The debate about where we came from and, by extension, where we are going is one that shows little sign of stopping. It is not just that the two main factions of thought in this argument - on one side creationism and on the other supporters of Charles Darwin's theories of Evolution - are so divided that makes resolution so unforeseeable. It is also the fact that both schools are themselves divided into multiple sub sections of belief and theory with their own diverse ideas about this biggest of big questions. All of which makes the chances of seeing creationism and evolution coexist any time soon seem small.
Perhaps the most crucial factor is that one set of beliefs negates and contradicts the other. The creationist thinking goes that the universe and all things in it were created simultaneously by a supernatural being about 6000 years ago. At this point human beings were created as they look now, which is in the image of that creator. This creator is generally considered to be the God of Abrahamic religions.
The theory of evolution asserts that life developed through billions of years of inherited characteristics. The process of natural selection, which is central to this theory, comes from the consideration of three main factors. Firstly that more offspring are bred than even have a chance of survival, secondly that traits differ from individual to individual influencing survival rates and thirdly that trait differences are heritable.
For this to be true, however, would mean the idea of a human being remaining in Gods image since the beginning of time is impossible. Also, as evolution puts the age of the earth at over 30 billion years, there can be no agreement on the date. So it would appear that one theory cannot live with the other.
There have been moves in recent years, however, towards a compromised stance. Sometimes this comes from scientists, sometimes it comes from priests and sometimes it comes simply from people who can't be totally sure of one idea or the other. Yet it is an increasingly popular perspective.
For this idea to work, it would rely upon a supernatural being creating the universe and then allowing evolution to occur on its own. While such a viewpoint is feasible, indeed quite appealing, it opens up wider issues of morality, religion and God. For example, if a religious groups was to concede this ground, it would essentially contradict beliefs they once held to be unswayable.
Within the scope of this compromise come yet more arguments. More and more religions now accept the idea of the human race evolving over the centuries. Yet they generally add the caveat that this was the will of God and not the survival instinct of the species. Though Darwinists accuse religious creationists of a belief in the unknowable, those creationists will often accuse the Darwinists of the same thing, as there always must be a limit on how much we know to be provable. The debate rages on.
With this many rifts in the argument it is hard to imagine a time when human beings together agree on where we came from. Perhaps the truth really does lie in a compromise, a place where creationism and evolution coexist. If so it will be a long time before we reach it.
Perhaps the most crucial factor is that one set of beliefs negates and contradicts the other. The creationist thinking goes that the universe and all things in it were created simultaneously by a supernatural being about 6000 years ago. At this point human beings were created as they look now, which is in the image of that creator. This creator is generally considered to be the God of Abrahamic religions.
The theory of evolution asserts that life developed through billions of years of inherited characteristics. The process of natural selection, which is central to this theory, comes from the consideration of three main factors. Firstly that more offspring are bred than even have a chance of survival, secondly that traits differ from individual to individual influencing survival rates and thirdly that trait differences are heritable.
For this to be true, however, would mean the idea of a human being remaining in Gods image since the beginning of time is impossible. Also, as evolution puts the age of the earth at over 30 billion years, there can be no agreement on the date. So it would appear that one theory cannot live with the other.
There have been moves in recent years, however, towards a compromised stance. Sometimes this comes from scientists, sometimes it comes from priests and sometimes it comes simply from people who can't be totally sure of one idea or the other. Yet it is an increasingly popular perspective.
For this idea to work, it would rely upon a supernatural being creating the universe and then allowing evolution to occur on its own. While such a viewpoint is feasible, indeed quite appealing, it opens up wider issues of morality, religion and God. For example, if a religious groups was to concede this ground, it would essentially contradict beliefs they once held to be unswayable.
Within the scope of this compromise come yet more arguments. More and more religions now accept the idea of the human race evolving over the centuries. Yet they generally add the caveat that this was the will of God and not the survival instinct of the species. Though Darwinists accuse religious creationists of a belief in the unknowable, those creationists will often accuse the Darwinists of the same thing, as there always must be a limit on how much we know to be provable. The debate rages on.
With this many rifts in the argument it is hard to imagine a time when human beings together agree on where we came from. Perhaps the truth really does lie in a compromise, a place where creationism and evolution coexist. If so it will be a long time before we reach it.
No comments:
Post a Comment