wrote this interesting piece yesterday. As I thought about it this was my comment, ‘I think that from the religious point of view, the answer is probably that Adam was not the first primate, not the first Cro-Magnon, or even possibly the first carrier of homo sapiens DNA. Fully recognizing the many limitations of Science Inc., I consider the existence of the Earth and of creatures biologically very like ourselves prior to ~6000 years ago to be pretty conclusively established. Whether we believe the Genesis account or not, we can clearly see that there were things very biologically similar to humans for a long long time, but that ~6000 years ago something changed which is hard to pin down but it doesn't seem way off the mark to call it the Creation of Man. But something did change, the observation that something changed is more or less on the level with cogito ergo sum. We are having this conversation ergo something changed.
I am prepared to believe that there were people before that time who were biologically identical with you and I, and they appear to have done the sorts of things that you might expect chimps to do with increased brain power or perhaps some other sorts of biological advantages that you and I might have. It seems clear that they formed communities, used more complicated tools than modern primates do, built some structures, drew some pictures. But what is it that is different between them and us?
I have read several things lately about the differences between Western man and the rest of humanity. It seems that about 1500 years of Christianity have left biological marks on us. A lot of it seems to be due to church law forbidding incest, but probably other things that the church did to change our ancestors way of life have had meaningful impacts. Anyway, the deep secret of the immigration debate is that Christendom's descendants and the rest of the world are not interchangable, despite sharing a lot more in common than any man and any ape.
I suspect that the Adam Change was something similar. I expect, btw, that the impact of the Adam Change has been somewhat muddied by intermarriage with Pre-Adamite biological humans, possibly those referenced in the Hebrew Bible as Giants or even Nephilim. But perhaps, the answer is that rather than being the first biological human Adam was rather the first biological human to carry the Imago Dei. Does this mean the first human with an immortal soul? First with an awareness of eternity and a spiritual world? First monotheist in a world of polytheistic Neanderthals? First believer? First of the Elect?’
I thought it was very interesting and you guys might want to be a part of the conversation.
The Origin of Species-Chimps and Chumps
The Origin of Species-Chimps and Chumps
The Origin of Species-Chimps and Chumps
My friend Luc Koch over at
wrote this interesting piece yesterday. As I thought about it this was my comment, ‘I think that from the religious point of view, the answer is probably that Adam was not the first primate, not the first Cro-Magnon, or even possibly the first carrier of homo sapiens DNA. Fully recognizing the many limitations of Science Inc., I consider the existence of the Earth and of creatures biologically very like ourselves prior to ~6000 years ago to be pretty conclusively established. Whether we believe the Genesis account or not, we can clearly see that there were things very biologically similar to humans for a long long time, but that ~6000 years ago something changed which is hard to pin down but it doesn't seem way off the mark to call it the Creation of Man. But something did change, the observation that something changed is more or less on the level with cogito ergo sum. We are having this conversation ergo something changed.
I am prepared to believe that there were people before that time who were biologically identical with you and I, and they appear to have done the sorts of things that you might expect chimps to do with increased brain power or perhaps some other sorts of biological advantages that you and I might have. It seems clear that they formed communities, used more complicated tools than modern primates do, built some structures, drew some pictures. But what is it that is different between them and us?
I have read several things lately about the differences between Western man and the rest of humanity. It seems that about 1500 years of Christianity have left biological marks on us. A lot of it seems to be due to church law forbidding incest, but probably other things that the church did to change our ancestors way of life have had meaningful impacts. Anyway, the deep secret of the immigration debate is that Christendom's descendants and the rest of the world are not interchangable, despite sharing a lot more in common than any man and any ape.
I suspect that the Adam Change was something similar. I expect, btw, that the impact of the Adam Change has been somewhat muddied by intermarriage with Pre-Adamite biological humans, possibly those referenced in the Hebrew Bible as Giants or even Nephilim. But perhaps, the answer is that rather than being the first biological human Adam was rather the first biological human to carry the Imago Dei. Does this mean the first human with an immortal soul? First with an awareness of eternity and a spiritual world? First monotheist in a world of polytheistic Neanderthals? First believer? First of the Elect?’
I thought it was very interesting and you guys might want to be a part of the conversation.