"Now giants were upon the earth in those days..."
The Nephilim spoken about in the Book of Genesis Chapter 6 come to mind reading Steve Sailer's recent post — Denisovans. Mr. Sailer begins,
He is also right to ask, "So, what happened to the not-so-modern humans who were around back then, like the Neanderthals?" So also is he right to be fascinated by the "new paper that came out today [which] finds evidence of Denisovan ancestry in various islands off the southeast coast of Asia, such as the Mamanwa negritos of the Philippines and Australian Aborigines."
- For the last couple of decades, there has been a popular theological concept that every living human being was 100% descended from modern humans who came Out of Africa about 50,000 years ago, so therefore there hasn't been enough time for evolution to cause any changes among people, so, therefore, Science Proves the complete genetic equality of all human racial groups.
He is also right to ask, "So, what happened to the not-so-modern humans who were around back then, like the Neanderthals?" So also is he right to be fascinated by the "new paper that came out today [which] finds evidence of Denisovan ancestry in various islands off the southeast coast of Asia, such as the Mamanwa negritos of the Philippines and Australian Aborigines."
Labels: Prehistory, Science, The Catholic Faith
11 Comments:
What I've found interesting is that Europeans and Asians have the same rough percentage of Neanderthal DNA, while people of pure African ancestry have none. Why Whites and Asians, but not Blacks?
On the issue of the Neanderthal, I have to take the side of the Kolbe Society and conclude they were, essentially, human in every way we are.
I suspect much of the fossil human record that is considered different species of human will, if looked at from outside the Darwinist blinkers, be considered the same way.
I've read speculation that autism comes from a Neanderthal gene, which is why it is virtually unknown in Africa.
I also wonder whether the Neanderthals could have been the "sons of God" who mated with the "daughters of men" in the same account from Genesis. My mother, a nurse who worked with the developmentally disabled, always called Down's folk "God's people" because of their innocence. Could the Neanderthals have been similarly innocent?
Iosue Andreas Sartorius writes : "Could the Neanderthals have been similarly innocent?"
No.
5 . . . Christ Jesus,
6 who offered himself as a ransom for all. 1Tim:2-5,6
All men on earth are the children of Adam and Eave, and only Adam and Eave.
Re: LtG,
That is correctly stated. Polygenism was condemned by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, the papal encyclical written in 1952.
When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church. [H.G. Para 37]
You both are right. This would mean the Neanderthals were pre-Adamite.
Iosue Andreas Sartorius writes : "This would mean the Neanderthals were pre-Adamite."
No. "or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents."
Neanderthals were men. They had rational souls, which is the specific difference, if it's rational, it's a man no different than you or I.
If they were 'pre-Adamite' then it follows that they had different first parents.
It's really pretty simple. The cause cannot be less than the effect. Thus a rational soul cannot come forth except as specifically created by God. Leave the rest of evolution aside, it does not matter in the least, Man is a new creation.
You could be right about Neanderthals being human (if they had rational souls), and are definitely right about us having only one set of first parents, but could they have been pre-Adamite and mated with humans? Scientifically, probably not.
This discussion sheds some light on the issue, and shuts me up on it:
http://bonald.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/more-on-adam-and-eve/
Speaking of "rational souls":
C.S. Lewis, in his wonderful "Space Trilogy," especially in its first book: "Out of the Silent Planet", discusses rational beings of various species. They are called "Hnau"
Here's an interesting take on it:
http://www.cslewis.org/journal/hnau-what-c-s-lewis-on-what-it-means-to-be-a-person/
- BTW: your chapcha this time is "priest". Odd, or fitting, no?
Neanderthals painted caves for heavens sake. Of course they were rational. Only a rational creature can abstract universals as those painting clearly show us are done. That's specifically the act of an immortal soul. Material souls can't do that.
Secondly, as St. Thomas writes, the specific difference of man is rational. If it's rational, then its a man.
Post a Comment
<< Home