What is the current theistic explanation for archaic human fossils?

[DeMotts]

There's quite a body of fossils that exist that illustrate a variety of archaic humans, from australopithecines to Homo rhodesiensis, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo naledi, Homo ergaster, Homo antecessor, and Homo habilis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_h ... on_fossils

For the theistic anti-evolutionists on the board: how do you explain such a variety of human fossils? What are australopithecines? How do they fit in with the creation story of the bible? Do you believe these fossils are legitimate or forgeries?

[Inquirer]

Choose is a conscious act, a decision arising from a rational process, that's what the word means - it means actively select from among alternative propositions.

If I ask you "Do you think the universe was created" then the answers you can choose from are "yes", "no" and "don't know" the process of adopting one of these answers is the process of choosing, you do, must make, a choice.

Not the same thing at all. You do not choose what to believe is true.

You do not understand logic then. The belief that some claim is true is based on inferences, induction (or in mathematics or symbolic logic, on deduction). All such reasoning though begins with premises, premises are chosen, therefore everything stemming from those premises is as a consequence, also chosen. If you choose different premises you'll likely arrive at different conclusions and believe something different.

Perhaps you don't grasp that your premises were chosen, but they were, either by you or by someone else, but they were chosen, of that there can be no doubt, not to a sane mind anyway.

But enough of this, I spend too much time casting pearls before swine in this forum, I have other things to attend to, good luck in your quest for understanding but do take note - your quest will mean more if you first understand yourself, until you understand how you think you'll likely go around in circles as so many in this science area do.

[brunumb]

What method, what facts, what data, has brought you to believe that the tales of Jesus' resurrection are truth?

Logic and reason.

But applying logic and reason to the tales of the resurrection of Jesus leads me to the conclusion that it is false. Maybe you did something ̶w̶r̶o̶n̶g̶ ̶d̶e̶s̶p̶i̶t̶e̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶a̶ ̶b̶r̶a̶i̶n̶ ̶s̶u̶p̶e̶r̶i̶o̶r̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶m̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶u̶s̶ ̶o̶r̶d̶i̶n̶a̶r̶y̶ ̶f̶o̶l̶k̶ I failed to do.

Corrections in red.

DO NOT CHANGE MY WORDS AND PRESENT THEM AS QUOTED BY ME.
I take offense at that. Present them as your own words.

Well do not presume to tell me what things I do choose and what things I don't.

I do choose what to believe and what not to believe, if you do not then who's doing your choosing for you?

Now you are being irrational and ridiculous. I am not telling you what to choose to believe. In this debate I am arguing that belief is not something one can choose to do. As usual, when you are confronted with things you cannot justify you simply twist things around and play the victim.

[brunumb]

The belief that some claim is true is based on inferences, induction (or in mathematics or symbolic logic, on deduction).

As I said, one's brain becomes convinced and the claim is accepted as true. It is not simply choosing to believe it as true like choosing which socks you will wear today.

[JoeyKnothead]

On the contrary, you are the one who has claimed that the story about Jesus is a "myth", a claim that you've offered no support for, a claim that something is true but is actually just a belief you hold.

See my Post 318, where I repeatedly stated it's the most generous, logical reading of the tale.

There are several subtly different definitions of "myth" I've assumed you mean "an unfounded or false notion" and therefore call you out for failing to prove said claim.

See above, and my Post 318.

Of course you stand no chance of supporting your claim because it is demonstrably false, the beliefs about Jesus are founded not unfounded, they are founded on the historic record, ask any professor of New Testament.

They're 'founded' in that which doesn't comport to biological processes.

People didn't just make up the stories, they read them, they can read them in what is the most well preserved and faithfully copied set of ancient documents in existence.

Folks can faithfully copy a lie up to the end of time, and it'll be it a lie the whole time.

So go ahead, make my day, prove that the claims made about Jesus are an unfounded or false notion, ball's in your court, now's your chance to show us what you've got...tick...tock...tick...tock...

As usual, the theist thinks "if you're wrong I'm right."

I'll dismiss any claim I made regarding tales of human / god hybrids being resurrected as myth.

Now, tell us all how that dismissal makes the tales magically become truth.

Where in our exchanges have you put truth to the tale?

[Bust Nak]

Listen very carefully - insinuating that another forum member advocates and approves of the sexual exploitation of children (a federal crime) is something I'd expect any moderator with integrity to put a stop to promptly, your not doing yourself any favors here, either moderate or step down as a moderator.

Moderator hat on: Not sure what you are complaining about here, we did put a stop to it promptly, within 24 hrs. You thanked me for reprimanding him. Was your expectation not met? Any comments on moderation should be handle by private message.

Hat off: You didn't answer my question. Why are your answers different when ask if taking slaves as spoils of war is moral vs if sexual exploitation of children is moral? Why "it depends" for one, but "immoral" for the other? Taking slaves is also a crime.

[otseng]

But enough of this, I spend too much time casting pearls before swine in this forum

Moderator Comment

Please avoid casting any forum members in a negative light.

Please review the Rules.



______________



Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Inquirer]

But enough of this, I spend too much time casting pearls before swine in this forum

Moderator Comment

Please avoid casting any forum members in a negative light.

Please review the Rules.



______________



Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

You mean like publicly insinuating someone is an advocate for the sexual abuse of children? that kind of "negative light"? Because that goes on and was reported and jack shit was said or done, so stop pretending to have principles, the moderation is not impartial and that means it really can't be called moderation.

Yes I know this very post breaks the rules but so what? you don't enforce them impartially so perhaps it'll get ignored like so many other violations.

[Jose Fly]

You mean like publicly insinuating someone is an advocate for the sexual abuse of children?

You were asked if taking little girls (only girls and only virgins, as the Bible depicts) for one's own "use" was good and moral, and you answered "it depends".

Your answer speaks for itself. Might as well own it.

And if you truly didn't appreciate that what the Bible depicts constitutes sexual slavery, again I have to question your knowledge of your own holy book.

[JoeyKnothead]

You mean like publicly insinuating someone is an advocate for the sexual abuse of children?

You were asked if taking little girls (only girls and only virgins, as the Bible depicts) for one's own "use" was good and moral, and you answered "it depends".

Your answer speaks for itself. Might as well own it.

And if you truly didn't appreciate that what the Bible depicts constitutes sexual slavery, again I have to question your knowledge of your own holy book.

It didn't seem to be a problem until after it was answered.

Pretty thing: Joey, do you wanna go for a ride?

Joey: Sure pretty thing, where we going?

Pretty thing: Shopping.

Joey:

[otseng]

[Replying to Inquirer in post #337]

Moderator Warning



No, your post will not be ignored, but will get a warning instead. If you are unable to abide by the rules, you are free to leave the forum.

Please review our Rules.



______________



Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.