>Thank you Glenn for working on my questions. In response to my question
>about the relationship between hominids and the historical first couple you
>replied that we need to define what a human is and that some have postulated
>that God intervened at some point along the way of hominid development and
>called the suitably advanced model Adam and Eve. (Sorry about the paraphrase
>|: ) I have a couple of problems with that theory. First, its only reason
>for existence seems to be to hook the hominids to scripture. I have never
>heard any scriptural or extrabiblical support for this idea. Secondly, it
>doesn't get around the problem of a first couple. If God had waited until the
>hominids had evolved to Cro-Magnon, then breathed into some couple the breath
>of life to make them the first couple, what happened to the rest of the
>Cro-Magnon population? It doesn't seem to fit God's character to just wipe
>them out.
I don't think what I hold to is your "suitably advanced model Adam and Eve."
I throw some twists on to the story (I would refer you to
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm See the Theory article or check the
ASA archives. It is there.) I agree with your objection to pulling out two
Cro-Magnons and breathing life into them. This is precisely what is wrong
with what Hugh Ross is doing. Modern Humans appeared 60,000 years prior to
when Hugh Ross says is the absolute oldest that mankind can appear if the
Bible is to be true. The only logical conclusion from Ross' stand is that the
Bible is untrue. Secondly, there is a transitional series of fossils from Homo
erectus to Homo sapiens. They are classed as "Archaic Homo sapiens" because
there is no clear morphological dividing line between us and erectus. When you
realize that most of the differences are in ths skull and the post cranial
bones are quite similar anyway, those who exclude the fire-making, Homo
erectus from humanity are excluding someone with only minor morphological
differences from us anyway.
The fact is that we find evidence of humanity long long ago, much earlier than
the time most Christians are looking for Adam. Mankind is the only animal
with an enlarged region of the brain known as Broca's area. (There is another
area known as Wernickes area also) It is used for speech. This area is first
found in the molds of the skull of homo habilis 2.4 million years ago. Since
only mankind talks, and that ability seems to be related to Broca's and
Wernicke's areas of the brain, the possession of it by a being 2.4 million
years ago would imply that maybe he could talk! In my opinion if you are
going on a search for Adam, you must go back before this time.
>To my question about unanswerable questions you replied "Sure but people
> are too quick to use this as a cop out to avoid having to answer difficult
> questions." I have heard that phrase before also. I suspect that the answer
to the exact Process that God used to create the first couple is akin to the
>question of God's soverignity versus man's free will or other questions we
>Christians have been arguing about for centuries.
Here you touched on something dear to my heart. I think there is a way to
unite freewill and determinism in one object. There is a mathematical object
known as Sierpinski's Gasket. Take 3 points and a starting point (s)
<pre>
.1,2
.s
.3,4 5,6.
</pre>
Take a die and roll it. If you roll a 1 or 2 move half the distance to the
1,2 point, a 3 or 4 move half the distance to the 3,4 point similarly for the
5 and 6 point. Make that new point your next starting point. Repeat this for
20,000 iterations or so and you will have the most beautiful series of
infinitly regressing triangles you will ever see.
This object combines free will with determinism. The choice of which dot to
move towards (1,2 or 3,4 or 5,6) is made with the roll of a die and is
therefore free. But the outcome everytime you do this (regardless of the
order of the choices) is determined to be the triangles I mentioned above.
There are lots of mathematical objects like this which unite randomness with
determined outcome. I would suggest that maybe we humans follow the same
rules. We are given free choices, but God has determined the outcome.
For a reference to this object get any book on nonlinear dynamics or chaos
theory.
glenn