Re: ORIGINS: a new successful prediction for my view 2/2

Stephen Jones (sejones@ibm.net)
Tue, 12 Nov 96 05:42:19 +0800

Group

On Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:29:07, Glenn Morton wrote:

GM>Stephen wrote of the Neanderthal flute:

SJ>Even conceding that this was a "flute" (which is open to doubt since
>it is broken and cannot be played and our resident musicians doubt
>that it could have played), how is this a problem for Ross' view?
>The date of "45,000 years ago" is well within Ross' 60,000 years for
>Adam.

GM>It is a problem for Ross because Ross wrote:
>
>"From a biblical standpoint, I see Neanderthals as one of
>the nephesh, soulish (not spiritual) creatures God made before he
>made humans. In other words, the Neanderthals must have been a
>bipedal mammalian species created a few tens of thousands of
>years before Adam and Eve. Neanderthals became extinct, possibly
>as the rusult of some climactic upheaval, at least several
>thousand years before the creation of Adam and Eve."~Hugh Ross,
>"Link with Neanderthals Cut by Computer," Facts & Faith, 9:3, 3rd
>Qtr. 1995, p. 2
>
>Since Neanderthal is not to be considered human, when Neanderthal shows
>evidence of an artistic spirit, it becomes a problem.

While I disagree with Ross about his "soulish" - "spiritual"
distinction, the existence of a musical instrument (if indeed it was
a musical instrument), being played by a Neanderthal (if indeed it
was played by a Neanderthal), 15,000 years *after* Ross' date for
Adam, is no problem for his view, since his criteria for humanity is
not music but spirituality:

"Neither are the painting and fabric discoveries conclusive evidence
of the human spirit. Certain bird species are capable of weaving.
Some create elaborate nests. Some even adorn their nests with
colorful objects that serve no apparent purpose but decoration. In
the case of the cave drawings and pottery fragments, the degree of
abstractness suggests the expression of something more than just
intelligence. Certainly no animal species other than human beings
has ever exhibited the capacity for such sophisticated expression.
However, the dates for these finds are well within the biblically
acceptable range for the appearance of Adam and Eve somewhere between
10,000 and 60,000 years ago according lo Bible scholars who have
carefully analyzed the genealogies. Since the oldest art and fabrics
date between 25,000 and 30,000 years ago, no contradiction exists
between anthropology and Scripture on this issue." (Ross H, "Art and
Fabric Shed New Light on Human History", Facts & Faith, Reasons To
Believe: Pasadena CA, Vol. 9, No. 3, Third Quarter 1995, pp1-2)

Now Ross may be wrong about this criterion (I believe he is - at
least in part), but his view is at least internally consistent, and
hence immune from criticisms like Glenn's that use a different set of
criteria and then try to show that Ross is inconsistent with those.

In any event, Glenn's 5.5 mya Homo habilis Adam view is so much more
inconsistent with both Scripture and science, and has so many more
problems than Ross' view, that Glenn is in no position to criticise
Ross until he gets his own house in order (Lk 6:42).

God bless.

Steve

-------------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen E (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ sejones@ibm.net |
| 3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ Steve.Jones@health.wa.gov.au |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ Phone +61 9 448 7439 (These are |
| Perth, West Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
-------------------------------------------------------------------