Do people still believe everyone decended from Adam and Eve?

Skywalker said:

Do you think Satan was literally talking to God in heaven or the heavenlies?

Click to expand...

Audie said:

You think animals don't have male and female,
can't tell one from the other ??

Lots of times people can easily tell which is which by looks or voice.

You sure believe some weird things.


Goodness gracious.

Click to expand...

Audie said:

Why not. Your God could hear a mouse squeek.

Click to expand...

Audie said:

None of it makes sense.
That's your problem, trying to make sense of nonsense.

Click to expand...

Audie said:

Bible stories can be disproved, not all, but some.

Click to expand...

Skywalker said:

I believe that only people having gender supports creation. Animals don't have masculine or feminine faces or voices. Why would people be identified by their reproductive role? I believe there are other aspects to gender-that are about reflecting different aspects of God's image-and that is why people are referred to by he or she.

Click to expand...

Skywalker said:

Animals can tell male and female because of hormones and smells, not because of appearance like with people. Gender in people is more than reproductive roles. Is Gender Identity Unique to Humans?

People don't have androgynous looking faces. Their faces are either masculine or feminine. The only reason we have genders for animals is because they are our pets and we name them and give them pronouns, and we have a concept of gender ourselves. The reason we identify people by gender is not because of how we identify mates, but because gender is part of who we are of being in God's image.

Click to expand...

Skywalker said:

It's similar to me believing that only people have a concept of gender. Male or female in people is more than sperm and eggs. I believe males are like steel and females are like flowers. Animals don't have such a concept.

Click to expand...

Mestemia said:

You really should have read your source more carefully.
It does not say what you claim it says.

Click to expand...

These studies are telling, but they’re not entirely conclusive. The subjects could have a full-blown, human-like concept of sex, but looking only at these tests, it’s also possible that the animals are simply learning to categorize images based on distinguishing features. subjects might be learning to recognize images of males and females based on depicted genitals, face shape, and body size rather than any social concept of the sexes.

Here it’s prudent to consider whether chimpanzees and bonobos have any sense of identity—or sense of self—at all. To find out, scientists have tested “mirror self-recognition”: the ability to recognize oneself in the mirror. As you might guess, chimpanzees and bonobos (along with other apes, dolphins, elephants, and some other nonhumans) show this ability, quickly realizing that the image in the mirror is a reflection of themselves and using the mirror to inspect their appearance. Scientists view this as evidence that an individual possesses an understanding of itself as an entity separate from the rest of the world. This understanding can be regarded as the foundation of a potential sense of gender identity.

A second question is: Do chimpanzees and bonobos understand that others are independent “selves” with their own internal mental lives? This understanding is really a set of abilities, collectively referred to as “theory of mind.” Chimp theory of mind is more controversial than mirror self-recognition, but the consensus view is that chimpanzees do possess this understanding, albeit probably not as fully as humans. (Again, because chimpanzees and bonobos are so closely related and have shown no major differences in cognitive abilities, we can assume the same is true of bonobos.)

So, chimpanzees and bonobos possess a sense of self and seem to understand that others, like them, have internal mental lives. And as we saw earlier, chimps seem to hold mental concepts of “male” and “female,” and categorize acquaintances accordingly. From there, I don’t think it’s implausible that chimps might apply those concepts not only to others but to their own sense of self. If—and this is a big if—that is the case, then chimpanzees possess sex roles that are not only flexible and potentially socially determined (as we saw earlier) but also tied to mental concepts that contribute to an individual’s sense of identity. If you ask me, that sounds a lot like gender.

It bears repeating that we lack direct evidence of an internal gender identity in chimpanzees, bonobos, and other nonhuman animals. But the question of gender in a nonhuman species has yet to be tackled in a comprehensive way, so perhaps a license to speculate a bit is warranted. If nothing else, it seems clear that gender in other species is entirely possible.

The more closely related two species are, the more likely it is that they share cognitive processes. And since chimpanzees and bonobos are our closest evolutionary cousins, the most scientifically sound approach may actually be to interpret ambiguous data as supporting, rather than challenging, the idea of human-like gender in our closest relatives. History has seen plenty of human-exceptionalist claims refuted. Much more research needs to be done, but in time, gender may turn out to be just one in a long list of attributes once thought to make humans unique.

Click to expand...

Subduction Zone said:

But it is not limited to man. That is an incredibly ignorant claim.

Click to expand...

Skywalker said:

Scientists believe that gender identity is unique to people.

Is Gender Identity Unique to Humans?

Click to expand...

Subduction Zone said:

What? What makes you think animals do not have male to female voices? Quite a few species rely on the different gender of voices to find a mate.

Click to expand...

Skywalker said:

Why do you think even in animals maleness and femaleness have qualities besides cells? The fact that not all animals rely on gender of different voices to find a mate shows that gender voices in animals are seasonal and even if they are not, this shows that animals don't exactly have the degree of gender that humans have.

Click to expand...

Mestemia said:

You really should have read your source more carefully.
It does not say what you claim it says.

Click to expand...

Before tackling this question, it is necessary to define “sex” and “gender.” Sex refers to biological traits associated with male and female bodies. Sex isn’t a perfect binary, but it is relatively simple compared to gender.

Gender is multifaceted, complex, and a little abstract, and not everyone agrees on exactly what it means. That said, there are a couple of aspects of gender that most experts say are essential. The first is the existence of socially determined roles. Gender roles refer to the range of behaviors that society deems normal or appropriate for people of a particular gender based on their designated sex—the norms that (at least in many Western cultures) cause us to expect men to be assertive and brave, and women to be caring and accommodating, for instance.

Click to expand...

Mestemia said:

You really should have read your source more carefully.
It does not say what you claim it says.

Click to expand...

Subduction Zone said:

Try again.

Click to expand...

Subduction Zone said:

Try again.

Click to expand...

Answer: In Proverbs 1:20–33 and Proverbs 8:1—9:12, wisdom is personified as a woman who has much to offer—including “enduring wealth and prosperity” and “life”—to anyone who would heed her words (Proverbs 8:18, 35).

We will look at Proverbs 8 in particular, since it seems to be a jumping-off point for some creative “proof-texting” by cults such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses to arrive at conclusions with no textual warrant. We will cover the three subjects that are often disregarded when considering these verses—figure of speech, genre, and grammatical gender—to focus on the question, why is Wisdom a she?

Let’s start with figures of speech. These, by definition, should not be taken literally. For example, “And the Lord said, ‘What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying to me from the ground’” (Genesis 4:10). Did Abel’s blood actually cry out, audibly, from the ground? No. The Lord was using a figure of speech called personification, or prosopopoeia, to help Cain understand the inescapable nature of sin. We realize that Abel’s blood was inanimate, non-articulate, and in no way capable of speech—its “cry” is just a literary figure. We cannot formulate a doctrine that says blood actually speaks after a person dies. This may sound like common sense, but people can and do invent such teachings! We must be alert to figures of speech, because in figure, God’s exact words will not equal His exact meaning.

In Proverbs 9:2 wisdom is not literally a woman who prepares a banquet. Wisdom is an intangible quality, but Solomon describes it as if it were an actual person—personification, again. But why is Wisdom a “she” and not a “he”? As we answer that, let’s consider genre.

Proverbs 8 is poetry—one of the many genres found in the Bible. This is important to consider, for, if we do not know what we are reading, we will not know how we should read it. A reader will always make some sense of the words, but if genre is not considered, the reader will likely miss the author’s intent. For example, if we’re reading Treasure Island, it’s important to understand it as a novel, that is, a work of fiction. This understanding will prevent our seeking out the family history of Jim Hawkins as if he were a real person. When reading the Bible, if we do not understand an author’s intent, then we will not understand God’s intent—which, of course, is what matters when it comes to interpreting His Word.

Proverbs 8 is a specific type of poem called an encomium—a poem of praise. Other encomia in Scripture are found in 1 Corinthians 13(in praise of love), Hebrews 11 (in praise of faith), and Proverbs 31:10–31 (in praise of the virtuous wife). We cannot interpret the Bible’s poetry in the same way we do its historical narratives, its prophecies, its apocalyptic passages, etc. For instance, we cannot treat “Love is patient, love is kind” (1 Corinthians 13:4) in the same way as “When anyone has a swelling or a rash or a shiny spot on their skin that may be a defiling skin disease, they must be brought to Aaron the priest” (Leviticus 13:2). The first passage is effusive, the latter exacting. These are just two examples of types of writings that must be read with sensitivity to their genre, purpose, and context. So, when we read that Wisdom is a “she,” understand that Proverbs is heavily artistic; therefore, we are not reading a technical definition of wisdom.

Finally, let’s talk about gender in language. Except for some personal pronouns, English does not use grammatical gender (classifying words as masculine, feminine, or neuter). However, the Hebrew language (in which Proverbs was written) does use grammatical gender, much like Spanish, French, and many other languages do. Herein is our problem. “She,” as we understand it, is not necessarily “she” as it was intended in Hebrew.

Native English speakers are ambivalent concerning grammatical gender. We naturally think of the noun girl as feminine and the noun boy as masculine, so, when assigning pronouns to these words, we use she/her/hers for girl and he/him/his for boy. When we speak of a ship, which has no actual gender, we use neuter pronouns (it/its). However, these ships are often named after men (such as the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan). The name of the ship does not affect its gender. To compound matters, mariners usually refer to a ship in feminine terms: she is a fine ship, head her into port, etc. Gender is somewhat arbitrary in English usage, but this is not the case in many other languages.

In many languages (including Hebrew) most nouns have a strong gender component—but the gender assignment is grammatical and does not necessarily indicate the physical gender of the object. In Spanish, a guitar (la guitarra) is feminine, and a car (el coche) is masculine. This has nothing to do with literal gender. In fact, the Spanish word masculinidad, which means “masculinity,” is a feminine noun! Therefore, when translating from Hebrew into English, we must distinguish grammatical gender from our notions of sexual gender.

In English, the word wisdom is grammatically neuter, but not so in Hebrew. The Hebrew word is chokmoth, and it is grammatically feminine. In Hebrew, it would have been natural to speak of wisdom as a “she.”

As previously mentioned, Solomon used the literary tool of personification to extol the inanimate and abstract idea of wisdom as if it were a real person. By doing so, Solomon communicated a vivid illustration of the blessings of being wise. In personifying wisdom, it was necessary to use the appropriate pronouns. Since a person is not referred to as an “it,” Wisdom as an antecedent requires feminine personal pronouns. The grammatical construction is an artifact of the process of personification. In other words, since the word wisdom is feminine (in Hebrew grammar), Wisdom personified becomes a “she” to satisfy the demands of diction—not to add information to its object.

There may be a couple other reasons why Solomon portrayed Wisdom as a “she.” In the broader context, Solomon is drawing a careful contrast between wise and foolish choices. Immediately before and after presenting Wisdom as an elegant lady offering riches and satisfaction, Solomon presents a picture of Folly, pictured as a prostitute who promises pleasure but who delivers death (Proverbs 6:24—7:27; 9:13–18). So, the foolishness of immorality is contrasted with the wisdom of virtue. Two parallel illustrations are used, and both involve a virtual woman.

Also, Proverbs shows us Wisdom personified performing activities that are usually associated with a woman (such as preparing a meal, Proverbs 9:2, 5). This description transcends the technical grammar and further necessitates the feminine pronouns applied to Wisdom.

Solomon was not saying that women are intrinsically wiser than men—that would be reading too much into the use of grammar. And he was definitely not referring to some type of goddess named “Wisdom” or “Sophia.”

It is impossible to tell whether or not Solomon intended a feminine portrayal of wisdom from the outset. Perhaps the feminine underpinnings of the word wisdom influenced his choice, or perhaps he just found himself awash in the feminine grammar and ran with it. Either way, the use of she was not necessarily driven by any intrinsic femininity of wisdom. As such, men should not be insulted nor women puffed up at its reading.

Click to expand...

Skywalker said:

I don't mean animals have gender at all, I mean they don't really have a concept of gender in the human sense of the term. Metaphorical Gender in English: Feminine Boats, Masculine Tools and Neuter Animals

The same word can have multiple meanings depending on the context.
Is Gender Unique to Humans?



Face and voice is an aspect of gender.

Click to expand...

Skywalker said:

What animals have a year round concept of gender?

Click to expand...

Mestemia said:

And your link STILL does not say what you claim it says.

Here is an example that strongly indicates you are full of crap:

Roy and Silo - Wikipedia.​

Click to expand...