Re: ID:philosophy or scientific theory?

From: David Campbell (bivalve@email.unc.edu)
Date: Mon Mar 13 2000 - 12:29:41 EST

  • Next message: George Murphy: "Re: Chimps, sin, Adam and Christ"

    > 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. This may reflect
    a teleological view that evolution equals progress. Such a view is also
    inherent in most popular worldviews claiming to be based on evolution
    (communism, Nazi-style racism, social Darwinism, etc.) and in certain other
    "disproofs" of evolution ("if we evolved from monkeys, how come there are
    still monkeys", etc.) However, biology gives us no basis to assess whether
    something has greater merit, merely if it succeeds.
    Another misunderstanding of evolution that can lead to claims that it is
    opposed to original sin is by accepting evolution as justification for
    "what comes naturally is morally OK". Biological evolution is a
    description of natural processes and has no inherent moral content. If one
    assumes that God created us via evolution and then told us what we ought to
    do, whereupon we disobeyed, there is no conflict with original sin.

    David Campbell



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 13 2000 - 12:30:01 EST