Modern Genetics and Adam & Eve

  • Thread starter Thread starter averheyen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
razredge said:
If you see no problem with modern genetics and monogenism then that is fine with me, but some of us do see a problem and would like to explore possible solutions.Does that make sense?
Click to expand...
Modern genetics excludes monogenism if that is meant as all humans springing from one single couple. The human population never sank to a single breeding pair; in deed, there is no genetic evidence that it ever sank below 3,000 breeding pairs. Of course, a Catholic may reject modern genetics, but a Catholic may also reject quantum mechanics, relativity, plate tectonics, and atomic theory. It won’'t mean those theories are falsified; it only means someone rejects them.
 
StAnastasia said:
. Of course, a Catholic may reject modern genetics, but a Catholic may also reject quantum mechanics, relativity, plate tectonics, and atomic theory. It won’'t mean those theories

are falsified; it only means someone rejects them.
Emphasis mine to show relationship to its preceding sentence.

Modern genetics is a real science and not a theory.

Furthermore, the science of modern genetics is used in many fields, In the Back Fence Forum, there is the example of genetics and cows in Australia. My textbook begins with the example of modern genetics being used in the fight against HIV. A couple of modern genetic research papers addressed a comparatively recent phenomenon of humans being able to live in extreme high altitudes.

I’m not sure why a Catholic was singled out. Everyone is welcome to free speech.
Click to expand...
 
StAnastasia said:
Modern genetics excludes monogenism if that is meant as all humans springing from one single couple. The human population never sank to a single breeding pair; in deed, there is no genetic evidence that it ever sank below 3,000 breeding pairs. Of course, a Catholic may reject modern genetics, but a Catholic may also reject quantum mechanics, relativity, plate tectonics, and atomic theory. It won’'t mean those theories are falsified; it only means someone rejects them.
Click to expand...
I know that - I’m on your side! 😉

I’ve actually been lurking on these boards for a few months and have read quite a few of these type of threads - I have to say that you have done an excellent job of representing the rational point of view - no mean feat considering the ignorance and idiocy that unfortunately seem far too common here (are there really modern day Catholic geocentrists? :()
 
razredge said:
I know that - I’m on your side! 😉

I’ve actually been lurking on these boards for a few months and have read quite a few of these type of threads - I have to say that you have done an excellent job of representing the rational point of view - no mean feat considering the ignorance and idiocy that unfortunately seem far too common here (are there really modern day Catholic geocentrists? :()
Click to expand...
I agree with you that StA is doing an excellent job of presenting the modernistic philosophical view of transitional religions.
 
averheyen said:
Does Modern Genetic research disprove that all human beings are descendents of the first two humans Adam and Eve? Yes or no and why or why not.
Click to expand...
What troubles me about the OP question is that many modern catholics have embraced the concept that religion is transitional, i.e., it flows along with changes in worldviews. Usually these catholics depend on old genetic speculations and keep repeating them as a mantra. One could almost say that it is a case of the blind leading the blind without the benefit of a guide dog.

Note: some Catholics would like to have Intelligent Design as the guide dog. It is my humble opinion that ID is o.k. for Protestant faiths; but when the rubber hits the road, ID, along with some of the other popular faith/science projects, has problems with some of the basic doctrines of Catholicism.

Regarding modern genetic research on CAF. :o

Regarding polygenism. The updated 21st century scientific basis for polygenism excludes any recognition of the spiritual realm, including denial of God.

Threads which hint of Catholicism’s doctrines on human nature via two founders known as Adam & Eve … :eek:
 
grannymh said:
I agree with you that StA is doing an excellent job of presenting the modernistic philosophical view of transitional religions.
Click to expand...
Clarification.
The presentation of transitional modernistic philosophical/theological views should not be confused with actual Catholicism.
 
razredge said:
I know that - I’m on your side! 😉

I’ve actually been lurking on these boards for a few months and have read quite a few of these type of threads - I have to say that you have done an excellent job of representing the rational point of view - no mean feat considering the ignorance and idiocy that unfortunately seem far too common here (are there really modern day Catholic geocentrists? :()
Click to expand...
Razredge, indeed there are geocentrists: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sungenis

And my father’s diocese of Santa Rosa has just had a Young Earth Creationists appointed bishop there – Robert Vasa – who is striking fear into the hearts of science teachers.
 
I don’t get this. Darwin was a monogenist who thought human evolution wouldn’t work with polygenism and the original believers in polygenism were basically idealists-maybe bigots-who assumed human races couldn’t have descended from common ancestry due to such apparently large variation. If someone doesn’t mind, where do I find that modern science proves polygenism?
 
fhansen said:
I don’t get this. Darwin was a monogenist who thought human evolution wouldn’t work with polygenism and the original believers in polygenism were basically idealists-maybe bigots-who assumed human races couldn’t have descended from common ancestry due to such apparently large variation. If someone doesn’t mind, where do I find that modern science proves polygenism?
Click to expand...
You need to be very careful with words here. In Catholic terms “polygenism” is the belief that all humans are descended from a population, not a single couple.

As you point out, in the nineteenth century ‘polygenism’ had a different meaning, that the different human races were descended from different ancestors.

What we are discussing here is Catholic polygenism. Was the whole human race once reduced to a population of a single breeding pair? Yes is Catholic monogenism, no is Catholic polygenism.

Both sides believe that all humans share the same ancestry all the way back, it is just a matter of how narrow the bottleneck is. Monogenism is a bottleneck of one breeding pair. Polygenism is a larger bottleneck. I have seen figures of between 1,000 and 20,000 breeding pairs, though 10,000 breeding pairs seems to be the most common figure. The bottleneck is often associated with the Toba eruption.

rossum
 
rossum said:
What we are discussing here is Catholic polygenism. Was the whole human race once reduced to a population of a single breeding pair? Yes is Catholic monogenism, no is Catholic polygenism.
Click to expand...
Pre-humans were reduced. Real humans expanded.
 
StAnastasia said:
Razredge, indeed there are geocentrists: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sungenis

And my father’s diocese of Santa Rosa has just had a Young Earth Creationists appointed bishop there – Robert Vasa – who is striking fear into the hearts of science teachers.
Click to expand...
Yes, absolutely shocking - I think it seems to be somewhat of an American problem - perhaps some of the hardline Protestant groups’ beliefs on science and the huge ID/evolution controversy are influencing US Catholicism.

I live in Australia and I definitely haven’t come across or heard of any literal Creationists, geocentrists etc. in the clergy over here, some lay people are unsure about evolution but it’s mostly down to ignorance and confusion, things like - ‘I don’t believe that we are descended from chimps’,‘if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes around?’ but once you explain how evolution actually works , I find they readily accept it.
 
Catholicism mandates that there was a historical Adam and Eve, that Adam sinned, and that all people living today descend from Adam. That is not necessarily in conflict with polygenism. People who are saying that Adam and Eve refer to a group of persons or whatever, and that there people living today who are not descended from Adam, that is outside of Catholicism.
 
Windfish said:
Catholicism mandates that there was a historical Adam and Eve, that Adam sinned, and that all people living today descend from Adam. That is not necessarily in conflict with polygenism. People who are saying that Adam and Eve refer to a group of persons or whatever, and that there people living today who are not descended from Adam, that is outside of Catholicism.
Click to expand...
Because of the ban on evolution discussion, people here are withholding necessary information regarding polygenism. :o
 
Windfish said:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7852971&postcount=6

Read what I said in 2).
Click to expand...
  1. Original Sin does seem to entail two first persons from which all of mankind descended. Indeed, I think the historical existence of Adam and Eve is a dogma. However, this does not necessarily have to conflict with science. What is demanded here is theological monogenism, not biological monogenism. If souls cannot be brought about by purely natural means, than God would have to ensoul two individuals, perhaps from a population of modern day humans (save for a rational soul), and it is these two that fell, who then mated with the other modern day humans.
Click to expand...
Souls cannot be brought about by purely natural means. The natural matter of the human anatomy, in or out of the womb, does not have the means or power to create the spiritual soul.
 
fhansen said:
So the ensoulment of a pair of humans, the rest of whom died out? Or maybe not. But if they mated with other modern humans, then how is OS transmitted to them?
Click to expand...
The difficulty is that matter depends on the God-created spiritual soul in order to be a living human person. Whatever
pre-history creatures were alive at the time of Adam are not humans no matter how many people claim that. The only true, fully complete humans became the sole founders of the human species. This is Catholic teaching.
 
grannymh said:
The difficulty is that matter depends on the God-created spiritual soul in order to be a living human person. Whatever
pre-history creatures were alive at the time of Adam are not humans no matter how many people claim that. The only true, fully complete humans became the sole founders of the human species. This is Catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand this. I just hadn’t heard of theories that try to reconcile polygenism with Catholic teaching.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top