Originally posted by Sparko
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Can The Atheist Do Good?
Collapse
X
-
Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-16-2017, 03:59 PM.
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostNot really accurate, many humans are about 5% Neanderthal. Do you consider Neanderthals human? There is not likely a specific time in the past you could draw a line and say at that time the first born 100% human.
Know that there are two natures in man: the physical nature and the spiritual nature. The physical nature is inherited from Adam, and the spiritual nature is inherited from the Reality of the Word of God, which is the spirituality of Christ. The physical nature is born of Adam, but the spiritual nature is born from the bounty of the Holy Spirit. The first is the source of all imperfection; the second is the source of all perfection.
http://reference.bahai.org/search?ma...e%5B%5D=en-SAQAtheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Postsure it was gradual, but there had to be a first modern human born. Even if everyone else was birthing 99% humans, there still had to be a first 100% human born. That is how it works, Tassy.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Postsure it was gradual, but there had to be a first modern human born. Even if everyone else was birthing 99% humans, there still had to be a first 100% human born. That is how it works, Tassy.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Postsure it was gradual, but there had to be a first modern human born. Even if everyone else was birthing 99% humans, there still had to be a first 100% human born. That is how it works, Tassy.
Note that they are one individual, not a breeding pair, although it's quite likely that they were the offspring of a breeding pair each of whom had all but one of any traits you list, albeit not the same one.
If Homo sapiens came about via reproductive isolation rather than evolution of a single lineage, which seems to be the more common method of new species originating, then the exact moment that Homo sapiens appeared would not be with a birth, but with the death of the last individual capable of successfully breeding with members of both Homo sapiens and the parent species. At that moment there would be many individuals within the newly isolated population, and consequently there would not be a first human born, there would be a bunch of humans.
If all dogs but great Danes and Chihuahuas were wiped out, thus creating two species of domestic dogs rather than one, then there wouldn't really be a first Canis chihuahua or Canis claudius born.Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Roy View PostIf you define the species Homo sapiens based on genetic or physical characteristics, such that there is a particular set of traits that make some-one human, then yes there will have been a first human who was the first to share all those traits. However, that individual will have been part of a population of thousands at least one other of which they successfully bred with.
Note that they are one individual, not a breeding pair, although it's quite likely that they were the offspring of a breeding pair each of whom had all but one of any traits you list, albeit not the same one.
If Homo sapiens came about via reproductive isolation rather than evolution of a single lineage, which seems to be the more common method of new species originating, then the exact moment that Homo sapiens appeared would not be with a birth, but with the death of the last individual capable of successfully breeding with members of both Homo sapiens and the parent species. At that moment there would be many individuals within the newly isolated population, and consequently there would not be a first human born, there would be a bunch of humans.
If all dogs but great Danes and Chihuahuas were wiped out, thus creating two species of domestic dogs rather than one, then there wouldn't really be a first Canis chihuahua or Canis claudius born.
Comment
-
Actually YOU put Trump in the White House. He wouldn't have gotten 1% of the vote if it wasn't for the widespread spiritual and cultural devastation caused by progressive policies. There's no "this country" left with your immigration policies, your "allies" are worthless and even more suicidal than you are and democracy is a sick joke that I hope nobody ever thinks about repeating when the current order collapses. - Darth_Executor striking a conciliatory note in Civics 101
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostExcept there WAS a first Chihuahua and a first Great Dane born. That is how the breed originated. Cross bred from other breeds.I'm not here anymore.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Postyes. which still means there was a first homo sapiens.
Homo sapiens is not a term that works over time like this. It is a term which is clear and unambiguous at the present time, and this is its proper utility. Every individual living thing in the present either is, or is not, "homo sapiens". That's not true over all time. There was no "first" homo sapiens.
There are many different definitions of "species" used in biology; even the term "species" has no single definition. And that's only considering the relatively easy case of classifications at a given point in time. When used over long spans of times, the notion of "species" becomes hopelessly problematic. The notion of a paleospecies (a species over time spans and in the past) is useful, but certainly not with any implication that there's a first individual for any species. (There can be, in some special cases where a species arises by hybridization, but this does not apply for homo sapiens.)
A friend of mine whom I got to know though the glory days of the old talk.origins newsgroup is John Wilkins: his academic field is philosophy of biology. He's a really interesting guy and one of his major research interests (as a philosopher of science, not as a scientist) is the definitions of the term "species". He's extensively published on the subject in the academic literature; his PhD was on "species concepts" and he has written a number of books on the topic. His blog includes a useful post on the subject: . It gives a bit of technical background as to just how messy the notion of species is and why presumptions of a clear binary classifier are just incorrect.
Cheers -- sylas
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostShuny don't you believe in a literal Adam? Certainly your religion does, that he was a manifestation of God, and the we get our physical life from him.
Selective citations of Baha'i scripture to justify your agenda is SOP in the history of our dialogue, without a serious interest in understanding the Baha'i Faith. This is typical your selective biased incomplete view. See the following outline explains Adams role in the Adamic cycle.
This involves only our planet, one of many in creation, and endless cycles many planets.Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-20-2017, 04:55 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostNot in the sense that Adam was the first human, nor Adam and Eve were the fault of the Fall and Original Sin. He was manifestation of God ONLY for the beginning of the Adamic cycle. There were more cycles of Revelation prior to Adam. Adam is a title in the Baha'i Faith for the First Manifestation of God for each cycle of Manifestions of God.
Now consider how far this meaning conforms to the reality. For the spirit and the soul of Adam, when they were attached to the human world, passed from the world of freedom into the world of bondage, and His descendants continued in bondage. This attachment of the soul and spirit to the human world, which is sin, was inherited by the descendants of Adam, and is the serpent which is always in the midst of, and at enmity with, the spirits and the descendants of Adam. That enmity continues and endures. For attachment to the world has become the cause of the bondage of spirits, and this bondage is identical with sin, which has been transmitted from Adam to His posterity. It is because of this attachment that men have been deprived of essential spirituality and exalted position. http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/S...=highlight#gr8Know that there are two natures in man: the physical nature and the spiritual nature. The physical nature is inherited from Adam, and the spiritual nature is inherited from the Reality of the Word of God, which is the spirituality of Christ. The physical nature is born of Adam, but the spiritual nature is born from the bounty of the Holy Spirit. The first is the source of all imperfection; the second is the source of all perfection. http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/S...=highlight#gr2A great man is a great man, whether born of a human father or not. If being without a father is a virtue, Adam is greater and more excellent than all the Prophets and Messengers, for He had neither father nor mother.http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/S...=highlight#gr1
So we inherent our "imperfections" from Adam, and Adam was created without father or mother.Last edited by seer; 03-20-2017, 05:03 PM.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 04-22-2024, 06:28 PM
|
17 responses
100 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
04-23-2024, 01:46 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
70 responses
392 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-26-2024, 05:47 AM | ||
Started by Neptune7, 04-15-2024, 06:54 AM
|
25 responses
160 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cerebrum123
04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
126 responses
682 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-30-2024, 09:12 AM | ||
Started by whag, 04-07-2024, 10:17 AM
|
39 responses
252 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
04-12-2024, 02:58 PM
|
Comment