Abstract
The paper discusses the two main sides of the human evolution argument between creationists and evolutionary scientists. The former feel that God is responsible for the creation of human life on this planet. The paper notes that the scientists' theory of evolution is that man evolved over millions of years, and is thus a product of nature, rather than divine intervention. The paper explores the argument put forth by Misia Landau in her essay "Human Evolution as Narrative." The paper explains Landau's point of view on the human evolution debates. Then, in order to put some of Landau's ideas to test, the paper engages in a critical dialogue on the human evolution debates.

Outline:
The Scientist and the Creationist
The Animal Liberation Activist
The Hollywood Producer
Analysis
Conclusion

From the Paper
"Landau begins by distinguishing between the structuralist approach to narrative and the hermeneutical approach. She first identifies similarities between structuralism and hermeneutics. Chief among these is the fact that both of the concepts "treat literature as a cultural system that is governed by a set of conventions and codes". How the two approaches differ is in the way they conceive of a literary system and the treatment of each text that results from that paradigm. Structuralism takes all the standard literary features of a text (i.e. plot, character, etc.) and tries to develop a system of classification and description out of those features. "

Tags:critical, dialogue, ancient, myths, structuralism, hermeneutics, folktales

Abstract
This paper discusses the impact of believing in evolution, on the behavior of students by describing both the evolutionary theory and its various effects. The paper presents the considerable debates on the issues of evolution and creationism. The writer claims that evolution is usually held responsible for inducing immorality among its followers.
Introduction
Evolution or Creation
Evolution and Ethics
Evolution and Morality
Evolution and the Value of Human Life
Co-Existence of Evolution and Religion/Morality
Belief in Evolution and Behavior of a Student
References

From the Paper
"The theory of evolution that man is just another animal in the line of living forms, attaches the same value to a man's life as the value that is attached to an animal. As a result, in presence of evolutionary claims, there is no rule that could regard a man's life as more important than an animal's and therefore worth treating any differently. Such a belief tends to lead, inevitably to unethical code of conduct. For instance, in January, 1973, the United States Supreme Court, in a 7-to-2 vote, decided that the human embryo growing within the human womb cannot be defined as "human" and as a result, it can be subjected to any kind of maltreatment. According to Darwin, an evolutionist, since the weaker members of society are unfit and, by the laws of nature, cannot survive, a baby growing in the womb cannot survive either unless helped by a stronger being. Unless the mother, a stronger being, is bound by a moral code, she will not help a baby grow. This will, in the long run, inevitably lead to extinction of human race."

Tags:creationism, darwin, immorality, ethics, education, religion, morality

Abstract
This paper explains that creationism vs. evolution is a debate about how human beings got to where we are today, whether they were created by an all-powerful deity in the image of itself fairly recently (a few thousand years ago), or whether they evolved as a species from simians through Neanderthals to the present status of homo sapiens over millions and millions of years of natural selection. The author examines that the Scopes trial of the 1920s, which brought up the debate in the U.S. in the context of which explanation of the origin of humans would be taught in public schools. The paper objectively reviews each side of the issue by studying arguments from Darwin and others and then extends the context of the Scopes trial to the present day debate.

From the Paper
"Unlike some Christian faiths which look to Genesis as a scientific text, the Catholic religion is amenable to treating the work as a metaphorical and idiomatic text that does not necessarily exclude evolutionary explanations provided by science, which explanations the religion encourages its members to consider as viable and acceptable without compromising their faith. In this religion, creation is thought of more in terms of the soul than the body, although this does not mean that religious practitioners do not refute the theological ramifications of evolution espoused by some, who tend to think of it as diametrically opposed to both the idea of original sin and the idea of Adam. The Catholic church does not endorse philosophical evolutionism. Thus, one could say that the Catholic religion views evolution as an interesting scientific principle that is something more than a hypothesis but less than a fact, and that accepting evolutionism is not necessarily the same thing as denying creation, which can be seen in religious rather than scientific terms as the formation of the soul rather than the body."

Tags:debate, image, simians, darwin, catholic

Abstract
This paper explains that the two basic theories about the origin of human life are evolution (or Darwinism) and creationism about which there are conflicting opinions as to which theory is correct and which theory should be taught in schools. Some people feel that creationism and evolution should both be discussed in the classroom and presented as equally valid theories. The author points out that many people feel that it is inappropriate to be teaching creationism in public school classrooms because it is religious doctrine, which is not appropriate under the Constitution of the United States that separates church and state. The paper concludes that both theories should be presented in the classroom as opposing but not necessarily mutually exclusive explanations for the origin of humanity.

From the Paper
"A large percentage of Americans, including many teachers, believe that creationism is a more valid theory than evolution. A study in 1996 found that most American completely reject the idea that evolution is the origin of humans. Another survey conducted in 2000 found that nearly 40 percent of Americans believe that creationism should be taught instead of evolution in the classroom, and many believe that evolution should be outright banned from the classroom. Further studies show that half of all Americans and Canadians do not consider evolution to be a valid scientific concept. Many have not been convinced by the scientific evidence with which they have been presented, and believe that evolution is scientifically unfounded."

Tags:theory, christian, darwin, constitution, science

Abstract
This paper discusses the debate between creationism and evolution and explains that it is not a clear-cut matter, since not all creationists dismiss evolution and some evolutionists can also be deists. The writer describes how the argument began as soon as evolutionary theory took shape and how the antagonism between faith and science is to be found in politics as well as society. Furthermore, the writer explains how the debate goes from literal to philosophical questions and then describes those in the middle who believe that evolutionary theory and God can co-exist.

From the Paper
"This statement reveals in its tone an atmosphere where there can be a scientific world wherein atheists and non-atheists can conduct themselves as usual without interfering with each other. But the real ramifications of this debate are not about physicists of different outlooks getting along well. The real matter is political; it is the question of how a nation shall be governed and the presumptions underlying the rights and obligations of its citizenry. Because of issues like the fundamental schism between dictated morality verses common sense morality (to which I will return), the way this issue polarizes people can be fundamental to ideology in theory, but also it attacks the power of a faith's institutions, if its judgments are taken from holy texts, that science keeps proving questionable."

Tags:Scripture, divisive, technology, neo-conservative, Biblical, secular, Genesis, democracy, deist-based

Abstract
A detailed discussion of the theories of evolution (naturalistic, theistic and creation science), and a comparison to the Christian belief of the world as G-d 's creation. The author analyzes whether a Christian can truly believe in the theories of evolution.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Evolution

A. Charles Darwin ? ?Origin of Species?

B. Supporting Evidence



II. Creationism

A. Definition

B. Bible

C. Supporting Evidence



III. Conclusion

A. Survey

Summary

From the Paper
From the paper:

There are three main views of how the universe came to be. Naturalistic evolution proclaims that the universe was driven by purely natural forces, without input from God. Theistic evolution states that evolution was a tool used by God. Creation Science states that everything was created by God in six days and six nights less than 10,000 years ago. What do people believe? Can a Christian, believing in God's miraculous creation, also believe in evolution?

Tags:belief, religion, creation, world, G-d, science, nature, universe

Abstract
This paper presents extreme arguments made by both scientific and religious communities revolving around the origins of life on earth. The author concludes that the anti-creationism argument is more persuasive because of Tenenbaums' emphasis on scientific facts, figures, and reasoning in hist justification for the theory of evolution.

From the Paper
"Gish uses the quotes that supports his view points from two newspaper articles, one journal and from one book that is refuting Darwinism as evidence for building his case in favor of teaching creationism in the class room. Further he advocates that a scientific theory must be based on repeatable observations, subjected to scientific tests, and potentially falsifiable. No human being has observed the origin, and so the opponent of creationism, i.e. theory of evolution, cannot be proved. By virtue of his educational qualification of Doctorate and his position as Senior Vice President of Institute for Creation Research, the author seems to be a person with rich experience and credibility. His high motivational level in defending the biblical concepts can be ascertained from the welcome note of the web site of IRC that starts with the wordings of, 'We believe God has raised up ICR to spearhead Biblical Christianity's defense against the godless and compromising dogma of evolutionary humanism.' The logic on which the author is building his case is entirely based on the mythical and religious faith only. Having found no scientific proof in support of creationism he urges that the students and teachers are to be encouraged to search out and find scientific evidence that contradicts the assumptions and claims of the validity of the theory of evolution. However he quotes that the fossil records found so far are totally complete and fully formed and there is no transitional form of fossil is so far found to prove the Darwinian theory of evolution. But he fails to provide data from any reliable source to substantiate his claim. Unable to provide foolproof evidence that the universe was created by a Creator, he resorts to emotional appeal of invoking the faith and belief of God. The author quotes Dr. Michael Ruse, who was one of the witnesses in support of evolution in the 1981 Arkansas trail related with the same topic, as a completely changed man after 20 years to say that evolution is being developed as an alternative to Christianity. By giving a religious dimension to a scientific question, the author is attempting to invoke religious emotions to the scientific dispute. The objective of the author in writing this article seems to give the creationism a dominant position in the science curriculum of the school by creating a mass opinion that evolution is a threat to Christianity. In the pursuance of his objective the author targets the parents, students, and science teachers to develop such a massive movement against the scientific study of biology. "

Tags:creation christianity science darwin, theory of evolution

Abstract
This paper argues that even though Darwin's theories are not fully compatible with the Bible, it does not necessarily mean that God did not plan evolution in advance. The great unfolding of nature in all its splendor, even from its most humble beginnings to an advanced state as evolution dictates, proves that man's ideas are compatible with those of God.

From the Paper
"So far, it seems that science and religion, as far as evolution is concerned, can never come to a consensus on whether life evolved from lower forms as maintained by Charles Darwin or was created by a divine God. However, the Holy Bible encourages man to roam the natural world in responsible freedom, meaning that man must show respect to God's creations while ignoring superstition. In addition, the Holy Bible puts man in the position as a creature of God and part of the divine created order. Unlike the rest of the natural world, man has the power of foresight and understanding which makes him a responsible being in the eyes of God. With these powers, man is commanded by God to control and manipulate the world, not as an arrogant and selfish being but as a steward of God's creations."

Tags:god, creation, bible

Abstract
Since at least the nineteenth century, the primacy of God in creation theory has been challenged vigorously by rationalists and by the scientific community. With this in mind, the paper examines more closely the curious intersection between orthodox Catholic beliefs about the centrality of God to the formation of the world and the idea universally accepted within the academic community that the world and all forms of life living upon it evolved by chance from primordial beginnings.

From the Paper
"To wit, the next several pages will show that there is still a "place" for God within the theory of evolution and that a person can believe in evolution and still believe in the Almighty. With that in mind, it is to a discussion of this important topic that we now turn."

Tags:catholicism, god, evolution

Abstract
This paper begins with an introduction to the debate, which is followed by an overview of the debate. The writer then discusses the impact of genetic modification on evolution, the effects of stewardship, and a conclusion and recommendations. This paper does not take any particular side and leaves the decision up to the reader.

From the Paper
"As is most apparent in today's world, science and religion have become two very dominant forces and the battle between these topics continues to affect many aspects of modern society. Although opinions have changed since the days of Charles Darwin and the time of the famous "Scope's Monkey Trial" in Dayton, Tennessee in 1925, science and religion, especially in the area of evolution, continue to seek answers to some very basic questions, such as exactly how life originated on earth and the direction in which life is heading. The fact that scientists and theologians frequently arrive at different answers to these questions does not seem to be the problem; in essence, the true problem lies in the vastly divergent approaches used by each in finding the answers to these seminal questions."

Tags:science, creation, god