> 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.
In my view, original sin and the curse affect our genes only in that
they can be defective. Let me digress to explain my point on the possibility
of this defectiveness.
I assume that before Adam and Eve sinned, God protected them so that
they could not, for example, slip and break a leg. Sure, there could
have been slippery places in the Garden, but as long as they completely
depended on God they were safe. In the same way, any radiation--say,
from the sun or other stars--could not damage their genes. After they
sinned, they did not have God's complete protection and so "accidents"
could happen.
Note that I am *not* saying there were any "original sin" genes. So,
then, what about Jesus's genetics? I suppose that, like others of his
contemporaries he could have injured himself. And, that he could have
carried some of those defective genes. After all, we know--it seems
to me--that from the time he was born in the manger that he did not
enjoy the complete protection that seems to have cahracterized God's
care for Adam and Eve before they sinned.
> 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.
Loren, I'm glad that you make the exception for human beings. As you
may realize, the nonnegotiable position I take re evolution is that
human beings were created de novo. We probably disagree on the probability
questions concerning macroevolution, but that is another matter.
> 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 do not hold that our first parents were necessarily created "a few
tens of thousands of years ago." But I do not waver from the position
that we have two parents, Adam and Eve, that Eve is the mother of all
living, and so forth.
>
> 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?
Since, as I have said before, the statement concerning Adam and Eve
is nonnegotiable, then I'd like geneticists, paleontologists, etc.,
to start out with this proposition instead of allowing it to be knocked
down by scientific conclusions. Glenn's idea and the two-Adam idea
seem to me not to be allowable. But there may be something there I
do not see. Concerning our origins, the one thing that I think must
stand is that Adam and Eve were created de novo. When, I don't know.
Where, I don't know. And, lots of other things I don't know!
In Christ,
Russ
email: rmaatman@dordt.edu Home address:
Russell Maatman 401 Fifth Ave. SE
Dordt College Sioux Center, Iowa 51250
Sioux Center, Iowa 51250 Home phone: (712) 722-0421