Origins of Life Essay Flashcards
Non-Religious (Scientific) KU
Theorised by Charles Darwin in the 1800s. All life began as a primordial soup which grew into the eclectic variety of life we see today. All life began from a common source which has developed over 1000s of years. However, scientists still don’t know how inorganic material became organic. When animals reproduce, mutations occur and will be passed onto their offspring. If these are by chance advantageous then an animal will have a better chance of survival. Eg polar bears have mutated to be white in the past which has meant they can sneak up on prey. This is called survival of the fittest. These mutations pass on through generations before eventually leading to a species evolving. Finally, he argues that we evolved from apes.
Non-Religious (Scientific) A
Non-religious people support this view as it does not include a supernatural being and it explains the variety of life in a natural and scientific way. Some may support this view as they have grown up in a secular society, their parents may have adopted this view and they may have learnt about it in their science class and that in a secular society that this is the answer
Non-Religious (Scientific) Implications
As a result of believing in Evolution, scientists would argue that religious and scientific views are incompatible as evolution demonstrates that there was no need for a creator such as God as life sparked into existence through a natural process.
Another implication of this view is it implies that human s are not special or ‘made in God’s image’ and nor do we have any purpose. Instead us humans are simply the product of a natural and random process and have evolved over time.
Non-Religious (Scientific) Evaluations
I think that this is a convincing viewpoint as it can be proven by the scientific process which ensures that the theory has been well tested by multiple experts to make sure its valid. Whereas, religion is down to blind faith.
There is also clear evidence which supports this theory . This evidence is observable meaning that it cannot be denied and can be verified by others. Therefore, as there is evidence that supports the theory then this makes me think that it is the most reliable.
Literal Christian (KU)
Literal Christians look to Genesis 1 which states that God was able to create life through commands and that man and women were created at the same time. As God created animals on the fifth day of the account and humans being created on Day six.
Literal Christians refer to Genesis 2 for specific answers about the origins of life. Genesis 2 says that firstly God created man out of dust from the ground. He breathed the breath of life into him. God then planted the garden of Eden as a home full of plants and fruit. It then became apparent that man needed a companion so God created all the animals, even the birds in the sky. Despite this, man still couldn’t find a companion so God took one of Adam’s ribs and created woman.
Literal Christians believe that God created all life, including the plants, animals and humans exactly as described in Genesis 1+2. They also believe that the bible is the word of God and is accurate and therefore does not need to be interpreted but accepted.
Literal Christian (A) Argument
Literal Christians would argue that humans are imperfect and therefore incapable of properly interpreting the word of God without making a mess of it.
Literal Christians would also argue that life shows intelligent design, in that life is so complex and perfect that it couldn’t have simply arisen from a random and natural process like evolution. Supporters of intelligent design argue that the delicate and complex balance of food chains and eco-systems suggest that a greater being like God is behind life.
Literal Christian (A) Implications
An implication of the Literal View is that they must reject modern scientific theories like the Theory of Evolution as these are not covered in the bible.
Due to their belief that God created humans ‘in his image’, this leads many literals to believe that humans are special and superior to other animals and have a God-given purpose
Literal Christians (E) Evaluations
I find this viewpoint unconvincing as it is not logically possible for both Genesis accounts to be literally true simultaneously as they contradict one another. One says God commanded humans into existence while the other says that man was created from dust and women from Man’s rib. Both cannot be true so either one is right or both are wrong.
I find the intelligent design argument weak because even if we are to believe that there was a more intelligent designer behind our universe it could’ve been a flying spaghetti monster for all we know. It doesn’t necessarily mean that it was a Christian God.
Non-Literal Christian (KU)
Non-Literals believe that the bible including Genesis 1+2 should be interpreted as they view the stories as being symbolic. Meaning they are not viewed as factually true but do deliver an important message.
They also believe that God created all life including the plants, animals and humans by using evolution as a mechanism to do so.
Non-Literal Christian (A) Argument
They may hold this belief due to have being brought up in a religious tradition that embraces modern scientific discoveries.
They believe that evolution was the work of God because the authors of Genesis had limited scientific knowledge and evolution and so the Genesis account was their way of explaining what they believed at the time although this was later proven false.
Non-Literal Christian (A) Implication
An implication of this view is that unlike Literal Christians, Non-Literals don’t have to try and explain away the differences between Genesis 1+2 as they simply argue that both accounts have the same overall message that God created all life.
Another implication is that Non-Literals may find religious and scientific viewpoints compatible as they work together to give a better understanding as religion can tell us why God created humans and science can tell us why he did it.
Non-Literal Christian (E) Evaluation
I find this viewpoint unconvincing as they don’t provide any actual evidence that God caused the Theory of Evolution. They simply say it must have been God as there is a gap in our knowledge. There is therefore insufficient evidence to support their claim.
I find the Non-Literal viewpoint to be further unconvincing as you can’t just pick and choose what parts of the Bible you want to believe. Only God/the author(s) know which parts are true. So if they can say that the bible is untrue when it says that God commanded life into existence , then I think it isn’t possible to claim that God created life as this could be untrue as well.
