Re: An interesting essay for evangelicals

From: Jim Armstrong (
Date: Tue Jan 21 2003 - 13:14:16 EST

  • Next message: "Re: An interesting essay for evangelicals"

    Re: "If our fallenness extends to our genomes"
    An interesting "If"! The idea of Adam's behavioral choice somehow
    resulting in a genetic tendency sounds [I'm bracing myself!] like a
    (failed) Marxian notion. Instead, it looks like Adam walked out of the
    gate of Eden with the same capacity for choice and error that he was
    created with, and that we have.


    Terry M. Gray wrote:

    > At 9:25 PM -0700 1/20/03, Jim Armstrong wrote:
    >> I think I'm with Burgy on this one. We should proceed with great and
    >> tempered caution - the human genome findings have every potential to
    >> present the Christian community (of which I am a part) with one of
    >> the greatest challenges of this new millenium, should it identify a
    >> genetic link to homosexuality.
    > Why? Does the existence of a genetic or physical-chemical basis for
    > some sinful behavior excuse it?
    > If our fallenness extends to our genomes then there's really nothing
    > surprising about finding a genetic or physical-chemical basis for
    > homosexual tendencies or any other tendencies that might be deemed
    > sinful. If someone has a particular disposition toward some sin for
    > whatever reason--genetic, upbringing, hormonal imbalances, abusive
    > past, etc.--they simply must take greater care in resisting that
    > particular sin.
    > Some of us, for whatever reason (possibly any or all of the above)
    > have short tempers. Those who do must take special care to guard
    > against that particular sin, perhaps in ways that others don't have to
    > worry about. We all have temptations created by internal and external
    > factors that must be resisted. It is true, of course, that some
    > temptations are more culturally acceptable than others and that
    > succumbing to them is seen as being more heinous.
    > I think it's a big mistake to define "normal" as "whatever is in the
    > genome". For the Christian, normal is what scripture, rightly
    > interpreted, says. (Yes, I know, that doesn't necessarily answer all
    > the hard questions.)
    > TG

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 21 2003 - 13:14:59 EST