Logic dictates that there is a God!

[jay_a2j]

Can we TRY not to miss the point?

Taken from Wiki:

"The Book of Genesis then relates how Yahweh, displeased with the builders' intent, came down and confused their languages and scattered the people throughout the earth (Genesis 11:5-8)."



SCATTERED....... Now take a map out and look at where each race of people came from. Yup, they were scattered! Asians in Asia, whites in Europe, Black in Africa, Indians from North and south America, Arabs from the middle east, etc.


Or do you suppose that apes evolved into different races at about the same exact time in history?


And I believe in fairy tales?

[jrl332005]

And I believe in fairy tales?

You do if you believe the random lies you are spouting.

[PLAYER57832]

Can we TRY not to miss the point?

Taken from Wiki:

"The Book of Genesis then relates how Yahweh, displeased with the builders' intent, came down and confused their languages and scattered the people throughout the earth (Genesis 11:5-8)."



SCATTERED....... Now take a map out and look at where each race of people came from. Yup, they were scattered! Asians in Asia, whites in Europe, Black in Africa, Indians from North and south America, Arabs from the middle east, etc.

Look up the word "scattered"... yep, it says, essentially "spread out". I agree with that.

It does NOT, however say anything about race. That is purely your addition. You can believe that, but just don't claim the Bible says that. The Bible simply says people spoke different languages and scattered.

Or do you suppose that apes evolved into different races at about the same exact time in history?

I suppose that only someone who thinks he knows evolution, but really only knows what young earth creationist sites claim is evolution, would even suggest such a thing.

A. We did not come from apes.

B. Whether we developed language before developing into the diversity some people claim can be dividedin to specific races is not specified either in the Bible or through science.

C. Evolutiion is mute on this. Evolution mostly deals with physical structure. Anthropologists will talk about the evolution of languages, just like political scientists speak of the evolution of political systems, meaning simply "change over time". These, however have nothing to do with the scientific theories of the origin of life, known collectively as Evolution.

And I believe in fairy tales?

Now you refer to someone else.

[Frigidus]

The Bible mentions tongues, as in languages, not skin color.

Hmmm maybe God should have spelled it out for those like you who would come along and pick his word apart. Just wondering..... are there any Asian groups that originally spoke English? Any white groups that originally spoke Swahili? Any black groups that spoke German? On and on and on and on. It does not take an Einstein to connect the dots here.

Jay, do you seriously think that English is as old as white people? Or that English is very distinct from German?
Swahili, incidentally appears to be pretty much an invented language, borrowing heavily from Arabic.

Actually, and correct me if im wrong, but I think while english is distinct from German, I do believe german was its derivative for much of it, while french, spanish and italian etc were more derived from latin. Obviously there are massive differences and examples of cross pollination, but for the most part these groups fit.

Its clearly a case of a common language being changed over time and over regions which naturally happens, and not a case of someone snapping their fingers and them all not understanding each other one day.

Yet another case where obvious and documented evolution is just ignored for the snap fingers theory.

Seriously though, if we can trace the changes in and creation of languages and writing, doesn't the whole Tower of Babel thing seem stupid? In that story God is the origin of all language, whereas there are plenty of examples of people creating their own languages throughout recorded history. Does this not raise any flags?

[PLAYER57832]

Seriously though, if we can trace the changes in and creation of languages and writing, doesn't the whole Tower of Babel thing seem stupid? In that story God is the origin of all language, whereas there are plenty of examples of people creating their own languages throughout recorded history. Does this not raise any flags?

Among other issues, science doesn't trace all languages back to a single source, at least currently.

Even among anthropologists, the question of when various languages arose and how is debated. I don't know enough about the specifics to really get into it. I do remember hearing about one theory that says kids are the originator of language. They linguist points to evolution of pigeon tongues as an example. The kids take part of the new tongue and part of the old and combine them, then tend to teach this to the adults.

Again, if someone more knowledgeable wants to say something different... go for it.

As for your last question, then you sort of have to get into why people create various languages. Perhaps it is because God made us that way. Now, that is pure supposition, not even something I am saying I believe, just a "possibility". Anyway, that is as far as I can or will go on that line of discussion right now.

(what I believe is that I don't know the real answer, except as laid out in the Bible.. anything else, I just don't know.)

[jay_a2j]

Seriously though, if we can trace the changes in and creation of languages and writing, doesn't the whole Tower of Babel thing seem stupid? In that story God is the origin of all language, whereas there are plenty of examples of people creating their own languages throughout recorded history. Does this not raise any flags?

Um no? Did anyone say the languages God gave during the scattering of man where all the languages that would ever be? Once a language is known, variations, dialect and the ability to form new languages altogether can be achieved. I just find it extremely hard to believe that all these languages "evolved" from nothing. Dare I say, it is indeed an impossible feat.

[tzor]

We didn't evolve from monmeys. we are a type of ape.

No, you may be a "type of ape". I am a human created in God's own image.

Jesus said to her, "Believe me, woman, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You people worship what you do not understand; we worship what we understand, because salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and truth; and indeed the Father seeks such people to worship him. God is Spirit, and those who worship him must worship in Spirit and truth."

[jonesthecurl]

Um, not sure what Tzor's point was there. But Jay I would like to ask what I think is a related question.


What do you think it means to be "made in God's image"?

Really this is not a mocking question. I honestly don't understand what this means...

You say men are not apes or monkeys, they are made in God's image like it says....

So what does this mean?

Did god have eyes and ears before he/she created light and sound? If so, why?

Does god have sexual organs?

If god has a digestive system, what did he eat before he created things to eat?

If he has legs, why did he need them? He doesn't need to walk anywhere, surely he already is everywhere.

I could go on. Why does god have eyes? fingernails? fingers? who was his barber before he created scissors?

[DangerBoy]

Um, not sure what Tzor's point was there. But Jay I would like to ask what I think is a related question.

I think he's trying to point out a problem about how Jay could say we're created in God's image while the Bible says God is a Spirit. Going by Tzor's logic then, how could we be created in the image of a spirit, which is non-material.

[PLAYER57832]

Seriously though, if we can trace the changes in and creation of languages and writing, doesn't the whole Tower of Babel thing seem stupid? In that story God is the origin of all language, whereas there are plenty of examples of people creating their own languages throughout recorded history. Does this not raise any flags?

Um no? Did anyone say the languages God gave during the scattering of man where all the languages that would ever be? Once a language is known, variations, dialect and the ability to form new languages altogether can be achieved. I just find it extremely hard to believe that all these languages "evolved" from nothing. Dare I say, it is indeed an impossible feat.

Except, jay, people spoke before Babel. God just made people speak in different tongues. That is not when we first acquired language.

[jonesthecurl]

Um, not sure what Tzor's point was there. But Jay I would like to ask what I think is a related question.

I think he's trying to point out a problem about how Jay could say we're created in God's image while the Bible says God is a Spirit. Going by Tzor's logic then, how could we be created in the image of a spirit, which is non-material.

See? I said it was related. I guess my question could be put thusly: Do we look like god? If not then what does the phrase "in his image" mean?

[PLAYER57832]

Um, not sure what Tzor's point was there. But Jay I would like to ask what I think is a related question.

I think he's trying to point out a problem about how Jay could say we're created in God's image while the Bible says God is a Spirit. Going by Tzor's logic then, how could we be created in the image of a spirit, which is non-material.

See? I said it was related. I guess my question could be put thusly: Do we look like god? If not then what does the phrase "in his image" mean?

My answer will no doubt differ from jay's. Ultimately, if we add to the Bible, it is opinion and not fact. So, most Christians stay with "his image" and leave it at that. However, there is a question as to whether that truly means "likeness" in the sense of seeing the same thing in a mirror, looking like God in appearance OR if it means something more esoteric, such as our soul, or other qualities that "make us human" such as our propensity toward faith, etc.

[tzor]

Um, not sure what Tzor's point was there. But Jay I would like to ask what I think is a related question.

What do you think it means to be "made in God's image"?

Really this is not a mocking question. I honestly don't understand what this means...

You say men are not apes or monkeys, they are made in God's image like it says....

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH - "IN THE IMAGE OF GOD"

Paragraph 6. Man
355 "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them."[218] Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is "in the image of God"; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created "male and female"; (IV) God established him in his friendship.

I. "IN THE IMAGE OF GOD"
356 Of all visible creatures only man is "able to know and love his creator".[219] He is "the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake",[220] and he alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God's own life. It was for this end that he was created, and this is the fundamental reason for his dignity:
What made you establish man in so great a dignity? Certainly the incalculable love by which you have looked on your creature in yourself! You are taken with love for her; for by love indeed you created her, by love you have given her a being capable of tasting your eternal Good.[221]

357 Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone. He is capable of self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering into communion with other persons. And he is called by grace to a covenant with his Creator, to offer him a response of faith and love that no other creature can give in his stead.

358 God created everything for man,[222] but man in turn was created to serve and love God and to offer all creation back to him:
What is it that is about to be created, that enjoys such honour? It is man that great and wonderful living creature, more precious in the eyes of God than all other creatures! For him the heavens and the earth, the sea and all the rest of creation exist. God attached so much importance to his salvation that he did not spare his own Son for the sake of man. Nor does he ever cease to work, trying every possible means, until he has raised man up to himself and made him sit at his right hand.[223]

359 "In reality it is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of man truly becomes clear."[224]
St. Paul tells us that the human race takes its origin from two men: Adam and Christ. . . The first man, Adam, he says, became a living soul, the last Adam a life-giving spirit. The first Adam was made by the last Adam, from whom he also received his soul, to give him life... The second Adam stamped his image on the first Adam when he created him. That is why he took on himself the role and the name of the first Adam, in order that he might not lose what he had made in his own image. The first Adam, the last Adam: the first had a beginning, the last knows no end. The last Adam is indeed the first; as he himself says: "I am the first and the last."[225]

360 Because of its common origin the human race forms a unity, for "from one ancestor [God] made all nations to inhabit the whole earth":[226]
O wondrous vision, which makes us contemplate the human race in the unity of its origin in God. . . in the unity of its nature, composed equally in all men of a material body and a spiritual soul; in the unity of its immediate end and its mission in the world; in the unity of its dwelling, the earth, whose benefits all men, by right of nature, may use to sustain and develop life; in the unity of its supernatural end: God himself, to whom all ought to tend; in the unity of the means for attaining this end;. . . in the unity of the redemption wrought by Christ for all.[227]

361 "This law of human solidarity and charity",[228] without excluding the rich variety of persons, cultures and peoples, assures us that all men are truly brethren.

[jonesthecurl]

Thank you tzor. I think jay's understanding may be less subtle.

[jay_a2j]

Thank you tzor. I think jay's understanding may be less subtle.

Actually, his answer works for me.

[2dimes]

I PMed my answer because I wanted to see Jay's answer without outside manipulation. Way to go tzor.

[Lionz]

Natty,

You might ask one or more question I'm not sure of a good way to answer, but maybe I have OCD combined with a major fear of lying and it's a combination that leads me to say little to no this is true or that is true type statement. What do I really know?

AAFitz,

Do you mean to argue that technology has led mankind farther from complete destruction? Maybe there are bombs you are not aware of and problems having to do with people getting away from organic food you are not aware of and diseases that have actually been spread with technology.

You can interact with individuals without taking free will away from them perhaps. And what if He saw a future 1,000 years after the flood with a corrupt central power based in Babel and He chose to avoid it?

Player,

What question?

And do you apparently have an example of a fossil of a human and ape ancestor? How about present one you feel is most convincing if you have more than one?

Frigidus,

What would someone inventing their own language really have to do with whether or not humans were scattered and given seperate tongues? Is there a made up language that does not stem from one or more other language in a way regardless?

Tzor and DangerBoy,

Humans have walked around in flesh bodies perhaps, but are humans not spirits?

Jones,

What if He and various angels have images you would consider to be humanoid? Maybe you will try to imagine a form more useful for navigating a 3D realm. Note: Humans might be able to fly without wings as spirits.

[jay_a2j]

You have the love "We didn't evolve from apes". I mean all those diagrams they had in school with the progression from ape to modern man! I guess evolutionists just don't know what they are talking about. Or keep changing the rules when one of them doesn't pan out.

Ooooh! Found one!

[john9blue]

We share a common ancestor with apes, which is different than evolving from apes.

[Iliad]

You have the love "We didn't evolve from apes". I mean all those diagrams they had in school with the progression from ape to modern man! I guess evolutionists just don't know what they are talking about. Or keep changing the rules when one of them doesn't pan out.

Ooooh! Found one!

So now you're actually using your own ignorance about what evolution is, or means, as an argument against it?

[john9blue]

You can't "use" ignorance intentionally. If he simply hasn't been properly educated about evolution then I don't blame him. It seems though that he's actively resisting trying to understand what evolution is about. That's not ignorance.

[jay_a2j]

How much MORE evidence do you need?????? Obviously THIS is the accepted evolution of man. But stay in denial. And just sit there and say, "We didn't evolve from apes" yet not tell WHAT we DID evolve from as PLAYER so often does. You people have no answers..... just theory which has way too many holes to be taken seriously.

[jonesthecurl]

Here's current thinking on the descent of humans.

http://www.archaeologyinfo.com/australo ... mensis.htm

[Neoteny]

How much MORE evidence do you need?????? Obviously THIS is the accepted evolution of man. But stay in denial. And just sit there and say, "We didn't evolve from apes" yet not tell WHAT we DID evolve from as PLAYER so often does. You people have no answers..... just theory which has way too many holes to be taken seriously.

FTR, if you talk to an evolutionist worth his salt, they would tell you they are extremely irritated by the "ascent of man" style works because they are so misleading. Perhaps it's not your fault that it is what you've learned, but you are still way totally wrong for relying on that.

[jonesthecurl]

"Nearly all experts agree Lucy was just a three foot tall chimpanzee".
Where do you get this stuff?