Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[LuckyR]

So, were Neanderthals able to go to heaven? Did they have souls? Were they the children of God? Were they made in God's image?

For those who would benefit from a review, Neanderthals are not Homo sapiens, as they are Homo neanderthalis. That is, we and they have a common ancestor, but they are not our ancestors. They did though live at the same time as Homo sapiens.

[Sculptor1]

God, as you understand the idea did not exist before 35kbp when HN died out.
You can trace the origins of the "modern" god concept to within 3 thousand years, before then all the evidence points to polytheisms, spirit worlds, and other so-called "primitive" religions.

As to whether they are our ancestors is once again a matter is intense speculation.
Initially it was thought that they represented an earlier form of humanity, until archaeological levels in the Levant showed modern humans under (earlier) than some HN finds.
What seems to have been the case is that HN were better cold adapted and as the ice ages waxed and waned, both type of humans moved south during the ice age and back to the north when warmer.
HN was first discovered circe 1930 and more finds have followed and been interpreted since 1859 (Darwin OOS) in the light of evolution.
More recently skull forms that seem to indicate transitional forms point to some interbreeding between Anatomically modern humans and HN.

But back to your question.
No one had ever heard of "Jahovah" so you question is a no brainer.

[value]

So, were Neanderthals able to go to heaven? Did they have souls? Were they the children of God? Were they made in God's image?

For those who would benefit from a review, Neanderthals are not Homo sapiens, as they are Homo neanderthalis. That is, we and they have a common ancestor, but they are not our ancestors. They did though live at the same time as Homo sapiens.

In the following topic it was questioned what the implications are of the idea that reality isn't 'really real'. One of the suggestions was that 'kind' would be applicable to reality itself.

Universe Isn't Locally Real - Nobel Prize in Physics 2022
https://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums ... 12&t=18367

In the case that kind is applicable to reality itself there would be a Universal mind that might justify ideas such as an afterlife. The pioneering done by an individual for the Universal mind essentially lives on forever and perhaps there is more to it from a spiritual perspective. Perhaps it is even possible to back in time and experience Neanderthal life.

Philosopher William James - the father of American psychology - was president of the Society for Psychical Research that researched paranormal phenomena (ψ psi). The association still exists today: https://www.spr.ac.uk/

Researchers that have continued his work claim that they have proof that William James is continuing his paranormal research "from the other side".

In an interesting twist on the story of William James and the psychics, Gary Schwartz, director of Behavioral Medicine Clinic at Yale University, published an article in 2010 reporting two “proof of concept” experiments supporting the idea that William James may be continuing his psychical research—“from the other side.”

(2019) The Lingering Spirit of William James (Harvard Crimson)
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019 ... iam-james/

[LuckyR]

God, as you understand the idea did not exist before 35kbp when HN died out.
You can trace the origins of the "modern" god concept to within 3 thousand years, before then all the evidence points to polytheisms, spirit worlds, and other so-called "primitive" religions.

As to whether they are our ancestors is once again a matter is intense speculation.
Initially it was thought that they represented an earlier form of humanity, until archaeological levels in the Levant showed modern humans under (earlier) than some HN finds.
What seems to have been the case is that HN were better cold adapted and as the ice ages waxed and waned, both type of humans moved south during the ice age and back to the north when warmer.
HN was first discovered circe 1930 and more finds have followed and been interpreted since 1859 (Darwin OOS) in the light of evolution.
More recently skull forms that seem to indicate transitional forms point to some interbreeding between Anatomically modern humans and HN.

But back to your question.
No one had ever heard of "Jahovah" so you question is a no brainer.

Answered as an archeologist, not as a theologian. The reason I make the distinction is that your "no brainer" answer if applied to humans before the invention of gods, is that humans started being God's creation only AFTER humans invented the idea of gods. Logical in a simple-minded way, but very against dogma.

[LuckyR]

So, were Neanderthals able to go to heaven? Did they have souls? Were they the children of God? Were they made in God's image?

For those who would benefit from a review, Neanderthals are not Homo sapiens, as they are Homo neanderthalis. That is, we and they have a common ancestor, but they are not our ancestors. They did though live at the same time as Homo sapiens.

In the following topic it was questioned what the implications are of the idea that reality isn't 'really real'. One of the suggestions was that 'kind' would be applicable to reality itself.

Universe Isn't Locally Real - Nobel Prize in Physics 2022
https://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums ... 12&t=18367

In the case that kind is applicable to reality itself there would be a Universal mind that might justify ideas such as an afterlife. The pioneering done by an individual for the Universal mind essentially lives on forever and perhaps there is more to it from a spiritual perspective. Perhaps it is even possible to back in time and experience Neanderthal life.

Philosopher William James - the father of American psychology - was president of the Society for Psychical Research that researched paranormal phenomena (ψ psi). The association still exists today: https://www.spr.ac.uk/

Researchers that have continued his work claim that they have proof that William James is continuing his paranormal research "from the other side".

In an interesting twist on the story of William James and the psychics, Gary Schwartz, director of Behavioral Medicine Clinic at Yale University, published an article in 2010 reporting two “proof of concept” experiments supporting the idea that William James may be continuing his psychical research—“from the other side.”

(2019) The Lingering Spirit of William James (Harvard Crimson)
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019 ... iam-james/

Not seeing the connection between our posts.

Please elucidate.

[amorphos_ii]

What would heaven be like with no birds and animals? Although, one has to say that eating and mating are the fundaments of their behaviour, and makes little sense in any world without death.

So would all the animals still be there, sitting around doing nothing for an eternity?

Anyway, as I see it, creatures are made for the given worlds. So animals and perhaps Neanderthals are simply earthly creatures which get reincarnated. To rise to another world requires being unlike this world – as modern humans are. So does that start at cave paintings ~ did Neanderthals do them?

Have you ever done magic mushrooms in a field with horses in [whom also appeared to have eaten some]? For us druids, animals are every bit as spiritual as we are. Maybe they are happy just being animals, or maybe the whole purpose of this world is to arrive at dwellers of the otherworld [heaven if you like]. Again, we have to wonder what another world but without animals would be like? Not heaven for worms and rabbits that’s for sure.

I have considered this a lot, and come to the initial conclusion that the otherworld or eternity [whatever], is a different kind of place, possibly has its own eternal time which is outside normal time. Something like nirvana or exactly that, except for us Druids you can just pop in and out of there once elevated or self deified if you like. Also we see those alien looking spirits depicted on cave walls in many places of the world from Mayans to Aboriginals, we druids call them silver or grey spirits, the ancient Egyptians called them ‘the shining ones of the moon’. I think we are all seeing the same event [the arising] and the same beings across time and location ~ a single event!

One thing I do know about these spirits which become the inhabitants of creatures and possibly us too, is that they definitely want to exist! So they assumedly don’t want to remain unmanifest, which makes their place of origin beyond time, not sound at all like nirvana or heaven.

There just seams to be a strong purpose for them and everything. That we don’t know what that purpose is, may suggest each is different and the whole thing is unlimited. We do know that nature treats parasites exactly the same as us, it wants everything to live and thrive equally.

_

[Sculptor1]

God, as you understand the idea did not exist before 35kbp when HN died out.
You can trace the origins of the "modern" god concept to within 3 thousand years, before then all the evidence points to polytheisms, spirit worlds, and other so-called "primitive" religions.

As to whether they are our ancestors is once again a matter is intense speculation.
Initially it was thought that they represented an earlier form of humanity, until archaeological levels in the Levant showed modern humans under (earlier) than some HN finds.
What seems to have been the case is that HN were better cold adapted and as the ice ages waxed and waned, both type of humans moved south during the ice age and back to the north when warmer.
HN was first discovered circe 1930 and more finds have followed and been interpreted since 1859 (Darwin OOS) in the light of evolution.
More recently skull forms that seem to indicate transitional forms point to some interbreeding between Anatomically modern humans and HN.

But back to your question.
No one had ever heard of "Jahovah" so you question is a no brainer.

Answered as an archeologist, not as a theologian. The reason I make the distinction is that your "no brainer" answer if applied to humans before the invention of gods, is that humans started being God's creation only AFTER humans invented the idea of gods. Logical in a simple-minded way, but very against dogma.

Theologians have nothing to say about Neanderthals that is of any value.
They do not get to claim magisterium over a epoch of people that they have denied the existence of since they invented themselves and their god.

By their own admission salvation is the ability to be able to accept Jesus as the son of god, which pretty much discludes any one born before the Common Era.

[value]

So, were Neanderthals able to go to heaven? Did they have souls? Were they the children of God? Were they made in God's image?

For those who would benefit from a review, Neanderthals are not Homo sapiens, as they are Homo neanderthalis. That is, we and they have a common ancestor, but they are not our ancestors. They did though live at the same time as Homo sapiens.

In the following topic it was questioned what the implications are of the idea that reality isn't 'really real'. One of the suggestions was that 'kind' would be applicable to reality itself.

Universe Isn't Locally Real - Nobel Prize in Physics 2022
https://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums ... 12&t=18367

In the case that kind is applicable to reality itself there would be a Universal mind that might justify ideas such as an afterlife. The pioneering done by an individual for the Universal mind essentially lives on forever and perhaps there is more to it from a spiritual perspective. Perhaps it is even possible to back in time and experience Neanderthal life.

Not seeing the connection between our posts.

Please elucidate.

My post intended to provide a basis to answer your questions.

My post indicated that a 'Universal mind' might be applicable which would potentially justify ideas such as 'souls', 'going to heaven' and 'being made in God's image' from a scientific perspective, which could make those concepts apply to Neanderthals.

My post wasn't intended to argue anything about human religion, if that was what your questions were more specifically about.

[Ecurb]

God, as you understand the idea did not exist before 35kbp when HN died out.
You can trace the origins of the "modern" god concept to within 3 thousand years, before then all the evidence points to polytheisms, spirit worlds, and other so-called "primitive" religions.

As to whether they are our ancestors is once again a matter is intense speculation.
Initially it was thought that they represented an earlier form of humanity, until archaeological levels in the Levant showed modern humans under (earlier) than some HN finds.
What seems to have been the case is that HN were better cold adapted and as the ice ages waxed and waned, both type of humans moved south during the ice age and back to the north when warmer.
HN was first discovered circe 1930 and more finds have followed and been interpreted since 1859 (Darwin OOS) in the light of evolution.
More recently skull forms that seem to indicate transitional forms point to some interbreeding between Anatomically modern humans and HN.

But back to your question.
No one had ever heard of "Jahovah" so you question is a no brainer.

The physical record provides little evidence about the belief systems of Neanderthals. Physical anthropology and archaeology can discover what tools primitive humans use, what animals they eat, etc. However, religious beliefs must be guessed at. We know that Neanderthals buried their dead, and often buried them with tools and weapons that might have been useful to the living, so we might guess they had some theories about the afterlife. Sculptor traces the origins of montheism to 3000 years ago, which, perhaps not coincidentally, coincides with the origins of writing, from which we can more readily glean ancient belief systems. The reality is that the archaelogical record allows us to discover some things about ancient cultures, and keeps others hidden. Animal food remains, for example, can be found, but very little evidence of plant-based diets remains. That probably has to do with the fact that bones are better preserved through time than plants; unfortunately, we must guess at religious practices from the evidence of burials and cave art, which doesn't get us very far.

[Sculptor1]

God, as you understand the idea did not exist before 35kbp when HN died out.
You can trace the origins of the "modern" god concept to within 3 thousand years, before then all the evidence points to polytheisms, spirit worlds, and other so-called "primitive" religions.

As to whether they are our ancestors is once again a matter is intense speculation.
Initially it was thought that they represented an earlier form of humanity, until archaeological levels in the Levant showed modern humans under (earlier) than some HN finds.
What seems to have been the case is that HN were better cold adapted and as the ice ages waxed and waned, both type of humans moved south during the ice age and back to the north when warmer.
HN was first discovered circe 1930 and more finds have followed and been interpreted since 1859 (Darwin OOS) in the light of evolution.
More recently skull forms that seem to indicate transitional forms point to some interbreeding between Anatomically modern humans and HN.

But back to your question.
No one had ever heard of "Jahovah" so you question is a no brainer.

The physical record provides little evidence about the belief systems of Neanderthals. Physical anthropology and archaeology can discover what tools primitive humans use, what animals they eat, etc. However, religious beliefs must be guessed at. We know that Neanderthals buried their dead, and often buried them with tools and weapons that might have been useful to the living, so we might guess they had some theories about the afterlife. Sculptor traces the origins of montheism to 3000 years ago, which, perhaps not coincidentally, coincides with the origins of writing, from which we can more readily glean ancient belief systems. The reality is that the archaelogical record allows us to discover some things about ancient cultures, and keeps others hidden. Animal food remains, for example, can be found, but very little evidence of plant-based diets remains. That probably has to do with the fact that bones are better preserved through time than plants; unfortunately, we must guess at religious practices from the evidence of burials and cave art, which doesn't get us very far.

What you say is true, and therefore the entire thread is verbal masturbation, since, by your problematic no one can ever say that HN are god's children or not, since there is no evidence.
However...

None of this is relevant.

1) We can trace exactly the origin of the concept of God historically.
2) All anthropological evidence of all pristine hunter/gatherer societies without exception shows that human society did not have a single personal god who considered His human creation as "children".

[Ecurb]

1) We can trace exactly the origin of the concept of God historically.
2) All anthropological evidence of all pristine hunter/gatherer societies without exception shows that human society did not have a single personal god who considered His human creation as "children".

How can we trace the origin of God historically in prehistoric times?

It is true that most hunter gatherer societies in the last 150 years have been polytheisitc, but Wilhelm Schmidt argued that this was a degeneration from a monotheistic form, and debates on the issue raged in the mid 20th century. Academic consensus supports your notion today, but is far from certain. Schmidt's notion was called Urmonotheismus in German.

[Sculptor1]

1) We can trace exactly the origin of the concept of God historically.
2) All anthropological evidence of all pristine hunter/gatherer societies without exception shows that human society did not have a single personal god who considered His human creation as "children".

How can we trace the origin of God historically in prehistoric times?

Well duh.
If you think you cannot then why are you on the thread?

It is true that most hunter gatherer societies in the last 150 years have been polytheisitc, but Wilhelm Schmidt argued that this was a degeneration from a monotheistic form, and debates on the issue raged in the mid 20th century. Academic consensus supports your notion today, but is far from certain. Schmidt's notion was called Urmonotheismus in German.

Utter balderdash.Totally risible.
Never heard of him.
Priests do not make good anthropologists because they see everything through to the same **** up lens they live their lives through.
This is the funniest thing I've heard all year.
Thanks.
But this is not a serious or respectable theory.

[Ecurb]

It is true that most hunter gatherer societies in the last 150 years have been polytheisitc, but Wilhelm Schmidt argued that this was a degeneration from a monotheistic form, and debates on the issue raged in the mid 20th century. Academic consensus supports your notion today, but is far from certain. Schmidt's notion was called Urmonotheismus in German.

Utter balderdash.Totally risible.
Never heard of him.
Priests do not make good anthropologists because they see everything through to the same **** up lens they live their lives through.
This is the funniest thing I've heard all year.
Thanks.
But this is not a serious or respectable theory.

If you've never heard of Wilhelm Schmidt, your anthropological education is incomplete. He was a well known linguist and ethnologist. Obviously, your ad hominem dismissal of his theories is nonsensical.

Sculptor evidently believes that if he (omniscient He) has never heard of someone, that person must not be worth hearing about. Wrong again.

One question for any lurkers: Why do internet trolls always claim to find posts with which they disagree "risible" and "the funniest thing I've heard all year". Clearly, Sculptor does NOT find Schmidt's theories funny. Why would he? Why would anyone? So why say that he does?

[Sculptor1]

It is true that most hunter gatherer societies in the last 150 years have been polytheisitc, but Wilhelm Schmidt argued that this was a degeneration from a monotheistic form, and debates on the issue raged in the mid 20th century. Academic consensus supports your notion today, but is far from certain. Schmidt's notion was called Urmonotheismus in German.

Utter balderdash.Totally risible.
Never heard of him.
Priests do not make good anthropologists because they see everything through to the same **** up lens they live their lives through.
This is the funniest thing I've heard all year.
Thanks.
But this is not a serious or respectable theory.

If you've never heard of Wilhelm Schmidt, your anthropological education is incomplete. He was a well known linguist and ethnologist. Obviously, your ad hominem dismissal of his theories is nonsensical.

Sculptor evidently believes that if he (omniscient He) has never heard of someone, that person must not be worth hearing about. Wrong again.

One question for any lurkers: Why do internet trolls always claim to find posts with which they disagree "risible" and "the funniest thing I've heard all year". Clearly, Sculptor does NOT find Schmidt's theories funny. Why would he? Why would anyone? So why say that he does?

No serious anthropologist would ever consider such rubbish. The theory is theological not anthropological.

[Ecurb]

No serious anthropologist would ever consider such rubbish. The theory is theological not anthropological.

Well, I'm neither a serious anthropologist nor particularly familiar with Schmidt's work. But he did found the journal Anthropos, which is still a leading anthropological journal. He was a student of Franz Boaz and Fritz Graebner. And he was named chairman of the Fourth Inernational Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, in 1952. So (although neither you nor I qualify as serous anthropologists, especially you with your penchant for non-serious laughter) some people who actually were serious anthropologists considered Schmidt to be one, too.

Of course no benighted Catholic priest could ever add anything to the world of science or philosophy -- Copernicus, Erasmus, Mendel and Bacon included.