ThaChozenWun
New member
Chike;1698616 said:
lol why oops?
and fuck outta here with that, when I see a fish turn into a rock ill believe in evolution.
Last edited:
solid analysis;1723466 said:
This is not correct, starting with the part i bolded. There's not enough information in that one verse to draw that conclusion. And to say man is composed of two components puts him on par with animals. Animals while they are alive have a soul (life). Just because they alive don't mean it's because they have spirit.
"God is a Spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24)
"And God said Let us make man in our image after our likeness"(Genesis 1:26)
The significance behind the fact man was made in the likeness of God is that man is a spiritual being, and has the ability to make choices between matters of right and wrong.
you say however, that the spirit is the only thing that makes man a living being.
Last edited:
Thanks for bringing this up, I forgot about this thread...yea i think that's amazing that God designed animals with capabilities of behaving in such ways.
However understand, the behavior of the animals is being characterized as such and such by US. We are the ones attempting to put the meaning behind it. the displays of apparent 'benevolence' shown by those monkeys is not so much something that falls outside of their natural behavior. Same way it's a natural instinct for the mother of any mammal to care for their newborns. Just because they care for their newborn doesn't mean they were doing something outside of their natural instincts that God designed them with. And it doesn't quite argue that they have an ability to outright alter their natural behavior at will, as if they have a spirit like man.
However understand, the behavior of the animals is being characterized as such and such by US. We are the ones attempting to put the meaning behind it. the displays of apparent 'benevolence' shown by those monkeys is not so much something that falls outside of their natural behavior. Same way it's a natural instinct for the mother of any mammal to care for their newborns. Just because they care for their newborn doesn't mean they were doing something outside of their natural instincts that God designed them with. And it doesn't quite argue that they have an ability to outright alter their natural behavior at will, as if they have a spirit like man.
Last edited:
KTULU IS BACK
New member
lol at the religious posters immediately going "well god clearly gave these monkeys this power"
Last edited:
1. "I think it's amazing that God created animals in behaving such ways", um okay because what does your next part say?
2. " However understand, the behavior of the animals is being characterized as such and such by US. We are the ones attempting to put the meaning behind it". So what amazing way are you talking about if we're putting meanings behind it? What meanings does this have, that they show? We attempt nothing but spectate and jot down. These are experts, who have studied these animals for their careers. They aren't altering meanings behind actions. Actions speak louder than words, right? They're showing many things, it's all emotions. They're showing sharing, anger, love, forgiveness, help, selfishness etc. How, if God has only granted it to humans because of souls?
3. It's more than just taking care of a newborn, it's everything about their lives and how they present themselves around others.
4. So you don't think any animal, mammal or whatever, can change their behaviors and lifestyles to fit whatever they think is necessary?
Last edited:
Ak Knowledge
New member
You guys are idiots... EVERY single Arch Bishop, bishop, or other member of the Vatican for that matter believe in evolution, and have vouched for it quite clearly. The last pope also announced evolution as beyond "just a theory."
Do you also believe the earth is only 10,000 years old?
a man lived in a fish for three days?
Every single species EVER created was hauled onto an ark, ALONG with it's opposite sex?
...Then again, a lady lived in a shoe with like 12 kids... so who am I to judge? Right mother goose?
Do you also believe the earth is only 10,000 years old?
a man lived in a fish for three days?
Every single species EVER created was hauled onto an ark, ALONG with it's opposite sex?
...Then again, a lady lived in a shoe with like 12 kids... so who am I to judge? Right mother goose?
Last edited:
KTULU IS BACK
New member
Ak, welcome to this fucking loony bin.
Last edited:
VIBE86;1725546 said:
1. "I think it's amazing that God created animals in behaving such ways", um okay because what does your next part say?
2. " However understand, the behavior of the animals is being characterized as such and such by US. We are the ones attempting to put the meaning behind it". So what amazing way are you talking about if we're putting meanings behind it? What meanings does this have, that they show? We attempt nothing but spectate and jot down. These are experts, who have studied these animals for their careers. They aren't altering meanings behind actions. Actions speak louder than words, right? They're showing many things, it's all emotions. They're showing sharing, anger, love, forgiveness, help, selfishness etc. How, if God has only granted it to humans because of souls?
3. It's more than just taking care of a newborn, it's everything about their lives and how they present themselves around others.
4. So you don't think any animal, mammal or whatever, can change their behaviors and lifestyles to fit whatever they think is necessary?
oh wow! nice....lol ok, so you going to tell me that those pics argue that the monkey was actually in deep thought right?
2. No, actions alone might speak louder than words but they don't fully define the character of any being. You talking about motivations behind human actions/behavior....and then your are applying those motivations behind certain human actions/behaviors to animals. Next you might find yourself arguing that a tiger is a murderer with a cruel intention just because it hunts down and takes the life of the baby of an antelope mother.
3. Ok, and? This doesn't argue that the animals are going against their natural instincts.
4. Not without training from an outside influence, nope. You not going to come across a monkey in it's natural context, sitting there, looking inwardly, pondering a deep thought.
Last edited:
solid analysis;1726093 said:
LOL I was matching your picture, although I knew what you were implying.
2. A tiger is doing what it does when it does these murderous things. This is talking solely about monkeys and their actions. They clearly present themselves on a level that even humans can simply read and relate to. People say only humans have morality, yet here we have something that shows us it's not only humans. It's actually very clear in the animal kingdom animals, to an extent, do have morality in their nature. Sometimes it exceeds that nature and blossoms into learning more things in the contents of morality. This was only applied to humans, and seen as "special" because God "granted" us these things. It's clear that these animals didn't need to be 'taught' like we are. We're told we need this bible, not only to believe, but to have good morals. So who 'TAUGHT' these monkeys? Who taught the whale at Sea World to literally give it's food to a seagull? Who taught monkeys to morn their losses?
4. You really don't think monkeys sit there and seriously ponder a real thought? You don't think they're capable of wondering? Thinking? Being able to process a thought, make it a action? I really beg to differ. You don't see much shows about animals and nature, do you?
I went to the zoo a year ago, with my kids for a school field trip my daughter had. We had stopped by the gorilla area, in which they had just put away all gorillas because there was a huge fight. We sat there for about 20 minutes, then all were back out. There is a huge glass viewing window, fits about 20 viewers to stand there. Monkeys can come up to the windows as well, pat on it and do whatever. So we're at the viewing window and there's a huge fucking gorilla just staring off into space at the window for about 1 minute. It sits there, turns around and looks then turns back and stares for about 2 minutes then charges the window yelling, then starts beating the window. All the kids back up running and screaming, then it stops, looks at all of us and stands up and beats his chest, hits the window again, turns around and lays down.
Now, it sat there figuring out what it should do. It sat there, looking around to make sure it was clear to do what it wanted to do. It sat there, again, thinking about this. Then he did what it wanted it to do. Then seen it scared us, showed us that this is his spot. That's clearly THINKING and PONDERING and WONDERING and considered a DEEP THOUGHT. Deep thoughts don't require that pose or long hours. It thought deep and hard enough to be angry, to show us something.
That isn't taught by an outside influence. This gorilla did what it would've done in it's natural habitat as well.
So with that all said, who taught this gorilla this shit? To sit there and think about how the fuck to get us gone from a window? It didn't try to break the window (and it probably couldn't, which it knew) it just knew to scare people off the window. How is that not considered a deep thought?
Last edited:
VIBE86;1726247 said:
sry but, vids or it didn't happen
j/k
how do you know God just didn't create animals with a wide selection of behaviors including the one the behaviors exhibited by the one u saw at the zoo like that? whatever the gorilla did was already written before it even happened...it was programmed into his instincts and his instincts made it come out at that point.
Last edited:
solid analysis;1726846 said:
Well bro, I don't know. I guess it comes down to our beliefs. It could very well be placed by God there, but at the same time it's like people make it out to be that God doesn't make them like that. Many "scc" I know talk about this. But it is what it is...
Last edited:
