The Theory Of Evolution In Charles Darwin's Origin Of Species

1406 Words3 Pages

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 this essay, the author

  • Argues that darwin's theory of evolution contradicts the notion that humans are made in the image of god.
  • Argues that the theory of evolution does not disprove the christian doctrine of creation in the slightest because the bible is the word of god.
Show More
Open Document