Well, I have already Pointed out in another Post, on another discussion thread here, that the mother of Adam could Not have been a Neanderthal.
I've never claimed she was. It was just useful to mention for that particular example. I tend to think that Adam's mother was a homo sapiens who's spirit was not a spirit child of God.
Only because we understand the physical genetic process and its relation to the normative case of natural reproduction. What is the normative case for heavenly beings bearing spirit children? We need a basis for the use of the word literal.
We already have it. The problems remains that you are confusing the process with the end result.
No I am not. The process is what matters in the normative case and is needed to make sense of the words. If assemble a human, atom by atom then it wouldn't be the literal child of anyone. One cannot make sense out of "literal child" without appealing to the normative biological process in some way.
We know that spirit is matter.
Why have two meanings for the same concept? Traditionally spirit is that which is not matter. It is the dual concept.
Does the phrase "matter and spirit" just now mean matter and more matter? What is mind?
If spirit is matter after all, then the word is spirit is useless.
Traditionally spirit is supposed to animate matter, so it isn't matter itself.
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie
yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo