The Mental Animal & The Rib!

``I`d also like to add that I dont agree with Darwin`s theory of evolution because I cant accept that my ancestors were apes!! ``(Rzaidi)

a good enough reason indeed...

If only someone had told Darwin this the poor old bearded chap would not have wasted himself in Galapagos Islands.

RZaidi #10: you write ``You`re saying that your ancestors were apes before they just evolved into walking talking human beings? well i guess that`s just your opinion because you obviously dont believe in God and how He created human beings``

I got news for you sister Rzaidi: God created apes too. And great-great...grandma Zaidi did indeed jump from tree to tree. So very sorry to break this to you. And if you think humans are too good to have ancestors that jump from tree to tree - that is a more elegant thing than a lot of things all humans also perform.

What?? You want an example of what these other things are??? Since you insist, here is one example: answering the call of nature. Another example: method of procreation...

Reflect upon this next time you think you are too good to be descended from an ape...

#9 by quest on July 23, 2003 2:47pm PT

You`re saying that your ancestors were apes before they just evolved into walking talking human beings? well i guess that`s just your opinion because you obviously dont believe in God and how He created human beings, which I have no problem with and I have no right to tell you whether I think you`re right or wrong. But lets just suppose that the theory of evolution is actually true and evolutionists are infact correct when they say that apes evolved into human beings... can you just answer one question that I have though? can you tell me how evolutionists explain the origin of apes??

and it isnt ``MR`` RZaidi...

I think it was written very good just a little lengthy for a reader like me.
For Mr RZaidi, I think evolutionists have better explained the origin of mankind than creationists.
I liked that Mr Paracha talked about Science, Religion and Art. Normally, Art is ignored in the discussion of Science and religion.

``...religions like Buddhism and Hinduism--the world`s major monotheist religions like Islam, Christianity and Judaism, suggest that man is basically a rib! Or, in other words, man is an extension of a rib.``

I just want to clarify something here, the book of Genesis in the Old Testament says that God created Adam, and Eve was created from Adam`s rib. Its true that the followers of Judaism and Christianity both believe in this, Islam however says nothing of the sort. According to the Quran, Adam and Eve were both created by God in the same way that all human beings are created.

I`d also like to add that I dont agree with Darwin`s theory of evolution because I cant accept that my ancestors were apes!! Like you said, human beings are ashraful-makhlukat. How can they be the supremest of beings created by God when at one time, they were swinging from tree to tree and fighting over bananas??

Nadeem:

According to the (mostly agnostic) sociologists, anthropologists, psychologists, gynecologists…sorry …the usually very observant and intelligent men & women of 21st Century science--``Man is a social animal.``

...what, no proctologist?!

I agrre with you -- man/womankind needs both Science and religion -- science to find the opium -- and the religion to sleep with it --

(with apologies to both Mulla Omar and Karl Marx)

you mean captialism aka american style captialism is not a religion??!!!

Lessons.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=naive

http://www.jabootu.com/images/apefinger.jpg

Interesting. Following is noted:
1. It is perceptive of you to exclude Hinduism and Buddhism from the the rib theory!
2. Further, I thought that Judeo-Christian-Islamic monotheists thought that God had created woman out of Adam`s rib. This coupled with your first sentence is a potent explosive!
3. There is no conflict between religion and science for those understand either!! Certainly not for those who understand both. So, here it is: Religion and philosophy are elementary science or self delusion. I use elementary in its ALL meanings.
4. Your assessment of the degradation of art in a commercial world is correct.
5. I congratulate you at your identification of the reasons for the rabid support of religions and the conversions of others derived therefrom.
6. I agree with your third paragraph form the end.
7. You should, however, not have caved in to the desire to get responses at any cost. You failed to propound a positive thesis on which substantive discussion could proceed.

Good to see your pieces on chowk.

Do the impossible!