Unintentional Comedy :-D

I like to delude myself into believing that I hang out on Internet debating news groups for the intellectual exchanges, and we do get some.

I'm pretty sure that the following type of exchange is why I really hang out on Internet debating news groups. (Despite my attempts to delude myself into believing otherwise ;-D

Unintentional comedy can be so much funnier than the real thing....

The topic of the debate (believe it or not) is the Historicity of the NT.

Undefined  is responding to a claim by a Christian that one of the NT genealogies is Mary's line and the other NT genealogy is Joseph's line in relation to Jesus and this, according him is why they are different.

Undefined doesn't identify himself as an atheist or Christian and responds by saying:
Neither genealogy mentions Mary. So, neither records Jesus' lineage through Mary.

Another Christian responds to Undefined with the following and then it starts:

Christian:
This is where you need to understand that only the *men* in a family were important. This comes about because Adam was told to be *fruitful and multiply* before he could name the woman *Eve*. And, because the man is the giver of life to his offspring. St. Thomas Aquinas said that the *sperm moves of its own volition.* Therefore man is the giver of life. And, to believe that God sent His Only Begotten Son to earth - it stands to reason that GOD - being a man - could give life to His Son - and So redeem us from Satan's sin in heaven and on earth.

The question would certainly then become - what is *life* - Is that tree outside my window *alive*.

Atheist:
Yes, it is. Unless it's dead.

Christian:
It is not *alive* with the same definition of *life* except in the English Language

Atheist:
Yes, it is. We share a common ancestor with trees, they are a living organism - they are born, they grow, they eat, they reproduce, they die - just like us.

Christian:
Well then why can't they talk to you

Atheist:
They don't have mouths. Or vocal chords. Or brains.

Mice can't talk to you. Do you think mice are alive? Babies can't talk to you. Do you think they are alive?

Christian:
 -- and why don't they obey you when you tell them to move over and give you room - or get away from your house a bit, because they are too close to the foundation.

Atheist:
Why don't you just pray to God to get him to move the tree for you?

Christian:
There is a difference between life that is the *breath of life* human beings receive at birth, and a tree.

Atheist:
No there isn't. We are similar in that we each have a life cycle.

Christian:
Of course, we both have *atoms* that are moving in us - but we don't both have a mind that can control what my next work I type is.

Atheist:
Having a mind isn't what defines being alive. Do you think that amoebas are alive? Are jellyfish alive?

Christian:
because that tree cannot get up and move over a bit where I would really like it to be.

Atheist:
Just because it isn't ambulatory doesn't mean it isn't alive. Do you think fish aren't alive because they can't walk?

Christian:
Like I am trying to explain.  In the English language we need a word for *life* that stands for human life, and a word for *life* that stands for plant life.

Atheist:
We already do - humans and plants. They are both members of the set of living organisms that live on Earth.

Christian:
In other words, the definition of *life* in the English Language is messed up to say the least,

Atheist:
What is "messed up" is your understanding of biology.

Christian:
Biology has nothing to do with this argument.

Atheist:
It has everything to do with this argument since biologists have learned to distinguish between living organisms and inanimate objects. Trees and humans are both living organisms.

Christian:
from the standpoint that an animal is alive because it can go anywhere it wants to when it wants to.

Atheist:
So by your definition a parapalegic isn't alive.

Christian:
A paraplegic is alive because they are a human being.

Atheist:
But they can't go anywhere they want, and you just said that "an animal is alive because it can go anywhere it wants to when it wants to." So by your definition, parapalegics are the same as trees. You are contradicting yourself.

Christian:
The tree is not truly alive - just like your wife's egg - is not truly alive because it cannot propel itself anywhere.

Atheist:
My wife's egg (I'm trying to keep a straight face here) isn't alive unless I fertilize it with my sperm. Once it is fertilized it is alive.

Christian:
Ah ha!  point I have been trying to make - and you just made it. The point in fact that the *male of the human species is the giver of life to his children.*

Atheist:
The point you were trying to make is that trees aren't alive.

Christian:
The fact that the *male of the human species* - reproduces Himself.

Atheist:
The human male does not "reproduce himself". The fertilized eggs gets one half of its DNA from the Mommy and the other half from the Daddy. If the human male "reproduced himself" then the human male would be no different from an amoeba.

Christian:
The fact that the *spirit* in your children came from the *male* of the family - and the fact that the female only puts the *human body* around the *soul* of a child.

Atheist:
If by "fact" you mean "uneducated lunacy", I agree!

Do you think a baby in the womb isn't alive?

Christian:
Yes, I believe a fetus is alive.

Atheist:
But babies in the womb can't go anywhere they want, and you just said that "an animal is alive because it can go anywhere it wants to when it wants to." So by your definition, babies in the womb are the same as trees - not alive. You are contradicting yourself.

Christian:
In fact since I have a child of my own, I know the supreme wonderful feeling of knowing that a child is alive inside of me.

Atheist:
Good for you.

So why was your baby alive even though it couldn't go where it wanted and, by your definition, a tree isn't alive because it can't go where it wants?

Christian:
I can remember when my husband reached over and felt that little one kick.  What joy. Of course, my ribs felts like they were getting kicked to smithereens. But the pain of childbirth was totally forgotten when I held that little one in my arms for the first time and counted the fingers and toes and saw the perfection that is *human beings*.

Atheist:
This is nice, but it doesn't explain why babies in the womb are alive and why trees aren't.

Christian:
It is interesting to see how the English Language has evolved to the place where the definitions of the words we use do not portray the truth we are trying to state.

Atheist:
Just because you don't understand the English language doesn't mean that everyone else doesn't either.

Christian:
The English language is not the *best* language when you want to express some ways of thinking.

Atheist:
The English language works just fine for communicating which objects are alive and what objects aren't.

Christian:
Other languages have their own nuances that sometimes give a completely more complete meaning to what they have to say.

Atheist:
Other languages work works just fine too for communicating which objects are alive and what objects aren't.

Christian:
I guess this is the human brain at work - trying to make a tree or dog or cat be something more than an animal that is eatable.

Atheist:
You want to eat trees and dogs and cats?

Christian:
We are probably already doing it and not knowing that it is what we are eating.

Atheist:
So besides all the other conspiracies you squawk about, now there's a conspiracy to feed us wood and pets. Do you think we are being fed people too?

Christian:
Some other cultures eat a lot of things that we, as Americans, will not touch. Like grasshopper legs in chocolate - um good.

Atheist:
That doesn't mean that you are being fed pets and trees by large corporations.