Genesis, Ed Feser and Dr. Bonnette

[Faith1960]

I’m trying to understand evolution and Genesis; as Catholics we’re not supposed to entertain the idea of polygenism. I thought I understood it, and now, after reading this article, below, by Dennis Bonnette, I’m confused again. I admit, much of this is waaaay over my head. I apologizeof this sounds confusing. I don’t understand science very well, so I hope my questions make sense!

drbonnette.com/Evolution_vs_Genesis.html

1. I was wondering if this article above, by Dr. Bonnette, particularly the last seven paragraphs discussing “The formation of the first woman from the man,” embryonic transformation, monogenism/polygenism, monozygotic twinning, XXY zygote forming monozygotic boy/girl twins, chromosomes etc. is a contradiction to Ed Feser’s explanation, below, of how we can reconcile evolution with Genesis?

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/monkey-in-your-soul.html

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/modern-biology-and-original-sin-part-i.html

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/modern-biology-and-original-sin-part-ii.html

(In short, Feser says that humans may have come from a group of “pre-humans,” rather than just one man and one woman, Adam and Eve, and that God infused a soul in two of them, making them the first human beings from a theological standpoint, which is different than the scientific definition of "humans.)

1. Is Bonnette grasping at straws, trying to explain “the formation of the first woman from man”?
2. For Mary to have given birth to her Divine Son, were the explanations Bonnette was giving about the Y and X chromosome necessary for Mary to have given birth to a Male, or could Mary have given birth to a male Savior without what Bonnette was saying about monozygotic twinning, and God foreordaining “an almost unique XXY zygote forming monozygotic boy/girl twins by one of the twins dropping the extra X chromosome and the other twin dropping the extra Y chromosome”?
3. For Mary to have given birth to her Divine Son, is it probable or even possible for it to be explained that by unseen divine intervention, a Y chromosome is changed into an X chromosome, with the twin becoming Eve? Or that an X chromosome was transformed into a Y chromosome for the Savior to be born?
4. Could God, and is it likely, that God infused a soul into both Adam and Eve, without Eve being created by Adams rib? I mean to say, could evolution have occurred and two of the human-like (prehumans?), a male and female, been given souls from where all true humans (people with souls) evolved without Bonnettes “more creative, evolutionary scenario” ?
5. Was it necessary for an X chromosome to have been transformed into a Y chromosome in order for a male savior to be born of Mary?

Like I said, this is way over my head.

 

[the_phoenix]

Hi there, Faith1960.

Actually, Dr. Bonnette is a member of CAF. Here is a link to his profile page:

forums.catholic-questions.org/member.php?u=33884

Maybe you could send him a private message.

Sadly, I haven’t read the specific writings you’re referring to … I really should go take a look at the links you provided. Especially because when my father was alive, he was friends with Dr. Dennis Bonnette, as well as being friends with James Likoudis.

~~ the phoenix

 

[Faith1960]

Hi there, Faith1960.

Actually, Dr. Bonnette is a member of CAF. Here is a link to his profile page:

forums.catholic-questions.org/member.php?u=33884

Maybe you could send him a private message.

Sadly, I haven’t read the specific writings you’re referring to … I really should go take a look at the links you provided. Especially because when my father was alive, he was friends with Dr. Dennis Bonnette, as well as being friends with James Likoudis.

~~ the phoenix

If you read the links I provided, I’d love to hear your opinions of my questions.

 

[the_phoenix]

I’m part way reading through the links and to give detailed answers can easily require much mulling over. Meanwhile, having quickly read through Dr. Bonnette’s, here are my spur-of-the-moment gut opinions (which opinions actually have not changed since before reading the article).

God as Creator normally works according to the laws of nature, but can also intervene on a supernatural level.

The same God who can turn water into wine, cleanse lepers, cause the blind to see, the deaf to hear, mutes to speak, raise the dead … can certainly change an X chromosome to a Y chromosome, or a Y chromosome to an X chromosome.

My father, I’m sure from hanging around friends like Dr. Bonnette, had an attitude of always being open to learning the truth, because the truth always leads to God. And that attitude has been passed along to me in that when it comes to topics like how long ago was the world created, what about the Big Bang theory, and what about evolution … I’m fine with believing either that creation could have all happened just as literally as it says in the Bible (supernaturally) … or that God chose to create the world and human beings through common scientific principles (naturally) with of course the supernatural addition of the soul. (I hope I haven’t left anything out.)

One question that comes to me is, how accurate is the theory of evolution? Are we understanding it correctly?

That said, (and forgive my repetition in different words), without yet having given Ed Feser the close reading that he deserves, I can accept Dr. Bonnette’s writings. And personally believe that however God chose to create Adam and Eve, the important thing is that He did create them, and that He did so out of love.

Please realize that these are just my quick opinions off the top of my head.

And one thing about tracing us all back to Adam and Eve. I do believe that’s possible for the personal reason that towards the end of his life, my father became deeply involved in genealogy, and actually traced back our own family tree all the way back to Adam. A bold claim that I would rather not back up in public because in order to do so, everyone here on the public forum would end up finding out my real last name. So yes, this paragraph contains what you might call anecdotal evidence.

In any case, nice meeting you!

And I’ll have to take a better look at the links …



~~ the phoenix

 

[Faith1960]

I’m part way reading through the links and to give detailed answers can easily require much mulling over. Meanwhile, having quickly read through Dr. Bonnette’s, here are my spur-of-the-moment gut opinions (which opinions actually have not changed since before reading the article).

God as Creator normally works according to the laws of nature, but can also intervene on a supernatural level.

The same God who can turn water into wine, cleanse lepers, cause the blind to see, the deaf to hear, mutes to speak, raise the dead … can certainly change an X chromosome to a Y chromosome, or a Y chromosome to an X chromosome.

My father, I’m sure from hanging around friends like Dr. Bonnette, had an attitude of always being open to learning the truth, because the truth always leads to God. And that attitude has been passed along to me in that when it comes to topics like how long ago was the world created, what about the Big Bang theory, and what about evolution … I’m fine with believing either that creation could have all happened just as literally as it says in the Bible (supernaturally) … or that God chose to create the world and human beings through common scientific principles (naturally) with of course the supernatural addition of the soul. (I hope I haven’t left anything out.)

One question that comes to me is, how accurate is the theory of evolution? Are we understanding it correctly?

That said, (and forgive my repetition in different words), without yet having given Ed Feser the close reading that he deserves, I can accept Dr. Bonnette’s writings. And personally believe that however God chose to create Adam and Eve, the important thing is that He did create them, and that He did so out of love.

Please realize that these are just my quick opinions off the top of my head.

And one thing about tracing us all back to Adam and Eve. I do believe that’s possible for the personal reason that towards the end of his life, my father became deeply involved in genealogy, and actually traced back our own family tree all the way back to Adam. A bold claim that I would rather not back up in public because in order to do so, everyone here on the public forum would end up finding out my real last name. So yes, this paragraph contains what you might call anecdotal evidence.

In any case, nice meeting you!

And I’ll have to take a better look at the links …



~~ the phoenix

Nice meeting you, too. I’ve “seen” you on CAF before but I’m not sure if we’ve ever paricipated on the same threads or not.

 

[triumphguy]

I’m trying to understand evolution and Genesis; as Catholics we’re not supposed to entertain the idea of polygenism. I thought I understood it, and now, after reading this article, below, by Dennis Bonnette, I’m confused again. I admit, much of this is waaaay over my head. I apologizeof this sounds confusing. I don’t understand science very well, so I hope my questions make sense!

drbonnette.com/Evolution_vs_Genesis.html

1. I was wondering if this article above, by Dr. Bonnette, particularly the last seven paragraphs discussing “The formation of the first woman from the man,” embryonic transformation, monogenism/polygenism, monozygotic twinning, XXY zygote forming monozygotic boy/girl twins, chromosomes etc. is a contradiction to Ed Feser’s explanation, below, of how we can reconcile evolution with Genesis?

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/monkey-in-your-soul.html

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/modern-biology-and-original-sin-part-i.html

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/modern-biology-and-original-sin-part-ii.html

(In short, Feser says that humans may have come from a group of “pre-humans,” rather than just one man and one woman, Adam and Eve, and that God infused a soul in two of them, making them the first human beings from a theological standpoint, which is different than the scientific definition of "humans.)

1. Is Bonnette grasping at straws, trying to explain “the formation of the first woman from man”?
2. For Mary to have given birth to her Divine Son, were the explanations Bonnette was giving about the Y and X chromosome necessary for Mary to have given birth to a Male, or could Mary have given birth to a male Savior without what Bonnette was saying about monozygotic twinning, and God foreordaining “an almost unique XXY zygote forming monozygotic boy/girl twins by one of the twins dropping the extra X chromosome and the other twin dropping the extra Y chromosome”?
3. For Mary to have given birth to her Divine Son, is it probable or even possible for it to be explained that by unseen divine intervention, a Y chromosome is changed into an X chromosome, with the twin becoming Eve? Or that an X chromosome was transformed into a Y chromosome for the Savior to be born?
4. Could God, and is it likely, that God infused a soul into both Adam and Eve, without Eve being created by Adams rib? I mean to say, could evolution have occurred and two of the human-like (prehumans?), a male and female, been given souls from where all true humans (people with souls) evolved without Bonnettes “more creative, evolutionary scenario” ?
5. Was it necessary for an X chromosome to have been transformed into a Y chromosome in order for a male savior to be born of Mary?

Like I said, this is way over my head.

Read Pope Emeritus Benedict’s book.

"In the Beginning…" A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

 

[Faith1960]

Read Pope Emeritus Benedict’s book.

"In the Beginning…" A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

Which one? I have one of his books but hate to say this, it was way over my head, too.

 

[Faith1960]

Which one? I have one of his books but hate to say this, it was way over my head, too.

Ooooops. Sorry, I thought that was your tag line, not the name of the book. I looked it up on Amazon.com and can’t find it. Could you please give me the brief Readers Digest version of what he wrote?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I’m trying to understand evolution and Genesis; as Catholics we’re not supposed to entertain the idea of polygenism. I thought I understood it, and now, after reading this article, below, by Dennis Bonnette, I’m confused again. I admit, much of this is waaaay over my head. I apologizeof this sounds confusing. I don’t understand science very well, so I hope my questions make sense!

drbonnette.com/Evolution_vs_Genesis.html

1. I was wondering if this article above, by Dr. Bonnette, particularly the last seven paragraphs discussing “The formation of the first woman from the man,” embryonic transformation, monogenism/polygenism, monozygotic twinning, XXY zygote forming monozygotic boy/girl twins, chromosomes etc. is a contradiction to Ed Feser’s explanation, below, of how we can reconcile evolution with Genesis?

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/monkey-in-your-soul.html

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/modern-biology-and-original-sin-part-i.html

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/09/modern-biology-and-original-sin-part-ii.html

(In short, Feser says that humans may have come from a group of “pre-humans,” rather than just one man and one woman, Adam and Eve, and that God infused a soul in two of them, making them the first human beings from a theological standpoint, which is different than the scientific definition of "humans.)

1. Is Bonnette grasping at straws, trying to explain “the formation of the first woman from man”?
2. For Mary to have given birth to her Divine Son, were the explanations Bonnette was giving about the Y and X chromosome necessary for Mary to have given birth to a Male, or could Mary have given birth to a male Savior without what Bonnette was saying about monozygotic twinning, and God foreordaining “an almost unique XXY zygote forming monozygotic boy/girl twins by one of the twins dropping the extra X chromosome and the other twin dropping the extra Y chromosome”?
3. For Mary to have given birth to her Divine Son, is it probable or even possible for it to be explained that by unseen divine intervention, a Y chromosome is changed into an X chromosome, with the twin becoming Eve? Or that an X chromosome was transformed into a Y chromosome for the Savior to be born?
4. Could God, and is it likely, that God infused a soul into both Adam and Eve, without Eve being created by Adams rib? I mean to say, could evolution have occurred and two of the human-like (prehumans?), a male and female, been given souls from where all true humans (people with souls) evolved without Bonnettes “more creative, evolutionary scenario” ?
5. Was it necessary for an X chromosome to have been transformed into a Y chromosome in order for a male savior to be born of Mary?

Like I said, this is way over my head.

I don’t believe Feser said what you said. Can you give me a reference?
Paur Vl said the first man can not have been the son of an animal as a result of generation as commonly understood. And that the first woman must have been derived in some manner from the first man. Also he said that the entire human race had to have come from this first couple. So don’t pay any attention to these types of studies unless you are expert enough to understand it.

Linus2nd

 

[Faith1960]

I don’t believe Feser said what you said. Can you give me a reference?
Paur Vl said the first man can not have been the son of an animal as a result of generation as commonly understood. And that the first woman must have been derived in some manner from the first man. Also he said that the entire human race had to have come from this first couple. So don’t pay any attention to these types of studies unless you are expert enough to understand it.

Linus2nd

You’ll have to find Feser’s thoughts by going through the links I provided.

 

[Faith1960]

I don’t believe Feser said what you said. Can you give me a reference?
Paur Vl said the first man can not have been the son of an animal as a result of generation as commonly understood. And that the first woman must have been derived in some manner from the first man. Also he said that the entire human race had to have come from this first couple. So don’t pay any attention to these types of studies unless you are expert enough to understand it.

Linus2nd

I’m not sure who you meant with the typo PaurVI but theCC allows us to believe that thing we’re not supposed to talk about here.

 

[Faith1960]

I just want everyone to know ahead of time that if these threads begin to upset me or have a negative impact on my faith, I may bow out of the conversation.
My spiritual director advised me to stay off CAF.
I post here to learn and enhance my faith through learning but sometimes reading various posts do just the opposite.

 

[Aloysium]

I’m not sure who you meant with the typo PaurVI but theCC allows us to believe that thing we’re not supposed to talk about here.

I am interested in what you mean. Please use the quote from the CC.

 

[Faith1960]

I am interested in what you mean. Please use the quote from the CC.

I hope I don’t get in trouble for posting this, but here’s one source. There are more but I really don’t feel like digging though everything to find them.

catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution

 

[Aloysium]

It is usually a good idea to actually quote things. No one likes “digging though everything to find them”; I most certainly do not.

The CC is quite clear about the creation of Adam and Eve:
371 God created man and woman together and willed each for the other. the Word of God gives us to understand this through various features of the sacred text. "It is not good that the man should be alone. I will make him a helper fit for him."242 None of the animals can be man’s partner.243 The woman God “fashions” from the man’s rib and brings to him elicits on the man’s part a cry of wonder, an exclamation of love and communion: "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."244 Man discovers woman as another “I”, sharing the same humanity.

May God guide you in your search for truth.

 

[Faith1960]

It is usually a good idea to actually quote things. No one likes “digging though everything to find them”; I most certainly do not.

The CC is quite clear about the creation of Adam and Eve:
371 God created man and woman together and willed each for the other. the Word of God gives us to understand this through various features of the sacred text. "It is not good that the man should be alone. I will make him a helper fit for him."242 None of the animals can be man’s partner.243 The woman God “fashions” from the man’s rib and brings to him elicits on the man’s part a cry of wonder, an exclamation of love and communion: "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."244 Man discovers woman as another “I”, sharing the same humanity.

May God guide you in your search for truth.

That’s why I provided the link I provided. There’s tons of stuff to be read but I’m not the one who’s skeptical and wanting to read it.

 

[asd72]

Which one? I have one of his books but hate to say this, it was way over my head, too.

I have just read it, because I’m having the same problem with the doctrine of original sin, and it did not address it as far as I was concerned.

 

[grannymh]

I have just read it, because I’m having the same problem with the doctrine of original sin, and it did not address it as far as I was concerned.

If you are referring to the Genesis description of Original Sin, page 71, in the fourth homily, may I gently point out that this is a normal, standard homily, in which individual aspects of doctrine are chosen for the particular occasion. Often, homilies are meant to bring to mind for our meditation, what one has already learned in Catholic education.

For example. On page 72, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI comments that "Theology refers to this state of affairs by the certainly misleading and imprecise term “original sin.” followed by the question “What does this mean?” Having a sound Catholic education, we recognize that original sin really describes our state at birth which is without Sanctifying Grace. For us, original sin is the deprivation of Adam’s original holiness and justice. We did not personally “commit” this state. We contracted this state via transmission by propagation. And yes, the nitty-gritty of it is still a mystery of God’s Divine Revelation.

Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin so that God’s loving life, Sanctifying Grace is within us. Because of our spiritual soul, we can share in God’s life through knowledge and love. We need to keep in mind that we are in the image of God because our own human nature unites both the material world and the spiritual world.

Genesis 1: 26-28 is key to the many meanings of our own life. The words “make man” and “created man” signify our status in relationship to God. Adam did not come into existence as equal to God or as having equal powers with God. There can be only one True God.

Adam did not exist until he was created by the Creator. Rather than having the same status as God, Adam as the created creature was dependent on God. The amazing truth is that Adam’s dependence on God was far different from all other creatures. Adam could freely live in an intimate relationship with his Creator. Because of his freedom to seek God or to seek his own pleasure, the only way that Adam could remain in a friendship relationship with God was to freely live in submission to God via obedience to God’s commands.

Tempted by Satan, Adam preferred his own desire to have the power of a god. (Genesis 3:5) He abandoned the requirements of his creaturely status and chose disobedience which was against his own good. With this act, he and Eve lost their original state of holiness. Their state was now one of deprivation of the original holiness that had been the basis for their relationship with God.

As one can easily see by the length of the above, the Catholic education context for the term “original sin” entails extensive information. By choosing another aspect of Original Sin, the Pope did not deny the first meaning of Original Sin.

What is important for all of us to remember is that learning about Original Sin is not an either-or situation. There are many aspects of Original Sin as taught by Catholicism. For example. With the Original Sin, Satan acquired “a certain domination over man” even though we remain free. Death had been brought into the human world. (Refer to Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraphs 399-409)

Jesus Christ conquered death.

In his fourth homily, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI chose still another aspect of Original Sin: the effects of the eventual human sins on the human community of Adam’s descendants. I cannot speak for others, but for me, this part of the homily did not start to become clear until a poster referred to Genesis 1:28 in another thread,
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10944350&postcount=105
This post talks about St. Thomas Aquinas who taught that the human person can be considered in two ways: first, as an individual per se (hence his definition of the person as being “an individual substance of a rational nature”) and in a secondary way as a member of a community. It is not possible to understand the human person without understanding the human being as being oriented towards other in community.

“Be fertile and multiply” means exactly what it says.

Before Adam’s disastrous choice, there was harmony starting with the inner harmony of the human person, the harmony between man and woman, and finally the harmony between the first couple and all creation. (CCC 376) The loss of this harmony coupled with the loss of “mastery of self” (explained in 377 and 405) wounded the human nature which we receive.

In our current culture of living for ourself and our own needs, the Pope reminds us that humanity is a united community from the moment that God blessed Adam and Eve. (Genesis 1:28)

For the complete context on the truths found in the first three chapters of Genesis, please refer to CCC 355-421.

 

[Faith1960]

Okay, for days, now, I’ve been reading and reading online about this topic, and am waiting for four books on this to be delivered, but I can’t find anything from a scientific viewpoint that supports the Biblical words in Genesis and the requirement that we believe in monogenism, not polygenism.

Everything I’ve read says either Adam and Eve were part of a group of people or that they never existed at all; and that there never was a human bottleneck of just two people.

I went to Adoration today and prayed about this, but so far, I’m still upset and confused.

I hope someone here can help me. Tomorrow I’m going to one of my Bible studies (I’m in two), and plan to discuss this with our teacher, who is a theologean who used to teach at the
Seminary.

 

[Della]

Okay, for days, now, I’ve been reading and reading online about this topic, and am waiting for four books on this to be delivered, but I can’t find anything from a scientific viewpoint that supports the Biblical words in Genesis and the requirement that we believe in monogenism, not polygenism.

Everything I’ve read says either Adam and Eve were part of a group of people or that they never existed at all; and that there never was a human bottleneck of just two people.

I went to Adoration today and prayed about this, but so far, I’m still upset and confused.

I hope someone here can help me. Tomorrow I’m going to one of my Bible studies (I’m in two), and plan to discuss this with our teacher, who is a theologean who used to teach at the
Seminary.

It seems to me that you are needlessly driving yourself crazy over this issue.

It also seems to me that you want scientific answers to theological questions. Science cannot prove the origins of mankind. Science is the testing of phenomena and data, not speculations about things it cannot test. This is why so much of what passes for scientific knowledge is not truly science, but speculation based on personal philosophies of those making the speculations. This is why you are getting so many answers to the same question by reading so-called scientific books on the topic. Truly, no scientist knows who Adam and Eve were nor how they came to be. So, you are not going to find the answer there.

The reason the Church tells us Adam and Eve were actual people and our only original parents is because that is what God revealed to us through Scripture and in the revelation of Christ. This is not mere speculation, but truth–revealed truth.

Exactly how God created us is not really important. We can see for ourselves that what Scripture tells us about man’s nature is true by simply looking at humanity. It doesn’t take a degree in science to show that we are born unable to always do what is right when even when we know right from wrong. The question then becomes: why not? The answer God gave us? Because our parents sinned by disobeying God.

As to how Jesus became man, it is a mystery. We don’t know. We only know that the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary and she conceived Jesus in her womb. What material God used of Mary’s is a moot point, surely. The important thing is he was born, he lived, he preached and taught, he founded his Church, he died on the cross, rose on the third day and ascended into heaven. What more do we need to know to believe and receive the peace and joy only God can give?

I’d also caution you that a Bible study may not be the best place to bring up such issues. If you are studying a particular book/topic, it would disrupt that discussion. Better to ask that the topic be raised at some future date to give everyone else, even the instructor, time to think about it, pray about it, and have some answers/thoughts to share at another time. Yes?

And finally, if your spiritual director advised you not to read more books on the topic, why are you doing it? What do you hope to gain from it? There are matters that are over all our heads, no matter how learned we might be. Each of us has intellectual limits and spiritual limits, as well. There is a time and a place for everything we need to understand. It may be that this topic, at the present time, is more than you can deal with. There’s no shame in that. Instead of delving into things too deep for you, and getting yourself confused and frustrated, wait until you have grown in faith and spiritual understanding before tackling this topic.