Evolution

[Era Might]

I'm not too scientifically savvy, so bear with me, but my point is more about theology than biology.

In what way can a species "evolve" into the human species? Every living thing has a soul. Except for the mystery of the hypostatic union, a human only has one soul (which is personal). If an ape were to "evolve" into a man, that would have to mean that a creature with a soul received another soul. But this can't happen.

So theologically, wouldn't it have to be said that man can evolve from MATTER, but not from another creature? I guess, if the Ape were dead, then the matter of the Ape could "mutate" or whatever they call it and evolve into the matter of man, at which point God infuses a personal soul. And so it would be said that the body of an Ape provided the body of man, but an Ape did not become a man. Is this what is meant in biology when it is said something "evolves", or does it mean that a living Ape can "evolve" into a living man? I don't see how this can be squared theologically.

Anyone know?

[goldenchild17]

Too much jumping through hoops if you ask me. That's one reason I abandoned the idea.

[Aloysius]

scientifically, an ape doesn't just evolve into a man lol (please excuse my slight chuckle, no offence intended)

it would happen that a slightly new species would appear by being born out of a different species. this generally happens in waves (contrary to what Darwin thought) where there are long periods of no evolution, then a generation has a slight genetic defect on the dna code and it becomes a radically different species... all sorts of genetic defects may arise but only the beneficial ones will remain

ergo, the original two humans would, in this position, have had parents who were not fully human (and thus did not have rational, eternal souls)

if you're a parent and have ever feared your children may have surpassed you intellectually, just think of the parents of the first human beings! they would be the equivalent of their kids' pets!

did you know that the most minute defect in a pig's DNA would give them wings? all the genetic info for how to make wings is contained within the pig's dna for some reason...

[Era Might]

But that's the thing. You say Adam and Eve had animals for parents, but if they had parents, that means they were living things. Say Adam and Eve came from Apes (or whatever). That would mean they were Apes too, because a creature can only produce its own kind, and if they did come from Apes (or whatever), then that means they were living beings with a non-rational soul. Which would mean that God would have to destroy that soul, at which point they would cease to be living beings, and then they would be infused with a new, rational soul, at which point they would become human beings.

This doesn't make sense to me. Genesis speaks of man being made from the "slime" of the earth, and this makes sense, because slime is not a living thing. Hence, whatever the "slime" is, it's just matter, not a living being, and would pose no problems as far as souls go.

The only option I see is what I explained above, that God would have to kill the creature that had evolved, thereby killing its non-rational soul, and then the matter would be given a rational soul and become a human being. But this seems strange, that God would kill a soul and then give a new soul as a new being. It's basically reincarnation, except it's your first incarnation, but in a body that was incarnated by another soul at one point. I suppose it's possible, but it doesn't sound reasonable.

[Aloysius]

no, the genetic mutation produces a new species... ergo the one who is conceived and born is an entirely new species.

evolutionary genetic mutation occurs at conception (or, for the elite few, by radioactive accident evolving them into superhumans)

[Era Might]

So your saying that the Ape (or whatever creature) would procreate the normal way, but at the moment of conception, there is a genetic mutation that makes their offspring an entirely new species (in this case, human)?

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1075268' date='Sep 26 2006, 12:08 AM']did you know that the most minute defect in a pig's DNA would give them wings? all the genetic info for how to make wings is contained within the pig's dna for some reason...
[/quote]

Some people at my school are actually trying to work on that...

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1075278' date='Sep 26 2006, 01:24 AM']
So your saying that the Ape (or whatever creature) would procreate the normal way, but at the moment of conception, there is a genetic mutation that makes their offspring an entirely new species (in this case, human)?
[/quote]
That is correct, however, the process is much more gradual. There are theoretically a lot of transitional forms that lead to a new species. The problem that evolutionary theory has faced from critics is that there are still a lot of "missing links" in the fossil record.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1075278' date='Sep 26 2006, 01:24 AM']
So your saying that the Ape (or whatever creature) would procreate the normal way, but at the moment of conception, there is a genetic mutation that makes their offspring an entirely new species (in this case, human)?
[/quote]
sure. maybe in the very egg and sperm the genetic mutation already began. it's the DNA code that changes... but in every species there are entire strands of code with superfluous information with one thing right before it that says "do not read the following instructions" and another line right after it which says "resume reading instructions"... if the proteins which say "do not read the following" are missing, then that whole line of genetic code becomes part of the being which was procreated.

it is thus possible that someday a pig will be born with wings.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1075281' date='Sep 26 2006, 01:27 AM']
Some people at my school are actually trying to work on that...
[/quote]
Genetic engineering is one of the most dangerous technologies ever developed. Not to mention the multitude of moral problems.

[Era Might]

So what is there to prevent this from happening in humans? If another species procreate a mutated new species, is it possible for a female human to conceive a new species? And what problem does that present theologically? Would we baptize this new species?

[Aloysius]

[quote name='thedude' post='1075282' date='Sep 26 2006, 01:29 AM']
That is correct, however, the process is much more gradual. There are theoretically a lot of transitional forms that lead to a new species. The problem that evolutionary theory has faced from critics is that there are still a lot of "missing links" in the fossil record.
[/quote]
a proper reading of the fossil record and the genetic code shows that, actually, the process is very sudden and rapid every so often; not gradually as traditional darwinian theory predicted.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1075287' date='Sep 26 2006, 01:34 AM']
a proper reading of the fossil record and the genetic code shows that, actually, the process is very sudden and rapid every so often; not gradually as traditional darwinian theory predicted.
[/quote]
I can believe that, but is it correct to say a chimpanzee isn't going to give birth to a modern homo sapiens?

[Aloysius]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1075286' date='Sep 26 2006, 01:32 AM']
So what is there to prevent this from happening in humans? If another species procreate a mutated new species, is it possible for a female human to conceive a new species? And what problem does that present theologically? Would we baptize this new species?
[/quote]
I don't know what other information our dna code holds... the human genome project might shed some light on that...

there is not really any danger of devolution... and it is possible that the first rational humans with souls were not homo homo sapiens (which is what we are)... so if there was to be another step it would very likely be divinely ordained and we ought to baptize it and all that. it would still have the full developement of a rational mind that we have, it would just have some other feature.

it's very unlikely that it will occur (especially within our lifetime, or for that matter our millenium or within tens of millenia from now) but it would not be de-evolved, it would be added upon but still retain the eseential nature of a human body.

[quote name='thedude' post='1075290' date='Sep 26 2006, 01:39 AM']
I can believe that, but is it correct to say a chimpanzee isn't going to give birth to a modern homo sapiens?
[/quote]
yes, that would be correct. the parents of adam and eve (assuming, of course, they had them) would not be apes, but a non-evolved species not that dissimilar than us.

[goldenchild17]

I don't think I'll get into this debate much because honestly I am so scientifically illiterate it's not funny. But I do have a couple questions to learn more about the theory.

Has there ever been a point that scientists could point to and say that here is an example where y was born from x, and is not the same species as x?

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1075294' date='Sep 26 2006, 01:43 AM']
I don't think I'll get into this debate much because honestly I am so scientifically illiterate it's not funny. But I do have a couple questions to learn more about the theory.

Has there ever been a point that scientists could point to and say that here is an example where y was born from x, and is not the same species as x?
[/quote]
Not that I know of. I am pretty sure it has never been observed (if it was we'd have heard about it), although adaptation has been observed on the microscopic level (super bacteria that become immune to antibiotics, etc.).

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='thedude' post='1075310' date='Sep 26 2006, 01:00 AM']
Not that I know of. I am pretty sure it has never been observed (if it was we'd have heard about it), although adaptation has been observed on the microscopic level (super bacteria that become immune to antibiotics, etc.).
[/quote]

Well that's what I'm wondering. I know micro-evolution seems to be a fact and I accept that no problem. It's obvious that there are many different kinds of people with many different characteristics. But we're all still people. Same with dogs and cats and just about any animal you can think. But I didn't know if there was an actual species jump observation, I am not aware of such so that's why I asked. It just seems to me that if everything came about through these species jumps, that at least one of them would've been discovered... I dunno.

[Aloysius]

it happens once every couple tens-of-thousands of years... according to the archaelogical record and the corresponding dna evidence that traces it all back.

of course you could just say that each of these species was created uniquely in each of these eras and they just happen to look the same and each one's beginning just happens to mark the end of the other one... but it wouldn't account for the dna record nor the fact that it is proven that the slightest variation in a dna sequence could produce a new species by having its formation in the womb read these sequences of dna that would not be read in the rest of its species...

[goldenchild17]

ok but don't we have way more species than could evolve every tens of thousands of years? Or is the earth really that much older than anyone expected?

[Aloysius]

they couldn't have all evolved from one single thing all by chance, I'd say. I'll jump ship as we expand into biology and geology... i'm an anthropologist and i'm tired anyway...

I know we can be fairly certain that the earth is at least 600 million years old

dinosaurs were around 65 million years ago, even in that time there's plenty of tens of thousands of years...