Young Earth Creationism

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Conservative (Talk | contribs) at 00:05, March 25, 2007. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search

Young Earth Creationism is the belief that the earth and the universe is approximately 6,000 years old, as opposed to the scientific view that the earth is approximately 4.6 billion years old. [1] [2] Young Earth Creationism is a subset of Creationism most commonly found among members of the Abrahamic faiths, especially Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Most young earth creationists believe that the book of Genesis is a straightforward narrative meant to be interpreted in a nearly literal fashion. Thus, young earth creationists believe that the universe was created by God. Young earth creationists scientists reject naturalistic explanations on the origins of the galaxies, stars, planets, and life first arose in the present universe. [3][4][5] In addition, young earth creationists frequently cite the scientific literature which admits the weaknesses of naturalistic explanations for origins of the natural world. For example, the following material is cited by young earth creationists:


““...most every prediction by theorists about planetary formation has been wrong.” Scott Tremaine, as quoted by Richard A. Kerr, “Jupiters Like Our Own Await Planet Hunters,” Science, Vol. 295, 25 January 2002, p. 605.[6]


“We don’t understand how a single star forms, yet we want to understand how 10 billion stars form.” Carlos Frenk, as quoted by Robert Irion, “Surveys Scour the Cosmic Deep,” Science, Vol. 303, 19 March 2004, p. 1750. [7]


“We cannot even show convincingly how galaxies, stars, planets, and life arose in the present universe.” Michael Rowan-Robinson, “Review of the Accidental Universe,” New Scientist, Vol. 97, 20 January 1983, p. 186. [8]


"When discussing organic evolution the only point of agreement seems to be: `It happened.' Thereafter, there is little consensus, which at first sight must seem rather odd." (Conway Morris, Simon [palaeontologist, Department of Earth Sciences, Cambridge University, UK], "Evolution: Bringing Molecules into the Fold," _Cell,_ Vol. 100, pp.1-11, January 7, 2000, p.1)[9][10]


Also, young earth creationists believe that the book of Genesis is historical in nature and that Bible exegesis warrants a 6 day creation with each day being 24 hours,[11][12][13]. Similarly, young earth creationist believe in the subsequent expulsion of humanity from the Garden of Eden, a global Noachian flood and the dispersal of humanity after the Tower of Babel. Young earth creationist scientists have a number of arguments that the earth and universe is approximately 6,000 years old. [14][15][16] Similarly, young earth creationist scientists have a number of arguments against the arguments that claim to show an extremely old age for the earth and the universe. [17][18][19]

Traditionally, Judaism supported young earth creationism. [20] In addition, a majority of the early church fathers supported the young earth creationist view. [21] While Young Earth Creationism is prominent in many conservative Protestant and Jewish denominations, theologically liberal Protestant and Jewish denominations as well as Roman Catholics generally reject it.

Popularity and Scientific Community Consensus

Roughly 47% of the United States population believes man was created by God pretty much in his present form less than 10,000 years ago (which is one tenet of Young Earth Creationism) and this number has stayed roughly constant for the last 20 years. [22][23] In 1997 in the United States there was a Gallup poll done among scientists showing that 55% believed that man developed over a period of millions of years from less developed forms of life and that God had no part in the process, 40% believed in Theistic Evolution, and 5% of scientists believed that God created man fairly much in his current form at one time within the last 10,000 years. [24]

According to creationist scientists community, there is widespread discrimination against creationist scientists. [25] This is not surprising given that a poll among United States scientists showed approximately 45% of scientists believed there was no God.[26] In addition, a survey found that 93% of the scientists who were members of the United States National Academy of Sciences do not believe there is a God.[27] Given this state of affairs, a future paradigm shift from the macroevolutionary position to a young earth creationist position may be slow given the worldviews of many scientists.

However, the current scientific community consensus is no guarantee of truth. The history of science shows many examples where the scientific community consensus was in error or currently has little or no empirical basis. For example, bloodletting was practiced from antiquity and still had many practioners up until the late 1800s. [28] Also, in regards to medical science, Richard Smith wrote in a 1991 British Medical Journal article the following: "Yet only about 15% of medical interventions are supported by solid scientific evidence, David Eddy professor of health policy and management at Duke University, told a conference in Manchester last week. This is partly because only 1% of the articles in medical journals are scientifically sound and partly because many treatments have never been assessed at all."[29] Another example where the current scientific consensus was wrong was that alchemy was at one time considered to be important science and was studied by such notable individuals as Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Roger Bacon, and Gottfried Leibniz.[30]

In addition, creationists can point out examples where the scientific community was in error and the Bible was clearly correct. For example, up until the 1970's the scientific communities consensus on how lions killed their prey was in error and it appears as if the Bible turned out to be right in this matter. [31] Also, for centuries the scientific community believed that snakes could not hear and the 1988 edition of The New Encyclopedia Britannica stated the snakes could not hear but that was mistaken and is appears as if the Bible was correct in this matter. [32] Many Young Earth Creationists believe that the Bible has many examples of showing an understanding of scientific knowledge beyond that believed to exist at the time it was written.[33][34]

External Links

See also

References

  1. http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3837
  2. http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3836
  3. http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp
  4. http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/21
  5. http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences.html
  6. http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes43.html
  7. http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes60.html
  8. http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes61.html
  9. http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/quotes/cequc001.html
  10. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WSN-4195FC1-1&_user=681891&_coverDate=01%2F07%2F2000&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000037419&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=681891&md5=1806889a6d57f9282db2e4c04d32e8f7
  11. http://creationwiki.org/Days_of_creation
  12. http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp
  13. http://www.icr.org/article/164/
  14. http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp
  15. http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp
  16. http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3040/
  17. http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dating.asp
  18. http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp
  19. http://www.apologeticspress.org/modules.php?name=Read&cat=1&itemid=22
  20. http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i2/tradition.asp
  21. http://www.robibrad.demon.co.uk/Chapter3.htm
  22. http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/news/2004/US/724_public_view_of_creationism_and_11_19_2004.asp
  23. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/24/AR2005092401262.html
  24. http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm#earth
  25. http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v9/i2/suppression.asp
  26. http://www.ovpr.uga.edu/researchnews/97su/faith.html
  27. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v394/n6691/full/394313a0.html
  28. http://elane.stanford.edu/wilson/Text/5d.html
  29. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=1932964&query_hl=6&itool=pubmed_docsum
  30. http://www.levity.com/alchemy/caezza4.html
  31. http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BLions87.htm
  32. http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BCobra94.htm
  33. http://creationwiki.org/index.php?title=Scientific_Foreknowledge
  34. http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i1/medicine.asp