Free Custom «Judeo-Christian Tradition» Essay Paper

Free Custom «Judeo-Christian Tradition» Essay Paper

Judeo-Christian tradition belief that the existence of man in not by blind chance by a well calculated plan by a benevolent creator who also created the heaven and the earth. This is an extension of its concept and idea of God which accordingly is an omnipresent (present everywhere and every-when), omnipotent (all-powerful), and omniscience (all-knowing), omnibenevolent (all-good) (Tobin, 45). This is better captured in the scriptures; Mathew 10:29 which can be paraphrased as “not a sparrow falls, but that thou art mindful of It. (Tobin, 53)” Even Einstein, who certainly was not a believer in the conventional Judeo-Christian view of God, in acknowledging God’s “Omni” nature, had this to say “God does not play dice with the universe” (Tobin, 53).

This belief has been severely castigated by certain sections of the scholastic family, especially philosophers and scientists, who belief that the existence of a man is a mere happenstance, a product of pure blind chance and necessity (Tobin, 63). Evolution by natural selection on the other hand refers to the process in which traits increases or decreases in a population primarily due to the consistent effects on the reproduction and survival of their bearers (Tobin, 72). To better understand natural selection, we should start by recognizing the variation that species within any given population have from one another. These differences that they possess ranges form minor to major differences.

If these characteristics increase the odds that the individual species having them will survive long enough to reproduce, then the number of these individual possessing them will tend to increase with every generation. This is obvious because a higher number of parents possessing them are giving birth to young ones with those straits thereby increasing the number of those in possession of those particular traits. With time, those particular traits will become a “norm” for a specific population. With new traits and “enhancement” to already existing traits keeping on coming up, they will no doubt be similarly “selected for,” thereby becoming a norm for a particular species. This essentially means that improvement on the species will continue accumulating.

On the other hand traits that had the effect of decreasing the relative odds of an individual’s species reproducing will most probably tend to be “selected against.” Conspicuously absent from the hypothesis behind natural selection is possible mechanism behind it, like genetics. In fact Darwin was not familiar with genetic, although it was subsequently applied to his theory after his death. However, he still managed to gather ample evidence in support of this hypothesis. This is what has since enabled us to understand the exact reason behind the naturally occurring variability in the populations, and the ability of beneficial traits to be preserved while harmful ones are being consistently reduced.

Majority of “creation scientist” have accepted the quiet observable fact to the effect that natural selection happens. In fact they have proceeded to enumerate how it is important and necessary for majority of the so called “creation theories.” Instead of driving the characteristics that are present in a population of organisms away from what can be considered as a ‘population mean’ and toward a kind of a new equilibrium state, natural selection operates to uphold the “created kind” through “stabilizing selection.” In a nutshell, all deviations from the initial “created kind” are removed, leaving behind the supernaturally specific “kind” (Berry, 25).

The old breed of scientists and proponents of the natural selection theory have issues with the Judeo-Christian view of God in that if he is an Omni-God then he would have foreseen all the needed adaptations in a human being and obviated the need for any subsequent adaption in traits in a bid to survive, what natural selection describes. However, the new breed of scientists, those who have devised and promulgated several theories of “intelligence design,” believes in some underlying ideas to the effect that there is a designer who guides evolution of all species through some quasi-magic means (Berry, 33). Natural selection is also an important component of their ID theories, but it is determinedly not the cause of “specified complexity” – the delicate adaptations of organisms to the contingencies and vagaries of their environment.

In ID theory, just like in the older theories of “creation science,” the only true function of natural selection is to “fix” the different characteristics of organisms in an “adaptive landscape,” that whose topography is specified basically by an intelligent designer, in this case, an Omni God. From the foregoing we therefore can assume that God spells out the characteristics of organisms in an intentional boundary, but still leave room for deviation to be carried out by man, just the same way they die. The is the main point of stabilizing selection, while there are departures from the population mean, these kind of deviations are done away with, in the process maintaining the population mean forever.

It can also be assumed that God does not just create and mercilessly kill, which would go against the assumption of a loving and caring deity, but has his modus operandi, like creating first a range of no-so-ideal individual, and then proceed to mercilessly eliminate those who do not conform to his intended ideal, a proper utilitarian deity indeed (Berry, 43). In a nutshell we can say that God fashions intentionally designing human being with enough developmental and genetic plasticity that some depart from the population mean, thereby forcing him to curse them to die or suffer, in order to bring forth and uphold that paragon of animals (Berry, 52).

 Benefit from Our Service: Save 25% Along with the first order offer - 15% discount, you save extra 10% since we provide 300 words/page instead of 275 words/page

Those who oppose any existence of compatibility between the evolution by natural selection and the Judeo-Christian view of God as a creator often point out that there is no rationality for a loving and caring God to unleash, or even allow, evil and suffering upon his people. However in explaining the possibility a loving and caring God doing such a thing has been explained by the suggestion that nature in itself is designed poorly.

After animals were dispersed in the world from the Noah Ark, they were distributed all over the world, what followed was a kind of natural selection which left only those animals that were suited in particular environment inhabiting the respective places. This is another area of compatibility of the evolution theory and the Judeo-Christian view of God as a creator.

The homology of structure and function which is observable in various animal species has been cited as another area of convergence of both the evolution by natural selection and Judeo-Christian view of God as creator. These similarities are distributed in a kind of a continuous fashion in all species, inherent similarities which are so entrenched that even natural selection does not seem like it can alter them. There is a significant similarity between the way a human being is constructed and how apes are constructed. For instance, an ape has a number of bones in its foot that is the same with that of the human being. One thing about these similarities is that they do not frequently jump from one species to the next, but seem to be extremely continuous. In fact, if you find two animals that appear too similar, chances are there is another in existence that in one way or the other is a living compromise of the two (Hall, et al, 36).

Although these same biological features, modified at different degrees, occurs from one animal species to another, the answer rest only in evolution. Another viable explanation can be found in the idea that a general environment necessitates homologous features and structures. Considering that cytochemistry has confirmed the hypothesis that each and every species is independent of any other species. It has also been found that centrifuging the cytoplasm of any cell results in differing chemical formula corresponding to their respective species (Hall, et al, 45). This essentially means that each species has its particular formula. This corresponds with God’s fixity in creating all life forms “according to their kinds” (Genesis 1:21, 24, 25). It is further reinforced by the fact that it is impossible for animal of the same species to bring forth fertile offspring, or cross-breed.



Our Customers' Testimonials

Current status


Preparing Orders


Active Writers


Support Agents

Order your 1st paper and get discount Use code first15
We are online - chat with us!