Genesis Vs Dais

Comparing Genesis I & II with Charles Darwin’s The Descent of Man

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.

Firstly, it is important to distinguish the main differences between the two schools of thought. Darwinism attempts to explain the source of all human life through a process called natural selection. Natural selection states that species produced random variations and that only those beings whose characteristics allow them to reproduce, thus survive, can continue developing. This process explains that all species are derived from a common ancestor, most popularly that homosapiens are derived from apes. Darwin discusses the sociability aspect of humans in comparison to animals; “animals of many kinds are social; we find even distinct species living together, some American monkeys; and united flocks of rocks, jackdaws and starlings” (Darwin 174). Humans, along with all other species, are the outcome of millions of years of natural selection. Thus, there is no difference between Homo ...

... middle of paper ...

...Creation. This belief agrees that DNA strands cause varieties within a genus; i.e some people are tall, some are short. With the agreement, Creationists are agreeing with facts brought up by Darwinists. Perhaps it should be noted that Darwin and Genesis may be mildly complimentary, as they ultimately answer different questions of How and Who, respectively.

Conclusively, even though Charles Darwin’s The Descent of Man and Genesis may share common flaws in human image interpretation and reliance on outside facts, it is undoubtedly impossible to ignore their fundamental differences. While the Bible relies on faith and religion, Darwin relies on science to explain the origin of the universe. Ultimately, even though there is common ground to be compared between the two accounts, its similarities are limited to common flaws both accounts create regarding the human image.