Christis


	Contents page \| Christis archive \| Submissions \| Advertising \| Links page \| Meet the team \| Cartoons \| Subscribe \| Christis timetable \| Search Christis

The Origin of a Sinful Species

Where the Christian Right and Richard Dawkins meet?

[The cover of Richard Dawkins' book, The Selfish Gene]

While doing some background reading for a module on the development of scientific thought about evolution, I was particularly struck by a passage in Richard Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene, which seemed strongly reminiscent of rhetoric that I had heard in an entirely different context. The idea of humanity being intrinsically selfish as a result of our genetic heritage (genes having been selfish since the origin of life), would fit very well with the kind of doctrine of original sin that is preached in some Christian circles.

Just compare these two passages; the first is from the first chapter of Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene, the second is from an American fundamentalist author, Dennis Schmidt.

“Our genes have survived, in some cases for millions of years, in a highly competitive world. This entitles us to expect certain qualities in our genes; a predominant one being ruthless selfishness. This gene selfishness will usually give rise to selfishness in individual behaviour. Much as we might want to believe otherwise, universal love and the welfare of the species as a whole are concepts which simply do not make evolutionary sense.” He goes on to say that, “I am not advocating a morality based on evolution. I am saying how things have evolved … My own feeling is that a human society based simply on the gene’s laws of universal ruthless selfishness would be a very nasty society in which to live. But unfortunately, however much we may deplore something, it does not stop it being true. Be warned that if you wish, as I do, to build a society in which individuals cooperate generously and unselfishly towards a common good, you can expect little help from biological nature. Let us try to teach generosity and altruism, because we are born selfish.”

“Death due to Adam’s sin is a complete separation of man from God. By Adam’s sin, all other men and women are born sinners; man’s mind is sinful from youth. The earth is also cursed for God punished all living things. This means that the devil (sin) is our father; until man is reborn, his father is Satan. A child born of its mother has the sin element from birth. The birth process brings sin unto the child. Sin is transmitted from Father to child. Adam sinned in the garden of Eden. Mankind’s sin started with Adam and passed on to all mankind making our nature sinful. Man’s seed comes from his father. The genes & sin characteristics pass, by seed of father, from one generation to the next (see in Hebrews’ how Levi was in Abraham’s seed). The punishment for this sin is death and hell.”

The similarity of these two views on the state of human nature is ironic considering that the proponents of them have historically been bitter opponents. Fundamentalists have sought to suppress all teaching of evolutionary theory in schools and attempted to prevent the publication of Dawkins’ work. In turn, Dawkins is an outspoken atheist who seizes any opportunity to attack the Bible, the Church and Christians (especially Creationists, those who believe in a literal seven-day creation) in his books.

That these opponents, working from the opposite extremities in terms of world view, should come round to the same pessimistic view of human nature, reminds me of the circular view of politics taught in schools where communism and dictatorship are shown to lead to similarly oppressive regimes. Perhaps a similar diagram of doctrine would accurately account for how the idea of selfish genes fits so neatly with the concept of an inherited sinful nature. Probably the defenders of both views would be horrified by my argument since they would not wish to have anything in common. However, I would like to suggest that the perpetuation of original sin through natural selection for selfish genes, is a plausible way of having a genetic mechanism for sin. After all, if we have all received sinful natures as a result of Adam’s fall ( and Fundamentalists are certain that, in this doctrine, they have interpreted Scripture in the only correct way), should we not expect to find some scientifically verifiable genetic component to this inheritance?

Fiona Worthy

What do you think about this issue? Write to submissions@christis.org.uk

Last modified: 25th November 2005