His paternal grand-father was none other than the same Thomas Henry Huxley who became regarded as being Darwin's "Bulldog" due to his vocal championing of the Theory of Evolution as presented by Charles Darwin and, independently, by Alfred Russel Wallace.
or Divine?" ~
our visitors can nevertheless find key insights on our site from such authorities as:-
- - - -
that give convincing support to such a "Tripartite" view of Human Nature!!!
Believe it, or believe it not,
All in all, then, a somewhat astonishing, evidenced, perception!
(and one with momentously far-reaching implications)
The content of this page now turns to a rather detailed consideration of the history of the gradual development of what is thought of as Darwinian Evolutionary Theory.
Brief biographical information about Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace intended to convey how their respective backgrounds and characters gave them potential towards the development of the Theory of Evolution will be presented.
Mention is then made of such important influences as Thomas Malthus' Essay on Population followed by an outline description of the scientific interactions between Darwin and Wallace including several autobiographical quotes as well as some key excerpts from their letters.
And so it was that Wallace sent a twenty page long memoir about this evolutionary theory to the influential expertnaturalist Charles Darwin, arrived in Darwin's hands in June 1858.
- I am now preparing my work for publication, but I find the subject so very large, that though I have written many chapters, I do not suppose I shall go to press for two years.-
From a letter by Charles Darwin to Alfred Russel Wallace dated May 1 1857 It was in 1858 whilst he was laid up with a malarial fever at Ternate, in the Celebes Islands, that a possible solution to the of evolution flashed into form in Wallace's mind.
He had given consideration to other, less persuasive, evolutionary theorising prior to the publication of Charles Darwin's "Origin of Species" and made strenuous efforts to obtain Darwin's book at the time of its first publication!
As we have explicitly expressed an aspiration "to better establish the claims of Spirituality to a fully respected validity without any attempt to dismiss the contributions of Science", it may suit some visitors to fast-forward over much of this intervening content and proceed fairly directly to the beginning of our consideration of Charles Darwin and the Theory of Evolution by following
The Great Poets have also won many truly instructive insights.
We are very hopeful that the content of this page will be seen as tending to better establish the claims of Spirituality to a fully respected validity without any attempt to dismiss the contributions of Science.
Religion was almost universally practiced by people living in "the West" prior to the impact of such things as Charles Darwin proposing a Theory of Evolution of Species.
Wallace, King and Sanders wrote in Biosphere, The Realm of Life: "In 1859, Charles Darwin published a theory of evolution that implied that humans evolved from apes.
Further down this page Charles Darwin's explanation of the Origin of Species is "acceptingly" considered and mention is made of Alfred Russel Wallace as an independent formulator of the Theory of Evolution.
Erasmus Darwin's idea of heritable evolutionary change being that a potentially rapid one driven by the "necessities of the creatures" where new parts and new propensities were open to being acquired - after birth - in line with such necessities in accordance with an unexplained "power of acquiring new parts".:-
Charles Darwin's I Think diagram on page 36 may then represent his own claim to distinct theorising.
Even his terms now stand as Heads of my Chapters …
The full title of Charles Darwin's notable work on Evolution is quite lengthy:-
Whilst in his private correspondence the scientific and rational Charles Darwin tended to see life as originating through natural, chemical, processes; (the phrase "spontaneous generation not improbable" was used by him in one of his notebooks as early as 1837), perhaps not wishing to appear as being completely faithless he nevertheless included the following sentence, as the concluding sentence, in the second, (1860), and subsequent editions of the "Origin of Species".
Rewriting the Book of Nature: Charles Darwin and the Rise of Evolutionary Theory Exhibition Installation image
Courtesy National Library of Medicine
From Emerson's "Historic Notes of Life and Letters in New England"
(penned circa 1867 ~ some six years after his reading about a persuasive Theory of Evolution as set out in Charles Darwin's "Origin of Species").
But the original Hebrew word has more meanings than that. can mean the planet, the land and its inhabitants, ground, soil, country, or territory (Zodhiates, page 1600-1601). When the late Menachem Begin and other Zionists speak of , or Greater Israel, they are referring to Israel's pre-1967 boundaries plus Jerusalem and the West Bank of the Jordan River. They are not laying claim to the Himalayas. If we understand to mean the region of the Middle East, then the story of Noah's flood does not have to cover Mt. Everest at 29,028 feet.Let the Earth Bring Forth.
The phrase "let the earth bring forth..." occurs three times in Genesis 1 (verses 11, 20 with water, 24). It does not refer to simple growth from nutrients, because this chapter is about creation. The literal meaning of this phrase matches theistic evolution better than any other creation theory! It's almost a definition of theistic evolution, which is why I put it at the top of this essay. God commanded the earth to produce animals, and the planet did so according to His command.These verses contradict the idea of direct creation of non-human life forms. Carnivores
There are several verses in Genesis that are taken to mean that animals were vegetarian until the Flood. Genesis 1:30 states: "And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so." After the Flood, God states in Genesis 9:3 "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things."I like the idea expressed in Genesis 1:30 of God's providence for all creatures. I also like the idea of the Peaceable Kingdom, where the lion lies down with the lamb and there is no violence. We don't have a clear indication of when the carnivorous animals switched to eating meat, because Genesis 9:3 refers only to mankind. Job 39:27-30 could indicate that eagles were created as carnivorous animals, but it's not clear enough by itself. I have looked at the sharp teeth of a Tyrannosaurus rex, and they don't look like something created by an to chew vegetation. Since I understand the references to death in Romans 5:12 to mean spiritual death, the presence of carnivorous animals does not pose a theological problem. This issue is not essential for salvation. I simply don't know how Genesis 1:30 fits in with what I can observe about animals. When taken with verse 29, the two verses could be merely a description of who gets to eat what kind of vegetation (man - seeds and fruit, animals and birds - grasses and plants). I do know that verse 30 occurs in a section that describes God's providence for all creatures, and that is the faith message I can take from it.With regard to pre-history and evolution, we do not know how long satan has been allowed some measure of influence and interference in the world. The Garden of Eden sounds somewhat like a sanctuary set up by God to guard Adam and Eve against the outside world. Was there trouble and danger out there even before the Fall of Mankind?In any case, the creation account in Genesis 1-2 is incomplete. Astronomy shows us this in a spectacular fashion. I think that the biological account in Genesis is also incomplete. Who can completely describe the mighty work of creation in just 2 chapters? Not Moses, nor any other possible human author of Genesis. God Almighty rested for the only time recorded in the Bible! I think there is a lot more that happened historically than just those relatively few words in Genesis 1-2. I think a few sentences cover millions of historical years, such as in Genesis 2:7: "The time came when the Lord God formed a man's body from the dust of the ground and breathed into it the breath of life. And man became a living person."Is the Bible incomplete? Yes, John says so at the end of his Gospel, in 20:30-31: "There were many other signs that Jesus worked and the disciples saw, but they are not recorded in this book. These are recorded so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing this you may have life through his name." John repeats the "incomplete" assertion in 21:25: "There were many other things that Jesus did; if all were written down, the world itself, I suppose, would not hold all the books that would have to be written."What we have is sufficient for Faith. The details left out are interesting, but they are not needed for Faith and Salvation. So we need not worry about the Bible being incomplete. We have enough testimony, both for our own faith and to witness to the world. I don't usually grind through the beginning of Genesis verse by verse, trying to match each one individually with a scientific or historical finding. I think that that approach obscures the greater faith message of the Author.