Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on science vs faith
Essay on science vs faith
Which one is correct, evolution or creation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on science vs faith
Although having different perspectives on the origin of life, evolutionists and creationists can concur that the universe appears to be a fascinating and astonishing place to live. Arguments have been made pertaining to the question that many humans ask themselves, "Where did I come from?" The two ideas that arise from this type of question comes from evolution and creation. Biblical creation is the side that evolutionists are arguing against. In Genesis 1:1, the verse says, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." This verse discusses that Biblical creation is the belief that God created and designed the earth. On the other hand, evolutionists believe in Darwinian evolution, which is the belief that the origin of life existed because of the Big Bang. Because science has to be observable, measurable, and repeatable, evolutionists rely only on science for their evidences. Although science is supported by mostly facts, creationists and evolutionists both practice faith. For instance, oxygen appears to be present when humans breathe but cannot be seen by their eyes. In order to believe that the existence of oxygen appears even with no physical evidence, people must exercise faith.
Evolutionists and creationists use faith to support for some of the their evidences. Christians use faith, especially when they do not have physical evidence of any of the prophecies. Although evolution and creation have many differences, faith seems to be the one substance that creationists and evolutionists use to believe for some of their notions. The topic of creation and evolution arise many debates. Because beliefs will influence peoples' thoughts and actions, knowing creation and evolution is prominent. Belie...
... middle of paper ...
... in this life. Something more meaningful and pleasant had to occur when humans existed. Because evolution consists of random chances and unintelligent accidents, then the existence of human life would not have a purpose in living abundantly or even living at all. A greater purpose exists in every individual because everyone was given this life for a purpose.
Works Cited
Ferrell, Vance. The Evolution Cruncher. Altamont, TN: Evolution Facts, 2001.
Shier, David, Jackie Butler, and Ricki Lewis. Hole's Essentials of Human Anatomy and Physiology. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2006. Print.
MacArthur, John. The Battle for the Beginning. Nashville, TN: W Pub. Group, 2001. Print.
Freeman, Scott. Biological Science. San Fransicso, CA: Benjamin Cummings, 2011. Print.
Dawkins, Richard. The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. New York: Free, 2009. Print.
Zhao, Buyun. "Charles Darwin & Evolution." Charles Darwin & Evolution. Christ's College, 2009. Web. 04 May 2014.
Marieb, E. N., & Hoehn, K. (2013). Human anatomy & physiology (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Bowler, Peter J. Evolution: The History of an Idea. London: University of California Press, 1989.
Marieb, E. N., (2006). Essentials of human anatomy and physiology. San Francisco, CA: Benjamin Cummings.
Introduction to Human Anatomy and Physiology Third Edition by Eldra Pear Soloman (pgs. 51 and 58)
Anyone with even a moderate background in science has heard of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution. Since the publishing of his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859, Darwin’s ideas have been debated by everyone from scientists to theologians to ordinary lay-people. Today, though there is still severe opposition, evolution is regarded as fact by most of the scientific community and Darwin’s book remains one of the most influential ever written.
"Introduction to Creationism Versus Evolution: At Issue." Creationism vs. Evolution. Ed. Eric Braun. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. At Issue. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 18 May. 2014.
Lennox, James. "Darwinism." Stanford University. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2010 Edition). , 13 Aug. 2004. Web. 12 May 2014.
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.
One Long Argument: Charles Darwin and the Genesis or Modern Evolutionary Thought. Ernst Mayr. Harvard University Press, 1993.
This statement is the foundational tenet for the evangelical and fundamentalist Christian dogma that purports a literal understanding of the Bible to be the unquestionable and undeniable truth. Creationism, a proposed alternative to evolutionary theory, requires a Christian dogma that holds the literal understanding of the Bible to be the sole source of truth. As an alternative to the natural explanation of the origins of life that science and evolutionary theory provides, creationism ministers a supernatural explanation as provided in the biblical Genesis. Given the source of information, the exclusive nature to its validity, and the unwavering conviction of its soundness, creationism is a religiously dogmatic understanding for the origin of life. As such, creationism does not promote scientific or religious freedom; rather, creationism is the promotion of a specific evangelical or fundamentalist Christian dogma that asserts a literal translation of the Bible as the sole guidance toward truth.
Thibodeau, G & Patton, K. (2008) Structure and Function for the Body. 13th Edition. St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier.
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.
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 from a historical standpoint. A concept known as Faith Vs Fact comprehensively summarizes the tone of this debate, which leads to the question of how life began. While creation represents a religious understanding of life, evolution acknowledges a scientific interpretation of the origins of life. The theory is illustrated as the process by which organisms change species over time.
While faith alone cannot be said to necessitate truth, it is by no means useless as a basis for knowledge in the areas of knowledge of religion and the natural sciences. Faith allows a knower to make the decision of what is knowledge and what is not, even when the knowledge claim cannot be justified by evidence or empirical reasoning. Yet simultaneously, this quality of faith renders it useless in finding absolute truth. In the natural sciences, faith can be seen as both a necessity, as it is essential for the building of knowledge, and yet also it must be challenged, as the advancement of science is through the disproving of current theories.