Where Did Humans Come From?

[FaithT]

I was curious as to how divided posters are on this topic. As a former Catholic, now Lutheran, (who is still unsure if I’m in the right church) I learned from the writings and some communication via email with Edward Feser, that humans may have started as part of a population of hominids but that God gave Adam and Eve souls, making them human. Then their offspring interbred with these other hominids and so on. I’m probably oversimplifying Feser’s theory and it’s been a long time since I’d read it, but what are your thoughts on this idea?
Or do you believe we came from Adam and Eve, whose children interbred with one another and so on?
Other theories?

 

[Tolworth John]

we cam from Adam and Eve,

What does the bible say?

Does it not say that man was from the begining of creation, that is, man has always been man.

 

[disciple Clint]

I was curious as to how divided posters are on this topic. As a former Catholic, now Lutheran, (who is still unsure if I’m in the right church) I learned from the writings and some communication via email with Edward Feser, that humans may have started as part of a population of hominids but that God gave Adam and Eve souls, making them human. Then their offspring interbred with these other hominids and so on. I’m probably oversimplifying Feser’s theory and it’s been a long time since I’d read it, but what are your thoughts on this idea?
Or do you believe we cam from Adam and Eve, whose children interbred with one another and so on?
Other theories?

There is justification for the view you have posted, Many things in the Bible are not intended to be taken literally, it is not a science book or a history book.

 

[Andrewn]

I learned from the writings and some communication via email with Edward Feser, that humans may have started as part of a population of hominids but that God gave Adam and Eve souls, making them human. Then their offspring interbred with these other hominids and so on.

The important thing is that there is a huge difference between modern humans and other huminids. This huge difference is the human spirit.

 

[Aussie Pete]

I was curious as to how divided posters are on this topic. As a former Catholic, now Lutheran, (who is still unsure if I’m in the right church) I learned from the writings and some communication via email with Edward Feser, that humans may have started as part of a population of hominids but that God gave Adam and Eve souls, making them human. Then their offspring interbred with these other hominids and so on. I’m probably oversimplifying Feser’s theory and it’s been a long time since I’d read it, but what are your thoughts on this idea?
Or do you believe we came from Adam and Eve, whose children interbred with one another and so on?
Other theories?

It's crystal clear from God's word that He created Adam and Eve. Catholicism tries to reconcile creation and evolution, and makes a mess of it. A hominid is not a lifeless, human shaped pile of dust. So either Feser is wrong or God's word is false. I trust God's word.

Where are the hominids now? Why would they die out and man thrive? Why no reference to hominids in God's word? Why would hominids and man interbreed? It would be little different from interbreeding with apes. Feser's idea is nonsensical unless you reject God's word. Then anything is possible.

 

[HTacianas]

I was curious as to how divided posters are on this topic. As a former Catholic, now Lutheran, (who is still unsure if I’m in the right church) I learned from the writings and some communication via email with Edward Feser, that humans may have started as part of a population of hominids but that God gave Adam and Eve souls, making them human. Then their offspring interbred with these other hominids and so on. I’m probably oversimplifying Feser’s theory and it’s been a long time since I’d read it, but what are your thoughts on this idea?
Or do you believe we came from Adam and Eve, whose children interbred with one another and so on?
Other theories?

That's more or less what I believe also. Adam and Eve represent humankind in general. The bible says that Adam was first created, and then he became a living soul after the breath of life was breathed into him. So what was Adam between the time he was created until he became a living soul? He was a created being but was not a living soul.

 

[Tolworth John]

a history book.

There I am afraid you are wrong. The bible is a history book and like any book or statement has the right to be taken as truth untill shown not to be correct.
Check out what prof Robert dick Wilson wrote as a result of his studies of the anctient languages in the near east and of the bible.

 

[coffee4u]

I was curious as to how divided posters are on this topic. As a former Catholic, now Lutheran, (who is still unsure if I’m in the right church) I learned from the writings and some communication via email with Edward Feser, that humans may have started as part of a population of hominids but that God gave Adam and Eve souls, making them human. Then their offspring interbred with these other hominids and so on. I’m probably oversimplifying Feser’s theory and it’s been a long time since I’d read it, but what are your thoughts on this idea?
Or do you believe we came from Adam and Eve, whose children interbred with one another and so on?
Other theories?

We came from Adam and Eve who were specially created in the image of God.
They fell and died spiritually and physically.
Only a perfect death could restore the spiritual condition, but the physical won't be restored until the second coming of Christ.

No other way of creating man fits the gospel. Death is God enemy and its fate is the same as that of Satan, the lake of fire. God would never use death or Satan to help shape his creation and then call it 'very good', the very idea is repulsive and yet evolution claims millions of years of death occurred before mankind came to be.

It was not considered interbreeding at that stage. Marrying family occurs through the Old Testament. For example Abraham married to his half sister. God didn't have any laws on family members marrying until the time of Mosses.

 

[disciple Clint]

There I am afraid you are wrong. The bible is a history book and like any book or statement has the right to be taken as truth untill shown not to be correct.
Check out what prof Robert dick Wilson wrote as a result of his studies of the anctient languages in the near east and of the bible.

I have listen to and read the work of many professors, anyone who insists on taking the bible literally is not a bible scholar.

 

[JAL]

I was curious as to how divided posters are on this topic. As a former Catholic, now Lutheran, (who is still unsure if I’m in the right church) I learned from the writings and some communication via email with Edward Feser, that humans may have started as part of a population of hominids but that God gave Adam and Eve souls, making them human. Then their offspring interbred with these other hominids and so on. I’m probably oversimplifying Feser’s theory and it’s been a long time since I’d read it, but what are your thoughts on this idea?
Or do you believe we came from Adam and Eve, whose children interbred with one another and so on?
Other theories?

Wow. I don't know who Edward Feser is but I reached the same conclusion.

I don't know where he stands on evolution. I myself am OEC (Old Earth Creationist).

As you know, incest is avoided this way.

 

[Tolworth John]

I have listen to and read the work of many professors, anyone who insists on taking the bible literally is not a bible scholar.

Yes you are of course correct.

Jesus never lived, never died on a cross and of course did not atone for our sins, sorry sin is not real.

Which leaves one with nothing, nilhism the abcense of any hope or reason for living.

 

[JAL]

Let me qualify that. In my view all living things have souls. Adam and Eve were simply the first humanoids whose soul was geared to experiencing conscience. That's what made them the first humans.

 

[Tuur]

What follows is only speculation: In whatever way God created the universe and this world and all life on it, in Chapter 2 of Genesis we have a specific account of the creation of Adam and Eve.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I was curious as to how divided posters are on this topic. As a former Catholic, now Lutheran, (who is still unsure if I’m in the right church) I learned from the writings and some communication via email with Edward Feser, that humans may have started as part of a population of hominids but that God gave Adam and Eve souls, making them human. Then their offspring interbred with these other hominids and so on. I’m probably oversimplifying Feser’s theory and it’s been a long time since I’d read it, but what are your thoughts on this idea?
Or do you believe we came from Adam and Eve, whose children interbred with one another and so on?
Other theories?

Frankly, I'll have to go on record and say that I'm one of those persons who doesn't think that Genesis chapter 1-11 (at least) should be taken as any sort of literal history, and at the same time, I think that what mainstream scientists say about the long natural history of our world in Evolutionary terms is approximately correct, even where modern humankind is concerned.

As for the issue of "the soul," that is a separate issue. If God exists then it's rational to think that we can be more than just walking meat sticks as well (and we can have spirit and soul) and none of this is specifically dependent upon God's Word.

No, it's dependent upon God Himself.

So, all in all, I wouldn't even worry about the Theory of Evolution. Just focus on Jesus Christ and all that we know about Him as Lord and Savior.

 

[disciple Clint]

Yes you are of course correct.

Jesus never lived, never died on a cross and of course did not atone for our sins, sorry sin is not real.

Which leaves one with nothing, nilhism the abcense of any hope or reason for living.

somewhat of a twisted straw man, isn't it?

 

[BobRyan]

I was curious as to how divided posters are on this topic. As a former Catholic, now Lutheran, (who is still unsure if I’m in the right church) I learned from the writings and some communication via email with Edward Feser, that humans may have started as part of a population of hominids but that God gave Adam and Eve souls, making them human. Then their offspring interbred with these other hominids and so on. I’m probably oversimplifying Feser’s theory and it’s been a long time since I’d read it, but what are your thoughts on this idea?
Or do you believe we came from Adam and Eve, whose children interbred with one another and so on?
Other theories?

The Bible says God created humans in Gen 1 and 2. I believe the Bible.

Eve was made from the rib of Adam - and neither of them had any genetic defects which means their children were perfect.

There is no "hominid- then - man made from the dust of the ground" support in Genesis 1 or 2.

7 Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living person

God was not a hominid
Dust is not a hominid.

The seven day timeline we see for all life on planet Earth in Gen 12:1-3 (from Gen chapters 1-2) is supported in legal code - in Ex 20:11

 

[The Barbarian]

Adam and Eve were the first to have living souls. God doesn't care in the least if you approve of evolution or not. Love, Him, love your fellow humans, and act on that love. Everything else depends on that, not who Adam's father was.

 

[tampasteve]

Overall I think other's have said it better than I as to how it is not a question relevant to salvation. I will add though, that we must take a long step back and look at the actual evidence being presented on the "human tree". May some of it be real? Probably. Is it as clear cut as many scientists present? No, not at all.

Look, scientists can't even decide if T-rex was one species, three species, several sub-species etc. and we have many T-rex fossils. Scientists are not even sure why we see so few juvenile dinosaur fossils, one running theory is that many of the dinosaur "species" we have listed are actually juvenile of other species. These issues are for animals that we have many to even thousands of fossils of a particular dinosaur.

How much more uncertain are we really when we are talking about building the tree of "human evolution" when we are building it off of a handful (at best) or one fossil? The evidence is presented as "fact" when in reality is is anything but.

 

[The Barbarian]

Look, scientists can't even decide if T-rex was one species, three species, several sub-species etc. and we have many T-rex fossils.

That's a consequence of common descent. As Darwin pointed out, there are many transitional populations that are difficult to classify, because they have not evolved sufficiently from other populations to say for sure whether or not they are a separate species. Humans and Neandertals are like that. We are certainly different races, but it's a matter of opinion whether or not we are different species. If creationism were true, this would not be the case; there would be nice divisions between species.

How much more uncertain are we really when we are talking about building the tree of "human evolution" when we are building it off of a handful (at best) or one fossil?

How many hominid fossils do you think we have? You might be surprised at the growing number of them. Here's a list of the important ones:
List of human evolution fossils - Wikipedia

The outline is more and more clear, but we may never have the complete picture. For what that's worth.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

It is well known among Scripture experts that the first five books of the Bible,
were written 500 years after the rest of the Pentateuch. In other words, the
author Moses, had the last five books committed to memory before writing the
creation story.

So, is it literally accurate? Science proves it's not, but allegorical and
the meaning of the story has meaning beyond being the historical fact
behind creation.