Re: A question for TE's

lhaarsma@OPAL.TUFTS.EDU
Mon, 27 Nov 1995 21:10:42 -0500 (EST)

Russ Maatman wrote:

> This morning's paper carried a story about an article in *Nature*
> concerning the Y chromosome, a follow-up on work reported last May.
>
> Analysis of this chromosome indicates that all modern men are descendants
> of one male who lived about 190,000 years ago. I assume "modern"
> includes the last several thousand years.
>
> Here is my question: Did Jesus possess this chromosome?

Interesting question.

Preliminary point: Do you believe that Original Sin and the Curse have
genetic consequences (as well as spiritual and social consequences) for
human beings? If so, then analysis of Jesus' chromosomes might, indeed,
have revealed something unusual about him.

Main point: If God miraculously created some of Jesus' genetic material
to *look like* genetic material from a being from whom he was not
descended,
> then what is the objection against holding that the first human
> beings possessed genetic material which *looked like* the genetic
> material of beings from whom they were not descended?

If it eventually turns out that there ARE evolutionary barriers between
species (or higher taxa), then I would have NO objection to God creating
the first humans (or the first members of ANY species) with genetic
material which *looked like* genetic material from closely related
species. In fact, I would say that it was very wise and proper for God to
create new species with as much genetic homology as possible to existing
species.

If there are NOT evolutionary barriers between species -- if
macroevolution is a scientific possibility -- then for God to miraculously
create new NON-HUMAN species in this way would (I think) be pretty much
the same thing as creating a "false history." I make an exception in the
case of humans because of Genesis 2. Since scriptures give us a _special_
account of _human_ creation, God could not be accused of creating a "false
history" EVEN IF he miraculously created the first humans with this sort
of genetic similarity to other species.

However, I think there are other problems with the idea that all humans
descended from a pair of humans specially created a few tens of thousands
of years ago.

**Theologically and philosophically: Why are there all those hominid
fossils? If God was intending to miraculously create the first pair of
humans, why did he also create all of the species of "intermediate"
hominids over the last 5 million years?

**Scientifically: It does not look (genetically) like all humans
descended from a pair of humans in the recent past. It looks like we all
share a mother (a single source of mitochondrial DNA) from about 100,000
years ago. It looks like all men share a father (a single source of Y
chromosome DNA) less than 190,000 years ago. But -- if I understand
heredity correctly -- this does not mean that ALL human genetic material
came from those two individuals. In fact, I believe that a lot of other
human genetic material _appears_ to have a far older "common ancestor."

I see two ways to avoid those problems, avoid the "appearance of age," and
still keep a more-or-less literalistic reading of Genesis 2: Glenn
Morton's million-year-old Adam hypothesis, or the "two-Adam" approach.

I actually like them both; I have only a few, minor problems with either
of those interpretations.

But since we're on the subject, I'd like to ask Stephen Jones (or anyone)
something about the "two-Adam" idea: I know there are a few passages
which might suggest otherwise (Cain's wife, etc.), but the language and
tone of Genesis 1-11 strongly suggests to me that the author believed
those stories (Adam and Eve, the Fall, the Flood, the Tower of Babel) to
be anthropologically universal --- affecting ALL human beings who then
existed, not just those in Mesopotamia. How do you reconcile this general
tone of Genesis 1-11 with the two-Adam approach?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There's nothing more exciting than science. You get |
all the fun of sitting still, being quiet, writing | Loren Haarsma
down numbers, paying attention. Science has it all!" | lhaarsma@opal.tufts.edu
--Principal Skinner (_The_Simpsons_) |