Adam and Eves Children, Sex, & Prehuman Societies

  • Thread starter Thread starter MindOverMatter2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MindOverMatter2

Guest
Did Adam and Eves Children breed with pre-human organisms (humanoid beings), and in effect breed them out of existence. If this were true (and I am tempted to think that it is), would it really be contradictory to the belief that we all descended from two parents? I think not, at least not in theological sense or context. We are spoken of as descending from two parents alone, but primarily in the sense that we are concious living beings sharing in the destiny of Adam and eve. That we might share dna with other living organisms doesn’t appear to present a problem to me, since, in so far as we are spiritual “persons”, we would still be descendants of Adam and Eve in the strong theological sense of there being only two parents for the whole human race; although only partly in a genetic biological sense.
 
I suppose that might explain why Cain was under the impression that there were people besides his family on the planet- “Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me”
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
Did Adam and Eves Children breed with pre-human organisms (humanoid beings), and in effect breed them out of existence. If this were true (and I am tempted to think that it is), would it really be contradictory to the belief that we all descended from two parents? I think not, at least not in theological sense or context. We are spoken of as descending from two parents alone, but primarily in the sense that we are concious living beings sharing in the destiny of Adam and eve. That we might share dna with other living organisms doesn’t appear to present a problem to me, since, in so far as we are spiritual “persons”, we would still be descendants of Adam and Eve in the strong theological sense of there being only two parents for the whole human race; although only partly in a genetic biological sense.
Click to expand...
This is what happens when you try to mix faulty macro evolutionary theory with theology. We can’t interpret everything that doesn’t fit our modern ideas of humanity into the “not literal” category.

Is it really so hard to accept that Adam and Eve DID exist, and that they were two fully realized humans like us?
 
The difficulty here is that some insist on using science to explain the work of God. Some of the same people who insist that science cannot study God also insist that the work of God conform to what science tells them. This is an ongoing problem.

God bless,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
The difficulty here is that some insist on using science to explain the work of God. Some of the same people who insist that science cannot study God also insist that the work of God conform to what science tells them. This is an ongoing problem.

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong with science informing our understanding of scripture. However, I am not somebody who is interested in challenging dogma. However I will challenge what I suspect to be false interpretation of what is dogmatically true. Science can help us to weed out false interpretations. That’s why serious Christians are not six day creationists.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
There is nothing wrong with science informing our understanding of scripture. However, I am not somebody who is interested in challenging dogma. However I will challenge what I suspect to be false interpretation of what is dogmatically true. Science can help us to weed out false interpretations. That’s why serious Christians are not six day creationists.
Click to expand...
Why and how do you judge “serious Christians”? Catholics are permitted to believe the earth was made in thousands of years. That is what the Church allows. Why should it concern you or science if some believe this?

God bless,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Why and how do you judge “serious Christians”? Catholics are permitted to believe the earth was made in thousands of years. That is what the Church allows. Why should it concern you or science if some believe this?

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
It doesn’t represent scientific reality, and if you respect science as a body of knowledge, then obviously the idea that the world was made in a thousand years is not an idea that is worthy of belief since it is unreasonable given what scientists have discovered about the universe. I no more believe that the world was made in seven days than the idea that world is flat.So why should I believe it?

In any case, I am not arguing that people should not believe that the world was created in seven days. This thread is obviously for those Catholics who have a healthy respect for scientific data. You are obviously not one of those people.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
It doesn’t represent scientific reality, and if you respect science as a body of knowledge, then obviously the idea that the world was made in a thousand years is not an idea that is worthy of belief since it is unreasonable given what scientists have discovered about the universe. I no more believe that the world was made in seven days than the idea that world is flat.So why should I believe it?

In any case, I am not arguing that people should not believe that the world was created in seven days. This thread is obviously for those Catholics who have a healthy respect for scientific data. You are obviously not one of those people.
Click to expand...
“healthy respect”? I have a healthy respect for what the Church teaches.

God bless,
Ed
 
I like this idea. I think it is very important that we do not ignore overwhelming scientific evidence regarding evolution. Regarding sex though, were our first parents bound by any natural law regarding marriage?? if Adam’s and Eve’s children were breeding with non-humans, does this mean sex with animals is ok today?
 
slywakka250 said:
I like this idea. I think it is very important that we do not ignore overwhelming scientific evidence regarding evolution. Regarding sex though, were our first parents bound by any natural law regarding marriage?? if Adam’s and Eve’s children were breeding with non-humans, does this mean sex with animals is ok today?
Click to expand...
Well, if a human being is only human when given a soul, then, what makes us human, is not the body; but rather it is the union of both body and soul. But if a body, without a soul, is biologically compatible in terms of human propagation, I am not sure that it would be wrong, at least not in the time of Adam and Eve, if God intended them to be vessels for human life. Its either that or incest. Incest is a sin today, but perhaps its not necessarily a sin, and perhaps this is also true with humanoids that have no rational soul.

However; if humanoids still existed today, I would argue that there is enough persons in the world, and that therefore the proper object of our desire should be other persons and not humanoids.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
Then why do you behave as if its a sin to believe in evolution?
Click to expand...
My behavior is not the issue. Church teaching tells me there is much to be skeptical about. Thanks to some people here, I see not the truth being advanced but an ideology.

As you know, that particular subject, evolution, cannot be discussed here.

God bless,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
My behavior is not the issue. Church teaching tells me there is much to be skeptical about. Thanks to some people here, I see not the truth being advanced but an ideology.

As you know, that particular subject, evolution, cannot be discussed here.

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
I can see through you. I am not discussing the theory of evolution. I am presupposing it. So your attempts to get me in to trouble will fall on death ears.
 
slywakka250 said:
I like this idea. I think it is very important that we do not ignore overwhelming scientific evidence regarding evolution. Regarding sex though, were our first parents bound by any natural law regarding marriage?? if Adam’s and Eve’s children were breeding with non-humans, does this mean sex with animals is ok today?
Click to expand...
It’s an interesting idea, and it might reconcile Scripture and our current understanding about evolution. However, what would the result of a human-nonhuman pairing? Would the children be half-human? Would a half-human have a rational soul (immortal soul)?
 
If at some point there was a genetic mutation that distinguishes between true humans and pre-humans, then that mutation would have most likely only happened to a single individual, either male or female, but not both. Then that mutation would have been passed to that first human’s children, who would have had one human parent and one pre-human parent.

I don’t see any scientific explanation how two humans, one male and one female, could both appear at the same time.
 
Quite scientifically possible.

In other news, this is pretty interesting.

Overall, I agree with MindOverMatter2. Isn’t the theological and ontological significance re: the essence of Man (though not persons), i.e., rational animality, soul-body composite, not homo sapiens sapiens DNA, primarily the fact that he resides at the center of Creation – the rational, immaterial aspect of his soul straddling delicately between Heaven and Earth alongside his sensible body?

As long as, say, a neanderthal had an intellective, immaterial soul informing his genetically differentiated body, he would classify as Man. I see no good theological reason to oppose such a theory; in fact, if I’m not mistaken, archeological evidence reveals they had larger cranial dimensions relative to body size, which as a rule even suggests higher intelligence.

edwest2,

Scientific method is a reliable process – one of many – for arriving at Truth, the truths of the sensible world. Christ is the Truth Himself; you should not be so worried that scientific fact will contradict revealed fact or that which you know by faith. If, however, you have good reason to think/know that your reasoning powers are just too limited to accept and research the bodies of natural scientific knowledge without losing all your faith, that is, to fully comprehend the ultimate beautiful unity of all Truth, then maybe your avoidance of it is a lamentable case of virtuous prudence.

Just try not to argue that it’s so for everyone else, since the public promotion of mockery-inducing Christian stereotypes, as being anti-intellectual, ignorant, fideistic, etc., serves only to provide an obstacle on the path to God for critical witnesses who do value Truth, however it’s discovered. I think you’re just over-reacting to pervasive Scientism by taking the opposite extreme.
 
Basic Catholic teaching regarding Adam and Eve is found in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4
Paragraphs 355-421.

The good news of Jesus Christ follows in Paragraph 422, etc.

One can put the word paragraph and its number in the Catechism’s search bar in link www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
Entering topics, like Adam, is also very useful.

When you enter a paragraph number, like “paragraph 355”, and then click on the opening line, CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 355 you will see the following under the paragraph:

»
»
»
»
 
The existence of Adam and Eve requires God’s intervention.
If you believe that Adam and Eve existed, then God was involved.
It is *de fide *Catholic teaching (required belief) that God directly creates the human soul (it is not a product of evolution).

God is necessarily involved, directly. Science can say nothing about this.
 
Just_Lurking said:
If at some point there was a genetic mutation that distinguishes between true humans and pre-humans, then that mutation would have most likely only happened to a single individual, either male or female, but not both. Then that mutation would have been passed to that first human’s children, who would have had one human parent and one pre-human parent.

I don’t see any scientific explanation how two humans, one male and one female, could both appear at the same time.
Click to expand...
The difference between today’s human being and pre-humans, which can also be considered
non-human animals, is that true, real, fully complete human nature is totally unique as it is rational/corporeal, spirit/matter, body and soul. In his nature, man unites the material and spiritual realms. All genetic mutations involve matter; therefore they are part of the material realm and as such cannot account for the spiritual soul of human nature.

While it is true that the material realm belongs to natural science, natural science is not the only explanation for a living organism which is both material and non-material.
In fact, natural science should not be expected to explain the total and fully complete origin of the human species.

The scientists who do try to explain human nature’s origin in solely material terms falter because the nitty-gritty of their methods and materials are limited or useless when it comes to the true human being who, alone, is called to share through knowledge and love in God’s own spiritual life. Our unique human nature is why Jesus Christ hung bleeding on a cross. May we always defend our human nature against modern attacks.

Blessings,
granny

Adam was the apple of God’s eye.
(example of reality and figurative language)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top