|
-- Posted by SpM at 2:04 pm on July 10, 2009
For those Christians who accept evolution, at what point in our evolutionary history do you think the soul emerged? Do you think that there is an absolute spiritual line that can be drawn between Man and the rest of the animal kingdom? Do you think God revealed Himself in some form to our distant ancestors? How do you interpret Genesis?
-- Posted by Chasey at 2:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
-- Posted by Praise the Lard at 2:06 pm on July 10, 2009
probably shouldn't post in this as a scientific atheist but there is no difference between man and the "animal kingdom" we just have a special adaptation evolutionarily
also we have a skewed perspective as .. you know, humans.
-- Posted by TaliaBBy at 2:07 pm on July 10, 2009
Evolution ftw.
-- Posted by Stormblazer at 2:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
 i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
-- Posted by Chasey at 6:56 am on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Stormblazer at 10:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
yeah
-- Posted by Prince o palities at 7:20 am on July 11, 2009
Quote: from SpM at 4:04 pm on July 10, 2009
For those Christians who accept evolution, at what point in our evolutionary history do you think the soul emerged? Do you think that there is an absolute spiritual line that can be drawn between Man and the rest of the animal kingdom? Do you think God revealed Himself in some form to our distant ancestors? How do you interpret Genesis?
I don't "accept" evolution; I take an essentially agnostic stance toward pre-history, mode of creation, etc. That having been said, I do not think that evolution is diametrically opposed to or fundamentally incompatible with Christianity. I'll do my best to answer the questions with a "given evolution is true for the sake of argument" stance. When did the soul emerge? I won't pretend to know a point in history or a scientific period development, but I can give you an answer to the underlying issue ensoulment. Man became a distinct, soul-bearing creature, when he reached the point in the evolutionary process where he was developmentally capable of bearing the imago dei. In other words, when man had reached a point on the evolutionary chain as to begin to embody the character of God which makes him distinct from the rest of Creation he can be assumed to have had a soul. Can a spiritual line be drawn between man and the animal? Yes. That line, as above, is the imago dei. Did God reveal Himself to our distant ancestors? How distant? To our prehistorical ancestors? Who knows? I'm not sure why it matters. (For the most part, with the other questions, I can see the points your driving at, but I don't understand what this question is doing here.) How do I interpret Genesis? It doesn't matter if young earth creation or evolution or something not yet proposed accurately describes the scientific origins of the earth. Genesis is not a scientific text. Such texts don't exist in antiquity. It's not even a historical text. As far as genre is concerned, it closely parallels in form the creation myths of other ANE civilizations. Those stories are not intended to convey scientific truth about who it would look like if one were to travel through time to the point of history when the Earth began. They are theological and socially paradigmatic. The Genesis text appropriates the ancient genre and radically redefines it to show the superiority of their theology and the cosmogonic justification for their social paradigms. It should be read in that context, demonstrating truths about God and the structure of the world/society/man rather than giving a history of world origins. By the way these were great questions (with the exception of one) that all Christians who do not hold to literal, Genesis creationism should have to ask themselves. It's nice to see new, engaging questions here.
-- Posted by Moridin at 4:19 pm on July 11, 2009
I don't "accept" evolution; I take an essentially agnostic stance toward pre-history, mode of creation, etc.
 Ladies and gentlemen, this is a clear confirmation that Prince o palities is a creationist (creationist: someone who does not accept universal common descent). One question though: do you also deny things like paternity testing, chromosomal typing and the usage of DNA evidence in crime scene investigations? They use the exact same reasoning for concluding universal common descent as they use in these areas. To not accept evolution is to deny pretty much all research that has been done in comparative anatomy, genetics, biochemistry, molecular biology, biogeography, embryology, endocrinology, paleontology, behavioral psychology, physiology etc. etc. Let us move on to the poor attempt at accommodationism between the science of evolution and Christian mythology.
In other words, when man had reached a point on the evolutionary chain as to begin to embody the character of God which makes him distinct from the rest of Creation he can be assumed to have had a soul.
Where exactly is this point and how does humans after this point differ biologically from before? There is no such thing as an "evolutionary chain". The Great Chain of Being is also Christian mythology. Evolution is a spreading tree, not a ladder. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_chain_of_being It is clear that you do not even grasp the very basics of evolutionary biology, so saying that you do not accept it is an intellectually dishonest position. I just love how creationists assert that evolution is invalid, but when asked to discuss some of the basics of it and the evidence for it, they come up blank.
It doesn't matter if young earth creation or evolution or something not yet proposed accurately describes the scientific origins of the earth.
Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of the earth. That's planetary formation. Evolution has to do with the diversity of life. Nothing more, nothing less. It saddens me to see how you so recklessly abandon reason and the respect for evidence. These are the sources of our progress in almost all areas of human inquiry and prospect. We live in very dangerous times when rational science is under attack and we abandon it at our own peril.
-- Posted by Moridin at 4:20 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 4:56 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Stormblazer at 10:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
yeah
What is the evidence for the claim that every organism has a spirit? Do viruses have spirit (viruses are not alive)? How about megaviruses that are larger and have more genetic material than bacteria? Do they have a spirit? When you say "spirit" what exactly are you referring to?
-- Posted by Dexter Ward at 4:23 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 5:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
Damn you I know there's a name for that but I can't think of it. Now that's going to annoy me till I figure it out. 
-- Posted by Chasey at 4:23 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:20 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 4:56 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Stormblazer at 10:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
yeah
What is the evidence for the claim that every organism has a spirit? Do viruses have spirit (viruses are not alive)? How about megaviruses that are larger and have more genetic material than bacteria? Do they have a spirit? When you say "spirit" what exactly are you referring to?
I believe any conscious being with emotions, thoughts and feelings has a spirit
-- Posted by Moridin at 4:28 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from HarrySunderland at 2:23 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 5:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
Damn you I know there's a name for that but I can't think of it. Now that's going to annoy me till I figure it out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
-- Posted by Moridin at 4:29 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:23 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:20 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 4:56 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Stormblazer at 10:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
yeah
What is the evidence for the claim that every organism has a spirit? Do viruses have spirit (viruses are not alive)? How about megaviruses that are larger and have more genetic material than bacteria? Do they have a spirit? When you say "spirit" what exactly are you referring to?
I believe any conscious being with emotions, thoughts and feelings has a spirit
What evidence is there for this? But all of those properties are just emergent properties of matter in certain configurations, nothing to do with spirits or the supernatural.
-- Posted by Chasey at 4:46 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:29 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:23 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:20 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 4:56 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Stormblazer at 10:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
yeah
What is the evidence for the claim that every organism has a spirit? Do viruses have spirit (viruses are not alive)? How about megaviruses that are larger and have more genetic material than bacteria? Do they have a spirit? When you say "spirit" what exactly are you referring to?
I believe any conscious being with emotions, thoughts and feelings has a spirit
What evidence is there for this? But all of those properties are just emergent properties of matter in certain configurations, nothing to do with spirits or the supernatural.
I don't need evidence to withold an idea
-- Posted by Moridin at 4:59 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:46 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:29 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:23 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:20 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 4:56 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Stormblazer at 10:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
yeah
What is the evidence for the claim that every organism has a spirit? Do viruses have spirit (viruses are not alive)? How about megaviruses that are larger and have more genetic material than bacteria? Do they have a spirit? When you say "spirit" what exactly are you referring to?
I believe any conscious being with emotions, thoughts and feelings has a spirit
What evidence is there for this? But all of those properties are just emergent properties of matter in certain configurations, nothing to do with spirits or the supernatural.
I don't need evidence to withold an idea
So you have none? If you want to be rational, you ought to present empirical evidence for empirical claims. Otherwise you discussing your ideas is just as rational as yelling at a box of cereals that your favorite color is blue.
-- Posted by Forever Angel at 5:12 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 6:59 pm on July 11, 2009
If you want to be rational, you ought to present empirical evidence for empirical claims. Otherwise you discussing your ideas is just as rational as yelling at a box of cereals that your favorite color is blue.
Are you equating the members of LiveWire to boxes of cereal? And that no one should have an opinion or an idea that hasn't be empirically proven? He made no claim, he only stated a belief.
-- Posted by Moridin at 5:17 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Forever Angel at 3:12 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 6:59 pm on July 11, 2009
If you want to be rational, you ought to present empirical evidence for empirical claims. Otherwise you discussing your ideas is just as rational as yelling at a box of cereals that your favorite color is blue.
Are you equating the members of LiveWire to boxes of cereal? And that no one should have an opinion or an idea that hasn't be empirically proven? He made no claim, he only stated a belief.
No, I am saying that if you are not interested in a rational discussion, claiming that something is true and then ignoring skeptical quests and demands for evidence is just as insane as telling a box of cereal that your favorite color is blue (or some other nonsensical action). No, I am saying that no one should state something as fact regarding the empirical world without evidence if they wish to remain rational. Beliefs are fact claims. If I claim that I believe in the existence of X, I am stating that I am convinced that X exists. Then it is perfectly legitimate to ask what evidence that person bases his conviction on. If there is no evidence, we can dismiss his claim.
-- Posted by Forever Angel at 5:30 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 7:17 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Forever Angel at 3:12 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 6:59 pm on July 11, 2009
If you want to be rational, you ought to present empirical evidence for empirical claims. Otherwise you discussing your ideas is just as rational as yelling at a box of cereals that your favorite color is blue.
Are you equating the members of LiveWire to boxes of cereal? And that no one should have an opinion or an idea that hasn't be empirically proven? He made no claim, he only stated a belief.
No, I am saying that if you are not interested in a rational discussion, claiming that something is true and then ignoring skeptical quests and demands for evidence is just as insane as telling a box of cereal that your favorite color is blue (or some other nonsensical action). No, I am saying that no one should state something as fact regarding the empirical world without evidence if they wish to remain rational. Beliefs are fact claims. If I claim that I believe in the existence of X, I am stating that I am convinced that X exists. Then it is perfectly legitimate to ask what evidence that person bases his conviction on. If there is no evidence, we can dismiss his claim.
Stating a belief has nothing to do with fact claims. If you are going to challenge every statement of belief, you have a lot of challenges to make... And how can you dismiss someone's belief of something? You may not believe the same thing, you may even disbelieve, but that will not change whether or not they believe.
-- Posted by Moridin at 5:36 pm on July 11, 2009
Yes, claiming to believe in the existence something is equivalent to stating that X exists unless you also state that you believe in things that obviously do not exist. Yes, I have no problem dismissing empirical assertions based on no evidence at all.
-- Posted by Forever Angel at 5:42 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 7:36 pm on July 11, 2009
Yes, claiming to believe in the existence something is equivalent to stating that X exists unless you also state that you believe in things that obviously do not exist. Yes, I have no problem dismissing empirical assertions based on no evidence at all.
What is the empirical assertion in, "i think every living thing has a spirit though"? That's the post you are arguing about...
-- Posted by Chasey at 2:31 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:59 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:46 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:29 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:23 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:20 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 4:56 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Stormblazer at 10:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
yeah
What is the evidence for the claim that every organism has a spirit? Do viruses have spirit (viruses are not alive)? How about megaviruses that are larger and have more genetic material than bacteria? Do they have a spirit? When you say "spirit" what exactly are you referring to?
I believe any conscious being with emotions, thoughts and feelings has a spirit
What evidence is there for this? But all of those properties are just emergent properties of matter in certain configurations, nothing to do with spirits or the supernatural.
I don't need evidence to withold an idea
So you have none? If you want to be rational, you ought to present empirical evidence for empirical claims. Otherwise you discussing your ideas is just as rational as yelling at a box of cereals that your favorite color is blue.
No; I don't see why you're getting so worked up over this. Who says that my idea of a spirit isn't emergent properties of matter in certain configurations, no one knows, NO ONE has precise and exact ideas as to any of this sort of stuff, so why should I need some flimsy evidence to try and back up something that is nothing more than opinion.
-- Posted by Moridin at 4:24 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 12:31 pm on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:59 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:46 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:29 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:23 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:20 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 4:56 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Stormblazer at 10:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
yeah
What is the evidence for the claim that every organism has a spirit? Do viruses have spirit (viruses are not alive)? How about megaviruses that are larger and have more genetic material than bacteria? Do they have a spirit? When you say "spirit" what exactly are you referring to?
I believe any conscious being with emotions, thoughts and feelings has a spirit
What evidence is there for this? But all of those properties are just emergent properties of matter in certain configurations, nothing to do with spirits or the supernatural.
I don't need evidence to withold an idea
So you have none? If you want to be rational, you ought to present empirical evidence for empirical claims. Otherwise you discussing your ideas is just as rational as yelling at a box of cereals that your favorite color is blue.
No; I don't see why you're getting so worked up over this. Who says that my idea of a spirit isn't emergent properties of matter in certain configurations, no one knows, NO ONE has precise and exact ideas as to any of this sort of stuff, so why should I need some flimsy evidence to try and back up something that is nothing more than opinion.
I'm not getting worked up, I am simply demanding evidence for your absurd fact claims. I just love how people like you proclaim certain knowledge, then when questioned starts asserting that no one knows anything about the area in question. So hypocritical. A spirit cannot by definition be material or emergent. spirit: 2 : a supernatural being or essence: as a capitalized : holy spirit b : soul 2a c : an often malevolent being that is bodiless but can become visible; specifically : ghost 2 d : a malevolent being that enters and possesses a human being http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spirit We DO KNOW a huge amount of things regarding the brain and the mind, so stop denying science. You are only embarrassing yourself. If you do not want to support your fact claims with evidence, then stop making fact claims. Furthermore, by admitting that your fact claims are just opinions proves that there are, in fact, not supported by the evidence.
-- Posted by Moridin at 4:24 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Forever Angel at 3:42 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 7:36 pm on July 11, 2009
Yes, claiming to believe in the existence something is equivalent to stating that X exists unless you also state that you believe in things that obviously do not exist. Yes, I have no problem dismissing empirical assertions based on no evidence at all.
What is the empirical assertion in, "i think every living thing has a spirit though"? That's the post you are arguing about...
See bold.
-- Posted by Chasey at 6:50 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:24 pm on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 12:31 pm on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:59 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:46 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:29 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 2:23 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 12:20 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 4:56 pm on July 11, 2009
Quote: from Stormblazer at 10:27 pm on July 10, 2009
Quote: from Chasey at 3:05 pm on July 10, 2009
i think every living thing has a spirit though
What would that be? By living things you're including everything from single-celled organisms such as bacteria all the way up through humans.
yeah
What is the evidence for the claim that every organism has a spirit? Do viruses have spirit (viruses are not alive)? How about megaviruses that are larger and have more genetic material than bacteria? Do they have a spirit? When you say "spirit" what exactly are you referring to?
I believe any conscious being with emotions, thoughts and feelings has a spirit
What evidence is there for this? But all of those properties are just emergent properties of matter in certain configurations, nothing to do with spirits or the supernatural.
I don't need evidence to withold an idea
So you have none? If you want to be rational, you ought to present empirical evidence for empirical claims. Otherwise you discussing your ideas is just as rational as yelling at a box of cereals that your favorite color is blue.
No; I don't see why you're getting so worked up over this. Who says that my idea of a spirit isn't emergent properties of matter in certain configurations, no one knows, NO ONE has precise and exact ideas as to any of this sort of stuff, so why should I need some flimsy evidence to try and back up something that is nothing more than opinion.
I'm not getting worked up, I am simply demanding evidence for your absurd fact claims. I just love how people like you proclaim certain knowledge, then when questioned starts asserting that no one knows anything about the area in question. So hypocritical. A spirit cannot by definition be material or emergent. spirit: 2 : a supernatural being or essence: as a capitalized : holy spirit b : soul 2a c : an often malevolent being that is bodiless but can become visible; specifically : ghost 2 d : a malevolent being that enters and possesses a human being http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spirit We DO KNOW a huge amount of things regarding the brain and the mind, so stop denying science. You are only embarrassing yourself. If you do not want to support your fact claims with evidence, then stop making fact claims. Furthermore, by admitting that your fact claims are just opinions proves that there are, in fact, not supported by the evidence.
What the hell, yes you are getting worked up. What does this even matter to you ?
I didn't even say anything about what I think being fact. If anything I emphasised the concept that it is no more than opinion and idea, which I don't need evidence for.
I don't fucking care what you think, I'm entitled to an opinion without people shoving science down my throat. Stop trying to make yourself look big. I didn't even state what MY idea of a spirit is, so you don't even have any grounds to try and argue with me over this.
-- Posted by Forever Angel at 10:52 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 6:24 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Forever Angel at 3:42 am on July 12, 2009
Quote: from Moridin at 7:36 pm on July 11, 2009
Yes, claiming to believe in the existence something is equivalent to stating that X exists unless you also state that you believe in things that obviously do not exist. Yes, I have no problem dismissing empirical assertions based on no evidence at all.
What is the empirical assertion in, "i think every living thing has a spirit though"? That's the post you are arguing about...
See bold.
See bold.
-- Posted by BurningRage at 11:03 am on July 12, 2009
by the fuck, moridin, you're being a bit like though police. people, although they dont have a right to deny evolution it's dues, have a right to think wwhatever they want to think as long as it doesnt contradict evidence.
and from what i've seen, spirits dont contradict evidence. evidence exists of such...
|