Genetics and Neanderthals

  • Thread starter Thread starter Faith1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Faith1960

Guest
I know we’ve discussed this in previous threads, which veered off in all kinds of directions, but,…I found this brief article in my email this afternoon, coming from Beliefnet, and it’s bugging me. Instead of going off in all directions as most threads tend to do, I’m hoping for a succint answer from a Catholic who knows his/her stuff. Does this contradict the Biblical and Catholic teaching that we’re literally desended from Adam and Eve?

blog.beliefnet.com/news/?p=4462&source=NEWSLETTER&nlsource=11&ppc=&utm_campaign=Bible&utm_source=NL&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_term=aol.com
 
Faith1960 said:
I know we’ve discussed this in previous threads, which veered off in all kinds of directions, but,…I found this brief article in my email this afternoon, coming from Beliefnet, and it’s bugging me. Instead of going off in all directions as most threads tend to do, I’m hoping for a succint answer from a Catholic who knows his/her stuff. Does this contradict the Biblical and Catholic teaching that we’re literally desended from Adam and Eve?

blog.beliefnet.com/news/?p=4462&source=NEWSLETTER&nlsource=11&ppc=&utm_campaign=Bible&utm_source=NL&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_term=aol.com
Click to expand...
Depends. If you think that Adam and Eve were chimp like. Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals are believed to be descended from the same chimp like ancestor. If the claim is that Adam and Eve were Homo Sapien, and that all mankind is descended from, then this new evidence (which is not the first along this line) would contradict that belief.
 
Faith1960 said:
I know we’ve discussed this in previous threads, which veered off in all kinds of directions, but,…I found this brief article in my email this afternoon, coming from Beliefnet, and it’s bugging me. Instead of going off in all directions as most threads tend to do, I’m hoping for a succint answer from a Catholic who knows his/her stuff. Does this contradict the Biblical and Catholic teaching that we’re literally desended from Adam and Eve?

blog.beliefnet.com/news/?p=4462&source=NEWSLETTER&nlsource=11&ppc=&utm_campaign=Bible&utm_source=NL&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_term=aol.com
Click to expand...
Adam and Eve did not exist. Their story is a midrash, a tale with doctrine.
 
Pfaffenhoffen said:
Adam and Eve did not exist. Their story is a midrash, a tale with doctrine.
Click to expand...
Catholic Dogmas:


  1. *] The first man was created by God. (De fide.)
    *] The whole human race stems from one single human pair. (Sent. certa.)
    *] Man consists of two essential parts–a material body and a spiritual soul. (De fide.)
    *] The rational soul is per se the essential form of the body. (De fide.)
    *] Every human being possesses an individual soul. (De fide.)
    *] Every individual soul was immediately created out of nothing by God. (Sent. Certa.)
    *] A creature has the capacity to receive supernatural gifts. (Sent. communis.)
    *] The Supernatural presupposes Nature. (Sent communis.)
    *] God has conferred on man a supernatural Destiny. (De fide.)
    *] Our first parents, before the Fall, were endowed with sanctifying grace. (De fide.)
    *] The donum rectitudinis or integritatis in the narrower sense, i.e., the freedom from irregular desire. (Sent. fidei proxima.)
    *] The donum immortalitatis, i.e.,bodily immortality. (De fide.)
    *] The donum impassibilitatis, i.e., the freedom from suffering. (Sent. communis.)
    *] The donum scientiae, i.e., a knowledge of natural and supernatural truths infused by God. (Sent. communis.)
    *] Adam received sanctifying grace not merely for himself, but for all his posterity. (Sent. certa.)
    *] Our first parents in paradise sinned grievously through transgression of the Divine probationary commandment. (De fide.)
    *] Through the sin our first parents lost sanctifying grace and provoked the anger and the indignation of God. (De fide.)
    *] Our first parents became subject to death and to the dominion of the Devil. (De fide.) D788.
    *] Adam’s sin is transmitted to his posterity, not by imitation, but by descent. (De fide.)
    *] Original Sin consists in the deprivation of grace caused by the free act of sin committed by the head of the race. (Sent. communis.)
    *] Original sin is transmitted by natural generation. (De fide.)
    *] In the state of original sin man is deprived of sanctifying grace and all that this implies, as well as of the preternatural gifts of integrity. (De fide in regard to Sanctifying Grace and the Donum Immortalitatus. D788 et seq.)
    *] Souls who depart this life in the state of original sin are excluded from the Beatific Vision of God. (De fide.)
 
Faith1960 said:
I know we’ve discussed this in previous threads, which veered off in all kinds of directions, but,…I found this brief article in my email this afternoon, coming from Beliefnet, and it’s bugging me. Instead of going off in all directions as most threads tend to do, I’m hoping for a succint answer from a Catholic who knows his/her stuff. Does this contradict the Biblical and Catholic teaching that we’re literally desended from Adam and Eve?

blog.beliefnet.com/news/?p=4462&source=NEWSLETTER&nlsource=11&ppc=&utm_campaign=Bible&utm_source=NL&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_term=aol.com
Click to expand...
This is an example of incomplete information regarding recent research in anthropology genetics. Genetic flow among ancient non-human beings is only an interesting side issue when it comes to the reality of true human descendants from two, sole, real human parents with the Biblical names of Adam and Eve.
 
Could Adam and Eve have been neanderthals? Sometimes neanderthals are said to be their own species (homo neanderthalensis) and sometimes they are said to be a subspecies of human (homo sapiens neanderthalensis). If we go with the assumption that neanderthals are a subspecies of humans and not a different species, doesn’t that mean Adam and Eve could’ve been homo sapiens neanderthalensis, not homo sapiens sapiens…

If so, that would not contradict the teaching of Adam and Eve I don’t think.

~Just musing~
 
buffalo said:
Catholic Dogmas:


  1. *]The first man was created by God. (De fide.)
    *]The whole human race stems from one single human pair. (Sent. certa.)
    *]Man consists of two essential parts–a material body and a spiritual soul. (De fide.)
    *]The rational soul is per se the essential form of the body. (De fide.)
    *]Every human being possesses an individual soul. (De fide.)
    *]Every individual soul was immediately created out of nothing by God. (Sent. Certa.)
    *]A creature has the capacity to receive supernatural gifts. (Sent. communis.)
    *]The Supernatural presupposes Nature. (Sent communis.)
    *]God has conferred on man a supernatural Destiny. (De fide.)
    *]Our first parents, before the Fall, were endowed with sanctifying grace. (De fide.)
    *]The donum rectitudinis or integritatis in the narrower sense, i.e., the freedom from irregular desire. (Sent. fidei proxima.)
    *]The donum immortalitatis, i.e.,bodily immortality. (De fide.)
    *]The donum impassibilitatis, i.e., the freedom from suffering. (Sent. communis.)
    *]The donum scientiae, i.e., a knowledge of natural and supernatural truths infused by God. (Sent. communis.)
    *]Adam received sanctifying grace not merely for himself, but for all his posterity. (Sent. certa.)
    *]Our first parents in paradise sinned grievously through transgression of the Divine probationary commandment. (De fide.)
    *]Through the sin our first parents lost sanctifying grace and provoked the anger and the indignation of God. (De fide.)
    *]Our first parents became subject to death and to the dominion of the Devil. (De fide.) D788.
    *]Adam’s sin is transmitted to his posterity, not by imitation, but by descent. (De fide.)
    *]Original Sin consists in the deprivation of grace caused by the free act of sin committed by the head of the race. (Sent. communis.)
    *]Original sin is transmitted by natural generation. (De fide.)
    *]In the state of original sin man is deprived of sanctifying grace and all that this implies, as well as of the preternatural gifts of integrity. (De fide in regard to Sanctifying Grace and the Donum Immortalitatus. D788 et seq.)
    *]Souls who depart this life in the state of original sin are excluded from the Beatific Vision of God. (De fide.)
Click to expand...

  1. And what does “Sent. certa.” mean? I don’t see it mentioned here.
 
samiam1611 said:
Could Adam and Eve have been neanderthals? Sometimes neanderthals are said to be their own species (homo neanderthalensis) and sometimes they are said to be a subspecies of human (homo sapiens neanderthalensis). If we go with the assumption that neanderthals are a subspecies of humans and not a different species, doesn’t that mean Adam and Eve could’ve been homo sapiens neanderthalensis, not homo sapiens sapiens…

If so, that would not contradict the teaching of Adam and Eve I don’t think.

~Just musing~
Click to expand...
Adam and Eve founded a distinct species whose nature is totally different from the nature of any other species regardless of how that species is named.

Catholicism teaches that human nature, in itself, uniquely unites both the material world and the spiritual world. This means that there was never any other species or subspecies *both *before and after Adam and Eve which could also be called human in its true meaning. In other words, the
God-created spiritual soul belongs to true human descendants from the first two true human beings.

It needs to be remembered that reports about ancient beings are only reporting details about material anatomies. This is because the domain of anthropology (also known as paleoanthropology) research resides in the material/physical world.

The Catholic teaching of two founders of our human nature stands as is.
 
Mudgely said:
Depends. If you think that Adam and Eve were chimp like. Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals are believed to be descended from the same chimp like ancestor. If the claim is that Adam and Eve were Homo Sapien, and that all mankind is descended from, then this new evidence (which is not the first along this line) would contradict that belief.
Click to expand...
buffalo said:
Neandertals were isolated humans.
Click to expand...
I have read that some taxonomists consider neanderthals to be a subspecies of homo sapiens (homo sapiens neanderthalensis) while others consider them their own species (homo neanderthalensis). If the former is correct, then Adam and Eve could have been neanderthals, couldn’t they?

~just musing~
 
samiam1611 said:
I have read that some taxonomists consider neanderthals to be a subspecies of homo sapiens (homo sapiens neanderthalensis) while others consider them their own species (homo neanderthalensis). If the former is correct, then Adam and Eve could have been neanderthals, couldn’t they?

~just musing~
Click to expand...
Adam and Eve are a distinct species as they are true humans like you and me.

It could be speculated that some of the first parent’s descendants lived in areas inhabited by ancient non-humans (also referred to as subhumans by some writers).
 
grannymh said:
This is an example of incomplete information regarding recent research in anthropology genetics. Genetic flow among ancient non-human beings is only an interesting side issue when it comes to the reality of true human descendants from two, sole, real human parents with the Biblical names of Adam and Eve.
Click to expand...
What is the complete information which unites anthropology genetics and the doctrine of Adam and Eve?
 
Faith1960 said:
What is the complete information which unites anthropology genetics and the doctrine of Adam and Eve?
Click to expand...
Modern anthropology genetics can work in the area of determining an individual’s ancestors and, in many cases, what part of the world these ancestors originally lived. The assumption here is that both the person and her or his ancestors are human.

The doctrine of Adam and Eve specifically defines human nature starting with today’s individuals and going back through the ages to the first human parents. On the other hand, paleoanthropology, truly fascinating as it is, does not deal with the spiritual principle in humanity. While it can contribute knowledge to the primeval event of Adam and Eve, technically anthropology, a true science, cannot be united with the monogenism of human nature’s beginning. About as far as it could go, anthropolgy might speculate that the posibility exists that two individual humans founded the human species. However, that speculation is unlikely since anthropology is on a different playing field.
 
grannymh said:
Modern anthropology genetics can work in the area of determining an individual’s ancestors and, in many cases, what part of the world these ancestors originally lived. The assumption here is that both the person and her or his ancestors are human.

The doctrine of Adam and Eve specifically defines human nature starting with today’s individuals and going back through the ages to the first human parents. On the other hand, paleoanthropology, truly fascinating as it is, does not deal with the spiritual principle in humanity. While it can contribute knowledge to the primeval event of Adam and Eve, technically anthropology, a true science, cannot be united with the monogenism of human nature’s beginning.
Click to expand...
Because?
 
Ahimsa said:
And what does “Sent. certa.” mean? I don’t see it mentioned here.
Click to expand...
Let’s look at some of the others that are Sent. Certa.


  1. *] Our natural knowledge of God in this world is not as immediate, intuitive cognition, but a mediate, abstractive knowledge, because it is attained through the knowledge of creatures. (Sent. certa.)
    *] Our knowledge of God here below is not proper (cognitio propia) but analogical (cognitio analoga or analogica). (Sent. certa.)
    *] The Son proceeds from the Intellect of the Father by way of Generation. (Sent. certa.)
    *] The Holy Ghost proceeds from the will or from the mutual love of the Father and of the Son. (Sent. certa.)
    *]The Father sends the Son: the Father and the Son send the Holy Ghost. (Sent. certa.)
    *]God was free to create this world or any other. (Sent. Certa.)
    *]God set a supernatural final end for the angels, the immediate vision of God, and endowed them with sanctifying grace in order that they might achieve this end. (Sent. Certa.)
    *]The primary task of the good angels is the glorification and the service of God. (Sent. certa.)
    *]Every one of the faithful has his own special guardian angel from baptism. (Sent. certa.)
    *]The Hypostatic Union was never interrupted. (Sent. certa.)
    *]The Blood in the Living Body of Jesus Christ is an integral constituent part of human nature, immediately, not merely mediately, united with the Person of the Divine Logos. (Sent. certa.)
    *]Just as Latria is due to the whole Human nature of Christ, so is it due to the individual parts of His nature. (Sent. Certa.)
    *] Christ’s soul possessed the immediate vision of God from the first moment of its existence. (Sent. certa.)
    *] Christ’s human knowledge was free from positive ignorance and from error. (Sent. certa.)
    *]By reason of His endowment with the fullness of created habitual grace, Christ’s soul is also accidentally holy. (Sent. certa.)
    *]Christ’s humanity, as instrument of the Logos, posesses the power of producing supernatural effects. (Sent. certa.)
    *]Christ’s soul was subject to sensual emotions. (Sent. certa.)
    *]God was not compelled to redeem mankind by either an internal or an external compulsion. (Sent. certa.)
    *]The Church is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ. (Sent. certa.)
    *]Not only those members who are holy but the sinners also belong to the Church. (Sent. certa.)
    *] Christ instituted all the Sacraments immediately and personally. (Sent. certa.)
    *] Christ fixed the substance of the Sacraments. The Church has no power to alter them. (Sent. certa.)
    *]The primary minister of the Sacraments is the God-Man Jesus Christ. (Sent. certa.)
    *] The Sacramental Accidents retain their physical reality after the change of the substance. (Sent. certa.)
    *] The Sacramental Accidents continue without a subject in which to inhere. (Sent. certa.)

    there are more…
 
samiam1611 said:
I have read that some taxonomists consider neanderthals to be a subspecies of homo sapiens (homo sapiens neanderthalensis) while others consider them their own species (homo neanderthalensis). If the former is correct, then Adam and Eve could have been neanderthals, couldn’t they?

~just musing~
Click to expand...
Neandertal brain cranium is larger. We have 5% Neandertal in all of us. Maybe Adam and Eve were a better human now classed as Neandertal. :hmmm:
 
Faith1960 said:
Because?
Click to expand...
I just edited post 12 with this–

About as far as it could go, anthropology might speculate that the possibility exists that two individual humans founded the human species. However, that speculation is unlikely since anthropology is on a different playing field.

Personally, out of respect for the good accomplished by the natural sciences, I prefer not to demand of them what does not belong in the scienitfic domain. In other words, the spiritual principle in human nature is not part of the sciences’ material/physical world. Anthropology does find what seems to be evidence of the spiritual aspects of human life, such as the beautiful cave paintings. But artistic intelligence is only part of human nature which is called by God to share in His life through knowledge and love. Anthropology cannot put the “image of God” under the proverbial microscope.
 
grannymh said:
I just edited post 12 with this–

About as far as it could go, anthropology might speculate that the possibility exists that two individual humans founded the human species. However, that speculation is unlikely since anthropology is on a different playing field.

Personally, out of respect for the good accomplished by the natural sciences, I prefer not to demand of them what does not belong in the scienitfic domain. In other words, the spiritual principle in human nature is not part of the sciences’ material/physical world. Anthropology does find what seems to be evidence of the spiritual aspects of human life, such as the beautiful cave paintings. But artistic intelligence is only part of human nature which is called by God to share in His life through knowledge and love. Anthropology cannot put the “image of God” under the proverbial microscope.
Click to expand...
In plain and simple English, please…
 
buffalo said:
Neandertal brain cranium is larger. We have 5% Neandertal in all of us.
Click to expand...
Well, all of us except those descended from Africa. So, how can we be part Neanderthal if we descended from two human homos sapiens?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top