Difference between revisions of "Creationism"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Attempts to Criticize Creationism: removing section, moving to page on YECism where some of it makes more, sense. no objection made on talk page)
m (Added a hyperlink or two)
Line 28: Line 28:
*[http://www.creationontheweb.com/ Creation Ministries International]
*[http://www.creationontheweb.com/ Creation Ministries International]
*[http://www.icr.org Institute for Creation Research]
*[http://www.icr.org Institute for Creation Research]
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html Talk Origins - Creationist Claims]
*[http://creationwiki.org/Main_Page CreationWiki]
*[http://creationwiki.org/Main_Page CreationWiki]
*[http://www.reasons.org Reasons To Believe]
*[http://www.reasons.org Reasons To Believe]

Revision as of 11:45, 1 March 2007

Creationism is a term with a variety of meanings. Most generally, creationism is the belief that the universe was originally created by God.[2]. Creationism can also mean a belief in a creation according to a literal interpretation of Genesis. Some forms of creationism (especially the more literal forms) conflict with evolutionary ideas while others do not.[3]. Not all Christian denominations embrace creationism with the more literal Genesis interpretations, but nearly all embrace the Crucifixion of Jesus as a redemption for the sin of Adam. Many non-Christian sects believe in a form of creationism, including American Indian religions, Hindus, and the Classical Greek and Egyptian polytheistic religions.

Types of Creationists

There are many different types of creationism, and this list is not meant to be exhaustive but to deal with only the major categories.

  • Young Earth Creationists generally accept a literal or nearly literal interpretation of Genesis and insist that the world is around 6000 years old. Traditionally, Judaism supported young earth creationism. [4] In addition, a majority of the early church fathers supported the idea the young earth creationist view. [5] An example of a Young Earth Creationist ministry today is Answers in Genesis.[6]
  • Old Earth Creationists Agree with the common scientific age of the earth at around 4.5 billion years but generally do not accept that all life on earth evolved from a common ancestor. Old Earth Creationists generally reconcile the age of the earth with Genesis by positing that the days in Genesis were not 24 hour days or by inserting gaps between various verses in the Bible. There is no general agreement among Old Earth Creationists on whether or not there was a global flood. An example of a major Old Earth Creationist ministry is Reasons to Believe [7].
  • Theistic Evolution is the belief that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in physical evolution. In general, theistic evolution accepts the age of the earth and common descent. Theistic evolutionists believe that at some point God intervened in a metaphysical fashion to give souls to some small group of human ancestors. This is the position proposed by a few Catholic theologians who do not speaking for the Catholic Church [1].

Position of Catholic Church on Creation

The doctrine of the Catholic Church about the existence of one Adam and Eve was set forth in an encyclical by Pope Pius XII known as Humani Generis. It prohibits the teaching of the theory of a gradual evolution of man. The Humani Generis emphasized that Adam (and Eve) did exist as the first parents, whose original sin was the basis for Jesus' sacrifice, and that no Catholic should teach anything to the contrary. The contemporary theory of evolution violates Humani Generis by promoting a gradual, population-based evolutionary process.

In 1996, Pope John Paul II gave a speech relating to evolution. The official English translation of his speech in the L'Osservatore Romano was that evolution is "more than one hypothesis." The French was ambiguous and those favoring evolution claimed that the Pope actually said that evolution is "more than a hypothesis." But there was no official "correction" to the English translation of evolution as "more than one hypothesis." Pope John Paul II wrote and spoke widely but never endorsed evolution, and the majority of his native Poland also reject it.

Controversial Classification

It is unclear if Intelligent Design amounts to a form of creationism and if so, where to place it in comparison to the other forms of creationism. This is due to the concept having many different definitions and proponents espousing different ideas. For example, one major proponent of Intelligent Design is Paul Nelson who a Young Earth Creationist, while Michael Behe, another major proponent, accepts common descent. William Dembski has stated unequivocally that Intelligent Design is not theistic evolution and they should not be considered the same[2] and that Intelligent Design is the Logos in terms of information theory[3], while Dembski and others have given other definitions that do not include any specific theological references. Arguably, intelligent design can be summarized as the notion that at some point in the past, in some way, some entity(possibly God) created life, or altered life at some point, or created the universe to be compatable with life. Behe and others have stated that Intelligent Design is not religious in nature but in the Dover trial, a US Federal District Judge (the lowest level federal judge of a general jurisdiction court) ruled as a one of his findings that Intelligent Design was essentially religious in nature. However, the conservative publication WorldNetDaily wrote, "A historic judicial ruling against intelligent design theory hailed as a "broad, stinging rebuke" and a "masterpiece of wit, scholarship and clear thinking" actually was "cut and pasted" from a brief by ACLU lawyers and includes many of their provable errors, contends the Seattle-based Discovery Institute." [8]

External links

References and Footnotes

  1. Mark Brumley, Evolution and the Pope
  2. What every theologian should know about creation, evolution, and design Center for Interdisciplinary Studies Transactions 3(2), William Demsbki
  3. [1] Signs of Intelligence: A Primer on the Discernment of Intelligent Design Touchstone Magazine, Volume 12, Issue 4 July-August 1999