On Fri, 28 Feb 1997 06:22:04 -0600, Glenn Morton wrote:
GM>There is a report in the New York Times this morning which says
>that early man was inhabiting Siberia 300,000 years ago. This too
>is confirmatory my view that archaic humans were very much like
>modern, technologically primitive peoples. To inhabit Siberia,
>clothing, and probably tight fitting clothing was believed to be
>necessary. It is cold up there. The article says that along with
>the spears reported in Nature, this also indicates the creativity of
>archaic hominids.
Again, I wish to reiterate that I appreciate the quotes that Glenn posts
of recent discoveries in anthropology. I have no problem with them at
all and they basically confirm my Pre-Adamite views. But
strangely enough they do not confirm Glenn's extreme Old-Adam views!
Glenn believes that "the creativity of archaic hominids" was such
that:
1. An australopithecine/Homo habilis/homo erectus called Noah built a
three-decker Ark 5.5 mya.
2. The Ark landed in Africa after the Flood in the Mediterranean.
3. The technology needed to build the Ark was lost for 5.2 mya but
slowly began to be regained about 0.3 mya.
4. Evidence of Noah's descendants for these 5.3 years was lost in the
African jungle.
So these discoveries of emerging hominid intelligence only hundreds
of thousands of years ago cited by Glenn do not support his extreme
Old-Adam view at all and in fact they are actually *fatal* to it.
There is of course not even a scrap of Biblical or anthropological
evidence for these claims by Glenn.
GM>Could this have been modern man? no. Anatomically modern people
>do not appear until 120,000 years ago
Agreed. So on Glenn's theory, Adam and Noah were not even
"Anatomically modern people"? If Adam was not of our species, then
he cannot be our representative. Jesus was the second Adam (Rom
5:14; 1Cor 15:22), and He was a member of our species, Homo sapiens
sapiens. Therefore, the first Adam was also a member of our species,
Homo sapiens sapiens.
GM>This discovery means that other old-earth creationists who believe
>that humanity was created less than 60-100 thousand years ago must
>now explain why the making of clothing for warmth is not
>characteristic of humanity.
They have already done this but blithely Glenn ignores it (as usual).
For example, Hugh Ross defines the essential "characteristic of
humanity" as "awareness of God and capacity to form a relationship
with Him":
"In Genesis 1, God speaks of adham (male and female), and only adham,
as being made in His image. The point is emphasized by repetition.
As humanity's story unfolds through subsequent chapters, we discover
that what makes humans different is a quality called "spirit." None
of the rest of Earth's creatures possesses it. By "spirit" the Bible
means awareness of God and capacity to form a relationship with Him.
Worship is the key evidence of the spiritual quality of the human
race, and the universality of worship is evidenced in altars,
temples, and religious relics of all kinds. Burial of dead, use of
tools, or even painting do not qualify as evidence of the spirit, for
non-spirit beings such as bower birds, elephants, and chimpanzees
engage in such activities to a limited extent." (Ross H., "Creation
and Time" 1994, p140)
Glenn must know that Ross believes this, but he evidently believes if
you repeat something often enough, people will believe it is true:
GM>Since clothing is part of the fall, I see little future in that
>approach.
That "clothing is part of the fall" is true. But that brief pre-Fall
condition of nakedness with no shame only applied to Adam and Eve *in
Eden* (Gn 2:25). If there were hominid species before Adam and Eve
(which the Bible neither confirms nor denies), then there is no
reason why they would not wear clothing for warmth, especially those
who lived in cold climates. Glenn here assumes what he wishes to
prove, namely these hominids were fallen descendants of Adam and Eve.
GM>In order to save the hypothesis that mankind is a late creation,
>these approaches are going to have to remove everything human from
>the sphere of humanity. As it stands now, art, music, building of
>huts, paving, digging post-holes, underground mining and now
>clothing are not indicative of humanity. What is left?
"What is left" is the one unique think that only Homo sapiens sapiens
is known to possess, namely "awareness of God and capacity to form a
relationship with Him".
Group
On Sun, 02 Mar 1997 17:30:45 -0600, Glenn Morton wrote Re: Oldest
Stone Tools and Intelligence:
[...]
GM>All of the above, combined with the other new discoveries, that
>Homo erectus was a hunter, not a scavenger and that some hominid
>lived in Siberia, 300,000 years ago, has shown that ancient man was
>far more intelligent and resourceful than was previously believed.
Again, I thank Glenn for these anthropology posts. Keep them coming!
GM>Of Christian apologetical view, mine is the only one which can
>easily incorporate such discoveries.
This is a presumptuous claim. Glenn simply ignores those "Christian
apologetical views" (eg. my Pre-Adamite model) which he cannot
handle, and picks on only those views which he thinks he can handle
(eg. YECs and some aspects of Hugh Ross). I have cited fairly
mainstream Pre-Adamite views, such as those contained in the
conservative evangelical Tyndale series commentary on Genesis by
Kidner:
"Man in Scripture is much more than homo faber, the maker of tools:
he is constituted man by God's image and breath nothing less. It
follows that Scripture and science may well differ in the boundaries
they would draw round early humanity: the intelligent beings of a
remote past, whose bodily and cultural remains give them the clear
status of 'modern man' to the anthropologist, may yet have been
decisively below the plane of life which was established in the
creation of Adam. If, as the text of Genesis would by no means
disallow, 2 God initially shaped man by a process of evolution it
would follow that a considerable stock of near-humans preceded the
first true man, and it would be arbitrary to picture these as
mindless brutes. Nothing requires that the creature into which God
breathed human life should not have been of a species prepared in
every way for humanity, with already a long history of practical
intelligence, artistic sensibility and the capacity for awe and
reflection.
On this view, Adam, the first true man, will have had as
contemporaries many creatures of comparable intelligence, widely
distributed over the world. One might conjecture that these were
destined to die out, like the Neanderthalers (if indeed these did),
or to perish in the Flood, leaving Adam's lineal descendants, through
Noah, in sole possession. Against this, however, there must be
borne in mind the apparent continuity between the main races of the
present and those of the distant past, already mentioned, which seems
to suggest either a stupendous antiquity for Adam (unless the whole
accepted dating of prehistory is radically mistaken, as some have
tried to show - e.g., Whitcomb and Morris, Op. Cit.) or the
continued existence of 'pre-Adamites' alongside 'Adamites' .
(Kidner D., "Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary"
Tyndale Press: London, 1967, pp28-29)
Glenn hopes to ignore other views as though they never existed in
order to leave his as the winner by default. Glenn's "view" is that
Adam was an Australopithecus/Homo habilis/homo erectus who lived 5.5
mya, built a 3-decker Ark and then lost all his technology, vanishing
wihout trace in the African jungle until he started to regain his
technology about 0.3 mya.
This view can "easily incorporate such discoveries" that "ancient man
was far more intelligent and resourceful than was previously
believed" because it has no tangible connection with either Biblical
or anthropological reality.
As I have said many times (but which Glenn just ignores), the
discoveries documenting the emergence of intelligence and technology
in hominids only hundreds of thousands of years ago, that Glenn cites
as supporting his theory, actually decisively refute it. What Glenn
needs (but doesn't have) is evidence of *fully developed"
intelligence and technology in hominids *5.5 million* years ago.
Glenn does not have to answer my *posts* (they are to the Group, not
to Glenn), but on Glenn's own strict standards of honesty and
integrity that he routinely applies to other Christian apologists,
Glenn cannot simply ignore the Pre-Adamite *position* as though it
doesn't exist.
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) |
-------------------------------------------------------------------