• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Generally, science and Christianity are considered two contradictory views of the universe. Science symbolizes an evolutionary and naturalistic view of the universe from which God is (or at least can be) excluded. Christianity symbolizes a world view w...

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Generally, science and Christianity are considered two contradictory views of the universe. Science symbolizes an evolutionary and naturalistic view of the universe from which God is (or at least can be) excluded. Christianity symbolizes a world view where everything is created by the direct creative act of God. Science offers us different ways at looking at the origins of life. Its two most famous theories are the Big Bang and the theory of evolution. The Big Bang theory is that there was a gigantic explosion caused by the matter of the universe which was densely squashed and caused the universe and life. This theory could offer a better explanation than Christianity because it has certain aspects to prove it - e.g. ...read more.

Middle

Science also uses Darwin's Theory of Evolution to help explain the origins of life. This theory states that animals and plants adapt to their surroundings and evolve. This tries exclude from the equation. This theory could offer a better explanation because it shows how God didn't need to create us because we have been able to adapt and evolve be ourselves over many years. Unfortunately, the theory only explains how animals and plants adapt and not where the universe came from and how we came to be. Also progress in genetics has not helped the evolution notion; the accidental profession claimed in evolution is thought to be brought about by chance mutations in the genome. ...read more.

Conclusion

This view could be the best explanation because you don't worry about anything and just live your life. So, in conclusion neither science nor Christianity can offer an explanation better than each other because no one truly knows about the origins of life. Christianity offers a story, not really proof, about God's qualities. Science is about the natural around us and can't prove whether someone like God exists and if he could create us. In my opinion we need both explanations because they provide both sides of the argument for the existence of life because one explains how we came to be and the other is what we have become. Also science and religion combines with scientists who believe in God so they would use both concepts. So, science doesn't offer a better explanation than Christianity but it does sometimes seem more logical. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. Is Galileo considered a "hero" or "anti-hero"?

    Here, Galileo is shown very self-centered and irrational because his request is very absurd in that circumstance. He is presented as a very passionate and dedicated person who spent almost his entire life proving that his ideas about the universe were right.

  2. "God is dead" - The Gay Science

    The fundamental principle, however, in both perspectives, is that God never dies and, in some form or another, always exists. Nietzsche felt that humans had 'killed' God, in the sense that they had created their own versions to profit themselves individually.

  1. Does the universe have a purpose? Discuss.Every culture in the world and most religions ...

    Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) stated that there is no case known (nor indeed is it possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself, because in that case it would be prior to itself, which is impossible.

  2. Examine the differences which may exist between a religious and scientific interpretation of the ...

    Indeed it appears as though these scientists had an effect on the church's leaders, so much so that in 1951 the Roman Catholic Church officially pronounced the Big Bang theory to be in accordance with the Bible.

  1. Explain the Ontological argument.

    carry out the actions, does this not suggest that he has pre-ordained evil. If he I not aware of this and the actions took him by surprise, surely this causes problems to his omnipotence? Thus, the freewill defence has many problems associated with it.

  2. T H E D E S I G N A R ...

    Philo strengthens his argument by another point: 4. Animal adaptation cannot be used to prove a designer of animals since if they did not adapt to their environment they would not survive. It is not legitimate to use what could not be otherwise as evidence of intelligent planning.

  1. A Big Bang Cosmological Argument for God's Nonexistence

    But this suggestion of an oscillating universe was contradicted in the late 1960s by the Hawking -Penrose singularity theorems,9A which demonstrate that under certain conditions imperfectly isotropic and homogeneous universes also originate in a big bang singularity. Precisely put, the theorems state that a singularity is inevitable given the following five conditions: a)

  2. Did God Create The World or was it Created by Chance?

    Where are they? How do we know we are the ?perfect? planet. If this universe is fine-tuned and that is the reason why we are 19.6 million kilometres from the sun or why gravity is not a little bit greater so the stars don?t become red-dwarfs.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work