Comments on TO ALL THOSE WHO BELIEVE MAN SPRANG FROM APES OR MONKEYS:

Go to LETTERS, ESSAYS & SHORTSAdd a commentGo to TO ALL THOSE WHO BELIEVE MAN SPRANG FROM APES OR MONKEYS:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Gorillas et al....
I think you are thinking too much like a modern person when you ask the question: Who raised the first human babies if we are descended from apes.

Whether or not we descend from apes, the gestation period for the human being...from conception to adult...

is a much longer process than for an animal...years if you include the 'socializing' part of growing up.

The fact is that raising kids was not a sort of separate category of specialist information for early humans like it is now. There were no books or directions. So, who raised them? No one did!

They just grew themselves! Of course the parents fed them (even birds do that for their helpless young) but the kids just hung around their parents and sort of picked up stuff...just like they STILL pick up language without a single formal lesson.

So think about it....babies just grew (if they didn't die and thousands did) and mothers breast fed them for much longer than modern mothers do. I don't understand what you are trying to get at by saying 'who raised them' all the time? Life has an automatic growing mechanism; no one has to do anything - except keep safe and eat, and as I said, animals do that for their young even now, so why wouldn't primitive human beings do the same thing?

Raphael

 

 

 


posted by Raphael222 on July 27, 2009 at 9:11 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Gorillas et al....
An interesting theory, Raphael! I will accept it as a "possible." But, still, who or what, cared for (raised) the first human baby?  What animal has that kind of patience?"

posted by GEPRUITT on July 27, 2009 at 3:34 PM | link to this | reply

 After God Eve and she got into trouble. So what else’s new? BCA, Bill*s RJJst

posted by BC-A on July 27, 2009 at 2:47 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Re: Re: Re: Gorillas et al....
1.I have always understood that angels in the Christian tradition anyhow are androgynous. They are sexless, neither male nor female.

2. I do not understand what you mean,

 Quote -  "GOD did need to use monkeys; He already had an intelligent being for a pattern." Unquote

3. What I was trying to say in my observation was that the animals were created before man - as per Genesis - and I sometimes think that they were sort of try-outs for the best kind of physical body for the man that God was going to make later on. He could see by their adaption to the physical realm what was the 'best adapted' form for his new creature, neither man nor angel : MAN

 4. Why, for example, don't human beings have the bodies of giraffes...or rhinoceroses, or fleas? Because those 'models' all have physical adaptability problems that would not be of any use to a man. Fleas live for too short a time- only a month or two; giraffes couldn't get on subways or type memos in Word; rhinoceroses would find it difficult to find beds that supported their weight and, none of those creatures have hands.

But apes/monkeys and so on are a primitive bodily form that God could see had great chances in adapting and developing...so he created man, certainly in his image spiritually, but using the basic body form of an animal - an ape. So man does not descend from apes, he has just got a physique similar to an ape for practical purposes.

 Why not?

 

 

 


posted by Raphael222 on July 26, 2009 at 10:00 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Re: Re: Re: Gorillas et al....
Correction. Please change "GOD did need" to "GOD did NOT need."

posted by GEPRUITT on July 26, 2009 at 9:47 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Re: Re: Gorillas et al....
I agree; man is not an angel.  But could it be that humankind are the sons and daughters of the angels?  The main point here is that GOD did need to use monkeys; He already had an intelligent being for a pattern!

posted by GEPRUITT on July 26, 2009 at 9:41 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Re: Gorillas et al....
Angels are not beings that are 'confined' as it were, for a time in a physical body. In other words they do not need physical bodies.

Man is not an angel.


posted by Raphael222 on July 26, 2009 at 5:55 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Gorillas et al....
But, wouldn't the most convenient and appropriate body shape be that of the angels???

posted by GEPRUITT on July 26, 2009 at 4:40 AM | link to this | reply

Re: From Gerald

Most of you seem to have adopted the humorous, tongue-in-cheek, approach, and that is good; I need a good laugh!

Thanks

posted by GEPRUITT on July 26, 2009 at 4:24 AM | link to this | reply

I can't! I am still praying for you! sam

posted by sam444 on July 26, 2009 at 12:20 AM | link to this | reply

Gorillas et al....
..are very sociable, etc. They feed their young and look after them. Even elephants show signs of caring for their comrades; so do whales and other marine creatures.

Monkeys in zoos show real concern for each other.

I don't know whether we 'sprang' from apes (although our DNA is supposed to be almost identical, like 98%, to a chimpanzee).

I have often thought that God simply put us in the most convenient body shape he had created and that was a monkey shape; but most of us did not spring from monkeys. Except me of course...(see below)

 Me on my mother's back as a child.

posted by Raphael222 on July 25, 2009 at 11:31 PM | link to this | reply

Gorillas et al....
..are very sociable, etc. They feed their young and look after them. Even elephants show signs of caring for their comrades; so do whales and other marine creatures.

Monkeys in zoos show real concern for each other.

I don't know whether we 'sprang' from apes (also our DNA is supposed to be almost identical, like 98%, to a chimpanzee).

I have often thought that God simply put us in the most convenient body shape he had created and that was a monkey shape; but we are obviously not monkeys.

 

Me on my mother's back when I was a child.

posted by Raphael222 on July 25, 2009 at 11:29 PM | link to this | reply

Hmmm...
It's mommy...

posted by GeorgeEdwinJohns on July 25, 2009 at 7:25 PM | link to this | reply