"Neanderthals were People too" -- what are the implications for faith?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I do go on and on and on and on about the first three chapters of Genes, because I hope that someone will actually read them to find out what happened at the beginning of human history.
Oh, I see. I would actually learn something if I took the time to read the source material of which I have been constantly posting? :rolleyes:
But, if you are bothered by reading, I can stop.
Resorting to personal insults is a poor argument for your position. Perhaps you aren’t as “all knowing” about the things you write as you think.
 
Obviously, Genesis 1:1 is an important Catholic doctrine.
Doctrine doe not simply come from the Bible. The Bible is a source of Tradition and a tremendous asset to the faith but it does not define doctrine.
 
Unfortunately, the current Science of Human Evolution does not allow an originating population of two.

The Science of Human Evolution usually begins with the Homo/Pan divergence or speciation event which results in separate large populations evolving into new random breeding populations over time. The Science of Human Evolution based on indiscriminate large populations is not the same as an immediate appearance of two real fully-complete human persons lovingly known as Adam and Eve.

evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/_0_0/evo_07
Science is provisional and as I posted before coming closer to what Genesis teaches.
 
Doctrine doe not simply come from the Bible. The Bible is a source of Tradition and a tremendous asset to the faith but it does not define doctrine.
Catholic doctrines are properly defined and duly declared by the major Ecumenical Catholic Church Councils guided by the wisdom of the promised Advocate, the Holy Spirit.

I should add what should be obvious is that there is intense preparation for each Council. This means that every Scripture verse connected in some way with the proposed doctrine is completely studied along with every writing of the Early Church Fathers, including homilies and letters. The liturgies in various geographic locations are studied. Basic theological and philosophical opinions are studied. Previous doctrines are studied. And with each study, there is intense prayer.
 
Unfortunately, the current Science of Human Evolution does not allow an originating population of two.

The Science of Human Evolution usually begins with the Homo/Pan divergence or speciation event which results in separate large populations evolving into new random breeding populations over time. The Science of Human Evolution based on indiscriminate large populations is not the same as an immediate appearance of two real fully-complete human persons lovingly known as Adam and Eve.

evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/_0_0/evo_07
The Church does not require that Adam and Eve popped into existence, whole, out of thin air (or dirt). Furthermore, it does not require that we disbelieve that evolution, as part of God’s overall plan, led to the emergence of humans in a strictly physiological sense. It does require affirming that the soul is not an emergent property of evolution, and that each soul is uniquely created by God, and that Adam and Eve are the first true humans in a metaphysical sense. It requires that all true humans claim descent from Adam and Eve. It does not require that all of our genetic diversity is from Adam and Eve.
 
Science is provisional and as I posted before coming closer to what Genesis teaches.
There is a difference between the material world in the first section of the first tremendous chapter of Genesis and the spiritual world. See dramatic shift of Genesis 1:25 to Genesis 1:26-27.

The current Science of Human Evolution is set in stone because it is based on the Evolution Model regarding large originating populations. Catholicism will not budge from an human originating population of two.
 
Catholic doctrines are properly defined and duly declared by the major Ecumenical Catholic Church Councils guided by the wisdom of the promised Advocate, the Holy Spirit.

I should add what should be obvious is that there is intense preparation for each Council. This means that every Scripture verse connected in some way with the proposed doctrine is completely studied along with every writing of the Early Church Fathers, including homilies and letters. The liturgies in various geographic locations are studied. Basic theological and philosophical opinions are studied. Previous doctrines are studied. And with each study, there is intense prayer.
Yeah, like I said; we don’t just get doctrine from the Bible.
 
The Church does not require that Adam and Eve popped into existence, whole, out of thin air (or dirt). Furthermore, it does not require that we disbelieve that evolution, as part of God’s overall plan, led to the emergence of humans in a strictly physiological sense. It does require affirming that the soul is not an emergent property of evolution, and that each soul is uniquely created by God, and that Adam and evebare the first true humans in a metaphysical sense. It requires that all true humans claim descent from Adam and Eve. It does not require that all of our genetic diversity is from Adam and Eve.
Adam and Eve popped into existence is a truth which is held by the Catholic Church.😉

Human genetic diversity is normal due to mutation and migration.
 
It does require affirming that… each soul is uniquely created by God, and that Adam and Eve are the first true humans in a metaphysical sense.
It seems that I have been saying something of the same all along. Trees of forbidden fruit and talking serpents are superfluous to the meaning of the story.
 
Yeah, like I said; we don’t just get doctrine from the Bible.
And like I said.
It is time for me to leave this thread. I seem to be repeating myself. :eek:
However, if anyone has the guts to examine a verse from the first three exciting chapters …

Trees of forbidden fruit and talking serpents – that is too scary for today’s Catholics. 😉
 
And like I said.
It is time for me to leave this thread. I seem to be repeating myself. :eek:
However, if anyone has the guts to examine a verse from the first three exciting chapters …
I like that. If someone holds an opinion contrary to yours, then none of us have the “guts” to actually examine the source material. Does it ever get lonely in your ivory tower?
 
It seems that I have been saying something of the same all along. Trees of forbidden fruit and talking serpents are superfluous to the meaning of the story.
I see the fruit of the tree as being a symbol of the choice man made against God’s precepts, not literal in that sense. I don’t necessarily claim that there was a literal Garden as well, that may have stood for the state of man’s relationship with God. But I do hold, and what the Catholic Church has taught, is that there was a first (metaphysical) man and woman who enjoyed God’s graces and knew no sim, and who chose themselves over God. And that all (metaphysical) humans can claim these two as their ancestors.

Now I’ve seen some thoughts on how we can reconcile this doctrine of monogeny with biological polygeny (in terms of more than one person), and essentially the children of Adam and Eve may have taken spouse’s from the population of physiological (but not metaphysical) humans. In such primitive times, the behavioral differences wouldn’t have been as pronounced. And the children of such humans would have (or could have) been true, metaphysical humans. All true humans are therefore descendants from Adam and Eve. Primitive physiological humans were not “true man”, had no rational souls, and were replaced over time by true humans. None of that is scientifically proven or a position of the Church, but it’s an attempt by some Catholic theologians and scientists on how evolutionary biology and Church doctrine on monogeny can be reconciled, that there were two first humans who disobeyed God in a profound way and broke the union between God and man, and whose consequences of sin we bear. A historical event told in a symbolic style. What we can’t do is merely take the fall of man as only moral story or fable. It is rooted in a historical reality, even if told in a mythological style.
 
There is a difference between the material world in the first section of the first tremendous chapter of Genesis and the spiritual world. See dramatic shift of Genesis 1:25 to Genesis 1:26-27.

The current Science of Human Evolution is set in stone because it is based on the Evolution Model regarding large originating populations. Catholicism will not budge from an human originating population of two.
It is based on starting diversity which science does not know.
 
One important thing is left out. The preternatural gifts of bodily immortal, freedom of sickness, irregular desire and infused knowledge that our first parents possessed and lost.
 
One important thing is left out. The preternatural gifts of bodily immortal, freedom of sickness, irregular desire and infused knowledge that our first parents possessed and lost.
I certainly don’t agree with those in the first true humans.
 
I have not read the entire thing, but this article from New York Times Magazine suggests that science has long gotten Neanderthals wrong, and that they displayed many behavioral characteristics that were similar to their Homo sapien neighbors in Africa. Note that the last common ancestor with neanderthals was over 500,000 years ago. But anyway, they too, apparently, buried their dead and made specialized tools and jewelry. They also painted their faces or bodies, which could represent symbolic thought.

Personally, human evolution has never really threatened my faith. I have always been open to science, and I think evolutionary biology expresses the creative work of God.

However, I wonder how this understanding of Neanderthals can be consistent with the uniqueness of the human person, who is not just body but soul as well. From the time of our “first parents,” we bodily creatures also have a spiritual aspect, made in the image of God, and can relate to God. Features such as self-consciousness and symbolic thought were thought to be particular attributes of humans made in God’s image, with an immortal soul.

So how this square with Catholic teaching?
From the Ivory Tower

My apology. I only skimmed the article. Still, Nana and Flint were the best I have seen. There were definitely human thoughts.😉

This one sentence “Neanderthals are people, too — a separate, shorn-off branch of our family tree.” made the most sense. Given the length of female fertility, tree branches multiplied and migrated. Catholic teaching is that Adam and Eve transmitted their human nature to their descendants. This means that God provided the spiritual immortal soul at conception. If we say that the Neanderthals are true people then they would have to have a fully-complete human nature of a decomposing anatomy and an immortal soul. This would square with Catholic teaching.

The current problem centers on the question – are the Neanderthals highly sentient material beings or are they true descendants of Eve and Adam. So far I have not seen any symbolic thought process which is an action of the rational mind and should not be confused with symbolic jewelry or burial customs. A rational mind can build on gained knowledge. The knowledge gained by Neanderthals is basically survival of the species and it appears to stay there…until they disappeared.

Similar behavioral characteristics would be natural because of similar material anatomies and the common need to survive as a community. Which the Neanderthals didn’t, but the initial small group of humans did survive and their “community” grew and eventually covered the globe. That is one basic difference between rational thought and a highly sentient material being.

There are many Catholics who say that the similarity of the Neanderthals with humans is enough to call the Neanderthals “a separate, shorn-off branch of our family tree.”
Maybe they are right. That would mean that the Neanderthals had the ability to recognize the super-natural.
CCC 28 has some interesting points.

**28 **In many ways, throughout history down to the present day, men have given expression to their quest for God in their religious beliefs and behavior: in their prayers, sacrifices, rituals, meditations, and so forth. These forms of religious expression, despite the ambiguities they often bring with them, are so universal that one may well call man a religious being:
From one ancestor [God] made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, so that they would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him - though indeed he is not far from each one of us. For “in him we live and move and have our being.”
Did the Neanderthals have religious beliefs or did they have simply rituals that worked for their community?

I do not think that we will know the answer to that question while we are on earth. In any case, God has always reached out to His children in His image, Genesis 1:27, regardless of what century they lived in. The natural law of right and wrong existed from the beginning. The sense that there is someone beyond the natural world has been in existence since the beginning of human history. See all the early legends. Unfortunately, there have been some awful conclusions about the super-natural. Still it is God, Who knows what is happening within a person.

Catholic teaching goes beyond the one-size-fits-all concept. Each person is personally known and loved by God. This love began with Adam and Eve.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top