Adam and Eve and Genetics Difficulty

[Latinitas]

Hi everyone,

Thanks so much for taking such an interest in my question; I didn’t expect so many replies. It’s a pleasant surprise. Keep them coming.

Anyhow, some of your responses have been very helpful. The difficulty I see with some of the responses, which posits that some difference between members of the homo sapiens species without rational souls (now, they shouldn’t be called homo sapiens, should they?), and interbreeding with them, is that I have always understood original sin to be passed on by the father alone. So it would seem that, if all men are to be conceived in original sin (save the Mother of God and Jesus Christ), they would need a human father who had a rational soul conceived in original sin. Furthermore, although I think I can reconcile it, how do you reconcile the dogmatic teaching of the Council of Vienne and the Fifth Lateran Council that the rational soul is the essential form of the human body, if you posit human bodies without them? I can see how it would happen to some extent, but if you could clarify that for me, I’d greatly appreciate it.

Once again, thanks for your consideration of this question, as well as your prayers,

Benedicat Deus,
Latinitas

 

[cfauster]

The AMH are a scientific (anthropology) and historical fact.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatomically_modern_human
They include more than one species, and are distinct from the BMH (behaviorally modern humans), who of course also have anatomically modern bodies.

If they had human bodies, then they were human beings.

The difficulty is in conjecturing about souls or the lack thereof, just to make polygenism fit with Scripture, particularly since souls do not fossilize.

ICXC NIKA

I think Rev. Austriaco would say that you’re both right. He takes a Thomistic hylomorphic approach to the metaphysics of the human soul.

Besides the essays to which I previously linked, he states it very simply here in the following words:

“We then turned to the question of the human soul and to the deeper question of when the human soul first appeared on the stage of human evolutionary history. My answer: Human souls were created when hominins became speaking bipeds, where language is a sure sign of the power of the intellect to abstract universals.”

In one of the essays to which I linked previously, he clarifies that this could have happened with as few as two individuals, the first two with the genetic endowment that facilitated that language ability. Again, in his scenario, they were not the only members of the interbreeding population, which would have numbered in the thousands.

 

[The_Wizard]

Adam and Eve or their offspring mating with non humans would be considered bestiality, a grave sin.

Are Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) consider non-humans? Recent discoveries (bbc.com/news/science-environment-33226416) suggests that early Homo sapiens settler in Europe mated with Neanderthals. Just wondering what people think about that. Remembering what St. Augustine wrote , “if anyone shall set the authority of Holy Writ against clear and manifest reason, he who does this knows not what he has undertakes
;”

 

[wmw]

I believe that God created Adam and Eve miraculous, as two fully grown adults, pattered after the AMH, but with some changes perhaps to the body and brain, as necessary or fitting, and with an immortal soul.

Yes, this is the only solution. Finding a scientific path that does not contradict church teaching is near impossible. I could also accept that two hominids were separated and given souls then some miraculous, or near so, growth of genetic materials was guided along. In any case God has told us he made it happen by miracle.

It makes sense then that God would put in two creation stories to describe this; one about all the universe and a second about man, male and female. What else should/could we understand from Him breathing life into the dust of the earth?

On Neanderthals - I think there is enough common in the DNA that interbreeding is not the answer. I think there are other mechanisms (possibly RNA changes in the DNA) that make what seems to be mutations in different species look like they came from a single (Neanderthal) source.

 

[wmw]

It seems that Benedict does not recognize a “Garden” prior to the fall. I don’t know exactly, but Benedicts interpretation of Original sin is unique to how the Catholic Church has historically understood it. It’s almost like he has equated original sin to just being an imperfect world. But doesn’t stay Adam/Eve were actual people who sinned while prior to this, the world was different.

There is no council doctrine nor excathedra (sp?) statement from a Pope that says we must believe in Eden or a Garden. These can be just “figurative”. Yet there are that an original pair was the source of all humanity. That’s the reason this is a difficulty at all.

 

[The_Wizard]

On Neanderthals - I think there is enough common in the DNA that interbreeding is not the answer. I think there are other mechanisms (possibly RNA changes in the DNA) that make what seems to be mutations in different species look like they came from a single (Neanderthal) source.

Here is the fly in that ointment, only DNA from European populations have traces of Neanderthal DNA. DNA form African populations have no Neanderthal DNA. The only place Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthalensis co-existed was outside Africa. The percent of Neanderthal DNA in European DNA makes it statistically unlikely that it was caused by mechanisms other then interbreeding.

 

[Ron_Conte]

I could also accept that two hominids were separated and given souls then some miraculous, or near so, growth of genetic materials was guided along. In any case God has told us he made it happen by miracle.

No, that is not an acceptable solution. Adam and Eve were created in original innocence; they were not fallen until they sinned. So God could not start with two hominids (fallen AMH) and make them into the first true human persons (BMH). They had to have been created from scratch, as full grown adults, miraculously.

Human persons mating with Neanderthals may have occurred. This presents no theological problem. It was sinful, but that doesn’t mean that God would keep it from happening.

 

[Ron_Conte]

If they had human bodies, then they were human beings.

The difficulty is in conjecturing about souls or the lack thereof, just to make polygenism fit with Scripture, particularly since souls do not fossilize.

ICXC NIKA

Anthropologists distinguish between AMH and BMH. The distinction is that the BMH can reason abstractly. I contend that abstract reasoning requires free will, to motivate the search for transcendent truths sought and found by abstract reasoning. Then reason and free will indicate an immortal soul.

I reject polygenism. Adam and Eve were the sole progenitors of all modern humans (BMH). Humani Generis permits the idea that the human body was developed by evolution. And that is exactly what I am proposing. The AMH are human in body only; they were not human persons.

 

[cjforJesus]

Anthropologists distinguish between AMH and BMH. The distinction is that the BMH can reason abstractly. I contend that abstract reasoning requires free will, to motivate the search for transcendent truths sought and found by abstract reasoning. Then reason and free will indicate an immortal soul.

I reject polygenism. Adam and Eve were the sole progenitors of all modern humans (BMH). Humani Generis permits the idea that the human body was developed by evolution. And that is exactly what I am proposing. The AMH are human in body only; they were not human persons.

After reading through all of these posts and speculations I am more convinced that we are created beings. I do not see how evolution is compatible with Christianity. If the soul is merely the ability to reason and speak than that would imply our souls are our brains and I do not think that is true.

I am going to visit the creation museum this summer and see what they have to say. I think creation makes much more sense then monkeys mating and becoming humans.
God bless all.

 

[wmw]

Here is the fly in that ointment, only DNA from European populations have traces of Neanderthal DNA. DNA form African populations have no Neanderthal DNA. The only place Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthalensis co-existed was outside Africa. The percent of Neanderthal DNA in European DNA makes it statistically unlikely that it was caused by mechanisms other then interbreeding.

So they say this decade, two decades ago they had no Adam and Eve just separate populations all over the world becoming human.

Then the latest research since this latest Out of Africa theory is about new means of developing new genes.

I don’t doubt their statistics just all the underlying basis for them.

 

[wmw]

After reading through all of these posts and speculations I am more convinced that we are created beings. I do not see how evolution is compatible with Christianity. If the soul is merely the ability to reason and speak than that would imply our souls are our brains and I do not think that is true.

I am going to visit the creation museum this summer and see what they have to say. I think creation makes much more sense then monkeys mating and becoming humans.
God bless all.

I don’t think the answer is all the way back to 6 day creationism either. There is a proper mix it’s just that scientists will never explore in an effort to confirm a miracle. The scientists have excluded any such thing as non-scientific, but we don’t have to be that way. Don’t make it exclusively an either/or question. Stay open to all honest searches for truth, but be advised of the strengths & blind spots of each camp.

 

[GEddie]

Anthropologists distinguish between AMH and BMH. The distinction is that the BMH can reason abstractly. I contend that abstract reasoning requires free will, to motivate the search for transcendent truths sought and found by abstract reasoning. Then reason and free will indicate an immortal soul.

I reject polygenism. Adam and Eve were the sole progenitors of all modern humans (BMH). Humani Generis permits the idea that the human body was developed by evolution. And that is exactly what I am proposing. The AMH are human in body only; they were not human persons.

Behaviors and rationality do not fossilize.

As to different species of “human life”, methinks too much importance is given to that boundary among beings for which only bones remain. Would alien biologists a million years from now consider Chihuahuas and Great Danes to be the same species?

 

[Aloysium]

. . . that boundary among beings for which only bones remain. . .

DNA may also exist, but as you infer the boundary is an arbitrary, human creation.

 

[cfauster]

I am going to visit the creation museum this summer and see what they have to say.

Well, they do offer immediate “answers.” See Tales of a Recovering Answer Addict.

For those committed to the Answers approach but unwilling to swallow the cost (and I’m not talking about the museum’s admission charge), there is a more honest alternative.

 

[cjforJesus]

Well, they do offer immediate “answers.” See Tales of a Recovering Answer Addict.

For those committed to the Answers approach but unwilling to swallow the cost (and I’m not talking about the museum’s admission charge), there is a more honest alternative.

Evolution does not require God,as a matter of fact it is easier for many people to grasp it by eliminating God altogether.
Natural selection and survival of the fittest ensures inheritance of superior genes.Weakness and sicknesss and poverty are to be systematically bred out of the population to ensure a better gene pool and a utopic society where everyone believes the same thing and thinks the same way
Love is a biochemical reaction in the brain to ensure pair bonding and reproduction.Nothing more.
We are simply higher animals competing for power,resources,and recognition.

A utopic(dystopic is more the reality) based on science ruling the masses is a society doomed to failure. There is no “voice of the dolphins”

 

[Glomung]

Adam and Eve were the ancestors of the Hebrews, and eventually Our Lord Jesus.
The day that God made Adam, my ancestors were already running around loose in America, Africa, and Europe. When Adam and Eve sinned they stood as representatives for all mankind.

When you stop making bad assumptions about the implications of certain parts of scripture, the conflicts with science and common sense disappear.

 

[cfauster]

Evolution does not require God,as a matter of fact it is easier for many people to grasp it by eliminating God altogether.
Natural selection and survival of the fittest ensures inheritance of superior genes.Weakness and sicknesss and poverty are to be systematically bred out of the population to ensure a better gene pool and a utopic society where everyone believes the same thing and thinks the same way
Love is a biochemical reaction in the brain to ensure pair bonding and reproduction.Nothing more.
We are simply higher animals competing for power,resources,and recognition.

A utopic(dystopic is more the reality) based on science ruling the masses is a society doomed to failure. There is no “voice of the dolphins”

Thank you for your post.

If the only way a person can avoid such false philosophy is by staying completely away from certain sciences, then by all means, it’s more important to maintain one’s relationship with God than to worry about the science.

If a person - in particular a Christian, including Catholic Christians - can and does avoid such philosophical error and atheism while still encountering scientific understandings of human origins, to me that’s also fine.

Best wishes.

 

[Ron_Conte]

Adam and Eve were the ancestors of the Hebrews, and eventually Our Lord Jesus.
The day that God made Adam, my ancestors were already running around loose in America, Africa, and Europe. When Adam and Eve sinned they stood as representatives for all mankind.

When you stop making bad assumptions about the implications of certain parts of scripture, the conflicts with science and common sense disappear.

No. It is Catholic dogma that all human persons, not just the Hebrews or just certain ethnic groups, are descendants of Adam and Eve: Council of Trent, Decree on Original Sin, 1-3.

 

[rossum]

On the other hand, genetic evidence seems to indicate that the human race cannot possibly come from just two human beings who mated; the mutation rate would simply be too high, and if that mutation rate continued, the human race would have mutated itself out existence.

Correct. There is too much genetic diversity in humans, and too much shared with chimpanzees to have had a genetic bottleneck of just two people in the last five million years.

Now, of course, this presents us with a difficulty. To defend the view that humans descend from 10000 primal ancestors does not seem to be able to be reconciled with Sacred Scripture, or Catholic dogma regarding original sin.

Consider those 10,000 ancestors. We can divide them into two groups: those who have currently living descendants and those who do not. If we go far enough back into the past, about 8,000 to 10,000 years IIRC, then those with living ancestors are all common ancestors to every living human. Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam are just two examples of such common ancestors. Any couple within that group, who did not have any children except with each other, can serve as Adam and Eve since all living humans are descended from that couple.

There is no problem with all humans being descended from a single couple. The problem arises if that couple are considered to be alone on the planet. They were not. See MRCA for a view of the concepts.

HTH

rossum

 

[GEddie]

Sometimes mystery just has to remain mystery. Twisting our minds into pretzels trying to make Church teaching jive with polygenism is probably a waste of time; we may never know enough.

ICXC NIKA