> Here's my basic question: how can we continue to recognize the reality and
significance of evil, which is so clearly presented in the Genesis story of the
Fall and its aftermath, while also accepting physical death and human origins
through evolution as part of God's good creation?
Physical death as we know it now is tainted by sin. However, some sort of
transformation seems to be necessary in going from earthly to eternal
existence, as evidenced by Enoch and Elijah and possibly by the unusual
features of the Lord's post-resurrection appearances.
One possibility might be the situation in Out of the Silent Planet, in which
unfallen creatures have some of the effects of Satan's attack, including death,
without having sin.
The most important point, however, is that God has created us and given us
directions on how we should live. The method of creation has nothing to do
with whether His laws are binding.
>If the Garden of Eden was not a specific place in time nor an accurate
representation of a situation that actually ever existed in human (and
pre-human) evolution, how do we understand the aftermath of the Fall?
God could have taken humans, created physically though evolution, and put them
in a garden. At any rate, He put them into a state of communion with Himself
which was broken through disobedience.
> Has anyone seen a good critique of C.S. Lewis's ideas on human evolution and
the Fall, one that would allow retention of Lewis's important theological
insights without requiring one to slight evolution? My son is well aware of
evolution, and is asking some very good questions, likely better than my
answers will ever be, but I'm trying.
Actually, my impression was that he was generally accepting evolution. E.g.,
in Perelandra, when Ransom sees the human-like aquatic creatures while riding
the fish after Weston, he speculates a bit on the evolution of inhabitants of
Venus and whether it was like ours. Mere Christianity has some evolutionary
speculations, suggesting that becoming a Christian could be viewed as an
evolutionary next step for humanity. This is sort of an orthodox use of de
Chardin's ideas although I do not know if there was direct influence.
David Campbell
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 21 2000 - 17:45:54 EST