Philip McPherson Rudisill
215 Piedmont Avenue, No. 304
Atlanta, GA 30308 USA
Tels. 404/351-9794 (Day) and 404/523-0970 (Evening); Fax 404/351-1491
pmr@mindspring.com - www.mindspring.com/~kantwesley
6/22/00
To the Editor of Faith and Values of the Atlanta Newspapers via fax 4/526-5746
Greetings:
The doctrine of creationism is contrary to human experience. If we thought that things could suddenly come into existence or (its corollary) go out of existence, it would never occur to us when searching for a missing item, and which we discover only upon a second look, that we had merely overlooked it in our haste or preoccupation the first time around. Consequently we must deny this doctrine in the science class in order not to deny one of the most fundamental of common experiences.
However, a more appropriate question for the person of faith is this: does evolution mean that we are not free beings? Freedom is the immediate ability, at this very instant, to act according to principles of right, namely that all people possess dignity and must be treated with respect. But each of us knows that we are free, for we are conscious of our own, personal, internal, self condemnation when we recall a violation of a principle of right on our part, e.g., upon the betrayal of a friend for some personal advantage. But this bad conscience and the concomitant endeavor for self justification plaguing all of us, even the teacher of science, would be utterly impossible and considered totally absurd if we were not truly free. Indeed, Immanuel Kant would suggest that if we were not free then a moral imperative would be no more comprehendible to us than a nursery rhyme.
Two points suggest themselves: freedom is made compatible with science by virtue of the bad conscience. The bad conscience is no fun, and it is understandable to science that we would act to avoid such. But a bad conscience is only possible via the idea of right conduct, and so we have the unusual situation of a mere idea (of right) actually affecting us in the world of science, but only because we are free.
Secondly: the idea of right conduct does not arise from the scripture, for upon the very testimony of scripture itself (Genesis 3:22), we ourselves know the difference between right and wrong. The role of scripture, for the Christian at least, is to learn of the gift of the Holy Spirit whereby we become new creatures.
Hence we can conclude: we must perforce reject the doctrine of creationism in the science class and in human.experience and, at the same time, we are secure in our faith as a result of the moral freedom recognized by all, and the miracle of the new birth attested to by the Christian.
Sincerely,
/s/ Philip McPherson Rudisill
To contact the author, please e-mail: pmr**kantwesley.com (note: the ** must be replaced by @)