   #copyright

Creationism

2007 Schools Wikipedia Selection. Related subjects: Myths; Religious disputes

          "Creationism" can also refer to origin beliefs in general, or to
          an alternative of traducianism.

   "The Creation of Light" by Gustave Doré.
   Enlarge
   "The Creation of Light" by Gustave Doré.

   Creationism can either refer to:
    1. the belief that humanity, life, the Earth, or the universe as a
       whole was specially created by a supreme being (often referred to
       specifically as God) or by other forms of supernatural
       intervention. or
    2. in other common definitions, it is referred to more precisely as
       the belief in a literal interpretation of specific religious works
       referring to God creating the universe.

   This divine intervention may be seen either as an act of creation from
   nothing ( ex nihilo) or the (re)-emergence of order from pre-existing
   chaos ( demiurge). Creationism is a belief about a supernatural entity
   and not per se a scientific description of nature. Various forms of
   creationism are found; principally in religions of the Abrahamic faiths
   such as Christianity, and in some Dharmic faiths such as Hinduism,
   although such beliefs can be found in many other theistic religions. In
   modern usage, the term creationism has come to be specifically
   associated with the brand of conservative Christian fundamentalism
   which rejects various aspects of evolution, geology, cosmology, and
   other natural sciences that address the origins of the natural world.

   Many who believe in a supernatural creation consider the idea to be an
   aspect of religious faith compatible with, or otherwise unaffected by,
   scientific descriptions. However, "creationism" in common usage
   typically connotes a religious, political, and social campaign—for
   instance, in education—to assert the dominance or widespread acceptance
   of a spiritual view of nature and of humanity's place in it. This view
   is in direct conflict with certain interpretations of the scientific
   method or naturalism that are rejected by such creationists as
   materialistic, secular, or even antireligious.

   Those who hold creationist views reject scientific theories which they
   feel contradict their religious texts. Most notable is the rejection of
   evolution and common descent by many creationists, who, like Bishop
   Wilberforce find the idea of humans being "ascended from lesser
   creatures" offensive or blasphemous. Such creationists often also
   reject the current scientific consensus regarding the origin of life,
   origin of the human species, geologic history of the Earth, formation
   of the solar system, and origin of the universe. Such Creationism is
   also separate from, and should not be confused with the separate
   Christian tradition of " Creation Spirituality" which draws upon the
   theology of Matthew Fox.

Overview

   The term creationism is most often used to describe the belief that
   creation occurred literally as described in the book of Genesis (for
   both Jews and Christians) or the Qur'an (for Muslims). The terms
   creationism and creationist have become particularly associated with
   beliefs conflicting with the theory of evolution by mechanisms acting
   on genetic variation. This conflict is most prevalent in the United
   States, where there has been sustained creation-evolution controversy
   in the public arena. Many who consider themselves adherents of the
   Abrahamic denominations, however, believe in divine creation but accept
   evolution by natural selection, as well as, to a greater or lesser
   extent, scientific explanations of the origins and development of the
   universe, the Earth, and life – such beliefs have been given the name "
   theistic evolution","evolutionary creationism" or "progressive
   creationism".

   In a Christian context, many creationists adopt a literal
   interpretation of the Biblical creation narratives, and say that the
   Bible provides a factual account, given from the perspective of the
   only one who was there at the time to witness it: God. They seek to
   harmonize science with what they believe to be an eye-witness account
   of the origin of things (see Young Earth Creationism, for example).
   Opponents argue that this throws doubt upon scientific evidence as an
   empirical source for information on natural history, questioning the
   scientific nature of the literalistic Biblical view. Creationists take
   the position that neither theory is verifiable in the scientific sense,
   and that the scientific evidence conforms more closely to the creation
   model of origins than it does to the evolutionary model.

   Almost all churches teach that God created the cosmos. Most
   contemporary Christian scholars from mainstream churches, such as Roman
   Catholic, Anglican and Lutheran, reject reading the Bible as though it
   could shed light on the physics of creation instead of the spiritual
   meaning of creation. The Roman Catholic Church now explicitly accepts
   the theory of Evolution , as do pretty well all Anglican scholars Of
   which Rev Dr John Polkinghorne FRS is a paradigm, arguing that
   evolution is one of the principles through which God created living
   beings. Earlier examples of this attitude include Frederick Temple, Asa
   Gray and Charles Kingsley who were enthusiastic supporters of Darwin's
   theories on publication, 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,
   which assumes that Genesis is a poetic work, and that just as human
   understanding of God increases gradually over time, so does the
   understanding of His creation. In fact, both Jews and Christians have
   been considering the idea of the creation history as an allegory
   (instead of an historical description) long before the development of
   Darwin's theory of evolution. Two notable examples are Saint Augustine
   (4th century) that, on theological grounds, argued that everything in
   the universe was created by God in the same instant, (and not in seven
   days as a plain account of Genesis would require) ; and the 1st century
   Jewish scholar Philo of Alexandria, who wrote that it would be a
   mistake to think that creation happened in six days, or in any set
   amount of time.

   However, many believers in a literal interpretation argue that once a
   poetic view of the creation account in Genesis is adopted, one begins
   to question the historicity of other central topics of that book.
   Furthermore, the liberal approach suggests, sometimes outright, that
   Jesus as seen in the New Testament, or the writers of the Bible, had a
   mistaken understanding of the reliability of the Bible, and erroneously
   believed the book of Genesis to be literal history: a proposition that,
   if adopted, could have radical implications for Christian faith and the
   reliability of the Bible.

Political context

   In the secular sense, "creationism" refers to a political doctrine
   which asserts the validity and superiority of a particular
   religiously-based origin belief over those of other belief systems,
   including those in particular espoused through secular or scientific
   rationale (see Creation-evolution controversy). The meaning of the term
   "creationism" depends upon the context wherein it is used, as it refers
   to a particular origin belief within a particular political culture.

   In the United States, more so than in the rest of the world,
   creationism has become centered in political controversy, in particular
   over public education, and whether teaching evolution in science
   classes conflicts unfairly with the creationist worldview. Currently,
   the controversy has come in the form of whether advocates of the
   Intelligent Design movement who wish to " Teach the Controversy" in
   science classes have overstepped the boundaries of separation of church
   and state.

   Creation Science is a branch of creationism that aims to reconcile
   modern science with a creationist worldview. Advocates of Creation
   Science believe that scientific evidence best supports the Biblical
   account of creation. The scientific status of Creation Science is
   disputed by most of the scientific community as pseudoscience because
   Creation Science begins with a desired answer and attempts to interpret
   all evidence to fit in with this predetermined conclusion. According to
   the methodological demarcation principle of the rationalistic
   falsificationism, justified by Karl Popper as a philosophy of science
   and broadly supported by scientists, scientific theories need to be
   falsifiable. Opponents of Creation Science see this as in direct
   conflict with the assumption that the literal interpretation of the
   Bible is absolutely true and cannot be refuted even in principle.

   The most widely accepted postmodern irrationalistic philosophy of
   science was proposed by Thomas Kuhn and contrasts this rationalistic
   view. He held that only such theories are accepted (by paradigm shift)
   that show a superior ability to solve problems. The scientific
   consensus is that this is not the case for either creation science or
   intelligent design. Yet, Kuhn's philosophy was partly welcomed and
   embraced by creation science and intelligent design proponents, since
   it lacks universal methodological rules that could rule out their views
   from science. This intentional and inherent provision has been a
   frequent cause of attack and criticism on Kuhn's philosophy, especially
   by those opposing relativism. (See Relevance of The Structure of
   Scientific Revolutions for details.)

History

   The history of creationism is tied to the history of religions.
   Creationism in the West primarily had some of its earliest roots in
   Judaism. For example, Abraham ibn Ezra's (c. 1089–1164) commentary on
   Genesis is greatly esteemed in traditional rabbinical circles and he
   was a creationist.

   In the 18th and 19th centuries, naturalists challenged the Biblical
   account of creation as to be in conflict with empirical observations of
   natural history from scientific inquiry. Creationists consider their
   primary source to be the ancient Hebrew text describing creation
   according to Genesis. While the term creationism was not in common use
   before the late 19th century they see themselves as being the
   philosophical and religious offspring of the traditions that held that
   text sacred.

   The biblical account of history, cosmology and natural history was
   believed by Jews, Christians and Muslims. But, both Jews and Christians
   have been considering the idea of the creation history as an allegory
   (instead of an historical description) long before the beginning of
   modern history. Most people in Europe, the Middle East and other areas
   of the Islamic world believed that a supreme being had existed and
   would exist eternally, and that everything else in existence had been
   created by this supreme being, known variously as God, YHWH, or Allah.
   This belief was based on the authority of Genesis, the Qur'an, and
   other ancient histories, which were held to be historically accurate
   and no systematic or scientific inquiry was made into the validity of
   the text.

   Islamic scholars preserved ancient Greek texts and developed their
   ideas, leading to the Renaissance which brought a questioning of
   Biblical cosmology. With the Enlightenment a variety of scientific and
   philosophical movements challenged traditional viewpoints in Europe and
   the Americas. Natural history developed with the aim of understanding
   God's plan, but found contradictions, which in revolutionary France
   were interpreted as science supporting evolution. Elsewhere,
   particularly in England, clerical naturalists sought explanations
   compatible with interpretations of biblical texts, anticipating many
   later creationist arguments.

   While the concept of an ancient earth became widely accepted, Charles
   Darwin's theory of natural selection directly challenged belief in
   God's immediate involvement in creating species, and in response
   Creationism arose as a distinct movement aiming to justify and reassert
   the literal accuracy of sacred texts, particularly the words of
   Genesis.

   The history of creationism has relevance to the creation-evolution
   controversy. Proponents of creationism claim that it has a rich
   heritage grounded in ancient recorded histories and consistent with
   scientific observation. Opponents describe creationism's offspring,
   creation science and intelligent design, as pseudosciences and argue
   that these are reactionary movements against science.

Types of creationism

   Creationism covers a spectrum of beliefs which have been categorized
   into the broad types listed below. As a matter of popular belief and
   characterizations by the media, most people labeled "creationists" are
   those who object to specific parts of science for religious reasons,
   though many (if not most) people who believe in a divine act of
   creation do not categorically reject those parts of science.

Young Earth creationism

   The belief that the Earth was created by God within the last ten
   thousand years, literally as described in Genesis, within the
   approximate timeframe of biblical genealogies (detailed for example in
   the Ussher chronology). (They may or may not believe that the Universe
   is the same age.) It rejects not only radiometric and isochron dating
   of the age of the Earth, arguing that they are based on debatable
   assumptions, but also approaches such as ice core dating and
   dendrochronology. Instead, it interprets the geologic record largely as
   a result of a global flood. This view is held by many Protestant
   Christians in the USA, and by many Haredi Jews. It is also estimated
   that 47% of Americans hold this view, and a little under 10% of
   Christian colleges teach it. For Christian groups promoting this view,
   see the Institute for Creation Research (ICR), El Cajon, California,
   USA, and the Creation Research Society (CRS), Saint Joseph, Missouri,
   USA. Answers in Genesis (AIG) Ministries based in the Greater
   Cincinnati area is currently constructing the first Creation Museum.

   Because Young Earth creationists believe in the literal truth of the
   description in Genesis of divine creation of every "kind" of plant and
   creature during a week about 6,000 years ago, they dispute parts of
   evolution (specifically Universal Common Ancestry) which describes all
   species developing from a common ancestor, independent of divine
   intervention, by random chance, over a much longer time.

Modern geocentrism

   The view that God recently created a spherical world, and placed it in
   the centre of the universe. The Sun, planets and everything else in the
   universe revolve around it.

Omphalos hypothesis

   The Omphalos hypothesis argues that in order for the world to be
   functional, God must have created the Earth with mountains and canyons,
   trees with growth rings, and that therefore no evidence that we can see
   of the presumed age of the earth and universe can be taken as reliable.
   The idea has seen some revival in the twentieth century by some modern
   creationists, who have extended the argument to light that appears to
   originate in far-off stars and galaxies.

Creation science

   The technical arm of the creationist movement, most adherents to
   creation science believe that God created the Earth only recently, and
   the scientific evidence supports their interpretation of scripture.
   Various claims of these creation scientists include such ideas as
   creationist cosmologies which accommodate a universe on the order of
   thousands of years old, explanations for the fossil record as a record
   of the destruction of the global flood recorded in Genesis (see flood
   geology), and explanations for the present diversity as a result of
   rapid degradation of the perfect genomes God placed in " created kinds"
   (see creation biology).

Old Earth creationism

   The view that the physical universe was created by God, but that the
   creation event of Genesis is not to be taken strictly literally. 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 the evolutionary theory are questionable.

   Old-Earth creationism itself comes in at least three types:

Gap creationism

   Also called "Restitution creationism" this is the view that life was
   immediately created on a pre-existing old Earth. This group generally
   translates Genesis 1:2 as "The earth became without form and void,"
   indicating a destruction of the original creation by some unspecified
   cataclysm. This was popularized in the Scofield Reference Bible, but
   has little support from Hebrew scholars.

Day-age creationism

   The view that the "six days" of Genesis are not ordinary
   twenty-four-hour days, but rather much longer periods (for instance,
   each "day" could be the equivalent of millions of years of modern
   time). This theory often states that the Hebrew word "yôm", in the
   context of Genesis 1, can be properly interpreted as "age." Some
   adherents claim we are still living in the seventh age ("seventh day").

Progressive creationism

   The view that species have changed or evolved in a process continuously
   guided by God, with various ideas as to how the process operates (often
   leaving room for God's direct intervention at key moments in
   Earth/life's 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. This view can be, and often is,
   held in conjunction with other Old-earth views such as Day-age
   creationism or framework/metaphoric/poetic views.

Theistic evolution

   Also known as "evolutionary creationism", this is the general view
   that, instead of faith being in opposition to biological evolution,
   some or all classical religious teachings about God and creation are
   compatible with some or all of modern scientific theories, including
   specifically evolution. It generally views evolution as a tool used by
   God, and can synthesize with gap or day-age creationism. Most adherents
   consider that the first chapters of Genesis should not be interpreted
   as a "literal" description. It can still be described as "creationism"
   in holding that divine intervention brought about the origin of life or
   that divine Laws govern formation of species, but in the
   creation-evolution controversy its proponents generally take the
   "evolutionist" side. This sentiment was expressed by Fr. George Coyne,
   (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.

   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, including
   atheists, 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. Among other things, it
   means that science does not deal with the question of the existence of
   a Creator, and argues neither for nor against it.

   Many creationists (in the strict sense) would deny that the position is
   creationism at all, while on the other hand many scientists support
   such faiths which allow a voice to their spiritual side.

Neo-Creationism

   Neo-Creationists intentionally distance themselves from other forms of
   creationism, preferring to be known as wholly separate from creationism
   as a philosophy. Its goal is to restate creationism in terms more
   likely to be well received by the public, education policy makers and
   the scientific community. It aims to re-frame the debate over the
   origins of life in non-religious terms and without appeals to
   scripture, and to bring the scientific debate before the public. One of
   its principal claims is that ostensibly objective orthodox science is
   actually a dogmatically atheistic religion. Its proponents argue that
   the scientific method excludes certain explanations of phenomena,
   particularly where they point towards supernatural elements. This
   effectively excludes religious insight from contributing to
   understanding the universe. Neo-Creationists also argue that science,
   as an "atheistic enterprise", is at the root of many of contemporary
   society's ills (social unrest, family breakdown). The most recognized
   form of Neo-Creationism in the United States is the Intelligent Design
   movement. Unlike their philosophical forebears, Neo-Creationists
   largely do not believe in many of the traditional cornerstones of
   creationism such a young Earth, or in a dogmatically literal
   interpretation of the Bible. Common to all forms of Neo-Creationism is
   a rejection of naturalism, usually made together with a tacit admission
   of supernaturalism, and an open and often hostile opposition to what
   they term " Darwinism", which generally is meant to refer to evolution.

Intelligent design

   Intelligent design (ID) is the concept 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." Its
   leading proponents, all of whom are affiliated with the Discovery
   Institute, a conservative Christian think tank , claim that intelligent
   design is a scientific theory that stands on equal footing with, or is
   superior to, current scientific theories regarding the origin of life.

Jewish creationism

   Judaism has a continuum of views about creation, the origin of life and
   the role of evolution in the formation of species. The major Jewish
   denominations, including many Orthodox Jewish groups, accept
   evolutionary creationism or theistic evolution. Reform and Conservative
   Judaism do not take the Torah as a literal text, but rather as a
   symbolic or open-ended work. For Orthodox Jews who seek to reconcile
   discrepancies between science and 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, our own epistemological limits are
   to blame for any apparent irreconcilable point. They point to various
   discrepancies between what is expected and what actually is to
   demonstrate that things are not always as they appear. They point out
   to the fact that the even root word for "world" in the Hebrew language
   — עולם (oh•luhm) — means hidden. Just as they believe God created man
   and trees and the light on its way from the stars in their adult state,
   so too can they believe that the world was created in its "adult"
   state, with the understanding that there are, and can be, no physical
   ways to verify this. This belief has been advanced by Rabbi Dr. Dovid
   Gottlieb, former philosophy professor at Johns Hopkins University.
   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. Other interesting parallels
   are brought down from, among other sources, Nachmanides, who expounds
   that there was a Neanderthal-like species with which Adam mated (he did
   this long before Neanderthals had even been discovered scientifically).

Christian God as absolute origin

   Nearly all denominations of Christianity assert that God is the origin,
   the first cause. The Roman Catholic Church holds as an unchangeable
   tenet of Christian faith, that "In the beginning God created the
   heavens and the earth". Here, creation is described as an absolute
   beginning, which includes the assertion that the very existence of the
   universe is contingent upon a necessary higher being, God, who is not
   Himself created. Therefore the doctrine of biblical creation places the
   knowledge of God central in the pursuit of the knowledge of anything,
   for everything comes from God. Nevertheless, this view does not mandate
   the concept of separate human creation; it says nothing about the
   mechanism by which any thing was created.

Prevalence of creationism

United States

   Creationist car in Athens, Georgia
   Enlarge
   Creationist car in Athens, Georgia

   According to a 2006 Gallup poll, about 46% of Americans believe in
   strict creationism, concurring with the statement that "God created man
   pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000
   years," and 36% believe that God guided the process of evolution. Only
   13% believe that humans evolved over millions of years, without any
   supernatural intervention. Belief in creationism is inversely
   correlated to education; of those with post-graduate degrees, only 22%
   believe in strict creationism.

   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 ascribed to Biblically literal
   creationism."

   In 2000, a poll by the left wing think-tank People for the American Way
   estimated that:

          20% of Americans believe public schools should teach evolution
          only;
          17% of Americans believe that only evolution should be taught in
          science classes — religious explanations should be taught in
          another class;
          29% of Americans believe that Creationism should be discussed in
          science class as a 'belief,' not a scientific theory;
          13% of Americans believe that Creationism and evolution should
          be taught as 'scientific theories' in science class;
          16% of Americans believe that only Creationism should be taught;

   According to a study published in Science, between 1985 and 2005 the
   number of adult 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 United States the study also compared data from 32 European
   countries (including Turkey) and Japan. The only country where
   acceptance of evolution was lower than in the United States was Turkey
   (25%). (See the chart)

   Less-direct anecdotal evidence of the popularity of creationism is
   reflected in the response of IMAX theaters to the availability of
   Volcanoes of the Deep Sea, an IMAX film which makes a connection
   between human DNA and microbes inside undersea volcanoes. The film's
   distributor reported that the only U.S. states with theaters which
   chose not to show the film were Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, and
   South Carolina:

          We've got to pick a film that's going to sell in our area. If
          it's not going to sell, we're not going to take it," said the
          director of an IMAX theatre in Charleston that is not showing
          the movie. "Many people here believe in creationism, not
          evolution."

The western world outside the United States

   Most vocal creationists are from the United States, and creationist
   views are much less common elsewhere in the western world.

   According to a PBS documentary on evolution, Australian Young Earth
   Creationists claimed that “five percent of the Australian population
   now believe that Earth is thousands, rather than billions, of years
   old.” The documentary further states that “Australia is a particular
   stronghold of the creationist movement.” Taking these claims at face
   value, Young Earth Creationism is very much a minority position in
   Western countries.

   In Europe, creationism is a less well-defined phenomenon, and regular
   polls are not available. However, evolution is taught as scientific
   fact in most schools. In countries with a Roman Catholic majority,
   papal acceptance of evolution as worthy of study has essentially ended
   debate on the matter for many people. In the United Kingdom the
   Emmanuel Schools Foundation (previously the Vardy Foundation), which
   runs three government-funded 13 to 19 schools in the north of England
   (out of several thousand in the country) and plans to open several
   more, teaches that creationism and evolution are equally valid “faith
   positions”. One exam board (OCR) also specifically mentions and deals
   with creationism in its biology syllabus . However, this deals with it
   as a historical belief and addresses hostility towards evolution rather
   than promoting it as an alternative to naturalistic evolution.
   Mainstream scientific accounts are still expressed as fact. In Italy,
   former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi wanted to retire evolution from
   schools in the middle level; after one week of massive protests, he
   reversed his opinion..

   According to a study published in Science, a survey over the United
   States, Japan and Europe showed that public acceptance of evolution is
   most prevalent in Iceland, Denmark and Sweden at 80% of the population.
   (See the chart)

   Of particular note for Eastern Europe, Serbia suspended the teaching of
   evolution for one week in 2004, under education minister Ljiljana
   Čolić, only allowing schools to reintroduce evolution into the
   curriculum if they also taught creationism. "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.
   Čolić resigned after the government said that she had caused “problems
   that had started to reflect on the work of the entire government.”

   In the United Kingdom 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 evolution theory and the rest did not know. The
   poll had the effect of reinforcing a culture war false dichotomy on the
   subject in an attempt by the news organization to demonstrate the
   extent of the controversy. As the poll lacked nuanced survey techniques
   and equivocated on origin definitions as well as forced participants to
   make choices as though there were only three options, its results do
   not necessarily indicate the views of the general public concerning
   mainstream science or religious alternatives.

Criticism of creationism

Scientific critique of creationism

   Since the origins of modern geology in the 18th and 19th centuries,
   forms of creationism have become increasingly separated from mainstream
   science. As modern science called into question the literal
   interpretations of biblical account of creation in Genesis,
   creationists (especially Young Earth creationists) began to actively
   oppose the scientific consensus on questions of origins.

   There is a fundamental difference between the scientific approach to
   explaining the natural world and the creationist approach. The
   scientific approach uses the scientific method as a means of
   discovering information about nature. Scientists use observations,
   hypotheses and deductions to propose explanations for natural phenomena
   in the form of scientific theories. Predictions from these theories are
   tested by experiment. If a prediction turns out to be correct, the
   theory survives. This is a meritocratic form of systematic enquiry,
   where the best ideas supported by evidence and positive experimental
   results survive. In principle, the scientific method does not seek
   answers that fit a certain pre-determined conclusion, but rather works
   to construct viable, testable, and provable theories based on a solid
   evidential foundation. The evidential foundation therefore precludes
   any reference to revelation.

   Creationism, on the other hand, works by taking theologically
   conservative interpretations of scripture as the primary or only source
   of information about origins. Creationists believe that since the
   Creator created everything and also revealed scriptures, the scriptures
   have pre-eminence as a kind of evidence. Consistency with their
   interpretations of scripture is the measure by which they judge all
   other evidence. They then accept or reject scientific accounts based on
   whether or not they agree with their beliefs, discounting that which
   contradicts their understanding of scriptural revelation. This
   perspective can be seen as a type of luddism or anti-modernism since
   any seemingly opposing ideas are either ignored or dismissed. Those who
   oppose creationism point out that such positions are fundamentally
   unscientific and a hallmark of pseudoscience. Additionally, aspects of
   the scriptures which are not subject to scientific examination are not
   considered as reliable evidence to scientists.

   Certain adherents to creationism have declared that there exist
   versions of creationism (namely creation science) that are based on the
   scientific method. It was such claims that were the basis for the legal
   arguments that creationism deserved equal-time in the science
   classroom. Skeptical critics charge that creation science is not a
   theory that has come about through a systematic and scientific
   accumulation of evidence. It is predominantly based on the assumption
   of a literal interpretation of religious scripture and the emphasis of
   the authority of scripture over other sources of knowledge is evident
   in creation science literature.

   All scientific theories are falsifiable; that is, if evidence that
   contradicts any given theory comes to light, or if the theory is proven
   to no longer fit with the evidence, the theory itself is shown to be
   invalid and is either modified to be consistent with all the evidence
   or is discarded. Scientific theories can be (and often are) found to be
   incorrect or incomplete. Since creationism rests on an article of
   faith, its construction assumes that the narrative accounts of origins
   can never be shown falsified, no matter how strong the evidence is to
   the contrary.

   Evolutionary modern synthesis is the theory that fits all known
   biological and genetic evidence while being backed up by overwhelming
   evidence in the fossil record. Contrary to frequent claims by many
   opponents of the theory of evolution, transitional fossils exist which
   show a gradual change from one species to another. Moreover,
   evolutionary selection has been observed in living species (for a
   macroscopic instance, “tuskless elephants,” see elephant).

   In the last ten years, DNA analysis techniques applied to many
   organisms have demonstrated the genetic relationship between all forms
   of known life (humans share 50% of their DNA with yeast, 96% with
   chimpanzees). Even if the theory of evolution was disproved, this would
   not imply separate human creation, which is the main feature of
   creationism in the Abrahamic religions. It is exclusively in the public
   sphere, where young Earth creationists (especially in the U.S.) have
   fought for recognition of their world view, that the debate about
   creationism and evolution continues.

The Christian critique of creationism

   In "Intelligent Design as a Theological Problem", George Murphy argues
   against the common view that life on Earth in all its forms is direct
   evidence of God's act of creation (Murphy quotes Phillip 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 Jesus." The basis of this
   theology is Isaiah 45:15, "Truly, thou art a God who hidest thyself, O
   God of Israel, the Savior." This verse inspired Blaise Pascal to write,
   "What meets our eyes denotes neither a total absence nor a manifest
   presence of the divine, but the presence of a God who conceals
   himself." In the Heidelberg Disputation, Martin Luther referred to the
   same Biblical verse to propose his "theology of the cross": "That
   person does not deserve to be called a theologian who looks upon the
   invisible things of God as though they were clearly perceptible in
   those things which have actually happened ... He deserves to be called
   a theologian, however, who comprehends the visible and manifest things
   of God seen through suffering and the cross."

   Luther opposes his theology of the cross to what he called the "
   theology of glory":

          A theologian of glory does not recognize, along with the
          Apostle, the crucified and hidden God alone [I Cor. 2:2]. He
          sees and speaks of God's glorious manifestation among the
          heathen, how his invisible nature can be known from the things
          which are visible [Cf. Rom. 1:20] and how he is present and
          powerful in all things everywhere.

   For Murphy, Creationists are modern-day theologians of glory. Following
   Luther, Murphy argues that a true Christian cannot discover God from
   clues in creation, but only from the crucified Christ.

   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 wrote, in
   Philippians 2:5-8,

          Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
          who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality
          with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the
          form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being
          found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto
          death, even death on a cross.

   Murphy concludes that,

          Just as the son of God limited himself by taking human form and
          dying on the cross, God limits divine action in the world to be
          in accord with rational laws 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.

   In March 2006, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the leader of
   the world's Anglicans, reported that he was opposed to teaching
   creationism in schools. "My worry is creationism can end up reducing
   the doctrine of creation rather than enhancing it," Williams explained.
   Archbishop Williams also explained that creationism was "a kind of
   category mistake, as if the Bible were a theory like other theories."
   Williams's position is in line with that of the Episcopal Church, the
   American branch of the Anglican Communion.

   Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism"
   This reference article is mainly selected from the English Wikipedia
   with only minor checks and changes (see www.wikipedia.org for details
   of authors and sources) and is available under the GNU Free
   Documentation License. See also our Disclaimer.
