re: Human evolution: astounding new story of the origin of our species

I’m running errands for older adults. I’ll get back to you later.

Yall are arguing with FooManChoo

The dude is a legit nutcase. Don't even bother. You can't convince someone that has such mental issues.

quote:

---

It's amazing that even in your ridiculous worldview, you believe that for what, 5,000 years, apart from one tiny tribe of people, everybody else was a "pagan" who went to "Hell"

---

what's the problem? should it be different? show your work

quote:

---

How ridiculous is that version of God?

---

as usual, blaming God for the choices people freely make

Just look at modern times. We’ve made more progress in the last 200 years than we’ve made in the last 5000 years before that. We hit 1B people around 1800, we are nearing 8B less than 200 years later.

quote:

---

Outside of the fact that children adopt the religious beliefs of their parents 90-95% of the time.

---

so you just admitted that not everyone has beliefs indigenous to their region which totally obviates your "gotcha"

ever heard of china?

quote:

---

If you were born in some backwater durka durka village you'd be worshiping Allah

---

not according to your own stats

quote:

---

It’s amazing the lengths people go to in order to reject their creator.

---

I've just finished Stephen Meyer's book Darwin's Doubt. He and guys like David Berlinski and Michael Behe make a compelling and scientific argument for intelligent design.

quote:

---

A transitional fossil

---

all fossils are "transitional"

quote:

---

The genetic evidence is overwhelming in support of the out-of-Africa model

---

like anything else, it's important to remember that all theories are pending

quote:

---

there was a well-established route from where anatomically modern humans originated with groups of people who left

---

which is not immune to revision.

Aurignacian migration

quote:

---

That the smartest man to live during that period got up each and every day for 50 years and learned/passed on nothing? And that behavior went on for over 11,000 generations. With no discernible improvements? No written legacy? No group fortifications?

bullshite. Didnt happen

---

Or, they did do all of these things but their discoveries were lost under thousands of feet of ocean depths and mountains of volcanic ash. All of earth’s excavated archaeology is not even the tip of the iceberg of what lies unexplored.

quote:

---

Even if that is the case it doesn't mean that you're correct.

---

It does seem to be the case, and I believe I'm correct because there is no rational basis for the reality we live in based on an atheistic view of the world. The best you can do is say "that's the nature of the universe" without provide a reason for why it must be that way. I can provide a coherent reason for why the universe is the way it is in my worldview, which requires the existence of God, and I've done so many times.

quote:

---

We've already had this discussion, you cannot substantiate rationality being dependent on the Christian God. You stopped responding to me when I questioned the assumptions you had that led you to the idea that rationality is dependent on the Christian God.

---

Yes I can, and I've done so several times already on this board. I stopped responding to you due to getting involved in other threads and losing track, but I've rationalized my position many times already and am happy to do so again.

quote:

---

That wasn't the case with the 10th plague of Egypt. Nor was it the case with the Midianites in Numbers chapter 31.

---

Yes it was the case in both examples. All people are sinners and are guilty in their representative Adam. God, being just, requires justice for sin. If He decided to wipe out everyone, He would be just to do so because He is our creator, He is the law-giver, and He is the judge, and He has the moral authority to condemn us if He chooses.

quote:

---

Pharaoh was the person being disobedient, and his disobedience caused the plagues. You could argue that the children were still sinners, but why didn't he kill them prior? Because it was a punishment for Pharaoh's disobedience. Why is God punishing others for Pharaoh's disobedience? Why does God even need Pharaoh's cooperation? Odd that children are being killed for Pharaoh's behavior, and Pharaoh's behavior wasn't even a factor...

---

Again, all people, including the Egyptians and the Hebrews, sin against God and He would be just to kill everyone (even today) whenever He desires to fulfill His purposes. Everyone dies already which is an evidence of our sinfulness, it's just a matter of when and how.

As to why God waited until Pharaoh rebelled, God was showing mercy. Every breath we take is a mercy from God because we could be killed immediately and judged for eternity and God would be just to do that. God desired to judge all of Egypt for their idolatry and their hatred and disdain for the people of God and He allowed them to live on until His judgement was imminent for the purpose of showing His power. I assume you've read the Bible, and if you have, you'll recall that this event was instrumental in calling the people of Israel to faith and repentance over and over again. What God did for them in Egypt was a constant warning to them.

God didn't need Pharaoh's cooperation. In fact we're told several times that while he hardened his heart against God, Moses, and Israel, God is said to have hardened his heart so that he wouldn't relent. Why? Because God wanted to show His power and that He is God. Why would God take credit for rescuing Israel from the bondage of slavery when it could just as easily been the will of Pharaoh? Because it wasn't Pharoah's will: God saved His people in spite of the hard heart of Pharaoh.

In regards to why the children were punished for Pharaoh: it's a matter of federal headship or representation. The people of Egypt were represented by their king and were judged because Egypt as a whole was judged due to the actions (and inaction) of their representative. They were also judged individually because they were idolaters, so it's not as if they were innocent and simply judged because of Pharaoh. God did show mercy to many Egyptians, both by not killing all their children but also by saving many and having them join the people of Israel in the exodus as part of the "mixed multitude" that came out (Ex. 12:37).

quote:

---

The same can be said for the "male little ones" slaughtered in Numbers chapter 31. They weren't the ones responsible for the Midianites deeds. Again you could say they're sinners and deserved to be killed anyways, but the Midianites had been sinners long before their spiritual war with the Hebrews. Why not order the Hebrews to commit genocide on literally the entire world? It's full of sinners... Because it wasn't because they were sinners in general, it was because they were committing certain sins against a certain group of people at a certain frequency at a certain period in time. It's very specific.

---

Again, it has to do with the actions of the Midianites against the people of Israel. The king wanted to go to war against Israel but saw how Israel defeated Midian's military superiors the Moabites and so they tried a different tactic: a curse. The king tried to get the seer Baalam to pronounce a curse against Israel but God wouldn't allow it. Then afterwards, the people of Midian seduced the Israelites into idolatry, which was essentially the last straw as God made it a big point for Israel not to go off after other gods. They were ultimately judged not just for their idolatry, but also for turning the people of Israel to it, as well. Everything that happened after (in terms of killing off the males and taking the women as slaves/wives) were the consequences of them being enemies of God. Again, God was just in having His enemies destroyed.

quote:

---

No, there are moral judgements of the subjective type.

---

I think you know what I meant but I'll clarify anyway: subjective moral statements are ultimately arbitrary (irrational) and meaningless. In order to make a meaningful moral statement, you have to call upon some sort of objective standard, and you cannot do so without borrowing from the Christian worldview.

To many any moral judgement as an atheist is irrational and inconsistent because without God, morality is nothing more than individual preference and it makes no sense to "judge" someone else's preference as being bad. It'd be like someone is wrong to like the color yellow more than the color red. In atheism, there is no possibility for objectivity within ethics/morality, and therefore all you have is preferences. Therefore, to make a moral judgement would require the Christian worldview which is the only one that provides a coherent basis for moral objectivity.

quote:

---

Assert that all you want, your god is a driver who steered into a crowd of people to solve a problem he could have solved without bloodshed. And you worship him for it.

---

That's not an accurate portrayal of God or His actions at all, but even if it were, you'd have no basis for saying it's morally wrong without acknowledging that He exists and provides a moral standard to judge His actions by.

quote:

---

No

---

whoa. you have proof that humans don't have souls?? why are you wasting your time here? you could be making millions if you were to just share this info with the world