Essay On Inherit The Wind

Inherit the Wind is a powerful play written by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee that tells of the significant battle of conventional, religious powers versus freedom and the growing reality of Charles Darwin’s theories. This play is not the exact encounter of the courtroom battle but rather a dramatic retelling of one of the greatest courthouse showdowns in human history. Although many think the religious “Bible-thumpers” defending the Bible to be bias and inconsiderate in this play and in the actual account, those accusers may now look back and see that those “Bible-beaters” really did know what they were talking about they just didn’t quite know how to defeat the false belief of evolution but still keep the freedom of speech and press.

As probably the best courtroom dramas of the twentieth century, Inherit the Wind is based on the famous, Scopes Monkey Trial. The play was printed virtually thirty years afterward and takes original authority in varying the true-life elements of the court case. The central conflict of the play is based on the Scopes Monkey Trial itself. Several themes are presented throughout the play, for example when Brady argues for religious values while Drummond argues for natural values and freedom of thought. The definition of a theme is an implicit or recurrent idea. We also see a theme of man versus society, furthermore, Bertram Cates versus the small town of Hillsboro. A third theme is appearance

Inherit the Wind is about a 24-year-old teacher named Bertram T. Cates, who is arrested for teaching Darwin's Theory of Evolution to his junior high-class. Some high-profile Hillsboro town’s people press charges and have Cates arrested for teaching evolutionism in a stringent Christian town. A famous lawyer named Henry Drummond defends him; while a fundamentalist politician Matthew Harrison Brady prosecutes. The story takes place in Hillsboro, which is a small town in Tennessee. Cates is merely trying to teach to his class that there is more to life than just what the Bible teaches. He is not trying to be nonreligious; rather he is just teaching his class to think outside the box. The town’s people think that Cates is trying to push

Some would believe that evolution is a theory that scientist made up to convince us that there is no God. To be a scientist does not necessarily mean that you cannot believe in God. Author Karl Giberson backs this by stating “…the majority of scientists are not hostile to religion and many of them are actually quite religious.” (Giberson, Say It Ain't So 359). Thus, believing that living creatures have evolved over time does not mean that you cannot also have religious beliefs. One theory does not necessarily have to be completely separate from the other.

That is why he asked questions that were impossible to answer. Brady was a very self-centered

For as long as mankind has had the curiosity to gaze at the stars, we have been constantly questioning our origin and place in the universe. From simple, yet elegant solutions (like our world being on the back of a large tortoise) to the more complex pantheons of gods and heavens, humanity’s dedication to classifying and comprehending our universe has enabled us to weave rich and complex mythologies and beliefs. However, in America today there are two prominent paradigms that are shaping how we see the world—Christian creationism and scientific evolution. These two schools of thought, like many other conflicting models of the universe and its creation, have fueled passions and incited spirited rivalries among its most ardent followers and fanatics, but, again like many other opposing beliefs, at the same time it is easy to see how they can be reconciled both within and without oneself. However, many scientists and theologians believe that one of the two is blasphemous and the other is gospel (or textbook) truth. For example, in Scott D Sampson’s essay Evoliteracy, (2006) Sampson denounces Christianity and pushes for everyone to learn the theory of Evolution instead of creationism. While he is correct in wanting a more educated populace, Christianity is not an inherently wrong construct. Similarly, many of those pushing for intelligent design have similarly decried the evolutionary theory as

Since Darwin constructed a conflict between creation and evolution, countless persons struggle with creationism. The majority of Christian leaders compromised the Bible in various styles, even making evolution the foundation of their biblical viewpoint. Darwin’s influence took root in the lives of numerous individuals and spilled into the schools as well as churches. According to Morris near the turn of the century liberal theologians reached an agreement that the gospel had to be reinterpreted in terms of evolutionary thought. Without the persuasion of Darwin’s prospective of evolution there would be no debate regarding creation furthermore; no Christian’s would remain obligated to comprise their faith.

"Religious opponents of evolution began cloaking religious beliefs in scientific sounding language and then mandating that schools teach the resulting 'creation science' or 'scientific creationism' as an alternative to evolution." (P. 21) For these religious opponents of evolution, trying to argue by using language as a mask for their religious beliefs is a smart tactic to try. However, religion often has no science to it. This leads to the question of why are these religious opponents trying to create arguments to mask their religious beliefs in scientific language and why are they so threatened by the teaching of evolution. Evolution teaches that organisms gained their functioning and complexity through a process of steps to get there. Most

As Christians, we know evolution has long been a subject debated amongst Christians and evolutionist. We believe that God created all things in six days, according to Genesis 1-11. Naturalism (atheism) believe out of nothing came the Big Bang, and billions of years of cosmic evolution. Some proponents disagree with other evolutionist about the Big Bang theory, they reason that it points to a Creator.

Creationism and Evolution is a heavily discussed topic all over the world, sparking controversy on every turn. Whether humanity evolved from monkeys over time or was created instantly by an almighty God; that has been the debate between creationist and scientist since Charles Darwin came forth with the evolution theory in the late eighteen-fifties. It’s hard to contest against the facts of science. Science tells us that the Earth was created relatively 4.5 billion years ago and life evolved from single-celled organisms. But can science really be counted on? For thousands of years science said that the universe always existed, that it never had a beginning, but now we all know how wrong they were. Religion had it right for thousands of years. Religion said it first, in the Christian religion in the Book of Genesis the first passage says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. At first the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, “‘Let there be light,’ and there was light”, a flash of light that created everything, doesn 't that sound a lot like the Big Bang Theory. To me creationism sounds far better than evolving from a bunch of apes, but I’ll let you make your own choice.

The topic of evolution, creationism, science and history make people feel uncomfortable when asked to make a choice between science and religion. Before a person can form an opinion about this subject matter one must understand evolution, which is hard for some to comprehend. People have different ways of understanding that religion and science are two different things. Science interprets physical reality and conducts experiments based on observation. “Darwin talks about evolution by natural selection as being the process by which organisms change over time as a result of inheritable physical behavior traits” (Hewlett & Peters, 2006). There is evidence of the origins of people in terms of family heredity via fossil records and imprints

The debate between creation and evolution has been around for a long time. For much of it, it has presented a choice between the two. Some claim that you either believe in God or evolution, not both. Others, that you have to choose young earth creationism simply because theistic evolution is not a viable option. Still more present young earth creationism as a naive understanding of both the Bible and science. However, since each position has evidence in support of it and against it, it is in no way true that any of them present us with an undeniable position of definite accuracy. Furthermore, the idea that there is only a choice between creation and evolution is false. Indeed, there are more positions than even creationism and theistic

I think there is a gray area when it comes to believing in god and evolution there are things that cannot be explained with either faith or reason, but together you can build a bridge and likely find a plausible answer. In a way to believe in evolution one still must have faith. In a sense you must have faith in the authority, the scientist providing you with information to believe in evolution. Through my schooling I want to point out some points in why it is possible to believe in both god and evolution. First off there is two different types of evolution macro and micro. Micro evolution is what we have seen happen at Galapagos Island through natural selection and survival of the fittest which has been recreated and tested in labs. As for Macroevolution, it deals with a large spectrum and is based on inference of fossils and DNA based on observations human’s evolution would fall into this spectrum. Again you must have faith to believe what comes after the missing link to our existence. Furthermore, this is why evolution is still a theory or an idea and surprisingly in a way it is

The Christian worldview does not embrace the theory of evolution. Christianity and evolution have different worldviews. We as Christians believe that God created the universe. Evolutionists do not agree that God had anything to do with the creation of the universe. The origins of man cannot be scientifically tested or verified since none of us were there. The reason that evolution cannot be proven is that true science is based on observation and testing. The theory of evolution should be considered to be a philosophy, not a scientific theory, but the fact that God created everything cannot be tested either and creation scientists readily acknowledge this fact. Nevertheless, the theory of evolution which is based on unobserved, untested ideas is no more reasonable than the creationist’s belief in God. From the perspective of a scientist who believes that evolution is responsible for all the diversity of life on earth, all organisms are descended from a common ancestor. Secular scientists present Darwin’s scientific observation of the changes in beaks of Galapagos finches as proof for the evolution of an animal kind into another. The creation scientists readily admit that there exist differences between finch beaks and they agree there is adaptation or variation within a species. To extrapolate that this observed variation translates into proof of evolution is not conclusive science. Operational science is science where

Evolution has been debated for many years. Most scientists assume evolution to be true, but it is not officially proven. Evolution is known as “fact and theory,” because it is a fact that organisms have changed over time, but the mechanism that changes those organisms is uncertain. One of the major debates regarding evolution is the belief in creationism. Creationists believe that the Universe and organisms on Earth were all created by a divine power. There are also some theories in which creationism and evolution coexist. One idea is that the divine being who created the world used evolution as a method. Another idea is that science and religion are actually the same thing and religion explains the unknown parts of science. For example, science says that the world couldn’t have been created in seven days, but one of God’s days may not be the same length