Primates and Theology

You would think that it would be perfectly compatible with most religions, playing further into the theme of man's slight stature compared to the divine.

I feel it's less about scriptural integrity and more about man's ego. Any argument against it can be summed up as "we're human, they're animals."
This comic is a good example, it presents biblical literalism and a gross caricature of anyone else who disagrees. You could ask "why couldn't God just teach the apes?" but that would be immediately shot down with the slippery slope fallacy.

I'd like to think I was a bit more special

>Morality can only come from a deity
Such a shit talking point. Morality can still be absolute, just based on human suffering (First, Do No Harm) rather than some authority figure's diktat.

I think the real problem is that humans have souls and apes do not, so them being related leads to some questions.

Who said they don't?

>something contingent can be absolute

really makes u fink

And being the only fully bipedal member of family hominoidea left alive isn't?

I'd prefer if I was created by God -- in accordance with His divine plan -- or, in other words, that I was in God's mind when He created everything

>humans
>fully bipedal
mfw

It isn't contingent.

Did he plan on creating us with a genome that is 98.8% similar to a chimp/bonobo?

God works in mysterious ways, faggot.

98.8% monkey
1.2% image of God

And you can see how much of a difference that 1.2% makes.

So why does God look like a bald, upright monkey?

That number is far less impressive when you consider that our genomes are also roughly 50% similar to bananas

Last I heard it was around 30%

Who's talking about looks? You said genomes.

Source?

Everything I'm finding is saying between 40 and 60%. I also just found sources that we share roughly 70% of our DNA with slugs and over 80% with dogs.

By the way, I'm not a creationist or anything, just saying I was always wowed by the 98.8% but it started to be less impactful to me with numbers like I'm citing here.

Might have been 40%. Anyways, it really loses its glamour when you realize every human on earth has a .1% genome difference, yet look at us.

Bump

>Were 17th century theologians really as disgusted by the idea of being related to apes/monkeys as people make them out to be?

Not really. There was debate over the matter but most were indifferent to the idea and a lot of the hold back came from people waiting to see the science play out rather than invoke a strict literal reading of the Bible.

"Higher Criticism" however did meet resistance and evolution eventually became incased within the debate on the theological level. The debate over evolution didn't become a popular concern until the Scopes Trial.

I read somewhere that when some Carthiginian explorer in ancient times went to some place in Africa, they discovered a "people" who were very hairy and strong and whose tribe seemed to be populated mostly with females, and they had trouble capturing them alive due to their resistance. The locals called them "gorillae", which is where the modern term "gorilla" originates. Whether or not they were actually gorillas, a different kind of ape or a human tribe is pure speculation, though.

>Morality can still be absolute, just based on human suffering (First, Do No Harm)

You might find comfort in Hegel or Spinoza

Just because we discovered stuff like genetic drift and natural selection doesn't mean you still can't believe it was a divine plan/creation. Try thinking of God in a more abstract sense, akin to Taoism or Pantheism, and read Hegel's Dialectics and Dialectical Materialism

Is there a source for that? I've read a bit of anthropology and I know that there is evidence of homo sapiens mating with archaic humans like neanderthals, homo erectus, and denisovans. It's possible that a very tiny population of subhuman species survived in a remote area of Africa after homo sapiens displaced the other subhuman species in their migration to Eurasia.

It's kind of unlikely due to the fact that any pygmy tribes found later in history were still homo sapien descendants of mitochondrial eve, just a separate group of homo sapiens who became geographically isolated
If such an animal existed it was most likely a type of human-like ape and not actually a human

shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Hanno.html

you guys really all are a bunch of religious freaks.
Of course higher apes think the same way we do, because they have the same brains and even exhibit all aspects of social interaction like us including :
art
religion
politics
rituals
rudimentary oral tradition and science

even lower creatures like birds and other mammals work the same way as us .... for what you guys pretend to be here , you really are quite stuck up your asses and thick headed, esp when it comes to religion... you just don't want to have an academic discussion about it outside the well threaded path of theology.

of course monkeys can have a religion and a concept of god ...the only requirement is memory, emotion and mostly a first person perspective...

damn it read about the animal minds
even wikipedia has a good article on evolution of natural religion and psychology of religion..

I'm fed up of religious mystics.... be more sceptical for fuck sake, you owe it to your culture and to the progress of mankind to be a little open minded

... i dont care i havent used puntuation, ..yes I know you first noticed that

You'd prefer , but has nothing to do with reality.
Even if a creator made all of the universe , everything that is self aware has the right to to interpret and construct its own reality and be respected...including so called animals
where do you think this "I'm special" comes from. It's just how your organism is wired ... individuality stems from your natural body not your soul , not god and not something else.
this is why you observe the world in first person.. a random adaptation coming from the most primitive form of life AKA the cell; a compartment of space enclosed by a membrane that interacts with the outside world on ITS OWN.

yea you can argue about god the creator how ever you want , but would you deny the scientific fact on how life formed and evolved. hint: central dogma of life "as-we-know-it-on-Earth" in the molecular evolutionary theory is the membrane.

i will castrate you with my bare teeth faggot and you will still like it cause god had it coming from you all along

not this mental deficient again. stop posting.

look who's talking

You think chimps don't also look at the stars and see their dead ancestors watching them from there?

what do you do for a living ?

Are you this guy?

this guy
youtube.com/watch?v=RIpDng99Rko

are you still butthurt? it's been 3 hours.

Nope I don't think they do

>Higher Criticism

Since Reverend Doctors now declare
That clerks and people must prepare
To doubt if Adam ever were;
To hold the flood a local scare;
To argue, though the stolid stare,
That everything had happened ere
The prophets to its happening sware;
That David was no giant-slayer,
Nor one to call a God-obeyer
In certain details we could spare,
But rather was a debonair
Shrewd bandit, skilled as banjo-player:
That Solomon sang the fleshly Fair,
And gave the Church no thought whate'er;
That Esther with her royal wear,
And Mordecai, the son of Jair,
And Joshua's triumphs, Job's despair,
And Balaam's ass's bitter blare;
Nebuchadnezzar's furnace-flare,
And Daniel and the den affair,
And other stories rich and rare,
Were writ to make old doctrine wear
Something of a romantic air:
That the Nain widow's only heir,
And Lazarus with cadaverous glare
(As done in oils by Piombo's care)
Did not return from Sheol's lair:
That Jael set a fiendish snare,
That Pontius Pilate acted square,
That never a sword cut Malchus' ear
And (but for shame I must forbear)
That -- -- did not reappear! . . .
- Since thus they hint, nor turn a hair,
All churchgoing will I forswear,
And sit on Sundays in my chair,
And read that moderate man Voltaire.

Veeky Forums is a septic tank bursting full of shit

, hope you like it in your safe space, oh king of Veeky Forums . don't worry it's not only you

You'll be relieved to hear I'm not coming here ever again. Rule the shit bog in piece

Goddamn, you fucking evolutionist deniers really are a bunch of faggots you know that

good riddance

How do you reconcile evolution with the second law of thermodynamics?

The Earth is not a closed system.

how can one be so fucking dumb as to have an answer right in front of it's eyes and still be blind to it

A reminder that classifying Humans as Primates is absurd since our Linguistic capacities are qualitatively and quantitatively incomparable to that of any Primate or known Animal.

Wait are some freaks in this thread genuinely saying they don't accept evolution?

That literally proves/disproves nothing you fucking pseud.

Most likely, yeah.

It either disproves Man's status as Animal or all of Taxonomy. Your choice.

>tfw someone doesn't accept dogma

"It does not please that I've placed Man among the Anthropomorpha, perhaps because of the term 'with human form', but man learns to know himself. Let's not quibble over words. It will be the same to me whatever name we apply. But I seek from you and from the whole world a generic difference between man and simian that [follows] from the principles of Natural History. I absolutely know of none. If only someone might tell me a single one! If I would have called man a simian or vice versa, I would have brought together all the theologians against me. Perhaps I ought to have by virtue of the law of the discipline." ~Carl von Linné

When all you can cite as a difference is a sophisticated series of hoots and hollers, your argument falls apart.

>hoots and hollers

This is certainly the way most Scientists speak so I guess they're telling the truth as far as they're concerned.

>But I seek from you and from the whole world a generic difference between man and simian that [follows] from the principles of Natural History. I absolutely know of none.
>Literally admitting you're as dumb as an Ape

This is almost Divinely ironic.

Fro anyone wondering why I've mentioned Language:

youtube.com/watch?v=7Sw15-vSY8E

>But I seek from you and from the whole world a generic difference between man and suidae that [follows] from the principles of Natural History. I absolutely know of none.

Linnaeus believed that man and beast weren't separated in a physical or spiritual sense, but more in terms of rank, being God's favored animal.

Personally, I find it humbling.

Linné was twice the Christian you'll ever be.

Well, we're both placental mammals, so there's that.

Do you think God's an idiot?
Everything that ever occurs is within God's divine plan.

Bump

Why is God always planning something?

Where is everybody?

what you'd like or prefer doesn't factor into anything

>souls exist
S P O O K Y
P
O
O
K
Y