RE: Adam, the first man

From: Wendee Holtcamp (wendee@greendzn.com)
Date: Tue Jun 11 2002 - 16:37:58 EDT

  • Next message: gordon brown: "RE: Adam, the first man"

    Jim wrote:
    > At any rate, I'm going to begin the (painful?) updating of the Adam
    > section of the Genesis in Question website. I don't always
    > get pleasant
    > responses when I suggest that Adam was the first "of the
    > chosen people,"
    > but not the first "technical human."

    This isn't what you asked, but, as I'm sure you're aware, there are a number
    of different possible scenarios with the first Adam given an evolutionary
    creationist perspective. You give one. Another related but not exactly the
    same is that Adam was the first that evolved Spirit or consciousness. I
    believe that Spirit is obviously spiritual, and consciousness is probably an
    evolutionary relict but I see the two as related. In the garden of Eden
    story, it speaks of Adam and Eve as becoming aware of good and evil --
    something I think of as consciousness. In this way, we are different from
    all other created things, and "like God." It could have happened in one gene
    mutation, so there could literally have been one literal Adam. Personally if
    such a thing did indeed happen, then I believe God was also behind it. Such
    is the "punctuated equilibrium" Gould proposed. (ie major evolutionary
    change happening in short periods of time, rather than longer, gradual
    changes). The evolutionary leap to consciousness could have also happened
    more gradually, in which case finding a literal Adam is more difficult.

    Adam could have been a Neanderthal man as I think Glenn proposes, or he
    could have been a modern Homo sapiens or anyone in between. I think its
    important that we don't know, and that there are many possible scenarios
    each with their own theological dilemmas.

    My 0.02, Wendee :)



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 11 2002 - 16:30:59 EDT