Humans origins

[_avg_]

I'm aware that many christians accept evolution and many dont see the creation in Genesis as a historical literal fact. I got a question : how evolution can be match with the idea that humans have a soul?

When you grant a diety with the logic-defying power of miracles, why attempt to reason anything at all?

The evolution version of humans origins basically is telling that we are animals because we evolved from animals.

No. We are animals because we are animals. This has nothing to do with evolution and everything to do with the linguists; blame Noah Webster, not Charles Darwin.

The question of "what makes humans different from 'animals'" was preeminently on the minds of the taxonomists, and sp. of Carl Linnaeus (a Christian who, long before Darwin lived, created the binomial nomenclatuer and classification system still used in most biology textbooks) when he wrote: "It is not pleasing that I place Man among the primates...I request from you and from the whole world the generic difference between Man and Simian, and this from the principles of Natural History. I certainly know of none. If only someone might tell me just one! If I called man a simian or vice versa I would bring together all the theologians against me. Perhaps I ought to, in accordance with the law of the discipline [of Natural History]."

To date, none have satisfied Linnaeus' pleas to seperate humans from the "animal world;" language, art, culture...all were at one time used to distinguish human-kind, and all have been observed in non-humans. "The soul," as the last line of demarcation, fades as but a shadow in the harsh light of knowledge (hint: do a serach for "nephesh") ...

I ask because according to christians animals don't have a eternal soul. Please DO NOT take this questions as religion bashing.

Please do not listen to the "christians." Most don't know what they're talking about...(hint: if you did the above search, you would better understand this admonishment)

 

[2322]

I don't think the theories are necessarily mutually exclusive.

What if God saw the protohumans and got an idea about making them more independent?

Huh. These primates are fascinating. I like watching them. What if I made them even smarter?

He does this a few times and realizes that each successive evolutionary step is even more interesting than the previous.

We could be just the latest in a long series of amusements God has caused to become via God at work via evolutionary changes.

 

[Love-it]

It amazes me how many people are confused about evolution, as evidenced by their statements that evolutionists claim man has evolved from apes or monkeys, when in fact the theory of the evolution of man and monkeys states that we have common ancestry.

 

[lucky8]

i believe the bible is a book of metaphors for morality....not facts about the past....and adam and eve is the metaphor for the first 2 evolved humans....who evolved from primate species...and im from KS where we dont learn evolution in school! ironyyyyy

 

[Not_Punny]

Contrary to popular belief, humans do NOT come from storks. Humans come from their mummy's tummy.

- - - - - - - - - -

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I didn't vote, because I don't think that the two options are the only ones.

What if this isn't the first time humanity has existed? What if spores travel through space and every once in a while, BINGO! Friendly environment = life starts all over again.

Planets don't live forever. But maybe humanity does.

(OK, now everyone can label me a nutcase. I've been pondering different theories about life and death since I was five years old. This is one of my current favorites.)

 

[str82fcuk]

I will not attempt to explain or justify my beliefs
but my choice is for all three and I suggest that you do not actively investigate my theory

I think humans and other animal species are genetically engineered crossbreeds 'created' by, as the bible says 'gods', or angels, or spirits, or aliens, or demons, or interdimensional beings if you prefer, they all being essentially much the same. I also think that they continue tinkering now and then ... but we, being an experiment, are not supposed to be aware of our condition, nor of them ... of course I could be wrong lol

fwiw

 

[B_tallbig]

It amazes me how many people are confused about evolution, as evidenced by their statements that evolutionists claim man has evolved from apes or monkeys, when in fact the theory of the evolution of man and monkeys states that we have common ancestry.

Of course humans dont evolve from current apes and current monkeys , were all have a common ancestry and were are in the same evolutionary family of primates.
People that think that we evolve from current apes and from current monkeys are really way off.

 

[B_tallbig]

When you grant a diety with the logic-defying power of miracles, why attempt to reason anything at all?


No. We are animals because we are animals. This has nothing to do with evolution and everything to do with the linguists; blame Noah Webster, not Charles Darwin.

The question of "what makes humans different from 'animals'" was preeminently on the minds of the taxonomists, and sp. of Carl Linnaeus (a Christian who, long before Darwin lived, created the binomial nomenclatuer and classification system still used in most biology textbooks) when he wrote: "It is not pleasing that I place Man among the primates...I request from you and from the whole world the generic difference between Man and Simian, and this from the principles of Natural History. I certainly know of none. If only someone might tell me just one! If I called man a simian or vice versa I would bring together all the theologians against me. Perhaps I ought to, in accordance with the law of the discipline [of Natural History]."

To date, none have satisfied Linnaeus' pleas to seperate humans from the "animal world;" language, art, culture...all were at one time used to distinguish human-kind, and all have been observed in non-humans. "The soul," as the last line of demarcation, fades as but a shadow in the harsh light of knowledge (hint: do a serach for "nephesh") ...



Please do not listen to the "christians." Most don't know what they're talking about...(hint: if you did the above search, you would better understand this admonishment)

I understand very well what you are saying and i agree 100% . i ask freddie because clearly evolution is a problem to religions like judaism christianity and islam . Those religions state that animals dont have eternal souls and that humans are spiritual special, somehow "created" at the image of this god. Evolution clearly states that we are animals because we evolve from animals. That means that humans and all other species dont have a eternal soul.

Something about those religions is wrong . Two main posibilities exist : Death is the end to all the living beings or all livings have a energy or something that survive death. Evolution idea is dangerous to this religions but very few people even religious people that accept evolution really dont understand what really imply if evolution is true. I'm agnostic but i dont really buy the eternal soul idea , were are all mortal beings . Those after life beliefs simply are a way of rejecting our mortality.

 

[B_tallbig]

Contrary to popular belief, humans do NOT come from storks. Humans come from their mummy's tummy.

- - - - - - - - - -

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I didn't vote, because I don't think that the two options are the only ones.

What if this isn't the first time humanity has existed? What if spores travel through space and every once in a while, BINGO! Friendly environment = life starts all over again.

Planets don't live forever. But maybe humanity does.

(OK, now everyone can label me a nutcase. I've been pondering different theories about life and death since I was five years old. This is one of my current favorites.)

I dont think that you are a nut case . I think you are a very hot girl with an strange idea ( the one you say above ) . Maybe you are right but i would agree with you if you present more evidence to your hipotesis.:tongue::wink::wink::wink:

 

[_avg_]

...clearly evolution is a problem to religions like judaism christianity and islam .

Not so. The natural sciences, in general, have forced these religions to reinterpret their mythology as something other than a literal history; the apologetics are numerous.

Those religions state that animals dont have eternal souls and that humans are spiritual special, somehow "created" at the image of this god. Evolution clearly states that we are animals because we evolve from animals. That means that humans and all other species dont have a eternal soul.

Not so. Again, look up "nephesh;" it is the Hebrew word for "soul" and is applied to all living things. The idea that a "soul" is something seperate from the physical self is a bit of a misunderstanding. And even were it some ghost-like "spiritual self," it is not eternal, as Jesus even referred to things which could destroy the soul. It is probably best to understand the "soul" and the "afterlife" as the Jews (including Jesus) did: that every "nephesh" dies, and God rewards the faithful by remembering and recreating them to live again, and 'punishes' the faithless by letting them stay dead.

But evolution is silent on the subject of the "soul" for at least two reasons: the first is that it is an ill-defined concept -- just what is a "soul"? Not even believers can agree. You neither prove nor disprove something that has no meaning. The second reason is that the concept of the "soul," as thus far defined, is unfalsifiable -- it cannot be scientific if there is no evidence that could potentially show the concept to be false.

Finally, with a miracle-causing God, anything is possible, rationality and reason be damned. Most proponents -- misguided as they may be -- say that God infuses a fetus with a "soul" at conception, which is entirely compatible with evolution.

Two main posibilities exist : Death is the end to all the living beings or all livings have a energy or something that survive death.

That's a false dichotomy, but you're on the right track. Simply, question what "religions" assert, search for knowledge, and do not accept an assertion that is not well evidenced.

Those after life beliefs simply are a way of rejecting our mortality.

Rather, they are a way of *coping* with our mortality, but I digress....

In short, evolution and the natural sciences are not opposed to religion, only to irrationality and poor reason. One might be forgiven for confusing these....

 

[Drifterwood]

I know where intelligent life has ended. :tongue:

 

[JustAsking]

I understand very well what you are saying and i agree 100% . i ask freddie because clearly evolution is a problem to religions like judaism christianity and islam ....

... Evolution idea is dangerous to this religions but very few people even religious people that accept evolution really dont understand what really imply if evolution is true. ...

Evolution doesn't seem to be a problem for Catholicism, Presbyterianism, Lutheranism, UCC, and many other mainstream Christian denominations. All of them have strong "social statements" regarding their endorsement of modern science and the acceptance of the modery Theory of Evolution as the best explanation for the diversity of life on the planet.

The only denominations who have trouble with ToE are those that interpret the Bible literally as a history or science textbook. They represent a small fraction of the world's population of Christians.

The other group that has trouble with Evolution is fundamentalist Islam.

 

[B_tallbig]

Evolution doesn't seem to be a problem for Catholicism, Presbyterianism, Lutheranism, UCC, and many other mainstream Christian denominations. All of them have strong "social statements" regarding their endorsement of modern science and the acceptance of the modery Theory of Evolution as the best explanation for the diversity of life on the planet.

The only denominations who have trouble with ToE are those that interpret the Bible literally as a history or science textbook. They represent a small fraction of the world's population of Christians.

The other group that has trouble with Evolution is fundamentalist Islam.

I know that many religions accept evolution but the problem to those religions is that they claim that humans are the only living beings in this planet with a eternal souls. We evolve from animals that means we are animals too and we dont have eternal souls. That's is what this idea really imply. We dont have to accept evolution to realize that we are animals but this idea is telling that .

 

[D_Hairy Reed]

I know that many religions accept evolution but the problem to those religions is that they claim that humans are the only living beings in this planet with a eternal souls. We evolve from animals that means we are animals too and we dont have eternal souls. That's is what this idea really imply. We dont have to accept evolution to realize that we are animals but this idea is telling that .

Matter of perspective, tallbig.

I am from India, cradle of the world's other two major religions, Hinduism and Buddhism. Both represent that the eternal soul exists in ALL living beings, which is why these religions advocate harmony with nature so as not to kill other, fellow sentient beings.

By merit of maturity - both Hinduism and Buddhism predate the Semitic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) by 1,500 and 500 years respectively- and the pluralism they espouse, there is a lot of space there for scientific derivations. Unfortunately, the semitic religions tend to be so bipolar (heaven vs hell, god vs devil, my way or the highway), that they leave very little space for alternative solutions, and as we all know reality can exist in extremes, as well as all places in between. The pluralism of the Eastern religions is better equipped to deal with plural scenarios, which probably explains their existence to date in contrast to the extinction of their contemporaries the Pharaonic, Mesopotamian or Ancient Chinese traditions.

Interesting anecdote: while visiting the Grand Canyon 3 weeks back, I overheard an American, Christian tourist struggling with the visitor boards on the geological history, saying: how can the scientists date the creation of the canyon to before Adam & Eve!! Very amusing, though I felt sincerely sorry for her lack of vision on planetary history...

 

[B_tallbig]

Matter of perspective, tallbig.

I am from India, cradle of the world's other two major religions, Hinduism and Buddhism. Both represent that the eternal soul exists in ALL living beings, which is why these religions advocate harmony with nature so as not to kill other, fellow sentient beings.

By merit of maturity - both Hinduism and Buddhism predate the Semitic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) by 1,500 and 500 years respectively- and the pluralism they espouse, there is a lot of space there for scientific derivations. Unfortunately, the semitic religions tend to be so bipolar (heaven vs hell, god vs devil, my way or the highway), that they leave very little space for alternative solutions, and as we all know reality can exist in extremes, as well as all places in between. The pluralism of the Eastern religions is better equipped to deal with plural scenarios, which probably explains their existence to date in contrast to the extinction of their contemporaries the Pharaonic, Mesopotamian or Ancient Chinese traditions.

Interesting anecdote: while visiting the Grand Canyon 3 weeks back, I overheard an American, Christian tourist struggling with the visitor boards on the geological history, saying: how can the scientists date the creation of the canyon to before Adam & Eve!! Very amusing, though I felt sincerely sorry for her lack of vision on planetary history...

I only mentioned that evolution is a problem to religions like Judaism , Islam and Christianity. Evolution is not a problem to religions like Hindusim and Buddism that believe in reincarnation or rebirth. I know that according to Hinduism and Buddism death is not the end to animals because they are part of samsara.

 

[D_Hairy Reed]

I know that according to Hinduism and Buddism death is not the end to animals because they are part of samsara.

I am impressed :smile: So we are on the same page then...

 

[Male Bonding etc]

i believe the bible is a book of metaphors for morality....not facts about the past....and adam and eve is the metaphor for the first 2 evolved humans....who evolved from primate species...and im from KS where we dont learn evolution in school! ironyyyyy

I agree and take evolution as a fact of nature. The degree to which it is directed, anticipated, or reacted to by some supreme being, force, or universal energy is the subject of religious or spiritual belief (or lack thereof). I tend to believe we are an integral part of an interaction that is at least a "two way street" and is probably more like a huge, highly energized, interactive network.

 

[JustAsking]

I only mentioned that evolution is a problem to religions like Judaism , Islam and Christianity. Evolution is not a problem to religions like Hindusim and Buddism that believe in reincarnation or rebirth. I know that according to Hinduism and Buddism death is not the end to animals because they are part of samsara.

The modern theory of Evolution is not a problem to some 80% of the 2 billion Christians around the world, who belong to denominations that have definite and explicit social statements embracing science and specifically evolution.

Also, I am pretty sure that all Jewish sects except Orthodox Judaism has no problem with the modern theory of Evolution.