25 replies to this topic

[Saru]

Palaeontologists have unearthed the most complete ever pre-human skeleton at a dig site in South Africa.

Discovery News said:

South African scientists said Thursday they had uncovered the most complete skeleton yet of an ancient relative of man, hidden in a rock excavated from an archaeological site three years ago.

Read more...

[St. Jimmy]

Interesting. I wonder how it looked alive.

[Paracelse]

St. Jimmy, on 16 July 2012 - 08:52 AM, said:

Interesting. I wonder how it looked alive.

Like a young dubbya????   On a serious note this is an incredible find who could have been left on a shelf without anyone noticing for another 50 years.  Wonder what creationists will say about this?

[Super-Fly]

Nice, interesting topic.

Thanks,

[willowdreams]

Paracelse, on 16 July 2012 - 01:10 PM, said:

Like a young dubbya????   On a serious note this is an incredible find who could have been left on a shelf without anyone noticing for another 50 years.  Wonder what creationists will say about this?

the creationalist will reread certain things in the bible, end for their own emotional/mental/spiritual well being, re see the meanings of what the scriptures imply, and rationalize it so it makes sense for them.

i often wonder something.. if somehow (thinking Tardis here) you were able to get a religious scholar from say 50 yrs after the bible was 'put together', and put him with a scholar of today.. if they would see the same meanings

keeping in mind.. the one from way back is closer to the timeline/culture and what the actual meaning would be.. and today we are further from the culture with less actual understanding

[Paracelse]

willowdreams, on 16 July 2012 - 04:41 PM, said:

the creationalist will reread certain things in the bible, end for their own emotional/mental/spiritual well being, re see the meanings of what the scriptures imply, and rationalize it so it makes sense for them.

i often wonder something.. if somehow (thinking Tardis here) you were able to get a religious scholar from say 50 yrs after the bible was 'put together', and put him with a scholar of today.. if they would see the same meanings

keeping in mind.. the one from way back is closer to the timeline/culture and what the actual meaning would be.. and today we are further from the culture with less actual understanding

I agree with  you entirely; I've been doing occasional translating and read translation of relatively modern text and I saw so many mistakes simply because a people interpret with their knowledge of the time.  For exemple most Christian see the word Christ as the title of one man in fact there were many christ in the time of JC

[jimbur]

Paracelse, on 16 July 2012 - 06:14 PM, said:

I agree with  you entirely; I've been doing occasional translating and read translation of relatively modern text and I saw so many mistakes simply because a people interpret with their knowledge of the time.  For exemple most Christian see the word Christ as the title of one man in fact there were many christ in the time of JC

Paracelse, on 16 July 2012 - 06:14 PM, said:

I agree with  you entirely; I've been doing occasional translating and read translation of relatively modern text and I saw so many mistakes simply because a people interpret with their knowledge of the time.  For exemple most Christian see the word Christ as the title of one man in fact there were many christ in the time of JC

Do you even know what the name "Christ" means? And can you name some of those other christ?  

Many animals have come and gone. How do they know this is not just an extinct species of ape?

[CRIPTIC CHAMELEON]

jimbur, on 16 July 2012 - 06:29 PM, said:

Do you even know what the name "Christ" means? And can you name some of those other christ?  

Many animals have come and gone. How do they know this is not just an extinct species of ape?

   First of all, Jews of the first century had only one name, plus "son of (his father)"- ben. So, Christ is not part of Jesus' real name - it simply means 'anointed', indicating the Messiah.

The name Jesus is the Greek translation of the name Joshua, an approximate transliteration of the Hebrew or Aramaic Yehoshua. In the Old Testament, Joshua is always transliterated into English as Joshua, but the New Testament was originally written in Greek, so the Greek form, Jesus, is used in English.

So, Jesus Christ's real name was Joshua ben Joseph, or more correctly, Yehoshua ben Yosef (Hebrew) or Yehoshua bar Yosef (Aramaic).



As they said the The remains are believed to be a young member of the Australopithecus species and are more complete than any other discovery of its kind. It isn't clear if the skeleton belonged to a direct ancestor of modern humans or a close relative however it is believed to be at least two million years old. Give them time they will work it out.

[brizink]

Correction: Christ means "savior" and if it did mean "anointed", it would not indicate the Messiah, it would indicate a cohen or someone of the priestly class. Back then every rabb, religious leader, prophet and scholar would have been a Messiah, but not to be confused with THE messiah (meschiackh). please do better research before you misinform people.

[brizink]

Actually its "Yehoshuakchu Ben Yosefakchu" you just called you precious Jesus; "Joshua, daughter of Joseph"

[csspwns]

wat species? homo erectus?

[Imaginarynumber1]

brizink, on 17 July 2012 - 12:49 AM, said:

Correction: Christ means "savior" and if it did mean "anointed", it would not indicate the Messiah, it would indicate a cohen or someone of the priestly class. Back then every rabb, religious leader, prophet and scholar would have been a Messiah, but not to be confused with THE messiah (meschiackh). please do better research before you misinform people.

Umm, Christ is from the Greek 'Kristos' which means anointed. It comes from the Hebrew Masiah (or something to that effect) which means Messiah.

Also, I wish these threads about human ancestors wouldn't always inevitably end up in a religious debate.

[CRIPTIC CHAMELEON]

Imaginarynumber1, on 17 July 2012 - 01:35 AM, said:

Umm, Christ is from the Greek 'Kristos' which means anointed. It comes from the Hebrew Masiah (or something to that effect) which means Messiah.

Also, I wish these threads about human ancestors wouldn't always inevitably end up in a religious debate.

I totally agree.

[Mycial]

This concept of evolution is somewhat off the wall. There are entities at work & control the planet either their in human form or from other dimensions. This is a zoo planet everything that has legs or wings has been genititcaly altered. Even mankind & humankind as well. Carrots are made by man many years ago by splicing to different vegetables. Tomatoes are also altered it was a poisoness berry over the many years they were able to scientifically change it by splicing another fruit/vegetable this is nothing new humans are also experiments. Your species is changing again due to alien techonolgy rather it's from humans from other planets or nonhuman entities as well. This is the reason why many thousands of your species are abducted & animals also to continuely change creations. There's a secret society dark cult that controls this planet people don't know what's on this planet from the oceans & underground & other planets.
Sorry if I've offended some people but the truth must come out we are here.

[Sundew]

Paracelse, on 16 July 2012 - 01:10 PM, said:

Like a young dubbya????   On a serious note this is an incredible find who could have been left on a shelf without anyone noticing for another 50 years.  Wonder what creationists will say about this?

We will have to wait and see what comes of this. First, a belief in science and a belief in God are not mutually excluded; Johannes Kepler said science was "thinking God's thoughts after Him," and Albert Einstein, "Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the the laws of the universe - a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of which our modest powers must feel humble." Second, sometimes science assumes too much, has a hidden agenda or even outright lies to accomplish said agenda. If you think this is an overstatement look up "Piltdown Man" on the web. Granted, this is the exception, not the rule, but it should give one cause to carefully consider the facts before jumping onboard conclusions drawn by some new scientific discovery.