Many Adams and Eves?

  • Thread starter Thread starter awatkins69
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think there’s one fossil upon which theists and atheists can both agree as totally wondrous.

The oldest fossil found so far is of a type of colony of blue-green bacteria, called Stromatolites, from a rock included in other rock, dating to approximately 3.5 billion years ago. Here are some references for that fossil:

ucmp.berkeley.edu/bacteria/cyanofr.html
smh.com.au/news/science/earlier-start-to-life-on-earth/2008/05/29/1211654221563.html?sssdmh=dm16.317233

The first solid rocks (e.g., having cooled after the “Hadean” period of meteor and comet’s storms upon the Earth) were about 3.8 billion years ago.

If 3.5 billion years ago, a life form existed, with relatively complex physiology that includes respiration and photosynthesis and colonial patterns of life, and was found in a rock that was an inclusion in another (younger) rock, it suggests that life appeared on Earth as soon as soon as it was able to.

Whoa! If that’s true, it could say that God did imbue the universe with properties that led to the appearance of life on earth as soon as it was physically possible. That to me suggest that the Logos, described in the first chapter of the Gospel of John, represents the elementary physics basis that lets our universe work. Physicists still can’t describe the interrelation of fundamental forces of the universe (e.g., the strength of the weak force, the strength of gravity). The strengths of these forces look like random numbers, but they happen to make our universe possible in a manner that supports life. Could the Logos be that which gave our universe life?
Very, very interesting!!! Thank you.

Do you have the actual research paper for the news story? If it says what I am hoping, there may be a possible connection to the origin of the human species, Adam and Eve.

Blessings,
granny

The quest for knowledge is worthy of the adventures of the journey.
 
I think there’s one fossil upon which theists and atheists can both agree as totally wondrous.

The oldest fossil found so far is of a type of colony of blue-green bacteria, called Stromatolites, from a rock included in other rock, dating to approximately 3.5 billion years ago. Here are some references for that fossil:

ucmp.berkeley.edu/bacteria/cyanofr.html
smh.com.au/news/science/earlier-start-to-life-on-earth/2008/05/29/1211654221563.html?sssdmh=dm16.317233

The first solid rocks (e.g., having cooled after the “Hadean” period of meteor and comet’s storms upon the Earth) were about 3.8 billion years ago.

If 3.5 billion years ago, a life form existed, with relatively complex physiology that includes respiration and photosynthesis and colonial patterns of life, and was found in a rock that was an inclusion in another (younger) rock, it suggests that life appeared on Earth as soon as soon as it was able to.

Whoa! If that’s true, it could say that God did imbue the universe with properties that led to the appearance of life on earth as soon as it was physically possible. That to me suggest that the Logos, described in the first chapter of the Gospel of John, represents the elementary physics basis that lets our universe work. Physicists still can’t describe the interrelation of fundamental forces of the universe (e.g., the strength of the weak force, the strength of gravity). The strengths of these forces look like random numbers, but they happen to make our universe possible in a manner that supports life. Could the Logos be that which gave our universe life?
Yes - Logos - the word, the language of DNA breathed/thought into the universe.
 
Do you have the actual research paper for the news story? If it says what I am hoping, there may be a possible connection to the origin of the human species, Adam and Eve.
Though I wish such a connection were possible, I think it’s impossible to draw a direct connection between the the time in which these fossils are estimated to have lived (e.g. 3.2-3.5 billion years ago) and the origin of Homo sapiens. However, life appearing as early as 3.5 billion years ago, possibly earlier, suggests that there’s fundamental in the nature of fundamental forces that may give rise, not only to life, but to conscious life. That may be strictly explained by materialist explanation of the universe, but what an odd coincidence! (Atheist often raise the “anthropic principle” as a way of getting around this coincidence, saying that “all possible worlds” exist, but that doesn’t do away with basic questions of existence or God.)

On the “earliest fossil” issue, there are a few references to which I have access, which may or may not be freely available on the web (if not, try a local library). Here are their references and abstracts. I don’t intend this to be an exhaustive search, and should caveat that some geologists are skeptical that the Australian fossils found in the “chert” rocks are in fact biological. I think, however, that most geologists do think these are real fossils. Please take that with a cubic meter of salt, since I’m not a geologist!

Schopf, J.W.; Packer, B.M. (1987) Early Archean (3.3-billion to 3.5-billion-year-old) microfossils from Warrawoona Group, Australia. Science 237: 70 - 73
DOI: 10.1126/science.11539686

sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;237/4810/70

Cellularly preserved filamentous and colonial fossil microorganisms have been discovered in bedded carbonaceous cherts from the Early Archean Apex Basalt and Towers Formation of northwestern Western Australia. The cell types detected suggest that cyanobacteria, and therefore oxygen-producing photosynthesis, may have been extant as early as 3.3 billion to 3.5 billion years ago. These fossils are among the oldest now known from the geologic record; their discovery substantiates previous reports of Early Archean microfossils in Warrawoona Group strata.

Nature 416, 73-76 (7 March 2002) | doi:10.1038/416073a. Laser–Raman imagery of Earth’s earliest fossils. J. William Schopf, Anatoliy B. Kudryavtsev, David G. Agresti, Thomas J. Wdowiak & Andrew D. Czaja sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;237/4810/70

Unlike the familiar Phanerozoic history of life, evolution during the earlier and much longer Precambrian segment of geological time centred on prokaryotic microbes. Because such microorganisms are minute, are preserved incompletely in geological materials, and have simple morphologies that can be mimicked by nonbiological mineral microstructures, discriminating between true microbial fossils and microscopic pseudofossil ‘lookalikes’ can be difficult. Thus, valid identification of fossil microbes, which is essential to understanding the prokaryote-dominated, Precambrian 85% of life’s history, can require more than traditional palaeontology that is focused on morphology. By combining optically discernible morphology with analyses of chemical composition, laser–Raman spectroscopic imagery of individual microscopic fossils provides a means by which to address this need. Here we apply this technique to exceptionally ancient fossil microbe-like objects, including the oldest such specimens reported from the geological record, and show that the results obtained substantiate the biological origin of the earliest cellular fossils known.

Catling, D.C.; Claire, M.W. (2005) How Earth’s atmosphere evolved to an oxic state: a status report. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 237: 1-20.

Nora Noffke, Microbially induced sedimentary structures in Archean sandstones: A new window into early life, Gondwana Research, Volume 11, Issue 3, April 2007, Pages 336-342, ISSN 1342-937X, DOI: 10.1016/j.gr.2006.10.004.

(sciencedirect.com/science/article/B7XNB-4MH2H9T-1/2/c8cf8eaa231b283912a0c5e738cc2498)

Until now, the most valuable information on the early life on the Archean Earth derived from bacterial fossils and stromatolites preserved in precipitated lithologies such as chert or carbonates. Also, shales contain complex biomarker molecules, and specific isotopes constitute an important evidence for biogeneicity. In contrast, because of their low potential of fossil preservation, sandstones have been less investigated. But recent studies revealed a variety of microbially induced sedimentary structures -- MISS' that differ greatly from any other fossils or sedimentary structures. Wrinkle structures’, multidirected ripple marks', biolaminites’, and other macrostructures indicate the former presence of photoautotrophic microbial mats in shallow-marine to tidal paleoenvironments. The MISS form by the mechanical interaction of microbial mats with physical sediment dynamics that is the erosion and deposition by water agitation. The structures occur not only in Archean tidal flats, but in equivalent settings throughout Earth history until today. MISS are not identified alone by their macroscopic morphologies. In thin-sections, the structures display the carpet-like fabrics of intertwined filaments of the ancient mat-constructing microorganisms. Geochemical analyses of the filaments proof their composition of iron minerals associated with organic carbon. In conclusion, microbial mats colonize sandy tidal settings at least for 3.2 Ga years. Therefore, Archean sandstones constitute an important archive for the exploration of early life.
 
Can you tell me me where YOU believe the allegory/symbolism/metaphor stop and history begin, is it at:-

Cain and Abel

Methuselah

Noah

Abraham

Melchizedek

Moses

David

Jesus

St Paul

St Stephen

Where do you believe the line is drawn.
Theologians don’t draw lines like that. The historical, historiographic, and archaeological picture is considerably more complicated than simple line drawing allows.
 
Theologians don’t draw lines like that. The historical, historiographic, and archaeological picture is considerably more complicated than simple line drawing allows.
I suppose that your answer above is better than “Exactly!”

But not by much.
 
Do you have the actual research paper for the news story? If it says what I am hoping, there may be a possible connection to the origin of the human species, Adam and Eve.
The cyanobacteria in the fossils is the same as todays cyanobacteria. The only facts that you’ll find in those papers is that in the supposed 3,500,000,000 years of evolution, bacteria have only ever reproduced bacteria, just as the book of Genesis says they would. The belief that microbes will become microbiologists, is a fairy tale for adults.
 
Though I wish such a connection were possible, I think it’s impossible to draw a direct connection between the the time in which these fossils are estimated to have lived (e.g. 3.2-3.5 billion years ago) and the origin of Homo sapiens. However, life appearing as early as 3.5 billion years ago, possibly earlier, suggests that there’s fundamental in the nature of fundamental forces that may give rise, not only to life, but to conscious life. That may be strictly explained by materialist explanation of the universe, but what an odd coincidence! (Atheist often raise the “anthropic principle” as a way of getting around this coincidence, saying that “all possible worlds” exist, but that doesn’t do away with basic questions of existence or God.)

On the “earliest fossil” issue, there are a few references to which I have access, which may or may not be freely available on the web (if not, try a local library). Here are their references and abstracts. I don’t intend this to be an exhaustive search, and should caveat that some geologists are skeptical that the Australian fossils found in the “chert” rocks are in fact biological. I think, however, that most geologists do think these are real fossils. Please take that with a cubic meter of salt, since I’m not a geologist!

Schopf, J.W.; Packer, B.M. (1987) Early Archean (3.3-billion to 3.5-billion-year-old) microfossils from Warrawoona Group, Australia. Science 237: 70 - 73
DOI: 10.1126/science.11539686

sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;237/4810/70

Cellularly preserved filamentous and colonial fossil microorganisms have been discovered in bedded carbonaceous cherts from the Early Archean Apex Basalt and Towers Formation of northwestern Western Australia. The cell types detected suggest that cyanobacteria, and therefore oxygen-producing photosynthesis, may have been extant as early as 3.3 billion to 3.5 billion years ago. These fossils are among the oldest now known from the geologic record; their discovery substantiates previous reports of Early Archean microfossils in Warrawoona Group strata.

Nature 416, 73-76 (7 March 2002) | doi:10.1038/416073a. Laser–Raman imagery of Earth’s earliest fossils. J. William Schopf, Anatoliy B. Kudryavtsev, David G. Agresti, Thomas J. Wdowiak & Andrew D. Czaja sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;237/4810/70

Unlike the familiar Phanerozoic history of life, evolution during the earlier and much longer Precambrian segment of geological time centred on prokaryotic microbes. Because such microorganisms are minute, are preserved incompletely in geological materials, and have simple morphologies that can be mimicked by nonbiological mineral microstructures, discriminating between true microbial fossils and microscopic pseudofossil ‘lookalikes’ can be difficult. Thus, valid identification of fossil microbes, which is essential to understanding the prokaryote-dominated, Precambrian 85% of life’s history, can require more than traditional palaeontology that is focused on morphology. By combining optically discernible morphology with analyses of chemical composition, laser–Raman spectroscopic imagery of individual microscopic fossils provides a means by which to address this need. Here we apply this technique to exceptionally ancient fossil microbe-like objects, including the oldest such specimens reported from the geological record, and show that the results obtained substantiate the biological origin of the earliest cellular fossils known.

Catling, D.C.; Claire, M.W. (2005) How Earth’s atmosphere evolved to an oxic state: a status report. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 237: 1-20.

Nora Noffke, Microbially induced sedimentary structures in Archean sandstones: A new window into early life, Gondwana Research, Volume 11, Issue 3, April 2007, Pages 336-342, ISSN 1342-937X, DOI: 10.1016/j.gr.2006.10.004.

(sciencedirect.com/science/article/B7XNB-4MH2H9T-1/2/c8cf8eaa231b283912a0c5e738cc2498)

Until now, the most valuable information on the early life on the Archean Earth derived from bacterial fossils and stromatolites preserved in precipitated lithologies such as chert or carbonates. Also, shales contain complex biomarker molecules, and specific isotopes constitute an important evidence for biogeneicity. In contrast, because of their low potential of fossil preservation, sandstones have been less investigated. But recent studies revealed a variety of microbially induced sedimentary structures -- MISS' that differ greatly from any other fossils or sedimentary structures. Wrinkle structures’, multidirected ripple marks', biolaminites’, and other macrostructures indicate the former presence of photoautotrophic microbial mats in shallow-marine to tidal paleoenvironments. The MISS form by the mechanical interaction of microbial mats with physical sediment dynamics that is the erosion and deposition by water agitation. The structures occur not only in Archean tidal flats, but in equivalent settings throughout Earth history until today. MISS are not identified alone by their macroscopic morphologies. In thin-sections, the structures display the carpet-like fabrics of intertwined filaments of the ancient mat-constructing microorganisms. Geochemical analyses of the filaments proof their composition of iron minerals associated with organic carbon. In conclusion, microbial mats colonize sandy tidal settings at least for 3.2 Ga years. Therefore, Archean sandstones constitute an important archive for the exploration of early life.
Wow! Thanks. I will look for these.

Blessings,
granny

The quest for truth is worthy of the adventures of the journey.
 
The cyanobacteria in the fossils is the same as todays cyanobacteria. The only facts that you’ll find in those papers is that in the supposed 3,500,000,000 years of evolution, bacteria have only ever reproduced bacteria, just as the book of Genesis says they would. The belief that microbes will become microbiologists, is a fairy tale for adults.
Right now I am looking for locations and descriptions. What if one living organism could exist without major changes, yet be composed of similar material as other living organisms which appear to exhibit gene mutations? The real question does not concern what may or may not have changed, but rather what could not have come from previous matter such as the souls of Adam and Eve.

When looking at natural science for answers about Adam and Eve, one has to keep in mind the limitations on one hand and the immense possibilities of intellect and will on the other hand. Add to that God’s blessing, Genesis 26- 31👍

May God’s blessings be upon you and yours,
granny
 
Can you tell me me where YOU believe the allegory/symbolism/metaphor stop and history begin, is it at:-

Cain and Abel

Methuselah

Noah

Abraham

Melchizedek

Moses

David

Jesus

St Paul

St Stephen

Where do you believe the line is drawn.
I can’t speak for StAnastasia.

Here is a related paragraph from the universal *Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. *Link www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
CCC 390 The account of the fall in *Genesis *3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.
 
And I am a “type” of femininity. Read my birth certificate. Am I allegorical?

Or are you saying that I am real? But also I can be allegorical in relationship to my pioneer ancestors and future descendents? Both? Because that is one way of teaching?

Blessings,
granny

The human person is the pinnacle of God’s creation.
No, you are neither allegorical nor a type, as Biblical authors would use the term.
 
Catholic teaching is that Adam and Eve are real, breathing people. There is no “either / or” about them. Just as there is no “either / or” about my being real.
The metaphor or allegorical part is an addition to reality. It does not replace reality.
.
Where is that exact Catholic teaching taught, today? In the Catechism?
 
No, Adam is not a type of Christ. Not at all. Christ is unique. Read Romans or the rest of the New Testament or the Catechism.
From newadvent.org/cathen/01129a.htm

More important is the theological doctrine formulated by St. Paul in Romans 5:12-21, and in 1 Corinthians 15:22-45. In the latter passage Jesus Christ is called by analogy and contrast the new or “last Adam.” This is understood in the sense that as the original Adam was the head of all mankind, the father of all according to the flesh, so also Jesus Christ was constituted chief and head of the spiritual family of the elect, and potentially of all mankind, since all are invited to partake of His salvation.** Thus the first Adam is a type of the second**, but while the former transmits to his progeny a legacy of death, the latter, on the contrary, becomes the vivifying principle of restored righteousness. Christ is the “last Adam” inasmuch as “there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12); no other chief or father of the race is to be expected. Both the first and the second Adam occupy the position of head with regard to humanity, but whereas the first through his disobedience vitiated, as it were, in himself the stirps of the entire race, and left to his posterity an inheritance of death, sin, and misery, the other through his obedience merits for all those who become his members a new life of holiness and an everlasting reward.** It may be said that the contrast thus formulated expresses a fundamental tenet of the Christian religion and embodies in a nutshell the entire doctrine of the economy of salvation**
 
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?
Origin of the Human Species by Catholic philosopher Dennis Bonnette

drbonnette.com/
 
No, you are neither allegorical nor a type, as Biblical authors would use the term.
But I am historically real, even though you do not know when I appeared on earth or exactly where. This is my point. Regardless of how Biblical or any kind of author or reader considers me, I remain historically real just like the two sole parents of the human species, aka Adam and Eve.
 
Where is that exact Catholic teaching taught, today? In the Catechism?

Basic Catholic teaching regarding Adam and Eve 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 paragraph numbers and topics such as Adam, etc. in the Catechism’s search bar in link www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
 
From newadvent.org/cathen/01129a.htm

More important is the theological doctrine formulated by St. Paul in Romans 5:12-21, and in 1 Corinthians 15:22-45. In the latter passage Jesus Christ is called by analogy and contrast the new or “last Adam.” This is understood in the sense that as the original Adam was the head of all mankind, the father of all according to the flesh, so also Jesus Christ was constituted chief and head of the spiritual family of the elect, and potentially of all mankind, since all are invited to partake of His salvation.** Thus the first Adam is a type of the second**, but while the former transmits to his progeny a legacy of death, the latter, on the contrary, becomes the vivifying principle of restored righteousness. Christ is the “last Adam” inasmuch as “there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12); no other chief or father of the race is to be expected. Both the first and the second Adam occupy the position of head with regard to humanity, but whereas the first through his disobedience vitiated, as it were, in himself the stirps of the entire race, and left to his posterity an inheritance of death, sin, and misery, the other through his obedience merits for all those who become his members a new life of holiness and an everlasting reward.** It may be said that the contrast thus formulated expresses a fundamental tenet of the Christian religion and embodies in a nutshell the entire doctrine of the economy of salvation**
It is important to finish reading the citation in order to find out what exactly is the tenet, i.e., the doctrine of the economy of salvation which is being expressed by a contrast. The below completes the citation marked in bold above.
It may be said that the contrast thus formulated expresses a fundamental tenet of the Christian religion and embodies in a nutshell the entire doctrine of the economy of salvation. It is principally on these and passages of similar import (e.g. Matthew 18:11) that is based the fundamental doctrine that our first parents were raised by the Creator to a state of supernatural righteousness, the restoration of which was the object of the Incarnation. It need hardly be said that the fact of this elevation could not be so clearly inferred from the Old Testament account taken independently.
Below is an appropriate paragraph from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. Please note that according to Catechism instructions (CCC 20) the section which begins with “St. Paul” is considered an observation of an historical or apologetic nature or a supplementary doctrinal explanation.
CCC 359 “In reality it is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of man truly becomes clear.”
St. Paul tells us that the human race takes its origin from two men: Adam and Christ. . . The first man, Adam, he says, became a living soul, the last Adam a life-giving spirit. The first Adam was made by the last Adam, from whom he also received his soul, to give him life… The second Adam stamped his image on the first Adam when he created him. That is why he took on himself the role and the name of the first Adam, in order that he might not lose what he had made in his own image. The first Adam, the last Adam: the first had a beginning, the last knows no end. The last Adam is indeed the first; as he himself says: “I am the first and the last.” *
  • footnote: St. Peter Chrysologus, Sermo 117; PL 52, 520-521
To gain a deeper understanding of the nature of Adam, please read Catechism paragraphs 355-421. One can put the word paragraph and the number in the Catechism’s search bar in link www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm Entering topics such as Adam, etc., is also very useful.

Blessings,
granny

The quest for knowledge is worthy of the adventures of the journey.
 
The cyanobacteria in the fossils is the same as todays cyanobacteria. The only facts that you’ll find in those papers is that in the supposed 3,500,000,000 years of evolution, bacteria have only ever reproduced bacteria, just as the book of Genesis says they would. The belief that microbes will become microbiologists, is a fairy tale for adults.
It’s no surprise that simple organisms that could live in extreme conditions would also exist today. There are pieces of genetic material that you and I both probably share that have been conserved since the very beginnings of eukaryotic life. Inside your cells, the ribosomes that read your DNA and coordinate its translation into functional proteins (e.g., enzymes, membrane channel proteins) are nearly identical to the ribosomes in my cell, as well as the ribosomes in monkeys, fungi, and plants, and unicellular organisms. Ribosomes are composed of stretches of RNA, another structure comprised of nucleic acids (other than DNA). The gene sequences of ribosomes are nearly identical across all life on earth.

Ribosomes are thought to have been one of the earliest evolutionary steps behind cellular life. They’re also critical to every living thing on earth. They’re very successful at doing they’re jobs, so they’ve been conserved over time.

Like ribosomes, cyanobacteria and many extremophiles are very good surviving in particular environments. There’s no surprise whatsoever that they would be around in similar form to 3.5 billion years ago.

It’s not correct to say that the theory of evolution requires everything to change over time. It simply states that, over time, the species that are best adapted to their environments and reproduce (bountifully) are the most likely to survive for long periods of time.

Species that are not the best adapted to their environments are less likely to reproduce (or produce fewer offspring), and therefore over the long term can survive only by finding a new niche where they’re more successful or by being fortunate enough to have a subpopulation of the species have genes or other traits that offer them a survival benefit over the rest of the species.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top