Attempts to Reconcile Polygenism with Original Sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter scpilgrim
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

scpilgrim

Guest
I came across this article recently, which attempts to reconcile the doctrine of Original Sin with the evolutionary theory of polygenism:

www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/papers/kemp-monogenism.pdf

Is anyone on here familiar with this article? Is the theory posited in this article one Catholics are permitted to subscribe to, in light of what Pope Pius XII said about polygenism in Humani Generis?

Thank you in advance for your (name removed by moderator)ut.
 
Oh wow, I was going to read the article but it is extremely long and the abstract does not give a clear view of what the author’s basic theory is.

I personally believe common ancestry from a single ancestral couple who committed the Original Sin is easily reconciled with genetic evidence showing a lack of such a severe bottleneck in the history of our species. However this subject is extremely difficult to discuss without breaking forum rules.
 
Skimming the article, this seems to be the very reconciliation I was thinking of. 👍
 
As Catholics we are not free to believe in polygenism, it is a matter of Faith that all men descend from Adam and Eve. God bless.
 
PietroPaolo said:
As Catholics we are not free to believe in polygenism, it is a matter of Faith that all men descend from Adam and Eve. God bless.
Click to expand...
We all agree that all true men are descended from the first human couple that we call by the Biblical names Adam and Eve and that Original Sin is passed down through natural propagation from these two original parents. The question is whether biological polygenism is really incompatible with that doctrine.
 
Aelred_Minor said:
We all agree that all true men are descended from the first human couple that we call by the Biblical names Adam and Eve and that Original Sin is passed down through natural propagation from these two original parents. The question is whether biological polygenism is really incompatible with that doctrine.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.
 
Well, perhaps there is some thought that a genetic Adam & Eve lived in about the same time period of the distant past…

Article here:Nature Link
 
Michael57 said:
Well, perhaps there is some thought that a genetic Adam & Eve lived in about the same time period of the distant past…

Article here:Nature Link
Click to expand...
I see no need to associate Adam or Eve with either “genetic Adam” or “genetic Eve.”

Really the whole naming is silly. According to an extremely “literal” reading of Genesis Adam would not be “genetic Adam” anyway. Noah would be. Eve meanwhile could be “genetic Eve”, or else some other common ancestor of the wives of Noah’s sons. In any case we would actually expect genetic Eve to have lived before genetic Adam. That’s all if we read Genesis in that way.
 
This is simply a restatement of an old idea that has been presented here more than once. Basically, one day, a pair of human beings attained a level of rational thought that allowed them to get a pair of souls.

These are two highly distinct ideas. Science cannot study the soul, therefore, science cannot define what spiritual/theological change occurred. There is no Church teaching that supports this totally fictitious idea.

Peace,
Ed
 
Aelred_Minor said:
We all agree that all true men are descended from the first human couple that we call by the Biblical names Adam and Eve and that Original Sin is passed down through natural propagation from these two original parents. The question is whether biological polygenism is really incompatible with that doctrine.
Click to expand...
It is.

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
This is simply a restatement of an old idea that has been presented here more than once. Basically, one day, a pair of human beings attained a level of rational thought that allowed them to get a pair of souls.

These are two highly distinct ideas. Science cannot study the soul, therefore, science cannot define what spiritual/theological change occurred. There is no Church teaching that supports this totally fictitious idea.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
I only skimmed the article but I don’t think it said anything about adult human beings attaining a certain level of rational thought as opposed to being given a rational soul from the first moment of their existence.
 
Aelred_Minor said:
. . . given a rational soul from the first moment of their existence.
Click to expand...
I see a rational soul as what constitutes my existence.
A rational soul has not been given to me; I am a soul.
We are a holy unity of body-soul, created as such in the womb; although as a result of original sin we are destined to physically die, we can be reborn in Christ.

There is nothing in the teachings of the church that supports polygenism.
You may want to remember this even though “this seems to be the very reconciliation (you were) thinking of.”
 
Hi Ed,

Not wishing to get into a debate (since I admittedly have not studied these matters- I gave the links simply as ones I found interesting and so wished to share), I don’t have much to state. I quite readily acknowledge my ignorance on this subject, and have no desire to give a demonstration of the fact. 🙂

That said, I’m not quite sure in what way your statement is relevant to what is expressed in those links. No doubt I’m overlooking the obvious, but if you could explain, I would be grateful. Thanks!

(And with that, I will bow out of this conversation and just be an observer).
 
If one is interested in truth, one should consult the Catechism, to which there’s not much I could add.
If one enjoys flights of fancy and science fiction, there’s a lot of it on the web.
 
InnocentSmith said:
Hi Ed,

Not wishing to get into a debate (since I admittedly have not studied these matters- I gave the links simply as ones I found interesting and so wished to share), I don’t have much to state. I quite readily acknowledge my ignorance on this subject, and have no desire to give a demonstration of the fact. 🙂

That said, I’m not quite sure in what way your statement is relevant to what is expressed in those links. No doubt I’m overlooking the obvious, but if you could explain, I would be grateful. Thanks!

(And with that, I will bow out of this conversation and just be an observer).
Click to expand...
Adam and Eve are our first parents. There were no others, including hominids, prehumans, almost humans. Science has no competence to judge a Biblical truth by inventing a story that tries to combine science with a subject science cannot study.

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Adam and Eve are our first parents. There were no others, including hominids, prehumans, almost humans. Science has no competence to judge a Biblical truth by inventing a story that tries to combine science with a subject science cannot study.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Thank-you for answering my question. As I said, I don’t really wish to get into any discussion, knowing well that I am not competent to comment much on these matters, due to my ignorance of many of the issues involved. The only thing I would wish to state is that I do agree with what you wrote in your last sentence, and that it seems to me to be entirely consistent with the content of the links above (though obviously they would disagree, rightly or wrongly, with the second sentence of your reply) . Hence, my confusion. But again, I do thank you for taking the time to answer my question. God bless!
 
If you finds your ideas, morals, attitudes toward life in conflict with the teachings of the church, you would do well to reconsider your position. The church, founded by Jesus and supported by the Holy Spirit provides us with God’s revealed truth.

If one cannot truly accept some aspect, it is important to at least come to some understanding of what the church teaches. When you get lost, you will have something to help you get back on track.

Consider what happens when one comes to know of God. The world is transformed; one sees oneself, others, nature, existence and what it brings, in a completely new light. As one’s faith deepens, the mystery and wonder of creation, brought into being by God, the source of all beauty, goodness and love, ever grows.

Thinking about the basics of our origin:
God breathed into dust he had shaped and thereby created Adam.
From Adam, He created the second person and from that couple all humanity sprang.

We are talking about God here, who created, and maintains the entire universe in being. Jesus was resurrected, ascended into heaven, where He sits in eternity.

Why do people feel that they have to conform this vision to some transient and inappropriately held ideas proposed by “science”?
If it springs from a hope that the “reconciliation” (which is actually a denial of revealed truth) will somehow make Christianity more palatable to nonbelievers, one will be seriously disappointed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top