nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
11,789
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 1:
Line 1: − {{Creationism2}}+ − + − '''Young Earth creationism''' (YEC) is the religious belief that [[Heaven]], [[Earth]], and [[life on Earth]] were created by a direct act of [[God]] dating [[Dating Creation|between 6,000<ref name = "Griffiths"/> and 10,000 years ago]].+ − Its adherents are those [[Christian]]s and [[Jew]]s who believe that [[God]] created the Earth in six 24-hour days, taking the [[Hebrew Bible|Hebrew]] text of [[Genesis (Hebrew Bible)|Genesis]] as a [[Biblical literalism|literal account]]. Some adherents believe that existing evidence in the natural world today supports a strict interpretation of scriptural creation as historical fact. Those adherents believe that the scientific evidence supporting [[evolution]], [[Geology|geological]] [[uniformitarianism]], or other theories which are at odds with a literal interpretation of the [[Creation according to Genesis|Genesis creation account]], is either flawed or misinterpreted.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thefirstsixdays.com |title=The First Six Days (of Creation): Confronting the God-Plus-Evolution Myth |accessdate=2007-08-25 |format= |work=}}</ref> − + − YECs claim that the lack of support for a Young Earth theory in professional science journals or among professional science organizations is due to discrimination and censorship.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0822sternberg.asp|title=The Smithsonian/Sternberg controversy|author=Sheppard, P|year=2005|publisher=[http://www.answersingenesis.org Answers in Genesis]|accessdate=2007-07-03}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0822sternberg.asp|title=Do Creationists Publish in Notable Refereed Journals?|author=Buckna, D|year=2007|publisher=[http://www.answersingenesis.org Answers in Genesis]|accessdate=2007-07-03}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53400|title=Congress slams Smithsonian's anti-religious attacks|year=2006|author=Unruh, B|accessdate=2007-07-03}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=3833&program=DI%20Main%20Page%20-%20News&callingPage=discoMainPage|title=US Congressional Committee Report: INTOLERANCE AND THE POLITICIZATION OF SCIENCE AT THE SMITHSONIAN|year=2006|author=United States House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform|publisher=[http://www.discovery.org The Discovery Institute]|accessdate=2007-07-03}}</ref> However, the overwhelming [[scientific consensus]] is that YEC claims have no scientific basis. For example, a statement by 68 national and international [[Academy of Sciences|science academies]] lists the following as evidence-based facts, established by numerous observations and independently derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines, without any contradiction from scientific evidence: that the Earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old and has shown continuing change; that life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago, and has subsequently taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve; and that the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicates their common primordial origin.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.interacademies.net/Object.File/Master/6/150/Evolution%20statement.pdf|title=IAP Statement on the teaching of evolution|year=2006|publisher=the Interacademy Panel on international issues|accessdate=2007-07-03|format=PDF}}</ref>+ − + − === Origins ===+ + + + + + + − Some YECs have claimed that this view has its earliest roots in Judaism, citing, for example, the commentary on Genesis by [[Abraham ibn Ezra|Ibn Ezra]] (c. 1089–1164).<ref name="Griffiths">{{ cite journal | title=Creation days and Orthodox Jewish tradition | last=James-Griffiths | first=P|journal=Creation|volume=26|issue=2|pages=53–55| url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i2/tradition.asp|accessdate=2007-07-03}}</ref> However, Shai Cherry of [[Vanderbilt University]] notes that Jewish theologians have generally rejected such literalist interpretations of the written text, and that even Jewish commentators who oppose some aspects of Darwinian thought generally accept scientific evidence that the Earth is much older.<ref>{{cite book|author=Cherry, S|title=Crisis management via Bilbical Interpretation: Fundamentalism, Modern Orthodoxy, and Genesis in Jewish Tradition and the Challenge of Darwinism (Cantor, G Swetlitz, M, editors|publisher=University of Chicago Press|year=2006|isbn=978-0226092775}}</ref> Similar claims are made of Christian commentators, but a number of prominent early [[Christianity|Christian]] [[Church Fathers]] including [[Justin Martyr]], [[Clement of Alexandria]], [[Origen]], and [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], did not believe the Genesis account depicted ordinary solar days and read [[Allegorical interpretations of Genesis|creation history as an allegory]] as well as being theologically true (however this being said, all of these men certainly ''did'' believe in a young earth<ref>Origen: < 10,000 years, Celsus, 1.20; Augustine: < 5,600 years, City 12.11; Eusebius: 5,228 years, Chronicle; Clement 5,592 years, Miscellanies 1.21</ref>). The [[Protestant reformation]] [[hermeneutic]] inclined some of the Reformers and later Protestants toward a literal reading of the Bible as translated, believing in an ordinary day, and maintaining this younger-Earth view. + + − The belief that the universe was made by a rational Creator was held by many of the founders of modern science, such as [[Nicolaus Copernicus|Copernicus]], [[Johannes Kepler|Kepler]], [[Michael Faraday|Faraday]], [[Galileo Galilei|Galileo]], [[James Clerk Maxwell|Maxwell]], [[Isaac Newton|Newton]], [[Robert Boyle|Boyle]], [[Blaise Pascal|Pascal]] and [[Nicolas Steno]], all of whom followed the empirical [[Baconian method]] described by [[Francis Bacon]] (1561 – 1626), who emphasised that the works of God in nature teach us how to interpret the word of God in the Bible.<ref name="moore">{{cite web | last = Moore | first = James | authorlink = James Moore (biographer) | title = Evolution and Wonder - Understanding Charles Darwin | work = Speaking of Faith (Radio Program) | publisher = American Public Media | url =http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/darwin/transcript.shtml | accessdate = 2007-06-27 }}</ref> + − In [[1650]], [[Archbishop Ussher]] published the [[Ussher chronology]], a chronology dating the [[Creation according to Genesis|creation]] to the night preceding [[October 23]] [[4004 BC]]. Ussher's proposed date of 4004 BC differed little from [[Dating Creation#Date of Creation according to the Pentateuch|other Biblically-based estimates]], such as those of [[Bede]] (3952 BC), Ussher's near-contemporary, [[Joseph Justus Scaliger|Scaliger]] (3949 BC), [[Johannes Kepler]] (3992 BC), [[Sir Isaac Newton]] (c. 4000 BC), or [[John Lightfoot]] (3929 BC).+ − === Decline ===+ + + + − Support for YEC declined from the 18th century onwards with the development of the [[scientific revolution]], and scientific [[paradigm shift]]s. Findings in geology led to a number of explanations which required an ancient Earth, such as [[Abraham Gottlob Werner]]'s [[Neptunism]]. [[James Hutton]], now regarded as the father of modern geology, went further and opened up the concept of [[deep time]] for scientific inquiry. Rather than accepting that the Earth was deteriorating from a primal state, he maintained that the Earth must be much older (indeed, he asserted that the Earth was infinitely old). Hutton stated that "the past history of our globe must be explained by what can be seen to be happening now … No powers are to be employed that are not natural to the globe, no action to be admitted except those of which we know the principle."<ref>'Theory of the Earth', a paper (with the same title of his 1795 book) communicated to the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and published in ''Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh'', 1785; cited with approval in Holmes, A., ''Principles of Physical Geology'', 2nd edition, Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., Great Britain, pp. 43–44, 1965.</ref>+ − Hutton's main line of argument was that the tremendous displacements and changes he was seeing did not happen in a short period of time by means of catastrophe, but that the incremental processes of uplift and erosion happening on the Earth in the present day had caused them. As these processes were very gradual, the Earth needed to be ancient, in order to allow time for the changes to occur. While his ideas of [[Plutonism]] were hotly contested, scientific inquiries on competing ideas of [[catastrophism]] pushed back the age of the Earth into the millions of years — still much younger than commonly accepted by modern scientists, but a great change from the literalist view of an Earth that was only a few thousand years old.<ref>[http://www.uwmc.uwc.edu/geography/hutton/hutton.htm ''Theory of the Earth''] full text (1788 version)</ref>+ + + + + − Hutton's ideas, called [[Uniformitarianism (science)|uniformitarianism]], or [[Gradualism]] were popularized by Sir [[Charles Lyell]] in the early 19th century. The energetic advocacy of Lyell led to the public and scientific communities largely accepting an ancient Earth. By this time the Reverends [[William Buckland]], [[Adam Sedgwick]] and other early geologists had abandoned their earler ideas of catastrophism related to a Biblical flood and confined their explanations to local floods. By the 1830s, mainstream science had abandoned YEC as a serious hypothesis. It became therefore important for biblical scholars as well as Christian scientists to harmonize the [[Genesis]] account with new scientific results into a 'new geology'.<ref>[http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/_0/history_12 Uniformitarianism: Charles Lyell], University of California Museum of Paleontology</ref>+ + − John H Mears was one such scholar who proposed several theories varying from a mix of long/indefinite periods with moments of creation to a day-age theory of indefinite 'days'. He subscribed to the latter theory (indefinite days) and found support from the side of [[James Dwight Dana]], Professor at Yale and one of the fathers of [[Mineralogy]] who wrote a paper consisting of 4 articles named 'Science and the Bible' on the topic.<ref name="Dana">{{cite book | last = Dana, Phd. Professor at Yale | first = James Dwight | title = Science and the Bible, a review of and the six days of creation of Prof. Lewis Taylor | publisher = Bibl. Soc. | year = 1856-1857}} URL: [http://www.farlang.com/gemstones/dana-science-bible/page_001 Prof. James Dwight Dana, Science and the Bible, online version] </ref> With the acceptance by many biblical scholars of a reinterpretation of Genesis 1 in the light of the breakthrough results of Lyell and supported by a number of renowned (christian) scientific scholars, a new hurdle was taken in the future acceptance of Developmentalism (based on Darwin's Natural selection). <ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=2054#P52_10723 | title = Bible.org, Darwinism and New England Theology | year = 2004 | accessdate = 2007-07-08 }}</ref>+ + + + + + + − + + − === Revival ===+ − The rise of [[fundamentalist Christianity]] at the start of the twentieth century saw a revival of interest in YEC, as a part of their rejection of the explanation of [[evolution]].{{Fact|date=August 2008}} In 1923, [[George McCready Price]], a [[Seventh-day Adventist Church|Seventh-day Adventist]] wrote ''The New Geology'', a book partly inspired by the book ''Patriarchs and Prophets'' in which [[Seventh-day Adventist Church|Seventh-day Adventist]] prophet [[Ellen G. White]] described the impact of the [[Great Flood (Biblical)|Great flood]] on the shape of the Earth. Although not an accredited geologist, Price's writings, which were based upon reading geological texts and documents, rather than field or laboratory work,<ref>The Creationists (Expanded Edition), p92, 106 [[Ronald Numbers]], 2006</ref> provide an explicitly fundamentalist perspective on geology. The book attracted only a small following, with its advocates almost all being Lutheran pastors and Seventh-day Adventists in America.<ref name="rsf">{{cite book|author=Marston, P & Forster, R| year=2001| title=Reason Science and Faith| publisher=Monarch Books| isbn =978-1579106614| url=http://www.ivycottage.org/group/group.aspx?id=6826| accessdate =2007-06-30}}</ref> [[Harry Rimmer]] was another prominent exponent of similar views, at least during some of his evangelizing career (Rimmer appears to have also subscribed to "[[gap creationism]]", and a local flood, at least at some times). − In the 1950’s, Price's work came under severe criticism, particularly by [[Bernard Ramm]] in his book ''The Christian View of Science and Scripture''. Together with [[J. Laurence Kulp]], a geologist and in fellowship with the [[Plymouth Brethren]],and other scientists<ref>[http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1993/PSCF12-93Yang.html Radiocarbon Dating and American Evangelical Christians<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>, Ramm influenced Christian organisations such as the [[American Scientific Affiliation]] (ASA) in not supporting [[flood geology]].+ − Price's work was subsequently adapted and updated by [[Henry M. Morris]] and [[John C. Whitcomb]] Jr. in their book ''[[The Genesis Flood]]'' in 1961. Morris and Whitcomb argued that the Earth was geologically recent and that the [[Great Flood]] had laid down most of the geological strata in the space of a single year, reviving pre-Uniformitarian arguments. Given this history, they argued, "the last refuge of the case for evolution immediately vanishes away, and the record of the rocks becomes a tremendous witness... to the holiness and justice and power of the living God of Creation!"<ref>Whitcomb, JC (1960). The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications. P&R Publishing. ISBN 978-0875523385</ref>+ + + + + − This became the foundation of a new generation of YEC thinkers, who organized themselves around Morris' [[Institute for Creation Research]]. Sister organizations such as the [[Creation Research Society]] have sought to re-interpret geological formations within a YEC viewpoint. [[Langdon Brown Gilkey|Langdon Gilkey]] writes,+ + + − <blockquote>... no distinction is made between scientific theories on the one hand and philosophical or religious theories on the other, between scientific questions and the sorts of questions religious beliefs seek to answer... It is, therefore, no surprise that in their theological works, as opposed to their creation science writings, creationists regard evolution and all other theories associated with it, as the intellectual source for and intellectual justification of everything that is to them evil and destructive in modern society. For them all that is spiritually healthy and creative has been for a century or more under attack by "that most complex of godless movements spawned by the pervasive and powerful system of evolutionary uniformitarianism", "If the system of flood geology can be established on a sound scientific basis... then the entire evolutionary cosmology, at least in its present neo-Darwinian form, will collapse. This in turn would mean that every anti-Christian system and movement ([[communism]], [[racism]], [[humanism]], [[libertarianism]], [[behaviorism]], and all the rest) would be deprived of their pseudo-intellectual foundation", "It [evolution] has served effectively as the pseudo-scientific basis of [[atheism]], [[agnosticism]], [[socialism]], [[fascism]], and numerous faulty and dangerous philosophies over the past century"<ref>(Gilkey, 1998, p. 35; quotations from Henry Morris).</ref></blockquote>+ − Morris' ideas had a considerable impact on creationism and fundamentalist Christianity. Armed with the backing of conservative organizations and individuals, his brand of "[[creation science]]" was widely promoted throughout the [[United States]] and overseas, with his books being translated into at least ten different languages.+ − In 1978, the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy developed the [[Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy]] which included the following:+ + + + + − <blockquote>WE DENY that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny that scientific hypotheses about Earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html|title=Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy with Exposition|year=1978|publisher=Bible Research|accessdate=2007-07-03}}</ref></blockquote>+ − As of 2008 a [[Gallup]] poll indicated that 50% of US adults agreed with the statement "human beings developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life." Whereas 44% of US adults agreed with the statement "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years."<ref>[ http://www.pollingreport.com/science.htm Gallup Poll. May 8-11, 2008. N=1,017 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.]</ref>+ + + + − The revival of YEC has had a periodic impact on science education, particularly in the United States, where periodic controversies have raged over the appropriateness of teaching YEC doctrine and creation science in public schools (see [[Teach the Controversy]]) side by side with the theory of [[evolution]].+ − YEC has failed to make an impact in more liberal circles of Christianity. For example, the Articles of Faith of the Baptist Church states no required beliefs concerning creation.<ref>[http://www.answersincreation.org/denomination.htm Church Denominations, Creation Science<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> Some Churches, such as the [[Roman Catholic Church]], accept the possibility of [[theistic evolution]] but despite this, some individual church members support YEC.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.catholicintl.com/scienceissues/dialogue-evolution1.htm |title=Dialogue on Evolution versus Creationism |accessdate=2007-10-10 |author=Philip Porvaznik |publisher=Catholic Apologetics International}} </ref>+ + + − + − YEC has always been the stated position of the [[Oriental Orthodox Church]], without having gone through any decline and revival. Fr. Tadros Y. Malaty, a Coptic Orthodox scholar, expresses the typical Oriental Orthodox view as follows:+ + + + − <blockquote>+ − Using mathematical calculations, man cannot be more than 6,000 years old. Assuming that every family had three children (a low number compared to previous centuries) and after accounting for natural death catastrophes and wars, we find that the world's population would approximate what it actually is now. If human history goes back a million years, then the world's population would have needed several times the land space we have now.<ref>Fr. Tadros Y. Malaty, ''Commentary on the Book of Genesis'' (1998) p. 22.</ref> − </blockquote> − == Characteristics and beliefs ==+ − ===Age of the Earth=== − − YECs believe that life was created by God [[created kind|'each after their kind']] in the universe's first six normal-length (24-hour) days. Additionally, they believe that the biblical account of [[Noah|Noah's flood]] is historically true, maintaining that there was a worldwide flood (circa 2349 BC) that destroyed all terrestrial life except that which was saved on [[Noah's Ark]]. (Barry Setterfield proposed in 1999 that the flood occurred much earlier around 3536 BC.) They assert that this global flood caused a multitude of geological features that scientists regard as evidence of an old Earth.+ − === Attitude towards science ===+ + + + + + − YEC is normally characterized as opposing [[evolution]], though it also opposes many claims and theories in the fields of [[physics]] and [[chemistry]] (especially absolute dating methods), [[geology]], [[astronomy]], [[cosmology]], [[molecular biology]], [[genomics]], [[linguistics]], [[anthropology]], [[archaeology]] and any other fields of science that have developed theories or made claims incompatible with the Young Earth version of world history. YECs are fundamentally opposed to any explanation for the origins of anything which replaces God as the universal creator as stated in the Bible, whether it be the origins of biological diversity, the origins of life or the origins of the universe itself. This has led some YECs to criticize [[intelligent design]], a proposal which some see as an alternative form of creationism, for not taking a stand on the age of the Earth, special creation, or even the identity of the designer. Some YECs see this as too compromising.<ref>{{cite web|title=AiG’s views on the Intelligent Design Movement|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0830_IDM.asp|author=Carl Wieland|date=30 August 2002|publisher=[[Answers in Genesis]]}}</ref>+ + − + + + + − + − YECs regard the Bible as a historically accurate, factually [[Biblical inerrancy|inerrant]] record of natural history. They accept its authority as the central organizing text for human life — the sole indisputable source of knowledge on every topic with which it deals. As [[Henry M. Morris|Henry Morris]], a leading YEC, explained it, Christians who flirt with less-than-literal readings of biblical texts are also flirting with theological disaster.<ref name="Morris Conflict">{{cite book|title=The Long War Against God: The History and Impact of the Creation/Evolution Conflict|author=Morris, HM|year=2000|publisher=Master Books|isbn=978-0890512913}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Morris, HM|title=Biblical Creationism: What Each Book of the Bible Teaches About Creation & the Flood|year=2000|publisher=Master Books|isbn=978-0890512937}}</ref> For the vast majority of YECs, an [[Allegorical interpretations of Genesis|allegorical reading]] of the [[Creation according to Genesis|Genesis accounts of Creation]], the [[Fall of man|Fall]], the [[Noah's ark|Deluge]], and the [[Tower of Babel]] would undermine core Christian doctrines like the birth and resurrection of [[Jesus|Jesus Christ]]. According to Morris, Christians must "either ... believe God's Word all the way, or not at all."<ref name="Morris Conflict" />Therefore, YECs take the account of Genesis to be a historical account of the origin of the Earth and life. The corollary is that many YECs regard Christians who do not regard [[Genesis]] as historically accurate as being inconsistent.+ + + + + + − + − YECs interpret the text of Genesis in a strictly literal fashion. Therefore, they believe that God created the world in six normal-length days, and planted below the [[Firmament]] the [[Garden of Eden]] for the habitation of an original human couple ([[Adam and Eve]]). As a result of the subsequent [[Fall of Man]], humanity was forced to work hard to provide food, childbirth became painful, and physical death entered the world. Some YECs assert that prior to the Fall all animals were herbivores (see below).+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + − The [[Genealogies of Genesis]] record the line of descent from Adam through [[Noah]] to [[Abraham]]. YECs interpret these genealogies literally, including the old ages of the men; up to Methuselah who lived 969 years. Differences of opinion exist regarding whether the genealogies should be taken as complete or abbreviated, hence the 6,000 to 10,000 year range usually quoted for the Earth's age. Proponents of [[Old Earth Creationism]], tend to interpret the genealogies as incomplete, and usually interpret the days of Genesis 1 figuratively as long periods of time.+ + − YECs believe that the [[Great Flood (Biblical)|great flood]] described in Genesis 6-9 was global in extent, and submerged the highest mountains on Earth. A range of suggestions are made to account for the mechanism for such a deluge. Earlier generations (following the lead of Morris and Whitcomb) believed that an orbiting [[vapor canopy]] collapsed, generating extreme rainfall (from "windows of heaven"). In more recent times it has been proposed that radical geological activity (the opening of the "fountains of the great deep") was largely responsible for the flood — elaborate theories such as [[Catastrophic plate tectonics]] and [[hydroplates]] have been put forward by some. These theories have the added benefit of explaining how the flood transformed an originally flatter Earth, raising up mountains and dropping sea beds; this then solves the problem of finding sufficient water to cover [[Mount Everest]]. Whatever the case, almost all YECs refer to a loosely codified idea called "[[Flood geology]]" to argue that the vast majority of present-day geological features are the result of the Great Flood.+ − To support their belief in a worldwide flood, YECs argue that anthropological evidence supports their belief that every culture studied has, in its history, a myth or story similar to that of Noah in two aspects: 1) the occurrence of a catastrophic flood and 2) human and animal life saved by a man who built a large boat and took aboard it for the duration of the flood enough life to repopulate the Earth.{{Fact|date=June 2007}} According to Genesis, two of every "unclean" kind of animal (male and female) and seven of every "clean" kind of animal were placed on the ark during the flood.+ − After the flood, Genesis reports increasingly shortened lifespans dropping quickly from an average of 900 years at the time of [[Noah]] to an average of 100 by the time of [[Abraham]]. Some YECs have suggested that this is due to effects associated with [[inbreeding]] that took place after the flood, as only eight people remained.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i4/years.asp|author=Carl Wieland|title=Living for 900 years|publisher=[[Answers in Genesis]]}}</ref> Another theory{{Fact|date=February 2008}} suggests that the [[Earth]] had a higher concentration of [[oxygen]] prior to the Flood, possibly due to a layer of water vapor ("[[vapor canopy]]") above the [[Earth]]. The result of such a postulation would be a giant [[Hyperbaric Chamber]], extending lifespans. Others hypothesize that the "[[firmament]]" of the "waters above" screened the Earth from harmful [[ultraviolet]] rays, which they argue, shorten [[life expectancy]].+ − === Human history ===+ − In keeping with a strictly literal interpretation of Genesis, YECs believe that [[Adam and Eve]] were the universal ancestors of the entire human race; accordingly it is usually held that their sons and daughters married amongst themselves to produce the next generation of children.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/Tools/cains_wife.asp|title=Cain’s wife — who was she?|publisher=[[Answers In Genesis]]}}</ref> [[Noah's flood]] is supposed to have killed all humans on Earth with the exception of Noah and his sons and their wives. All humans alive today are therefore believed to be descended from this single family, which carried the [[gene pool]] for the entire human race. In contradiction to what is accepted by [[anthropology|anthropologists]], YECs assert that [[Indigenous peoples of the Americas|native Americans]], [[Australian aborigines]] and all other races arose from the migration of people around the world following the [[Tower of Babel]] event in the [[3rd millennium BC]].+ + + − Genealogies in the Genesis text identify individuals named [[Egypt]], [[Gomer]], [[Sheba]], [[Canaan]], and [[Sidon]], who are said to have founded the cities and civilizations that were later to bear their names.+ − + − YECs usually interpret [[Genesis]] to teach that prior to the [[Fall of man]] there was no predatory or [[carnivore|carnivorous activity]] amongst animals, and animals did not die. It is thought that all animals, together with humans, subsisted on an entirely vegetarian diet.<ref>{{cite web|title=Creation’s original diet and the changes at the Fall|publisher=[[Answers in Genesis]]|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v5/i2/diet.asp}}</ref> This raises the question of what was the original (i.e. pre-Fall) function of such things as snake venom and spiders webs. YECs typically answer these questions either by postulating a non-lethal original purpose for these predatory mechanisms (eg. snake venom was designed to soften fruit), or suggesting that these mechanisms were miraculously added to animals by God or the [[devil]] at the time of the Fall.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/bad_things.asp|title=How did bad things come about?|publisher=[[Answers in Genesis]]}}</ref>+ + + + + − The implication of these ideas - that before the Fall animals would eventually exceed the [[carrying capacity]] of the Earth - is not considered a problem by some YECs since they believe that the Earth did not remain in its unfallen state for any (generationally) appreciable time.<ref name="Grudem">Wayne A. Grudem "Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine", Zondervan, 1996. ISBN 0-3102-8670-0</ref>+ − + − YECs also assert that all modern species of land vertebrates are descended from those [[created kind|original animals on the ark]]. Most YECs believe that the Ark "kinds" diversified as they subsequently adapted to their environments by the process of variation and rapid natural selection. The selection of such animals as kangaroo and koalas on the ark is based upon hypothesized sunken land bridges between Australia and South East Asia, over which Noah or his sons, or the ancestors of the animals themselves, could travel. Many YECs assert that the process of variation and natural selection resulted in a net ''loss'' of genetic information.{{Fact|date=September 2008}}+ − + − The significance of this issue to YECs has its roots in a biblical interpretation of the fall of man that results in sin bringing death into the world, not just for mankind but for all creatures.<ref>{{cite web|last=Ham|first=Ken|last2= and others|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/Area/AnswersBook/dinosaurs19.asp|title=What happened to the dinosaurs?|accessdate=2007-03-14}}</ref> − + − The Old Testament also describes a huge creature called a "[[behemoth]]" (Job 40:15-24) that "moves his tail like a cedar"; the behemoth is described as ranking "first among the works of God" and as impossible to capture (vs. 24). Some Biblical scholars identify the behemoth as either an [[elephant]], a [[hippopotamus]], or a [[cattle|bull]], but as these animals have very thin tails that are not comparable to the size of a [[cedar]] tree, [[creationists]] often identify the behemoth as a [[sauropod]] dinosaur. Other creationists refer to "behemoth" as a ''[[Brachiosaurus]]'', since the Bible says in Job: "He is the chief of the ways of God", suggesting he is the largest animal God created.<ref name="clarifying">{{cite web|url=http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/dinos.shtml|title=Dinosaurs and the Bible|publisher=Clarifying Christianity'|year=2005|accessdate=2007-03-14}}</ref> However, others postulate that the reference to the cedar tree actually refers to its needle-like leaves, which resemble the bristly hair present on the tails of modern elephants, rhinoceroses, and hippopotamuses.<ref name="BOTF">{{cite book | author= Bright, Michael | title=Beasts of the Field: The Revealing Natural History of Animals in the Bible | year=2006 | pages= p346 | id=1861058314 }}</ref> Other critics contend that the word "tail" is a euphemism for the animal's [[penis]], and that the passage should be understood as describing its virility.<ref name="isbn0-262-66165-9">{{cite book |author=Pennock, Robert T. |title=Tower of Babel: the evidence against the new creationism |publisher=MIT Press |location=Cambridge, Mass |year=2000 |pages= |isbn=0-262-66165-9 |oclc= |doi=}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH711.html |title=CH711: Behemoth a Dinosaur |accessdate=2007-09-13 |format= |work=}}</ref>+ − [[Image:Zuiyo Maru.jpg|thumb|250px|Carcass found by the ''[[Zuiyo Maru]]'', said to be a plesiosaur-like creature by some creationists; scientists who have studied it concluded that the remains belong to a [[basking shark]].]]+ − The [[Leviathan]] is another creature referred to in the Bible's Old Testament; it is described as having a variety of dinosaur, dragon, and water-serpent-like characteristics. Some scholars identify the Leviathan in Job c. 41 with the [[nile crocodile]], others point out that it has seven heads and suggest it is purely mythical. As with the behemoth, creationists have sometimes tried to connect the Leviathan with dinosaurs.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH711_1.html|title=Claim CH711.1: Leviathan as a dinosaur|publisher=the TalkOrigins Archive|accessdate=2007-03-14}}</ref>+ − One view proposed by some is that the serpent in the [[Garden of Eden]] may have actually been a type of dinosaur.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.totheends.com/dino.html |title=To The Ends Of The Earth--Dinosaurs in the Bible |accessdate=2007-09-14 |format= |work=}}</ref> They point out that, according to Christian interpretation, God was speaking to the Devil when he cursed the serpent, not to an ordinary snake. + − YECs do not deny the existence of [[dinosaur]]s and other extinct animals present in the [[fossil record]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/Docs/2.asp|title=Dinosaurs and the Bible|publisher=Answers in Genisis|accessdate=2007-12-23}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/24/AR2005092401262.html|title=In Evolution Debate, Creationists Are Breaking New Ground|publisher=The Washington Post}}</ref> Usually, they assert that the fossils represent the remains of animals that perished in the Great Flood. Most believe that Noah took the dinosaurs with him in his Ark<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/05/27/1934224.htm|title=Dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark: US museum|publisher=ABC News (Australia)|accessdate=2007-11-06}}</ref>, and that they gradually became extinct as a result of a vastly different post-flood environment.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/what-happened-to-the-dinosaurs What Really Happened to the Dinosaurs? - Answers in Genesis<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> The newly-established [[Creation Museum]] in [[Kentucky]] portrays humans and dinosaurs co-existing before the Flood. For many years, YECs referred to supposed associated human and dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy Riverbed of [[Glen Rose, Texas|Glen Rose]], [[Texas]] as proof of coexistence, though most now have abandoned these "[[man track controversy]]" claims, as careful scrutiny has shown them to be either fabrications or spurious phenomena.<ref name=Humanist>{{cite journal+ − | last = Edwords − | first = Frederick − | authorlink = Fred Edwords − | title = Seeing the Light − | journal = The Humanist − | volume = 46 − | issue = 2 − | pages = 33–34 − | publisher = [[American Humanist Association]] − | date = March/April 1986 − | issn = 0018-7399 − }}</ref> − Some creationists assert that [[living dinosaurs]] (as well as other extinct creatures such as [[plesiosaur]]s) still survive in isolated spots, accounting for alleged sightings of lake and [[sea monster]]s.<ref>[http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=115 Creation Science Evangelism - Creation, Evolution, Dinosaurs, and the Bible<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> Other creationists urge caution about alleged plesiosaurs living today, since rotting [[basking sharks]] can form a pseudo-plesiosaur shape.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v13/i2/sharks.asp Letting rotting sharks lie<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> Creationists sometimes turn to [[cryptozoology]] to support the idea that creatures known from fossils lived alongside humans in historical times.+ + + + + + + − YECs occasionally claim that dinosaurs survived in [[Australia]], and that [[Indigenous Australians|Aboriginal]] legends of reptilian monsters are evidence of this,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v21/i1/aborigines.asp|title=Australia’s Aborigines ... did they see dinosaurs?|first=Rebecca|last=Driver|publisher=Answers in Genesis|accessdate=2007-03-14}}</ref> referring to what is known as ''[[Megalania]]'' (''Varanus priscus''). However, ''Megalania'' was a gigantic [[monitor lizard]], and not a dinosaur, as its discoverer, Richard Owens, realized.+ + − == Comparison with other forms of creationism ==+ + + + + + + + − YEC is only one of several forms of creationism. YECs typically oppose these alternative theories, which they consider to be as "compromises" with science<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/compromise.asp Get Answers: Creation Compromises<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> or otherwise flawed.+ − === Old Earth creationism ===+ − {{see also|Old Earth creationism}}+ + − YECs reject [[Old Earth creationism]] and [[Day-Age Creationism]] on textual and theological grounds. In addition, they claim the scientific data in geology and astronomy point to a young Earth, against the consensus of the general scientific community.+ − YECs generally hold that when Genesis describes the creation of the Earth occurring over a period of days, this indicates normal-length 24 hour days, and cannot reasonably be interpreted otherwise. They agree that the Hebrew word for "day" (''yôm'') can refer to either a 24-hour day or a long or unspecified time, but argue that whenever the latter interpretation is used it includes a preposition defining the long or unspecified period. In the ''specific context of Genesis 1'', since the days are both numbered and are referred to as "evening and morning", this can mean only normal-length days. Further, they argue that the 24-hour day is the only interpretation that makes sense of the [[Shabbat|Sabbath]] command in [[Exodus]] 20:8–11. YECs argue that it is a glaring [[exegesis|exegetical]] [[fallacy]] to take a meaning from one context (yom referring to a long period of time in Genesis 1) and apply it to a completely different one (yom referring to normal-length days in Exodus 20).<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i1/days.asp How long were the days of Genesis 1?<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>+ − − Further, YECs argue that their position is the only way to explain the [[Fall (religion)|Fall]], which introduced death and suffering into the world. They argue that all long-age views entail death before sin, which they regard as a severe theological error, violating [[Genesis]] 3, and for Christians, [[Epistle to the Romans|Romans]] 5:12–19, 8:17–22 and [[1 Corinthians]] 15:21–22.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0221plant_death.asp The Fall: a cosmic catastrophe<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>. Further discussion and refutation of these objections can be found on the [[Day-Age Creationism]] page. − − === Gap creationism === − {{see also|Gap creationism}} − − The "gap theory" acknowledges a vast age for the universe, including the Earth and solar system, while asserting that life was created recently in six 24-hour days by divine fiat. Genesis 1 is thus interpreted literally, with an indefinite "gap" of time inserted between the first two verses. (Some gap theorists insert a "primordial creation" and [[Lucifer]]'s rebellion into the gap.) − − Most YEC organizations reject the gap theory, and say it is unscriptural, unscientific, and not necessary, in its various forms.<ref>{{cite web − | title=The gap theory — an idea with holes? − | author=Henry M. Morris − | month=December | year=1987 − | url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v10/i1/gaptheory.asp − | accessdate = 2007-02-14 − }}</ref><ref>{{cite web − | title=‘Soft’ gap sophistry − | author=Don Batten − | month=June | year=2004 − | url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i3/softgap.asp − | accessdate = 2007-02-14 − }}</ref> It is asserted that the entire universe is only thousands of years old. − − === The ''Omphalos'' hypothesis === − {{see also|Omphalos hypothesis}} − − Many YECs distinguish their own hypotheses from the "Omphalos hypothesis", today more commonly referred to as the apparent age concept, put forth by the naturalist and science writer [[Philip Henry Gosse]]. [[Omphalos (book)|Omphalos]] was an unsuccessful mid-19th century attempt to reconcile creationism with geology. Gosse proposed that just as [[Adam and Eve|Adam]] had a [[navel]] (''omphalos'' is Greek for navel), evidence of a [[gestation]] he never experienced, so also the Earth was created ''[[ex nihilo]]'' complete with evidence of a prehistoric past that never actually occurred. The Omphalos hypothesis allows for a young Earth without giving rise to any predictions that would contradict scientific findings of an old Earth. Although both logically unassailable and consistent with a literal reading of Scripture, Omphalos was rejected at the time by scientists on the grounds that it was completely [[falsifiability|unfalsifiable]] and by theologians because it implied to them a deceitful God, which they found theologically unacceptable. − − Most YECs today argue that Adam did ''not'' have a [[navel]],<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i3/bellybutton.asp Did Adam have a belly-button?<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> and in contrast to Gosse, posit that not only is the Earth young but the scientific data supports that view. However, the apparent age concept is still used in YEC literature.<ref>[http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1674 Apologetics Press - Apparent Age<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref><ref>[http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/apparent_age.html The Apparent Age Argument<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref><ref>[http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/aa.htm Appearance of Age - theology overview & web-links<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> − − == Criticism == − ===Scientific=== − YEC was abandoned as a mainstream scientific concept around the start of the 19th century.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/darwin/sect2.htm |title=History of Science: Early Modern Geology|accessdate=2007-09-24 |format= |work=}}</ref> Many scientists see it as a faith position, and regard attempts to prove it scientifically as being little more than religiously motivated [[pseudoscience]]. In 1997, a poll by the Gallup organization showed that 5% of US adults with professional degrees in science took a YEC view. In the aforementioned poll 40% of the same group said that they believed that life, including humans, had evolved over millions of years, but that [[God]] guided this process; a view described as [[theistic evolution]], while 55% held a view of "naturalistic evolution" in which God took no part in this process.<ref name="gallup 1997">{{cite web|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm|title=Gallup Poll 1997}}</ref> Some scientists who believe in creationism are known to subscribe to other forms such as [[Old Earth creationism]] which posits an act of creation that took place millions or billions of years ago, with variations on the timing of the creation of mankind. [[Kent Hovind]] commented on discussing the topic of people asking, "Couldn't God use Evolution to create?" He gives the answer, "Well, it wouldn't be the God of the Bible! The "god" that would use an evolutionary process is cruel, and wasteful, and retarded! Doesn't he know what He wants? Can't He just make it right in six days?"{{Citequote|date=August 2008}} − − Critics argue that every challenge to evolution by YECs is either made in an unscientific fashion, or is readily explainable by science, and that while a gap in scientific knowledge may exist now it is likely to be closed through further research. While scientists acknowledge that there are indeed a number of gaps in the scientific theory, they generally reject the creationist viewpoint that these gaps represent fatal, insurmountable flaws with evolution. Those working in the field who pointed out the gaps in the first place have often explicitly rejected the creationist interpretation. The "[[God of the gaps]]" viewpoint has also been criticized by [[theology|theologians]], although creationists claim that their models are based on what is known, not on gaps in knowledge. − − Christian YECs adhere strongly to the concept of [[biblical inerrancy]], which declares the Bible to be divinely inspired and therefore scientifically infallible and non-correctable. This position is considered by devotees and critics alike to be incompatible with the principles of scientific [[Objectivity (philosophy)#Epistemic objectivity|objectivity]]. The creationist organizations [[Answers in Genesis]] (AiG) and [[Institute for Creation Research]] (ICR) require all members to pledge support for biblical inerrancy. − − YECs often suggest that supporters of evolution theory are primarily motivated by [[atheism]]. Critics reject this claim by pointing out that many supporters of evolutionary theory are in fact religious believers, and that major religious groups such as the [[Roman Catholic Church]] and [[Church of England]] believe that the concept of biological evolution does not imply a rejection of the scriptures. Nor do they support the specific doctrines of biblical inerrancy proposed by YEC. Critics also point out that workers in fields related to evolutionary biology are not required to sign statements of belief in evolution comparable to the biblical inerrancy pledges required by [[Institute for Creation Research|ICR]] and [[Answers in Genesis|AiG]]. This is contrary to the popular belief of creationists that scientists operate on an [[A priori and a posteriori (philosophy)|a priori]] disbelief in biblical principles<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i3/admission.asp Amazing admission<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>. They also discount Christian faith positions, like those of French Jesuit priest, geologist and paleontologist [[Pierre Teilhard de Chardin]], who saw that his work with evolutionary sciences actually confirmed and inspired his faith in the cosmic Christ. Nor do they believe the views of Catholic priest Fr. [[Thomas Berry]], a cultural historian and eco-theologian, that the [[cosmology|cosmological]] 13 billion year "Universe Story" provides all faiths and all traditions a single account by which the divine has made its presence in the world. − − Proponents of YEC are regularly accused of [[quote mining]], the dishonest practice of isolating passages from academic texts that appear to support their claims while deliberately excluding context and conclusions to the contrary.<ref>[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/project.html Quote Mine Project: Examining 'Evolution Quotes' of Creationists<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> − − === Theological === − − Some theologians oppose the proposition that God can be a legitimate or viable subject for scientific experimentation, and reject a literal interpretation of Genesis. They propose there are statements in the creation week itself which render the historical interpretation of [[Genesis]] incompatible with [[scientific evidence]]. − − One example is that God created the Earth and heavens, and light, on Day 1, plant life on Day 3, and the sun and moon on Day 4. One must ask where the light in Day 1 came from, and why there were plants in Day 3 if the sun, which provides all light to the Earth, did not even exist until Day 4.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n2/framework-interpretation-critique-part-one A Critique of the Framework Interpretation of the Creation Account (Part 1 of 2) - Answers in Genesis<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> YECs such as [[Basil the Great]] and [[John Calvin]] answered this by suggesting that the light created by God on Day 1 was the light source. [[Answers in Genesis]] has refined this by suggesting that the Earth was already rotating with respect to this light.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1203.asp How could the days of Genesis 1 be literal before the sun was created?<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> One can also make a case that God created the plants toward the evening of Day 3, the Sun was created on the morning of Day 4, therefore the plants only had to endure darkness for a period not much longer than a typical night. − − Another problem is the fact that distant galaxies can be seen. If the universe did not exist until 10,000 years ago, then light from anything farther than 10,000 light-years would not have time to reach us. Most cosmologists accept an inflation model as the likely explanation for the horizon problem. Inflationary models also account for other phenomena, and are in agreement with observations of recent microwave anisotropy satellites. Creationists have also proposed models to explain why we see distant starlight.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v25/i4/lighttravel.asp Light-travel time: a problem for the big bang<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/405.asp Does Distant Starlight Prove the Universe Is Old? - Answers in Genesis<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> See [[creationist cosmologies]] for more information. − − Many critics claim that Genesis itself is internally inconsistent on the question of whether man was created before the animals ({{bible|Genesis 2:19}}) or after the animals as stated in Genesis 1. Proponents of the [[Documentary hypothesis]] suggest that Genesis 1 was a [[litany]] from the ''[[Priestly source|Priestly]]'' source (possibly from an early Jewish [[liturgy]]) while Genesis 2 was assembled from older ''[[Jahwist]]'' material, holding that for both stories to be a single account, Adam would have named all the animals, and God would have created Eve from his rib as a suitable mate, all within a single 24 hour period. Many creationists attribute this view to misunderstanding having arisen from poor translation of the tenses in Genesis 2 in contemporary translations of the Bible (e.g. compare "planted" and "had planted" in [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen%202:8;&version=9 KJV] and [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen%202:8;&version=31 NIV]).<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v16/i1/genesis.asp Biblical Exegesis</ref> − Some Christians assert that the Bible is free from error only in religious and moral matters, and that where scientific questions are concerned, the Bible should not be read literally. This position is held by a number of major denominations. For instance, in a publication entitled ''The Gift of Scripture''<ref>http://www.catholic-ew.org.uk/liturgy/Resources/Scripture/ (October 2005)</ref>, the [[Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales]] comments that "We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision". The Bible is held to be true in passages relating to human salvation, but "We should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other, secular matters."<ref>[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1811332,00.html Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible - Times Online<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> However, that view of the inerrancy of scripture was rejected by [[Paul VI]] in the formulation of [[Dei Verbum]] 11 forcing the commission to adjust the wording and add crucial footnotes to keep it in line with prior teaching. The relater then said that it was not to be understood as limiting biblical inerrancy to only matters of salvation. However that view has since become predominant due to the deliberate decision to interpret it in a heterodox manner regardless of what it was truly asserting.{{Syn|date=March 2008}}{{Clarifyme|date=March 2008}} By contrast, YECs contend that moral and spiritual matters in the Bible are intimately connected with its historical accuracy; in their view, the Bible stands or falls as a single indivisible block of knowledge.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i4/editorial.asp ‘But Genesis is not a science textbook’<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> − − While some theologians believe there is an inherent conflict between the Bible and science, popular Christian thought holds to the value of science in understanding the physical world. In this view the Bible serves to give understanding about God and the state of mankind (of which the accuracy of the Genesis account is a factor) and that supposed clashes between them are merely a matter of faulty understanding. Christian theologians and scientists like [[Augustine of Hippo]] and [[Gallileo]] held that, the literality creation in Genesis were believed to be true at the time, it doesn't destroy Christianity to suggest future scientific discoveries might change the way we view this account but, in the same way science could clarify the content of Scripture, it could also stand opposed to it and neither of these men ever proposed that science was superior or more reliable than the Bible.{{Clarifyme|date=March 2008}} This theological understanding is also upheld by the majority of YECs — that science is a very useful tool but still only a tool and that if, by science, something is found to contradict with the Bible, we should first question the science before trying to shift our understanding of the Bible. − − Aside from the theological doubts voiced by other Christians, YEC also stands in opposition to the [[creation myth]]ologies of other religions (both [[extant]] and [[extinct]]). Many of these make claims regarding the origin of the universe and humanity that are completely incompatible with those of Christian creationists (and with one another). − {{portal|Creationism}}+ − {{col-begin}}+ − {{col-3}}+ − + − + − + − + − + − * [[Dating Creation]]+ − + − + − + − − {{col-break}} − − * [[Existence]] − * [[Ex nihilo]] − * [[Flat Earth Society]] − * [[Flood Geology]] − − − − * [[Living dinosaurs]] − * [[Quran]] − − {{col-break}} − * [[Rapid-decay theory]]+ − * [[Rationalism]] − * [[Sons of Noah]] − * [[Starlight problem]] − * [[Theism]] − * [[Timeline of the Universe]] − * [[Ultimate fate of the Universe]] − * [[Ussher chronology]] − * [[Young Earth Creationist cosmologies]] − − {{col-end}} − === Church bodies whose official position is YEC === − * [[Evangelical Reformed Presbyterian Church]] − * [[Lutheran Church Missouri Synod]] − * [[Protestant Reformed Churches in America]] − − − + − + − == External links ==+ − ===Websites supportive of YEC=== − * [http://www.answersingenesis.org Answers in Genesis] − * [http://www.creationontheweb.com/ Creation Ministries International] − * [http://www.icr.org Institute for Creation Research] − − === Websites critical of YEC === − * [http://www.talkorigins.org/ The TalkOrigins Archive] − * [http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/ No Answers In Genesis] − * [http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Main_Page EvoWiki] − * [http://www.answersincreation.org Answers In Creation] - Old Earth creationist website purportedly demonstrating the errors of YEC − − === Other === − * [http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm US poll results — Public beliefs about evolution and creation] − * [http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/The_History_of_Young_earth_creationism Evowiki article on the History of YEC] − − − − − − [[de:Junge-Erde-Kreationismus]] − [[fr:Créationnisme Jeune-Terre]] − [[ko:젊은 지구 창조론]] − [[nl:Jongeaardecreationisme]] − [[ru:Младоземельный креационизм]] − [[fi:Nuoren Maan kreationismi]] − [[tr:Genç Dünya yaratılışçılığı]] − [[zh:年轻地球创造论]]
Young Earth Creationism (view source)
Revision as of 22:47, October 22, 2008
, 22:47, October 22, 2008Reverted edits by ReaganFan0101 (Talk) to last version by Aschlafly
[[Image:Michelangelo creation-of-sun-and-moon.jpg|right|thumb|300px|[[Michelangelo|Michelangelo's]] painting of the creation of the [[Sun]] and [[Moon]].]]
[[Image:Durer Adam and Eve.jpg|thumb|right|Adam and Eve, the first human beings according to [[Genesis]].]]
'''Young Earth Creationism''', sometimes abbreviated ''YEC'',<ref>"YEC", can refer to Young Earth Creationist or Young Earth Creationism. "YECs" refers to Young Earth Creationists. The abbreviation was likely originally used by opponents, and possibly disparagingly, but is accepted by Young Earth Creationists, who sometimes use it of themselves.</ref> is a form of [[creationism]] which holds that the [[Earth|earth]] and the [[Universe|universe]] are approximately 6,000 years old.<ref>Sarfati, 1999, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3837 Chapter 8, How old is the earth?].</ref><ref>Sarfati, 1999, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3836 Chapter 7, Astronomy] of Refuting Evolution.</ref>
Young earth creationists hold that both creation and the [[Theory of Evolution|evolutionary position]] are at root tied to [[worldview]]s, and because they are both claims about historical (or prehistorical) events, they depend on untestable assumptions. At the same time, young earth [[Creation Science|creation scientists]] argue that the young universe view is the explanation that best fits the evidence.
Many Young Earth creationists (YECs) are active in the development of [[creation science]], an endeavor that holds that the events associated with supernatural creation can be evidenced and modelled through an interpretation of the [[scientific method]]. This has led to the establishment of a number of Young Earth Creation Science organizations such as the [[Institute for Creation Research]] and the [[Creation Research Society]].
Most other scientists regard young earth creationism as being unscientific. Many do so because they believe that things such as [[radiometric dating]] and [[biology|biological]] observations have disproved it, and/or for ideological reasons. In addition, these scientists may not be aware of the many [[anomaly|anomalies]] associated with the old earth/universe position.
== Beliefs ==
== History ==
=== Biblical ===
Young Earth creationism generally takes the following positions regarding the biblical book of [[Genesis]]:
* Creation took place over a period of six ordinary (solar/24-hour) days, with God then "resting" on the seventh day.
* This creation, described in Genesis as "good" and "very good", was without flaw or defect.
* All people are descended from the first couple, [[Adam]] and [[Eve]].
* Adam and Eve [[sin]]ned, leading to their expulsion from the [[Garden of Eden]].
* A global [[Great Flood|Noachian flood]] occurred, destroying all land-based, air-breathing life, except that on the [[Ark]].
* The dispersal of humanity was caused by God after the [[Tower of Babel]]. <ref>[http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/confusionoflanguages.html Is there any reference to the confusion of languages at Babel in early Mesopotamian literature?] (ChristianAnswers.Net).</ref><ref>[http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a021.html Is there archaeological evidence of the Tower of Babel?] (ChristianAnswers.Net).</ref><ref>Jackson, Wayne, [http://www.christiancourier.com/archives/babel.htm The Tower of Babel—Legend or History?] [[December 17]] [[1999]] (Christian Courier).</ref>
=== Scientific ===
Young earth creationism holds that the scientific evidence is unreasonably ''interpreted'' by evolutionists and [[atheism|atheists]]/[[naturalism|naturalists]] as supporting their point of view, but that the same evidence can be reasonably interpreted by creationists to support the creationary point of view. This imposes a heavy burden on the testability of both theories, which is one of the reasons why some scientists question whether either the creationary or evolutionary view is scientific.
They further argue that the scientific evidence is more consistent with the creationary point of view than the evolutionary point of view.
Some specific arguments are as follows:
* The [[First Law of Thermodynamics|first law of thermodynamics]] and [[Second law of thermodynamics|second law of thermodynamics]] argue against an eternal universe and these laws point to the universe being created by [[God]].<ref>[http://godevidences.net/space/lawsofscience.php Evidences for God From Space—Laws of Science]</ref><ref>Thompson, Bert, [http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329 So Long, Eternal Universe; Hello Beginning, Hello End!], 2001 (Apologetics Press)</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences14.html</ref>
* The [[theory of evolution]] is at odds with scientific evidence. They often cite secular scientific sources which agree with them on various points (for further details please see: [[theory of evolution]] and [[creationism]]).<ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/21</ref>
* Both evolutionary scientists and young earth creation scientists believe that [[speciation]] occurs, however, young earth creation scientists state that speciation generally occurs at a much faster rate than evolutionary scientists believe is the case.<ref>[[Creation Ministries International]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3036/ Speciation: Questions and Answers]</ref>
*Many young earth creationists (including those at [[Creation Ministries International]] and [[CreationWiki]]) assert that the [http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible contains knowledge that shows an understanding of scientific knowledge beyond that believed to exist at the time the Bible was composed].<ref>[http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible Scientific Foreknowledge]</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i1/medicine.asp</ref>
== Biblical exegesis ==
Young earth creationism holds that the book of Genesis is historical in nature and that [[Bible exegesis]] warrants a six-day creation with each day being 24 hours.<ref>[http://creationwiki.org/Days_of_creation Days of Creation] (CreationWiki).</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp Genesis Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis).</ref><ref>Niessen, Richard, [http://www.icr.org/article/164/ Theistic Evolution and the Day-Age Theory] ''Impact'' 81, March 1980.</ref>
Andrew Kulikovsky describes it as follows:
{{QuoteBox|The hermeneutic employed by most YECs is best described as the historical-grammatical method in which historical narrative (such as the book of Genesis) is interpreted as literal history, prophecy is interpreted as prophecy, poetry is interpreted as poetry, etc.
<ref>Kulikovsky, Andrew S., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/tjv16v2_forster.pdf Fostering fallacy] ''Journal of Creation'' 16(2) 2002, p.31-36.</ref>}}
{{QuoteBox|Historical-grammatical exegesis involves a systematic approach to analyzing in detail the historical situation, events and circumstances surrounding the text, and the semantics and syntactical relationships of the words which comprise the text.<ref>Kulikovsky, Andrew S., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4880/ The Bible and hermeneutics] ''Journal of Creation'' 19(3):14–20, December 2005, p.14-20.</ref>}}
== Age of the Universe and Earth - General Overview ==
Young earth creation scientists advance a number of reasons for the earth and [[universe]] being approximately 6,000 years old.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp ‘Young’ age of the Earth & Universe Q&A] (Answers in Genesis).</ref><ref name="AiG Astr QA">[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp Astronomy and Astrophysics Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis).</ref><ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3040/ ‘Young’ age of the Earth & Universe Q&A] (Creation Ministries International).</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dating.asp Radiometric Dating Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis)</ref><ref name="AiG Astr QA" /><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp</ref> They argue that the evolutionary geological timescale is in error,<ref>Woodmorappe, John, [http://www.trueorigin.org/geocolumn.asp The Geologic Column: Does It Exist?] ''Journal of Creation'' 13(2):77–82, 1999 </ref><ref>Morris, Henry, [http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] ''Impact'' 6, August 1973</ref><ref>[http://www.allaboutcreation.org/geologic-time-scale.htm Geologic Time Scale - The Misconceptions] (All About Creation)</ref> and that [[geology]] further provides multiple lines of evidence that the earth is young.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp Geology Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis)</ref><ref>[http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm Geology] (Creation.org)</ref><ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html Geology Links] (Northwest Creation Network)</ref><ref>Baumgardner, John, [http://globalflood.org/ Genesis Flood] [[28 July]] [[2003]].</ref> Rejecting the [[uniformitarianism (science)|uniformitarian]] assumptions of secular geologists, they use a [[geologic system|geological system]] that depends more on [[Catastrophism|catastrophism]]<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/geologic-record</ref> and point out that catastrophism is being increasingly accepted in the field of geology.<ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/12061.htm</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref>
== Astronomy ==
[[Image:NGC .jpg|right|thumb|350px|The majestic spiral [[galaxy]] ''NGC 4414'', imaged by the [[Hubble Space Telescope]] in 1995.]]
The young earth creationism view is that the various astronomical bodies such as [[planet]]s, [[star]]s, and [[galaxy|galaxies]] were supernaturally created and that [[Materialism|materialistic]] explanations of the the origins of various astronomical bodies are insufficient and counter evidence.<ref>Brown, 1991, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences.html Astronomical and Physical Sciences]; Sarfati, 1999, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3836 Chapter 7].</ref> In addition, creationists often cite the secular scientific literature in order to make the case that materialist explanations of various astronomical bodies are inadequate:
{{cquote|...most every prediction by theorists about planetary formation has been wrong.<ref>Scott Tremaine, as quoted by Richard A. Kerr, “Jupiters Like Our Own Await Planet Hunters,” Science, Vol. 295, 25 January 2002, p. 605, quoted by [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes42.html Brown, 2001, notes for chapter 43].</ref>}}
{{cquote|Attempts to find a plausible naturalistic explanation of the origin of the [[Solar System]] began about 350 years ago but have not yet been quantitatively successful, making this one of the oldest unsolved problems in modern science.<ref>Stephen G. Brush, A History of Modern Planetary Physics, Vol. 3 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996, p. 91, quoted by [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes42.html Brown, 2001, notes for chapter 43]).</ref>}}
{{cquote|We don’t understand how a single star forms, yet we want to understand how 10 billion stars form.<ref>Carlos Frenk, as quoted by Robert Irion, “Surveys Scour the Cosmic Deep,” Science, Vol. 303, 19 March 2004, p. 1750, quoted by Brown, 1991, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes59.html Notes for chapter 61]</ref>}}
{{cquote|We cannot even show convincingly how galaxies, stars, planets, and life arose in the present universe.<ref>Michael Rowan-Robinson, “Review of the Accidental Universe,” New Scientist, Vol. 97, 20 January 1983, p. 186, quoted by Brown, 1991, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes59.html Notes for chapter 62].</ref>}}
In the 20th century, many religious groups abandoned (Young Earth) creationism as a literal description of the Earth's history altogether and came to regard the biblical account of creation in [[Genesis]] as purely allegorical or mythological.{{Fact|date=April 2008}}
In 2001, Cristina Chiappini wrote regarding the [[Milky Way]] galaxy the following:
:". . . it is an elegant structure that shows both order and complexity. . . . The end product is especially remarkable in the light of what is believed to be the starting point: nebulous blobs of gas. How the universe made the Milky Way from such simple beginnings is not altogether clear. - Cristina Chiappini, "The Formation and Evolution of the Milky Way," [[American Scientist]] (vol. 89, Nov./Dec. 2001), p. 506. <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/547/</ref>
Dr. [[Walt Brown]] provides numerous citations to the secular science literature that corroborate the failings of current old universe paradigm explanations in regards to the planets, stars, and galaxies.<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes43.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes60.html#wp1142334</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes61.html#wp1212721</ref>
The [[Institute for Creation Research]] has a notable essay by David Coppedge entitled "Mature at Birth: Universe Discredits Evolution" which cites recent findings which challenge an old universe paradigm.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/2946/</ref> In addition, [[Henry Morris]] has an essay regarding the subject of the failings of the old universe paradigm entitled "What Astronomers Don't Know". <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/547/</ref>
Young earth creationist scientists also contest the [[Big Bang theory]] stating that it is scientifically unsound.
<ref name="BB Critique">Thompson, Bert, Harrub, Brad, and May, Branyon [http://www.apologeticspress.org/modules.php?name=Read&cat=1&itemid=22 The Big Bang Theory—A Scientific Critique] ''Apologetics Press'', May 2003 - 23[5]:32-34,36-47.</ref>
<ref>Brown, Walt, 2001, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html Big Bang?]</ref> <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/309</ref> <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2047</ref> <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/343/</ref>
=== Starlight and the Age of the Universe ===
{{main|Starlight problem}}
[[Image:Barry_setterfield.jpg|right|thumb|175px|[[Barry Setterfield]]]]
Anti-creationists often claim that [[star|starlight]] from millions of light years away demonstrates that the Biblical timescale of 6,000 years is in error, as insufficient time has passed for the light from distant stars to reach [[Earth]].
Creationists respond in part by pointing out that the popular Big Bang theory has its own star light-travel time problem (the horizon problem), citing the work of Dr. [[Charles W. Misner]]. <ref>Lisle, Jason, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/167/ Light-travel time: a problem for the big bang], Creation 25(4):48–49, September 2003.</ref>
Secondly, creationists have proposed a number of explanations for the objection, and although none are yet certain, they claim that it shows that the critics' claims that it cannot be explained is unfounded.
==== Setterfield's decay of the speed of light ====
One early explanation was that of creationist [[Barry Setterfield]], who proposed that the speed of light was faster in the past.<ref>Wieland, Carl, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2551/ Speed of light slowing down after all?], Journal of Creation 16(3):7–10, December 2002.</ref>.
Critics objected to Setterfield's proposal, including on the grounds that the constancy of the speed of light is one of science's most fundamental laws.<ref name="JS">Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2430/ Have fundamental constants changed, and what would it prove?], 22nd August, 2001.</ref>
Yet in 1999, John Webb, a professor at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, and his colleagues reported astronomical observations suggesting that the value of the fine-structure constant (which is related to the speed of light) may have changed (although the size of the change was much smaller than proposed by Setterfield).
They subsequently published this in 2001 in ''[[Physical Review Letters]]''.<ref>http://www.nature.com/physics/highlights/6849-3.html#ref1</ref><ref name="JS" />
However, other problems with the proposal has led most creationists to abandon the idea.<ref>For example, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2996#c_decay CMI] and [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp#c_decay AiG] say that this is an idea that should not be used.</ref>
==== Russell Humphreys' model ====
Creationary physicist Dr. [[Russell Humphreys]] proposed a model based on [[Albert Einstein|Einstein's]] law of relativity (as the Big Bang model is), but with a different starting assumption, a bounded universe.
Humphreys' model proposes that God created the universe much smaller than it is now, then expanded it, quoting the Bible saying that God "stretched out the heavens".
In such a scenario, time would pass at different rates on Earth and in outer parts of the universe, so that while 6,000 years went by on Earth, billions of years passed on the outer edge of the universe.
This model is also based on the [[Genesis]] account recording the days of creation according to time on Earth, rather than elsewhere.
==== John Hartnett's model ====
Young earth creationist scientist Dr. [[John Hartnett]] proposes a model similar to Humphreys, wherein the Earth was trapped in a time-dilation field caused by extremely strong gravitation during the first few days of creation, from Earth's point of view, while billions of years passed for the rest of the universe.
He attributes the field, it's removal and the continued balance in our solar system (after the field was removed) to divine intervention. <ref>Hartnett, John G., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j17_2/j17_2_98-102.pdf A new cosmology: solution to the starlight travel time problem] ''Journal of Creation'' 17(2):98–102, August 2003.</ref>
Whilst Humphreys' model has time dilation caused only by gravity (per [[Albert Einstein|Einstein's]] [[General Theory of Relativity]]), Hartnett's model also takes into account time dilation caused by motion (God's expansion of the universe) (per Einstein's [[Special Theory of Relativity]]).
===Oriental Orthodox Church===
== Biology ==
According to young-Earth creationists, God separately created each ''kind'' of living thing, or ''[[baraminology|baramin]]'', to reproduce "after its kind".
Living things had built into them a capacity for variation and adaptation, but within the limits of their ''kind''.
Genetically, in the case of sexually-reproducing species, much this is due to the [[information]] carried on each living thing's [[DNA]] being a subset of the parent's DNA, with the subset of information being selected for by the process known as natural selection (described by a creationist before Darwin wrote about it).
Mutations also play a part in this variation, but only to the extent of ''destroying'' genetic information, not ''creating'' it.
Many of the ensuing variations have been classified by science as different ''species'', but this speciation is not evolution, as it does not involve the generation of new genetic information and therefore could not have produced the evolutionary "family tree".
YECs believe that most of the world's living things were wiped out by the [[Great Flood]], but that pairs of each ''kind'' that could not survive in a flood (i.e. air-breathing, land-dwelling creatures) survived the flood on [[Noah's Ark]], and from the Flood survivors all modern species have descended.
YECs believe that the Earth is "young", on the order of 6,000 to 10,000 years old,<ref>[http://www.earthage.org/youngearthev/evidence_for_a_young_earth.htm Evidence for a young Earth]</ref> rather than the [[Age of the Earth|age of 4.6 billion years]] calculated by modern [[geology]] using [[geochronology|geochronological]] methods including [[radiometric dating]]. YECs typically derive their range of figures using the ages given in the [[genealogies of Genesis|genealogies]] and other dates in the [[Bible]], similar to the process used by [[James Ussher]] (1581–1656), [[Church of Ireland Archbishop of Armagh]] and [[Primate of All Ireland]], when he dated creation at [[5th millennium BC|4004 BC]]. [[Ussher chronology|Ussher's chronology]], published in 1650, has been subsequently revised many times, most recently in 2003 by Larry and Marion Pierce.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i1/archbishop.asp|title=Archbishop’s achievement|publisher=[[Answers in Genesis]]|author=Jonathan Sarfati}}</ref>
== Geology ==
YECs believe that most rocks were laid down in two main episodes.
The first was in creation week, particularly when God caused the waters of the Earth to gather together into the sea and dry land to appear.
The second was during Noah's Flood.
The effects of a global watery catastrophe would have been enormous, with massive amounts of erosion and sedimentation.
Further, many young-Earth creationists believe that there was a single supercontinent prior to the Flood, which broke up during the Flood.
This would have further contributed to a massive reshaping of the Earth's surface.
== Anthropology ==
{{main|Biblical anthropology}}
YECs challenge the [[methodological naturalism]] of the [[scientific method]], which they conflate with [[philosophical naturalism]], and [[uniformitarianism (science)|uniformitarianism]] as the dominant principles of the scientific community. They assert instead that available physical evidence best supports original catastrophism and a young Earth. See [[Creation-evolution controversy]] for a more complete discussion.
YECs believe that all intact evidence of civilisation is evidence of post-flood civilisation, as the [[Global flood|Flood]] destroyed the pre-flood world.
God confounded man's single language at the [[Tower of Babel]], forcing different family groups to separate and spread around the world.
Most of the people groups listed in the 'Table of Nations' in {{Bible ref|Genesis|10}}, which contains a family tree of Noah's descendants, are identifiable from non-biblical records.
People enduring a forced migration will find any shelter they can, and this would explain much of the evidence of "cavemen".
=== View of the Bible ===
== Contrasted with evolution ==
The young earth creationism view contrasts with evolution and other aspects of the old universe view in the following ways:
* According to the [[chronogenealogies]] in the Bible, the age of the [[universe]] and [[Earth]] is approximately 6,000 years. The old universe view is that the universe started about 14,000 million years ago, and Earth was formed around 4,500 million years ago.
* The creation account has everything being created over a period of six ordinary days, whereas the old universe view has things appearing over billions of years.
* The order of creation is different. The creation account has the Earth before the sun, plants before the sun, and birds before land animals, among other differences. The old universe view is the opposite order for each of these.
* The creation account records that death didn't exist prior to the [[Fall of man|Fall]], whereas the evolutionary view is that death and suffering are part of the biological process and existed for billions of years of death prior to the appearance of [[homo sapiens|man]].
* The creation account records various living things being separately created, whereas the evolutionary view has all living things being descended from the first living cell.
=== Interpretation of Genesis ===
== Responses to criticisms ==
Young Earth creationist responses to criticisms from atheistic evolutionists, theistic evolutionists, progressive creationists, and others include the following:
* ''The young Earth view is just one interpretation of the Bible.''
: The young Earth view is the clear intention of the authors of the Bible. See [[Creation week]] for more. Also, the young Earth view was the view of most of the church throughout most of its history. That has only changed in order to accommodate non-biblical views of history.
* ''Creationists read the Bible literally, whereas parts, such as the creation account, are really metaphor.''
: Creationists reject that they read all the Bible literally, and accept that there is metaphor an other non-literal passages in the Bible. Instead, they read the Bible the way it was meant to be understood, which in the case of the creation account, is as literal history. See [[#Biblical exegesis|Biblical exegesis]] above and [[Creation week]] for more.
* ''Evolution has scientific evidence, and creationism does not.''
: Both creationists and evolutionists have the same evidence. The difference is in how that evidence is interpreted.
* ''Creation relies on faith, not evidence.''
: Both creation and evolution are faith positions based on different worldviews. Evolutionists exclude God from consideration ''a priori'', not because of the evidence.
* ''If creation had scientific merit, why don't they publish their evidence in peer-reviewed scientific papers?''
: The scientific establishment won't allow creationists to publish. See [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]].
* ''Creationists start with a preconception and try and fit the evidence to that. Evolutionists start with the evidence.''
: Both creationists and evolutionists have their worldview as a starting point. Evolutionists try and fit the evidence into their idea just as much as they accuse the creationists of doing.
* ''Because they are based on the Bible, creationists are not willing to change their views. Evolutionists will change their views as new evidence is found.''
: Creationists start with the Bible as the foundation of their views, but beyond that are willing to change their views as new evidence is found. Evolutionists are willing to change the details of how evolution works, but are not prepared to change their basic view that evolution did occur.
* ''Creationists are anti-science.''
: Many creationists are scientists and fully support science. They never reject science itself, and the criticism is bogus.
== Arguments for a recent creation ==
{{main|Arguments for a recent creation}}
[[Image:Roth-01.gif|right|thumb|350px|The arrows point to [[Paraconformity|paraconformities]] at the [[Grand Canyon]].]]
Many arguments for a recent creation have been put forward by creationary scientists, both scientific and theological arguments.
Scientific arguments include [[radiometric dating]] results that disagree with secular ages, other dating methods that do not fit with secular ages, and phenomenon showing events that occurred quickly.
There should be no <sup>14</sup>C present in carbon supposedly older than 100,000 years, yet it has proved impossible to find any such carbon without <sup>14</sup>C.
Dating methods don't have to be based on radioactivity.
Measuring the amount of [[sodium]] in sea water, for example, and calculating how long it would take to reach those levels is another method.
Yet calculations show that the amount of sodium could not have taken longer than 62 million years to accumulate, well short of the 3,000 million year supposed age of the oceans.
[[Polystrate fossil]]s demonstrate that many layers of [[sedimentary]] rock that are normally supposed to take a long time to form can be formed quite quickly.
=== Animal behavior ===
== Adherents of Young Earth Creationism ==
Young Earth Creationism is a subset of [[Creationism]] most commonly found among members of the [[Abrahamic religion]]s, especially [[Judaism]], [[Christianity]], and [[Islam]] (for details please see: [[Creationism]]). In regards to early Judaism and early Christianity,
early [[Judaism]] supported young earth creationism and a majority of the early [[church fathers]] held the young earth creationist view.<ref>
* James-Griffiths, James,[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i2/tradition.asp Creation days and Orthodox Jewish tradition] ''Creation'' 26(2):53–55, March 2004.
* Bradshaw, Robert I., [http://www.robibrad.demon.co.uk/Chapter3.htm Creationism & the Early Church, chapter 3, The Days of Genesis 1]
* http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/tjv16v2_forster.pdf</ref>
== Organizations and publications ==
=== Diversification of life ===
=== Organizations ===
Some of the more notable young earth creationist organizations include: [[Answers in Genesis]] (America and the United Kingdom), [[Creation Ministries International]] (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, U.S.A., and United Kingdom), [[Institute for Creation Research]] (U.S.A.), [[Creation Research Society]] (U.S.A.), and [[NorthWest Creation Network]] (Washington state, U.S.A.) which founded [[CreationWiki]].
=== Palaeontology and dinosaurs ===
=== Magazines and newsletters ===
The term "dinosaur" was first used by [[Richard Owen]] in 1842. As it is a modern coinage derived from Greek, the Bible does not use the word "dinosaur", but the [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]] word ''tanniyn'' ({{IPA|/tan·ˈnin/}}) has been interpreted as referring to them by some Christians.<ref name="clarifying">{{cite web|url=http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/dinos.shtml|title=Dinosaurs and the Bible|publisher=Clarifying Christianity'|year=2005|accessdate=2007-03-14}}</ref> In English translations, ''tanniyn'' may be translated as “sea monster” or “serpent”, but it is usually translated as “dragon”. These creatures are mentioned close to thirty times in the [[Old Testament]], where they are encountered both on land and in the water.
The Institute for Creation Research publishes a free monthly magazine, ''Acts & Facts'', which includes news of the organization and articles.
Creation Ministries International publishes a 56-page colour magazine, ''Creation'', with no paid advertising, which is distributed to 140 countries.<ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3871/97</ref>
Answers in Genesis, which previously distributed ''Creation'', began their own magazine, ''Answers'', in 2006. It contains advertising and its target audience is primarily American.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am</ref>
=== Peer-reviewed journals ===
The [[Creation Research Society Quarterly]] is published quarterly by the Creation Research Society,<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq.html</ref> and the Journal of Creation is published three times a year by Creation Ministries International.<ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3873/98</ref>
==Further Reading==
*[[Duane Gish]], ''Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No!'', El Cajon: [[Institute for Creation Research]], 1996 <ref>http://www.icr.org/store/index.php?main_page=pubs_product_book_info&products_id=2176</ref>
*[[Jonathan Sarfati]], ''Refuting Evolution'', Master Books, 1999 [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4014/ (Free on-line version)]
*Jonathan Sarfati, ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Master Books, 2002, ISBN 0890513872 [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4013/ (Free on-line version)]
*[[R.L. Wysong]], ''The Creation-Evolution Controversy''.<ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/05105.htm</ref><ref>http://www.wysong.net/page/WOTTPWS/PROD/EDUAIDS/ED022-S</ref>
*[[Phillip E. Johnson|Phillip Johnson]], ''Darwin on Trial''. InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois. 1991 <ref>http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/darwin.html</ref>
*[[R. C. Sproul]], ''Not a Chance: The Myth of Chance in Modern Science and Cosmology'', Baker Book House: 1994 <ref>http://www.ldolphin.org/chance.html</ref><ref>http://store.apologeticsgroup.com/product_info.php?products_id=191</ref>
* [[Walt Brown]], ''In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood'', 7th Edition, 2001 [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/IntheBeginningTOC.html (free online version)]
== External Links ==
Young earth creationism websites:
*[http://www.answersingenesis.org Answers in Genesis]
*[http://www.creationontheweb.com/ Creation Ministries International]
*[http://www.icr.org Institute for Creation Research]
*[http://edinburghcreationgroup Edinburgh Creation Group]
*[http://trueorigins.org TrueOrigins.org]
*[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/index.html Center for Scientific Creation]
*[http://www.allaboutcreation.org/ AllAboutCreation.org]
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/ageyoung.html Biblical Young Earth Creationism]
Articles focusing on arguments for a young earth:
*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/feedback/2006/0303.asp What are the most compelling evidences of a young earth - AiG]
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/young.html Evidence Supporting a Recent Creation - Northwest Creation Network]
*[http://www.icr.org/article/1842/ Evidence for a Young World - Institute for Creation Research]
Videos focusing on arguments for a young earth:
*http://edinburghcreationgroup.org/youngearth.php Evidence for a Young Earth - Dr Marc Surtees
== See also ==
== See also ==
*[[Creation Science]]
*[[Christianity and Science]]
*[[History of Young Earth Creationism]]
* [[Antediluvian]]
*[[List of Young Earth Creationists]]
* [[Biblical cosmology]]
*[[Earth Age Opinions of Prominent Christians - Pre-1800]]
* [[Cosmogony]]
=== Alternative views===
* [[Cosmological argument]]
*[[Old Earth Creationism]]
* [[Creator god]]
*[[Theistic evolution]]
*[[Theory of Evolution]]
* [[Day-Age Creationism]]
*[[Gap theory]]
* [[Deism]]
*[[Day age creationism]]
* [[Elohim]]
*[[Progressive Creationism]]
* [[Gap Creationism]]
* [[Higher criticism]]
* [[History of Creationism]]
==References==
== References ==
{{reflist|2}}
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Creationism]]
[[Category:Abrahamic Religions]]
[[Category:Young Earth creationism|*]]
[[Category:Creation science]]
[[ar:نظرية خلق الأرض الفتية]]