Many Adams and Eves?

  • Thread starter Thread starter awatkins69
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sulkow82 - the basic problem with polygenism (IMHO) is that if there were multiple genetic parents (even if only 2 of them had real souls), then there would have been a time when “real humans” would be walking around right next to “not-real humans” (i.e. don’t have real souls). In fact, there could be those folks walking around today, right next to you and me. Descendants of the non Adam-Eve couple.
Yes, there would have been such a time. However, this would have been very short lived in the “grand scheme of things.” When you go as far back as the establishment of humanity, genetically even if the community I suggested was populated at a thousand (which would be EXTREMELY large, it would more likely number under a hundred) we would still all be descended from this group.
Our image and likeness of God resides in our souls. Our human dignity is based on our image and likeness of God.
I agree.
Can you imagine the moral havoc that could be wreaked if someone were to point around and say “even though that looks human it is not really human”?
Moral havoc… yes. Also the person who says that would be showing his ignorance about the development of humanity. What I am proposing also puts an interesting spin on Gen 4: 17. For the sake of this discussion, the issue, then becomes did Cain’s wife have an eternal soul? Also, to use the example of Cain, assuming she did not (for the sake of argument by saying she was a different member of that community), Enoch still would have an eternal soul being a descendent of Adam and Eve.
 
Earlier this month it was announced that fossilized skeltons were found in a cave in South Africa, belonging to a previously unknown human ancestor. They’re thought to be a link between tree dwelling apes and the first hominids that took steps on two feet.
This is an interesting idea and worth examining. These “tree dwelling apes,” did they have feet? Did they eat, sleep and raise their young in trees? What if they wanted to get from one tree to another? Did each family of tree dwelling apes ‘own’ a particular tree? What if something of value fell to the ground?

And once these tree dwelling apes transitioned to using their feet, could they run? Could they outrun the predators currently on the ground?

God bless,
Ed
 
< In the neatly aligned sequences we now find another form of difference, where a single ’letter’ is different between the human and chimp genomes. These provide another 1.23% difference between the two genomes. Thus, the percentage difference is now at around 72%.>

Isn’t 72% a rather large percentage?
No.
 
This is an interesting idea and worth examining. These “tree dwelling apes,” did they have feet? Did they eat, sleep and raise their young in trees? What if they wanted to get from one tree to another? Did each family of tree dwelling apes ‘own’ a particular tree? What if something of value fell to the ground?

And once these tree dwelling apes transitioned to using their feet, could they run? Could they outrun the predators currently on the ground?

God bless
Ed
Here’s a link to one of the articles aout this: guardian.co.uk/science/2010/apr/08/fossil-skeletons-unknown-human-ancestor
 
Huh - where did I say that?
Redratfish said: I think that the only thing a Catholic must agree is that Adam and Eve were the first full humans, don’t quote me on that though

You replied: AND we are all descendants. (emphasis, mine)

I thought you were agreeing with the other poster when he stated that Adam and Eve were the “first full humans.” I apologize if I was wrong.
 
Redratfish said: I think that the only thing a Catholic must agree is that Adam and Eve were the first full humans, don’t quote me on that though

You replied: AND we are all descendants. (emphasis, mine)

I thought you were agreeing with the other poster when he stated that Adam and Eve were the “first full humans.” I apologize if I was wrong.
Just to clarify:

Three important things to note:

Adam was first human
Eve came from Adam
Adam and Eve are our first parents
All humans are related through this descendency
 
Yes, there would have been such a time. However, this would have been very short lived in the “grand scheme of things.” When you go as far back as the establishment of humanity, genetically even if the community I suggested was populated at a thousand (which would be EXTREMELY large, it would more likely number under a hundred) we would still all be descended from this group.
We would all be descended from this group, but some of us would have immortal souls, and some would not. You are assuming that over time, all the “soul filled” humans would have interbred with all the others. There’s no way to prove that. That’s the problem.
Moral havoc… yes. Also the person who says that would be showing his ignorance about the development of humanity.
The conclusion derives directly from your premise.

Were you there? Was anybody there? Do you have genealogical charts that prove your knowledge of the development of humanity from hundreds or thousands of individuals?
What I am proposing also puts an interesting spin on Gen 4: 17. For the sake of this discussion, the issue, then becomes did Cain’s wife have an eternal soul? Also, to use the example of Cain, assuming she did not (for the sake of argument by saying she was a different member of that community), Enoch still would have an eternal soul being a descendent of Adam and Eve.
So how do you know that Cain’s wife was not his sister?
 
Just to clarify:

Three important things to note:

Adam was first human
Eve came from Adam
Adam and Eve are our first parents
All humans are related through this descendency
Can you clarify further by saying that either you do or do not believe that Adam and Eve were the result of evolution?
 
Can you clarify further by saying that either you do or do not believe that Adam and Eve were the result of evolution?
Adam and Eve are not the result of evolution. They are distinct and their lineage is distinct.
 
I suspect that those who hear about evolution on a regular basis often do not have a clear understanding of what the Church teaches or somehow believe that science has disproved something. It is either exciting to them or they have not examined what the Church teaches in the same depth as they have examined certain scientific claims.

At the present time, Secularists very much want the purely Biology textbook version of evolution to be true. We, meaning human beings, are simply collections of chemicals that became more complex for no particular reason. We look like human beings because that’s how ‘natural selection’ picked out certain elements of the primordial soup as we became more complex. Once again, God is, and must be ignored by these Secularists who seek to find a common answer. Saying God did something like adding an invisible (to science) soul is meaningless and easily discarded. This is not good enough for Catholics.

Genesis is the most often attacked book of the Bible by those who believe science has ‘proven’ something. Let’s look at Romans 5:12:

“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all had sinned:”

Here we clearly see that by one man sin entered the world.

Apparently, to find this ‘common ground,’ God does nothing. Evolution is let loose as if it has a mind to create and select. This makes no sense as a stand alone idea. Evolution has no creative force or selecting ability.

To the purely Secularist mind, we are simply matter in motion. A ball of rock orbiting a star that spontaneously produced life because a bunch of chemicals got together?

No scientist can produce life in the lab, yet a great faith is exhibited by some that life arose by itself. There is no evidence for this.

So, people post here as if most of the answer is proven with certainty: we are simply chemicals in motion. Nothing more.

Who did Jesus Christ die for? A hominid? A proto-human? No. Science cannot provide an answer.

The link between Adam and Jesus is direct. Jesus, Himself, was far more than a man but the Word made Flesh.

It would be fruitful, I think, for those who consider scientific claims to imagine how He fits into any sort of evolution. He chose to be born and to enter human history. He manipulated the wind and the storm without technology. He raised the dead and mutiplied the loaves and fishes, creating matter from nothing, just as the Bible tells us.

At present, science does not have any credible explanation for this reality. Catholics need to realize that there are some who are desparate to separate us from the reality of the Living God. After we die, we will meet God. All of us, believers and nonbelievers.

God bless,
Ed
 
We would all be descended from this group, but some of us would have immortal souls, and some would not. You are assuming that over time, all the “soul filled” humans would have interbred with all the others. There’s no way to prove that.
Just as it is impossible to prove the contrary.

That’s the problem.
The conclusion derives directly from your premise.
Were you there? Was anybody there? Do you have genealogical charts that prove your knowledge of the development of humanity from hundreds or thousands of individuals?
Of course I was not there. To ask me if I was there and have the genealogical charts opens the door for me to ask of you the same questions. As the events in Cain’s life (as documented in the Bible) also brings up, there are issues such issues as migration and the willingness of groups to break apart.
So how do you know that Cain’s wife was not his sister?
If you ask this, either you misread my post or I wasn’t clear enough. My comment about here was to compare what I am describing with more traditional polygenism (as I understand it). Besides, the specific state of her soul is irrelevant compared to their children, etc.

Lastly, I would like to say that I have never found any documents which expressly forbid key points to which I have presented. However, I have found this…

catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp

where it states:
Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul.
I have kept in line with this teaching.

sulkow82 SFO
 
I think that the only thing a Catholic must agree is that Adam and Eve were the first full humans, don’t quote me on that though
Yes, Adam and Eve were the first fully complete human beings having a nature which is an unique unification of spirit/matter, rational/corporeal, spiritual soul and material body.

Currently, people are attacking Catholic beliefs by denying that Adam and Eve were the first, two, sole parents of the human species. That all humanity is descended directly from these first two parents is an essential doctrine of the Catholic Church.

Blessings,
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect.
 
Scientific evidence supports the conclusion that all humans did not descend from just one pair of humans, but a small group of humans with the population at lowest being 1000. Offiial Church teaching contradicts this, and says that the faithful must accept that we are descended from a literal Adam and Eve. Is this a contradiction between faith and reason?
Your question is based on a false assumption. Those 1000 people are called the “bottleneck.” The earth’s population was decimated by a natural disaster, a volcano IIRC and it is estimated that only 1000 remained alive. Those 1000 people were all descended from the original two, Adam and Eve.

I believe science has proven through DNA that all humans are descended from one man and one woman.

Since humans originated in Africa, it would be safe to say Adam and Eve were black, something some fundamentalist Christians are uncomfortable with.
 
Just as it is impossible to prove the contrary.
snip…
Yes, it is impossible to prove either way.

However, to leave open the door to the possibility that humanity as we now know it could actually consist of humans-with-souls and humans-without-souls is a grave moral error. It is necessary that since “it is impossible to prove” that we agree to default to the morally safe position, which is that all humans have souls, and are made in the image and likeness of God.

Saying that we are descended from multiple parents, only 2 of whom had real souls, opens the can of worms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top