Why didn't God save Neanderthals?

[wmw]

Not true. The truths that these geometries give are absolute truths in their respective realm of application. For example, in Euclidean geometry, it is absolutely true that the base angles of an isosceles triangle are equal. This is absolutely true in Euclidean geometry and if you don’t believe it, give us a counterexample.

Once we define a system it will be true within that system. I can define that red = black. It is true in my system, but there is no connection to absolute truth.

All logic systems work this way, we build upon axioms that are considered true, but are not truly proved to be truth for the real world. In the real world Euclidean geometry is a good approximation of situations where the curvature of space is non negligible; hence, not an absolute description.

 

[simpleas]

Yes neaderthals had souls because they made fire?

Were their first parents tempted by the devil and failed?

So they were under the dominion of the devil?

But they were so close to us? What about form and substance?

Believe it or not I was asking if making fire set humans apart from other animals

I came across this write up and I’m alittle more informed about Neanderthals than I was!

biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/p83.htm

Finally we arrive at Homo neanderthals (or Homo [sapiens] neanderthalensis), which became real men with souls, and they arrived about 200,000 to 500,000 years ago. Adam and Eve’s ancestors, the neanderthals, were very intelligent, human-like animals. They used fire, fur, stone weapons, and so on. All this is continuous evolution. Their throat evolved and they were able to produce a large number of “words.” They had developed a large collection of word-signals that they used in “communication” mainly in hunting. They were like humans but they were not humans. They did not have three very important things including, of course, a spiritual soul:

Thanks

 

[grannymh]

Believe it or not I was asking if making fire set humans apart from other animals

I came across this write up and I’m alittle more informed about Neanderthals than I was!

biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/p83.htm

Finally we arrive at Homo neanderthals (or Homo [sapiens] neanderthalensis), which became real men with souls, and they arrived about 200,000 to 500,000 years ago. Adam and Eve’s ancestors, the neanderthals, were very intelligent, human-like animals. They used fire, fur, stone weapons, and so on. All this is continuous evolution. Their throat evolved and they were able to produce a large number of “words.” They had developed a large collection of word-signals that they used in “communication” mainly in hunting. They were like humans but they were not humans. They did not have three very important things including, of course, a spiritual soul:

Thanks

I have not completely read the link. Yet, I do have a tiny question regarding the words I put in bold.

Did Adam and Eve really have ancestors in the plural?

Ancestors in the plural is polygenism which basically denies the Catholic doctrine of human origin. Information source: the 1950 Encyclical by Pope Pius XII. Humani Generis. w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

In the science of human origin, the speciation event is known as a common ancestor population in the hundreds to thousands. This common population diverges into separate lineages of random-breeding populations diagramed according to clades which are determined by genetic relationships. In this cladistics system, we are an extant population descending from previous populations in the hundreds to thousands. Sample clades. “Trees Not Ladders.” evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/_0_0/evo_07

When checking popular sources like BioLogos, we discover that the Catholic doctrine of two, original, sole, real, first originating population of two, fully-complete human parents of humankind is not recognized as part of general Christianity. This is because the Catholic Church has not yielded to the big tent theory, which can ignore annoying Catholic doctrines. The big tent is for happy agreement regardless.

 

[OneSheep]

Believe it or not I was asking if making fire set humans apart from other animals

I came across this write up and I’m alittle more informed about Neanderthals than I was!

biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/p83.htm

Finally we arrive at Homo neanderthals (or Homo [sapiens] neanderthalensis), which became real men with souls, and they arrived about 200,000 to 500,000 years ago. Adam and Eve’s ancestors, the neanderthals, were very intelligent, human-like animals. They used fire, fur, stone weapons, and so on. All this is continuous evolution. Their throat evolved and they were able to produce a large number of “words.” They had developed a large collection of word-signals that they used in “communication” mainly in hunting. They were like humans but they were not humans. They did not have three very important things including, of course, a spiritual soul:

Thanks

Simpleas, Good Morning!

I must write a quote I my wife read recently off a facebook post:

“Be extremely cautious about quotes from famous people that you read on the internet”

• Abraham Lincoln

I find the opinion of the writer on that link interesting, but really, he has no way of knowing whether or not Neanderthals had souls, were self-aware, or what have you. Plenty of people with souls do not bury their dead, and plenty of people with souls demonize (dehumanize) their enemies and may even eat them when they kill them; this was (is?) the norm in some cultures.

And, as has already been pointed out, did Adam and Eve necessarily come after Neanderthals? We have no evidence of this, and I have never read anything from official Church doctrine that says one way or another.

Great find though, Simpleas! I find his stance understandable and acceptable.

Have a great weekend.

 

[simpleas]

I have not completely read the link. Yet, I do have a tiny question regarding the words I put in bold.

Did Adam and Eve really have ancestors in the plural?

Ancestors in the plural is polygenism which basically denies the Catholic doctrine of human origin. Information source: the 1950 Encyclical by Pope Pius XII. Humani Generis. w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

In the science of human origin, the speciation event is known as a common ancestor population in the hundreds to thousands. This common population diverges into separate lineages of random-breeding populations diagramed according to clades which are determined by genetic relationships. In this cladistics system, we are an extant population descending from previous populations in the hundreds to thousands. Sample clades. “Trees Not Ladders.” evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/_0_0/evo_07

When checking popular sources like BioLogos, we discover that the Catholic doctrine of two, original, sole, real, first originating population of two, fully-complete human parents of humankind is not recognized as part of general Christianity. This is because the Catholic Church has not yielded to the big tent theory, which can ignore annoying Catholic doctrines. The big tent is for happy agreement regardless.

Thanks for those links, the Humani Generis is pretty long so I’ve just touched the surface of it for now.

According to the guy that wrote the piece I linked, adam and eve evolved from non human creatures, they became humans when God gave them a spiritual soul. This was something I pondered on a while back as I’m sure many people might believe to be possible due to the science and discoveries made since Human Generis was written. Why would it not be considered by the church, if God allowed evolution as we have come to know, giving a creature that has evolved to a level of intelligence a soul at a certain point in this evolution process, still makes adam and eve the first true humans, because they have the spiritual soul within them?
I sometimes think that if people believe God made the first two humans separate from all other creatures, it sort of separates us from the whole of creation, but we came from the earth, just as all other living beings did. Although he could have made us “separate” I suppose, just as Genesis describes.

Why not happy agreement? People still believe God is the creator, just have different views on how it all came to be…

 

[simpleas]

Simpleas, Good Morning!

I must write a quote I my wife read recently off a facebook post:

“Be extremely cautious about quotes from famous people that you read on the internet”

• Abraham Lincoln

I find the opinion of the writer on that link interesting, but really, he has no way of knowing whether or not Neanderthals had souls, were self-aware, or what have you. Plenty of people with souls do not bury their dead, and plenty of people with souls demonize (dehumanize) their enemies and may even eat them when they kill them; this was (is?) the norm in some cultures.

And, as has already been pointed out, did Adam and Eve necessarily come after Neanderthals? We have no evidence of this, and I have never read anything from official Church doctrine that says one way or another.

Great find though, Simpleas! I find his stance understandable and acceptable.

Have a great weekend.

Good afternoon Onesheep.

*“Be extremely cautious about quotes from famous people that you read on the internet”

• Abraham Lincoln*

The writer is only speculating, but I thought it too was interesting.

Well, that is something I find hard to understand, if people living today also carry out something’s that we see as dehumanizing, but to them it is their rituals/tradition, are they any less a human than we are? I would say no, and that is why I think of the Neanderthals as being humans.

Just my own opinion

 

[wmw]

This statement quoted is to tell of the scientific definition of “speciation” within the theory of evolution.

In the science of human origin, the speciation event is known as a common ancestor population in the hundreds to thousands. This common population diverges into separate lineages of random-breeding populations diagramed according to clades which are determined by genetic relationships. In this cladistics system, we are an extant population descending from previous populations in the hundreds to thousands. Sample clades. “Trees Not Ladders.” evolution.berkeley.edu/evolib…le/_0_0/evo_07

With only populations in the “hundreds to thousands” defined as the only method of speciation it is evolution that defines that there can’t be a description of human species development where only 2 humans begin the species.

Your description of a single pair of humans emerging from non-humans is not considered evolution. You are free to believe that Adam and Eve had non-human parents according to the Church. It is evolution science that says two people can NOT found a new species. The Church says there were no other founders of humans, but an original pair. Therefore, there is No middle ground where Church and evolution science can agree given the definition and current dogma of humans first appearing on this earth .

 

[grannymh]

, if God allowed evolution as we have come to know, … …

My apology for this out-of–context quote. Yet, it precisely describes the key difference between the Catholic doctrine of human origin and the contemporary science position on human origin.

The actual evolution position that “we have come to know” is that species do not evolve as individuals. Species evolve as populations larger than two. The Catholic Church is one of the few Christian faiths which maintains that two real sole fully-complete human parents founded humankind.

Kindly refer to wmw, post 246, for excellent information.

Why not happy agreement? People still believe God is the creator, just have different views on how it all came to be…

The Catholic Church has not yielded to the big tent theory, which can ignore annoying Catholic doctrines. The big tent is for happy agreement regardless.

God as the Creator is not an annoying doctrine.

Depending on the geographical location and the power of some people wishing to update Catholicism, annoying Catholic doctrines would include Original Sin, the need for the Sacrament of Confession, and in some instances the purpose of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

 

[simpleas]

This statement quoted is to tell of the scientific definition of “speciation” within the theory of evolution.

With only populations in the “hundreds to thousands” defined as the only method of speciation it is evolution that defines that there can’t be a description of human species development where only 2 humans begin the species.

Your description of a single pair of humans emerging from non-humans is not considered evolution. You are free to believe that Adam and Eve had non-human parents according to the Church. It is evolution science that says two people can NOT found a new species. The Church says there were no other founders of humans, but an original pair. Therefore, there is No middle ground where Church and evolution science can agree given the definition and current dogma of humans first appearing on this earth .

Right, so we can say that God may have given a non human a soul, which made that creature into a spiritual human being, that then went on to procreate with another spiritual human being and were the founders of the spiritual human race.

 

[simpleas]

My apology for this out-of–context quote. Yet, it precisely describes the key difference between the Catholic doctrine of human origin and the contemporary science position on human origin.

The actual evolution position that “we have come to know” is that species do not evolve as individuals. Species evolve as populations larger than two. The Catholic Church is one of the few Christian faiths which maintains that two real sole fully-complete human parents founded humankind.

Kindly refer to wmw, post 246, for excellent information.

The Catholic Church has not yielded to the big tent theory, which can ignore annoying Catholic doctrines. The big tent is for happy agreement regardless.

God as the Creator is not an annoying doctrine.

Depending on the geographical location and the power of some people wishing to update Catholicism, annoying Catholic doctrines would include Original Sin, the need for the Sacrament of Confession, and in some instances the purpose of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

I said people believe in God as the creator, but may have different ideas as to how God put it all together, I never said God as the creator is an annoying doctrine?

Thanks

 

[grannymh]

I said people believe in God as the creator, but may have different ideas as to how God put it all together, I never said God as the creator is an annoying doctrine?

Thanks

I am the one who spoke about annoying doctrines. Please refer to post 247.

It is important I that clarified that God as the Creator does not belong to the category of annoying doctrines. However, the reality of a literal Adam and Eve as the sole founders, population of two, of humankind is a very popular annoying doctrine.

Depending on the geographical location and the power of some people wishing to update Catholicism, annoying Catholic doctrines would include Original Sin, the need for the Sacrament of Confession, and in some instances the purpose of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

My apology for not being clearer.

 

[Tomdstone]

Yes neaderthals had souls because they made fire?

300,000 years ago, neanderthal man was using fire on a regular basis. Foods that cannot be digested easily, such as wheat, rice, and potato, became easily digested foods once cooked. Also, cooking killed many parasites in food. AFAIK, no other animal used fire for cooking.

 

[OneSheep]

Well, that is something I find hard to understand, if people living today also carry out something’s that we see as dehumanizing, but to them it is their rituals/tradition, are they any less a human than we are? I would say no, and that is why I think of the Neanderthals as being humans.

Just my own opinion

Hi Simpleas!

When I said “dehumanizing/demonizing” I was referring to the automatic reaction that occurs when resentment is triggered in peoples’ minds. When a person automatically thinks “that person is evil/worthless”, the dehumanization has already occurred in their mind. They have not willed the perception, it has been triggered. It happens in chimpanzees and humans, and probably also (evidence suggests) neandethal-humans.

Just a clarification.

Thanks, and hope you had a great weekend.

 

[wmw]

Right, so we can say that God may have given a non human a soul, which made that creature into a spiritual human being, that then went on to procreate with another spiritual human being and were the founders of the spiritual human race.

Catholics should follow Church teaching that there was an original pair with immortal souls from which all humans with immortal souls came to be without other ancestors. All these decedents have immoral souls, all are human, and no non-human(s) have immortal souls - Yes, I hope we agree on that. Yet, realize this is not considered reasonable by evolution science because it would take God to do something like that.

 

[oldcelt]

Catholics should follow Church teaching that there was an original pair with immortal souls from which all humans with immortal souls came to be without other ancestors. All these decedents have immoral souls, all are human, and no non-human(s) have immortal souls - Yes, I hope we agree on that. Yet, realize this is not considered reasonable by evolution science because it would take God to do something like that.

Catholics, can, and even should follow such a belief. However, modern DNA science has convincingly dis proven that notion.

 

[grannymh]

Catholics, can, and even should follow such a belief. However, modern DNA science has convincingly dis proven that notion.

Modern science cannot probe every action which occurred every day in every place on planet earth going thousands of years backwards in beings with 20,000 to 25,000 genes more or less and billions of chemical base pairs.

svswans.com/black.html

 

[oldcelt]

Modern science cannot probe every action which occurred every day in every place on planet earth going thousands of years backwards in beings with 20,000 to 25,000 genes more or less and billions of chemical base pairs.

svswans.com/black.html

Thousands of years and and 20-25k genomes are now child’s play. Science may not have probed all the secrets…but it is trying.

 

[grannymh]

Thousands of years and and 20-25k genomes are now child’s play. Science may not have probed all the secrets…but it is trying.

May I gently suggest that one learns about the methods and materials in paleoanthropology research where one of the considerations is contaminated DNA. Also, the genome is roughly all the genetic material in an organism. One might find the completed Human Genome Project interesting.

I doubt that dedicated women and men scientists would consider their work child’s play.

genome.ucsc.edu/

sciencemag.org/site/special/neandertal/

 

[oldcelt]

May I gently suggest that one learns about the methods and materials in paleoanthropology research where one of the considerations is contaminated DNA. Also, the genome is roughly all the genetic material in an organism. One might find the completed Human Genome Project interesting. I doubt that dedicated women and men scientists would consider their work child’s play.

genome.ucsc.edu/

sciencemag.org/site/special/neandertal/

Having actually recovered, physically, the evidence of human existence dating back many thousands of years and done the analysis on the same, I can assure you that what is being questioned in this thread is is, indeed, child’s play. The next great announcements will be coming soon and re-write the current knowledge of human existence in North America.
Contaminated DNA is always taken in to account, but is remarkably rare. What, in your knowledge, would be the contaminants involved with samples over 8,000 BP?

 

[Hans_W]

I came across this write up and I’m alittle more informed about Neanderthals than I was!

biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/p83.htm

This is the most bizarre article I’ve read in a very long time. I would not recommend it as basis for any understanding on Neanderthals.

OneSheep has posted a great link: discovermagazine.com/2013/march/14-interbreeding-neanderthals
Here is another more recent one: blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2011/11/14/neanderthal-neuroscience/

That’s what nature tells us. I am convinced that many Christian scientists work on these projects.