Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and adaption
Darwin Theory of Evolution
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and adaption
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and adaption
In Charles Darwin’s ‘Origin of Species’ the theory of evolution argues that the appearance of design in creatures are favourable chance mutations that have developed over time. Species have adapted to their habitats over a period, possessing many unfavourable traits that have slowly diminished over time due to not being able to survive in that particular environment (Darwin 1906: 97). Darwin’s theory has posed multiple problems for the Christian doctrine of creation, from the effect it has had on the concept of intelligent design to undermining the idea that humankind was made in the image of God. Nevertheless there are a handful of theistic counter-arguments to contest the theory of evolution but many lack legitimacy and evidence as it has …show more content…
Genesis 1:27 states ‘So God created humankind in his image…’ yet the theory of evolution proposes that there have been different species of humans in the past. Homo erectus was one of the first human species from around 2 million years ago, to which Homo sapiens evolved around 400, 000 years later (Michollet 2000: 82). There is an unexpected complexity to the modern man that was not known before Darwin’s theory. According to evolution, humanity has not always had the form it possesses today. This plural origin to humanity would disprove the idea that humans were made in the image of God – disproving the Christian doctrine of creation. Still, Samuel Wilberforce has argued that due to characteristics man has such as supremacy over the Earth and free will that the design of humankind is ‘utterly irreconcilable with the degrading notion of the brute origin of him who was created in the image of God…’ (Brooke 2012: 50). Wilberforce has used the works of geologist Charles Lyell to support his argument. In his ‘Principles of Geology’ Lyell has asserted that the continual extinction and renewal of a species ‘all in accommodation to the changes which must continue in the inanimate and habitable Earth’ is contradictory (Brooke 2012: 50). Lyell believes that the Earth is always sustaining life and because of this the theory of evolution seems unnecessary. It does not make sense …show more content…
Chapters of Genesis have been interpreted in non-literal ways since around 1820; discoveries in geology before the arrival of Darwin’s theory have shown that the Earth is much older than Archbishop Ussher’s proposal that the world began in 4004 BCE (Ferguson 2012: 84). St Augustine himself suggested that the early books of the Bible were metaphorical and were written so the Bible would be accessible to those who were uneducated (Stewart-Williams 2010: 58). Many Christians today do not take the literal view of Genesis but still view God as the Creator despite Darwin’s theory surfacing over a century ago. Numerous believers maintain that discoveries in science that explain the process of creation just register the power of a Creator to ordain those laws (Ferguson 2012: 85). An explanation for this may be that many people who hold the belief that God is the Creator held this belief before encountering the theory of evolution (Stewart-Williams 2010: 51). They simply do not stop believing just because of this. A creator God may be an internalization that they have more than likely grown up with. Still, this could be a cultural factor as Christianity is embedded in so many societies
In Charles Darwin’s life he had helped make a significant advancement in the way mankind viewed the world. With his observations, he played a part in shifting the model of evolution into his peers’ minds. Darwin’s theory on natural selection impacted the areas of science and religion because it questioned and challenged the Bible; and anything that challenged the Bible in Darwin’s era was sure to create contention with the church. Members of the Church took offense to Darwin’s Origins of Species because it unswervingly contradicted the teachings of the book of Genesis in the Bible. (Zhao, 2009) Natural selection changed the way people thought. Where the Bible teaches that “all organisms have been in an unchanging state since the great flood, and that everything twas molded in God’s will.” (Zhao, 2009) Darwin’s geological journey to the Galapagos Islands is where he was first able to get the observations he needed to prove how various species change over t...
Mark Driscoll brings out different viewpoints relating to creation. As Christians, Genesis 1:1 can be our foundation in our belief, “in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” This helps us realize the miraculous act of God by which He brought the universe into existence. We should not have to rely on individuals using Charles Darwin’s evolutionary theory to help explain the origin of life apart from God. God creation set us apart. After all, God stated His creation was made “very good”.
There have been various theories of the creation of the universe and mankind, each drawing back to either religion or science, or a combination of both. Charles Darwin’s The Descent of Man and the Genesis accounts are often seen as personifications of two opposing views of our universe. Charles Darwin is a representation of evolution; the development of species through a lengthy process of natural selection. On the contrary, Genesis is a representation of creation by the Bible; God’s creation of both mankind and the Earth around them. Even though the accounts are inherently opposing and each claim to possess an indisputable explanation of the universe, they contain the following similarities; both portray the human image inappropriately and both indirectly rely on the opposing belief.
We humans have always thought of ourselves as being unique, whether by divine sanction or by a self-established belief in superiority. For some, this understanding is intimately tied to the traditional tenets that have long been held as fact, having only recently been challenged. For modern Christians, the literal interpretation of the Bible=s account of creation has come under attack by the development and widespread acceptance of Darwinian evolution. To some, undermining the credibility of Biblical creation directly calls into question the Bible=s authority on its moral teachings. As Ken Ham, from the WGBH Boston Video Evolution Series: What About God? states, AYwhat it [the Bible] says is what it meansYit relates to the authority of scripture and the gospelsYso, if the Bible got it wrong in astronomyYgeologyYbiologyYthen why should I trust the Bible when it talks about morality and salvation? [i]@ It is no wonder with sentiments like these that the backlash against evolution has been so strong and lasting; nonetheless, it has not been until the last few decades that such a debate has moved from the pulpit to the laboratory. With a more educated and well-informed army of Christians, who believe in creationism, the scientific evidence for evolution has now come under assault. With creationists and intelligent design advocates like Henry M. Morris and Michael J. Behe respectively, the attack on Darwin is no longer argued as religion versus evolution per se, but rather one Alegitimate@ scientific theory against another.
Yet creation and evolution seem diametrically opposed. If we were created randomly and purposelessly, as evolution suggests, then the creation account of a sculptor molding his clay to make man appears erroneous. So scientists often call the Genesis account a “myth” – a story conceived by early man to explain away his questions. Christians are often offended by implications like these, and end up attacking science’s claims. In turn, many scientists feel distaste for people who don't accept their elegant theory and their mounds of evidence, and thus reject the others' view. Though a war has been established pinning these two theories against each other, this dichotomy is actually a false one. Christians do not need to give up their faith and scientists can start believing in God. These two clashing but persuasive theories, creation and evolution, can be reconciled. First, these theories need to be defined.
For centuries people have believed in Creationism which is the idea that the Earth, its inhabitants, and everything in the universe was created and governed by a supernatural power. According to Branch and Scott, the biggest influence on this idea is the Bible and more specifically the Book of Genesis which presents “creation ex nihilo (“from nothing”), a world flood, [and] a relatively recent inception of the Earth” (27). Branch and Scott are of course referring to the Judeo-Christian biblical creation stories of “Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden, the Flood and Noah’s Ark” which, in the seventeenth-century Europe, were “generally considered to by literally true” (Park 24). From these stories the idea that except for the “great flood, the Earth and its inhabitants were pretty much the same now a...
After Sir Charles Darwin had introduced his original theory about the origins of species and evolution, humanity’s faith in God that remained undisputed for hundreds of years had reeled. The former unity fractured into the evolutionists, who believed that life as we see it today had developed from smaller and more primitive organisms, and creationists, who kept believing that life in all its diversity was created by a higher entity. Each side introduced substantial arguments to support their claims, but at the same time the counter-arguments of each opponent are also credible. Therefore, the debates between the evolutionists and the creationists seem to be far from ending. And though their arguments are completely opposite, they can co-exist or even complement each other.
The debate among creationists and evolutionists as to the origin of modern life on Earth has pushed increasingly into the limelight over the last several years. Unfortunately, such mainstream coverage has caused many of the related issues to become skewed and misinterpreted. In the article “Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution,” Mark Isaak attempts to make clear the true nature of evolutionary theory so that, if it must be challenged, such arguments can be made on a purely factual basis rather than, as Isaak says, “against a set of misunderstandings that people are right to consider ludicrous” (“Misconceptions” Para. 1). He presents these misconceptions and his explanation of the faulty logic behind each one in five main categories: “Evolution has never been observed,” “Evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics,” “There are no transitional fossils,” “The theory of evolution says that life originated, and evolution proceeds, by random chance,” and “Evolution is only a theory; it hasn't been proved” (“Misconceptions” Para. 2). In addressing each of these proposed falsehoods individually, Isaak forms an argument with few faults that is clear, precise, and effective.
Within a few decades, geneticists determined that quantitative characters are influenced by multiple genetic loci and that the alleles at each locus follow Mendelian laws of inheritance.
Humans have asked questions about their origin and their purpose on earth for eons. The Bible tells humans that God created them and explains their purpose. However, since the Renaissance, humanism answers questions about origins by naturalistic means and science has been redefined in the process. Most institutions of higher education and many individuals have adopted the naturalistic theory of evolution to explain human origin without considering its effects on faith. In contrast to prevailing thought at Goshen College, a literal six-day creation is foundational to the Gospel message. Combining evolution and Christianity makes one’s faith less logical and opens one’s science to new quandaries.
While the theory of evolution is very commonly accepted amongst most scholars and intellectuals, when the scientific facts used to 'support' it are closely examined, it becomes apparent that it is merely that: a theory. Inaccurate information, misguided philosophers, and in some cases, just plain ignorance, have all contributed to this 'scientific religion' that does nothing but lead people away from the true nature of our existence, the Genesis creation. The creation 'story' is much more than just a story, it is a scientifically provable fact, and one that should be treated as more than just a parable or story, as the Word of God is pure and the absolute truth.
San Diego: Greenhaven Press, “Should the Bible Be Interpreted Literally.” Two Paths 1-4 Google. Web. 27 April 2011. “Understanding Evolution.”
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution centres on the idea that species compete to survive, and favorable characteristics are passed on from one generation to the next. Darwin said that evolution took place by a process of natural selection or survival of the fittest. This meant that the animals and plants best suited to their surroundings survived and were able to pass on their genes to their offspring. The ones that weren't best suited died off and didn't get the chance to reproduce. Animals and plants had to change or evolve due to environmental pressures.
Darwin is considered by other people as the creator of Evolution. Darwin was not the only man to arrive at the theory of evolution. Darwin came to his theory of evolution at the same time as an another man who goes by the name of Alfred Russell Wallace came to the same conclusion. Wallace being relatively unknown was not respected for having the same conclusion because the fact that people were so apt to listen to the theory’s of Charles Darwin. After time Darwin published a book On the Origin of Species, and it was a big success: it’s first printing sold out immediately and a second printing sold out a month later. Darwin’s Theories found their way out of the scientific world and into the business world, eventually ending up in everyday society.
Numerous studies have been conducted on where humans evolved from and how they have developed over the years. Some people believe in the theory of evolution and others believe in the theory developed in religion. The researcher is interested in this topic because this is the theory of how human’s evolved over time. This theory marks where humans first started from, to now and the phenomena continues today. Another reason is because there are so many different facts and evidence found throughout the years to prove that humans have evolved over the years into the people they are today. Charles Darwin is not the founder of evolution, but with help from history and these scientists, Thomas Henry Huxley, Alfred Wallace and John Gould, he was able to develop the theory of evolution. These scientists contributed a huge amount to Charles research and helped him come up with the conclusion of where humans evolved.