A.Suarez's Treatment on a Pope's Formulation for Original Sin's Transmission!

George
I dare to say that you are confirming what I claim.

Dennis states:

Here he does not clearly distinguish Humanity as community of Image Bearers and the evolving species of “anatomically modern human.”

Thus, when “he finds no evidence of anything dramatically changing in the genome [of modern humans] for 400,000 years”, Dennis suggests that there is no sharp beginning of Humanity either, which clearly contradicts Genesis 1:26-28.

Notice also that this contradicts Point 10 of BioLogos, What We Believe:

“10. We believe that God created humans in biological continuity with all life on earth, but also as spiritual beings. God established a unique relationship with humanity by endowing us with his image and calling us to an elevated position within the created order.” [emphasis mine]

The problem with @DennisVenema position is that he overlooks what Denis Alexander has often stressed: One cannot discuss “Adam and Eve” coherently without “integrating the scientific and biblical narratives.”

Similarly for Ann Gauger @agauger:

She identifies Humanity with Homo genus. And because she rightly keeps to a sharp beginning of Humanity she is led to conclude that Homo genus has a sharp biological beginning too, what is wrong.

Homo sapiens and Homo genus are evolutionary biological constructs: It is biologically impossible to establish when the species Homo sapiens or the genus Homo begins with anything other than arbitrary criteria.[see this Essay]

So I can’t help concluding:

@agauger and @DennisVenema fall in the same pitfall: Lack of distinction between the sharp beginning of Humanity and the fuzzy beginning of a whatever evolutionary biological construct.

1 Like