For most of human history, the religious view that an omnipotent being created humanity was the accepted explanation. For example, in the Judaic/Christian Bible, the Book of Genesis details the creation of the earth and all its inhabitants, and remains a religious cornerstone to understanding our origins. It states that God made the planet Earth, all of the animals, and then humans: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”[i] Since the Book of Genesis was written around 1400 BC[ii], it is logical to assume that the humans that were created “in the image of God” were the same type of humans that wrote the book. There is nothing in the Bible that mentions other hominids or that there had been any gradual change to humanity. Indeed, the concept of other hominids was unknown at the time, so humans were considered “fully formed”[iii].
One reason why the Bible’s telling of events was so widely accepted was probably due to there being no other explanation available; early human societies were likely not concerned with finding archeological discoveries. However, while many philosophers over the centuries have questioned “creationism”, it was not until the nineteenth century that science had progressed far enough to begin providing physical evidence of previous hominid species. Fossils of ancient bones were being discovered more and more often, creating questions that religion could not readily answer. Then, in 1859, naturalist Charles Darwin published the idea of evolution by natural selection.[iv] The debate over the origins of humanity has been raging ever since.
Those that accept evolution as fact have a wealth of evidence on their side. Professor David Kalivas states: “The overwhelming amount of fossil evidence indicating the existence of previous generations of pre-human and early human beings supports the conclusion that evolution is a fact of nature, which means that human beings have gradually changed over long spans of time.”[v] In fact, the fossils of other hominids show exactly how humans have changed over the years. In the case of the Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis), there are a number of similarities to modern humans (Homo sapiens), but what is most interesting are the obvious differences, such as a raised brow and thicker arm bones.[vi] Over time, these physical attributes changed, but the fossil record gained even more credibility when their age was scientifically proven through radiocarbon dating.[vii]
Additionally, the more recent discovery of DNA has essentially proven that evolution is a fact. For example, the migratory patterns of early hominids are thought to have begun in Africa, moved south and east to India and Asia, and moved north to Europe.[viii] Examination of DNA from people all across those areas has verified many similarities, echoing the migratory patterns.[ix] Clearly, in the time it took to migrate across India, Asia and into the Americas, the early hominids changed bit by bit, adapting to their new environments.
Unfortunately, there is no physical evidence to support the theory that humans were created by a supernatural being. The argument for creation simply requires faith, and many of the faithful have attempted to combine the facts of evolution with their beliefs, with limited success. Some “Creationists” flatly refuse to combine the two, saying they are incompatible. Eddie Snipes of Exchanged Life Outreach states:
“Not only do you have to discredit the first eleven chapters of Genesis, but also the New
Testament. The foundation of the New Testament is that sin entered through death … if
evolution exists, then the Bible is false. Death did not come by sin but existed millions or
billions of years before man arrived.”[x]
Gary Martin, founder of the Young Earth Creation Club, takes that stance even further:
“Based on the fact that the Bible is God's revealed truth to us, and that He was the only
eye-witness to what actually happened ‘in the beginning’, it should be obvious that when
the Bible and evolutionary dogma conflict, God's word should be taken over the opinions
of fallible, sinful scientists who weren't there ‘in the beginning.’”[xi]
The problem with this argument is that if being there “in the beginning” was the one item that would prove everything and guarantee acceptance, then the Bible’s version cannot be believed either, because the writer(s) of Genesis were also not present during the Creation.
The arguments of Messrs. Martin and Snipes illustrate how evolution and creationism truly are incompatible. What they’re basically saying here is that to accept a “creation myth” as true, one must also accept the religion it is associated with, in this case Christianity. Some Christians interpret the events depicted in the Bible literally, as though they are historic facts. However, there are many tales in the Bible and in religious folklore that have come under scientific scrutiny in an attempt to prove that they are, in fact, true. Unfortunately, all have failed to prove their validity.
In the case of The Great Flood, the Bible states God caused a flood that covered the entire planet: “And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.”[xii] If a flood of this magnitude had actually occurred, there would be geological evidence to prove it, but there isn’t. Scientists studying the area around the Black Sea have discovered evidence of nearby waters rising in the time frame in question, but nowhere near the amount depicted in the Bible, and certainly not enough to cover the entire planet.[xiii] Alleged religious artifacts have also failed to provide conclusive evidence that they are genuine, such as Veronica’s Veil and the Shroud of Turin.[xiv]
Even the text of the Bible is suspect. There are dozens of different English language translations of the Bible such as the King James Version, the Jerusalem Bible, the New International Version, the Revised Standard Version, etc. With so many different interpretations, the stories themselves can change, and sometimes even contradict each other. When there are multiple versions of the same event being presented as truth, it becomes even more difficult to verify what really is true from what is false.
However, many of the faithful state that to believe in Creation does not require in-depth analytical thinking. Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the Human Genome project, states: “reason alone cannot prove the existence of God. Faith is reason plus revelation … ultimately, a leap of faith is required.”[xv] Therein lays the heart of the matter – in order to accept Creation, one must simply have faith; to believe without having proof.
Unfortunately, Creation as described in the Judaic/Christian Bible actually contradicts the physical record of early hominid fossils. Genesis describes man being created whole and fully formed, but as modern man – as Homo sapiens. The very existence of early hominid fossils proves that this did not happen; modern man did not suddenly appear on the planet. The evolution of humans happened over enormous amounts of time, with several different versions continuously changing and adapting into Homo sapiens.
Interestingly, there is one possible concept that might combine these two very different modes of thought. In Genesis, God created the world and all its inhabitants in six days – but some have asked how long is a “day” to an omnipotent, immortal being? While it can be argued that the writer(s) of the Bible thought in terms of the 24-hour rotation of the planet, what a god considers a “day” might be very different. Could a god merely have “started” the process, and the actual appearance of animals and humans followed, taking place over a span of time that to humans is incomprehensibly long? A passage from the book of Genesis leaves this possibility wide open: “And God said, let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life (emphasis added).[xvi] This passage could easily be interpreted as saying that God allowed the waters themselves to be the primordial soup where life formed. This is, in fact, the widely accepted theory of how all life formed on earth. Whether one believes that a god started the process in motion or not is still up to for debate.
There is one aspect of this discussion that may someday actually rectify the opposing viewpoints: what happens to us after we die? Does our “soul” (if we even have one) continue? I think it does, but not in the way that many religious people believe it does. I think we continue in some fashion because of chemistry. One of the basic laws of chemistry is the law of conservation of mass, which states that nothing actually disappears; it merely changes its state of existence. For example – when water boils in a tea kettle, the water is transformed from a liquid state to a gaseous state. All the molecules/atoms are still present; it's just in a new form. This is a measurable, known fact. The steam mixes with other gaseous substances and eventually can become clouds and then rain, regaining its liquid form, and if frozen turns into a solid form: ice.
The human "soul", consciousness or life-force (whatever you want to call it) is indefinable, immeasurable and is usually referred to in the abstract. We do not have the means to identify what it actually is, but one thing we do know is that if it does exist, it clearly resides in the body, and specifically in the brain. (Have you ever noticed how those people in a “vegetative state” are still alive, but not functioning like they used to – this usually happens because of a brain injury.) So now we apply Einstein’s theorem and some simple analytics: matter is energy. If the soul is inside the human body (matter), and matter is energy, then the soul – which is part of the matter – is also energy. Also, if all matter can change from one form to another, it is logical to assume that the same happens to the soul. The catalyst for inducing change in the tea kettle is the heat from the stove, so it would follow that the catalyst for the soul to transform would be the death of the body. However, since it operates at a different level/frequency/dimension/whatever, than the body, its next state of existence is clearly outside of what we are currently able to identify and measure. Given time, we may eventually know the properties and dynamics of this other world.
Is that “other world” what some people call Heaven? In all likelihood this next phase of existence is simply a natural occurrence, and someday we will be able to logically explain how it came to be, just as we can do now regarding the origins of humanity. Whether or not a god created us, there is one immutable fact that cannot be ignored: the fossil record. To deny the existence of these items is to deny that those people once lived and walked on this earth. Their bones exist; therefore they once existed, too. The only logical explanation we have that tells us why they existed is evolution – they are our ancestors. Denying their existence is to deny our own.
References
- Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca; Piazza, Alberto; Menozzi,Paolo and Mountain, Joanna. “Reconstruction of human evolution: bringing together genetic, archaeological, and linguistic data”. National Academy of Sciences (Vol 85), August 1988, pp 6002-6006. http://www.pnas.org/content/85/16/6002.full.pdf+html
- Collins, Francis. “Why this scientist believes in God.” CNN.com (April 6, 2007). http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.commentary/index.html
- Dorminey, Bruce. “Noah's flood not rooted in reality, after all?” National Geographic News (February 6, 2009). http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/02/090206-smaller-noah-flood.html
- Enotes.com. “When was the bible written?” Enotes.com, Inc. (2009). http://www.enotes.com/history-fact-finder/religion/when-was-bible-written
- Genesis 1, King James Version. (n.d.) BibleGateway.com. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=KJV
- Genesis 7, King James Version (n.d.) BibleGateway.com. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%207&version=KJV
- Grabianowski, Ed. “How human migration works” (n.d.). HowStuffWorks, Inc./Discovery Communications, LLC. (1998-2009) http://science.howstuffworks.com/evolution/human-migration3.htm
- Institute of Human Origins (IHO). “Becoming human” (2008). www.becominghuman.org/
- Kalivas, David. “Commentary: evolution and faith”. University of Massachusetts Online, World Civilization I week one discussion post (September 4, 2009).
- Martin, Gary. “President George Bush is wrong, creation and evolution are incompatible” (n.d.). The Young Earth Creation Club. http://www.creationists.org/irreconcilable-differences-between-creation-and-evolution.html
- Nickell, Joe. “Claims of invalid “Shroud” radiocarbon date cut from whole cloth.” Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (March 2, 2005). http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/claims_of_invalid_ldquoshroudrdquo_radiocarbon_date_cut_from_whole_cloth/
- Snipes, Eddie. “Are evolution and creation compatible?” Exchanged Life Outreach (n.d.) http://www.exchangedlife.com/Creation/compat.shtml
- Tignor, Robert, et al. Worlds Together Worlds Apart. W. W. Norton & Company (NY: 2008).
ENDNOTES:
[i] Genesis 1, King James Version. (n.d.) BibleGateway.com.
[ii] Enotes.com. “When was the bible written?” Enotes.com, Inc. (2009).
[iii]Tignor, Robert, et al. Worlds Together Worlds Apart. W. W. Norton & Company (NY: 2008), p 5.
[iv]Ibid, p 738.
[v]Kalivas, David. “Commentary: evolution and faith”. University of Massachusetts Online, World Civilization I week one discussion post (September 4, 2009).
[vi]Institute of Human Origins (IHO). “Becoming human” (2008).
[vii]Tignor, Robert, et al. Worlds Together Worlds Apart. W. W. Norton & Company (NY: 2008), p 9.
[viii]Tignor, Robert, et al. Worlds Together Worlds Apart. W. W. Norton & Company (NY: 2008), pp 18-19.
[ix]Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca, et al. “Reconstruction of human evolution: bringing together genetic, archaeological, and linguistic data”. National Academy of Sciences (Vol 85), August 1988, p 6002.
[x]Snipes, Eddie. “Are evolution and creation compatible?” Exchanged Life Outreach (n.d.).
[xi]Martin, Gary. “President George Bush is wrong, creation and evolution are incompatible” (n.d.). The Young Earth Creation Club.
[xii]Genesis 7, King James Version (n.d.) BibleGateway.com.
[xiii]Dorminey, Bruce. “Noah's flood not rooted in reality, after all?” National Geographic News (February 6, 2009).
[xiv] Nickell, Joe. “Claims of invalid “Shroud” radiocarbon date cut from whole cloth.” Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (March 2, 2005).
[xv]Collins, Francis. “Why this scientist believes in God.” CNN.com (April 6, 2007).
[xvi] Genesis 1, King James Version. (n.d.) BibleGateway.com.