Neanderthals lived more recently than thought

schemanista wrote

What about PYGMIES + DWARVES.

Sorry. Pharyngula inside joke.

No seriously, what if there was another intelligent race somewhere that could use reason and tools and even communicate intelligently with us. They're not "human" though, so what would christians think about that? Souls or not?

Baphomet wrote

No seriously, what if there was another intelligent race somewhere that could use reason and tools and even communicate intelligently with us. They're not "human" though, so what would christians think about that? Souls or not?

Me, as a Christian, cannot say one way or the other. Because I believe that all things were created by God, who am I to say if they have soul? Hell, who am I to say that life does not exist anywhere else in the universe and not have a soul non the less an undiscovered living species on earth. (Don’t try tricking me into saying that any other species that we find has a soul. I am only talking about what science called the first men) that is not the basis of my / our faith.

[Choobus]

Eauh wrote

Me, as a Christian, cannot say one way or the other.

As an idiot you could simply make up some bullshit though.

Choobus wrote

As an idiot you could simply make up some bullshit though.

How can some one who asks about what christians think discount what they think?

Eauh wrote

Me, as a Christian, cannot say one way or the other. Because I believe that all things were created by God, who am I to say if they have soul? Hell, who am I to say that life does not exist anywhere else in the universe and not have a soul non the less an undiscovered living species on earth. (Don’t try tricking me into saying that any other species that we find has a soul. I am only talking about what science called the first men) that is not the basis of my / our faith.

Then who are you, a mere christian, to say that a fetus or a clump of cells has a soul? What about a retraded kid? What if we mix the DNA of a dog and a human? Does it have a half soul?

If you can't say what a soul is and if there is no way to determine who or what has a soul, I have no reason to believe that such a thing exists.

[Victus]

Eauh wrote

Just another case of science is always changing what it says...

Did you know about the latest date of neanderthals before this thread? Do you now? Oh no, you've changed what you know!

Eauh wrote:

Just another case of science is always changing what it says...

Thus proving it's adaptability and thus superiority over something static and unchanging, such as the bible. Oh wait, they changed that enough as it is. At least science gives us things like medicine. The pages of the bible don't even make decent rolling paper.

Eauh, of course science changes things that it says! When we find new evidence, we reinterpret the old and hypothesize how the it all fits together. The hypothesis that survives is the one that passes the criticism. It's called thinking empirically. Why would you be surprised at all that science is able to change?

[Tenspace]

Eauh wrote

Me, as a Christian, cannot say one way or the other. Because I believe that all things were created by God, who am I to say if they have soul? Hell, who am I to say that life does not exist anywhere else in the universe and not have a soul non the less an undiscovered living species on earth. (Don’t try tricking me into saying that any other species that we find has a soul. I am only talking about what science called the first men) that is not the basis of my / our faith.

First, define soul. I disagree with your assumption that a soul is a real, existent thing.

[Choobus]

Eauh wrote

Topic: Neanderthals lived more recently than thought

Just another case of science is always changing what it says...

that's right cumchugger, science does change as we learn more. That seems much better than an immutable story made up by goat herders centuries ago.

[Victus]

Choobus wrote

that's right cumchugger, science does change as we learn more. That seems much better than an immutable story made up by goat herders centuries ago.

Made up = Recylced from myths existing before them
Centuries = Millenia

[Choobus]

Eauh wrote

How can some one who asks about what christians think discount what they think?

like this: Christians are idiots and what they think is as important as a fart in a storm

Baphomet wrote

No seriously, what if there was another intelligent race somewhere that could use reason and tools and even communicate intelligently with us. They're not "human" though, so what would christians think about that? Souls or not?

I suspect that there would be a theological argument or two arising from this hypothetical situation. The really interesting thing is how both sides of the divide (theological vs. metaphysical naturalism) would probably jump at the chance to assert that this new-found sentience proved each side right all along.

schemanista wrote

I suspect that there would be a theological argument or two arising from this hypothetical situation. The really interesting thing is how both sides of the divide (theological vs. metaphysical naturalism) would probably jump at the chance to assert that this new-found sentience proved each side right all along.

Or maybe the Neanderthals would just throw poo at us and call it "god"

[GodlessHeathen]

brad89 wrote

Why would you be surprised at all that science is able to change?

:lol::lol:
Because he's a religiot, of course! He doesn't understand the concept of "integrating new information."

Eauh wrote

Just another case of science is always changing what it says...

Look at it this way: Susie from your church seems like a nice, Christian young lady. She attends church every Sunday, participates in bible study, dresses modestly, etc. From such evidence, you may believe that Susie is a chaste young woman, possibly even a virgin (since, say, she's never been married).

Now, one day, you walk into the church office to find Susie on all fours, your pastor fucking her balls-deep from behind, with the youth director's cock in her mouth. And she is definitely enjoying it.

Given this new information, what do you do? Either a) your opinion of Susie changes, or b) you're an imbecile.

That's kind of the way science works.