Results 221 - 240 of 701
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Sir Pent Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
221 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20113 | ||
Contrary View, Scripture ....................... Dear Lionstrong, Matthew 10:16 is a passage where Jesus, Himself instructs His disciples to be "shrewd as snakes" or "wise as serpents". Using these words according to their standard definitions (in the dictionary), this is saying that animals can think. Shrewd is defined as clever, which is defined as smart, which is defined as intellegent, which is defined as the ability to learn. 99 percent of people ages 5 and up would say that these are all synonomous with "thinking" and being "rational". I assume you must be using the word "rational" with some specific meaning that it ordinarily doesn't have. Perhaps if you explain how you define the word, it would help us to proceed. I don't want to be rude, but I am truly confused by your ideas on this issue. |
||||||
222 | The Serpent's Class | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20339 | ||
Clarification ................................... Dear Lionstrong, I'm not sure exactly what your point is in this post. However, I'm not sure that this interpretation of the verse is the only possible one. Just because the verse says that the serpent was more crafty than any "beast of the field", that doesn't mean that it is necessarily in the same category. If I say that Curt Schilling is a better pitcher than anyone on the Yankees, it doesn't mean that Curt is a Yankee (in fact he plays for Arizona). Similarly, the serpent could actually be in the category of "creeping things" and yet still be more crafty than the "beasts of the field". |
||||||
223 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20341 | ||
Contrary View, logic ............................ Dear Lionstrong, Yes, I agree that the image of God is uniquely given to humans and not to animals. However, I disagree that "the image of God is rationality." Rationality is merely the ability to think, or to process information in an orderly manner. This ability is not limited to humanity, for animals obviously do this. The image of God is much greater and all-encompassing than just pertaining to our brains. |
||||||
224 | What fruit did Eve eat from the tree? | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20386 | ||
Personal Note ................................... Dear Nazman, I also would like to welcome you to the Forum, and look forward to the ideas that you'll have to share with us in the future. |
||||||
225 | The Serpent's Class | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20670 | ||
Personal Note ................................. Dear Lionstrong, You could be entirely correct, I just wanted to point out that it wasn't the only possible interpretation. I am curious though, why you brought this up. Do you glean something from this passage based on the idea that the serpent changed classes? If so, I would be interested in hearing your thoughts. |
||||||
226 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20675 | ||
Confusion ....................................... Dear Lionstron, I must admit that I am very confused by your continuing to post that animals are incapable of thinking. I can only come up with 3 possible explanations. 1. You are using the word "thinking" to mean something other than its typical definition in the dictionary. If this is the case, please share the definition that you are using. 2. You are joking around with me. The "leather shoes" comment was kind of humorous, so maybe this is it. 3. You just want to have the last post. If this is the case, just let me know, and I'll stop responding for you. I really am curious what the original idea was that you were trying to make, but I seem to have lost it in the whole discussion of whether animals had the ability to use their brains. |
||||||
227 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20786 | ||
Personal Note ................................... Dear Hank, Thanks for the oil; may our lamps never run dry. I, too, liked the idea about the typing dog. Maybe I could call him Dautsund Matrix. |
||||||
228 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20790 | ||
Conrary view, Experience ...................... Dear Lionstrong, You said that my definition of "rational" was acceptable, so let's take a look at it. I have defined rationality as the ability to learn or to process information in an orderly manner. This is a pretty standard definition according to dictionaries. Now let's look at some historical facts about animals. There was once a scientist named Pavlov. He had a bunch of dogs that he did an experiment with. He would ring a bell, and then feed them. He did this over a period of time, and noticed a change in the dogs. They associated the bell sound with food, which was demonstrated by salivation. When Pavlov would ring the bell, the dog's mouths would water even before he would feed them. This was not INSTINCT. A wild dog's mouth doesn't water when it hears a bell. These specific dogs were able to PROCESS INFORMATION that they received to LEARN that the food followed the bell. A much more advanced experiment was performed with the famous gorilla named, Koko. She was able to actually LEARN sign language and was able to communicate with her trainers and visitors. She was able to PROCESS INFORMATION not only that she was specifically taught, but was also able to combine concepts in order to learn things that were not taught to her. Her story has been chronicled and documented in numerous books and documentaries. I assume that you were unaware of these events, and share them so that you may be better informed of the scientifically proven exhibitions of animal intellegence. However, you can observe these things on your own as well. If you or someone you know has a dog that can "sit", "lie down", or "roll over" on command, that is also a good example. These are not INSTINCTS. Wild dogs do not understand a human voice command, much less obey it. These behaviors must be LEARNED, and that shows "rationality". This all being said, you did earlier in this thread, quote several good Bible verses, which seem to say that animals are not rational. I would suggest that the Bible is using the word "rational" to mean something beyond what the dictionary defines the word to mean. This would be similar to when Jesus said, "I am the Truth", meaning more than just being a fact and real. |
||||||
229 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20898 | ||
Personal Note .................................... Dear Radioman, I know you're joking here, but some posts would definately indicate that the assertion is false :) |
||||||
230 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 20899 | ||
Clarification .................................... Dear Lionstrong, I think that I am beginning to see what you are meaning when you talk about being "rational". In your last post, you said there was a "line of the personal. Now, what we have above the line is God, men and angels, and below the line everything else." On that point, I completely agree with you. God has personality, angels have personalities (I think), and humans have personalities. Animals DO NOT have personalities. An animal (especially a pet) may appear to have a personality, but I believe that it is not real. Rather, I believe that it is merely instincts and learned behaviors that we associate with personality traits and therefore project onto the animal. This description seems to fit what you are calling "rationality", and if that is what you mean, then we really have no disagreement, other than definitions. In any case, we agree that humans are in the image of God, animals are not, and that is what totally seperates us from them. P.S. Dear Charis, I would have to do some research to know for sure, but I'm relatively certain that some animals (dolphins, gorillas, etc.) have been taught to complete three tasks in a row on command. |
||||||
231 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 21016 | ||
Clarification .................................. Dear Lionstrong, The never-ending struggle to find common ground continues :) In your last post, you talk about rationality in terms of "appreciation for her personal history" and "fear of death or non-being". This seems to me like you are talking about being self-aware, which is defined by the dictionary as "an awareness of one's own personality or individuality". If this is what you are talking about, then I also agree with you. Humans have an ability to recognize their unique existance, seperate from the rest of the universe. They are able to perceive that "I" am something other than just stuff (tissue and electric currents). They are also therefore concerned about what happens to "I" after the stuff ceases to function. I do not believe that animals have this ability, and I don't know of any experiments to the contrary. However, I would reiterate that this is "self-awareness", and that is beyond mere intellegence. You seem to agree that animals can communicate to some degree. I think that communication requires some level of intellegence and rationality; don't you? |
||||||
232 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 21138 | ||
Contrary View .................................. Dear Lionstrong, I respect you personally, but your post is based on purely circular reasoning. You say that animals don't communicate, because communication requires thought, and animals don't think. But your fundamental assumption "animals don't think" is the very thing that is being debated. It is not logical to prove an idea by using something completely based on the idea itself. Secondly, you are using a different definition of communication than the dictionary. The true definition of communication is simply "an exchange of information". It is a proven fact that animals are able to do this. Finally, you said that animals are intellegent but not rational. Yet earlier in this thread, you agreed that those words were synonymous, which would be in agreement with the dictionary. It definately appears that you (and perhaps certain Bible verses) are using the word "rational" to have a special meaning beyond the standard definition. Do you mean "self-awareness"? |
||||||
233 | An Animal Spoke to Eve | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 22203 | ||
Personal Note .................................... Dear Lionstrong, Eve wasn't surprised that the snake talked to her because she knew that animals were rational and it was therefore perfectly normal to carry on a conversation with them :) Just giving you a hard time my friend :) |
||||||
234 | Gen.3:15 | Gen 3:15 | Sir Pent | 24170 | ||
Personal Note ................................... Dear Casiv, I would just like to tell you that I believe this is the best post that you have contributed to this forum thus far. The point you are making is very understandable. It is supported by referrences in both the Old and New Testaments. And it is a cool thought that I had not previously discovered. I really like your idea that it is the very same thing which the serpent injured (the heel) that will completely destroy it (crush the head). You are correct that it is a good picture of Christ, who Satan injured (on the cross), but who eventually defeated Satan once and for all. Once again, great post. I hope to see more posts like this one in the future. |
||||||
235 | Is God still creating man in His image? | Gen 5:3 | Sir Pent | 16150 | ||
Kalos, I agree that we are not created by God in the same way that Adam and Eve were. Our physical bodies grow from the genetic blueprints of our parents, as opposed to Adam being formed out of dust. On the other hand, I believe that each person's soul (or spirit depending on which forum member you ask) is unique. I don' think that it is merely a product of former creations, but is a new creation of God. "Remember, O Lord, what the measure of life is, for what vanity thou hast created all the sons of men!" (Psalm 89:47) So do you think that that the image of God is more directly connected with our physical bodies or our spirit (soul)? |
||||||
236 | Is God still creating man in His image? | Gen 5:3 | Sir Pent | 16179 | ||
I thought this thread was about man's being created in the image of God. Now it seems to be getting onto the subject of the death penalty. There is another thread currently going, which is dealing with that issue, but I would like to just respond briefly to this post. People who are against the death penalty DO NOT BELIEVE that criminals "shouldn't be punished for their crimes". They just believe that this punishment should not be killing the criminal. |
||||||
237 | Sorry about the digression. | Gen 5:3 | Sir Pent | 16202 | ||
Dear Bill MC, I wish that I had a better answer for you, but this is one subject that I have not thought deeply about in the past. I do beieve that God does actually create each individual "spirit" (to use your word, others might call it "soul"). However, as for whether this is still in God's image or not, I don't know. I can't think of any biblical passages, other than the ones already listed in this thread, that are related. I did have one idea which came to mind. You have probably heard of the idea that "there is a God-shaped hole inside each of us". Have you ever made paper machette? As a kid, we took a balloon, covered it with the paper machette, let it dry, and then popped the balloon and removed the pieces. This left a balloon shaped hole in the middle. However, the outside was also in the same shape (image) as the balloon had been. Perhaps this is what being made in the image of God is. C.S.Lewis writes in his book "Mere Christianity" about how humans are born with a innate knowledge that the world (and themselves personally) is/are supposed to be better. Perhaps it is this ability to realize that there is something higher and better than the reality around us (which no other living thing seems to posess). If so then I think that the answer to the original question is "yes". P.S. I would just like to beat everyone to the punch by saying that this could all be meaningless dribble. I have no biblical support for this theory, and don't even know for sure if I believe it. However, like I said, I haven't thought through this very much at all, and this just came to me. |
||||||
238 | Version vs Version - Again | Gen 6:1 | Sir Pent | 114013 | ||
My answer......................................... Hi dat, Thanks for giving an example of what you are talking about with versions disagreeing with each other. The passage that you talked about is a rather confusing one and has actually been talked about quite a bit on this forum in the past. I'll just give you one interpretation that is a commonly held belief amoung Christians. The versions that you mention are all correct. The word "Nephilim" is simply a title for these particular people talked about in this chapter. "Sons of God" is another name for them, and "giants" is simply a description of them. It is similar to if I said, "The Bronx Bombers played a game yesturday" or "The Yankees played a game yesturday" or "The guys in pinstripes played a game yesturday". All three sentances are true and don't contradict each other. Does that make sense. |
||||||
239 | Version vs Version - Again | Gen 6:1 | Sir Pent | 114014 | ||
Disagreement............................ Hi Ikeepoo68, I disagree that God put people on other planets. I also disagree that these non-existent people came to Earth. I also disagree that these non-existent people were giants and mistaken for Gods. Do you have any places in scripture that lead you to believe any of these things? |
||||||
240 | How many yrs was promised to us to live? | Gen 6:3 | Sir Pent | 116549 | ||
My answer......................................................... Welcome to the forum Escottl, I think that the verse you are looking for is Genesis 6:3. It speaks of God lowering the normal lifespan of humans to 120 years. Although this is shorter than some of the lifespans of the first people, it is still longer than the "three scores" that you mentioned, which would only be 60 years. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Next > Last [36] >> |