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]

Speak for yourself. I do choose what to believe, what to regard as true, using rationalism, logic and reason.

Back to front. When you apply that rationalism, logic and reason and you end up convinced that something is true, you believe. It is not simply a matter of choosing to believe. Even when you accept certain assumptions it is because you are convinced they are correct.

Only if you CHOOSE to BELIEVE that rationalism, logic and reason can lead us to truth.

[Inquirer]

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.

[Inquirer]

It is immoral to me, but I cannot prove it to be absolutely immoral...

They why didn't you say "it is immoral to me" when asked if taking slaves as spoils of war is moral or not?

That might or might not be the case, he (or you) is free to raise that and quote me to continue the discussion if he wants. My complaint about Jose is nothing to do with whether he stated "his own stance" but on his insinuation that I approve of the sexual exploitation of children, which (as your reprimand to him shows) is a violation of the forum rules, a very different matter altogether.

Would you have complained if the insinuation was that you approved of taking slaves as spoils of war? You are not really helping your own case here.

I'm not seeking help.

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.

[brunumb]

Speak for yourself. I do choose what to believe, what to regard as true, using rationalism, logic and reason.

Back to front. When you apply that rationalism, logic and reason and you end up convinced that something is true, you believe. It is not simply a matter of choosing to believe. Even when you accept certain assumptions it is because you are convinced they are correct.

Only if you CHOOSE to BELIEVE that rationalism, logic and reason can lead us to truth.

Nope. Somehow even with that super intellect of yours you still fail to get it. You don't choose what you believe. Your brain is convinced of something and you adopt it as truth. Unfortunately too many theists rely on faith to lead them to their supposed truth and that causes all sorts of confusion. Perhaps therein lies your problem.

[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.

[Inquirer]

Speak for yourself. I do choose what to believe, what to regard as true, using rationalism, logic and reason.

Back to front. When you apply that rationalism, logic and reason and you end up convinced that something is true, you believe. It is not simply a matter of choosing to believe. Even when you accept certain assumptions it is because you are convinced they are correct.

Only if you CHOOSE to BELIEVE that rationalism, logic and reason can lead us to truth.

Nope. Somehow even with that super intellect of yours you still fail to get it. You don't choose what you believe. Your brain is convinced of something and you adopt it as truth. Unfortunately too many theists rely on faith to lead them to their supposed truth and that causes all sorts of confusion. Perhaps therein lies your problem.

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.

[Inquirer]

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?

[JoeyKnothead]

Have a nice day Joey, that was the last chance I'm willing to give you, to debate sensibly, logically and rationally with me. Incidentally your interest in learning more of the evidence for and historicity of, Christ is not really well served in the Science and Religion area, so please ask your question here:

You won't be the last one to run away from me complaining how I'm such a mess it keeps you from showing your claims / beliefs are truth.

Christianity and Apologetics

There are plenty of people with greater expertise than me who frequent this section,

That ain't a tall order.

I'm sure you'll find the answers you're looking for there.

I just wanna know what the pretty thing does when her and them hens of hers gather in their flock.

[Inquirer]

Have a nice day Joey, that was the last chance I'm willing to give you, to debate sensibly, logically and rationally with me. Incidentally your interest in learning more of the evidence for and historicity of, Christ is not really well served in the Science and Religion area, so please ask your question here:

You won't be the last one to run away from me complaining how I'm such a mess it keeps you from showing your claims / beliefs are truth.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

[brunumb]

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.