RE: How and when did we become "men"?

From: Glenn Morton (glenn.morton@btinternet.com)
Date: Sat Apr 20 2002 - 23:43:20 EDT

  • Next message: Vernon Jenkins: "Re: A matter of trust?"

    Hi Dick,

    >-----Original Message-----
    >From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
    >Behalf Of Dick Fischer
    >Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 6:25 AM

    I wrote:
    >Woah, Dick, don't go leaping to conclusions. I just presented many cases
    >which show all signs of being animal sacrifice and now without even
    >discussing why those examples don't qualify, you simply repeat your
    >falsified claim. You once made the claim that you were an 'evidence' sort
    >of guy. Then discuss the evidence.

    Dick Replied,
    >
    >"Falsified"? I can't discuss what is missing, Glenn.

    Dick, please read what I said. I asked you to discuss the evidence I cited
    of animal sacrifice. How can you say it is missing? It is in the penultimate
    e-maile I sent you.

      And this isn't my
    >point
    >anyway. What you seem to be looking for is some way to attach spirituality
    >to mankind who lived in antiquity. It isn't my concern, but I seem to get
    >drawn
    >in anyway. What I have tried to point out since I began is that Adam
    >appears
    >as a late entry into the human race, not at the apex.

    When you claim that spirituality(or more correctly the image of God) didn't
    exist until man started sacrificing animals, it is your concern. And you
    made the claim a couple of your e-mails ago. Do I need to quote it again?
    Maybe I better.

    On Fri 4/19/02 5:48 AM you wrote:
    >Catal Huyuk in Syria was abandoned prior to 7,000 years ago and showed no
    >evidence of animal sacrifice.
    >
    >So if I can pick an activity demonstrating spirituality, that's it.

    First you say it is evidence now you say it isn't your concern. Which is it
    Dick?

    >
    >It isn't germane to my case whether Homo erectus stared at the nighttime
    >sky and contemplated his origin. Or whether he killed bears or arranged
    >skulls, or whether early modern Homo sapiens did it.
    >
    >What you seem to want to imply is that this "spirituality" exists because
    >all
    >hominids emanate from Adam. That's an argument that is DOA in my book.

    I don't think you even discuss it in your book, if I may be permitted to
    make a logical equivocation here.

    >
    >Whatever spirituality may have been present before Adam was given his
    >mission
    >is beside the point. I found your discussion of bears fascinating, as I
    >find much
    >of your research fascinating. I hope you continue to bestow on us the
    >blessing
    >of your keen intelligence and the information you continually uncover. I
    >sincerely
    >mean that. (You could lighten up a little.)

    One reason I have not done much over the past couple of years is that I find
    it very generally useless to discuss evidence with people who have already
    got their minds firmly shut, which seems to be at a higher percentage among
    religious peoples. And that is truly sad. And because of this, these
    discussions have come to frustrate me because no matter what one puts out,
    it is generally ignored, as you did, claiming that animal sacrifice didn't
    exist prior to 7000 BC and when presented with evidence, you don't even
    mention it in your next email in any substantive manner (other than that
    lots of stuff about killing bears snipped).

    Insanity is doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different
    outcome. By that definition, I am insane. I keep hoping eventually that
    some apologist will actually deal with the data rather than dismissing it
    via solipsism or killing it by the silence which comes when one ignores any
    contradictory data. Yep, I think I need to see my shrink again.

    >
    >But if you think Adam was an Australopithicine, who had apes for parents,
    >you won't get any support from me.

    Since I can't even get you to discuss the data, I long ago gave up on
    support.

    And let's change the ground rules here. For the future, simply assume I
    don't believe my own concordance of genesis with science. No longer assume
    that I am trying to convince anyone of that viewpoint. Assume that I am
    merely trying to show you places where your view is contradicted by the
    data. And boy does your view fail to meet any level of anthropological data
    or physical reality.

    glenn

    see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
    for lots of creation/evolution information
    anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
    personal stories of struggle



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:42:09 EDT