0
Scientists generally have no argument with the notion of creation, as long as it does not conflict with known scientific facts. However, creationism is a dogmatic religious belief that insists that science is wrong and that the earth was created exactly as its proponents believe The Bible literally says it was.
The Bible itself is the greatest enemy of these creationists. First of all, there are two, incompatible creation stories in Genesis, at 1:1-2:4a and at 2:4b-20. Creationists ought to decide which creation story it is that they support - the first one, which states that man, both male and female, was created last of all living things, or the second story that says that Adam was created first, then all other living things, and then Eve. Leon R. Kass (The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis) says that pious readers, believing that the text cannot contain contradictions, ignore the major disjunctions between the two creation stories and tend to treat the second story as the fuller, more detailed account of the creation of man (and woman), but he says we must scrupulously avoid reading into the second story any facts or notions taken from the first (and vice versa) if we mean to understand each story on its own terms. Anything less than this can not be compared with science.
The second creation story appears to place creation some six thousand years ago, yet science has shown that the world is approximately 4.54 million years old. Some creationists accept the great age of the world, and say that the 'day' of the first creation story is really intended to mean an indefinite period, even though experts in the Hebrew language say there is no reason to interpret the text in this way. And a problem with this is that the scientific creation of the world was never so simple and linear that it could fit the creation story, no matter how interpreted.
The first creation story also suffers from the problem that creation is supposed to have occurred in an impossible sequence. As the early Church Father, Origen, had to say on this (On First Principles, 3.1.1): "Now what man of intelligence will believe that the first and the second and the third day, and the evening and the morning existed without the sun and moon and stars? And that the first day if we may so call it, was even without a heaven? And who is so silly as to believe that God, after the manner of a farmer, planted a paradise eastward in Eden, and set in it a visible and palpable 'tree of life' ..."
Much of the evidence against creationism is the evidence for cosmology and evolution. There is so much evidence that science has the explanation for what really happened, that creationism must remain a convenient religious discussion only.
For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
What else can I help you with?
Is creationism credible?
There are at least two, quite different forms of creationism, and the question of whether creationism is credible must be applied separately to each. No doubt, both Young-Earth creationism and Old-Earth creationism are credible to their proponents, but the question must be whether they are credible to other well informed people.Young-Earth creationism holds that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, usually around six thousand. However, science has proven conclusively that the world is billions of years old, so this can not be credible. Because of the overwhelming evidence that the world is certainly more than six thousand years old, some Young-Earth creationists have adapted Young-Earth creationism by saying that each of the days stated in Genesis chapter 1 was really an almost indefinite period of time. According to this version, the world could be many thousands of years old. This not only undermines the standard Young-Earth creationism argument, but it is even less credible, given that there is no supporting evidence for this, not even biblical evidence.Old-Earth creationism accepts the scientific evidence for the great age of the Earth, so from this point of view it is more credible than Young-Earth creationism. Nevertheless, some Old-Earth creationists say that God created all living things just as they are today. Others accept that species evolved, but say that this was not the result of natural selection but Intelligent Design. Both versions of Old-Earth creationism fail in the face of scientific evidence, although Intelligent Design is more sophisticated and therefore somewhat more credible. Intelligent Design is also claimed by some Young-Earth creationists, perhaps because it has captured the imagination of a proportion of the population, but it seems inherently an Old-Earth creationism concept.Ultimately credibility comes down to whether a hypothesis is compatible with the scientific evidence. Creationists do not put forward scientific evidence to support their hypotheses, instead proposing various ways in which they believe they can undermine the evidence for evolution. Occasionally, scientists respond (eg. Dawkins, Perakh, et al)and demonstrate the failure of these arguments. So, to be credible, creationism has to adapt further, until its claims are at least somewhat consistent with the scientific evidence.For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
When was creationism done?
When Charles Hodge wrote "What is Darwinism?" in 1874 and argued that evolution can not explain the complexities of the eye is when creationism was first used as a tool against evolution. Before that, Thomas Aquinas and later William Paley used the design argument to 'prove' God's existence, as a small group in the United States are doing today, and the story of Creation was believed to be literally true by all Christian sects. However, it was not called 'Creationism' as there was no opposing theory at the time.
Why is creationism considered pseudoscience?
Creationism is considered a Pseudoscience because it is impossible to prove that a divine being created a world, because we cannot study divine beings. Science only deals with things that can be observed and reported, and is based on facts, not beliefs.
Who will give a guest lecture on Creationism?
The Institute for Creation Science and Answers in Genesis are just two organisations that have speakers available to give lectures on Creationism.
How old is the creationism theory?
If you're talking about the 'Creation Account', according to the Bible, it's as old as mankind.According to Bible chronology, Adam was created in 4026 BCE.Eve some time after.The account of creation was written by Moses in 1513 BCE, when he was in the wilderness.However, the heavens and the earth were created "in the beginning", long before mankind was created. The Bible never comments on how long ago that was, so the earth and the planets and the stars, etc, could have been around for billions of years before man was ever created. The creation account in the Bible only talks about the time when God turned his attention to the 'already existing' earth, to prepare it for life.
Is there evidence for progressive creationism?
No.
What is a scientific view on creationism?
The scientific view on creationism is that it is not supported by empirical evidence or scientific consensus. Evolutionary theory, supported by a vast body of evidence, is widely accepted by the scientific community as the explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. Creationism, which posits divine intervention as the origin of species, is considered a belief system based on faith rather than scientific inquiry.
Does creationism disprove adaptation?
No, creationism and adaptation are not mutually exclusive concepts. Creationism is a belief in a divine creator, while adaptation is a scientific process by which organisms change over time to better survive in their environment. Many people believe that adaptation is evidence of intelligent design by a divine creator.
Why is creationism not considered to be a scientific theory?
To be technical it is supported by no evidence, is internally inconsistent and is not falsifiable.
How come creationism isn't taught in public schools?
Creationism IS taught in public schools. There are many forms of creationism taught in mythology classes. Creationism, itself, is explored in philosophy classes. Biblical creation is taught in English and literature classes. Musical interpretations of Genesis are taught in music classes. Creationism is not taught in science classes because it is not supported by any scientific evidence whatsoever. It makes no verifiable predictions. It also has no practical application.
What are the key components of creationism?
Answer: Key components of creationism would include the following:1. Clear statement of presupposition or bias -belief in the infallibility of the Bible and its historical record of what happened in the beginning.2. Following from this a continual search for and presentation of evidence which supports this view in literally every area of science.3. A constant critique of evolutionary explanations in comparison with 'real science.'4. Defence against many false representations of its position.Key areas of evidence: Age of the earth and universe (geology and astronomy), study of the fossil record and its evidence (palaeontology), study of biology and its evidences particularly around mutations and changes in living things.
What are the two kinds of Creationism?
The two main kinds of Creationism are young Earth Creationism, which believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible and asserts that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, and old Earth Creationism, which accepts scientific evidence for the age of the Earth but still believes in a divine creator.
Are atheists for or against the teaching of creationism v evolution?
'Atheists' are a general grouping, not a specific one.Many have no opinion on the subject, and allow expert opinions to weigh the matter on their behalf.Some refuse the admission of creationism in public education as science (although private education may do what it pleases) because it is inherently unscientific and in many places, illegal to do so. Evolution is accepted because of its scientific support.Others make acceptance for creationism taught in religious classes, which is fair enough.
In what testament of the Bible does it state the scientific evidence for evolution and creationism?
Bible is not empirical thus anything conceived within its story cannot be perceived as scientific evidence. For anything.
Why is creationism not considered a science?
Creationism is not considered a science because it is based on religious beliefs rather than empirical evidence and the scientific method. Science relies on observable data, experimentation, and peer review to support its claims, while creationism is rooted in faith and does not follow the same rigorous scientific standards.
Do you think that Evolution and Creationism should be taught in school?
Evolution is a widely accepted scientific theory supported by extensive evidence, and should be taught in science classes. Creationism, however, is based on religious beliefs and is not supported by scientific evidence, so it is not appropriate to be taught in a science classroom. It may be more suitable for discussion in courses on religion or philosophy.
Is creationism a myth or a theory?
Creationism is a belief system that asserts that the universe and living beings originate from specific acts of divine creation. From a scientific perspective, creationism is considered a myth rather than a theory because it lacks empirical evidence and does not adhere to the scientific method of investigation and naturalistic explanations.
