ASA friends:
During recent months I've encountered on this listserv several ideas
concerning the origin of the human race which bother me. Earlier, I
contended for what I think is the correct approach to the question.
I want to try again. Very likely my argument on the origin of the human
race got too mixed up with other issues. Besides, I have never won any
prizes for clarity.
In case you do not have time to read this rather long post, here is the
summary of my argument: God created human beings in his image. We have no
means of knowing that fossils, behavior associated with the living beings
which became fossilized, and the structure of those beings and say, "These
beings were created in the image of God." God could have created beings
which seemed to be like us, but which did not bear his image. Adam and Eve
were the parents of all human beings. When they sinned, they broke but did
not destroy that image. Christ's salvation consists of restoring that
image. Therefore, the image of God consists first of all in that which
Christ redeems. This understanding of the origin and nature of the human
race enables one to understand the "problem" biblical passages which some
say indicate the existence of "human" beings which were either pre-Adamites
or contemporary with Adam.
__________________________________________________________
Following is a more detailed discussion of my argument. For convenience in
later discussion, I use numbered points.
First, the over-all picture: (1) Adam and Eve were created in the image of
God. (2) Adam and Eve are the parents of the human race. (3) Therefore,
each human being bears the image of God. (4) Being human means bearing that
image and bearing that image means being human. (5) Since Adam and Even
fell into sin, the image every human being bears is broken. (6) Redemption
by Christ, who is God, consists of restoring the broken image of God in
his people.
Second, possible problems with the over-all picture: (7) Fossil evidence
points to human-like behavior of ancient beings who lived as long as a few
million years ago. (8) DNA and other biological evidence suggests common
ancestry for modern humans and other primates. (9) Evidence suggests the
structure of human language may be over 80,000 years old. (10) Certain
biblical passages seem at first glance to suggest the existence of
pre-Adamites and human contemporaries or Adam.
My thesis which ties these ten points together is this: The image of God is
not detected or determined by behavior, mental capacity, or body structure.
Beings which do not bear the image of God could still carry out human-like
activities and could be physically similar to human beings. Rather, the
image of God is that which makes human beings human; it is that which needs
restoring by Christ.
I shall now discuss the ten points.
For points (1)-(6), to conserve space I provide only biblical references.
(I know! People can be a tad obnoxious when they quote the Bible and say,
"This is what I believe! What do you believe?" But let's take up discussion
of these references in later posts.) I base the six points mainly on these
passages: Point (1): Gen. 1:26-27, 5:1. Point (2): Gen. 2:23. Points (3)
and (4): Gen. 5:3. 9:6; I Cor. 11:7; James 3:9. Points (5) and (6): Col.
3:10; Rom. 8:29; I Cor. 15:49; 2 Cor. 3:18.
Now, concerning the problems with these six points. For Point (7), some of
the fossil evidence I have seen cited on this listserv are the following:
Three million years ago (mya) an Australopithecine picked up a stone
because he saw a human face on it; 2.6 mya Australopithecines could plan
days ahead (they could butcher in places they had not made the butchering
tools and then later return the tools); for a 2.5 mya hominid, apparently a
tool-user, bones had been cut and broken; a 2.34 mya old tool factory has
been discovered; 800 thousand years ago (kya) hominids crossed the sea to
colonize Indonesian islands; there were "industries" in northern Spain by
ca. 400 kya; _Homo erectus_ of 350-424 kya built a village, with campsite,
shelters, hearths, workshops, paved area, small tools, engraved sets of
lines indicating abstract thinking, and an altar; between 233 and 800 kya
_Homo erectus_ modified a stone to make it look like a female figure;
anatomically modern Neanderthal was in Europe 35 kya; Neanderthal
sophisticated artwork of 32-35 kya has been found; and 11.5 kya skull in
Brazil similar to Australian aborigine, proving the ability to sail great
distances.
For point (8) some of the DNA and hemoglobin evidence I have seen cited on
this listserv are the following: hemoglobin data seems to relate us to
hominids of 400 kya, with the method capable of going back 1.3 mya, better
than mtDNA (200-400 kya); some pseudogenes are common to animals and man.
For Point (9), some of the linguistic evidence I have seen cited on this
listserv are the following: because Australians separated from other people
ca. 80 kya and their language has the same structure as other languages,
language began at least 80 kya.
For Point (10), some "problem passages" are the following: Gen. 4:13-17:
Cain said to the LORD, "My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you
are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I
will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill
me." But the LORD said to him, "Not so ; if anyone kills Cain, he will
suffer vengeance seven times over." Then the LORD put a mark on Cain so
that no one who found him would kill him. So Cain went out from the Lord's
presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden. Cain lay with his
wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then
building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch.
Gen. 6:1-2: When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters
were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were
beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.
My response to the arguments implied in Points (7)-(10) follows.
Point (7): Some of the beings represented by these fossils may indeed have
been descendants of Adam. But there ought not to be a problem with claiming
that some of these beings, in spite of their activities, did not bear God's
image.
Point (8): Let's be wary of claiming that DNA and other biological evidence
proves human beings and other primates have common ancestry. We've insisted
many times on this listserv that this is a universe in which everything
"fits in." It is fine tuned. No wonder modern humans and some animals are
close genetically. As for genetic "errors," we can call them errors only if
we know the mind of God. In the past, many of us have decried the argument
which says that God is in the gaps, that is, places we do not understand.
Let's not make a similar mistake by postulating something concerning
genetic "errors," which represent gaps in our genetic knowledge.
Point (9): Here the matter can go either way. Perhaps human language is
80,000 years old. Or, it could be that non-human beings could speak. The
ability to speak doesn't prove the speaker bears the image of God.
Point (10): To understand Cain's worry, we must go back to Adam's search
for a "suitable helper" (Gen. 2:20). Adam did not find a suitable helper,
although the fact of his looking around suggests there might have been some
candidates. Perhaps Cain knew of these candidates and so was worried. There
is no evidence he "married" one of them. Is there an objection to the idea
that in fact he married his sister?
The "sons of God" married the "daughters of men." It's been suggested that
angelic beings married human beings. Rather, it seems that the "sons of
God" were men who should have married the women who were "daughters of
God." Although God told his covenant people not to marry unbelievers, they
broke that law.
Russ
Russell Maatman
e-mail: rmaat@mtcnet.net
Home: 401 5th Avenue
Sioux Center, IA 51250
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 09 2000 - 18:06:00 EST