There is often some confusion between fact (evolution theory) and theory of creationism. It is called evolutionary scientific fact that living things are related to each other and have been transformed over time. The theory of evolution is the scientific model that describes the evolutionary transformation and explains its causes. Evolution is a change in the gene pool. In order to understand the evolution, it is necessary to view populations as a collection of individuals, each carrying a different set of characters. A gene is a hereditary unit. In the context of life sciences, evolution is a change in the genetic profile of a population of individuals, which can lead to the emergence of new species, adaptation to different environments or to the emergence of evolutionary novelties.
According to ______ “It has always been an irreconcilable conflict between the position of science regarding the appearance of living beings and their development, and on the other theological position, which attributes the appearance of all animal species spontaneously during the six “days "of creation in Genesis 1 recounted by the Bible.” The theological position seems intransigent, since putting a deaf ear to the evidence provided by science, that beings have been generated by evolution through descent and that definitely could not happen in six days. From the point of view of common sense, this situation the only thing showing is ignorance and religious fanaticism, which insists on putting the theory of evolution, which is already sufficiently proven in general in doubt, and no doubt already.
The theory of evolution has nothing to do with belief in God or any religious dogma, because evolution does not refer at any time to theological questions...
... middle of paper ...
...fficult task to uproot medieval ideas of the mind of religious, since when talking about the Word of God, no one wants to appear bold, so that they are not taches want to change the word or contradict the religious authorities. It is a misunderstanding that should be debunked, detailing what is God 's message of what they have only been human ancestral assumptions. At least they have kept the original writings of the biblical books and translations that have been made are increasingly accurate. But the interpretation of these books has not kept pace. We have to declare that, strictly speaking, there is no contradiction between what he says Genesis 1 and declaring biological evolution, because the first says that everything was created by God, and the second explains how they were created species, not who created; and yet still cannot ensure how life first originated.
Evolution is deemed as being scientific because it is testable and correctable, unlike creationism which deals with “God’s will,” an unchanging and set in stone philosophy that contradicts any scientific notion it attempts to deliver. Evolution is the scientific explanation to how organisms developed the forms and functions
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.
In the beginning, God created...the earth and the heavens, or an evolving mass of matter, later to become the heavens and the earth? The conflict between science and religion is a hot topic in many intellectual circles today. One of the more controversial topics is creation versus evolution. How did the world get to where it is right now? How was creation initiated? Is there a Creator or was life created spontaneously? These are some of the questions that boggle minds and set people searching for answers. There is even a conflict within the church: Did God create the heavens and the earth as they are, or did God allow the universe to develop according to natural laws? This conflict between science and religion continues to hold up in our supposed intellectual society. In order to tame this conflict and be true to their faith and science, Christian biologists have an obligation to reflect their Christianity in the realm of biology as well as their biological intellect in the realm of Christianity.
These days, most of the textbook only presents evolution theory as a fact to interpret the origin of life and the earth. More and more people get to reject creation unconsciously because they had no opportunity to compare and evaluate both worldview in same degree. I interviewed my three close acquaintances and heard a various responses from many people including my interviewees. Some of them had same belief with me, but some people had significantly different opinion with me. As a consequence of evolution theory’s monopoly in education, non-believers and Christians are unconsciously influenced by this secular worldview.
...tarted rationalizing their emotions, the clarity of evolution dawned upon their eyes, and of acceptance of new foreign ideas. Here was a thing that not only could explain the mysteries of life, but also serve as testimonial to the foolishness of pride. Evolution was a hallmark in the relations between science and religion, as the two sides realized neither was trying to undermine the other, and even in some cases joined in union to promote humanities advancement. The story of evolution is significant to history not only because of its scientific achievements, but also the gap it bridged between the scientific and religious community, and the lesson it taught that acceptance of new ideas does not have to mean the end of prior beliefs altogether. No other scientific revolution has generated as much human controversy and unity as Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.
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.
The first part of the evolution theory is evolution itself. Evolution itself is the idea that a species undergoes a genetic change over time to evolve into something that is very different. These differences are seen in our DNA and are considered mutations at first but slowly become the norm.
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.
Evolution, otherwise sometimes called the “Devil’s hoax,” is a controversial topic that ignites a rather substantial reaction, particularly in Christian religious communities. Through the years, the heated debate over whether God or evolution is right has become a major breaking point for people of faith. Evolution suggests that God didn’t miraculously place humans in their present form on Earth and that the Bible isn’t the ultimate scientific truth. In this world, science is pitted against religious faith, suggesting neither can exist mutually with the other. The Lutheran church has taken it’s own stance in the controversy, making a muddy splash in a worldly puddle between the real dirt of science and the sanctified Holy waters of faith. In doing so, the church provides explanations of figurative language and contextual issues that show how the two are not one in the same and offer a world where science and faith can freely live side-by-side, happily ever after.
Only in the past one hundred years have men finally put aside their Biblical and mythical tales about creation, and looked to the facts in order to piece together a logical explanation for the origin of mankind. In turn, men were now able to explain the enigma of their origin without the presence of a supernatural being responsible for their creation. At the head of a slew of men trying to uncover logical reasons for mans derivation was Charles Darwin. Darwin was the most accomplished of these men because he was able to put forth a logical conjecture that was based upon facts and observations. This theory, for a short time, was able to end the feud among educated men because many now put their trust in this new “theory of evolution”. Unfortunately, this revolutionary new theory threatened the religious beliefs about creation and soon a new rivalry emerged between the creationists and evolutionists.
...tside of its own boundaries. Fairly or not, the theory of evolution has been hijacked as an anti-religious symbol by those with an axe to grind against God.
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.
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
The information presented in evolution studies must be viewed with an open mind since there is no definite proof or law of evolution. The dilemma boils down to science vs. religion. God has been our creator since beginning of time, but the discoveries of recent science are sudde...
Wiester, John L. 1993. The Real Meaning of Evolution. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 45 (3): 182-86.