Exclude God from the definition of science and, in one felldefinitional swoop, you exclude the greatest natural philosophers ofthe so-called scientific revolution—Kepler, Copernicus, Galileo,Boyle, and Newton (to name just a few). (2014: 42)
Under a theist interpretation, randomness could either be a merelyapparent aspect of creation, or a genuine feature. Plantinga suggeststhat randomness is a physicalist interpretation of the evidence. Godmay have guided every mutation along the evolutionary process. In thisway, God could
He had never wronged me....For his gold I had no desire.
Debates on the fall and the historical Adam have centered on how thesenarratives can be understood in the light of contemporary science. Onthe face of it, limitations of our cognitive capacities can benaturalistically explained as a result of biological constraints, sothere seems little explanatory gain to appeal to the narrative of thefall. Some have attempted to interpret the concepts of sin and fall inways that are compatible with paleoanthropology. Peter van Inwagen(2004), for example, holds that God could have providentially guidedhominin evolution until there was a tightly-knit community ofprimates, endowed with reason, language, and free will, and thiscommunity was in close union with God. At some point in history, thesehominins somehow abused their free will to distance themselves fromGod. For van Inwagen, the fall was a fall from perfection, followingthe Augustinian tradition. John Schneider (2014), on the other hand,argues that there is no genetic or paleoanthropological evidence forsuch a community of superhuman beings. Helen De Cruz and Johan DeSmedt (2013) favor an Irenaean, rather than an Augustinianinterpretation of the fall narrative, which does not involve ahistorical Adam, and emphasizes original innocence as the state thathumans had prior to sinning.
The protagonist or narrator becomes the true focus of the tale.
So I opened it--you cannot imagine how stealthily, stealthily--until, at length, a single dim ray, like the thread of a spider, shot from out the crevice and fell full upon the vulture eye."
However, Poe was a perfectionist who left very little to guesswork.
"I saw it with perfect distinctness--all a dull blue, with a hideous veil over it that chilled the very marrow in my bones....[N]othing else of the old man's face or person [could be seen]."
To the narrator that fear is represented by the old man's eye.
It was the beating of the old man's heart....It increased my fury....But even yet I refrained and kept still." The heartbeat grew "...quicker and quicker, and louder and louder every instant.
Does the narrator have any reason to fear the old man or his eye?
The narrator "...dragged him to the floor, and pulled the heavy bed over him." He did not die at once, but in a short time, the hideous heartbeat stopped; then the narrator removed the bed, and examined the body.
How and why this "dark side" emerges differs from person to person.
A knocking was heard at the door, and when the narrator answered it, he found three men who quickly introduced themselves "...as officers of the police." They told the narrator that a neighbor had reported hearing a shriek in the night, and that they were there conducting an investigation to make sure that no foul play had occurred.