Speculation on Darwin and Eden

I have a speculation about Original Sin and Darwinism.

It seems to me that Man, Adam, was given power over creation to name it and be custodian of it. When he sinned, he paid the price, his generations paid the price and all things under his dominion paid the price. The Lion no longer laid down with the lamb and the soil had to be worked.

This sounds like the advent of Darwinism to me. Put aside chronology for a moment, if we assume Eden was of the earth but not in time like after the fall. Darwinism is like the chaos and sadness of sin: ME Centered: How do I struggle to survive. Darwinism is the world we live in, which is a fallen world. Christ came to redeem us. He acted in ways that surprise us who are enmeshed within the Darwinian process: Instead of fight or flight, Christ preached turn the other cheek and showed humility when he was spat upon. Instead of conquering for survival; Christ freely laid down His life. What could be more in opposition to Darwinism?

Christ who was like us in all things except sin, repudiated by His life I believe the idea inherent in darwinism, which is me first. God is Spirit and Love and Truth while Darwinian evolution is struggle and chaos and disease and death and the strong survive.

I don’t know where the garden of eden was within reality, but the affront to God affected us and maybe the past as well, as Christ redeemed those who had sinned in the past, e.g. Mary and opening the gates of Heaven as mediator for all men for all time as well as the future by reconciling us to God, so it is mete that the fall affected all reality under Adam’s dominion, past and future until Christ reigns in glory in a new world.

It’s just a speculation, but for my mind it seems to fit.

 
 
***
 
Because Adam and Eve were not originally of a fallen nature and had an unfettered free will and still sinned against an infinitely good God. This was the original sin against an infinite being far beyond time and space and one can infer that in giving man dominion over creation when man fell, creation fell–all of it–and still all of creation, which fell for all space and all time, past present and future, can not make up for a sin against the eternal Creator, who is infinitely good. Only Jesus could suffice.

This is the spiritual dynamic that undergirds the me first nature of this fallen world that seems imprinted on reality. Why we recoil when we see for example the bear eat its own young and all the harshness of natural selection and in our heart we think: It wasn’t supposed to be this way.

According to the CCC, Adam’s sin is not simply a story. A later literary style than Exodus is no theological objection; the Holy Spirit Who guides the authors may teach in many styles and reveal certain truths at certain times. It’s always been this way in salvation history; it is not inconsistent that it was written at a later date, for the same infinite Holy Spirit guides the Church also and chooses how and when to reveal wisdom and truth.  Jesus came to Earth in the fullness of time.  I believe this is called providence. 

From the CCC:
390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.

This is not hebraic theology. Man (The whole of creation?) falls from that first sin and that one sinner and mankind (the whole of creation?) being redeemed by the One Redeemer Who by necessity was God Himself to reconcile the sin against God.

Romans 5

19 For as by the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners; so also by the obedience of one, many shall be made just.

 
 
Advertisements

One response to “Speculation on Darwin and Eden

  1. The objection that evolution is not directed, so that it has no moral imprimatur does not invalidate the observer\’s claim that many consequences–I do not venture to say all consequences–of natural selection are in opposition to Charity. Natural selection within the context of limited resources creates a competition environment.  This runs contrary to the Good News that in emptying oneself to the Father in obedience one becomes actualized and becomes a beacon and help to others to become actualized as opposed to grasping for resources detracting from another\’s well being.  This argument conflates physical processes (selection in the physical world) with spiritual life; however, the spiritual life has physical consequences.  In a similar fashion many of the effects of natural selection advance negative moral consequences.
     
    I am not advocating a moral system only thinking about how reality reflects metaphysical biblical truths in the story of Genesis and the redemption being holistic in that the fallen world will be redeemed as well as Man with a new heaven and earth.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s