SUPPORT THE WORK

GetWiki

Creationism

ARTICLE SUBJECTS
aesthetics  →
being  →
complexity  →
database  →
enterprise  →
ethics  →
fiction  →
history  →
internet  →
knowledge  →
language  →
licensing  →
linux  →
logic  →
method  →
news  →
perception  →
philosophy  →
policy  →
purpose  →
religion  →
science  →
sociology  →
software  →
truth  →
unix  →
wiki  →
ARTICLE TYPES
essay  →
feed  →
help  →
system  →
wiki  →
ARTICLE ORIGINS
critical  →
discussion  →
forked  →
imported  →
original  →
Creationism
[ temporary import ]
please note:
- the content below is remote from Wikipedia
- it has been imported raw for GetWiki
{{Hatnote|"Creationism" can also refer to creation myths, or to an unrelated concept about the origin of the soul.}}{{For|the movement in Spanish literature|Creacionismo}}{{pp-protect|small=yes}}{{short description|religious belief}}{{Creationism2}}Creationism is the religious belief that the universe and life originated "from specific acts of divine creation",Gunn 2004, p. 9, "The Concise Oxford Dictionary says that creationism is 'the belief that the universe and living organisms originated from specific acts of divine creation.'"BOOK, Olivier, Brosseau, Marc, Silberstein, Evolutionism(s) and Creationism(s), Thomas, Heams, Philippe, Huneman, Guillaume, Lecointre, Marc, Silberstein., Handbook of Evolutionary Thinking in the Sciences, 881–96, Springer, Dordrecht, 2015,weblink harv, 9789401790147, as opposed to through natural processes, such as evolution.WEB,weblink creationism: definition of creationism in Oxford dictionary (American English) (US), Oxford Dictionaries, Oxford University Press, Oxford, Definition, 656668849, The belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution., 2014-03-05, Creationism covers a spectrum of views including evolutionary creationism,{{citation needed|reason=We need a reliable source which explicitly says that creationism "covers" the evolutionary creationism and/or other views.|date=January 2019}} but the term is commonly used for literal creationists who reject various aspects of science, and instead promote pseudoscientific beliefs. Literal creationists base their beliefs on a fundamentalist reading of religious texts, including the creation myths found in Genesis and the Quran.NEWS, Chang, Kenneth, Creationism, Without a Young Earth, Emerges in the Islamic World,weblink The New York Times, November 2, 2009, en, WEB, al-Azami, Usaama, Muslims and Evolution in the 21st Century: A Galileo Moment?,weblink Huffington Post Religion Blog, 19 February 2013, 2013-02-14, For young Earth creationists, these beliefs are based on a literalist interpretation of the Genesis creation narrative and rejection of the scientific theory of evolution.Haarsma 2010, p. 168, "Some Christians, often called 'Young Earth creationists,' reject evolution in order to maintain a semi-literal interpretation of certain biblical passages. Other Christians, called 'progressive creationists,' accept the scientific evidence for some evolution over a long history of the earth, but also insist that God must have performed some miracles during that history to create new life-forms. Intelligent design, as it is promoted in North America is a form of progressive creation. Still other Christians, called 'theistic evolutionists' or 'evolutionary creationists,' assert that the scientific theory of evolution and the religious beliefs of Christianity can both be true." Literalist creationists believe that evolution cannot adequately account for the history, diversity, and complexity of life on Earth.NEWS,weblink Academics fight rise of creationism at universities, Campbell, Duncan, February 20, 2006, Guardian Media Group, The Guardian, London, 2010-04-07, The first use of the term "creationist" to describe a proponent of creationism is found in an 1856 letter of Charles Darwin describing those who objected on religious grounds to the then emerging science of evolution.WEB,weblink Darwin, C. R. to Hooker, J. D., Darwin, Charles, Charles Darwin, July 5, 1856, Correspondence of Charles Darwin#Darwin Correspondence Project website, Darwin Correspondence Project, Cambridge University Library, Cambridge, UK, Letter 1919, 2010-08-11,
  • WEB,weblink Darwin, C. R. to Gray, Asa, Darwin, Charles, May 31, 1863, Darwin Correspondence Project, Cambridge University Library, Cambridge, UK, Letter 4196, 2010-08-11,

Biblical basis

The basis for many creationists' beliefs is a literal or quasi-literal interpretation of the Old Testament, especially from stories from the book of Genesis:
  • The Genesis creation narrative (Genesis 1–2) describes how God brings the Universe into being in a series of creative acts over six days and places the first man and woman (Adam and Eve) in a divine garden (the Garden of Eden). This story is the basis of creationist cosmology and biology.
  • The Genesis flood narrative (Genesis 6–9) tells how God destroys the world and all life through a great flood, saving representatives of each form of life by means of Noah's ark. This forms the basis of creationist geology, better known as flood geology.
A further important element is the interpretation of the Biblical chronology, the elaborate system of life-spans, "generations," and other means by which the Bible measures the passage of events from the creation (Genesis 1:1) to the Book of Daniel, the last biblical book in which it appears. Recent decades have seen attempts to de-link creationism from the Bible and recast it as science; these include creation science and intelligent design.Richard F. Carlson, Tremper Longman III, Science, Creation and the Bible: Reconciling Rival Theories of Origins, p.25 There are also non-Christian forms of creationism,WEB,weblink Creationism and intelligent design, 2 June 2009, 2 October 2018, BBC, notably Islamic creationismNEWS,weblink Creationism, Minus a Young Earth, Emerges in the Islamic World, Kenneth, Chang, 2 November 2009, 2 October 2018, NY Times, The New York Times Company, and Hindu creationism.NEWS,weblink Darwinism, through a Chinese lens, Riazat, Butt, 16 November 2009, 2 October 2018, The Guardian, Guardian News and Media Limited,

Types

Several attempts have been made to categorize the different types of creationism, and create a "taxonomy" of creationists.JOURNAL, Scott, Eugenie C., Eugenie Scott, July–August 1999, The Creation/Evolution Continuum,weblink Reports of the National Center for Science Education, 19, 4, 16–17, 23–25, 2158-818X, 2014-03-14, JOURNAL, Wise, Donald U., January 2001, Creationism's Propaganda Assault on Deep Time and Evolution,weblink Journal of Geoscience Education, 49, 1, 30–35, 1089-9995, 2014-03-09, 2001JGeEd..49...30W, 10.5408/1089-9995-49.1.30, JOURNAL, Ross, Marcus R., Marcus R. Ross, May 2005, Who Believes What? Clearing up Confusion over Intelligent Design and Young-Earth Creationism,weblink PDF, Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 3, 319–323, 1089-9995, 2014-03-09, 2005JGeEd..53..319R, 10.5408/1089-9995-53.3.319, 10.1.1.404.1340, Creationism (broadly construed) covers a spectrum of beliefs which have been categorized into the general types listed below.{| class="wikitable"|+ Comparison of major creationist views!!Humanity!Biological species!Earth!Age of Universe
! Young Earth creationism
Directly created by God. Directly created by God. Macroevolution does not occur.|Less than 10,000 years old. Reshaped by global flood.|Less than 10,000 years old, but some hold this view only for our Solar System.
! Gap creationism|Scientifically accepted age. Reshaped by global flood.|Scientifically accepted age.
! Progressive creationism|Directly created by God, based on primate anatomy.|Direct creation + evolution. No single common ancestor.|Scientifically accepted age. No global flood.|Scientifically accepted age.
! Intelligent design|Proponents hold various beliefs. (For example, Michael Behe accepts evolution from primates.)
Miracle>Divine intervention at some point in the past, as evidenced by what intelligent-design creationists call "irreducible complexity."|Some adherents accept common descent, others not. Some claim the existence of Earth is the result of divine intervention.|Scientifically accepted age.
! Theistic evolution (evolutionary creationism)|Evolution from primates.|Evolution from single common ancestor.|Scientifically accepted age. No global flood.|Scientifically accepted age.

Young Earth creationism

File:ICR building.jpg|thumb|right|The Institute for Creation ResearchInstitute for Creation ResearchYoung Earth creationists such as Ken Ham and Doug Phillips believe that God created the Earth within the last ten thousand years, literally as described in the Genesis creation narrative, within the approximate time-frame of biblical genealogies (detailed for example in the Ussher chronology). Most young Earth creationists believe that the universe has a similar age as the Earth. A few assign a much older age to the universe than to Earth. Creationist cosmologies give the universe an age consistent with the Ussher chronology and other young Earth time frames. Other young Earth creationists believe that the Earth and the universe were created with the appearance of age, so that the world appears to be much older than it is, and that this appearance is what gives the geological findings and other methods of dating the Earth and the universe their much longer timelines.The Christian organizations Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and the Creation Research Society (CRS) both promote young Earth creationism in the US. Another organization with similar views, Answers in Genesis (AiG)—based in both the U.S. and the United Kingdom—has opened the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, to promote young Earth creationism. Creation Ministries International promotes young Earth views in Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand, the US, and the UK. Among Roman Catholics, the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation promotes similar ideas. In 2007, Ken Ham founded the Creation Museum and Ark Encounter in northern Kentucky.

Old Earth creationism

Old Earth creationism holds that the physical universe was created by God, but that the creation event described in the Book of Genesis is to be taken figuratively. This group generally believes that the age of the universe and the age of the Earth are as described by astronomers and geologists, but that details of modern evolutionary theory are questionable.Old Earth creationism itself comes in at least three types:

Gap creationism

Gap creationism, also called "restoration creationism," holds that life was recently created on a pre-existing old Earth. This version of creationism relies on a particular interpretation of {{Bibleverse|Genesis|1:1–2|KJV}}. It is considered that the words formless and void in fact denote waste and ruin, taking into account the original Hebrew and other places these words are used in the Old Testament. Genesis 1:1–2 is consequently translated:
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Original act of creation.) "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
Thus, the six days of creation (verse 3 onwards) start sometime after the Earth was "without form and void." This allows an indefinite "gap" of time to be inserted after the original creation of the universe, but prior to the creation according to Genesis, (when present biological species and humanity were created). Gap theorists can therefore agree with the scientific consensus regarding the age of the Earth and universe, while maintaining a literal interpretation of the biblical text.Some{{which|date=November 2013}} gap creationists expand the basic version of creationism by proposing a "primordial creation" of biological life within the "gap" of time. This is thought to be "the world that then was" mentioned in 2 Peter 3:3–7.{{Bibleverse|2 Peter|3|KJV}} Discoveries of fossils and archaeological ruins older than 10,000 years are generally ascribed to this "world that then was," which may also be associated with Lucifer's rebellion. These views became popular with publications of Hebrew Lexicons such as Strong's Concordance, and Bible commentaries such as the Scofield Reference Bible and The Companion Bible.{{citation needed|date=November 2013}}

Day-age creationism

Day-age creationism states that the "six days" of the Book of Genesis are not ordinary 24-hour days, but rather much longer periods (for instance, each "day" could be the equivalent of millions, or billions of years of human time). The physicist Gerald Schroeder is one such proponent of this view. This version of creationism often states that the Hebrew word "yôm," in the context of Genesis 1, can be properly interpreted as "age."Strictly speaking, day-age creationism is not so much a version of creationism as a hermeneutic option which may be combined with other versions of creationism such as progressive creationism.{{Citation needed|date=January 2017}}

Progressive creationism

Progressive creationism holds that species have changed or evolved in a process continuously guided by God, with various ideas as to how the process operated—though it is generally taken that God directly intervened in the natural order at key moments in Earth history. This view accepts most of modern physical science including the age of the Earth, but rejects much of modern evolutionary biology or looks to it for evidence that evolution by natural selection alone is incorrect.{{Citation needed|date=June 2009}} Organizations such as Reasons To Believe, founded by Hugh Ross, promote this version of creationism.Progressive creationism can be held in conjunction with hermeneutic approaches to the Genesis creation narrative such as the day-age creationism or framework/metaphoric/poetic views.

Philosophic and scientific creationism

Creation science

Creation science, or initially scientific creationism, is a pseudoscienceJOURNAL, 2267227, 18059309, 10.1038/sj.embor.7401131, 8, 12, Taking on creationism. Which arguments and evidence counter pseudoscience?, December 2007, EMBO Rep., 1107–9, Greener, M, NAS 1999, p. R9{{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/*weblink |date=* |title=Amicus Curiae Brief Of 72 Nobel Laureates, 17 State Academies Of Science, And 7 Other Scientific Organizations }}, Edwards v. AguillardBOOK, Sahotra Sarkar, Jessica Pfeifer, The Philosophy of science: an encyclopedia. A-M,weblink 2006, Psychology Press, 978-0-415-93927-0, 194, Okasha 2002, p. 127. Okasha's full statement is that "virtually all professional biologists regard creation science as a sham{{snd}}a dishonest and misguided attempt to promote religious beliefs under the guise of science, with extremely harmful educational consequences." that emerged in the 1960s with proponents aiming to have young Earth creationist beliefs taught in school science classes as a counter to teaching of evolution. Common features of creation science argument include: creationist cosmologies which accommodate a universe on the order of thousands of years old, criticism of radiometric dating through a technical argument about radiohalos, explanations for the fossil record as a record of the Genesis flood narrative (see flood geology), and explanations for the present diversity as a result of pre-designed genetic variability and partially due to the rapid degradation of the perfect genomes God placed in "created kinds" or "Baramin" (see creationist biology) due to mutations.

Neo-creationism

Neo-creationism is a pseudoscientific movement which aims to restate creationism in terms more likely to be well received by the public, by policy makers, by educators and by the scientific community. It aims to re-frame the debate over the origins of life in non-religious terms and without appeals to scripture. This comes in response to the 1987 ruling by the United States Supreme Court in Edwards v. Aguillard that creationism is an inherently religious concept and that advocating it as correct or accurate in public-school curricula violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.WEB,weblink Neocreationism, Morris, Henry M., Henry M. Morris, icr.org, Institute for Creation Research, Sep 29, 2014, NEWS, Safire, William, August 21, 2005, On Language: Neo-Creo,weblink The New York Times, Sep 29, 2014, CONFERENCE, Scott, Eugenie C., Eugenie Scott, The Flight from Science and Reason, 1996, Creationism, ideology, and science,weblink 2009-11-12, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 775, 505–22, 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1996.tb23167.x, 1995NYASA.775..505S, One of the principal claims of neo-creationism propounds that ostensibly objective orthodox science, with a foundation in naturalism, is actually a dogmatically atheistic religion.WEB,weblink Darwinism is Materialist Mythology, Not Science, Johnson, Phillip E., October 2004, DarwinReconsidered.org, Sep 29, 2014, Its proponents argue that the scientific method excludes certain explanations of phenomena, particularly where they point towards supernatural elements, thus effectively excluding religious insight from contributing to understanding the universe. This leads to an open and often hostile opposition to what neo-creationists term "Darwinism", which they generally mean to refer to evolution, but which they may extend to include such concepts as abiogenesis, stellar evolution and the Big Bang theory.Unlike their philosophical forebears, neo-creationists largely do not believe in many of the traditional cornerstones of creationism such as a young Earth, or in a dogmatically literal interpretation of the Bible.

Intelligent design

Intelligent design (ID) is the pseudoscientific viewJOURNAL, Boudry, Maarten, Maarten Boudry, Blancke, Stefaan, Braeckman, Johan, Johan Braeckman, December 2010, Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience, The Quarterly Review of Biology, 85, 4, 473–82, 10.1086/656904, 21243965,weblink 1854/LU-952482, Article available from Universiteit GentBOOK, Pigliucci, Massimo, Massimo Pigliucci, 2010, Science in the Courtroom: The Case against Intelligent Design,weblink Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk, Chicago, Illinois, University of Chicago Press, 978-0-226-66786-7, 2009049778, 457149439, 160–86, Pigliucci 2010, that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."WEB,weblink Top Questions: Questions About Intelligent Design: What is the theory of intelligent design?, Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute, Seattle, WA, 2007-05-13, All of its leading proponents are associated with the Discovery Institute,WEB,weblink Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1, TalkOrigins Archive, The TalkOrigins Foundation, Inc., Houston, TX, 2014-03-13, a think tank whose Wedge strategy aims to replace the scientific method with "a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions" which accepts supernatural explanations.WEB,weblink Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals, Forrest, Barbara, Barbara Forrest, May 2007, Center for Inquiry, Center for Inquiry, Washington, D.C., A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy, PDF, 2014-03-13, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20110519124655weblink">weblink 2011-05-19, WEB,weblink The Wedge, 1999, Center for Science and Culture, Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture, Seattle, WA, PDF, 2014-03-13, It is widely accepted in the scientific and academic communities that intelligent design is a form of creationism,JOURNAL, Mu, David, Fall 2005, Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design,weblink PDF, Harvard College#Publications and media, Harvard Science Review, 19, 1, 22–25, 2014-03-13, Mu 2005, ...for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience.,
  • JOURNAL, Klotzko, Arlene Judith, May 28, 2001, Cynical Science and Stem Cells,weblink The Scientist (magazine), The Scientist, 15, 11, 35, 0890-3670, Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudo-science of 'intelligent design theory.', 2014-03-13,
  • COURT, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04, cv, 2688, December 20, 2005, , s:Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District/6:Curriculum, ConclusionPage 136 of 139|Curriculum, Conclusion, p. 136]].Numbers 2006 and is sometimes referred to as "intelligent design creationism."Forrest & Gross 2004Pennock 2001, "Wizards of ID: Reply to Dembski," pp. 645–667, "Dembski chides me for never using the term 'intelligent design' without conjoining it to 'creationism'. He implies (though never explicitly asserts) that he and others in his movement are not creationists and that it is incorrect to discuss them in such terms, suggesting that doing so is merely a rhetorical ploy to 'rally the troops'. (2) Am I (and the many others who see Dembski's movement in the same way) misrepresenting their position? The basic notion of creationism is the rejection of biological evolution in favor of special creation, where the latter is understood to be supernatural. Beyond this there is considerable variability..."
  • Pennock 1999Scott 2005BOOK, Young, Matt, Edis, Taner, Taner Edis, Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism, Rutgers University Press, 2006,weblink 9780813538723,
ID originated as a re-branding of creation science in an attempt to avoid a series of court decisions ruling out the teaching of creationism in American public schools, and the Discovery Institute has run a series of campaigns to change school curricula.WEB,weblink Creationism/ID: A Short Legal History, Flank, Lenny, Talk Reason, April 24, 2006, 2014-03-09, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20140823063247weblink">weblink August 23, 2014, In Australia, where curricula are under the control of state governments rather than local school boards, there was a public outcry when the notion of ID being taught in science classes was raised by the Federal Education Minister Brendan Nelson; the minister quickly conceded that the correct forum for ID, if it were to be taught, is in religious or philosophy classes.NEWS, Smith, Deborah, October 21, 2005, Intelligent design not science: experts,weblink The Sydney Morning Herald, Sydney, Fairfax Media, 2007-07-13, In the US, teaching of intelligent design in public schools has been decisively ruled by a federal district court to be in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In Kitzmiller v. Dover, the court found that intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents,"COURT, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04, cv, 2688, December 20, 2005, , s:Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District/6:Curriculum, Conclusion#Page 136 of 139|Curriculum, Conclusion, p. 136]]. and hence cannot be taught as an alternative to evolution in public school science classrooms under the jurisdiction of that court. This sets a persuasive precedent, based on previous US Supreme Court decisions in Edwards v. Aguillard and Epperson v. Arkansas (1968), and by the application of the Lemon test, that creates a legal hurdle to teaching intelligent design in public school districts in other federal court jurisdictions.s:Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District et al.|Full text of U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III's ruling in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, dated December 20, 2005.]]

Geocentrism

In astronomy, the geocentric model (also known as geocentrism, or the Ptolemaic system), is a description of the Cosmos where Earth is at the orbital center of all celestial bodies. This model served as the predominant cosmological system in many ancient civilizations such as ancient Greece. As such, they assumed that the Sun, Moon, stars, and naked eye planets circled Earth, including the noteworthy systems of Aristotle (see Aristotelian physics) and Ptolemy.Articles arguing that geocentrism was the biblical perspective appeared in some early creation science newsletters associated with the Creation Research Society pointing to some passages in the Bible, which, when taken literally, indicate that the daily apparent motions of the Sun and the Moon are due to their actual motions around the Earth rather than due to the rotation of the Earth about its axis for example, Joshua 10:12 where the Sun and Moon are said to stop in the sky, and Psalms 93:1 where the world is described as immobile.BOOK, Numbers, Ronald L., 1993, Originally published 1992; New York: Alfred A. Knopf, The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press, 237, 978-0-5200-8393-6, 93015804, 810488078, Contemporary advocates for such religious beliefs include Robert Sungenis, co-author of the self-published Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right (2006).NEWS, Dru, Sefton, March 30, 2006, In this world view, the sun revolves around the earth,weblink Times-News (Hendersonville, North Carolina), Times-News, Hendersonville, NC, Hendersonville Newspaper Corporation, Religion News Service, 5A, 2014-03-14, These people subscribe to the view that a plain reading of the Bible contains an accurate account of the manner in which the universe was created and requires a geocentric worldview. Most contemporary creationist organizations reject such perspectives.{{refn|group="note"|Donald B. DeYoung, for example, states that "Similar terminology is often used today when we speak of the sun's rising and setting, even though the earth, not the sun, is doing the moving. Bible writers used the 'language of appearance,' just as people always have. Without it, the intended message would be awkward at best and probably not understood clearly. When the Bible touches on scientific subjects, it is entirely accurate."WEB,weblink Astronomy and the Bible: Selected questions and answers excerpted from the book, DeYoung, Donald B., November 5, 1997, Answers in Genesis, Answers in Genesis Ministries International, Hebron, KY, 2013-12-01, }}

Omphalos hypothesis

The Omphalos hypothesis argues that in order for the world to be functional, God must have created a mature Earth with mountains and canyons, rock strata, trees with growth rings, and so on; therefore no evidence that we can see of the presumed age of the Earth and age of the universe can be taken as reliable.Gosse 1857 The idea has seen some revival in the 20th century by some modern creationists, who have extended the argument to address the "starlight problem". The idea has been criticised as Last Thursdayism, and on the grounds that it requires a deliberately deceptive creator.

Theistic evolution

Theistic evolution, or evolutionary creation, is a belief that "the personal God of the Bible created the universe and life through evolutionary processes."Sweet & Feist 2007, p. 48, "Evolutionary Creation (or Theistic Evolution) asserts that the personal God of the Bible created the universe and life through evolutionary processes." According to the American Scientific Affiliation:also called evolutionary creation{{snd}}proposes that God's method of creation was to cleverly design a universe in which everything would naturally evolve. Usually the "evolution" in "theistic evolution" means Total Evolution{{snd}}astronomical evolution (to form galaxies, solar systems,...) and geological evolution (to form the earth's geology) plus chemical evolution (to form the first life) and biological evolution (for the development of life){{snd}}but it can refer only to biological evolution.WEB,weblink Evolutionary Creation, Rusbult, Craig, 1998, American Scientific Affiliation, Ipswich, MA, 2014-03-14, }}Through the 19th century the term creationism most commonly referred to direct creation of individual souls, in contrast to traducianism. Following the publication of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, there was interest in ideas of Creation by divine law. In particular, the liberal theologian Baden Powell argued that this illustrated the Creator's power better than the idea of miraculous creation, which he thought ridiculous.Bowler 2003, p. 139 When On the Origin of Species was published, the cleric Charles Kingsley wrote of evolution as "just as noble a conception of Deity."WEB,weblink Darwin and design: historical essay, 2007, Darwin Correspondence Project, Cambridge University Library, Cambridge, UK, 2012-04-18, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20141021101910weblink">weblink 2014-10-21, WEB,weblink Kingsley, Charles to Darwin, C. R., Kingsley, Charles, Charles Kingsley, November 18, 1859, Darwin Correspondence Project, Cambridge University Library, Cambridge, UK, Letter 2534, 2010-08-11, Darwin's view at the time was of God creating life through the laws of nature,INTERVIEW, Moore, James, James Moore (biographer), Krista Tippett, Evolution and Wonder: Understanding Charles Darwin,weblink NPR, On Being, Speaking of Faith with Krista Tippett, September 20, 2007, American Public Media, 2014-03-09, Quammen 2006, p. 119 and the book makes several references to "creation," though he later regretted using the term rather than calling it an unknown process.Barlow 1963, p. 207 In America, Asa Gray argued that evolution is the secondary effect, or modus operandi, of the first cause, design,Dewey 1994, p. 27 and published a pamphlet defending the book in theistic terms, Natural Selection not inconsistent with Natural Theology.JOURNAL, Miles, Sara Joan, September 2001, Charles Darwin and Asa Gray Discuss Teleology and Design,weblink Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 53, 196–201, 2008-11-22, JOURNAL, Gray, Asa, Asa Gray, 1860, Natural Selection not inconsistent with Natural Theology,weblink The Atlantic, The Atlantic Monthly, Reprint,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20090220124011weblink">weblink 2009-02-20, 2009-04-11, "Atlantic Monthly for July, August, and October, 1860, reprinted in 1861." Theistic evolution, also called, evolutionary creation, became a popular compromise, and St. George Jackson Mivart was among those accepting evolution but attacking Darwin's naturalistic mechanism. Eventually it was realised that supernatural intervention could not be a scientific explanation, and naturalistic mechanisms such as neo-Lamarckism were favoured as being more compatible with purpose than natural selection.Bowler 2003, pp. 202–08Some theists took the general view that, instead of faith being in opposition to biological evolution, some or all classical religious teachings about Christian God and creation are compatible with some or all of modern scientific theory, including specifically evolution; it is also known as "evolutionary creation." In Evolution versus Creationism, Eugenie Scott and Niles Eldredge state that it is in fact a type of evolution.Scott 2005, pp. 62–63It generally views evolution as a tool used by God, who is both the first cause and immanent sustainer/upholder of the universe; it is therefore well accepted by people of strong theistic (as opposed to deistic) convictions. Theistic evolution can synthesize with the day-age creationist interpretation of the Genesis creation narrative; however most adherents consider that the first chapters of the Book of Genesis should not be interpreted as a "literal" description, but rather as a literary framework or allegory.From a theistic viewpoint, the underlying laws of nature were designed by God for a purpose, and are so self-sufficient that the complexity of the entire physical universe evolved from fundamental particles in processes such as stellar evolution, life forms developed in biological evolution, and in the same way the origin of life by natural causes has resulted from these laws.WEB,weblink The Origin of Life, Moritz, Albrecht, October 31, 2006, TalkOrigins Archive, The TalkOrigins Foundation, Inc., Houston, TX, 2008-11-22, In one form or another, theistic evolution is the view of creation taught at the majority of mainline Protestant seminaries.Scott 1999 For Roman Catholics, human evolution is not a matter of religious teaching, and must stand or fall on its own scientific merits. Evolution and the Roman Catholic Church are not in conflict. The Catechism of the Catholic Church comments positively on the theory of evolution, which is neither precluded nor required by the sources of faith, stating that scientific studies "have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man."JOURNAL, Akin, Jimmy, January 2004, Evolution and the Magisterium,weblink Catholic Answers, This Rock, 15, 1, 1049-4561,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20070804102139weblink">weblink 2007-08-04, 2014-03-14, Roman Catholic schools teach evolution without controversy on the basis that scientific knowledge does not extend beyond the physical, and scientific truth and religious truth cannot be in conflict.NEWS, Guntzel, Jeff Severns,weblink March 25, 2005, Catholic schools steer clear of anti-evolution bias, National Catholic Reporter, Kansas City, MO, The National Catholic Reporter Publishing Company, 0027-8939, 2007-08-15, Theistic evolution can be described as "creationism" in holding that divine intervention brought about the origin of life or that divine laws govern formation of species, though many creationists (in the strict sense) would deny that the position is creationism at all. In the creation–evolution controversy, its proponents generally take the "evolutionist" side. This sentiment was expressed by Fr. George Coyne, (the Vatican's chief astronomer between 1978 and 2006):...in America, creationism has come to mean some fundamentalistic, literal, scientific interpretation of Genesis. Judaic-Christian faith is radically creationist, but in a totally different sense. It is rooted in a belief that everything depends upon God, or better, all is a gift from God.WEB,weblink Text of talk by Vatican Observatory director on 'Science Does Not Need God. Or Does It? A Catholic Scientist Looks at Evolution', Coyne, George V., George Coyne, January 30, 2006, Catholic Online, LLC, 2011-03-10, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20110606050849weblink">weblink June 6, 2011, While supporting the methodological naturalism inherent in modern science, the proponents of theistic evolution reject the implication taken by some atheists that this gives credence to ontological materialism. In fact, many modern philosophers of science,Pennock 1999
  • WEB,weblink Naturalism is an Essential Part of Science and Critical Inquiry, Schafersman, Steven D., Steven Schafersman, May 1997, Free Inquiry: The Humanist and Skeptic Website of Steven Schafersman, Steven Schafersman, 2014-03-15,
  • WEB,weblink On Methodological Naturalism and Intelligent Design (or Why Can't Lawrence VanDyke Leave Well Enough Alone?), Leiter, Brian, Brian Leiter, April 6, 2004, Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog, Brian Leiter, Blog, 2014-03-15,
  • JOURNAL, Burgeson, John W., 1997, NTSE: An Intellectual Feast,weblink Origins & Design, 18, 2, 2014-03-15,
  • Draper 2005
  • JOURNAL, Pigliucci, Massimo, Massimo Pigliucci, Banta, Joshua, Bossu, Christen, Crouse, Paula, Dexter, Troy, Hansknecht, Kerry, Muth, Norris, 1, May–June 2004, The Alleged Fallacies of Evolutionary Theory,weblink Philosophy Now, 46, 0961-5970, 2014-03-15,
  • WEB,weblink Statement on Intelligent Design, 2005, The Department of Biology, University of Iowa, Petition, Iowa City, IA,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100901150357weblink">weblink 2010-09-01, 2014-03-15,
  • JOURNAL, Pigliucci, Massimo, December 2005, Science and fundamentalism,weblink EMBO Reports, 6, 12, 10.1038/sj.embor.7400589, 1469-3178, 2014-03-15, 1369219, 16319954, 1106–1109,
  • WEB,weblink Justifying Methodological Naturalism, Martin, Michael, Michael Martin (philosopher), 2002, The Secular Web, Internet Infidels, Internet Infidels, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO, 2014-03-15, including atheists,WEB,weblink Intelligent Design or Natural Design, Bradley, Raymond, November 23, 2005, Butterflies and Wheels, Ophelia Benson, Seattle, WA, 2014-03-16, refer to the long-standing convention in the scientific method that observable events in nature should be explained by natural causes, with the distinction that it does not assume the actual existence or non-existence of the supernatural.

Religious views

Christianity

{{Further|Genesis creation narrative|creation–evolution controversy}}{{As of|2006}}, most Christians around the world accepted evolution as the most likely explanation for the origins of species, and did not take a literal view of the Genesis creation myth. The United States is an exception where belief in religious fundamentalism is much more likely to affect attitudes towards evolution than it is for believers elsewhere. Political partisanship affecting religious belief may be a factor because political partisanship in the US is highly correlated with fundamentalist thinking, unlike in Europe.JOURNAL, Miller, Jon D., Scott, Eugenie C., Eugenie Scott, Okamoto, Shinji, August 2006, Public acceptance of evolution,weblink Science (journal), Science, 313, 5788, 765–66, 10.1126/science.1126746, 16902112, 2014-03-16, Most contemporary Christian leaders and scholars from mainstream churches,WEB,weblink Denominational Views, October 17, 2008, National Center for Science Education, National Center for Science Education, Berkeley, CA, 2010-05-17, such as AnglicansWEB,weblink Episcopal Church, General Convention (2006), National Center for Science Education, National Center for Science Education, Berkeley, CA, 2010-05-17, 2008-09-09, and Lutherans,ENCYCLOPEDIA, Schick, Edwin A., Bodensieck, Julius, The Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church,weblink 2010-05-17, Evolution, 1965, Augsburg Fortress, Augsburg Publishing House, 1, Minneapolis, MN, 64021500, 947120, Edited for the Lutheran World Federation.
  • JOURNAL, Hollabaugh, Mark, October 2006, God allows the universe to create itself and evolve,weblink The Lutheran, 0024-743X, 2014-03-16, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20131231072935weblink">weblink 2013-12-31, consider that there is no conflict between the spiritual meaning of creation and the science of evolution. According to the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, "...for most of the history of Christianity, and I think this is fair enough, most of the history of the Christianity there's been an awareness that a belief that everything depends on the creative act of God, is quite compatible with a degree of uncertainty or latitude about how precisely that unfolds in creative time."NEWS, March 21, 2006, Interview: Rowan Williams,weblink The Guardian, Transcript, London, Guardian Media Group, 2014-03-16,
Leaders of the AnglicanNEWS, Williams, Christopher, March 21, 2006, Archbishop of Canterbury backs evolution,weblink The Register, London, Situation Publishing Limited, 2011-03-10, and Roman CatholicJOURNAL, McDonell, Keelin, July 12, 2005, What Catholics Think of Evolution,weblink Slate (magazine), Slate,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20050716003211weblink">weblink 2005-07-16, 2014-03-16, See also the article Catholic Church and evolution.
churches have made statements in favor of evolutionary theory, as have scholars such as the physicist John Polkinghorne, who argues that evolution is one of the principles through which God created living beings. Earlier supporters of evolutionary theory include Frederick Temple, Asa Gray and Charles Kingsley who were enthusiastic supporters of Darwin's theories upon their publication,Polkinghorne 1998, pp. 7–8 and the French Jesuit priest and geologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin saw evolution as confirmation of his Christian beliefs, despite condemnation from Church authorities for his more speculative theories. Another example is that of Liberal theology, not providing any creation models, but instead focusing on the symbolism in beliefs of the time of authoring Genesis and the cultural environment.
Many Christians and Jews had been considering the idea of the creation history as an allegory (instead of historical) long before the development of Darwin's theory of evolution. For example, Philo, whose works were taken up by early Church writers, wrote that it would be a mistake to think that creation happened in six days, or in any set amount of time.PhiloWEB,weblink Philo of Alexandria (c. 20 BC{{snd, c. AD 50) |last=Bradshaw |first=Rob |website=Early Church.org.uk |publisher=Steve Bradshaw |location=West Wickham, England |accessdate=December 21, 2011}} Augustine of the late fourth century who was also a former neoplatonist argued that everything in the universe was created by God at the same moment in time (and not in six days as a literal reading of the Book of Genesis would seem to require);JOURNAL, Young, Davis A., March 1988, The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation,weblink American Scientific Affiliation, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 40, 1, 42–45, 0892-2675, 2008-08-18, It appears that both Philo and Augustine felt uncomfortable with the idea of a seven-day creation because it detracted from the notion of God's omnipotence. In 1950, Pope Pius XII stated limited support for the idea in his encyclical Humani generis.WEB,weblink Pope Pius XII, Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, Vatican: the Holy See, Holy See, St. Peter's Basilica, Vatican City, Encyclical#Catholic usage, Papal encyclical, August 12, 1950, 2011-11-08, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20120419021937weblink">weblink April 19, 2012, In 1996, Pope John Paul II stated that "new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis," but, referring to previous papal writings, he concluded that "if the human body takes its origin from pre-existent living matter, the spiritual soul is immediately created by God."NEWS, Pope John Paul II, Pope John Paul II, October 30, 1996, Magisterium is concerned with question of evolution, for it involves conception of man,weblink L'Osservatore Romano, Message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Weekly English, Tipografia Vaticana, Vatican City, Holy See, 44, 3, 7, 2014-03-19, In the US, Evangelical Christians have continued to believe in a literal Genesis. Members of evangelical Protestant (70%), Mormon (76%) and Jehovah's Witnesses (90%) denominations are the most likely to reject the evolutionary interpretation of the origins of life.REPORT, 2008, U.S. Religious Landscape Survey,weblink Pew Research Center, Washington, D.C., Social and Political Views, 95, PDF, 2014-03-19, Report 2: Religious Beliefs & Practices, Chapter 2.Jehovah's Witnesses adhere to a combination of gap creationism and day-age creationism, asserting that scientific evidence about the age of the universe is compatible with the Bible, but that the 'days' after Genesis 1:1 were each thousands of years in length.BOOK, Chryssides, George D., Historical Dictionary of Jehovah's Witnesses, 2008, Scarecrow Press, 9780810862692, 37,weblink en, The historic Christian literal interpretation of creation requires the harmonization of the two creation stories, Genesis 1:1–2:3 and Genesis 2:4–25, for there to be a consistent interpretation.WEB,weblink Are There Two Creation Accounts in Genesis?, Jackson, Wayne, Apologetics Press, Montgomery, Al, 2007-05-23, WEB,weblink Tobin, Paul N., 2000, The Creation Myths: Internal Difficulties, The Rejection of Pascal's Wager: A Skeptic's Guide to Christianity, Paul Tobin, Singapore, 2014-03-19, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20141008175621weblink">weblink 2014-10-08, They sometimes seek to ensure that their belief is taught in science classes, mainly in American schools. Opponents reject the claim that the literalistic biblical view meets the criteria required to be considered scientific. Many religious groups teach that God created the Cosmos. From the days of the early Christian Church Fathers there were allegorical interpretations of the Book of Genesis as well as literal aspects.Forster & Marston 1999Christian Science, a system of thought and practice derived from the writings of Mary Baker Eddy, interprets the Book of Genesis figuratively rather than literally. It holds that the material world is an illusion, and consequently not created by God: the only real creation is the spiritual realm, of which the material world is a distorted version. Christian Scientists regard the story of the creation in the Book of Genesis as having symbolic rather than literal meaning. According to Christian Science, both creationism and evolution are false from an absolute or "spiritual" point of view, as they both proceed from a (false) belief in the reality of a material universe. However, Christian Scientists do not oppose the teaching of evolution in schools, nor do they demand that alternative accounts be taught: they believe that both material science and literalist theology are concerned with the illusory, mortal and material, rather than the real, immortal and spiritual. With regard to material theories of creation, Eddy showed a preference for Darwin's theory of evolution over others.Eddy 1934, p. 547

Hinduism

Hindu creationists claim that species of plants and animals are material forms adopted by pure consciousness which live an endless cycle of births and rebirths.McGrath 2010, p. 140 Ronald Numbers says that: "Hindu Creationists have insisted on the antiquity of humans, who they believe appeared fully formed as long, perhaps, as trillions of years ago."Numbers 2006, p. 420 Hindu creationism is a form of old Earth creationism, according to Hindu creationists the universe may even be older than billions of years. These views are based on the Vedas, the creation myths of which depict an extreme antiquity of the universe and history of the Earth.Carper & Hunt 2009, p. 167Dasgupta 1922, p. 10

Islam

Islamic creationism is the belief that the universe (including humanity) was directly created by God as explained in the Qur'an. It usually views the Book of Genesis as a corrupted version of God's message. The creation myths in the Qur'an are vaguer and allow for a wider range of interpretations similar to those in other Abrahamic religions.Islam also has its own school of theistic evolutionism, which holds that mainstream scientific analysis of the origin of the universe is supported by the Qur'an. Some Muslims believe in evolutionary creation, especially among liberal movements within Islam.Writing for The Boston Globe, Drake Bennett noted: "Without a Book of Genesis to account for ... Muslim creationists have little interest in proving that the age of the Earth is measured in the thousands rather than the billions of years, nor do they show much interest in the problem of the dinosaurs. And the idea that animals might evolve into other animals also tends to be less controversial, in part because there are passages of the Koran that seem to support it. But the issue of whether human beings are the product of evolution is just as fraught among Muslims."NEWS, Bennett, Drake, October 25, 2009, Islam's Darwin problem,weblink The Boston Globe, Boston, MA,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20091030044754weblink">weblink 2009-10-30, 2014-03-21, However, some Muslims, such as Adnan Oktar (also known as Harun Yahya), do not agree that one species can develop from another.NEWS,weblink Irvine, Chris, September 29, 2008, Creationist Adnan Oktar offers trillion-pound prize for fossil proof of evolution, The Daily Telegraph, London, Telegraph Media Group, 2014-03-21, NEWS, January 7, 2004,weblink Creationism: Science and Faith in Schools, The Guardian, Conferences, London, Guardian Media Group, 2008-07-18, Since the 1980s, Turkey has been a site of strong advocacy for creationism, supported by American adherents.JOURNAL, Edis, Taner, November–December 1999, Cloning Creationism in Turkey,weblink Reports of the National Center for Science Education, 19, 6, 30–35, 2158-818X, 2008-02-17, NEWS, Kaufman, Marc, November 8, 2009,weblink In Turkey, fertile ground for creationism, The Washington Post, Washington, D.C., The Washington Post Company, 2014-03-21, There are several verses in the Qur'an which some modern writers have interpreted as being compatible with the expansion of the universe, Big Bang and Big Crunch theories:WEB,weblink The Big Bang Echoes through the Map of the Galaxy, Harun Yahya, Adnan Oktar, June 30, 2005, Harun Yahya, Global Publication Ltd. Co., Horsham, England, 2014-03-21, Bucaille 1977

QURAN, 21, 30, y, Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?,
QURAN, 41, 11, y, Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth: 'Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly.' They said: 'We do come (together), in willing obedience.',
QURAN, 51, 47, y, With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of space.,
QURAN, 21, 104, y, The Day that We roll up the heavens like a scroll rolled up for books (completed),- even as
We produced the first creation, so shall We produce a new one: a promise We have undertaken: truly shall We fulfil it., {{see also|Predestination in Islam}}

Ahmadiyya

The Ahmadiyya movement actively promotes evolutionary theory.Masood 1994, Chapter 13, "Every Wind of Doctrine" {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130208191324weblink |date=2013-02-08 }} Ahmadis interpret scripture from the Qur'an to support the concept of macroevolution and give precedence to scientific theories. Furthermore, unlike orthodox Muslims, Ahmadis believe that humans have gradually evolved from different species. Ahmadis regard Adam as being the first Prophet of God{{spaced ndash}}as opposed to him being the first man on Earth. Rather than wholly adopting the theory of natural selection, Ahmadis promote the idea of a "guided evolution," viewing each stage of the evolutionary process as having been selectively woven by God.WEB,weblink Guided Evolution: Proof From Punctuated Equilibrium, Lahaye, Ataul Wahid, Shah, Zia H., Al Islam, Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, London, PDF, 2014-03-21, Mirza Tahir Ahmad, Fourth Caliph of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community has stated in his magnum opus Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge & Truth (1998) that evolution did occur but only through God being the One who brings it about. It does not occur itself, according to the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.

Judaism

For Orthodox Jews who seek to reconcile discrepancies between science and the creation myths in the Bible, the notion that science and the Bible should even be reconciled through traditional scientific means is questioned. To these groups, science is as true as the Torah and if there seems to be a problem, epistemological limits are to blame for apparently irreconcilable points. They point to discrepancies between what is expected and what actually is to demonstrate that things are not always as they appear. They note that even the root word for "world" in the Hebrew language—עולם (Olam)—means hidden—נעלם (Neh-Eh-Lahm). Just as they know from the Torah that God created man and trees and the light on its way from the stars in their observed state, so too can they know that the world was created in its over the six days of Creation that reflects progression to its currently-observed state, with the understanding that physical ways to verify this may eventually be identified. This knowledge has been advanced by Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb, former philosophy professor at Johns Hopkins University.{{Citation needed|date=August 2015}} Also, relatively old Kabbalistic sources from well before the scientifically apparent age of the universe was first determined are in close concord with modern scientific estimates of the age of the universe, according to Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, and based on Sefer Temunah, an early kabbalistic work attributed to the first-century Tanna Nehunya ben HaKanah. Many kabbalists accepted the teachings of the Sefer HaTemunah, including the medieval Jewish scholar Nahmanides, his close student Isaac ben Samuel of Acre, and David ben Solomon ibn Abi Zimra. Other parallels are derived, among other sources, from Nahmanides, who expounds that there was a Neanderthal-like species with which Adam mated (he did this long before Neanderthals had even been discovered scientifically).Aviezer 1990Carmell & Domb 1976Schroeder 1998JOURNAL, Tigay, Jeffrey H., Winter 1987–1988, Genesis, Science, and 'Scientific Creationism',weblink Conservative Judaism (journal), Conservative Judaism, 40, 2, 20–27, 0010-6542, 2014-03-21, Reform Judaism does not take the Torah as a literal text, but rather as a symbolic or open-ended work.Some contemporary writers such as Rabbi Gedalyah Nadel have sought to reconcile the discrepancy between the account in the Torah, and scientific findings by arguing that each day referred to in the Bible was not 24 hours, but billions of years long.The Challenge of Creation: Judaism's Encounter with Science, Cosmology, and Evolution, Natan Slifkin, Zoo Torah, 2006, p. 129 Others claim that the Earth was created a few thousand years ago, but was deliberately made to look as if it was five billion years old, e.g. by being created with ready made fossils. The best known exponent of this approach being Rabbi Menachem Mendel SchneersonThe Challenge of Creation: Judaism's Encounter with Science, Cosmology, and Evolution, Natan Slifkin, Zoo Torah, 2006, p. 158 Others state that although the world was physically created in six 24 hour days, the Torah accounts can be interpreted to mean that there was a period of billions of years before the six days of creation.The Challenge of Creation: Judaism's Encounter with Science, Cosmology, and Evolution, Natan Slifkin, Zoo Torah, 2006, pp. 169, 170

Bahá'í Faith

In the creation myth taught by Bahá'u'lláh, the Bahá'í Faith founder, the universe has "neither beginning nor ending," and that the component elements of the material world have always existed and will always exist.`Abdu'l-Bahá 1982, p. 220 With regard to evolution and the origin of human beings, `Abdu'l-Bahá gave extensive comments on the subject when he addressed western audiences in the beginning of the 20th century. Transcripts of these comments can be found in Some Answered Questions, Paris Talks and The Promulgation of Universal Peace. `Abdu'l-Bahá described the human species as having evolved from a primitive form to modern man, but that the capacity to form human intelligence was always in existence.

Prevalence

File:Views on Evolution.svg|thumb|right|440px|Views on human evolution in various countries 2008JOURNAL, Le Page, Michael, April 19, 2008, Evolution myths: It doesn't matter if people don't grasp evolution,weblink New ScientistNew ScientistMost vocal literalist creationists are from the US, and strict creationist views are much less common in other developed countries. According to a study published in Science, a survey of the US, Turkey, Japan and Europe showed that public acceptance of evolution is most prevalent in Iceland, Denmark and Sweden at 80% of the population. There seems to be no significant correlation between believing in evolution and understanding evolutionary science.WEB,weblink Weekend update: You'd have to be science illiterate to think 'belief in evolution' measures science literacy, Kahan, Dan, Dan Kahan, May 24, 2014, Cultural cognition#Cultural cognition project at Yale Law School, Cultural Cognition Project, Yale Law School, New Haven, CT, Blog, 2015-03-23, JOURNAL, Shtulman, Andrew, March 2006, Qualitative differences between naïve and scientific theories of evolution,weblink Cognitive Psychology, 52, 2, 170–94, 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.10.001, 16337619, 0010-0285, 2015-03-23, 1992CogPs..24..535V,

Australia

A 2009 Nielsen poll showed that 23% of Australians believe "the biblical account of human origins," 42% believe in a "wholly scientific" explanation for the origins of life, while 32% believe in an evolutionary process "guided by God".WEB,weblink Faith: What Australians believe in, Marr, David, December 19, 2009, The Age, Melbourne, Australia,weblinkweblink December 11, 2018, no, WEB, Maley, Jacqueline, December 19, 2009, God is still tops but angels rate well,weblink The Age, Melbourne, Australia,weblink September 13, 2012, A 2013 survey conducted by Auspoll and the Australian Academy of Science found that 80% of Australians believe in evolution (70% believe it is currently occurring, 10% believe in evolution but do not think it is currently occurring), 12% were not sure and 9% stated they do not believe in evolution.WEB,weblink Science literacy in Australia, 2013, Australian Academy of Science,weblink December 11, 2018, no,

Canada

A 2012 survey, by Angus Reid Public Opinion revealed that 61 percent of Canadians believe in evolution. The poll asked "Where did human beings come from{{snd}}did we start as singular cells millions of year ago and evolve into our present form, or did God create us in his image 10,000 years ago?"NEWS, Believe In Evolution: Canadians More Likely Than Americans To Endorse Evolution,weblink September 6, 2012, The Huffington Post#International editions, HuffPost Canada, AOL, 2012-04-28,
  • PRESS RELEASE, Canseco, Mario, September 5, 2012, Britons and Canadians More Likely to Endorse than Americans,weblink PDF, New York, Angus Reid Public Opinion, 2014-05-11,

Europe

In Europe, literalist creationism is more widely rejected, though regular opinion polls are not available. Most people accept that evolution is the most widely accepted scientific theory as taught in most schools. In countries with a Roman Catholic majority, papal acceptance of evolutionary creationism as worthy of study has essentially ended debate on the matter for many people.In the UK, a 2006 poll on the "origin and development of life", asked participants to choose between three different perspectives on the origin of life: 22% chose creationism, 17% opted for intelligent design, 48% selected evolutionary theory, and the rest did not know.NEWS, January 26, 2006, Britons unconvinced on evolution,weblink BBC News, London, BBC, 2014-03-27, WEB,weblink BBC Survey On The Origins Of Life, January 30, 2006, Ipsos MORI, Ipsos MORI, London, 2014-03-27, A subsequent 2010 YouGov poll on the correct explanation for the origin of humans found that 9% opted for creationism, 12% intelligent design, 65% evolutionary theory and 13% didn't know.WEB,weblink The origin of humans, November 20, 2010, YouGov Global, YouGov, YouGov Plc, London, Prospect Survey Results, PDF, 2014-03-24, The former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, head of the worldwide Anglican Communion, views the idea of teaching creationism in schools as a mistake.NEWS, Bates, Stephen, March 20, 2006, Archbishop: stop teaching creationism,weblink The Guardian, London, Guardian Media Group, 2014-03-27, In Italy, Education Minister Letizia Moratti wanted to retire evolution from the secondary school level; after one week of massive protests, she reversed her opinion.NEWS, May 3, 2004, Italy Keeps Darwin in its Classrooms,weblink Deutsche Welle, Bonn, Germany, ARD, 2014-03-27, JOURNAL, Lorenzi, Rossella, April 28, 2004, No evolution for Italian teens,weblink The Scientist (magazine), The Scientist, 2014-03-27, There continues to be scattered and possibly mounting efforts on the part of religious groups throughout Europe to introduce creationism into public education.NEWS, April 19, 2007, In the beginning,weblink The Economist, London, Economist Group, 0013-0613, 2007-04-25, This article gives a worldwide overview of recent developments on the subject of the controversy. In response, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has released a draft report titled The dangers of creationism in education on June 8, 2007,WEB,weblink The dangers of creationism in education, June 8, 2007, Committee on Culture, Science and Education, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Report, Doc. 11297, 2014-03-22, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20130309011447weblink">weblink March 9, 2013, reinforced by a further proposal of banning it in schools dated October 4, 2007.WEB,weblink The dangers of creationism in education, October 4, 2007, Committee on Culture, Science and Education, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Resolution, Resolution 1580, 2014-03-22, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20140307163155weblink">weblink March 7, 2014, Paras. 13, 18Serbia suspended the teaching of evolution for one week in September 2004, under education minister Ljiljana Čolić, only allowing schools to reintroduce evolution into the curriculum if they also taught creationism.NEWS, de Quetteville, Harry, September 9, 2004, Darwin is off the curriculum for Serbian schools,weblink The Daily Telegraph, London, Telegraph Media Group, January 24, 2012, "After a deluge of protest from scientists, teachers and opposition parties" says the BBC report, Čolić's deputy made the statement, "I have come here to confirm Charles Darwin is still alive" and announced that the decision was reversed.NEWS, September 9, 2004, Serbia reverses Darwin suspension,weblink BBC News, London, BBC, 2014-03-21, Čolić resigned after the government said that she had caused "problems that had started to reflect on the work of the entire government."NEWS, September 16, 2004, 'Anti-Darwin' Serb minister quits,weblink BBC News, London, BBC, 2014-03-27, Poland saw a major controversy over creationism in 2006, when the Deputy Education Minister, Mirosław Orzechowski, denounced evolution as "one of many lies" taught in Polish schools. His superior, Minister of Education Roman Giertych, has stated that the theory of evolution would continue to be taught in Polish schools, "as long as most scientists in our country say that it is the right theory." Giertych's father, Member of the European Parliament Maciej Giertych, has opposed the teaching of evolution and has claimed that dinosaurs and humans co-existed.NEWS, December 18, 2006, And finally...,weblink Warsaw Business Journal, Warsaw, Poland, Valkea Media, 2014-03-27,

United States

File:Creationist car.jpg|230px|right|thumb|Anti-evolution car in Athens, GeorgiaAthens, GeorgiaA 2017 poll by Pew Research found that 62% of Americans believe humans have evolved over time and 34% of Americans believe humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.NEWS, Masci, David, For Darwin Day, 6 facts about the evolution debate,weblink Pew Research Center, 10 February 2017, Another 2017 Gallup creationism survey found that 38% of adults in the United States inclined to the view that "God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years" when asked for their views on the origin and development of human beings, which Gallup noted was the lowest level in 35 years.NEWS, In US, Belief in Creationist View of Humans at New Low,weblink Gallup, May 22, 2017, en-us, According to a 2014 Gallup poll,WEB,weblink In U.S., 42% Believe Creationist View of Human Origins, Newport, Frank, November 19, 2004, Gallup.com, Gallup, Inc., Omaha, NE, 2014-05-10, about 42% of Americans believe that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so." Another 31% believe that "human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process,"and 19% believe that "human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process."Belief in creationism is inversely correlated to education; of those with postgraduate degrees, 74% accept evolution.AV MEDIA, Newport, Frank (Host), June 11, 2007, Evolution Beliefs,weblink The Gallup Poll Daily Briefing, 2014-03-27, Omaha, NE, Gallup, Inc., yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20140427004950weblink">weblink April 27, 2014, WEB,weblink Beliefs of the U.S. public about evolution and creation, Robinson, Bruce A., November 1995, ReligiousTolerance.org, Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, Kingston, Canada, 2007-11-11, In 1987, Newsweek reported: "By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) who give credence to creation-science, the general theory that complex life forms did not evolve but appeared 'abruptly.'"JOURNAL, Martz, Larry, McDaniel, Ann, June 29, 1987, Keeping God Out of the Classroom,weblink PDF, Newsweek, 23–24, 0028-9604, 2015-09-25, A 2000 poll for People for the American Way found 70% of the US public felt that evolution was compatible with a belief in God.WEB,weblink Evolution and Creationism In Public Education: An In-depth Reading Of Public Opinion, March 2000, People For the American Way, People For the American Way, Washington, D.C., PDF, 2014-03-28, According to a study published in Science, between 1985 and 2005 the number of adult North Americans who accept evolution declined from 45% to 40%, the number of adults who reject evolution declined from 48% to 39% and the number of people who were unsure increased from 7% to 21%. Besides the US the study also compared data from 32 European countries, Turkey, and Japan. The only country where acceptance of evolution was lower than in the US was Turkey (25%).According to a 2011 Fox News poll, 45% of Americans believe in Creationism, down from 50% in a similar poll in 1999.NEWS, September 7, 2011, Fox News Poll: Creationism,weblink Fox News Channel, Fox News, News Corporation, 2011-09-22, 21% believe in 'the theory of evolution as outlined by Darwin and other scientists' (up from 15% in 1999), and 27% answered that both are true (up from 26% in 1999).In September 2012, educator and television personality Bill Nye spoke with the Associated Press and aired his fears about acceptance of creationism, believing that teaching children that creationism is the only true answer without letting them understand the way science works will prevent any future innovation in the world of science.NEWS, Luvan, Dylan, September 24, 2012, Bill Nye Warns: Creation Views Threaten US Science,weblink Associated Press, 2014-03-09, WEB, Fowler, Jonathan, Rodd, Elizabeth, Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children,weblink August 23, 2012, YouTube, Big Think, New York, 2012-09-24, NEWS, Deiviscio, Jeffrey, A Fight for the Young Creationist Mind: In ‘Undeniable,’ Bill Nye Speaks Evolution Directly to Creationists,weblink November 3, 2014, The New York Times, November 4, 2014, In February 2014, Nye defended evolution in the classroom in a debate with creationist Ken Ham on the topic of whether creation is a viable model of origins in today's modern, scientific era.NEWS, Boyle, Alan, Alan Boyle, February 5, 2014, Bill Nye Wins Over the Science Crowd at Evolution Debate,weblink NBCNews.com, 2014-02-06, NEWS, Kopplin, Zack, Zack Kopplin, February 4, 2014, Why Bill Nye the Science Guy is trying to reason with America's creationists,weblink The Guardian, London, Guardian Media Group, 2014-02-06, {{YouTube |id=z6kgvhG3AkI |title=Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham |last=Foreman |first=Tom (Moderator) |authorlink=Tom Foreman |date=February 4, 2014 |website=YouTube |publisher=Answers in Genesis |location=Hebron, KY |accessdate=2014-02-05}} (program begins at 13:14).

Education controversies

File:Truth fish.jpg|thumb|right|The Truth fish, one of the many creationist responses to the Darwin fish ]]In the US, creationism has become centered in the political controversy over creation and evolution in public education, and whether teaching creationism in science classes conflicts with the separation of church and state. Currently, the controversy comes in the form of whether advocates of the intelligent design movement who wish to "Teach the Controversy" in science classes have conflated science with religion.People for the American Way polled 1500 North Americans about the teaching of evolution and creationism in November and December 1999. They found that most North Americans were not familiar with Creationism, and most North Americans had heard of evolution, but many did not fully understand the basics of the theory. The main findings were:{hide}bar box|title= Americans believe that:|barwidth=200px|width=80%|bars={{bar percent|
  • Public schools should teach evolution only|silver|60|20%{edih}
{hide}bar percent|
  • Only evolution should be taught in science classes, religious explanations can be discussed in another class|gray|51|17%{edih}
{hide}bar percent|
  • Creationism can be discussed in science class as a 'belief,' not a scientific theory|silver|87|29%{edih}
{hide}bar percent|
  • Creationism and evolution should be taught as 'scientific theories' in science class|gray|39|13%{edih}
{hide}bar percent|
  • Only Creationism should be taught|silver|48|16%{edih}
{hide}bar percent|
  • Teach both evolution and Creationism, but unsure how to do so|gray|12|4%{edih}
{hide}bar percent|
  • No opinion|silver|3|1%{edih}
}}In such political contexts, creationists argue that their particular religiously based origin belief is superior to those of other belief systems, in particular those made through secular or scientific rationale. Political creationists are opposed by many individuals and organizations who have made detailed critiques and given testimony in various court cases that the alternatives to scientific reasoning offered by creationists are opposed by the consensus of the scientific community.WEB,weblink Statement on the Teaching of Evolution, February 16, 2006, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C., PDF,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20060221125539weblink">weblink 2006-02-21, 2014-03-09,
  • PRESS RELEASE, AAAS Denounces Anti-Evolution Laws as Hundreds of K-12 Teachers Convene for 'Front Line' Event, February 19, 2006, American Association for the Advancement of Science, St. Louis, MO,weblink Pinholster, Ginger,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20060421193306weblink">weblink 2006-04-21, 2014-08-05, JOURNAL, Delgado, Cynthia, July 28, 2006, Finding the Evolution in Medicine,weblink NIH Record, 1057-5871, 2014-03-31, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20081122022815weblink">weblink November 22, 2008, "...While 99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution, 40 to 50 percent of college students do not accept evolution and believe it to be 'just' a theory."{{snd}}Brian Alters

Criticism

Christian criticism

Most Christians disagree with the teaching of creationism as an alternative to evolution in schools.BOOK, Exploring and Proclaiming the Apostles' Creed, Roger, van Harn, David F., Ford, Colin E., Gunton, A&C Black, 2004, 978-0-8192-8116-6, 44,weblink Extract of page 44BOOK, Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism, Aron, Ra, Pitchstone Publishing, 2016, 978-1-63431-079-6, 182,weblink Extract of page 182 Several religious organizations, among them the Catholic Church, hold that their faith does not conflict with the scientific consensus regarding evolution.WEB,weblink Statements from Religious Organizations, National Center for Science Education, National Center for Science Education, Berkeley, CA, 2011-03-10, 2008-09-08, The Clergy Letter Project, which has collected more than 13,000 signatures, is an "endeavor designed to demonstrate that religion and science can be compatible."In his 2002 article "Intelligent Design as a Theological Problem," George Murphy argues against the view that life on Earth, in all its forms, is direct evidence of God's act of creation (Murphy quotes Phillip E. Johnson's claim that he is speaking "of a God who acted openly and left his fingerprints on all the evidence."). Murphy argues that this view of God is incompatible with the Christian understanding of God as "the one revealed in the cross and resurrection of Christ." The basis of this theology is Isaiah 45:15, "Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour."Murphy observes that the execution of a Jewish carpenter by Roman authorities is in and of itself an ordinary event and did not require divine action. On the contrary, for the crucifixion to occur, God had to limit or "empty" himself. It was for this reason that Paul the Apostle wrote, in Philippians 2:5-8:Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.Murphy concludes that,Just as the Son of God limited himself by taking human form and dying on a cross, God limits divine action in the world to be in accord with rational laws which God has chosen. This enables us to understand the world on its own terms, but it also means that natural processes hide God from scientific observation.For Murphy, a theology of the cross requires that Christians accept a methodological naturalism, meaning that one cannot invoke God to explain natural phenomena, while recognizing that such acceptance does not require one to accept a metaphysical naturalism, which proposes that nature is all that there is.JOURNAL, Murphy, George L., 2002, Intelligent Design as a Theological Problem,weblink Covalence: The Bulletin of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Alliance for Faith, Science and Technology, IV, 2, 52753579, 2014-03-31, Reprinted with permission.The Jesuit priest George Coyne has stated that is "unfortunate that, especially here in America, creationism has come to mean...some literal interpretation of Genesis." He argues that "...Judaic-Christian faith is radically creationist, but in a totally different sense. It is rooted in belief that everything depends on God, or better, all is a gift from God."BOOK, Purcell, Brendan, From Big Bang to Big Mystery: Human Origins in the Light of Creation and Evolution, 2012, New City Press of the Focolare, 978-1565484337, 94,

Teaching of creationism

Other Christians have expressed qualms about teaching creationism. In March 2006, then Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the leader of the world's Anglicans, stated his discomfort about teaching creationism, saying that creationism was "a kind of category mistake, as if the Bible were a theory like other theories." He also said: "My worry is creationism can end up reducing the doctrine of creation rather than enhancing it." The views of the Episcopal Church{{snd}}a major American-based branch of the Anglican Communion{{snd}}on teaching creationism resemble those of Williams.The National Science Teachers Association is opposed to teaching creationism as a science,WEB, NSTA Position Statement: The Teaching of Evolution, National Science Teachers Association, 2013,weblink as is the Association for Science Teacher Education,WEB, ASTE Position Statement on Teaching Biological Evolution, 2015, Association for Science Teacher Education,weblink the National Association of Biology Teachers,WEB, NABT Position Statement on Teaching Evolution, National Association of Biology Teachers, 2011,weblink yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20150916020337weblink">weblink 2015-09-16, the American Anthropological Association,WEB, Statement on Evolution and Creationism, American Anthropological Association, 2000,weblink the American Geosciences Institute,WEB, American Geological Institute Position on Teaching Evolution, American Geoscience Institute, 2000,weblink the Geological Society of America,WEB, 2012, Position Statement: Teaching Evolution, Geological Society of America,weblink the American Geophysical Union,WEB, AGU Position Statement on Teaching Creationism as Science, American Geophysical Institute, 1998,weblink and numerous other professional teaching and scientific societies.In April 2010, the American Academy of Religion issued Guidelines for Teaching About Religion in K‐12 Public Schools in the United States, which included guidance that creation science or intelligent design should not be taught in science classes, as "Creation science and intelligent design represent worldviews that fall outside of the realm of science that is defined as (and limited to) a method of inquiry based on gathering observable and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning." However, they, as well as other "worldviews that focus on speculation regarding the origins of life represent another important and relevant form of human inquiry that is appropriately studied in literature or social sciences courses. Such study, however, must include a diversity of worldviews representing a variety of religious and philosophical perspectives and must avoid privileging one view as more legitimate than others."WEB,weblink American Academy of Religion on teaching creationism, July 23, 2010, National Center for Science Education, National Center for Science Education, Berkeley, CA, 2010-08-09, Randy Moore and Sehoya Cotner, from the biology program at the University of Minnesota, reflect on the relevance of teaching creationism in the article "The Creationist Down the Hall: Does It Matter When Teachers Teach Creationism?" They conclude that "Despite decades of science education reform, numerous legal decisions declaring the teaching of creationism in public-school science classes to be unconstitutional, overwhelming evidence supporting evolution, and the many denunciations of creationism as nonscientific by professional scientific societies, creationism remains popular throughout the United States."JOURNAL, Moore, Randy, Cotner, Sehoya, May 2009, The Creationist Down the Hall: Does It Matter When Teachers Teach Creationism?, BioScience, 59, 5, 429–35, 10.1525/bio.2009.59.5.10, 0006-3568, 25502451, 1985BioSc..35..499W,

Scientific criticism

Science is a system of knowledge based on observation, empirical evidence, and the development of theories that yield testable explanations and predictions of natural phenomena. By contrast, creationism is often based on literal interpretations of the narratives of particular religious texts.NAS 2008, p. 12 Some creationist beliefs involve purported forces that lie outside of nature, such as supernatural intervention, and often do not allow predictions at all. Therefore, these can neither be confirmed nor disproved by scientists.NAS 2008, p. 10, "In science, explanations must be based on naturally occurring phenomena. Natural causes are, in principle, reproducible and therefore can be checked independently by others. If explanations are based on purported forces that are outside of nature, scientists have no way of either confirming or disproving those explanations." However, many creationist beliefs can be framed as testable predictions about phenomena such as the age of the Earth, its geological history and the origins, distributions and relationships of living organisms found on it. Early science incorporated elements of these beliefs, but as science developed these beliefs were gradually falsified and were replaced with understandings based on accumulated and reproducible evidence that often allows the accurate prediction of future results.WEB,weblink An Index to Creationist Claims, Isaak, Mark, 2006, TalkOrigins Archive, The TalkOrigins Foundation, Inc., Houston, TX, 2012-12-09, Futuyma 2005Some scientists, such as Stephen Jay Gould,Gould 1999 consider science and religion to be two compatible and complementary fields, with authorities in distinct areas of human experience, so-called non-overlapping magisteria.JOURNAL, Gould, Stephen Jay, March 1997, Nonoverlapping Magisteria,weblink Natural History (magazine), Natural History, 106, 16–22, 3, 0028-0712, 2014-03-31, This view is also held by many theologians, who believe that ultimate origins and meaning are addressed by religion, but favor verifiable scientific explanations of natural phenomena over those of creationist beliefs. Other scientists, such as Richard Dawkins,Dawkins 2006, p. 5 reject the non-overlapping magisteria and argue that, in disproving literal interpretations of creationists, the scientific method also undermines religious texts as a source of truth. Irrespective of this diversity in viewpoints, since creationist beliefs are not supported by empirical evidence, the scientific consensus is that any attempt to teach creationism as science should be rejected.WEB,weblink Royal Society statement on evolution, creationism and intelligent design, April 11, 2006, Royal Society, Royal Society, London,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20080602213726weblink">weblink 2008-06-02, 2014-03-09, WEB,weblink Ten Major Court Cases about Evolution and Creationism, Matsumura, Molleen, Mead, Louise, February 14, 2001, National Center for Science Education, National Center for Science Education, Berkeley, CA, 2008-11-04, Updated 2007-07-31.WEB,weblink Ann Coulter: No evidence for evolution?, Myers, PZ, PZ Myers, June 18, 2006, Pharyngula (blog), Pharyngula, ScienceBlogs, ScienceBlogs LLC, Blog, 2007-09-12, yes,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20070809011055weblink">weblink August 9, 2007, ">

Organizations{| style"width:100%;"

style="vertical-align:top;"
Creationism (in general)


Young Earth creationism


Old Earth creationism
  • Old Earth Ministries (OEM), formerly Answers In Creation (AIC), led by Greg NeymanWEB,weblink About Old Earth Ministries?, Old Earth Ministries, Old Earth Ministries, Springfield, OH, 2014-03-09,
  • Reasons to Believe, led by Hugh Ross
Intelligent design


Evolutionary creationism


Evolution

See also

{hide}Wikipedia books
|1=Evolution
|3=Creationism and Intelligent Design
{edih}{{Div col}}

Footnotes

{{Reflist|group="note"|refs=}}

Notes

{{Reflist|30em}}

References

  • BOOK, `Abdu'l-Bahá, `Abdu'l-Bahá, 1982, Originally published 1922–1925, The Promulgation of Universal Peace: Talks Delivered by 'Abdu'l-Bahá during His Visit to the United States and Canada in 1912, Compiled by Howard MacNutt, 2nd, Wilmette, IL, Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 978-0-8774-3172-5, 81021689, 853066452, `Abdu'l-Bahá 1982,
  • BOOK, Aviezer, Nathan, Nathan Aviezer, 1990, In the Beginning—: Biblical Creation and Science, Hoboken, NJ, KTAV Publishing House, 978-0-88125-328-3, 89049127, 20800545, Aviezer 1990,
  • JOURNAL, Barlow, Nora, Nora Barlow, 1963, Darwin's Ornithological Notes,weblink Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series, 2, 7, 201–278, 0068-2306, 2009-06-10, Barlow 1963,
  • BOOK, Bowler, Peter J., 2003, Evolution: The History of an Idea, 3rd, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press, 978-0-520-23693-6, 2002007569, 49824702, Bowler 2003,
  • BOOK, Bucaille, Maurice, Maurice Bucaille, 1977, Original French edition published 1976, The Bible, The Qur'an and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge, translated from the French by Alastair D. Pannell and the author, Paris, Seghers, 76488005, 373529514, Bucaille 1977,
  • BOOK, Bucaille, Maurice, 1976, The Qur'an and Modern Science,weblink Booklet, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Cooperative Offices for Call & Guidance at Al-Badiah & Industrial Area, 52246825, 2014-03-21, Bucaille 1976,
  • BOOK, Carmell, Aryeh, Domb, Cyril, 1976, Challenge: Torah Views on Science and its Problems, Jerusalem; New York, Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists; Feldheim Publishers, 978-0-87306-174-2, 77357516, 609518840, Carmell & Domb 1976,
  • BOOK, Carper, James C., Hunt, Thomas C., 2009, The Praeger Handbook of Religion and Education in the United States, 1: A–L, Westport, CT, Greenwood Publishing Group, Praeger Publishers, 978-0-275-99228-6, 2008041156, 246888936, Carper & Hunt 2009,
  • BOOK, Collins, Francis S., Francis Collins, 2006, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, New York, Free Press (publisher), Free Press, 978-0-7432-8639-8, 2006045316, 65978711, Collins 2006, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief,
  • BOOK, Dasgupta, Surendranath, Surendranath Dasgupta, 1922, A History of Indian Philosophy, 1, Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Press, 22018463, 4235820, Dasgupta 1922,
  • BOOK, Dawkins, Richard, Richard Dawkins, 2006, The God Delusion, London, Bantam Press, 978-0-5930-5548-9, 2006015506, 70671839, Dawkins 2006,
  • BOOK, Desmond, Adrian, Adrian Desmond, 1989, The Politics of Evolution: Morphology, Medicine, and Reform in Radical London, Science and its Conceptual Foundations, Chicago, Illinois, University of Chicago Press, 978-0-226-14346-0, 89005137, 828159401, Desmond 1989,
  • BOOK, Desmond, Adrian, Moore, James, James Moore (biographer), 1991, Darwin, London; New York, Michael Joseph (publisher), Michael Joseph; Viking Press, Viking Penguin, 978-0-7181-3430-3, 92196964, 26502431, harv,
  • BOOK, Dewey, John, John Dewey, 1994, The Influence of Darwinism on Philosophy, Martin Gardner, Martin Gardner, Great Essays in Science, Buffalo, NY, Prometheus Books, 978-0-87975-853-0, 93035453, 28846489, Dewey 1994,
  • BOOK, Draper, Paul R., Paul Draper (philosopher), 2005, God, Science, and Naturalism, Wainwright, William J., The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion, 272–303,weblink Oxford; New York, Oxford University Press, 10.1093/0195138090.003.0012, 978-0-1951-3809-2, 2004043890, 54542845, 2014-03-15, Draper 2005,
  • BOOK, Dundes, Alan, Alan Dundes, 1984, Introduction, Dundes, Alan, Sacred Narrative: Readings in the Theory of Myth, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press, 978-0-5200-5192-8, 83017921, 9944508, Dundes 1984,
  • BOOK, Dundes, Alan, 1996, Madness in Method, Plus a Plea for Projective Inversion in Myth, Patton, Laurie L., Laurie L. Patton, Doniger, Wendy, Wendy Doniger, Myth and Method, Charlottesville; London, University of Virginia Press, 978-0-8139-1657-6, 96014672, 34516050, Patton & Doniger 1996,
  • BOOK, Eddy, Mary Baker, Mary Baker Eddy, 1934, Originally published 1875 as Science and Health; Christian Scientist Publishing Company: Boston, MA, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, Sunday school, Boston, MA, Christian Science Publishing Society for the Trustees under the will of Mary Baker G. Eddy, 42044682, 4579118, Eddy 1934, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures,
  • BOOK, Forrest, Barbara, Barbara Forrest, Gross, Paul R., Paul R. Gross, 2004, Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design, Oxford; New York, Oxford University Press, 978-0-19-515742-0, 50913078, 2002192677, Forrest & Gross 2004, Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design,
  • BOOK, Forster, Roger, Roger T. Forster, Marston, V. Paul, 1999, Genesis Through History, Reason, Science, and Faith, Crowborough, East Sussex, Monarch Books, 978-1-85424-441-3, 99488551, 41159110, Forster & Marston 1999,
  • BOOK, Futuyma, Douglas J., Douglas J. Futuyma, 2005, Evolutionary Science, Creationism, and Society, Evolution, Sunderland, MA, Sinauer Associates, 978-0-87893-187-3, 2004029808, 57311264, Futuyma 2005,
  • BOOK, Giberson, Karl W., Yerxa, Donald A., 2002, Species of Origins: America's Search for a Creation Story, Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield, 978-0-7425-0764-7, 2002002365, 49031109, Giberson & Yerxa 2002,
  • BOOK, Gosse, Philip Henry, Philip Henry Gosse, 1857, Omphalos: An Attempt to Untie the Geological Knot, London, John Van Voorst, J. Van Voorst, 11004351, 7631539, Gosse 1857, Omphalos (book),
  • BOOK, Gould, Stephen Jay, Stephen Jay Gould, 1999, Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life, Library of Contemporary Thought, 1st, New York, Ballantine Books, Ballantine Publishing Group, 978-0-345-43009-0, 98031335, 39886951, Gould 1999, Rocks of Ages,
  • BOOK, Gunn, Angus M., 2004, Evolution and Creationism in the Public Schools: A Handbook for Educators, Parents, and Community Leaders, Jefferson, NC, McFarland & Company, 978-0-7864-2002-5, 2004018788, 56319812, Gunn 2004,
  • BOOK, Hayward, James L., 1998, The Creation/Evolution Controversy: An Annotated Bibliography, Magill Bibliographies, Lanham, MD; Pasadena, CA, Scarecrow Press; Salem Press, 253, 978-0-8108-3386-9, 98003138, 38496519, Hayward 1998,
  • BOOK, Lamoureux, Denis O., Denis Lamoureux, 1999, Evangelicals Inheriting the Wind: The Phillip E. Johnson Phenomenon, Darwinism Defeated?: The Johnson-Lamoureux Debate on Biological Origins, Foreword by J. I. Packer, Vancouver, B.C., Regent CollegeMedia, Regent College Publishing, 978-1-57383-133-8, 40892139, Lamoureux 1999,
  • BOOK, Masood, Steven, 1994, Originally published 1986, Jesus and the Indian Messiah, Oldham, England, Word of Life, 978-1-898868-00-2, 94229476, 491161526, Masood 1994,
  • BOOK, McComas, William F., 2002, Science and Its Myths, Shermer, Michael, Michael Shermer, The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience, 1, Santa Barbara, CA, ABC-CLIO, 978-1-57607-653-8, 2002009653, 50155642, Shermer 2002, The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience,
  • BOOK, McGrath, Alister E., Alister McGrath, 2010, Science and Religion: A New Introduction, 2nd, Malden, MA, Wiley-Blackwell, 978-1-4051-8790-9, 2009020180, 366494307, McGrath 2010,
  • BOOK, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Sciences, 1999, Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences,weblink 2nd, Washington, D.C., National Academies Press, National Academy Press, 978-0-309-06406-4, 99006259, 43803228, 2014-11-22, NAS 1999,
  • BOOK, National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine, Institute of Medicine, 2008, Science, Evolution, and Creationism, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 1, 3–4,weblink Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 978-0-309-10586-6, 2007015904, 123539346, 2014-11-22, NAS 2008, 2008PNAS..105....3A, 10.1073/pnas.0711608105, 18178613, 2224205,
  • BOOK, Numbers, Ronald L., Ronald Numbers, 1998, Darwinism Comes to America, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 978-0-674-19312-3, 98016212, 38747194, Numbers 1998,
  • BOOK, Numbers, Ronald L., 2006, Originally published 1992 as The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism; New York: Alfred A. Knopf, The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design, Expanded ed., 1st Harvard University Press pbk., Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 978-0-674-02339-0, 2006043675, 69734583, Numbers 2006, The Creationists,
  • BOOK, Okasha, Samir, 2002, Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction, Very Short Introductions, 67, Oxford; New York, Oxford University Press, 978-0-19-280283-5, 2002510456, 48932644, Okasha 2002,
  • BOOK, Pennock, Robert T., Robert T. Pennock, 1999, Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against the New Creationism, Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 978-0-262-16180-0, 98027286, 44966044, Pennock 1999,
  • BOOK, Pennock, Robert T, Robert T. Pennock, 2001, Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives, Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 978-0-262-66124-9, 2001031276, 46729201, Pennock 2001,
  • BOOK, Philo, of Alexandria, Philo, 1854–55, The First Book of the Treatise on The Allegories of the Sacred Laws, after the Work of the Six Days of Creation,weblink The Works of Philo Judaeus,weblink Bohn's Classical Library, Translated from the Greek, by Charles Duke Yonge, C. D. Yonge, London, Henry George Bohn, H.G. Bohn, 20007801, 1429769, 2014-03-09, Philo,
  • BOOK, Plimer, Ian, Ian Plimer, 1994, Telling Lies for God: Reason vs Creationism, Milsons Point, NSW, Random House, Random House Australia, 978-0-09-182852-3, 94237744, 32608689, Plimer 1994,
  • BOOK, Polkinghorne, John, John Polkinghorne, 1998, Science and Theology: An Introduction, Minneapolis, MN, Fortress Press, 978-0-8006-3153-6, 98229115, 40117376, Polkinghorne 1998,
  • BOOK, Quammen, David, David Quammen, 2006, The Reluctant Mr. Darwin: An Intimate Portrait of Charles Darwin and the Making of His Theory of Evolution, Great Discoveries, New York, James Atlas, Atlas Books/W. W. Norton & Company, 978-0-393-05981-6, 2006009864, 65400177, Quammen 2006,
  • BOOK, Rainey, David, Faith Reads: A Selective Guide to Christian Nonfiction, 2008, Westport, CT, Libraries Unlimited, 978-1-59158-602-9, 2008010352, 213599217, Rainey 2012,
  • BOOK, Schroeder, Gerald L., Gerald Schroeder, 1998, Originally published 1997; New York: Free Press (publisher), Free Press, The Science of God: The Convergence of Scientific and Biblical Wisdom, 1st Broadway Books trade paperback, New York, Broadway Books, 978-0-7679-0303-5, 97014978, 39162332, Schroeder 1998,
  • BOOK, Scott, Eugenie C., Eugenie Scott, 1999, Science, Religion, and Evolution, Springer, Dale A., Scotchmoor, Judy, Evolution: Investigating the Evidence,weblink Reprint, The Paleontological Society Special Publications, 9, Pittsburgh, PA, Paleontological Society, 00274093, 42725350,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20030628210954weblink">weblink 2003-06-28, Scott 1999, "Presented as a Paleontological Society short course at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America, Denver, Colorado, October 24, 1999."
  • BOOK, Scott, Eugenie C., Eugenie Scott, 2005, Originally published 2004; Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Greenwood Press, Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction, Foreword by Niles Eldredge, 1st paperback, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press, 978-0-520-24650-8, 2005048649, 60420899, Scott 2005,
  • BOOK, Secord, James A., Victorian Sensation: The Extraordinary Publication, Reception, and Secret Authorship of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, Chicago, Illinois, University of Chicago Press, 2000, 978-0-226-74410-0, 00009124, 43864195, Secord 2000,
  • BOOK, Stewart, Melville Y., Melville Y. Stewart, 2010, Science and Religion in Dialogue, Malden, MA, Wiley-Blackwell, 978-1-4051-8921-7, 2009032180, 430678957, Stewart 2010,
  • BOOK, Sweet, William, William Sweet, Feist, Richard, 2007, Religion and the Challenges of Science, Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT, Ashgate Publishing, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 978-0-7546-5715-6, 2006030598, 71778930, Sweet & Feist 2007,
  • BOOK, Wilder-Smith, A. E., A. E. Wilder-Smith, 1978, Die Naturwissenschaften kennen keine Evolution: Empirische und theoretische Einwände gegen die Evolutionstheorie, The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution, Basel, Switzerland, Schwabe Verlag, 978-3-7965-0691-8, 80067425, 245955034, Wilder-Smith 1978,
  • BOOK, Young, Davis A., 1995, The Biblical Flood: A Case Study of the Church's Response to Extrabiblical Evidence, Grand Rapids, MI, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Eerdmans, 978-0-8028-0719-9, 95001899, 246813515, Young 1995,

Further reading

  • BOOK, Anderson, Bernard W., Bernhard Anderson, 1967, Creation versus Chaos: The Reinterpretation of Mythical Symbolism in the Bible, New York, Association Press, 67014578, 671184, Anderson 1967,
  • BOOK, Anderson, Bernhard W., 1984, Creation in the Old Testament, Issues in Religion and Theology, 6, Introduction by Bernhard W. Anderson, Philadelphia; London, Fortress Press; Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 978-0-8006-1768-4, 83048910, 10374840, Anderson 1984,
  • BOOK, Barbour, Ian G., Ian Barbour, 1997, Religion and Science: Historical and Contemporary Issues, 1st HarperCollins revised, San Francisco, CA, HarperCollins, HarperSanFrancisco, 978-0-06-060938-2, 97006294, 36417827, Barbour 1997,
  • BOOK, Barbour, Ian G., 2000, When Science Meets Religion, 1st, San Francisco, CA, HarperSanFrancisco, 978-0-06-060381-6, 99055579, 42752713, Barbour 2000,
  • BOOK, Clark, Kelly James, 2014, Religion and the Sciences of Origins: Historical and Contemporary Discussions, 1st, Basingstoke, UK, Palgrave Macmillan, 978-1-137-41483-0, 2014466739, 889777438, Clark 2014,
  • BOOK, Darwin, Charles, Charles Darwin, 1958, Barlow, Nora, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, 1809-1882: With original omissions restored; Edited and with Appendix and Notes by his grand-daughter, Nora Barlow,weblink London, Collins, 93017940, 869541868, 2009-01-09, Darwin 1958,
  • BOOK, Kaplan, Aryeh, Aryeh Kaplan, 1993, Immortality, Resurrection, and the Age of the Universe: A Kabbalistic View, With an appendix Derush Or ha-Hayyim by Israel Lipschitz; translated and annotated by Yaakov Elman, Hoboken, NJ, KTAV Publishing House in association with the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists, 978-0-88125-345-0, 92036917, 26800167, Kaplan 1993,
  • BOOK, Kauffman, Stuart A., Stuart Kauffman, 2008, Reinventing the Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason and Religion, New York, Basic Books, 978-0-465-00300-6, 2007052263, 191023778, Kauffman 2008,
  • BOOK, Leeming, David Adams, Leeming, Margaret, 1995, A Dictionary of Creation Myths, New York, Oxford University Press, 978-0-19-510275-8, 95039961, 33160980, Leeming & Leeming 1995,
  • JOURNAL, Primack, Joel R., Joel Primack, Abrams, Nancy Ellen, Jan–Feb 1995, In a Beginning...: Quantum Cosmology and Kabbalah,weblink PDF, Tikkun (magazine), Tikkun, 10, 1, 66–73, 0887-9982, 2014-04-24,
  • BOOK, Roberts, Michael, 2008, Evangelicals and Science, Greenwood Guides to Science and Religion, Westport, CT, Greenwood Press, 978-0-313-33113-8, 2007041059, 174138819, Roberts 2008,

External links

{{Commons|Creationism}} {{Philosophy of religion}}{{Authority control}}

- content above as imported from Wikipedia
- "Creationism" does not exist on GetWiki (yet)
- time: 4:21am EST - Wed, Feb 20 2019
[ this remote article is provided by Wikipedia ]
LATEST EDITS [ see all ]
GETWIKI 09 MAY 2016
GETWIKI 18 OCT 2015
M.R.M. Parrott
Biographies
GETWIKI 20 AUG 2014
GETWIKI 19 AUG 2014
GETWIKI 18 AUG 2014
Wikinfo
Culture
CONNECT