"Dr. Blake Nelson" wrote:
> > Our knowledge of human evolution strongly
> > suggests that the first
> > humans would have inherited tendencies toward sexual
> > promiscuity, theft,
> > violence and, in general, selfishness. (By
> > "inherited" I do not mean
> > just strictly genetic but also include cultural
> > conditioning.) If this
> > is true then "original righteousness" could mean
> > only the theoretical
> > possibility of them not sinning.
>
> The problem in this regard is we do not know what the
> condition of the first moral agents were for a couple
> reasons. First, we don't know when or how moral
> agency appeared in evolutionary time. Second, even if
> we could pinpoint it, there is no obvious way to make
> a determination whether those people lived in original
> righteousness or not. What archaeological evidence
> would show this? So, I think it is a little
> presumptuous to say that not sinning was only a
> theoretical possibility, although I sympathize with
> that sentiment.
>
> I think there is perhaps an over playing of some of
> our nearest primate relatives as an analogue to
> humans. This stems from the fact that the primate you
> choose as a comparison will result in different
> conclusions. Depending on the sins you want to
> address, you get different "propensities" to sin
> depending on which primates you look at. Bonobos, for
> example, engage in promiscuity, but very little
> violence. Chimpanzees display more violence. Some
> primates display fidelity in mating relationships,
> etc. All of these are imperfect analogues and we can
> only speculate about the lineage of humans and what
> propensities there were in that lineage before humans
> became moral agents. This underscores the difficulty
> of saying which sins were "inevitable."
It's true that you will get a different impression of the
"pre-sinfulness" of our pre-human relatives depending upon which modern
species and which particular sins you consider. But whether you
consider sexual promiscuity, violence, or theft you are seeing some
suggestion of the _curvatus in se_ - in simple terms, the selfishness -
which is characteristic of sin. & aside from individual items of
empirical evidence, one would expect that natural selection would result
in some tendencies of this sort.
The basic problem is not individual sins but the fundamental sin
of putting something - anything - in creation ahead of God. That's what
the First Commandment, Genesis 3, & Romans 1 are about.
& the processes of natural selection, as well as the behaviors of our
close non-human relatives, make it hard to believe that the first
hominids to be aware of God (however that may have happened) would have
had a realistic possibility of fearing, loving, & trusting in God above
all things.
> > Sin would have
> > been - to use a
> > distinction I think of R. Niehbuhr "inevitable"
> > though not "necessary."
>
> Of course, the inevitability of humans sinning has
> been discussed by theology long before evolution came
> into our scientific picture of the world. For
> example, in discussion of God's foreknowledge of the
> Fall, etc. Indeed, the Christian traditions all hold
> (to different degrees) that we are incapable of
> righteousness without God's working in our life
> through Christ and/or the Holy Spirit.
Yes, but the traditional belief has been that before the fall
humans were capable of not sinning at all. Now, even with Christ and
the Holy Spirit, they are not. Christians continue to be sinners until
death. There are, of course, some who will dispute this but I think
that that is possible only if one has a relatively superficial view of
sin.
>
>
> > Acts which were not sinful before, because their
> > ancestors were not
> > moral agents, would have been sinful when they
> > became moral agents.
> > (I.e., it's kind of like the distinction that is
> > supposed to be made in
> > the classic insanity defence.)
>
> Yes, exactly.
>
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 27 2002 - 19:40:50 EDT