thank the Great Spirit for that.
On that same line of thought, it's very possible that the preverbial "Adam" that God spoke to was merely the first man who God got around to talking to. The story about him being made in God's image could've been much more loosely meant, in that God said "I made you in my image" (once upon a time, but you've evolved into who you are now). In any case the idea that a superficial appearance of the deity being closer to us than animals merely overshadows a point of arrogance, more so than accuracy. It doesn't matter if God's image looks like man or if man looks like God because, supposedly, we're all God's creatures. Just because he might've told us he loved us and we rounded up some books and a few dialogues around the globe to get a popular opinion going, doesn't necessarily make it so.
There's just as much possibility of any Great Spirit being plausable as there is for God, and the image of each is just as diverse, because of that interpretation given book. Man writing a book "inspired" by God is about as loose as you can get. I've read Star Wars books "inspired" by the original movies, but all they are are a military novel about an adventure. It holds true to some inspired lines of thought, but that doesn't make it exact in any sense. For man to go pulling the strings on how things worked in literature for something even as important as creation isn't that far fetched.
Seeing as most mankind has a certain air of ego about it, I wouldn't put it past the authors to have gone and made man just the first thing God loved, rather than the animals around man. It inspires mankind to believe more so and any other story might lead them down a path of low self esteem that some can't handle, of being looked at as just another creature of God, here to be loved. Mankind is but a brother or sister to nature and everything in it. We can't accept that "daddy loves his children the same" because we're all brats that want to know in our hearts that He loves us the most.
Anyways, yeah.. had that musing of thought after reading a few replies above and grasping onto what the concept being described was. Moving somewhat backwards, I guess, but trying to keep us on the idea being discussed of evolving creatures and the place it has in religion and/or the world rationally.
Regarding the learning behaviours of chimpanzees and apes: Michael Cook in his book A Brief History of the Human Race, tells how scientists have discovered over 30 learned behaviours in apes. Also see the link below:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4166756.stm
Besides, how do we know that God isn't a monkey, after all? Has anybody ever seen him?
[I know that man was made in God's image and all that, but some people really do look like monkeys :D]
<a mimmick is a copy and can never be original.Granted when you add something of your own it would be original but it would no longer be a copy.>
Okmit,
Originality is merely a variant of a copy. When the copy differs from its predecessors, then that difference is what we call original. A bit like evolution itself.
Do you seriously suggest that other animals do not show original behaviours? What about the blue tits that peck through the tin foil found on milk bottles in the UK, in order to get the milk. Is this not original? Do you think they saw some bird that was trained to do this and copied it exactly?
Look at the miror and see for yourself. Then you will get the answer. A painter, whatever a skill He/she may have, can never paint as the original. We are a copy of the original. A copy or a prototipe that has a mission on this limited world in time and space. The physica apearance changes from the time of birth to the time of death. It's a chimical and a biological process. But to evolve from a creature to become another that for me doesn't exist. Why monkeys doesn't. Evolution is only in our minds and our way of living. Look at senturies that have passed and see the difrence for yourself. There is no sign of evolution but only in our way of living and the inteligence that we have reached because we have learned from our parents as they did from theirs. We can shape our bodies as we like but I'm still longing for the day that we evolve to become like angels and fly without the edd of technology. :angel:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
<There is no sign of evolution>
There is plenty of evidence for evolution: fruitflies, moths and bacteria all supply evidence of it. Take any creature that has a short lifespan, play around with its environment in specific ways and you will see evolution in action. Why do you think viruses are so good at combatting antibiotics?
You have evidence, you say. I say, evidence according to whom? Is this something you have witnessed with your own eyes, or do you rely on the word of SCIENTISTS who report their findings? How is this different from a Christian who relies on the Bible to tell him or her of things unseen? Can you not see that SCIENCE is a religion itself, with scientists taking the place of prophets, telling the laity of things beyond comprehension? If they say, "This fossil is a hundred-millon years old, we can prove it by carbon dating.", the sheep follow without question. Now me, I question EVERYTHING. It thus becomes easier for me to belive in a surpreme God, than in say, the primordal soup theory, since if it were correct, we could certainly duplicate it in a controled labroratory environment. But we can't. And re the 7 days. The Bible says "For a day is as a thousand years with the Lord, and a thousand years is as a day." II Peter 3:8 :angel: :) :idea:Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Darcy
On the other hand, how is reading books on evolution going to convince someone who doesn't believe either? And BTW, I HAVE read Darwin. If you are going to disagree with someone, you at least owe them the courtesy of finding out where they stand. He said apes and men had a "common ancestor" but evolved in different directions, so I do wish people would get it right! :smash: As I said before, I believe God created everything, but things have happened that have caused animals, yes and man as well, to adapt to new environments. This is true evolution. And I believe science supports it. Notice how often they use the word "designed.", as in "a frog's legs are perfectly designed to jump." So whom do they think "designed" them, pray tell?Quote:
Originally Posted by blp