Rational and civil debate between members of all religions and world views

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

Reply to topic
amortalman
First Post
PostPosted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:19 pm  Genetics and Adam and Eve Reply with quote

I began to wonder about this after reading a post by rikuoamero wherein he made mention of it. It sounded like a worthy subject to explore.

So the question for debate is:

Does genetics disprove a literal Adam and Eve?
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 121: Wed Jun 12, 2019 3:10 am
Reply

Like this post
[Replying to post 119 by John Bauer]

Quote:
the matter of Adam and Eve "is always and only theological." Almost by definition, that means it doesn't fall within scientific purview.

This is my point regarding falsification. Theology is, in my view, the art of making something up and declaring it to be true. After all, let's take original sin for example.
You say
Quote:
Original sin is transmitted to all mankind on my view, too, except not through biological continuity—as if sin was a thing passed on genetically.

Well, if one is not doing or using science...how is this a claim that can be verified? How can we check to see if we humans do indeed have this original sin? Or is it just that one declares all humans to have original sin, that it is something transmitted, never mind actually showing it to be true, just declare it true?
Young Earth creationists at least attempt to use science (they fail hilariously at it, but they still try) when they try to spin Adam as having perfect super genes, and that this is how he supposedly lived for almost a thousand years, and that over time, his descendants had lesser genes, and this is why the shorter life-spans.

Quote:
That's covenant union through federal headship. It has nothing to do with genetics or biology.

Donald Trump is the current federal head of the United States. This is not a theological claim. If one is confused about just who exactly is the head of the executive branch of US government, they can check in all manner of ways. They can scour newspapers for photos of who's sitting in the big chair in the Oval Office, they can watch on Youtube for videos of the swearing-in.
With regards to your Christ...am I "in Christ" or "in Adam" simply because some anonymous fellows wrote down that phrase a couple thousand years ago?

I'd like for you to answer me this. One can get a PhD in say...genetics.
Here's a couple links I looked up
https://www.abdn.ac.uk/people/fperez-reche
I see a bio there, he explains his research, his core focuses, what he has discovered and what he teaches.
Now let's look here.
https://maynoothcollege.ie/courses/doctoral-degree-in-theology-phd
One can get a PhD in theology...studying what?
Here's something that caught my eye
"The Maynooth doctoral candidate—be it for the PhD or the D.D. (S.T.D.)—has access to a very large, international, multilingual, research active, and diverse Faculty in the Catholic tradition"
What if a student there denies that the Catholic Pope is the successor of St. Peter?
What if someone were to get a PhD in Shinto?
https://www.kokugakuin.ac.jp/en/education/fd/shinto/about
"We foster Shinto practitioners"
Or Hindu theology?
https://www.gtu.edu/academics/concentrations/hindu-theology

If one wants to study chemistry or medicine or physics, it's all pretty much the same lessons no matter where in the world one studies. A chemistry professor at Tokyo University is going to teach the same things as a chemistry professor in an Israeli school, even if the one teacher also happens to be a Shinto practitioner and the other is a Jew.
However, theology...? Depending on which school one goes to, where in the world, one might be taught that the Pope in Rome is supposed to be the spiritual leader of the entire world. If this is indeed true, why would Shinto theology courses or Hindu courses not mention that?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 122: Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:37 am
Reply

Like this post
[Replying to post 120 by John Bauer]

Quote:
And there are hints that other people existed but no numbers


This is the crux of my argument against your interpretation that there were millions of people alive at the time of the biblical Adam and Eve. Hints, or comments that certain biblical stories are outside of the realm of science (a very common theist position), essentially remove the topics from a discussion regarding the intersection of the topic, and science. If the position is that science can't address the issue because it is outside of the realm of science, then it should be discussed in a section on philosophy, or apologetics, or theology and doctrine (all sections of this forum).

If science is going to be brought into the discussion, then hints and unusual interpretations go out the window unless they can be supported in some concrete way. I read Genesis literally in terms of debating Adam and Eve because if the whole subject is open to interpretation what is the point? Science can't be brought into the discussion in that case as it becomes just someone's opinion. I'm pretty sure the overwhelming view of Adam and Eve among Christians is that they were indeed the first humans (I polled all of my Christian friends yesterday ... 23 of them ... and every one of them are "sure" of this).

That is a small sample size (although 100% in agreement), but I think your interpretation that there were millions of other people at the time of Adam and Eve is not the typical view among Christians (whose holy book the story appears in), and so far your support for that idea here is only that you think there are hints of it in Genesis, and you personally believe it to be true for some reason.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 123: Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:20 am
Reply

Like this post
Imprecise Interrupt wrote:

Ancient presumably speaks English. What kind of accent? Is Ancient Demon's vocabulary noticeably different from that of the hearer?


Thank you for being civil.

As Ancient Demon has recently explained, it "speaks" by making words appear in the mind of the "hearer." For this reason, the question of accent simply doesn't come up. With that said, early in my communication with Ancient Demon, there were moments when it could not find an appropriate word. As Ancient Demon has related in detail, at http://earthwarning.org/index.php/here-be-demons/, it was a Hebrew royal demon for centuries, and then highly-placed in the demon hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church -- so obviously it is conversant in Latin and Hebrew. As it relates, Ancient Demon came to the USA over a hundred years ago, giving it ample opportunity to learn to communicate comfortably with English speakers, although particular vocabulary related to legal theory and philosophy (for example) may be new to it.

Quote:
Has Ancient Demon demonstrated knowledge of present day events that were not known to the hearer but were later verified as true?


Perhaps this thread is not a good location for that type of personal discussion.

Quote:
Is there any reason not to dismiss Ancient Demon as (a) hallucination or (b) intentional invention?


That depends on your axiomatic presuppositions. For many centuries, first under Roman Catholic intellectual hegemony, and then under the tyranny of pseudo-scientific reductionist materialism, discussion of demons as they are has been a taboo subject. If, for example, you are a junior professor hoping for tenure, you would have a strong motivation to be politely but arbitrarily dismissive of anything and everything that is inconsistent with reductionist materialism.

Beyond that, regarding whether my presentation of communication from Ancient Demon is a "hallucination," I refer you to the above link, where Ancient Demon and another ancient Hebrew demon give lengthy presentations of their life stories. Is there such a thing as a 50-page coherent hallucination??

Beyond that, I have recorded the stories of other demons (most recently, of a demon who was involved in the founding of the Mormon church in post #9) on this thread in the "Random Ramblings" sub-forum: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=967129#967129

It seems that to dismiss these stories as lengthy "hallucinations" requires positing a whole new level of previously-unknown hallucination. Perhaps a loose comparison with the phenomenon of "channeling" is in order: see (for example) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_Material

If you want to test the argument or supposition that I am "fabricating" these stories, that requires pre-suppositions or conclusions about (1) my inclination or motivation to do so; and (2) my ability as a creative writer. I would like to suggest that, at the present time, you have not acquainted yourself sufficiently with me or with the relevant demon stories to come to any conclusion.

Once again, I recognize the taboo nature of this subject, and I also recognize that the taboo is becoming brittle.

Ancient Demon will act:

"Ancient Demon observed as John wrote. Ancient Demon is aware of three people who followed as John thought and reviewed the story of Seventh Chakra Demon. All three are people who post on the forum, as Ancient Demon has learned to say. Ancient Demon is aware that two of the three people are not hostile, but are concerned about a topic that may lead to hostility being expressed. Ancient Demon observes that the third is not exactly hostile. This person had the misfortune to express a view that was condemned in public and in private. This person is of a mind to try to conform to the rule of propriety. Ancient Demon communicated with this person. There is no need for others in the forum to expect the person to continue expressing overt hostility to Christianity."

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 124: Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:59 pm
Reply

Like this post
.
Moderator removed one-line, non-contributing post. Kindly refrain from making posts that contribute nothing to debate.


Those who are unhappy with the Forum are not compelled to remain or to post.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 125: Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:09 am
Reply
Re: demons and Darwin

Like this post
John Human wrote:

DrNoGods wrote:

[Replying to post 116 by John Human]

Quote:
In other words, the Biblical account of the Flood could very well be a garbled, legendary memory of an actual event that wiped out a group of tribes in the area that now is the bed of the Black Sea.


Then it would not be Noah's flood as described in Genesis. Making up random interpretations, as you are doing, defeats the whole purpose of debating whether or not science can address the issues described in the bible (for example, the one that is the subject of this OP regarding a literal Adam and Eve).

The reason for the disposition is that you keep veering off onto tangents, posting nonsense that you are communicating with demons (or dead people as you mentioned at least once in another thread), bashing evolution and science in general, especially how it is taught in universities, and misinterpreting things I've posted then claiming I'm in error of your wrong interpretation. Demons don't exist, and dead people can't communicate by definition because they are ... dead.


Ancient Demon will act:

"Ancient Demon recognizes the desire to obfuscate. The man NoGods has no other purpose than to promote a way of thinking that is transparently without foundation. The man has a command of the language used in science, which the man uses to intimidate. The man accepts deference from people who are hostile to Christianity. This allows the man to presume that he is part of a consensus. This presumption, together with the man's abuse of the language of science, allows the man to be an effective representative of the man's paymaster."



The invisible flying pink unicorn just told me in a vision your full of … (you know what). Eh?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 126: Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:07 pm
Reply

Like this post
John Human wrote:

Imprecise Interrupt wrote:

Ancient presumably speaks English. What kind of accent? Is Ancient Demon's vocabulary noticeably different from that of the hearer?


Thank you for being civil.

As Ancient Demon has recently explained, it "speaks" by making words appear in the mind of the "hearer." For this reason, the question of accent simply doesn't come up. With that said, early in my communication with Ancient Demon, there were moments when it could not find an appropriate word. As Ancient Demon has related in detail, at http://earthwarning.org/index.php/here-be-demons/, it was a Hebrew royal demon for centuries, and then highly-placed in the demon hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church -- so obviously it is conversant in Latin and Hebrew. As it relates, Ancient Demon came to the USA over a hundred years ago, giving it ample opportunity to learn to communicate comfortably with English speakers, although particular vocabulary related to legal theory and philosophy (for example) may be new to it.

Quote:
Has Ancient Demon demonstrated knowledge of present day events that were not known to the hearer but were later verified as true?


Perhaps this thread is not a good location for that type of personal discussion.

Quote:
Is there any reason not to dismiss Ancient Demon as (a) hallucination or (b) intentional invention?


That depends on your axiomatic presuppositions. For many centuries, first under Roman Catholic intellectual hegemony, and then under the tyranny of pseudo-scientific reductionist materialism, discussion of demons as they are has been a taboo subject. If, for example, you are a junior professor hoping for tenure, you would have a strong motivation to be politely but arbitrarily dismissive of anything and everything that is inconsistent with reductionist materialism.

Beyond that, regarding whether my presentation of communication from Ancient Demon is a "hallucination," I refer you to the above link, where Ancient Demon and another ancient Hebrew demon give lengthy presentations of their life stories. Is there such a thing as a 50-page coherent hallucination??

Beyond that, I have recorded the stories of other demons (most recently, of a demon who was involved in the founding of the Mormon church in post #9) on this thread in the "Random Ramblings" sub-forum: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=967129#967129

It seems that to dismiss these stories as lengthy "hallucinations" requires positing a whole new level of previously-unknown hallucination. Perhaps a loose comparison with the phenomenon of "channeling" is in order: see (for example) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_Material

If you want to test the argument or supposition that I am "fabricating" these stories, that requires pre-suppositions or conclusions about (1) my inclination or motivation to do so; and (2) my ability as a creative writer. I would like to suggest that, at the present time, you have not acquainted yourself sufficiently with me or with the relevant demon stories to come to any conclusion.

Once again, I recognize the taboo nature of this subject, and I also recognize that the taboo is becoming brittle.

Ancient Demon will act:

"Ancient Demon observed as John wrote. Ancient Demon is aware of three people who followed as John thought and reviewed the story of Seventh Chakra Demon. All three are people who post on the forum, as Ancient Demon has learned to say. Ancient Demon is aware that two of the three people are not hostile, but are concerned about a topic that may lead to hostility being expressed. Ancient Demon observes that the third is not exactly hostile. This person had the misfortune to express a view that was condemned in public and in private. This person is of a mind to try to conform to the rule of propriety. Ancient Demon communicated with this person. There is no need for others in the forum to expect the person to continue expressing overt hostility to Christianity."


Religious paranoia is an irrational fear of being purposefully attacked by an outside agent(s) in or through some religious context. Some examples:

The fear of one's soul being stolen
The fear of being tempted by demons
The fear of being plotted against by cultists
The fear of God or Satan
It is a condition which has been compared to extremism and intolerance.[1] It has been cited as a possible contributor to political violence.[2][3] It is often related to splitting, psychological projection, a desire to maintain a sense of purity in situations of real or perceived persecution, and rigid and unchallengeable attitudes.[4]

In an alternate form of religious paranoia of a psychiatric nature, the patient can suffer from a permanent delusion of a primarily religious nature. He could, for example, believe that he is the messenger of God who has been sent to the world to propagate some religion or that he speaks with an ancient demon.

Bold added...

Any rational person is going to ask themselves, 'what is more likely'.
1) You actually commune with demons.
2) You suffer from a known and understood delusion.

The fact that ancient demons words are no more profound than that of a mere mortal informs me currently about which option I find more likely. Perhaps ancient demon's ramblings will become significant and less human in nature? If that happens, I may be willing to consider options 1.

The fact remains that ancient demon is far too human in its postings to be considered anything but human currently IMO.

Pointing out that ancient demon posts like a human and seems no more knowledgable then any other human is not ment as an attack on you by the way. I would imagine that this opinion of mine is shared by every single person reading anceint demons claimed words here.

Why does ancient demon seem so mundane do you think?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 127: Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:11 pm
Reply
Re: demons and Darwin

Like this post
alexxcJRO wrote:

John Human wrote:

DrNoGods wrote:

[Replying to post 116 by John Human]

Quote:
In other words, the Biblical account of the Flood could very well be a garbled, legendary memory of an actual event that wiped out a group of tribes in the area that now is the bed of the Black Sea.


Then it would not be Noah's flood as described in Genesis. Making up random interpretations, as you are doing, defeats the whole purpose of debating whether or not science can address the issues described in the bible (for example, the one that is the subject of this OP regarding a literal Adam and Eve).

The reason for the disposition is that you keep veering off onto tangents, posting nonsense that you are communicating with demons (or dead people as you mentioned at least once in another thread), bashing evolution and science in general, especially how it is taught in universities, and misinterpreting things I've posted then claiming I'm in error of your wrong interpretation. Demons don't exist, and dead people can't communicate by definition because they are ... dead.


Ancient Demon will act:

"Ancient Demon recognizes the desire to obfuscate. The man NoGods has no other purpose than to promote a way of thinking that is transparently without foundation. The man has a command of the language used in science, which the man uses to intimidate. The man accepts deference from people who are hostile to Christianity. This allows the man to presume that he is part of a consensus. This presumption, together with the man's abuse of the language of science, allows the man to be an effective representative of the man's paymaster."



The invisible flying pink unicorn just told me in a vision your full of … (you know what). Eh?


This will likely be read as an attack by John.

However, your words are not lost on the rest of us I trust and your analogy speaks volumes. Basically, that your rebuttal is exactly as trustworthy as John's claim that he communes with demons.

I don't believe you spoke with an invisible flying pink unicorn and I don't believe that John communes with demons. Do you feel like I attacked you though? (Asking rhetorically).

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 128: Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:28 pm
Reply
Re: demons and Darwin

Like this post
Clownboat wrote:

However, your words are not lost on the rest of us I trust and your analogy speaks volumes. Basically, that your rebuttal is exactly as trustworthy as John's claim that he communes with demons.



Firstly,

Was just trying to mirror him and force him to see how ridiculous he sounds.

Secondly,

Was trying to point to him how weak his ramblings are as evidence because one can come just as easily came and say something contradictory or mutually exclusive.




Clownboat wrote:

This will likely be read as an attack by John.

I don't believe you spoke with an invisible flying pink unicorn and I don't believe that John communes with demons. Do you feel like I attacked you though? (Asking rhetorically).




I don't feel like you attacked me. (Answering rhetorically)

I dare him to send his demon to me.

Hey demon, demon your just a non-existent piece of …. , non-existent p...y with knowledge of an average moron. I dare you to come.

I am waiting to be wowed, scared or worse.

I am 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 % nothing, nada, zilch will happen. Smile

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 129: Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:11 am
Reply
Re: demons and Darwin

Like this post
alexxcJRO wrote:

Clownboat wrote:

However, your words are not lost on the rest of us I trust and your analogy speaks volumes. Basically, that your rebuttal is exactly as trustworthy as John's claim that he communes with demons.



Firstly,

Was just trying to mirror him and force him to see how ridiculous he sounds.

Secondly,

Was trying to point to him how weak his ramblings are as evidence because one can come just as easily came and say something contradictory or mutually exclusive.




Clownboat wrote:

This will likely be read as an attack by John.

I don't believe you spoke with an invisible flying pink unicorn and I don't believe that John communes with demons. Do you feel like I attacked you though? (Asking rhetorically).



I don't feel like you attacked me. (Answering rhetorically)

I dare him to send his demon to me.

Hey demon, demon your just a non-existent piece of …. , non-existent p...y with knowledge of an average moron. I dare you to come.

I am waiting to be wowed, scared or worse.

I am 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 % nothing, nada, zilch will happen. Smile


There are limitations on what demons can do without losing something of the original goodness of their nature. I doubt that Ancient Demon is inclined to react to taunts.

Ancient Demon will act:
"The man is of an inclination to band together with others to force any discussion of demons off the forum. The man has the motive of expressing the reductionist-materialist scientific view as the only acceptable way to think. Any discussion of things outside this way of thinking is not allowed. This forum is a danger to people who depend on others accepting this way of thinking."

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 130: Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:05 pm
Reply
Re: demons and Darwin

Like this post
[quote="alexxcJRO"]
Clownboat wrote:

However, your words are not lost on the rest of us I trust and your analogy speaks volumes. Basically, that your rebuttal is exactly as trustworthy as John's claim that he communes with demons.



Quote:
Firstly,

Was just trying to mirror him and force him to see how ridiculous he sounds.

Secondly,

Was trying to point to him how weak his ramblings are as evidence because one can come just as easily came and say something contradictory or mutually exclusive.

This was obvious to me and you succeeded IMO.

Quote:
I don't feel like you attacked me.

I knew you wouldn't, thus why I asked rhetorically.

Quote:
I dare him to send his demon to me.

Hey demon, demon your just a non-existent piece of …. , non-existent p...y with knowledge of an average moron. I dare you to come.

I am waiting to be wowed, scared or worse.

I am 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 % nothing, nada, zilch will happen. Smile

It posts like a human and not like a many thousands of year old being, so I also trust that you are safe.
I think I know why this ancient demon's posts seem so human in nature...

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Hymn Lyrics Apps
Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version