Do our ancestors have an afterlife?

[Leyla]

From what I studied, animals dont have a soul and therefore no afterlife. At what time, will God draw the line between man and animal in our evolutionary path? Will heaven and hell be filled with neanderthals, homo erecti etc? [EDIT: currently trying to figure out if animals have a soul or not, thanks for pointing it out]

Edited May 10, 2019 by Leyla

[thomas t]

Hi Leyla;

still wanting to answer you in the other thread, this one here I find is more crucial.

You seem to take the answers from the Theory of Evolution as a given:

8 hours ago, Leyla said:

the line between man and animal in our evolutionary path

noone can disprove God from intervening. Even scientists can't. But if a loving God intervenes, it looks like this:

He giveth to the beast his food, and to the young ravens which cry. Psalms 147:9 KJV

The ToE is about survival of the fittest. The Bible, in contrast, is about survival of the loved ones.

If they say they can't disprove God, then they can't disprove him helping hungry animals, either... But in case he does, the Theory of Evolution would be wrong in its entirety regardless of how well supported by facts it may be.

It could be that God simply doesn't leave evidence behind every single time he helps an animal surviving. Why should he?

But I'm certainly not going to say that there is a big conspiracy against God going on in the scientific world. Neither would I resort to name calling against evolutionists. This is what many of my colleagues do. Unfortionately. Furthermore, I take evolution as a fact.

It's just that the Theory of Evolution and the Book of Genesis and the Psalms and other Biblical books are overlapping in a sense that they are mutually exclusive. You have to decide: either believe the one or the other.

 

BTW I suppose animals have souls +afterlife, too, at least Bible doesn't teach otherwise. I simply reject the idea that we have ancestors from before Adam.

Regards,

Thomas

 

Edited May 9, 2019 by thomas t
typo

[Leyla]

16 minutes ago, thomas t said:

Hi Leyla;

still wanting to answer you in the other thread, this one here I find is more crucial.

Hello, Im looking forward to any kind of answers! 

25 minutes ago, thomas t said:

BTW I suppose animals have souls +afterlife, too, at least Bible doesn't teach otherwise. I simply reject the idea that we have ancestors from before Adam.

Is there any reason, outside of genesis, to not believe that we had ancestors before adam?

 

[thomas t]

Hi Leyla,

first off, I think you ask great questions.... and whenever my colleagues want to sell you some of their "science" you check it against the facts and you only believe what is well documented. That's great. You're doing a great job here! Thank you for being here.

But my collegues also were getting personal in the other thread. They sometimes discussed you instead of the topic. I read that they said you're likely to end up in hell (the topic of the thread being arguments for God's existence!), they said that you "played" them, or they suggested insulting you using a scripture verse (to me, it seemed they were suggesting this). Well, co-poster Dove seemed to also have seen the problem.

So I won't post again in that thread. I want to avoid posting alongside with my colleagues in that thread so nobody thinks that I approve of their way to discuss faith. Which I don't.

I honestly hope that this time here in this thread... whoever wants to join the debate will do so politely. I also hope that you won't get banned you from posting here in the main sections just for asking some difficult questions - difficult for some.

So let's discuss this topic now:

14 hours ago, Leyla said:

Is there any reason, outside of genesis, to not believe that we had ancestors before adam?

Great question. In my opinion, there will be evidence for Adam not having any ancestors.... in case the Creator wants this evidence to be in place.

Whereas many colleagues say there is evidence... I don't see a reason for why Jesus would have added that evidence? My colleagues and I agree in the basics of faith and in many other things, but sometimes there are different opinions when it comes to the details. This happens.

 

Actually, when it comes to evidence for God... the Bible offers help. Romans 1:20 - I put it in my words - says nature is so charming as a whole and so wonderful that it is evident to see who is behind it.

So, when nature as a whole is already the one big evidence for Him... why should He want to add further evidence going into detail? Isn't nature enough?

God isn't accountable to us. Maybe I have to disappoint you here.

 

Regards,

Thomas

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by thomas t
clarity

[BorderCowboy]

Hmmm, who are we ta say animals do not have a soul? I recently lost my pal Cujo to cancer that took him bad. This animal understood me better than most people have, wouldn't that lead ya to believe God had a hand in that? Remember the ark? god saved animals two by two, I believe when i get call'd home my friend Cujo will be one of those welcomin' me home.

Just my two bits,  JJ

[Tzephanyahu]

Shalom Leyla,

Interesting questions again...

On 5/9/2019 at 8:23 AM, Leyla said:

From what I studied, animals dont have a soul and therefore no afterlife.

What makes you say this?  That's not my understanding from the Bible.

On 5/9/2019 at 8:23 AM, Leyla said:

At what time, will God draw the line between man and animal in our evolutionary path?

So there is not evolutionary path.  Evolution is, of course, a theory.  The theory can be disproved by researching the evidence towards a global flood that took place thousands of years ago (at the time of Noah).  For more on this matter, please feel free to jump into my website.  The research is methodical and as objective as possible - as it was written for non-believers.  If you take your time an follow it through (don't rush it), I don't think you'll ever believe in evolution with any confidence again. Link here

Love & Shalom

[Leyla]

4 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said:

"Shalom Leyla,

What makes you say this?  That's not my understanding from the Bible."            [That animals have no souls]

Hello, I could be wrong about that, I will look more into it.

 

4 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said:

So there is not evolutionary path.  Evolution is, of course, a theory.  The theory can be disproved by researching the evidence towards a global flood that took place thousands of years ago (at the time of Noah).  For more on this matter, please feel free to jump into my website.  The research is methodical and as objective as possible - as it was written for non-believers.  If you take your time an follow it through (don't rush it), I don't think you'll ever believe in evolution with any confidence again. Link here

Love & Shalom

Evolution is a fact and the theory of evolution by natural selection a theory. I read through the link you gave me and I saw several things that I consider a mistake.

 

4 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said:

Evolution is just a school of interpretation, with the base assumption being that all life can and has evolved accidentally. 

Evolution doesnt happen accidentally. Natural selection is not random, animals that are better suited to their enviroment are universally more likely to survive. The people that wrote it, probably confused "evolved" with "mutated". If its "mutated" then we can say randomly/accidentally, however you want to call it.

 

4 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said:

If youve ended up on this page then there’s a chance that you believe in Evolution over Creation. After all, how can we really believe in the Bible? Aren’t we trusting in scrolls written thousands of years ago, by men we don’t know, and pay heed just because they’re revered as “wise men”? Keep in mind, we could ask the same question about the Theory of Evolution. Aren’t we trusting in hundreds of thousands of journals (we haven’t read), by men we don’t know, and pay heed just because they’re revered as “intelligent men”

We are not trusting the theory of evolution or the people that developed/work on it. We can view all released scientific papers that are released. Sometimes we have too wait some time, until already published papers are made public. If we have the equipment and knowledge, then we can replicate all experiments in the scientific papers, that lead the scientist into the assumption that an evolution happened.

4 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said:

I hear people reference broad terms such as  “scientists have proved… ” or “they have discovered… ”.  I doubt the layman knows the name of many individual scientists or scholars, never mind know about them to verify their impartiality. There are a handful of famous, almost celebrity types such as Richard Dawkins, Bill Nye and Brian Cox, all mainly known for their multimedia “bite-sized” approach to the subject. They are indeed smart and speak eloquently with great passion, but are you really content to settle on the Origin of Life based on their confident words alone? Personally, I wonder how that is any different than following a prophet…

The difference between a prophet and for example Richard Dawkins, is that noone would take Dawkins seriously, if all he did was make claims, without any evidence for these claims. People like Dawkins, read through scientific papers (or make them themselves) and present it to us in a way that is easier to understand.

 

4 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said:

My point is this: Creationists and Evolutionists share the commonality of a faith (by definition), just in different things and different people. Both sides use science, but whereas Creationists have faith in God and the Bible, Evolutionists have faith in men and their Papers. Neither side has empirical proof of their assumptive interpretations, but both have faith in them, implicitly.    https://i2.wp.com/faithandtheword.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/2-faith.png?resize=768%2C477&ssl=1

I looked for the definition of faith and found "Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence." The theory of evolution by natural selection and evolution itself, has very good proof and evidence and thats the only reason why people even talk about it. People tried to disprove evolution since the very first day and noone was able to do it yet. That speaks alot for how strong it is.

5 hours ago, BorderCowboy said:

Hmmm, who are we ta say animals do not have a soul? I recently lost my pal Cujo to cancer that took him bad. This animal understood me better than most people have, wouldn't that lead ya to believe God had a hand in that? Remember the ark? god saved animals two by two, I believe when i get call'd home my friend Cujo will be one of those welcomin' me home.

Just my two bits,  JJ

Again, Im not 100% sure, that animals have no souls, that was simply my conclusion I got so far (and it could be wrong)

5 hours ago, thomas t said:

Hi Leyla,

first off, I think you ask great questions.... and whenever my colleagues want to sell you some of their "science" you check it against the facts and you only believe what is well documented. That's great. You're doing a great job here! Thank you for being here.

But my collegues also were getting personal in the other thread. They sometimes discussed you instead of the topic. I read that they said you're likely to end up in hell (the topic of the thread being arguments for God's existence!), they said that you "played" them, or they suggested insulting you using a scripture verse (to me, it seemed they were suggesting this). Well, co-poster Dove seemed to also have seen the problem.

So I won't post again in that thread. I want to avoid posting alongside with my colleagues in that thread so nobody thinks that I approve of their way to discuss faith. Which I don't.

Hello, and thanks for the kind words. I try to not take anything personal because these subjects are very close to most people here so I can relate why some people could say or think something, that they usually would not do. 

 

5 hours ago, thomas t said:

Great question. In my opinion, there will be evidence for Adam not having any ancestors.... in case the Creator wants this evidence to be in place. Whereas many colleagues say there is evidence... I don't see a reason for why Jesus would have added that evidence? My colleagues and I agree in the basics of faith and in many other things, but sometimes there are different opinions when it comes to the details. This happens.

Actually, when it comes to evidence for God... the Bible offers help. Romans 1:20 - I put it in my words - says nature is so charming as a whole and so wonderful that it is evident to see who is behind it.

So, when nature as a whole is already the one big evidence for Him... why should He want to add further evidence going into detail? Isn't nature enough?

Just pointing to the beautiful nature, as proof for God can be misused. I want to give you one example of the Quran S30:8 " Have they not thought about their own selves? God did not create the heavens and earth and everything between them without a serious purpose and an appointed time, yet many people deny that they will meet their Lord. " This Quran verse tries to proof allah, by pointing to our  bodies, to the sky and to the earth [and what is on the earth]. So basically the same argument, can be used in any religion and it would only point to a "God" or more "Gods" but not to which God and not which specific religion. It doesnt proof that our genesis was the actual beginning of everything. Christianity could have just hijacked this idea form other religions. If our genesis has no value, then there is no reason to reject the idea of ancestors before the first human.

 

5 hours ago, thomas t said:

So, when nature as a whole is already the one big evidence for Him... why should He want to add further evidence going into detail? Isn't nature enough?

Also, is nature really sufficient proof for a God?

Edited May 10, 2019 by Leyla

[Tzephanyahu]

6 minutes ago, Leyla said:

Evolution doesnt happen accidentally. Natural selection is not random, animals that are better suited to their enviroment are universally more likely to survive. The people that wrote it, probably confused "evolved" with "mutated". If its "mutated" then we can say randomly/accidentally, however you want to call it.

Well, the very nature of Evolution is technically "accidental".  Selection implies intelligence, so I'm afraid that's not an option for evolutionists!   The mutation, as evolutionists suppose, is either suited to it's environment or not, and it flourishes if it does - so the theory goes.  There is no controlled or non-accidental evolution, by definition. To suppose there is would indicate an intelligence outside of the lifeform controlling the the mutation for it's benefit.  There has never been an example of energy adapting to form NEW information (see the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics).  In fact, without any substantial evidence for this, evolution should really be called a hypothesis and not even a theory.

12 minutes ago, Leyla said:

We are not trusting the theory of evolution or the people that developed/work on it. We can view all released scientific papers that are released. Sometimes we have too wait some time, until already published papers are made public. If we have the equipment and knowledge, then we can replicate all experiments in the scientific papers, that lead the scientist into the assumption that an evolution happened.

Have you ever read those scientific papers yourself?  I have read some and I'm well aware of the single mandate behind some these papers, having done the thorough research myself.  You say "IF we have the equipment and knowledge THEN..."  This only highlights my point.  You have not done so yourself so, until you do, it's a belief in what you are told.  Some believe blindly what Evolutionary Scientists say, some believe blindly what the Prophets of Yahweh say.  But Christians admit there is faith involved and do not act as if they were involved in the testing and proving personally, as most pro-evolutionists do.

15 minutes ago, Leyla said:

The difference between a prophet and for example Richard Dawkins, is that noone would take Dawkins seriously, if all he did was make claims, without any evidence for these claims. People like Dawkins, read through scientific papers (or make them themselves) and present it to us in a way that is easier to understand.

Not really true.  I have seen many of Dawkins lectures and he only cites "we can prove.." or "the University of X found out...", the rest is implied with mockery or man's logic.  Again, have you taken these claims and investigated them thoroughly for yourself?  If you haven't yet, but trust that Dawkins is speaking the truth, that is the definition of faith.

17 minutes ago, Leyla said:

The theory of evolution by natural selection and evolution itself, has very good proof and evidence and thats the only reason why people even talk about it.

Okay, provide it to me.  I'll happily look at any evidence you suppose exists for evolution.  You speak so confidently about it, so surely you have this information to hand or clearly memorised.  Surely you will not need to look it up online first, because you speak with the boldness of someone who has this proof easily accessible in mind.  BUT, if you do have to research first (and I invite you to try), then you are speaking with faith.  Faith in what this or that person says, or what you assume has already been proven by others.  Until you know the evidence and facts explicitly, you are only trusting in simple men dressed in suits and labcoats, with accreditations after their names (given to them by other men). 

 

This has been a great debate though.  Thank you for reading the page and please continue to the evidence page, if you have the time.  Either way, thanks for the thoughtful responses.   It has been an interesting discussion.

May Yahweh bless you in your continued search for the truth

Love & Shalom

[thomas t]

Hi Leyla,

thank you very much for your understanding of how discussions evolve here. It's nice to talk to someone relaxed!

3 hours ago, Leyla said:

is nature really sufficient proof for a God?

this wonderful nature is sufficient proof for a wonderful God, in my opinion. Not just some deity...

This nature, for me, points to a God who loves freedom. Allah is someone loving freedom?

3 hours ago, Leyla said:

If our [Book of] genesis has no value [derived from sound proof]

[added mine, tell me, if I misunderstood you]

Let me tell you one story out of my life. I once told someone "I'm a musician, I earn some money playing on the streets".

Then she said "prove it - or I won't believe you!"

Was she right in saying so? Was my assertion about my personal life worthless? I just told her I'm a musician. What's the matter? When I tell you "I'm 39 years old" do I have to prove it

Genesis has great value to me!

 

... just a little word to the very good discussion you're having with brother Tzep...

3 hours ago, Leyla said:

The difference between a prophet and for example Richard Dawkins, is that noone would take Dawkins seriously, if all he did was make claims, without any evidence for these claims.

I'm not so much into what Dawkins says, but one thing is sure: no Christian is entitled to take self-proclaimed prophets seriously in case he or she doesn't prove their identity as a prophet through the facts. This my interpretation of 1 John 4:1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

Let me tell you one story out of my life. A woman came to me telling me she is a prophet. Then she just gave three key words. She didn't seem to have any idea of what the key words were about. Actually, the three words were the key elements of the dream I had the same morning. So I believed her saying she's a prophet.

Best regards,

Thomas

 

 

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by thomas t
clarity

[missmuffet]

On 5/9/2019 at 12:23 AM, Leyla said:

From what I studied, animals dont have a soul and therefore no afterlife. At what time, will God draw the line between man and animal in our evolutionary path? Will heaven and hell be filled with neanderthals, homo erecti etc? [EDIT: currently trying to figure out if animals have a soul or not, thanks for pointing it out]

All humans have a soul and will go either to heaven or Hades. I do not believe that animals have a soul. I believe in a young earth so I do not believe in neanderthals. I also do not believe in evolution.