as hughmanatee was correct to point out i have omitted at least two aspects of the natural view which need attention. we can take a look at them now before moving on to the theological view. both have to do primarily with our mental capabilities how we think and react to others of our kind.

many species are social, forming groups based on genetics, self-preservation, or food gathering and distribution. humans are distinguished by degree only in the diversity of the institutions they form for survival. as with other species identity within the group plays a vital role in influencing behavior but humans differ in their ability to form and adapt to new and specialized groups. the largest groups are typically centered around racial geographic or creedal commonalities but many smaller groups form based on other more specific needs.

most animals can communicate but distinct speech and the variety of languages is a defining aspect of humanity. language then is also central to the sociological aspects of the human dynamic.

psychologically, humanity stands apart in its recognition of the individual. personality is genetically tied but expresses itself predominantly through psychological means. that is – the human individual is self-aware and cognizant to a greater degree than any of the animals. consciousness and emotion are not unique to humanity per se but the extent to which humans experience and express them is. mans ability to not only recognize but study these factors of development and existence set him apart from the rest of the animal kingdom.

i hope this helps clarify some of the issues involved with the discussion of the natural view of humanity. any questions or responses up to this point are appreciated.

as we discussed previously there are two approaches to understanding what makes us definitively human. lets take a look at the natural approach including scientific evidences and what they imply.

biologically, man is classified as a Homosapien. several noteworthy associations come along with this namely our enlarged brains, pipedal locomotion, and manipulative use of opposable thumbs. we are the only evident technologically advanced animal and our ability to abstract is unequalled in the animal kingdom. this is a basic overview of the natural characteristics which signify humans as different from other animals.

that said - we can hardly understand ourselves as being significantly different by anything more than degree scientifically speaking as there are other animals who exhibit similar qualities to a greater or lesser extent. if indeed the natural idea of humanity is the only means we have of understanding what makes us human then the implicit conclusion is that we too are simply animals whose evolution has given us greater abilities than other animals.

the naturalistic view is physiologically precise. i have no argument with anything represented above on its own basis. before we move on to the theological (and subsequent look at how it differs dramatically from the scientific) i would like to get your input on the naturalistic approach.

personally i think its an incomplete way of understanding what makes us human. so much so that it fails utterly to establish a basis for understanding ourselves as having purpose or meaning - yet we are creatures plagued in a sense by the need for exactly that. purpose and meaning. natural science is not really a means of comprehending such things however and that im told is why we have philosophy.

and its in that vein that i quote Nitzsche:

"Science probes the processes of nature, but it . . . knows nothing of taste, love, pleasure, displeasure, exaltation, or exhaustion. Man must in some way interpret, and thereby evaluate, what he lives through and experiences."

looking forward to your thoughts on things so far...

in watching this movie i noticed it brings up an important question that i think xianity should address.

essentially what makes a human human?

there are basically two ways of looking at this (scientific and theological) and i plan on adressing both in the next couple of posts but i wanted to get your thoughts on the idea first.

so what do you think?

***post has been edited to add a few new sub-headings***

sinners.

that word flips our pride switch into overdrive.

we like to think we are generally

good.

moral.

loving.

somehow deserving of Gods love.

but this is not the case. we are the breakers of communion with God.

we dont like to face this.

     we will do anything to get around it.

    & nbsp;   &n bsp; we will go to great lengths and fool ourselves in the process

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;  ending up with nothing but emptiness

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;   all for the sake of pride.

and thats the great tragedy.

our disassociation with Y-hw-h is our own doing

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;  tho we blame everyone including him

connecting the dots of pain and suffering we have experienced

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p; while ignoring his arms.

and we miss something about ourselves…

hanging around in the holy wild has shown me that im not necessary to Y-hw-h.

no one is.

the entire human race from first

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;  to

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;  last are completely unnecessary to him.

consider this:

that which is necessary cannot be done without. in a case where something is necessary and cannot be done without agape cannot exist bc the thing is not desired but

vital.

Y-hw-h is love and extending himself in love to us is part of the very nature of

    & nbsp;   &n bsp; who he is

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;   not bc we are necessary but precisely bc we are not.

it is his joy to love us.

     it is his pleasure.

    & nbsp;   &n bsp; it is to his own greater glory.

"God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."

Romans 5:8

if we are necessary to God then he [b]had[/b] to die to save us –

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;  he had no choice.

it wasnt an option bc he couldnt have done without.

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;       there is no love in that.

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;  there is only obligation.

its in understanding that we are unneccessary and

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;   God did it anyway

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;        that we understand agape.

and understanding agape in this way allows us to understand

how

to

commune

with

God

on his basis

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;– loving his creation as much as he does

    & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;         & nbsp;   &n bsp;   &nb sp;   &nbs p;     ;       – and recognizing our humble place in it.

~holy Father ~

dont build me up.

tear me down.

wreck me

and make me useful

for your joy.

for your pleasure.

for your name.