Darwin: God Created Life
One can get the general impression that, by definition, scientists are objective, or at least empirical, when it comes to putting forth their ideas regarding evolution and the beginning of life. However, evolution and creation are two separate issues as Charles Darwin was very much aware of when he wrote On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life in 1859. Not long before his death in 1882, he published the sixth and final edition, whose title was shortened to Origin of the Species.
As Darwin is considered the father of evolution, which has come to connote the absence of a Creator when it comes to the origin of life, religious people often loathe hearing anything quoted from Darwin. But Darwin has gotten a bad rap from those, whose motives I leave uncommented upon, who have tied Darwin’s evolution views to atheism. This postulation is a straw man, albeit one that is propagated and repeatedly put forth as fact. Although, as of recent date in 2019, this traditional "Darwinism" has come under scrutiny. [Scientists Challenge Darwinism].
The Royal Society, the oldest scientific academy in the world, officially established by Royal Charter of incorporation in 1662, is generally considered one of the world's preeminent scientific societies. Sir Isaac Newton, at one time, was President of the Royal Society. More recently, Sir Martin Rees, Baron Rees of Ludlow also was President of the Royal Society, from 2005-2010.
Rees wrote a book called Before The Beginning. On the back cover of his book, first printing edition August 1998, Sir Martin Rees is described as “ … one of the most creative and original of contemporary scientists ….”
Before going any further, I want to note that using Sir Rees as an example here is merely illustrative of the point we are making, namely that scientists are not always straightforward and objective in their presentation of Darwin’s philosophy regarding evolution and life. No motives are imputed to Sir Rees. So we will quote him verbatim from his own book. And we will quote Darwin verbatim from his Origin of the Species, and you can draw your own conclusions.
In Rees book Before The Beginning, chapter 1, From Atoms to Life: Galactic Ecology, p. 7, first paragraph, first sentences of text, Rees states, “’Whilst this planet has been cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning forms most wonderful … have been and are being evolved.’ These are the closing words of Charles Darwin’s Origin of the Species."
In Darwin’s Origin of the Species, his final edition, Oxford World Classics, 1998, p. 396, last paragraph, last sentence, Darwin states, “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that whilst the planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and wonderful have been, and are being evolved.” These, in fact, are Darwin’s closing words in Origin of the Species.
Darwin gives the Creator credit for the origin of life and evolution. Sir Rees’s out of context quote does not. This is a critical and major point. Darwin has been painted as the father of evolution with the implicit proposition that life in our universe did not begin with creation at the hand of a Creator. Therefore, God does not exist. But in his Origin of the Species, Darwin said no such thing. This is indicative of that which the apostle Paul wrote to the ekklesia in Rome, “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things … who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator ….” [Rom. 1:22, 23, 25].
Quoting a portion of Darwin’s closing words, out of context, creates the impression that “Whilst” was the beginning of Darwin’s “closing words” rather than the middle of them. This is especially misleading as Sir Rees makes the point of telling his readers, “These are the closing words of Charles Darwin’s Origin of the Species.” They’re not. They are subjectively edited words that create a false rendering of Darwin's intent.
Why would someone of his stature in the scientific community present Darwin’s closing words in this manner? For the record, I sent an email to Sir Rees addressing this, but I never received a reply. However, I cannot comment on whether his misrepresented Darwin quote was addressed in later editions of Before The Beginning, if any were published.
There is a chasm between a number of those in science and religion when it comes to evolution and the origin of life. And this false gap has been laid in the lap of Charles Darwin. But as we read above, “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one ….” These were Darwin’s closing remarks concerning the origin of life and evolution. Darwin is unequivocal about believing the Creator was responsible for both. But, many, for whatever their motivation, use Darwin to imply the opposite.
It’s time we give Darwin credit for stating God is the Creator of the origin of life and evolution. Origin of the species is addressed by evolution, or changes available within our DNA. Darwin knew nothing about DNA. Also, keep in mind, Species is a classification created by scientists that denotes the end of the evolutionary line. This is where the smallest changes take place. At the other end of the human classification tree is Kingdom [Animalia], followed by Phylum [Chordata], Class [Mammalia], Order [Primates], Family [Hominidae], Genus [Homo] and lastly, Species [sapiens]. Darwin is saying that life at the Kingdom level began with creation. Darwin is unsure whether God allowed a few forms or one form to evolve or change in accordance with what God created in the beginning.
Darwin, however, and this is important to keep in mind, only was addressing his observations of creatures in the flesh. But herein lies a crucial difference between mankind and other hominids. One that is missing from the debates of creation versus evolution. Those descended from Adam are differentiated by the spirit of man as opposed to the spirit of creatures that gave life to hominids before Adam even though we may have physical similarities in common.
As pointed out in Three Creations Of Life: A Bridge To Understanding, The Blind Man's Elephant, 2007, "Life similarities are of the flesh. Life differences are of the spirit."
Knowing this, there is no conflict between evolution and the creation of man. We could be 100% in the flesh like a pre-Adam hominid, it makes no matter. And the fact that chimps and humans are 99.7% alike does not matter either. What matters to God, and makes us different, is the spirit of man God gave to Adam. This is the second creation. It's part of God’s creation concerning man. But it is a part that Darwin and scientists cannot discern through physical observation.
“And God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness ….’” [Gen. 1:26]. God is of the Spirit. And it is in this image and likeness that mankind was created, and not the flesh. This difference is addressed in the Book of Ecclesiastes.
"For that which befalls the sons of men befalls beasts; even one thing befalls them: as the one dies, so dies the other; yes, they have all one breath; so that a man has no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All [our bodies] go to one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knows the spirit of man that goes upward, and the spirit of the beast that goes downward to the earth?" [Ecc. 3:19-21]. This fits perfectly with "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." [Gen. 2:7]. Life in the flesh is tied to the breath of life, but it is our spirit that makes us different.
Darwin echoed this dichotomy in his Descent of Man, chapter 21, General Summary and Conclusion, “We must, however, acknowledge, as it seems to me, that man with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other men but to the humblest living creature, with god-like intellect, which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the solar system—with all these exalted powers—Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin.”
Darwin observed the physical similarities common among creatures in the flesh. And as we just read, according to the word of God, mankind’s body has no preeminence over that of beasts, or animals. Scientists classify mankind in the Animal Kingdom for this reason. This is all in accordance with the word of God. We have the same breath as animals. Breath is a purely physical thing comprised of oxygen, nitrogen and about a dozen minute amounts of other gases that are transferred through the alveoli of the lungs. It is a matter of physiology common to mammals. Darwin noted this commonality.
Even with the cessation of breathing at death, our bodies are not different than animals. They all return to the dust of the earth. So we should not be dismayed when scientists claim man’s body and the bodies of hominids are similar, or that we share some common DNA. DNA is of the flesh after all. The difference with mankind, those descended from Adam, is of the spirit. This is what separates man’s “lowly origin,” from his “Godly origin.” Animals only have a “lowly origin,” which is embodied in the spirit of creatures. If we understood the plan of God, this would be apparent. [See the Feature article, Three Temple Ages Make A Plan].
Darwin stated that the origin of life is from the Creator. Whether or not bodies evolved, or changed, over a long period of time is irrelevant for the plan of God. God created life. God created Adam. But what makes us different from others in the Animal Kingdom classification, according to the word of God, is the spirit of man we all receive at first breath, the beginning of life. [See the Sneakers article, Biologically Irrefutable, Guv'nor?].
Darwin noted the physical similarities between mankind and creature kind. And because of their tremendous likenesses, he thought our bodies could have changed or evolved over time into what our spirits walk around in today. [See the Feature article, Brown Paint: Quantum Potentialities]. And while this may be true for animals and hominids, Adam’s creation, though similar in body to those hominids that preceded him, was a distinct creation. It was a creation that addressed the spirit. God set Adam apart, not just in the garden in Eden, but in the spirit of life given to him.
Life similarities are of the flesh. Life differences are of the spirit. This is what makes mankind different from animals. Bottom line, Darwin has been misrepresented. We have to give him his due for clearly stating, “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator ….”
To read about this in much greater detail, see chapter one, Three Creations Of Life: A Bridge To Understanding, The Blind Man's Elephant. It is now a complimentary PDF at the bottom of the Home page.
As Darwin is considered the father of evolution, which has come to connote the absence of a Creator when it comes to the origin of life, religious people often loathe hearing anything quoted from Darwin. But Darwin has gotten a bad rap from those, whose motives I leave uncommented upon, who have tied Darwin’s evolution views to atheism. This postulation is a straw man, albeit one that is propagated and repeatedly put forth as fact. Although, as of recent date in 2019, this traditional "Darwinism" has come under scrutiny. [Scientists Challenge Darwinism].
The Royal Society, the oldest scientific academy in the world, officially established by Royal Charter of incorporation in 1662, is generally considered one of the world's preeminent scientific societies. Sir Isaac Newton, at one time, was President of the Royal Society. More recently, Sir Martin Rees, Baron Rees of Ludlow also was President of the Royal Society, from 2005-2010.
Rees wrote a book called Before The Beginning. On the back cover of his book, first printing edition August 1998, Sir Martin Rees is described as “ … one of the most creative and original of contemporary scientists ….”
Before going any further, I want to note that using Sir Rees as an example here is merely illustrative of the point we are making, namely that scientists are not always straightforward and objective in their presentation of Darwin’s philosophy regarding evolution and life. No motives are imputed to Sir Rees. So we will quote him verbatim from his own book. And we will quote Darwin verbatim from his Origin of the Species, and you can draw your own conclusions.
In Rees book Before The Beginning, chapter 1, From Atoms to Life: Galactic Ecology, p. 7, first paragraph, first sentences of text, Rees states, “’Whilst this planet has been cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning forms most wonderful … have been and are being evolved.’ These are the closing words of Charles Darwin’s Origin of the Species."
In Darwin’s Origin of the Species, his final edition, Oxford World Classics, 1998, p. 396, last paragraph, last sentence, Darwin states, “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that whilst the planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and wonderful have been, and are being evolved.” These, in fact, are Darwin’s closing words in Origin of the Species.
Darwin gives the Creator credit for the origin of life and evolution. Sir Rees’s out of context quote does not. This is a critical and major point. Darwin has been painted as the father of evolution with the implicit proposition that life in our universe did not begin with creation at the hand of a Creator. Therefore, God does not exist. But in his Origin of the Species, Darwin said no such thing. This is indicative of that which the apostle Paul wrote to the ekklesia in Rome, “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things … who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator ….” [Rom. 1:22, 23, 25].
Quoting a portion of Darwin’s closing words, out of context, creates the impression that “Whilst” was the beginning of Darwin’s “closing words” rather than the middle of them. This is especially misleading as Sir Rees makes the point of telling his readers, “These are the closing words of Charles Darwin’s Origin of the Species.” They’re not. They are subjectively edited words that create a false rendering of Darwin's intent.
Why would someone of his stature in the scientific community present Darwin’s closing words in this manner? For the record, I sent an email to Sir Rees addressing this, but I never received a reply. However, I cannot comment on whether his misrepresented Darwin quote was addressed in later editions of Before The Beginning, if any were published.
There is a chasm between a number of those in science and religion when it comes to evolution and the origin of life. And this false gap has been laid in the lap of Charles Darwin. But as we read above, “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one ….” These were Darwin’s closing remarks concerning the origin of life and evolution. Darwin is unequivocal about believing the Creator was responsible for both. But, many, for whatever their motivation, use Darwin to imply the opposite.
It’s time we give Darwin credit for stating God is the Creator of the origin of life and evolution. Origin of the species is addressed by evolution, or changes available within our DNA. Darwin knew nothing about DNA. Also, keep in mind, Species is a classification created by scientists that denotes the end of the evolutionary line. This is where the smallest changes take place. At the other end of the human classification tree is Kingdom [Animalia], followed by Phylum [Chordata], Class [Mammalia], Order [Primates], Family [Hominidae], Genus [Homo] and lastly, Species [sapiens]. Darwin is saying that life at the Kingdom level began with creation. Darwin is unsure whether God allowed a few forms or one form to evolve or change in accordance with what God created in the beginning.
Darwin, however, and this is important to keep in mind, only was addressing his observations of creatures in the flesh. But herein lies a crucial difference between mankind and other hominids. One that is missing from the debates of creation versus evolution. Those descended from Adam are differentiated by the spirit of man as opposed to the spirit of creatures that gave life to hominids before Adam even though we may have physical similarities in common.
As pointed out in Three Creations Of Life: A Bridge To Understanding, The Blind Man's Elephant, 2007, "Life similarities are of the flesh. Life differences are of the spirit."
Knowing this, there is no conflict between evolution and the creation of man. We could be 100% in the flesh like a pre-Adam hominid, it makes no matter. And the fact that chimps and humans are 99.7% alike does not matter either. What matters to God, and makes us different, is the spirit of man God gave to Adam. This is the second creation. It's part of God’s creation concerning man. But it is a part that Darwin and scientists cannot discern through physical observation.
“And God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness ….’” [Gen. 1:26]. God is of the Spirit. And it is in this image and likeness that mankind was created, and not the flesh. This difference is addressed in the Book of Ecclesiastes.
"For that which befalls the sons of men befalls beasts; even one thing befalls them: as the one dies, so dies the other; yes, they have all one breath; so that a man has no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All [our bodies] go to one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knows the spirit of man that goes upward, and the spirit of the beast that goes downward to the earth?" [Ecc. 3:19-21]. This fits perfectly with "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." [Gen. 2:7]. Life in the flesh is tied to the breath of life, but it is our spirit that makes us different.
Darwin echoed this dichotomy in his Descent of Man, chapter 21, General Summary and Conclusion, “We must, however, acknowledge, as it seems to me, that man with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other men but to the humblest living creature, with god-like intellect, which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the solar system—with all these exalted powers—Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin.”
Darwin observed the physical similarities common among creatures in the flesh. And as we just read, according to the word of God, mankind’s body has no preeminence over that of beasts, or animals. Scientists classify mankind in the Animal Kingdom for this reason. This is all in accordance with the word of God. We have the same breath as animals. Breath is a purely physical thing comprised of oxygen, nitrogen and about a dozen minute amounts of other gases that are transferred through the alveoli of the lungs. It is a matter of physiology common to mammals. Darwin noted this commonality.
Even with the cessation of breathing at death, our bodies are not different than animals. They all return to the dust of the earth. So we should not be dismayed when scientists claim man’s body and the bodies of hominids are similar, or that we share some common DNA. DNA is of the flesh after all. The difference with mankind, those descended from Adam, is of the spirit. This is what separates man’s “lowly origin,” from his “Godly origin.” Animals only have a “lowly origin,” which is embodied in the spirit of creatures. If we understood the plan of God, this would be apparent. [See the Feature article, Three Temple Ages Make A Plan].
Darwin stated that the origin of life is from the Creator. Whether or not bodies evolved, or changed, over a long period of time is irrelevant for the plan of God. God created life. God created Adam. But what makes us different from others in the Animal Kingdom classification, according to the word of God, is the spirit of man we all receive at first breath, the beginning of life. [See the Sneakers article, Biologically Irrefutable, Guv'nor?].
Darwin noted the physical similarities between mankind and creature kind. And because of their tremendous likenesses, he thought our bodies could have changed or evolved over time into what our spirits walk around in today. [See the Feature article, Brown Paint: Quantum Potentialities]. And while this may be true for animals and hominids, Adam’s creation, though similar in body to those hominids that preceded him, was a distinct creation. It was a creation that addressed the spirit. God set Adam apart, not just in the garden in Eden, but in the spirit of life given to him.
Life similarities are of the flesh. Life differences are of the spirit. This is what makes mankind different from animals. Bottom line, Darwin has been misrepresented. We have to give him his due for clearly stating, “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator ….”
To read about this in much greater detail, see chapter one, Three Creations Of Life: A Bridge To Understanding, The Blind Man's Elephant. It is now a complimentary PDF at the bottom of the Home page.
Italics, bold and [ ] are the author's.
© copyrighted material 2007-2024. www.redshoe.com All rights reserved.
Notice to readers. All redshoe generated articles may be hyperlinked or copied to PDF format for use as long as no editing or alteration of content is made. See Menu banner for other terms of use.