David Campbell wrote:
>
> > It should perhaps be noted that some Evangelicals who place a heavy
> >emphasis on original sin as a reason for questioning evolution are either
> >inconsistent or have watered down the doctrine.
>
> Could you explain how these views connect with evolution?
>
> My impression is that the purported opposition of original sin and
> evolution usually reflects misunderstanding of evolution.
I didn't say that the putative connection shows either good science or good
biology but it does get made. Witness, e.g., the James Kennedy quote cited earlier
or the Wells one which Glenn just posted.
I'm not sure what the logic is & suspect that often it's just an idea that
if the traditional recent Adam & Eve view goes then all of Christianity crumbles. If
it's more carefully thought out it's probably something like this: Evolution says
that we act "bestial" because of our evolutionary background & therefore can't really be
blamed for it. I think that evolution does raise such questions, but not so much about
the idea of original sin as of original _righteousness_ - i.e., of the teaching that
humanity was created in a state in which people could _avoid_ sin.
Given what we know about the evolutionary process & the behavior of our closest
surviving relatives (& here's where Glenn's long excursus on bad chimp behavior is
instructive) it's hard to see how to understand such a "state of integrity" as a
condition which persisted for any period of time in the history of real humans. It has
to be understood rather as an expression of the principle that sin is not intrinsic to
proper humanity. But to see what that [proper humanity is we have to consider Christ,
not the first humans.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 13 2000 - 16:53:06 EST