Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 60:
Line 60: + + + + + + + +
Depends on who is the best source
::::Myself, I don't think the actual answer matters to Ecclesiastes, because (according to my analysis) Solomon wrote this book while he was an idolater - so he got a lot of things wrong. (Perhaps this page isn't [[Talk:Ecclesiastes|the best place to discuss this sub-topic further]]...) --[[User:EvanW|EvanW]] 15:18, 20 January 2010 (EST)
::::Myself, I don't think the actual answer matters to Ecclesiastes, because (according to my analysis) Solomon wrote this book while he was an idolater - so he got a lot of things wrong. (Perhaps this page isn't [[Talk:Ecclesiastes|the best place to discuss this sub-topic further]]...) --[[User:EvanW|EvanW]] 15:18, 20 January 2010 (EST)
I don't know why you all keep repeating the eukaryotic bit; I wasn't ignoring you. But you seem to be missing the main point I'm making.
There is more to a person than his [[human body]], and biologists have apparently decided not to study or even acknowledge aspects of human beings which make them entirely distinct from animals. In fact, along with Feuerbach and Lenin they have ideologically chosen to assert that humans evolved naturally from animals; that's why we are animals.
We need not propagate the erroneous assumptions of biologists, or their short-sightedness. Science is more than just [[physical science]]. [[Anthropology]] and [[psychology]] are sciences, and they are by no means required to adhere to liberal, anti-religious positions such as [[methodological naturalism]].
Linneaus is free to put humans where he wants. Meanwhile, God has put us where He wants. Pick a side, my friend. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 17:11, 22 January 2010 (EST)