one of the biggest controveries in the world: evolution versus creation. i recently had to write a persuasive/argumentative speech on a controversial topic and i chose something i was interested in. this. below you'll find the essay i wrote, i hope you enjoy it (-: (DISCLAIMER: these are my views and opinions. i'm not trying to change any views or anything like that. the following essay is wholly me.)
Steven Weinberg, a theoretical physicist and atheist, once said “I think the world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious belief; and anything that we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done, and may in fact be our greatest contribution to civilization.” While the Apostle’s Creed begins with “I believe in God, the Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth.”
The question now is, what do you believe?
This controversy over evolution and creationism has been going on since the dawn of time and will probably only cease when dusk settles in for the last time. This controversy has prompted wars all over the world for centuries, causing horrific bloodshed and tragedies. The thing about this controversy, though, is that no one can ever agree on which theory is right.
So which do you believe?
Do you believe in Charles Darwin’s theory where life started from a single cell organism and has developed over time into a bigger, better species? Or do you believe in the one where the idea of concept and design is so complex and unthinkable, that there must be a creator? Both of these theories are probable, evolution you’re believing in something scientifically proven, whereas creationism you’re believing in a higher power. But what about a third option, the one where evolution and creationism are one in the same?
The assumption is that evolution is sprouted from science and creationism is rooted in faith. The ones who make this argument are only half right. Evolution and creationism are both sprouted from science, and at the same time are both rooted in faith. The question now is, how?
Since kindergarten, we’ve been forced to take a science classes where we experimented, observed, and journaled different numbers. This type of science is considered experimental/observational science. For something to qualify as this, variables must be able to be manipulated, observe what's happening, evaluate the results, and repeat the experiment. An example would be from ninth grade biology where we had to test how to water was able to travel through a single thread string to get to the other end.
The theory of evolution, if it’s sprouted from only science, would be invalid if we’re going by the above criteria for what science is. No one was around when the universe was created, or the world, so there’s no possible way for us to have some type of observation or experiment. Therefore scientists are using what’s called historical science, in which we observe what’s happening now and try to come up with an idea to how and why things are the way they are (Mayr. 2017). We’re talking about interpreting present phenomena, not observing past events.
The idea of creationism proceeds along the same lines. There are individuals who say they have witnessed present phenomena, that no one other than God (or religion) could have contributed too. Dr. Mary Neal chronicled the time she died in a kayaking accident, and while the paramedics were trying to save her life, Dr. Neal claimed to see that happening, and seeing “these spirits” who told her it wasn’t her time yet in her book, To Heaven and Back. Dr. Neal not only discusses this, but goes beyond that. She treads into the territory where she didn’t believe in God, and she rejected every prayer.
To Christians, this is a testament that there must be a heavenly father. But just like evolution, there’s not rock-hard evidence, Dr. Mary Neal was only observing present phenomena. Does that sound familiar? The idea of creationism is not only rooted in faith, but has sprouted from science as well.
Now of course there are going to be people who object to this idea, but on what grounds? The Evolutionists and Creationists are basically doing the same thing. Those who object will insist that creationism is completely based off of faith and not science, but I say vice versa. The following definition of faith comes from Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." In other words, faith is the substance of things hoped for, and faith is the evidence of things not seen.
Through this interpretation, the idea of historical science becomes fact. No one was around when the world was created and there is no proven evidence that God exists. We must go from what is happening today, and keep the faith that we are right. Creationists will affirm faith through Hebrews 11:3 "By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.”And the Evolutionists will affirm it the opposite way, by faith we understand the worlds were framed by something else so that things that are visible were made through evolution.
The Evolutionists and Creationists are both taking leaps of faith in their theories or ideas, and are both using historical science to interpret the present phenomena. As I mentioned above, the Evolutionists and Creationists are doing the same thing. They’re telling the same story, just in a different way.
So which do you believe?
Do you hold onto the belief where we evolved from a single cell organism and are continuing to evolve into something newer, bigger and better? Or do you grasp onto the belief that there is something bigger, more powerful and greater than us out there?
Or are you like me, who accepts the idea that evolution and creationism coexist in this crazy, beautiful world? In the end we have the freedom to choose what we want, we have the right to believe whatever we want. John McCain once said “I believe in evolution. But I also believe, when I hike the Grand Canyon and see it at sunset, that the hand of God is there also.”
So which do you believe?
xoxo,
l.k
Steven Weinberg, a theoretical physicist and atheist, once said “I think the world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious belief; and anything that we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done, and may in fact be our greatest contribution to civilization.” While the Apostle’s Creed begins with “I believe in God, the Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth.”
The question now is, what do you believe?
This controversy over evolution and creationism has been going on since the dawn of time and will probably only cease when dusk settles in for the last time. This controversy has prompted wars all over the world for centuries, causing horrific bloodshed and tragedies. The thing about this controversy, though, is that no one can ever agree on which theory is right.
So which do you believe?
Do you believe in Charles Darwin’s theory where life started from a single cell organism and has developed over time into a bigger, better species? Or do you believe in the one where the idea of concept and design is so complex and unthinkable, that there must be a creator? Both of these theories are probable, evolution you’re believing in something scientifically proven, whereas creationism you’re believing in a higher power. But what about a third option, the one where evolution and creationism are one in the same?
The assumption is that evolution is sprouted from science and creationism is rooted in faith. The ones who make this argument are only half right. Evolution and creationism are both sprouted from science, and at the same time are both rooted in faith. The question now is, how?
Since kindergarten, we’ve been forced to take a science classes where we experimented, observed, and journaled different numbers. This type of science is considered experimental/observational science. For something to qualify as this, variables must be able to be manipulated, observe what's happening, evaluate the results, and repeat the experiment. An example would be from ninth grade biology where we had to test how to water was able to travel through a single thread string to get to the other end.
The theory of evolution, if it’s sprouted from only science, would be invalid if we’re going by the above criteria for what science is. No one was around when the universe was created, or the world, so there’s no possible way for us to have some type of observation or experiment. Therefore scientists are using what’s called historical science, in which we observe what’s happening now and try to come up with an idea to how and why things are the way they are (Mayr. 2017). We’re talking about interpreting present phenomena, not observing past events.
The idea of creationism proceeds along the same lines. There are individuals who say they have witnessed present phenomena, that no one other than God (or religion) could have contributed too. Dr. Mary Neal chronicled the time she died in a kayaking accident, and while the paramedics were trying to save her life, Dr. Neal claimed to see that happening, and seeing “these spirits” who told her it wasn’t her time yet in her book, To Heaven and Back. Dr. Neal not only discusses this, but goes beyond that. She treads into the territory where she didn’t believe in God, and she rejected every prayer.
To Christians, this is a testament that there must be a heavenly father. But just like evolution, there’s not rock-hard evidence, Dr. Mary Neal was only observing present phenomena. Does that sound familiar? The idea of creationism is not only rooted in faith, but has sprouted from science as well.
Now of course there are going to be people who object to this idea, but on what grounds? The Evolutionists and Creationists are basically doing the same thing. Those who object will insist that creationism is completely based off of faith and not science, but I say vice versa. The following definition of faith comes from Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." In other words, faith is the substance of things hoped for, and faith is the evidence of things not seen.
Through this interpretation, the idea of historical science becomes fact. No one was around when the world was created and there is no proven evidence that God exists. We must go from what is happening today, and keep the faith that we are right. Creationists will affirm faith through Hebrews 11:3 "By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.”And the Evolutionists will affirm it the opposite way, by faith we understand the worlds were framed by something else so that things that are visible were made through evolution.
The Evolutionists and Creationists are both taking leaps of faith in their theories or ideas, and are both using historical science to interpret the present phenomena. As I mentioned above, the Evolutionists and Creationists are doing the same thing. They’re telling the same story, just in a different way.
So which do you believe?
Do you hold onto the belief where we evolved from a single cell organism and are continuing to evolve into something newer, bigger and better? Or do you grasp onto the belief that there is something bigger, more powerful and greater than us out there?
Or are you like me, who accepts the idea that evolution and creationism coexist in this crazy, beautiful world? In the end we have the freedom to choose what we want, we have the right to believe whatever we want. John McCain once said “I believe in evolution. But I also believe, when I hike the Grand Canyon and see it at sunset, that the hand of God is there also.”
So which do you believe?
l.k
Interesting article...
ReplyDelete