P
Pete_1
Guest
How is the modern view of evolution reconciled with the Catholic dogma that Eve came from Adam?
peace,
peace,
- Status
T
Thing
Guest
We are all related to one woman, ‘mitochondrial Eve’.
The biblical Eve was formed from tissue taken from Adams body.
So the Biblical Eve is a clone of Adam.
They were genetically identical.
So science agrees our parents were Adam and Eve, real people too…
The biblical Eve was formed from tissue taken from Adams body.
So the Biblical Eve is a clone of Adam.
They were genetically identical.
So science agrees our parents were Adam and Eve, real people too…
P
PhilVaz
Guest
Thank goodness, we finally have a question that hasn’t been asked and answered 4.5 billion times. 
Just kidding.
My view is if Eve came literally from the “side” or “rib” of Adam that would be a miracle of God, and therefore would not be testable by science. Evolution simply says we all had two parents, and we all have common ancestors that link us back eventually to primate ancestors. “Eve from Adam” would simply be a one-time miraculous exception to that. As I summarize Dennis Bonnette from his Origin of the Human Species –
“…evolutionary science sees the broad picture of human origins taking place over a time-frame measured in hundreds of thousands, or even millions of years. It cannot focus on events affecting a single pair of humans at a given point in time. Anthropological data and theories are so general that they cannot oppose particular facts about an Adam and Eve, unless even the broad trends of such data are shown to oppose such particulars’ possibilities. Speculation based upon present data can, at best, indicate the nature and activities of early humans, pointing to largely undefined populations and imprecise time periods. It cannot address with precision the conditions of existence of a single pair of humans at a particular, distant-past time. It cannot exclude, a priori, the possibility of miraculous divine intervention whose reality falls entirely outside the fossil record.”
I don’t see it as a problem. How could it be a problem since “Eve from Adam” would not be a testable thing. It would be a miracle, just as God giving the first souls to the first human being or beings.
Adam, Eve, and the Hominid Fossil Record
Phil P
Just kidding.My view is if Eve came literally from the “side” or “rib” of Adam that would be a miracle of God, and therefore would not be testable by science. Evolution simply says we all had two parents, and we all have common ancestors that link us back eventually to primate ancestors. “Eve from Adam” would simply be a one-time miraculous exception to that. As I summarize Dennis Bonnette from his Origin of the Human Species –
“…evolutionary science sees the broad picture of human origins taking place over a time-frame measured in hundreds of thousands, or even millions of years. It cannot focus on events affecting a single pair of humans at a given point in time. Anthropological data and theories are so general that they cannot oppose particular facts about an Adam and Eve, unless even the broad trends of such data are shown to oppose such particulars’ possibilities. Speculation based upon present data can, at best, indicate the nature and activities of early humans, pointing to largely undefined populations and imprecise time periods. It cannot address with precision the conditions of existence of a single pair of humans at a particular, distant-past time. It cannot exclude, a priori, the possibility of miraculous divine intervention whose reality falls entirely outside the fossil record.”
I don’t see it as a problem. How could it be a problem since “Eve from Adam” would not be a testable thing. It would be a miracle, just as God giving the first souls to the first human being or beings.
Adam, Eve, and the Hominid Fossil Record
Phil P
P
Pete_1
Guest
Perhaps I should rephrase, how can the dogma that Eve came from Adam be reconciled with science (e.g how did a woman come from a man), whilst at the same time rejecting polygenism.We are all related to one woman, ‘mitochondrial Eve’.
The biblical Eve was formed from tissue taken from Adams body.
So the Biblical Eve is a clone of Adam.
They were genetically identical.
So science agrees our parents were Adam and Eve, real people too…
P
PhilVaz
Guest
<< how can the dogma that Eve came from Adam be reconciled with science (e.g how did a woman come from a man), whilst at the same time rejecting polygenism. >>
That’s actually two issues: Eve from Adam, and polygenism.
Polygenism is not necessarily rejected by Pius XII. There can be spiritual or theological monogenism yet physical polygenism. The human population never got down physically to just two people. If it did, we wouldn’t have made it, we would have gone extinct.
Eve from Adam is not a problem to me (it would be a one-time miracle), as for polygenism see this paper published in the Vatican’s own newspaper:
Theology of Original Sin and the Scientific Theory of Evolution (17 April 1969)
You will get a few Catholics on here who don’t accept a “historical Adam and Eve” at all. I am not one of those. How to reconcile everything is difficult, but Adam and Eve would be the first true human beings with souls. When they lived we’re not sure, but the other article I linked has some guesses.
Phil P
That’s actually two issues: Eve from Adam, and polygenism.
Polygenism is not necessarily rejected by Pius XII. There can be spiritual or theological monogenism yet physical polygenism. The human population never got down physically to just two people. If it did, we wouldn’t have made it, we would have gone extinct.
Eve from Adam is not a problem to me (it would be a one-time miracle), as for polygenism see this paper published in the Vatican’s own newspaper:
Theology of Original Sin and the Scientific Theory of Evolution (17 April 1969)
You will get a few Catholics on here who don’t accept a “historical Adam and Eve” at all. I am not one of those. How to reconcile everything is difficult, but Adam and Eve would be the first true human beings with souls. When they lived we’re not sure, but the other article I linked has some guesses.
Phil P
T
Thing
Guest
Women can come from men today, scientifically if not legally.
If you accept that everything that exists had to have a beginning to its existance - and so a creator. It is a lesser thing to believe that Eve also had her beginning - and its easier still to believe it when science says that the science of cloning is not a scientific impossibility.
Science just complements whatever it is the truth is. And not all evidence needs to be or can be scientific.
P
Pete_1
Guest
Ahh interesting, thankyou very much.
P
Pete_1
Guest
How so?
T
Thing
Guest
Human cloning?
P
Pete_1
Guest
Really have they done this? I assumed the clones would be of the same sex, do you have a source?
peace,
P
PhilVaz
Guest
pete << Ahh interesting, thankyou very much. >>
There is also a recent article published in the same Vatican newspaper on this question by a Catholic biologist, I believe it was Jan 2006. You can search for the January 16, 2006 edition of L’Osservatore Romano, article by biologist Fiorenzo Facchini: “The spark of intelligence was lighted in one or more hominids when, where and in the ways God willed it.” (from the Wikipedia article I helped edit on Evolution and the Church)
There is also the 2004 statement by the ITC endorsed by Cardinal Ratzinger: “While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens…Every individual human being as well as the whole human community are created in the image of God. In its original unity – of which Adam is the symbol – the human race is made in the image of the divine Trinity.” (Communion and Stewardship from July 2004)
Finally, there is also Cardinal Schonborn’s book Chance or Purpose (he doesn’t delve into this question specifically I don’t think) and the new one Creation and Evolution (Ignatius Press, 2008) from Pope Benedict’s 2006 “study circle” meeting with various theologians and scientists.
I don’t think a strict physical monogenism can be held to in light of modern science, but a combo of physical polygenism with spiritual monogenism can.
It would absolutely be so easy if science still believed the earth was 6000 years old, and that Genesis was literally right that Adam and Eve were the first and only two people on earth. But alas, we have discovered a lot of new things the past 200 or so years.
Phil P
There is also a recent article published in the same Vatican newspaper on this question by a Catholic biologist, I believe it was Jan 2006. You can search for the January 16, 2006 edition of L’Osservatore Romano, article by biologist Fiorenzo Facchini: “The spark of intelligence was lighted in one or more hominids when, where and in the ways God willed it.” (from the Wikipedia article I helped edit on Evolution and the Church)
There is also the 2004 statement by the ITC endorsed by Cardinal Ratzinger: “While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens…Every individual human being as well as the whole human community are created in the image of God. In its original unity – of which Adam is the symbol – the human race is made in the image of the divine Trinity.” (Communion and Stewardship from July 2004)
Finally, there is also Cardinal Schonborn’s book Chance or Purpose (he doesn’t delve into this question specifically I don’t think) and the new one Creation and Evolution (Ignatius Press, 2008) from Pope Benedict’s 2006 “study circle” meeting with various theologians and scientists.
I don’t think a strict physical monogenism can be held to in light of modern science, but a combo of physical polygenism with spiritual monogenism can.
It would absolutely be so easy if science still believed the earth was 6000 years old, and that Genesis was literally right that Adam and Eve were the first and only two people on earth. But alas, we have discovered a lot of new things the past 200 or so years.
Phil P
T
Thing
Guest
The science is a possibility, - as in we know today it is not scientifically impossible to clone creatures.
Probably the clones would be of the same sex, I don’t know.
But then, twins are clones and can be of both sexes. And I have no sources, many should be readily available to you, though, on the latest news in human cloning.
P
Pete_1
Guest
The science is a possibility, - as in we know today it is not scientifically impossible to clone creatures.
Probably the clones would be of the same sex, I don’t know.
But then, twins are clones and can be of both sexes. quote]
from wikipedia:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identical_twins#Identical_twins
Monozygotic twins are genetically identical (unless there has been a mutation in development) and they are always the same sex.
Among monozygotic twins, in extremely rare cases, twins have been born with opposite sexes (one male, one female). The probability of this is so vanishingly small (only 3 documented cases[25]) that multiples having different sexes is universally accepted as a sound basis for a clinical determination that in utero multiples are not monozygotic. When monozygotic twins are born with different sexes it is because of chromosomal birth defects. In this case, although the twins did come from the same egg, it is incorrect to refer to them as genetically identical, since they have different karyotypes.
So I guess it is a possiblity, thanks.
peace,
- Status