As another (relative) newcomer, I am somewhat confused by the consternation
by some about humans having somehow connected to Neanderthals. If I was a
Fundie preacher, I would welcome an explanation of those "sons of God" and
Nephilim found in Chapter 6 of Genesis, and their descendants mentioned at
the end of Numbers 14. (No, don't ask me how they survived the Flood...)
Also, as an OEC, I am intrigue that one can accept evolution, which was
John's first premise, then balk at the thought of the evolution of
humans-in-the-image-of-God, or of the existence of a "Soul."
For myself, if Neanderthals worshiped a higher being, that makes them human
enough for me.
To paraphrase Twain: Man is the only animal that prays. Or needs to.
Warner Robins Georgia
From: Richard Kouchoo [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: Redheads descended from Neanderthals?
I am a newcomer here (actually I've been here a few times in the past) and
been following a few discussion threads quite intently.
I found John Burgeson's take on the creation of soul very interesting:
_Perhaps, just perhaps, the creation of
humans-in-the-image-of-God did not take place as an event -- but as a
process. If one allows that it may be a process, rather than an
event-at-a-moment-of-time, then that process may well have started prior
to both Neanderthal and Homo-sapiens_
However I have an objection to this line of reasoning since its implications
not very comforting. The special, instantaneous creation of the soul is
absolutely necessary, doctrinally speaking. Without it, Christ's death and
resurrection are pointless, since the meaning of sin and specifically,
sin, as Christian tradition has envisaged it for the past two millennia,
redundant. 'A process' of original sin is completely alien to Christian
and Tielhard's ideas are more in line with patheism than Christianity.
My two cents.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 30 2002 - 18:46:00 EST