Darwin, after traveling the world and gaining a great amount of data, introduced the idea of evolution. Though evolution to this day is still debated upon between the religious and scientific communities, it is one of the greatest and most compelling discoveries in recent memory. In the year 1859, Darwin published On the Origin of Species and the world would never be the same. He went into great depth on natural selection and how species could evolve over time in order to create an entirely new species. His theories would predate all ideas that God created man.
Darwin was known for trying his best to present his scientific ideas in a way that it did not offend any believer or even in some perspectives were compatible with God. But his theory has been manipulated by both supporters and opposes of his work. Many people from a religious perspective believe that Darwin's theory undermines the fundamental beliefs that they hold, almost as an attack to their values (Dennett, 1995). Darwin's theory is that humans have evolved over time from other organisms, this is almost a slap-in-the-face for one of Christianity's core beliefs. Which is that God made us in His image when He made Adam and Eve; this means that above any other creature on the planet humanity has a special relationship with God.
By saying that if you were to drop a stone, and it falls to the ground. Logically and scientifically explained it would be because of gravity. And you would not say that it was being pushed down by a God, just because we do not understand it. In respect to evolution, Dawkins replied. Dawkins replied to Lennox on his accusation that the principles of going from simple to complex is the belief of the atheist.
The idea of suspension of disbelief is that you don’t use any kind of rationalization to explain the impossible, so what if you could explain religious belief with logic? Can you rationalize faith, although by definition it is not rational? According to John Cottingham, who is an English philosopher, argues there is absolutely nothing to rationalize since religion is “all about one's feeling of absolute dependence and commitment” ("Religious Faith [...]”). In an interview, he says: “It is problematic if you think the only model for reasonable belief is a scientifically based on impartial assessment from evidence.
Over the eras, many scientists have expressed concerns with Darwin's evolution theory and in "Was Darwin Wrong?" by David Quammen one can learn about the proof behind the theory of evolution. Many people do not believe in evolution due to an overall unawareness about the theory and religious upbringing. However, Quammen clarifies the truth behind evolution in his article. The article states five positions of evidence biogeography, embryology, morphology, paleontology, and the bacterial resistance to antibiotics discovered in humans.
Many people believe that if you cannot see something, that something does not exist. By something I mean God. Those who discard the thought of a Creator then turn to science to provide evidence for our origins. The theory science puts forth is called evolution. What is evolution?
Hume questions the notion of causation within his philosophical work. In “Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion,” assumptions and speculations of how the world was founded are classified as not true empirical evidence. Hume believed that although everything in the universe had a cause we could not explain how the universe was caused. (Hume, 1779). Likewise Immanuel Kant opposed the cosmological theory, he also believed that there were limitations to how much we
Dawkins also has based his theology mainly off proofs of science and predominantly attacks Christianity with his atheistic ideas. His scientific discovery of how memes have involved culture and transformed different ideas into what it is today has lead him into a theology that isn’t theology at all but anti theology that mainly attacks the Abrahamic religions and trying to disprove them. Which has gotten him many critiques over the years from many theologians but Dawkins has gotten a large amount of a following particularly from many famous atheists and other atheists to get them to talk about what they believe and help with
When incorporating both science and religion to explain the physical, chemical, and biological origins, one must look at the origin of the cosmos, Earth history, the origin of life, and biodiversity. In doing so, one must maintain a balance between science and religion so that one does not supersede the other. Furthermore, by examining both sides, it will establish an answer that is mutually beneficial for both parties. Starting with the origin of the cosmos, Genesis 1:1 states that God created the universe, Earth, day, and night for nothing. While this story is accepted based on faith, science shows a similar event that resulted in the creation of the universe.
Theories of evolution by natural processes, theories of evolution by natural selection, and even the existence of evolution at all, have been up for debate for many centuries. While many scientists/philosophers/researchers have been discredited, two evolutional theorists have conducted enough research and have gained enough supporting evidence to obtain naturalists group’s support over the years. These two most widely accepted theorists of evolution were: Jean Baptist Lamarck and his believe of acquired characteristics along with independent progression and his predecessor Charles Darwin, who would discredit Lamarck’s theories to provide the foundation for modern day evolutionary thought. Lamarck cemented the concept that offspring inherit
John Morris. Creationism is religious, but no more than evolution. Because to believe in evolution, is to believe there is no God, but you believe in science. To believe that evolution is the only theory with scientific fact, is totally untrue. Not to mention that evolution breaks many scientific laws which include; the second law of thermodynamics, the law of cause and effect, and the law of biogenesis.
The research that does not show the impact of Christianity on the scientific Revolution mostly question if it was even necessary on the Birth of Science. Also, the
A Christian Worldview of Research In the world of research, a person with a Christian worldview should stick out from the rest. Christian researchers need to be the models of moral behavior, treat ethical issues according to scripture, and create an environment with their actions, words, and attitudes. It is imperative that Christians see medical research not as part of the secular worldview, but be non-judgmental, and treat fellow investigators and study participants regardless of sickness, need, ethnic background, religious status or financial situation. Colossians 3:23 says, “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men.”
Aguillard to Kitzmiller v. Dover cases, the similarities I found out that both cases were fighting for evolution as being the real science which is need to be teaching in school but not anything that is based on religion. another point is also both uses Lemon test as the bases of their augment to show that the creation or intelligent design are all based on religion so its violated the Establishment Clause. One difference between the two cases is that Kitzmiller v. Dover cases were challenging the intelligent design as a science while Edwards v. Aguillard case were challenging creation as a science. In Aguillard case, teaching of creation science was found to be unconstitutional as it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The arguments concerning the definition of science, which were put forth in both case were creation as science and intelligent design as science.