The Different Views of the Origin of Life that Exist in Religious and Scientific Communities Around the World You are a journalist working for the Sunday Times newspaper. Your
editor has asked you to write a piece entitled 'Where did it all
begin?' The aim of the article is to discuss the different views of
the origin of life that exist in religious and scientific communities
around the world. As a part of your task, you must comment on why
people have these different views, what scientific evidence exist
Sunday Times – special article of the creation of the universe…
By our amazing correspondent
So, where did it all begin? By ‘all’, I mean of course the universe
and life. Who created earth and mankind? How did earth and the
universe come about? Was it a huge accident – or was it a coordinated
creation? There are many views on this matter, many by different
religious sects and scientific communities. I didn’t know where to
start at first, but thought it wise to start off with a scientific
review, assess its evidence, and then look at other creation beliefs
of other religions. The school’s astrology club seemed a suitable
place to begin my search for the most logical creation story. Of
course, I was very reluctant to go to inside the dreaded lab, where
the rejected schoolchildren dwell, but I was forced to and nothing
could deter me from my determinedness.
I asked some members of the astronomy club what they though about the
creation of the universe and life. They all agreed that it was a
theory called ‘the big bang’ that was most reasonable. This is the
mos...
... middle of paper ...
... experience the
jealousy, desire, and misery of a physical existence (this is the
period in which we are living). In time, the world dissolves,
returning all creatures to the soul-life and beginning the cycle once
again.
The immense diversity of creation stories, each as logical as the one
before, has confused me further. I could not decide which one was the
‘correct’ creation story. One could only look at their faith and
decide if they want to believe that creation story. And it is only
natural that people would strive to justify their religion’s creation
story, for they have grown with that religion. As yet, there is no
total scientific proof to asses the validity of these creation
beliefs. With nothing but bamboozlement gained from this report, I
have decided that these matters should be left to time to prove.
The idea of evolution by Darwin indicated that the world is not created by God, but through some kind of modification. This controversial idea is strongly objected by most of the religions, such as Catholic, Christian, and Islam etc. These religions sturdily believe that God is the creator of the world, the creator of everything. However, to some extent, Buddhism does teach the similar theory to Darwin’s idea, which Buddhism does not include the idea of God. Also, like the way Darwin talks about “Natural Selection”, Buddhism says that if a person wants to have improvement, he or she must do the good things and undo the bad things. Therefore, as a Buddhist, the idea of evolution shown a positive affect on my beliefs, and it emphasizes and truly proves the teaching of Buddha in a scientific way.
Scientific Naturalism and Christianity are possibly the two most contradictory worldviews that are in our culture today. They are also the two most difficult to understand by one another. There is very little about these two worldviews that they have in common. They are a vast amount of ideas and beliefs held by adherents of each that are different. In order for these two worldviews to successfully co-exist in society, it is important to understand, accept, and learn from each one.
explosion; nothing turns into something, and the world as we know it is formed. Or, there is a one true God who formed this world through supernatural means and created man out of the dust. Both seem pretty far-fetched for the ultimate answer to the preeminent question of the age: Why we are here and where we came from. Evolution is assumed to be true due to the fact that it seems to be proven by natural scientific organic processes, and Christianity is assumed to be false because it is based off some book that a bunch of random people wrote form 5,000 years ago. All of this would be postulated if this paper was written by the general populous, but this is not the case. In this paper, evolutionism, also called Darwinism, and creationism will be compared and contrasted, and in the end, give substantial information as to why creationism is the only conceivable answer.
For centuries, the battle has been raging between science and religion over the question of how man came into being. The two opposing forces have clashed countless times in history, with such violent conflicts as to result in bloodshed and death. Probably the most controversial issue debated by the two sides is the creation of everything in the universe, from stars and planets to plants and people. Christians use the Bible, specifically the book of Genesis, to support their belief of creation, while scientists support their ideas with observational data and mathematical calculations. Although the Bible provides a credible explanation for the origin of Earth and its life forms, the scientific perspective of creation presents a thorough explanation of the beginnings of the Earth and man with more information and evidence.
There has been a great deal of heated debate for the last few decades about where modern Homo sapiens originated. From the battle grounds, two main theories emerged. One theory, labeled “Out-of-Africa” or “population replacement” explains that all modern Homo sapiens evolved from a common Homo erectus ancestor in Africa 100,000 years ago. The species began to spread and replace all other archaic human-like populations around 35,000 to 89,000 years ago. The rivaling opinion, entitled the “regional continuity” theory or “multiregional evolution” model refutes this theory and states modern humans evolved from various species of Homo erectus who interbred with others that lived in places such as Asia, Africa, and Europe. These scientists believe this theory would explain why there are differences among races around the world.
Young Earth creationists believe that Earth and everything on it was created by God between 5700 and 10000 years ago (Numbers, 2006). They believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible in terms of the age of the earth. They differ from old earth creationists who interpret Genesis metaphorically and believe that the Earth is 13.798 +- 0.037 old (Scott, 2000). Young earth creationists also interpret the passages in the bible of the flat Earth literally. They reject modern astronomy, physics, the big bang theory, the age of Earth and chemistry. They also reject biological modifications that happened throughout history. Young Earth creationists believe that God created every genetic variation in all living creatures on earth. Henry Morris was one of the biggest influences of young Earth creationism in the second half of the 20th century (Scott, 2000).
Christian Beliefs in the Origins of the World “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. ” A Description of Christian Beliefs About the Origins of The World Christians believe that God created the universe. In Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis, we are told that God creates both the universe and everything that is in it.
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.
In the history of science vs. religion there have been no issues more intensely debated than evolution vs. creationism. The issue is passionately debated since the majority of evidence is in favor of evolution, but the creation point of view can never be proved wrong because of religious belief. Human creation breaks down into three simple beliefs; creation theory, naturalistic evolution theory, and theistic evolution theory. The complexities of all three sides create a dilemma for what theory to support among all people, religious and non-religious.
The Comparison of the Creation of the Universe and Origin of Man and New Species
When the modern person ponders the formation of human beings, our mind automatically goes to Adam and Eve, whom were the first man and woman created by God according to the Book of Genesis. Before there was Adam and Eve, diverse cultures came up with myths about the construction of humans. These myths included: “The Song of Creation” from the Rig Veda, An African Creation Tale, From the Popol Vuh, and A Native American Creation Tale “How Man Was Created” Each one of these legends gives a diverse perspective on the creation of human beings.
In Alfred North Whitehead’s “Religion and Science”, he nullifies the argument between the religious factions and scientists of the world by eliminating all grounds for the argument. Although debated to the “ends of the Earth”, Whitehead points out that these two subjects are actually based upon events that are unrelated. He states “Science is concerned with the general conditions which are observed to regulate phenomenon; whereas religion is wholly wrapped up in the contemplation of moral and aesthetic values”(Whitehead, Religion and Science). Through his definition of both viewpoints, he is able to explain one will never see the other, thus no argument exists.
At first glance, many facets of science and religion seem to be in direct conflict with each other. Because of this, I have generally kept them confined to separate spheres in my life. I have always thought that science is based on reason and cold, hard facts and is, therefore, objective. New ideas have to be proven many times by different people to be accepted by the wider scientific community, data and observations are taken with extreme precision, and through journal publications and papers, scientists are held accountable for the accuracy and integrity of their work. All of these factors contributed to my view of science as objective and completely truthful. Religion, on the other hand, always seems fairly subjective. Each person has their own personal relationship with God, and even though people often worship as a larger community with common core beliefs, it is fine for one person’s understanding of the Bible and God to be different from another’s. Another reason that Christianity seems so subjective is that it is centered around God, but we cannot rationally prove that He actually exists (nor is obtaining this proof of great interest to most Christians). There are also more concrete clashes, such as Genesis versus the big bang theory, evolution versus creationism, and the finality of death versus the Resurrection that led me to separate science and religion in my life. Upon closer examination, though, many of these apparent differences between science and Christianity disappeared or could at least be reconciled. After studying them more in depth, science and Christianity both seem less rigid and inflexible. It is now clear that intertwined with the data, logic, and laws of scien...
Rust, Peter. 1992. How Has Life and Its Diversity Been Produced? Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 44 (2): 80-94.
“The greatest mystery of existence is existence itself” (Chopra). Chopra, a world-renowned author, perceives the existence of life as a truly mystifying cerebration. The pending question that many scientist, and even theists, attempt to answer is how life ultimately began. Currently, the mystery is left with two propositions, evolution and creation. While both approaches attempt to answer the origins of life, evolution and creation are two contrasting concepts. Evolution views life to be a process by which organisms diversified from earlier forms whereas creation illustrates that life was created by a supernatural being. Creation and evolution both agree on the existence of microevolution and the resemblance of apes and humans but vary in terms of interpreting the origins of the life through a historical standpoint. A concept known as Faith Vs Fact comprehensively summarizes the tone of this debate, which leads the question of how life began.