The God Gene?

One scientist thinks so. But then, he's the same guy who claimed to have found the "gay gene" in the early 90's. Assuming for a moment that this is right, even though I doubt its validity, the question then becomes: Is the inclusion of this gene superior or inferior? I imagine there will be two markedly differing answers.



Nomad bloviates at 9 PM: I find it really funny that so many Christians in general, and Christian intellectuals especially, are so scandalized by news items such as this. They seem to agree with liberal thinkers who would posit any predisposition toward evil, is an immediate vindication of performing that evil act. As though a man who gets himself blind stinking drunk is not liable for the family he kills when he tries to drive home, and gets into a crash.



First, all of these studies are *NOT* authoritative. They are simply correlations between certain gene groups, and people groups based on surveys. It is like noting the fashion choices of 100 Americans, and deciding that RED SWEATSHIRTS create a tendency toward violence. Maybe it is, or maybe you shouldn't be choosing your subjects outside of a communist revolutionary meeting place. In none of these cases have the amino acids produced by these genes been shown to have any significant impact on brain function, hormone function, etc. So right now, all we have are educated guesses. Better than uneducated guesses, but not by a long shot.



Second, there is actually a scriptural basis for theorizing that predisposition to sin is genetic. "...punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments." Exodus 20:5b-6. Even original sin is shown to be passed down from Adam to his sons "made in Adam's image." Yet the fact that we may be predisposed to sin is not more an excuse for it, than a genetic predisposition to loud voices excuses not being quiet in a library. It just requires more from those who are predisposed.



The best example for this second principle is a very simple one from my own family. Compulsive behavior is shown to have a strong genetic link in my mother's family. He uncles have been alcoholics, her sisters tend to obesity, and all tend toward cluttered pack-rat homes. Yet, this does not give me an excuse to be a glutton or a drunkard. It just means that I have to work harder not to drink to excess (perhaps by abstaining) and I have be more disciplined in my eating habits (no McDonald's!).



The "God gene" and the "Gay gene" don't bother me any more than the "alcoholic gene," for which there is stronger evidence. They may exist, or they may not. Either way, it is how we ACT which is important, not how we are predisposed.

(Sorry for the altered post, but I am one of the guys being hit by the Comments section issues.)