Download 4 Is religious faith compatible with scientific evidence

Is religious faith compatible with scientific evidence?
Booklet 4 Including Past Exam Questions and Mark Schemes
AO1 Specification content



Philosophical definitions and concepts of miracle, including inherent difficulties with the
concepts of ‘laws of nature’ and ‘an interventionist God’
Challenges to belief in miracles, with particular reference to Hume, and arguments in defence of
the reality of the miraculous. Candidates will be expected to be familiar with several definitions
of ‘miracle’ and be able to outline the concepts and theories mentioned
The relationship between contemporary religious and scientific
world views of the origin of the universe and human life,
including concepts of creation and evolution and theories of
Intelligent Design, Big Bang and continuous creation
Scientific views of the origin of the universe and of human life should
include those of Darwin, Dawkins and Hawking, and candidates will be
expected to be aware of the variety of religious responses to these views
evidenced in the writings of such as Teilhard de Chardin, Peacocke,
Stannard and Polkinghorne.
AO2
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The adequacy of philosophical definitions of ‘miracle’
How far belief in miracles is reasonable
To what extent arguments against the occurrence of miracles are convincing
Whether belief in miracles is essential for a religious believer
How far attempts to reconcile religious and scientific views of the origin of the world and of
the origin of human life are successful.
1
Creation
The relationship between religion and science
Science is the systemic examination of the world using experimental methods to determine
physical laws and principles in order to explain the way things are. It is used as a basis for
prediction and for the development of technologies. Clearly, it has had a powerful impact on
people’s lives, such that to question the validity of science and scientific method seems to fly
in the face of four centuries of advance in human understanding.
However, religious beliefs also claim to give an overall view of the
nature of life, to explain why things happen, and to influence
events, through the help of God or gods, or through the acting out
of moral principles.
So it would seem that religion and science offer alternative ways of understanding the world. If that is
so, then – given the success of science and technology – religion is likely to lose credibility, or be seen as
a pre-scientific or outmoded way of thinking. But is that necessarily so?
It is possible to define the roles of science and religion in a way that prevents them coming into conflict
with each other. For example, one could say:



Science is concerned with facts, religion with values
Science examines the world in an impersonal way, religion in a personal
Science engages the analytic mind, religion addresses feelings and emotions
However, such divisions will only avoid conflicts provided that religion does not attempt to make factual
statements about the way the world is, and science does not have any influence on people’s overall
values and behaviour patterns.
But neither side will accept the restrictions. Religion makes claims
about God’s actions in creating the world, or intervening in response
to prayer or producing miracles – events that go against the
scientifically predictable order of things. These things concern the
same world that is examined by science and both sides will want to
make factual claims. Science is not neutral, it does not deal with just
facts. The possibilities opened up by science automatically feed into
people’s expectations and understanding of life.
2
Religious beliefs about creation
Introduction
Virtually all religions include an explanation for life on Earth in their scriptures. In March 2006, Rowan
Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, joined the evolution versus creationism debate when he said in
an interview with the Guardian newspaper that he did not believe that creationism - the scriptural
account of the origins of the world - should be taught in schools.
I think creationism is, in a sense, a kind of category mistake, as if the Bible were a theory like other
theories. Whatever the biblical account of creation is, it's not a theory alongside theories. It's not as if the
writer of Genesis or whatever sat down and said well, how am I going to explain all this... 'In the
beginning God created the heavens and the earth...'
Rowan Williams in The Guardian, 21 March 2006
So what is creationism all about - what does it mean, and why does it matter so much to many religious
people? And what is intelligent design and how does it differ from creationism?
The Book of Genesis






The Book of Genesis contains two accounts of creation – the Priestly tradition (Gen 1:1-2:4a) and
an older version from the Yahwistic tradition (Gen 2:4).
One way of understanding these two stories is as myth. A myth is a pre-scientific ways of
understanding creation.
There are similarities between Genesis 1:1-2:4a and Babylonian creation myths.
Myths attempt to answer the same Ultimate Questions as philosophy but in a different way.
The creation stories are anthropocentric – i.e. they don’t try and answer why creation exists,
they try and answer the question why do humans exist.
The purpose of the creation stories is to introduce the ongoing relationship between God and
humanity starting with Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Noah, Abraham…the Patriarchs…the
Israelites, Moses…etc.
The Genesis account of creation
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth
was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the
Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And
God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the
light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the
darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
6 And
God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made
the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called
the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
3
9 And
God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And
it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw
that it was good.
11 Then
God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear
fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation:
plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their
kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.
14 And
God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let
them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the
sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern
the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of
the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness.
And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
20 And
God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the
vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the
water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its
kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number
and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and
there was morning—the fifth day.
24 And
God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the
creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so.
25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the
creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
26 Then
God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish
in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, [a] and over all the
creatures that move along the ground.”
27 So
God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
28 God
blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.
Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the
ground.”
29 Then
God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that
has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds
in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in
it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
4
31 God
saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—
the sixth day.
2 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array.
2 By
the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested
from all his work. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all
the work of creating that he had done.
Summary of the first Genesis account of creation – ex nihilo, fixity of species, God decrees
Day
Events
5
Write a summary of the second Genesis account of creation –God is more anthropomorphic and
involved in creation
Include – the role of the women, the term ‘formed’ or fashioned, the order of events
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
6
Two versions of creation found in Genesis
Genesis 1 1 – 2 3
Genesis 2 4 – 3 24
The story - Read the Bible extract and write a
The story- Read the Bible extract and write a
summary of this version of creation
summary of this version of creation
Analysis and commentary
Analysis and commentary
When was it written?
When was it written?
What is God’s role?
What is God’s role?
Where do humans fit into the story?
Where do humans fit into the story?
How long did creation take?
How long did creation take?
Any comments?
7
The Concept of God as Creator



Neither Judaism nor Christianity attempts to argue the existence of God as God is assumed as a
matter of faith.
The Bible explores the relationship between God and humanity.
The Book of Genesis is the main source for Judaism and Christianity’s understanding of creation.
God and Creation








In Genesis God is portrayed as the Supreme Being having no equal.
God is separate from his creation - He is transcendent.
It is not clear as to whether God creates out of nothing – creatio ex nihilo.
God appears to bring order (Gk cosmos) out of disorder (Gk Chaos).
Both Judaism and Christianity assume that God did create out of nothing.
Some scientists have problems with creation ex nihilo as they argue that matter cannot simply
come into existence.
Augustine suggested that time itself is an aspect of the created world – beginning and creating
out of nothing do not refer to some particular moment in time.
For Augustine the universe could be eternal, while at the same time created, sustained and
dependent upon God.
God and Humanity




In Genesis humanity is the pinnacle of creation – God looks back on the sixth day and declares
that it is VERY good.
God places all creation under humanity’s stewardship to look after and care for it.
Both stories suggest an anthropocentric view of creation – it has been placed here for the
benefit of humanity.
This is in stark contrast to evolutionary theories of creation – i.e. Darwinism whereby humanity
has come about via ‘blind design’.
Creation Elsewhere in the Bible


The Bible is full of references to God as creator.
The Psalms often sing God’s praises as Creator:
The heaven’s declare the glory of God, the vault of heaven proclaim his handiwork; day
discourses of it to day, night to night hands on the knowledge.
Ps 19:1-2
Yahweh, what variety you have created, arranging everything so wisely! Earth is
completely full of things you have made.
Ps 104:24
8
Christian responses to scientific theories of creation
Creationism – literal accounts
The main points of creationism are these:

All life was created by the actions of God

Some Creationists say God did this in a single creative event

Some Creationists don't limit creation to one event

All the forms of life existing today were created by the actions of God

The organisms created by God can't produce new forms of organism - only God can do this

The most common theory follows the accounts in the Biblical Book of Genesis, but most religions have
their own creation story

Modern creationism uses scientific evidence to support scripture

Most scientists say the creationism theory is false and unscientific
Creationism teaches that:

everything in the universe has God as its ultimate cause

the nature of life on Earth is the direct result of God's creative actions
An alternative way of putting the same idea is:

the universe and everything in it could not have come into being without a supreme being causing it
to happen
Creationism is largely based on religious belief, but gains much support from what its protagonists see
as the failures of other theories to explain the evidence properly.
Forms of creationism Creationism teaches that life on Earth is the result of God's creative action, and
not the result of blind scientific processes. Creationism doesn't attempt to explain how God did this:
We do not know how God created, what processes He used, for God used processes which are not now
operating anywhere in the natural universe. This is why we refer to divine creation as Special Creation.
We cannot discover by scientific investigation anything about the creative processes used by God.
Gish, Evolution? The Fossils Say No!, 1979
Young Earth creationism - literal

The Book of Genesis is literally true

The Earth and all forms of life were created by God in 6 days, around 10,000 years ago.
Scientists are almost unanimous in saying that as the Earth is 4 billion years old, and that the Young
Earth theory is false.
9
Old Earth creationism – non-literal

The Earth is as old as scientists say (around 4 billion years)

The universe, Earth, and life were created by processes in which God played an active part

There have been countless divine acts of creation throughout history

God acts both by direct creation and by guiding the processes he created

Humanity was directly created by God

The difference between this theory and Theistic Evolution is that in Theistic Evolution God doesn't
play an active part after the original creation of the universe and the forces that operate in it.
Gap creationism
Gap creationism adds a new idea:

There were two creations - one before Adam, and a second one, which included Adam and Eve, after
a lengthy time gap

This theory reconciles the age of the Earth with the story in Genesis
Most scientists say that the geological evidence shows that this theory is false.
Day-Age creationism
Day-Age creationism adds an element that reconciles the long period of time shown by the fossil record
with the story in Genesis.
Each 'day' in the Biblical '6 days' of creation wasn't really a day, but a period of millions of years. The
theory is supported by Biblical references that show that one of 'God's days' is a lot longer than 24
hours.
‘For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by...’
Psalm 90:4
‘With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.’
2 Peter 3:8
Progressive creationism
Progressive creationism accepts the scientific timetable of creation, and gives evolution a small part to
play in the story of life.
God created the various 'kinds' (some people would say 'species' but other categories have been
suggested) of plant and animal one after another - according to the timetable shown by the fossil
record. The scientific timetable of creation reflects the timetable that God used to create life on earth.
God created each kind of organism as we find it. Different forms of organism are separate creations, not
the result of evolution from an earlier form. Some created organisms do become extinct. Microevolution can take place within a kind of organism to produce subtle variations e.g. Lions, tigers and cats
within the cat family and the different sizes of beak within the Galapagos finches.
10
Intelligent design
The current state of life on Earth has come about through the actions of an intelligent Designer. This is
because:

Some living things contain certain types of complexity that are best explained as the result of an
intelligent cause

Some aspects of the universe show positive evidence of having been designed by some form of
intelligence
This designer need not be God but most proponents of intelligent design seem to have God in mind.
This theory has been accused of being creationism in disguise. Although a few scientists have supported
intelligent design, the majority of those working in the field regard the theory as false and unscientific.
The Intelligent Design theory claims that some sort of supernatural designer was involved in the
creation of life on Earth. It differs from Creationism because it divorces Creationist ideas from their
roots in Scripture.
The argument in favour of Intelligent Design has two parts:

Evolutionary theory doesn't fully explain the origin and development of life on Earth

Life on Earth - and more generally the universe - shows so much order, purpose and design that there
must have been a designer
The important part of the Intelligent Design theory is "design", and the idea that the Universe and life
must somehow be designed is a very old one, going right back to Aristotle.
Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century used the argument to try and prove the existence of God:

wherever complex design exists, there must have been a designer

nature is complex

therefore nature must have had an intelligent designer
Most intelligent design arguments avoid any reference to scripture and try to eliminate anything that
might look as if it was derived from religious belief. The modern concept of intelligent design owes much
to Phillip Johnson, an American professor of Law. Johnson published the book Darwin on Trial (1991),
and in 1996 established the Centre for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute. Johnson put ID
forward not as a creationist theory, but as a theory that acknowledged that there was more to the
development of life on Earth than could be explained by a totally naturalistic account.
The theoretical foundations of ID were provided by Michael Behe (author of Darwin's Black Box: The
Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, 1996), William Dembski and others.
11
Why ‘scientific’ creationism denies the evidence of evolution?
Noah’s flood
The occurrence of the worldwide flood (Noah’s flood) destroyed most animal and plant life and
greatly affected the processes operating on earth. The water resulted in weathering and made
rocks appear older than they actually were.
Carbon dating
Carbon dating has been discovered to be incorrect; for example, the ‘evolutionary’ history of
the horse has been proven to be flawed and so has the belief that humans descend from apes.
Evolutionary history
Scientists already accept that much of evolutionary history has been discovered to be incorrect
and it is believed that, eventually, all such ‘histories’ will be proved wrong. For example, an idea
called biogenetic law was used as evidence for the theory of evolution. This hypothesis stated
that during its development in the womb, the human embryo retraces its evolutionary history –
that it has gill slits like a fish, and a tail like a monkey. Modern biology now rejects this theory.
Artificial selection
Artificial selection cannot be considered as natural selection because it is deliberate, guided by
intelligence, and supports selective breeding of certain species by mankind. For example, the
liger, ‘created’ by man via artificial selection, is a hybrid cross between a male lion and a female
tiger.
Fossil records
Fossil records have never supported the theory of evolution. Even Darwin himself was
concerned about what he referred to as ‘imperfection of the geological records’. A fossil has yet
to be discovered that demonstrates a species in transition, even though evolutionists have
been looking for one for 130 years.
Also, mistakes have been made with the evidence that is found, as was made with ‘Lucy’. Lucy
is yet another evolutionary fable, and an example of the inevitable circular reasoning behind
evolutionary theory. Lucy had nothing to do with human origins, as had initially been believed,
but was simply an extinct primate – an australopithecine. There is already evidence which
shows that humans appeared in the fossil record before the australopithecines, suggesting that
humans and australopithecines lived as contemporaries throughout the australopithecine
history, and therefore that Lucy could not be a hominoid.
The case for the australopithecines as human ancestors has been based on three evolutionist
claims that:
 they were relatively big brained
 they were bipedal
 they appear in the fossil record at the relevant time
12
In reality, the fossil record shows us that the australopithecines do not appear at the relevant
time; they are far too recent. Although brain organisation is more important than brain size, the
significant gap between the cranial capacities of the largest australopithecine and the smallest
human has not been bridged. There is no smooth transition from non-human to human fossils
in this regard.
Australopithecine bipedality
The evidence for australopithecine bipedality is controversial. First, bipedality does not indicate
a human relationship: birds are bipedal, but no one suggests that they are closely related to
humans. Evolutionists make much of the alleged australopithecine bipedality because to make
a case for human evolution, they must demonstrate the origin of bipedality from a primate
stock.
Task
Explain why scientific creationism denies evolutionary theories.
Statement
Evidence and example
Explanation
13
The origin of the universe
Science assumes that the universe has a fundamental unity and coherence, and that it is capable of
being understood: hence the scientific quest for a TOE (a Theory of Everything), a set of principles that
will explain how the universe originated and came to be as it is today.
The scientific quest to do this is not so different from the religious desire for an overall source of
creative power and reason (God), which will make sense of everything.
Therefore, once again, we find that science and religion are on parallel tracks, each seeking a goal in
terms of understanding the nature and significance of life as we experience it.
Dimensions
You do not need detailed knowledge of cosmology, but some idea of the scale of the universe is
valuable, simply in order to put theories of origin and religious views into some overall perspective.
There are at least ten billion galaxies in the universe. Our own galaxy is thought to contain 100 billion
stars, and to be about 100,000 light years in diameter. The sun, about 32,000 light years from the centre
of the galaxy is a relatively modest star – one of ten billion trillion in the known universe.
It is generally held that the universe is 13.9 billion years old, and that our sun (a second generation star)
is around five billion years old. The dimensions of the universe are determined by our ability to observe
it. We cannot, for example, observe anything that is moving away from us at a speed greater than the
speed of light, simply because the light from it would never reach us. Indeed, we cannot even know
whether such a thing is possible.
We are part of the universe, not external observers; we can only see the universe from our own
perspective.
The Big Bang theory
The Big Bang theory is an explanation for the origin of the knowable
universe and the development of the laws of physics and chemistry. It is
thought to have taken place some 10 – 15 billion years ago.
The Big Bang Theory is a scientific concept that says that the Universe was
created about 13.7 billion years ago when a concentration of mass
exploded. The material slowly collected into stars and galaxies as it spread.
Observations by astronomers show that the stars and galaxies are spreading
apart and that the Universe is expanding. The spectrum of light changes and
shifts towards the red if a body being observed is moving away at very great
speed. In 1929 E.P. Hubble observed this red shift in the light coming from
distant galaxies. This indicated that distant galaxies were moving away from
us and away from one another. He also noted that those galaxies that are
furthest away, are receding faster than those nearer to us. Hence the
universe is expanding and from the speed of its expansion it is possible to
calculate its age, probably around 13.0 billion years.
Tracing the expansion backwards lead to a ‘hot big bang’, when all space, time and matter started to
expand outwards from an infinitely small point, called a space time singularity. The ‘hot big bang’
creates time and space, in the sense that space and time as we know them are a feature of what is
14
happening within that expansion. It is therefore problematic to try to ask what happened before the
‘hot big bang’ because ‘before’ is a function of time, and the only time we know is time within our
expanding universe. To ask about that ‘before’ we would have to step outside time and space.
However, it is always possible to imagine earlier states, other universes before this one, and so on. That
is because, as Kant explained, the mind imposes ideas of space and time on everything it experiences or
even thinks about.
This theory has great religious implications. Some religions accept the Big Bang theory, while others are
opposed to it.
Religious implications
This idea of the Universe being created at a specific time, years ago, has religious implications. It points
to the idea that God or some Supreme Being created the Universe and our Earth at that time. A number
of religions allude to such a situation in their Holy Books. On the other hand, if evidence shows that the
Universe did not to start at a specific time, then the concept of God creating the Universe years ago
takes a hit and may seem doubtful.
Christians accepting the theory
Many Christians accept the Big Bang theory as within the realm of possibilities and not contrary to their
religious beliefs. The Biblical story of the creation of the world shared by both Christian and Jewish
religions says that God created the Heavens and Earth in six days. However, the interpretation considers
the question, "How long is a day to God?" This would allow the possibility of 13.7 billion years in
formation. In the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Pius XII was a proponent of the Big Bang Theory and the
Church follows the idea that creation from nothing stated in Genesis is consistent with the Big Bang.
These religions do not take the creation story in the Bible literally, but instead consider it more of a
metaphysical tale.
Christians rejecting the theory
There are several religions that reject the possibility of the Big Bang Theory, because it goes against their
religious beliefs. Many Evangelical or Fundamentalist Christian religions believe in a literal interpretation
of the Bible. They believe that the Bible is fact, word-for-word, and that the Earth and Universe were
created by God in six 24-hour days.
The concept of the Universe being billions of years old is also contrary to their belief that the Earth is
less than 7000 years old.
Summary
The Big Bang Theory is a scientific concept that says that the Universe was created about 13.7 billion
years ago when a concentration of mass exploded. This theory has great religious implications of a
Supreme Being creating the Universe. Many Christians accept the Big Bang concept. Other Christians
such as Fundamentalists are opposed to it.
15
The Steady State– Theory:
There is no beginning
and no end to the
universe; it has always
been there!
The basis of this theory goes against the “cosmological” argument for the existence of the universe.
Steady State suggests there was no beginning to the universe. Rather it states that matter and energy
cannot be created; therefore the universe cannot be created because it has always been there. This is
based on the notion that it has always held the same appearance from whatever time or place it could
be observed from.
It further proposes that although the universe is expanding– its galaxies are moving apart from each
other and new galaxies replace old ones by filling in the gaps left by dying galaxies. So there is a
continuous creation of new particles and matter, and the rate at which this takes place is determined by
the expansion of the universe. This happens at a steady rate and always stays the same. The universe is
- self-sustaining, self-regulating and can reorganise itself “ad infinitum.”
What problems would the suggestion of the Steady-State theory pose for people who believe in God?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
16
If the universe is indeed continually expanding and there is no end to the cycle, does this mean that the
Bible is wrong and there will not be a day of judgement?
What answer might a believer say in response to this question? Explain:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The evolutionary model for the origin of life
Through the study of simple organisms and the chemistry of living things, we can develop scientific
theories about how life on Earth began. The main theory is that living things developed from molecules
that could replicate, or copy, themselves, rather like DNA does.
There are two possible origins for these replicating molecules:

they were produced by the conditions on Earth at the time

they came from somewhere else, such as another planet in our Solar System, or further out in space
Over many millions of years these molecules joined with other molecules, becoming gradually more
complex and dependent on each other. The process of evolution by natural selection eventually led to
all of the different living things that we see on Earth today.
Darwin's theory of evolution
Charles Darwin (1809 - 1882)
Charles Darwin was an English naturalist who studied variation in plants and
animals during a five-year voyage around the world in the 19th century. He
explained his ideas on evolution in a book called, 'On the Origin of Species',
published in 1859.
Darwin's ideas caused a lot of controversy, and this continues today, because they can be seen as
conflicting with religious views about the creation of the world and the creatures in it.
The basic idea behind the theory of evolution is that all the different species have evolved from simple
life forms. These simple life forms first developed more than 3 billion years ago (the Earth is about 4.5
billion years old).
17
Natural selection
The theory of evolution states that evolution happens by natural selection. The key
points are that:





individuals in a species show a wide range of variation
this variation is because of differences in their genes
individuals with characteristics most suited to the environment are more
likely to survive and reproduce
the genes that allow these individuals to be successful are passed to their
offspring
Individuals that are poorly adapted to their environment are less likely to
survive and reproduce. This means that their genes are less likely to be
passed to the next generation. Given enough time, a species will gradually
evolve.
Conditions on Earth
Life on Earth today exists because of the conditions that were present when life was evolving. If, in the
past, conditions had been different e.g. hotter, colder, or the Earth more or less massive, then evolution
by natural selection could have produced some very different results. Our bodies would have changed
to suit the Earth's conditions.
Origins of life
Living organisms on Earth today, and the chemicals which work together to keep them alive, are
extremely complex, even in single-celled micro-organisms. Some people find it hard to accept that such
complexity could have evolved through natural selection. Some religious people believe that all living
things on Earth were made by God, or that life was begun by God but then evolved through natural
selection. We will probably never be absolutely certain about how life began, as no one was there to
observe it. But scientists must base their theories on evidence.
Evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution
Fossils
Fossils of ammonites - sea creatures that became extinct about 65
million years ago
Most of the evidence for evolution comes from the fossil record. Fossils
show how much, or how little, organisms have changed over time.
One of the problems with the fossil record is that it contains gaps. Not
all organisms fossilise well. And many fossils are destroyed by the
movements of the Earth, or have simply not been discovered.
18
Darwin’s effect on creationism
Darwin’s theory of evolution undermined the biblical account of creation for a number of reasons:

He showed how living things developed in small steps, and how this development could be the
result of chance. Darwin thus demonstrated that life-forms were not in their final form at the
time of creation, and might not be the work of a designer.
 Evolution showed that things changed to fit in with the environment rather than the
environment being shaped for their needs. This conflicted with the biblical account that God
created the environment for the benefit of various life forms.
 Nature red in tooth and claw did not match the idea of a gentle and kind deity, as the exponents
of natural theology deemed God to be.
Darwin had accounted for all human characteristics by natural selection from other life-forms, and
concluded that humans descended from apes.
Darwin had attacked the Christian idea that humans were unique and made in ‘God’s image’.
Christians believed that humans had a spiritual soul, which distinguished them from animals. God
put the soul there – but if mankind developed from animal origins then were did Darwin’s theories
leave this idea? Were human’s soulless beings like the animals? Darwin cast further doubt on the
biblical account of Creation, especially the story of Adam and Eve.
Briefly explain the Big Bang theory.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
19
Briefly explain the Steady State and continuous creation theory.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Briefly explain the theory of evolution.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Briefly explain Darwin’s theory of natural selection.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
20
Do religion and science have to be in conflict?
Compatible
Conflict
Not literal
Scientific discoveries meant that . . .
God of the Gaps
Scientific discoveries have shown that the church
has made mistakes. . .
21
2011
3. (a) Examine differences between religious and scientific accounts of the origins of the universe. [30]
NB Candidates should be drawing out differences as opposed to reeling off information about the
respective accounts. The better answers, then, could include the information below, but in the form of:
"Religious accounts occur in a relatively short period of time, whereas Science...."
Religious view- purpose/meaning; choice; looks at the "why", God/gods; found in sacred writings and/or
traditions; different interpretations of creation stories; values the spiritual; faith; fixity of species; divine
creations, including humans in "image of God;" timescale etc.
Scientific view- Big bang; accident; looks at the "how"; based on human observation; values the physical
and reason; humans - not part of process at the very beginning etc. [30]
(b) ‘Religious and scientific views of the origins of the universe cannot be reconciled.’
Evaluate this contention. [20]
Agree
• The big bang does not need God;
• Literal understanding of Creation stories; Creationism.
• Steady state theory does not necessitate a God.
• Later Hawking (no need for God).
• Newton's mechanistic universe does not need a God.
• God of the gaps-so few gaps as to be non-existent etc.
Disagree
• Big bang could have been a conscious decision of God.
• Non-literal interpretation of Creation stories.
• Steady state allows for a god.
• Earlier Hawking; Newton-God "set up" mechanistic universe; god of the gaps serves a purpose; specific
scholars e.g. de Chardin, A. Peacocke, R. Peacock, Polkinghorne etc. [20]
2012
3. (a) Explain why belief in miracles may be challenged. [30]
Candidates may use some of the following:

Hume's criticisms.

Just a coincidence.

Leads to an arbitrary God who is "not worthy of worship".

Not compatible with love and justice.

Not compatible with Creator establishing laws of nature.

"Breadth or depth" applies here. [30 AO1]
22
(b) ‘Belief in miracles is essential for a religious believer.’ Assess this view. [20]
Agree Candidates may refer to:

Attested in sacred writings.

Basis of faith.

Gives credibility to the ministry of founders of faith.

Evidence today e.g. healing.

Shows God's revelation etc.
Disagree Candidates may refer to:

Other parts of sacred writings are just as essential.

Miracles may not be the basis of a faith.

Religion is more than belief in just one phenomenon.

Not compatible with an impartial God.

Belief involves free-will which miracles usurp etc. [20 AO2]
2013 3. (a) Examine what philosophers understand by the term ‘miracle’. [30]
More than one definition is expected. Any philosopher can be credited.
Below are the ones often read in scripts:

Aquinas’ three types.

Holland ‒ ‘a coincidence taken religiously as a sign’.

Hume ‒ ‘a violation ... invisible agent’.

Swinburne ‒ look for references to ‘timescale’ and ‘religious significance’.

Hick ‒ ‘evoking and mediating awareness ...’

Mackie ‒ ‘a violation ... supernatural’.
(b) ‘No definition of miracle is adequate’. [20 AO2]
This will involve working with the definitions of miracle and assessing their adequacy. Arguments may
include the following but credit any valid arguments:

Some definitions are too restrictive/too broad.

A coincidence is not a miracle.

A definition must/not involve God/gods.

Laws of nature can/not be broken.

A miracle is what the individual defines it as, etc.
23
2014
Q.3 (a) Examine religious views of the origins of human life. [AO1 30]
Candidates are likely to include some or all of the following but credit other relevant points:

Creation stories from any religion; differing interpretations are acceptable to cover the plural 'views'myth, metaphor, literal and so on.

Conscious decision of God or gods.

Possible involvement of God in the Evolutionary process/Anthropic Principle.

Answers "why?"

Fixity of species.

God's design.

Intelligent design.
(b) 'Religious and scientific views of the origins of human life are incompatible.' Assess this view.
[AO2 20]
Candidates are likely to include some or all of the following but credit other relevant points:
Agree

Literal understanding of Creation stories does now allow for compatibility with science.

Fixity of species is incompatible with scientific origins.

God of the gaps -so few gaps as to be non-existent.

Evolution-no need for a God.

Scientists who say they are incompatible.
Disagree

Non-literal interpretation of Creation stories.

There are theologians who claim they are not incompatible.

Anthropic principle-God designed the conditions necessary for Evolution.

ID claims to justify religious views via scientific means.

There are theologians who say they are compatible.
2015
(a) Examine reasons for not believing in miracles.
(30 marks)
(b) ‘Challenges to belief in miracles are unconvincing.’ Assess this view..
(15 marks)
24