If Adam was the first Human being. why Isn’t Eden described to be from Africa as the first Homo sapien?
does this mean there were homo sapiens and then there was Adam?
was Adam the first human to be given a soul?
I believe this is the general consensus.
He may not have been the first physical specimen of what we call human, but he was the first God gifted with a rational soul.
Genesis is not history, it is allegory. If you take it historically, you will go wrong.
Eden is placed where moden archeology places the earliest civilizations probably 2K -2.5K years before Genesis was written.
My own take on creation (and there is no support for this so take it with a grain of salt). Homo Sapiens fossels have been found that are over 200,000 years old yet therewas a major change in the artifacts they left about 40-50K years ago. My personal take is that is when God said,“Let Us create man.”
For 150K years Homo Sap was little different from Neandertal then, suddenly, there is art, complex tools, agriculture, buildings, machines, civilization.
My musing, for what it is worth.
They can’t both be true.
I think you misunderstand the Catholic position.
When we received a rational soul is the point when we switched from being primarily instinct-driven beings with some problem solving intelligence, to being fully rational self-aware beings.
Prior to the soul, we had base line intelligence, like what you see in certain classes of primate, after the soul is when we begin to see the development of art, social structure, and the basic aspects of society.
but are not we the soul?
I believe the Garden of Eden is a discontinuous place, a place not part of this physical universe. It is a place apart, like Purgatory, Heaven, or Hell. The description in the Bible is figurative: two known rivers and two unknown rivers, meaning that the Garden of Eden is like this world, and unlike it. It is an unfallen place, where humanity dwelt when we were unfallen.
so Adam was the first man to have a soul?
How can you possibly claim to know this?
Well, because it’s not on this planet and Adam and Eve were the first of their kind.
I don’t claim to know this, and I don’t believe the Church has an official teaching on this. This is just the explanation I’ve heard put forth most often.
The explanation I’ve heard is that the cataclysmic flood of Noah really changed the geography of the planet, so the Tigris River might not be where it is today, and ditto with a lot of other locations.
For the record, our Mormon friends have identified Eden’s location has being in Missouri.
I believe something akin to this. I also think that the descendants of Adam and Eve perhaps mated with some of the non-humans such as the Neanderthals at some point in time. This would explain why we have some Neanderthal DNA in us and why it’s more prevalent in people of European decent than say people of African or native Australian descent. Of course my theory assumes that the Flood was a localized event.
As to where Eden is, well it could just represent the state of the Earth prior to the Fall which is why we can never return to it…we can’t undo the Fall. The description in the Bible that states it was somewhere around the Tigris and Euphrates could refer to where Adam and Eve just happened to live.
The first Homo sapiens or the first ones with a soul?
Humans stand alone. I don’t believe in archaic humans. Granted, there was inbreeding and that led to many issues; however, I don’t believe in soulless Homo sapiens.
Most of these “supposed” archaic humans are based on sparse bone fragments and extensive guessing and reconstruction.
Now that is hilarious.
You need to be educated on this. I cannot do it in a post.
We see them now post-flood. Before the flood, they could have taken vastly different paths.