/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>609302

>art is an integral part of what makes us human

gonna need a source on this

where is the problem?

Are you implying that neanderthals weren't human?

>>609304

>>609307

Hugh Ross has in the past, and it seems this view has spread throughout OEC teaching. I think art has been raised as a uniquely human trait.

>>609302

So neanderthals are human.. All humans have neanderthal DNA. Problem?

>>609316

Having the same DNA as neanderthals =/= having neanderthal DNA

>>609316

>All humans have neanderthal DNA

No. Africans do not.

>>609302

>art found in a time we think wasn't dominated by homo sapiens

>so it must be neanderthals

Classic historians honestly

I get so sick of this profession

There is no hard proof neanderthals made art, all there is to it is that there's art in Spain in an era that wasn't considered an era of homo sapiens. For all we know they find Homo Sapiens there next year like they did in Israel a couple months ago.

Adam and Eve were Neanderthals, probably. Adam means ruddy/red and Neanderthals had the genes for red hair. Then Adam's sons got wives, probably from the other races already on earth who were not descended from Adam, making modern man, a mix of Neanderthal and pre-Adam races.

>>609432

Neanderthals were nephilim along with other "acient humans"

>>609536

>nephilim

No such thing.

Put away the NIV.

>>609546

/pol/acks actually believe this

>>609549

I refuse to believe people are this stupid.

>>609536

No they were not. If they were, we wouldn't have their DNA. Also, see>>609548

>>609670

The out of africa theory (if believed to be true) also means that Black people didn't evolve.

>>609783

>Numbers 13:33

>There also we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim); and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight.”

Nephilim existed before and after the flood. Watch video related that speaks of giants with two rows of teeth that lives all over North America.

> Or do you expect me to believe Robert Wadlow was a Nephil? Or Andre the Giant?

Nice fallacy of composition. Really proves your point.

>>609793

>double rows of teeth

Rubbish is what that is.

https://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/the-modern-mythology-of-giants-double-rows-of-teeth

>>609793

Also what would the function of these "double-rowed" teeth serve? Seems like it'd hinder more than anything.

>>609770

>Out of Africa

<black people didn't evolve

And here we have one of the mote common misunderstandings in paleoanthropology. By the time people started to diverge and settle on other continents we were already what would be classified as homo sapiens sapiens. One race is not more "evolved" than the other, as it isn't an orthogenetic pattern of development.

Neanderthals also did the Lascaux caves. Nothing new.

>>609432

It means blood red, which probably just means rosy-skin/blushing. We also can thank Neanderthals for pink skin.

>>609302

some interesting stuff

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170523083548.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/

>>609326

Stop classifying people into artificial categories like "species". Just because they have different ancestors and different genes doesn't mean they're not all human.

>>609852

Fuck, I realized how SJW my argument sounds. To be specific, if you want to say a particular organism isn't human, then give some evidence besides the fact that they have different genes or different ancestors compared to the majority of modern-day humans. Looking at the pictures, all those people seem human enough to me. What you call "sapiens" being smarter or more empathetic than aborigines and negroids doesn't mean Aboriginal Oceanians or Sub-Saharan Africans are incapable of abstract thinking or feeling empathy.

>>609830

Hey look, someone who actually knows what they're talking about

>>609830

>not more evolved

Well it must just be breeding then considering the skeletal and cranial capacity differences between the races.

>>609847

Again another misunderstanding. The original paper on the subject suggested that the jaw in question has a certain root structure only found in hominins. But when dealing with Miocene apes there's a bit of an issue, the traits become somewhat confusing as to whether or not they're inherited or merely a similar adaptation. Best example of this relating to human evolution would be ramapithecus back in the 60 to the 90s.

>>609859

Not breeding so much as it is environment. Hell, chimpanzees from different regions display skeletal differences that could be considered greater than those between the various races of man.

>>609793

>Nephilim existed before and after the flood.

As dead spirits.

>Nice fallacy of composition.

How is it a fallacy? Your statement that Goliath was a Nephil when he is never referred to as such seems like a pretty big assumption.

As for the report by the Israelite spies, here's the verse in the Catholic Bible:

>33 And they spoke ill of the land, which they had viewed, before the children of Israel, saying: The land which we have viewed, devoureth its inhabitants: the people, that we beheld, are of a tall stature.

And the KJV:

>32 And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature.

>33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

It was an "evil report" because they spoke falsely.

>>609901

>It was an "evil report" because they spoke falsely.

Huh, never noticed that detail. Makes sense, considering how whiney and slimey the Israelites could be.