The Evolution of Human Language: Would anyone like to join for a while?


(Henry Stoddard) #1

It is difficult to explain the concept of the human soul. Do we have just the human brain that develops and thinks without the Greek concept of the immortality of the soul in which Plato believed? Aristotle believed that souls are simply those things that make matter alive. Animals, plants, and Human beings have souls; however, they may die with the body. Human beings are believed by some Christians to survive death not because of the immortality of the soul and resurrection of the body; on the contrary, we go to heaven at death as well as the Second Advent of Christ because time and eternity are not the same. The dead in both cases already have their spiritual bodies. This implies that when the brain evolves, human languages evolve and change from generation to generation because the brain develops language. It is true to say that languages influence each other; however, does evolution of the brain affect language as well? Is that one of the reasons that English came from Proto-German. Also, was the Tower of Babel the cause for the evolution of human language because of the will of God, or is it just a story to explain different languages? Is the Indo-European proto language related to any other language family, or are these families from completely different origins? Can that question be answered?


(George Brooks) #2

“. . . aren’t evolutionary creationists also creationists?”

Henry, doesn’t look like anyone is here…

As for the term “evolutionary creationists” … how would an Evolutionary Creationist be different from a BioLogos supporter - - if they both consider the Earth to be millions of years old ?

George


(Henry Stoddard) #3

@gbrooks9,@cstump,@Eddie

Evolutionary Creationism is BioLogos; it is in Dr. Haarma’s book on “Origins.” Therefore, BioLogos is a creationist movement. Our Lord created through evolution, George. Why is that a problem? Also, where it your discussion about the development of language. How does your statement relate to that, George? Anyway, have a good day.

Post Scriptum: Does anyone else see a problem with discussing the origin and development of language in the human brain? Linguistics is a science too, you know. Dr. Stump and Eddie, please reply. How does George’s statement relate to this topic? George’s reply has not logic in it. Did he mean it for something else I said? I believe that he and I come from different universes. I come from this one.


(George Brooks) #4

It won’t be a problem as long as you ALWAYS include the word “Evolution”, and always understand that word to be a reference to “OLD EARTH” evolution.

This is why I do not favor trying too hard to distinguish between ID and TE. Once you accept that God directs evolution … it really doesn’t matter too much to a Christian how much “magical stuff” is in that intersection between “GOD” and “EVOLUTION”.

P.S. Henry, the reason my posting doesn’t match the heading of your thread is because you instructed me to come to this thread. Since I wasn’t going to spend a “Posting Coin” on a thread you were losing interest in … I came here and posted it here. I didn’t realize it was going to “throw” you so badly. But this particular thread doesn’t really interest me. Next time, I’ll post where the question is asked, and send you a personal message about some other thread you are recommending.

George


(Andrew M. Wolfe) #5

Without going into all your many other questions: reconstructions beyond Proto-Indo-European, such as Nostratic, are widely considered to be speculative and unreliable. There’s every reason to believe PIE is related to other families of languages, but the precise nature of those relationships is impossible to determine at this time depth.

I would love to see BioLogos touch on Genesis 11, with similar nuance to how they approach earlier chapters, but I’m not sure if that’s something of interest to them.


(Henry Stoddard) #6

It is all right, my friend AMWolfe. Oh, should I call you Dr. Wolfe, Mr. Wolfe, or Ms. Wolfe? I do mean this with respect.

Your fellow scholar,

Henry


(Andrew M. Wolfe) #7

You can just call me AMW or Wolfe. I prefer to remain relatively anonymous here. No need for formalities of Dr/Mr/Ms/etc. :slight_smile: Kind of you, though.


(Henry Stoddard) #8

You are welcome, Wolfe. I can understand why you wish to remain as Wolfe. I do see that I bit you are a good teacher if that is your position.


(system) #9

This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.