Can I stay Catholic and not believe in a literal Adam and Eve?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DetectiveNiko
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DetectiveNiko

Guest
What exaclty are the Church teachings on this, since I feel like we have backed ourselves up into a corner.
Everything points to the fact that never in the history of mankind was there only 2 people.
(Before you say : " But mitochondrial Eve ! " you should realize that even then there were more than a pair of people )
I also find the theory that God gave some random 2 humans a soul pretty random and farfetched even for someone like God who is omniscient.
I assume not believing in a literal Adam and Eve also creates problems with the purpose of baptism
To me what would make the most sense is if there exsisted many people originally and we just share a sinful nature. ( Jesus’s sacrifice could still be used in that way )
[I know someone posted a thread similliar recently, but it wasn’t that detailed and most people just answered with mitochondrial Eve and I don’t find that a satisfying answer ]
[ I am also entirely sorry ahead of time for making so many posts in last few days, I am on the verge of becoming agnostic and I want to try to clear this mess up by Christmas ]
 
Please know that evolution is not fact based whatsoever. Nada. It is purely theoretical and lacking in substantial evidence. Many secular scientists simply rely on evolution as if it has been proven (even though it cannot) and lay their claims on top of it as if it were true. There are a lot of holes in the evolution theory.

All of the Church Fathers believed in a literal interpretation of the creation story. No, it is not an outdated idea. You will just find a lot of people try to impose their evolutionist views on you by claiming that the Church Fathers lived in different times. This is a silly thought because the Church Fathers had far more wisdom and knowledge on Catholic matters than anyone today.

I think in your post you are referencing evolution, saying you don’t believe God would randomly give two people souls. That would be correct. To think we came from animals, that God randomly decided to appoint two souls to random animals is disturbing at best.

God created two humans, two souls together. We were meant to have a body and soul. God created everything perfect, with the animals lower than us, so that man would have dominion over the land and animals.
 
Last edited:
Many Catholics believe that Adam and Eve, our first parents, were two hominids in a larger community of hominids, whom God set apart and gifted with eternal souls. We need not necessarily believe that there was a genetic bottleneck. It’s possible that their children married other members of the larger genetic community, and the resulting offspring were gifted with souls, until with a certain number of generations all living hominids had eternal souls. All recent Popes going back to Pius XII in the 1950s have been open to modern scientific evidence in regards to evolution.
 
I’m having trouble figuring out the purpose of your post.

Do you want to believe that some humans are not fully human?

Do you want to believe that some humans are not related to all other humans?

If some humans are unrelated to all other humans, does that make them subject to slavery or other limitations of the usual human rights? Is this something you want to believe?

And why would you assume that God would pick two hominids randomly, when (if He is omniscient and omnipotent) He would be much more likely to have really good reasons for His picks?

Is there some reason that you have a time limit on deciding your beliefs and thoughts? Wouldn’t it be more natural to let your decisions and investigations take the time they take?

So yeah, I am puzzled. Even minor questions of philosophy usually require some major periods of skull sweat and research, and you don’t necessarily know when, or if, you will reach any kind of understanding. If you really are interested in this topic, why are you asking a bunch of forum dwellers, when you could be reading the great theologians and saints?
 
Last edited:
What exactly points to the fact that were never only 2 people in the history of mankind? Nobody from the beginning of mankind is here to tell us how many people there were.
 
DetectiveNiko said:
What exaclty are the Church teachings on this, since I feel like we have backed ourselves up into a corner.

Everything points to the fact that never in the history of mankind was there only 2 people.
Click to expand...
That’s not what the Church teaches, however… 😉

The Church teachings deal with the first two human beings. That means persons with souls. Science can talk about Neandertals, Homo erectus, Homo sapiens… but the Church never talks in those terms (since the Church isn’t talking about science).

The Church requires you to believe in a first set of two human (ensouled) beings. It doesn’t map those on a particular two hominins. What you accept – from a scientific perspective – is up to you, but isn’t part of Church teaching.
DetectiveNiko said:
(Before you say : " But mitochondrial Eve ! " you should realize that even then there were more than a pair of people )
Click to expand...
Umm… “mitochondrial Eve” isn’t who you think she is, I’m afraid. You realize, don’t you, that there isn’t a single “mitochondrial Eve” across all time, right? That label only means “the woman from whom all humans currently living are descended.” If parts of the world should drop into the ocean tomorrow, the identity of “mitochondrial Eve” would change.

So… don’t be fooled: “Mitochondrial Eve” and “the Eve of the Bible” are not the same person – and were never intended to be, by the scientists who made up that label!
DetectiveNiko said:
I am also entirely sorry … I am on the verge of becoming agnostic and I want to try to clear this mess up by Christmas
Click to expand...
Yes. Not knowing whether Christ is real or not would put a dent in your understanding of Christmas. 😉

(I’ll be praying for you, @DetectiveNiko!)
 
misstherese said:
All of the Church Fathers believed in a literal interpretation of the creation story.
Click to expand...
Umm… you might want to read St Augustine’s “On the Literal Interpretation of Genesis.” It might surprise you… 😉
 
misstherese said:
Please know that evolution is not fact based whatsoever. Nada. It is purely theoretical and lacking in substantial evidence.
Click to expand...
What exactly are you talking about ? There is lots. For example, people generally fish bigger fish because they want more meat out of it. With the whole “survival of the fittest concept” there are more and more fish that are small, because the big ones just die out. People generally have the misconception that evolution is one species somehow transforming into another overtime, while thats not the case, its just some animals mutate based on their enviroment and some survive because of those mutations some die out.

And I did not come here to argue if Evolution is true or not, there is another thread for that.
 
I should have said young earth. St. Augustine believes in a young earth, not necessarily a completely literal interpretation.
 
I don’t see how that link helps honestly. Yes genesis is not literal,I get that, but even your post claims that there were original parents.
 
A majority believing something does not mean its true.
That would mean that by the light of todays sexual revolution that homosexual relations are ok. (Don’t want to change the topic but I think you get what I mean )
 
So you’re disregarding the Catechism?! The Church affirms Adam and Eve are our original parents. If you’re unwilling to accept this then that’s your problem.
 
As I said, its kinda hard for me to believe that, it just seems way overcomplicated even for an omniscient being. But I will think about it
 
Genesis isn’t literal, unless you believe the contrary to be true.

From my perspective no, you can’t consider yourself Catholic (or Christian, for that matter) if you don’t believe in a literal Adam and Eve. But since I seem to have a habit of offending every moderator on this board by using the Truth, I suppose I better say this is my opinion.

Original sin is integral to Jesus and his mission on earth.

I take a fundamentalist stance. Adam and Eve literally existed and were the progenitors of the Antideluvian (pre-flood) kings.

I don’t personally believe the chronology of earth or its Judaeo-Christian timeline makes any sense without them.
 
Last edited:
Isn’t the whole point of my post that I have a problem believing that part of the Catechism and came here to ask for help ?
But I guess you kinda answered the title quesiton, regarding that thanks.
 
That all relies on the premise that an individual can only carry two varieties of any one gene, but perhaps that was not true for Adam and Eve, considering Adam and Eve didn’t themselves have a mom and a dad. Also, maybe mutation is being downplayed, and occurred more rapidly in the beginning.
 
You have it backwards I think…

What a majority believe would be evolution, including the secular world.

A minority believe in Creationism.

A minority believe the sexual revolution did harm, while a majority believe it did good for society (secular society).
 
Actually mutations are more frequent over time, as can be seen today with so many children with down syndrome and other genetical problems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top