>While I disagree with Ross about his "soulish" - "spiritual"
>distinction, the existence of a musical instrument (if indeed it was
>a musical instrument), being played by a Neanderthal (if indeed it
>was played by a Neanderthal), 15,000 years *after* Ross' date for
>Adam, is no problem for his view, since his criteria for humanity is
>not music but spirituality:
>
No, Stephen, you obviously didn't read what I wrote. The earliest flute, a
multihole, multi-note instrument from Libya is dated at around 80-100 thousand
years ago. This is 20-40,000 years PRIOR to Hugh Ross's date of 60,000 years
ago.
[snip]
>Now Ross may be wrong about this criterion (I believe he is - at
>least in part), but his view is at least internally consistent, and
>hence immune from criticisms like Glenn's that use a different set of
>criteria and then try to show that Ross is inconsistent with those.
>
His view is contradicted by the evidence.
>In any event, Glenn's 5.5 mya Homo habilis Adam view is so much more
>inconsistent with both Scripture and science, and has so many more
>problems than Ross' view, that Glenn is in no position to criticise
>Ross until he gets his own house in order (Lk 6:42).
Thanks for the advice.
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm