Co-existance: Did "Cavemen" have Souls?

[menofstjoseph]

With respect to other Christian faiths, Catholicism considers that only the direct descendents of Adam and Eve have spiritual souls which call these direct descendents to share, through knowledge and love, in God’s own life.

Neanderthals may have a few genes, just like my cousin Chilly Chimp, which are similar to humans, but that in no way means that both Neanderthals and our chimp cousins have immortal, non-material, eternal souls. Early hominids (Neanderthals and other similar non-human species) along with the chimps were not the reason that Jesus Christ hung bleeding on a Cross.

I am assuming that your referral of other species is to pre-human anatomies (hominids) which eventually decomposed or became prized fossils. Regardless of how many species of hominids existed at a point in pre-history, human nature is the only one which is spirit/matter, rational/corporeal, soul and body. It is only Adam who committed the sin, a major error, which broke the relationship with God, Himself.

Catholicism has always extended charity to non-human animals. According to another poster, it was an adaptation of Descartes extreme dualism which led to the modern disrespect of animals.

**Granny,
The debate, as I understand it, is not whether Neanderthals were our ancestors (my understanding they were not), but they were another rational, intelligent, tool building race which lived along side of us - the coexisted with us. They may not have been our intellectual equals, but they were certainly intelligent and rational, and they communicated. They were not simply an animal on par with a dolphin, chimp, or horse.

Before you respond further, I suggest you read the article linked in my original post. Also, here are a few articles to add some fuel to the fire:

pressherald.com/news/nationworld/neanderthals-humans-interbred-in-middle-east-research-suggests_2010-05-07.html**

DID HUMAN’S AND NEANDERTHALS BATTLE FOR CONTROL OF THE MIDDLE EAST? news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/03/0305_0307_neandertal.htmlnews.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/03/0305_0307_neandertal.html

 

[cassini]

homo sapiens and homo neandertalensis are designations of man.

There is no real way of knowing the answer to this question this side of heaven. However, there is evidence that the species did intermarry and share DNA which leads to a very plausible concept that the species were closely related enough for breeding and so therefore it is a theologically ‘safe’ answer that yes they had souls.

There is no possible major Error from this position due to the lack of the continued existence of other species of man. Also, it does extend theological charity to these now extinct races.

Yet another question to ask in heaven.

No cthulhubryan. We know the answer today. It is simple. If they were human beings they descended from human souled Adam and Eve and had human souls. If they were monkeys (note how they are all ‘children’ fossils, that is, small monkey size.) they had monkey souls. It is as simple as that if you are a Catholic. There are no other options.

 

[grannymh]

**Before you respond further, I suggest you read the article linked in my original post. Also, here are a few articles to add some fuel to the fire: **

My very brief reaction to the OP link was in post 42. It was: “As far as I could tell, the link is an article by writer John Noble Wilford, August 29, 1995. It appeared to be a summary. No matter. There is plenty of new research regarding Neanderthals. However, to assume that they were rational beings or as the OP says “a separate, possibly equal, manner of man” raises the question as to what should readers assume is the meaning of men.”

Regarding this link in post 45

pressherald.com/news/nationworld/neanderthals-humans-interbred-in-middle-east-research-suggests_2010-05-07.html

Out of respect for this forum’s current ban on evolution discussion, I am approaching this link from my policy of reading the actual scientific research.

This link is a media story from the Portland Press Herald. Apparently, it was picked up from the Los Angeles Times.

Due to time restrictions on my part, I had to scan the story. Did spot the Max Planck Institute which is one of the major players in the field. However, I could not immediately find the citations which are often at the end of a story. I did find this very interesting statement: “**Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our **accuracy form”

Back in the days of black and white as a writer/editor, when I wrote about a person, I presented that person with my version of an “accuracy form” before the story went to press. I have been out of the public relations field for many years. Thus, currently, I want to see the actual research paper which includes methods and materials before I accept a news article as chapter and verse.

Blessings,
granny

“The shepherds sing; and shall I silent be?”
from the poem “Christmas” by George Herbert

The “Twelve Days of Christmas” are meant to be celebrated.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I am not a geneticist, so I can’t say about the DNA. I have, however, discussed this with a forensic anthropologist. She informed me that western Europeans have many skeletal features peculiar to them and Neanderthals only, including some features that serve no functional purpose but are inheritable.

For whatever it’s worth, she believes and (to me) convincingly argues that Neanderthals were simply human beings having a somewhat different physiognomy from those we call “Cro Magnon”, and that Neanderthals simply “disappeared” into the larger population in the same sort of way that pre-Celtic people largely “disappeared” into, e.g., the Scottish population.

I also recall reading the opinion of one anthropologist that the way we picture Neanderthals is determined by conventional artists’ renderings of them, but that if we render them only slightly differently, but still consistent with their skeletal features, we would not especially remark one if we met him on the street, suitably barbered and dressed.

So, for my part, my guess is that they were just people. Artifacts can tell us a lot, but they don’t always tell us enough. Until very recently, nobody knew there were tartan-wearing, Celtic-appearing people in China 5,000 years ago until the discovery of the Tarim “mummies” either. Nor did anybody know, until then, how ancient some of the tartan patterns still used in Scotland and Ireland really are.

Interestingly, northern Chinese DNA has features similar to that of European DNA, but different from southern Chinese DNA. Possibly the Tarim “Celts” simply disappeared into the Mongolic population of northern China over time, and possibly the Neanderthals disappeared in the very same way.

 

[grannymh]

I am not a geneticist, so I can’t say about the DNA. I have, however, discussed this with a forensic anthropologist. She informed me that western Europeans have many skeletal features peculiar to them and Neanderthals only, including some features that serve no functional purpose but are inheritable.

For whatever it’s worth, she believes and (to me) convincingly argues that Neanderthals were simply human beings having a somewhat different physiognomy from those we call “Cro Magnon”, and that Neanderthals simply “disappeared” into the larger population in the same sort of way that pre-Celtic people largely “disappeared” into, e.g., the Scottish population.

I also recall reading the opinion of one anthropologist that the way we picture Neanderthals is determined by conventional artists’ renderings of them, but that if we render them only slightly differently, but still consistent with their skeletal features, we would not especially remark one if we met him on the street, suitably barbered and dressed.

So, for my part, my guess is that they were just people. Artifacts can tell us a lot, but they don’t always tell us enough. Until very recently, nobody knew there were tartan-wearing, Celtic-appearing people in China 5,000 years ago until the discovery of the Tarim “mummies” either. Nor did anybody know, until then, how ancient some of the tartan patterns still used in Scotland and Ireland really are.

Interestingly, northern Chinese DNA has features similar to that of European DNA, but different from southern Chinese DNA. Possibly the Tarim “Celts” simply disappeared into the Mongolic population of northern China over time, and possibly the Neanderthals disappeared in the very same way.

Have you considered the idea that the only real people (as opposed to “just people”) existing today are ones whose nature unites the material and spiritual worlds?

Have you considered that “skeletal features” refer to a decomposing material anatomy and not to the fact that God calls real people with a real human nature to share in His divine life?

Please note – the above questions are not meant to call into question Anthropology or its current research. Since I am waiting to see if I can audit an Anthropology course this spring semester, it should be obvious that I do have great respect for this discipline.

Blessings,
granny

“The shepherds sing; and shall I silent be?”
from the poem “Christmas” by George Herbert

The “Twelve Days of Christmas” are meant to be celebrated.

 

[menofstjoseph]

Have you considered the idea that the only real people (as opposed to “just people”) existing today are ones whose nature unites the material and spiritual worlds?

Have you considered that “skeletal features” refer to a decomposing material anatomy and not to the fact that God calls real people with a real human nature to share in His divine life?

Please note – the above questions are not meant to call into question Anthropology or its current research. Since I am waiting to see if I can audit an Anthropology course this spring semester, it should be obvious that I do have great respect for this discipline.

Blessings,
granny

“The shepherds sing; and shall I silent be?”
from the poem “Christmas” by George Herbert

The “Twelve Days of Christmas” are meant to be celebrated.

Granny,
I am just trying to clarify your position on all of this…not trying to be combative in anyway.

I don’t believe anyone is holding that Neanderthals relationship to man is as part of the evolutionary chain. I don’t think any scientist believe they have anything to do with the evolution of man. Therefore not only should we NOT discuss evolution in this forum, but it is really not relative to this particular thread.So, if evolution is off the table as part of the discussion, what exactly is it about the man’s confirmed co-existence with Neanderthals bothers you so much?

Do you think Neanderthals are somehow a blight to Salvation History? I am not convinced either way. However, I do believe that Truth only comes from God. So if they were an intelligent species that co-existed with modern man and that is the Truth then that fact has to be part of God’s goodness and his plan.

Even if it was discovered they were building condos along the Red Sea back when we were just getting kicked out of the Garden, it wouldn’t shake my faith on iota.

 

[grannymh]

Granny,
I am just trying to clarify your position on all of this…not trying to be combative in anyway.

My position is that the Neanderthals do not have souls.

So, if evolution is off the table as part of the discussion, what exactly is it about the man’s confirmed co-existence with Neanderthals bothers you so much?

What really needs to be *philosophically addressed is the false implication that the Neanderthals are something which they are not. This is why I keep going back to the philosophical question – What is human nature?

Do you think Neanderthals are somehow a blight to Salvation History?

Excuse me. Salvation History concerns the soul of real human beings who have directly descended from the two, real, sole parents of the human species.

So if they were an intelligent species that co-existed with modern man and that is the Truth then that fact has to be part of God’s goodness and his plan.

All of God’s creatures are part of God’s goodness and His plan.

Intelligence, which can be considered as one of the forms of consciousness, exists both in humans and animals. The difference is that intelligence which exists in non-human creatures, is part of the natural animal state of being sentient or having consciousness. The intellect in a human includes the tools of reason, self reflection, logical evaluation, and analytical thought. The intellect and will are immaterial/spiritual. Neanderthals, though loved by many, do not have an immaterial/spiritual soul.

Blessings,
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

 

[Ridgerunner]

My position is that the Neanderthals do not have souls. ** Maybe they didn’t, but you’ll be mighty surprised if, when you get to heaven, you are greeted by some of them. Personally, I expect to. But I don’t know they will any more than you know they won’t.**

What really needs to be *philosophically addressed is the false implication that the Neanderthals are something which they are not. This is why I keep going back to the philosophical question – What is human nature? ** But Granny, you don’t know that Neanderthals were anything other than human beings, body and soul. You don’t know that their creation story is anything but our own. **

Excuse me. Salvation History concerns the soul of real human beings who have directly descended from the two, real, sole parents of the human species. **And how do you know Neanderthals weren’t? You don’t know, any more than I or anybody else does, whether Adam and Eve lived 10,000 years ago or a half million years ago or anything else. Nobody does. Nor was any historian there when God made Adam and Eve, either, and none of us know precisely how He did it or quite what their children looked like. **

All of God’s creatures are part of God’s goodness and His plan. No argument from me on this.

Intelligence, which can be considered as one of the forms of consciousness, exists both in humans and animals. The difference is that intelligence which exists in non-human creatures, is part of the natural animal state of being sentient or having consciousness. The intellect in a human includes the tools of reason, self reflection, logical evaluation, and analytical thought. The intellect and will are immaterial/spiritual. Neanderthals, though loved by many, do not have an immaterial/spiritual soul. **Again, you don’t know Neanderthals didn’t have souls any more than you know how fast an angel can count to ten million or how much one knows about nuclear physics. There is no particular reason to believe Neanderthals were anything but fully human, and fair reason to think they were. One thing is for sure…they certainly weren’t monkeys despite artists renderings that make them seem as close to apelike as the artist can make them look. And if some anthropologists are right, I am as likely as not to have some Neanderthal ancestry, given that I am of western European descent. I, for one, am not going to call them apes. **

Blessings,
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

 

[grannymh]

Dear Ridgerunner,

For some reason, I can’t get your post 52 to print as a quote, so I can respond to all the things I don’t know. Guess I also don’t know much about computers.

Some of the things you mentioned I really don’t know. I don’t know the exact date when the two, sole parents of humanity lived and I don’t know if they were really named Adam and Eve.

I don’t know any historian who was there when God made Adam and Eve. Nor do I know if their children had blue or brown eyes.

I don’t know how fast an angel can count to a million. And for the record, I don’t know how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. As for nuclear physics, I prefer knowing something about biology.

I do appreciate the list of the “don’t know” items. I shall do my best to learn some more things in 2011.

Blessings,
granny

The quest for knowledge is worthy of the adventures of the journey.

 

[LogisticsBranch]

Would you and others be so kind as to bring the particular evidence
to my nitty-gritty of materials and methods thread in the Back Fence Forum where it can be discussed in depth.

Oh, and would everyone be so kind to also go to :Forums > The Water Cooler > Back Fence and see my responses to the Topic: Re: “Msgr. Charles Pope: Catholics cannot accept mainstream Evolutionary Theory” where I spoke about Neanderthals on page 24 and also mentioned the following:

As an adult woman with a background in science, I have told you before that Adam and Eve is a religious statement not a scientific one. Basically what you are telling people in your message above is that you support “creation science” which I do not support. I’ve contributed quite a few messages on this topic. Again I repeat, I disagree with “Msgr. Charles Pope: Catholics cannot accept mainstream Evolutionary Theory”. You may wish to review my posts on this topic and two important posts (#147 and #148) that I made on “The Teaching of Evolution.”
Introduction
The National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) strongly supports the position that evolution is a major unifying concept in science and should be included in the K–12 science education frameworks and curricula. Furthermore, if evolution is not taught, students will not achieve the level of scientific literacy they need. This position is consistent with that of the National Academies, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), and many other scientific and educational organizations.

NSTA also recognizes that evolution has not been emphasized in science curricula in a manner commensurate to its importance because of official policies, intimidation of science teachers, the general public’s misunderstanding of evolutionary theory, and a century of controversy. In addition, teachers are being pressured to introduce creationism, “creation science,” and other nonscientific views, which are intended to weaken or eliminate the teaching of evolution.nsta.org/about/positions/evolution.aspx

I think in all fairness I have the right to share my stuff too. And, today I am the pround Mother of a 2 week old puppy that was given to me by a dear friend! She’s a springer spaniel. I named her Grace. She was the only one left alive. The mother and her siblings froze to death and was found by my friend. I’m feeding her using a bottle and keeping her warm. She is adorable! Any prayers for her would be appreciated. Thank you.

 

[grannymh]

I have actually posted a similar question quite some time ago, but wasn’t as direct as I should have been so I didn’t get a satisfactory answer. I thought I would reintroduce it.

Recent scientific data has been unearthed which strongly indicates, if not flat out proves, that modern man and Neanderthals shared the Earth at the same time - they coexisted.

Neanderthals were not our ancestor, but they did predate us. By most accounts these were not a lower-human species, but a separate, possibly equal, manner of man. By most accounts they were rational beings - capable of many of the same thoughts and emotions we have - though they may not have been the intellectual equals of modern man. However, I don’t think IQ score is the prime prerequisite for a soul ownership…which leads me to the point of this thread.

So, what does it mean if these two seperate human species coexisted during the time of the Genisis story.

To underscore the possible co-existence during Genesis (and therefore the possible cohabitation of the “Garden of Eden”), a NY Times article indicates these two species possibly even lived in close proximity to one another in what is not referred to as the Holy Land.“Recent excavations in Israel suggest that Neanderthals and modern humans might have overlapped there as early as 100,000 years ago. Their stone tools and bones have been found in caves only a few miles apart. Whether the two human groups were exact contemporaries in the region, or moved in and out without meeting, has not been determined. Nor is it possible to determine what their relations were with each other, if they did share the place at the same time.” LINK

So, for the sake of this discussion, ASSUME that it is a FACT, they lived side-by-side with us, would these rational beings been bystanders to the Fall of Man and its effects on Salvation history (just as a dog, chicken or porcupine would have been) or were they equals to us in their ability to receive God’s graces?

Did they have souls?

Questions for the OP.

What is it about the human person that you are really trying to find out?
What is your definition of soul when you are referring to Neanderthals?
Is this a serious thread?

 

[grannymh]

Questions for the OP.

What is it about the human person that you are really trying to find out?
What is your definition of soul when you are referring to Neanderthals?
Is this a serious thread?

My apology. It is not necessary for you to reply to my questions.

In my humble observation, Post 52 is the perfect example why evolution discussion is banned in this and other forums. I certainly agree with the ban. It is why I avoid a proper answer to this post.

Consequently, I close my participation here by providing a source for Catholic teaching. This particular citation and the Catechism in general will be helpful to those interested in learning about basic Catholicism.

Blessings,
granny

Basic Catholic teaching **regarding the origin of human nature **
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 is also very useful since the Catechism does expand on the basics and implications.
Do check out the Index.

When one enters 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:

»
»
»

 

[cthulhubryan]

No cthulhubryan. We know the answer today. It is simple. If they were human beings they descended from human souled Adam and Eve and had human souls. If they were monkeys (note how they are all ‘children’ fossils, that is, small monkey size.) they had monkey souls. It is as simple as that if you are a Catholic. There are no other options.

True,

I had not considered that. Thanks!

 

[Faith1960]

Oh, and would everyone be so kind to also go to :Forums > The Water Cooler > Back Fence and see my responses to the Topic: Re: “Msgr. Charles Pope: Catholics cannot accept mainstream Evolutionary Theory” where I spoke about Neanderthals on page 24 and also mentioned the following:



I think in all fairness I have the right to share my stuff too. And, today I am the pround Mother of a 2 week old puppy that was given to me by a dear friend! She’s a springer spaniel. I named her Grace. She was the only one left alive. The mother and her siblings froze to death and was found by my friend. I’m feeding her using a bottle and keeping her warm. She is adorable! Any prayers for her would be appreciated. Thank you.

Congrats on your new addition!

 

[edwest2]

Modern humans have Neanderthal DNA. Neanderthals were human, and had a soul.

news.discovery.com/human/neanderthal-human-interbreed-dna.html

Peace,
Ed

 

[grannymh]

Modern humans have Neanderthal DNA. Neanderthals were human, and had a soul.

news.discovery.com/human/neanderthal-human-interbreed-dna.html

Peace,
Ed

Ed,

Note:
These are philosophical, faith based questions which have nothing to do with the banned topic in this forum.

Who is the authority who declared that all Neanderthals descended from Adam and Eve? When was this declared? Citations, please.

Thank you in advance for your response.

Blessings,
granny

 

[edwest2]

Ed,

Note:
These are philosophical, faith based questions which have nothing to do with the banned topic in this forum.

Who is the authority who declared that all Neanderthals descended from Adam and Eve? When was this declared? Citations, please.

Thank you in advance for your response.

Blessings,
granny

You are incorrect on this point. The constant faith v science struggle occurs here on a regular basis. It is all based on a simple “show me proof” basis. You must recall Paul in the Bible telling the people: If Christ is not risen your faith is in vain. Ye are still in your sins.

See? If a real historical Jesus did not actually live, die and rise again in actual history then our faith is in vain. There is a definite, undeniable connection between the two.

If we have neanderthal DNA, it could only come from interbreeding.

Peace,
Ed

 

[grannymh]

You are incorrect on this point. The constant faith v science struggle occurs here on a regular basis. It is all based on a simple “show me proof” basis. You must recall Paul in the Bible telling the people: If Christ is not risen your faith is in vain. Ye are still in your sins.

See? If a real historical Jesus did not actually live, die and rise again in actual history then our faith is in vain. There is a definite, undeniable connection between the two.

If we have neanderthal DNA, it could only come from interbreeding.

Peace,
Ed

Thank you for your response.
If you, or anyone else, ever comes across an article on Neanderthals being human and having a soul per your post 59, please let me know (via PM) so I can read it. Or if you have a name of some authority, also let me know. Thank you.

Blessings
granny

“The shepherds sing; and shall I silent be?”
from the poem “Christmas” by George Herbert

The “Twelve Days of Christmas” are meant to be celebrated.