> > IMO Steve is completely correct. Furthermore, it's clear that,
> > historically, racist attitudes among Americans were around long before
> > human evolution was taken seriously by anyone. Of course if one is a
> > racist one can use use evolution, or Genesis 9, or whatever seems
> > authoritative, to justify it. & those evolution or the Bible can blame
> > those things for racism. But these are quite different from showing any
> > causak connection. _Post hoc ergo propter hoc_ is still a logical
> > fallacy.
> Of course it is still a logical fallacy. But how about insisting that
> people are equal for a truly fundamental reason, namely, that they all bear
> the image of God and that they are all image-bearers because they are
> descendants of the first pair given that image, Adam and Eve? Might not
> that approach help a bit in combatting racism?
Maybe. But those who accept evolution may argue that the major
premise is false so the conclusion doesn't follow. That doesn't mean
the conclusion is _wrong_ of course, but a questionable argument for it
casts it in a poor light.
One is on solider ground theologically, & avoids problematic
scientific claims, by emphasizing the unity of all peoples in Christ
(e.g., Gal.3:28). This is not only a statement about redemption but,
with realization that Christ is most fully the image of God & the agent
& goal of creation, a statement about creation. In general, we are
better off emphasizing Christ rather than Adam & Eve.
George L. Murphy