Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   When did Homo Sapiens become 'in the image of God' ?
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 4887 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 16 of 52 (513087)
06-24-2009 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by bluescat48
06-22-2009 9:56 AM


Huh... I've never thought about this. Blue and RADZ do have a point. If any evolutionist Christian says that humans are spiritually different than animals, then where, along the chain of evolution did we get that relationship with God? Of course, they could just say that all organisms have it and it showed up in Man through evolution... but then why not treat all animals (and protists!!!!) as equals? Oh yes, the whole "dominion" thing..........
Or, maybe, it's a mutation!!! No-wait-not testable. (mutter, mutter)

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts
I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes
"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by bluescat48, posted 06-22-2009 9:56 AM bluescat48 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Blue Jay, posted 06-25-2009 2:08 PM Teapots&unicorns has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4640 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 17 of 52 (513103)
06-25-2009 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by bluescat48
06-22-2009 9:56 AM


Of course, this was a question intended for theistic evolutionists.
From an atheist point of view, the answer is easy: Humans are not any different then any other animal. I think everyone agrees that this is the correct answer from an atheist. (Thus why I said it maybe won't interest atheist, since they don't have the dilemna theistic evolutionist have)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by bluescat48, posted 06-22-2009 9:56 AM bluescat48 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Meddle, posted 06-25-2009 3:03 AM slevesque has replied
 Message 28 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-26-2009 9:51 PM slevesque has replied

  
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1270 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


Message 18 of 52 (513111)
06-25-2009 3:03 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by slevesque
06-25-2009 1:24 AM


Of course, this was a question intended for theistic evolutionists.
Why is the whole 'image of god' thing just a problem for theistic evolutionists? As I understand it, the bible makes the creation of man out to be a unique event separate from the rest of the animals. Yet that being the case, why are apes so much like us both physically and especially genetically? Those who argue against the evidence for evolution suggest genetic similarities result from god creating closely related species from 'the same mould', so why use a primate 'mould' to create humans?
As for those in this thread suggesting that the 'image of god' is not describing a physical appearance but is instead relating to some aspects of our nature, what exactly is about our nature that is 'godlike', since in other threads (such as the thread 'Many Christians Lack Responsibility') these same people insinuate that our nature is naturally fallen/sinful?
Anyway, if a 'god' does exist, I always tend to think of it along the lines of the monoliths in 2001

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by slevesque, posted 06-25-2009 1:24 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by slevesque, posted 06-25-2009 5:09 AM Meddle has replied
 Message 20 by Blue Jay, posted 06-25-2009 7:17 AM Meddle has replied
 Message 22 by Granny Magda, posted 06-25-2009 7:29 AM Meddle has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4640 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 19 of 52 (513119)
06-25-2009 5:09 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Meddle
06-25-2009 3:03 AM


Are you suggesting that the Genesis account indicates that God created man as totally different from the rest of creation ? I don't have this impression when reading it, although it mark a difference between humans and the animals. But it isn't that much of a separate event from the rest of the animals, making man on the 6th day with the rest of the mammals etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Meddle, posted 06-25-2009 3:03 AM Meddle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Meddle, posted 06-29-2009 6:06 AM slevesque has not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2697 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 20 of 52 (513123)
06-25-2009 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Meddle
06-25-2009 3:03 AM


Hi, Malcolm.
Malcolm writes:
As for those in this thread suggesting that the 'image of god' is not describing a physical appearance but is instead relating to some aspects of our nature, what exactly is about our nature that is 'godlike', since in other threads (such as the thread 'Many Christians Lack Responsibility') these same people insinuate that our nature is naturally fallen/sinful?
Brilliant question!
Most would probably consider the "fallen/sinful" state to be a corruption of our original "good" nature.
In short, we maintain some of God's qualities (intelligence, knowledge of good and evil, etc.), but not all of them.
This is not necessarily my personal opinion, though.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Meddle, posted 06-25-2009 3:03 AM Meddle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Teapots&unicorns, posted 06-25-2009 7:26 AM Blue Jay has not replied
 Message 47 by Meddle, posted 06-29-2009 6:10 AM Blue Jay has not replied

  
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 4887 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 21 of 52 (513125)
06-25-2009 7:26 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Blue Jay
06-25-2009 7:17 AM


Most would probably consider the "fallen/sinful" state to be a corruption of our original "good" nature.
In short, we maintain some of God's qualities (intelligence, knowledge of good and evil, etc.), but not all of them.
How are you looking at this question? Is it from a creationist point of view or evolutionist? Because this topic is mainly useless in the eyes of IDers, it is (I'm guessing) mainly directed at theistic evolutionists.
Also, are you talking about fallen/sinful "animals" here? I'm not sure I understand your response.........

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts
I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes
"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Blue Jay, posted 06-25-2009 7:17 AM Blue Jay has not replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 22 of 52 (513127)
06-25-2009 7:29 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Meddle
06-25-2009 3:03 AM


Hi Malcolm,
Anyway, if a 'god' does exist, I always tend to think of it along the lines of the monoliths in 2001
Aaaah, you're a Scientologist!
Mutate and Survive

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Meddle, posted 06-25-2009 3:03 AM Meddle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Teapots&unicorns, posted 06-25-2009 7:34 AM Granny Magda has not replied
 Message 24 by Meddle, posted 06-25-2009 7:56 AM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 4887 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 23 of 52 (513129)
06-25-2009 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Granny Magda
06-25-2009 7:29 AM


Aaaah, you're a Scientologist!
No, just one of those excommunicated sects. (They prefer to imagine God as Darth Vader)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Granny Magda, posted 06-25-2009 7:29 AM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1270 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


Message 24 of 52 (513131)
06-25-2009 7:56 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Granny Magda
06-25-2009 7:29 AM


Noooo! This is more along the lines of wild musings of a lazy agnostic
Anyway isn't scientology the one with all those folk coming to earth, lining up at volcanoes, and getting blown up by nuclear bombs by Ming the Merciless, or whoever? Yes the scifi references just keep on coming

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Granny Magda, posted 06-25-2009 7:29 AM Granny Magda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Teapots&unicorns, posted 06-25-2009 8:23 AM Meddle has not replied

  
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 4887 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 25 of 52 (513132)
06-25-2009 8:23 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Meddle
06-25-2009 7:56 AM


Anyway isn't scientology the one with all those folk coming to earth, lining up at volcanoes, and getting blown up by nuclear bombs by Ming the Merciless, or whoever? Yes the scifi references just keep on coming
Actually, I think it's the Galactic Lord Xenu. LOL.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Meddle, posted 06-25-2009 7:56 AM Meddle has not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2697 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 26 of 52 (513150)
06-25-2009 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Teapots&unicorns
06-24-2009 8:23 PM


Aside: Blue Man Group
Hi, Teapots&Unicorns.
T&U writes:
Blue and RADZ do have a point.
Who's "Blue"?
There are three members named "Blue____" active on this website (and I think a couple more inactive members), two of whom have posted on this thread.
I tried changing my name a couple of times because of this (my aliases are listed in my signature), but I am too attached to the name "Bluejay" to abandon it, so I keep coming back to it.
Edited by Bluejay, : fixed subtitle

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Teapots&unicorns, posted 06-24-2009 8:23 PM Teapots&unicorns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Teapots&unicorns, posted 06-25-2009 3:08 PM Blue Jay has not replied

  
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 4887 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 27 of 52 (513153)
06-25-2009 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Blue Jay
06-25-2009 2:08 PM


Re: Aside: Blue Man Group
Sorry Bluejay. I meant you and bluecat.

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts
I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes
"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Blue Jay, posted 06-25-2009 2:08 PM Blue Jay has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 28 of 52 (513253)
06-26-2009 9:51 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by slevesque
06-25-2009 1:24 AM


From an atheist point of view, the answer is easy: Humans are not any different then any other animal. I think everyone agrees that this is the correct answer from an atheist.
No, I think you'll find that atheists can tell the difference ...
(Thus why I said it maybe won't interest atheist, since they don't have the dilemna theistic evolutionist have)
I don't see that they have more of a dilemma than you do: as I have pointed out, the intermediate forms exist whether or not you admit that they are evidence of descent. And why can't they get out of it the same way you did, by saying: "I also think his whole creation is somewhat also 'in God's image'"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by slevesque, posted 06-25-2009 1:24 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by greentwiga, posted 06-27-2009 2:56 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 40 by slevesque, posted 06-27-2009 6:03 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 3427 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 29 of 52 (513262)
06-27-2009 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Dr Adequate
06-26-2009 9:51 PM


I found this in Wikipedia:
Until about 50,000—40,000 years ago the use of stone tools seems to have progressed stepwise. Each phase (H. habilis, H. ergaster, H. neanderthalensis) started at a higher level than the previous one, but once that phase started further development was slow. These Homo species were culturally conservative, but after 50,000 BP modern human culture started to change at a much greater speed. Jared Diamond, author of The Third Chimpanzee, and other anthropologists characterize this as a "Great Leap Forward." Modern humans started burying their dead, making clothing out of hides, developing sophisticated hunting techniques (such as using trapping pits or driving animals off cliffs), and engaging in cave painting.[39] As human culture advanced, different populations of humans introduced novelty to existing technologies: artifacts such as fish hooks, buttons and bone needles show signs of variation among different populations of humans, something that had not been seen in human cultures prior to 50,000 BP. Typically, H. neanderthalensis populations do not vary in their technologies.
Modern human behavior includes four apects: abstract thinking (concepts free from specific examples), planning (taking steps to achieve a further goal), innovation (finding new solutions), and symbolic behaviour (such as images and rituals). Among concrete examples of modern human behavior, anthropologists include specialization of tools, use of jewellery and images (such as cave drawings), organization of living space, rituals (for example, burials with grave gifts), specialized hunting techniques, exploration of less hospitable geographical areas, and barter trade networks. Debate continues as to whether a "revolution" led to modern humans ("the big bang of human consciousness"), or whether the evolution was more gradual.[40]
Human evolution - Wikipedia
It sounds like some scientists think that there was a relatively quick change. There is nothing to say that there was not some sudden brain change and then use of the new brain to invent new tools etc over a relatively short period.
As for the Image of God, I once heard a pastor quote a verse that God will hide us under his pinions. He then said, "So God is a giant chicken." Then he said that God is a spirit and that he uses these images that we can picture. We are not in his physical image (If we were would we have to have feathers?) The image of God is explained in other ways. God breathed his spirit into us (Gen 2) He cut out the heart of stone and put in a heart of flesh. (Isaiah?) We sin, and we die in that day (spiritually - God removes his spirit) We repent, and we are made into his image (and grow in that likeness) As Ecclesiastes ponders, at death the human spirit goes up and the animal spirit does not. He also indicates that many men do not know that and must think that both fates are the same.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-26-2009 9:51 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by RAZD, posted 06-27-2009 11:43 AM greentwiga has not replied

  
LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 52 (513272)
06-27-2009 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by slevesque
06-14-2009 3:32 AM


In the image of GOD
slevesque OP writes:
1- Biblically, is there a difference between animals and humans ?
2- If there are no differences, then why would God regard humans as anymore special than other animals ?
3- If there is a difference, what is it ?
4- If this difference is that humans are thelogically in God's image, then at what point along their evolutionnary progression did they become 'in God's image' ?
G'day Slevesque, I couldn't help myself from responding to your topic, sorry.
Man was made in the image of God from the beginning of Creation. Any Christian must agree with Jesus who says "6 But from the beginning of creation he made them male and female. "(Mark 10:6 NJB)
He made man in the beginning. Man didn't evolve from any ape. Evolutionists are clawing onto a theory which is laughable. If they don't like a God then they have to find some other theory because evolution just doesn't cut it. I can't believe we are still having this debate.
You can lead an athiest to water but you can't make him think.

There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything.
blz paskal

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by slevesque, posted 06-14-2009 3:32 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by slevesque, posted 06-27-2009 6:04 PM LucyTheApe has not replied
 Message 44 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-27-2009 9:21 PM LucyTheApe has not replied
 Message 50 by onifre, posted 06-30-2009 6:13 PM LucyTheApe has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024