Young Earth creationism
Part of a series on | ||||
Creationism | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
History | ||||
Types | ||||
Biblical cosmology | ||||
|
||||
Creation science | ||||
|
||||
Rejection of evolution by religious groups | ||||
Religious views | ||||
|
||||
Young Earth creationism (YEC) is a form of
Since the mid-20th century, young Earth creationists—starting with
A 2017
Among the biggest young Earth creationist organizations are Answers in Genesis, Institute for Creation Research, and Creation Ministries International.
Background and history
Biblical dates for creation
Young Earth creationists have claimed that their view has its earliest roots in ancient Judaism, citing, for example, the commentary on
The most accepted and popular date of creation among young Earth creationists is 4004 BC because this specific date appears in the
The
Famous poets and playwrights of the
...The poor world is almost 6,000 years old.[30]
Scientific Revolution and the old Earth
Beginning in the 18th century, support for a young Earth declined among scientists and philosophers as new knowledge including discoveries of the Scientific Revolution and philosophies of the Age of Enlightenment. In particular, discoveries in geology required an Earth that was much older than thousands of years, and proposals such as Abraham Gottlob Werner's Neptunism attempted to incorporate what was understood from geological investigations into a coherent description of the Earth's natural history. James Hutton, now regarded as the father of modern geology, went further and opened up the concept of deep time for scientific inquiry. Rather than assuming that the Earth was deteriorating from a primal state, he maintained that the Earth was infinitely old. Hutton stated that:
the past history of our globe must be explained by what can be seen to be happening now … No powers are to be employed that are not natural to the globe, no action to be admitted except those of which we know the principle.[31]
Hutton's main line of argument was that the tremendous displacements and changes he was seeing did not happen in a short period of time by means of catastrophe, but that the incremental processes of uplift and erosion happening on the Earth in the present day had caused them. As these processes were very gradual, the Earth needed to be ancient, in order to allow time for the changes to occur. While his ideas of Plutonism were hotly contested, scientific inquiries on competing ideas of catastrophism pushed back the age of the Earth into the millions of years – still much younger than commonly accepted by modern scientists, but much older than the young Earth of less than 20,000 years in which Biblical literalists believed.[32]
Hutton's ideas, called uniformitarianism or gradualism, were popularized by Sir Charles Lyell in the early 19th century. The energetic advocacy and rhetoric of Lyell led to the public and scientific communities largely accepting an ancient Earth. By this time, the Reverends William Buckland, Adam Sedgwick and other early geologists had abandoned their earlier ideas of catastrophism related to a biblical flood and confined their explanations to local floods. By the 1830s, the scientific consensus had abandoned a young Earth as a serious hypothesis.[33][34]
John H. Mears was one of several[citation needed] scholars proposing Biblical interpretations ranging from a series of long or indefinite periods interspersed with moments of creation to a day-age theory of indefinite 'days'. He subscribed to the latter theory (indefinite days) and found support from the side of Yale professor James Dwight Dana, one of the fathers of mineralogy, who wrote a paper consisting of four articles named 'Science and the Bible' on the topic.[35] As many biblical scholars reinterpreted Genesis 1 in the light of Lyell's geological results with the support of a number of renowned (Christian) scientific scholars, Developmentalism, a form of theistic evolution based on Darwin's Natural selection, grew in acceptance.[36]
This 19th century trend was contested. The scriptural geologists[37] and later the founders of the Victoria Institute[38] opposed the decline of support for a biblically literal young Earth.
Christian fundamentalism and belief in a young Earth
The rise of
In the 1950s, Price's work came under severe criticism, particularly by Bernard Ramm in his book The Christian View of Science and Scripture. Together with J. Laurence Kulp, a geologist and in fellowship with the Plymouth Brethren, and other scientists,[42] Ramm influenced Christian organizations such as the American Scientific Affiliation (ASA) in not supporting flood geology.
Price's work was subsequently adapted and updated by Henry M. Morris and John C. Whitcomb Jr. in their book The Genesis Flood in 1961. Morris and Whitcomb argued that the Earth was geologically recent and that the Great Flood had laid down most of the geological strata in the space of a single year, reviving pre-uniformitarian arguments. Given this history, they argued, "the last refuge of the case for evolution immediately vanishes away, and the record of the rocks becomes a tremendous witness... to the holiness and justice and power of the living God of Creation!"[43]
This became the foundation of a new generation of young Earth creationist believers, who organized themselves around Morris'
... no distinction is made between scientific theories on the one hand and philosophical or religious theories on the other, between scientific questions and the sorts of questions religious beliefs seek to answer... It is, therefore, no surprise that in their theological works, as opposed to their creation science writings, creationists regard evolution and all other theories associated with it, as the intellectual source for and intellectual justification of everything that is to them evil and destructive in modern society. For them all that is spiritually healthy and creative has been for a century or more under attack by "that most complex of godless movements spawned by the pervasive and powerful system of evolutionary uniformitarianism", "If the system of flood geology can be established on a sound scientific basis... then the entire evolutionary cosmology, at least in its present neo-Darwinian form, will collapse. This in turn would mean that every anti-Christian system and movement (communism, racism, humanism, libertarianism, behaviorism, and all the rest) would be deprived of their pseudo-intellectual foundation", "It [evolution] has served effectively as the pseudo-scientific basis of atheism, agnosticism, socialism, fascism, and numerous faulty and dangerous philosophies over the past century.[44]
Impact
A 2006 joint statement of
As such, young Earth creationism is dismissed by the academic and the scientific communities. One 1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".
Morris' ideas had a considerable impact on creationism and fundamentalist Christianity. Armed with the backing of conservative organizations and individuals, his brand of "creation science" was widely promoted throughout the United States and overseas, with his books being translated into at least ten different languages. The inauguration of so-called "young Earth creationism" as a religious position has, on occasion, impacted science education in the United States, where periodic controversies have raged over the appropriateness of teaching YEC doctrine and creation science in public schools (see Teach the Controversy) alongside or in replacement of the theory of evolution. Young Earth creationism has not had as large an impact in the less literalist circles of Christianity. Some churches, such as the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox churches, accede to the possibility of theistic evolution; though some individual church members support young Earth creationism and do so without those churches' explicit condemnation.[57]
Adherence to young Earth creationism and rejection of evolution is higher in the U.S. than in most of the rest of the
Reasons for the higher rejection of evolution in the U.S. include the abundance of fundamentalist Christians compared to Europe.
Characteristics and beliefs
The common belief of young Earth creationists is that the Earth and life were created in six 24-hour periods,[63] 6,000–10,000 years ago. However, there are different approaches to how this is possible given the geological evidence for much longer timescales. The Science Education Resource Center at Carleton College has identified two major types of YEC belief systems:[63]
- Believers in geological strata. Major American YEC organizations such as the Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis support this approach with detailed argumentation and references to scientific evidence, though often framed with pseudoscientific misconceptions.[63]
- A less-visible form of YEC not seen as often on the internet is one which claims that there has been essentially no development of the Universe, Earth, or life whatsoever since creation—that creation has been in a steady state since the beginning without major changes. According to
View of the Bible
Young Earth creationists regard the Bible as a historically accurate, factually inerrant record of natural history. As Henry Morris, a leading young Earth creationist, explained it, "Christians who flirt with less-than-literal readings of biblical texts are also flirting with theological disaster."[66][67] According to Morris, Christians must "either ... believe God's Word all the way, or not at all."[66] Young Earth creationists consider the account of creation given in Genesis to be a factual record of the origin of the Earth and life, and that Bible-believing Christians must therefore regard Genesis 1–11 as historically accurate.
Interpretations of Genesis
Young Earth creationists interpret the text of Genesis as strictly literal. Young Earth creationists reject
The genealogies of Genesis record the line of descent from Adam through Noah to Abraham. Young Earth creationists interpret these genealogies literally, including the old ages of the men. For example,
Young Earth creationists believe that the flood described in Genesis 6–9 did occur, was global in extent, and submerged all dry land on Earth. Some young Earth creationists go further and advocate a kind of
Age of the Earth
The young Earth creationist belief that the age of the Earth is 6,000 to 10,000 years old conflicts with the
Between 1997 and 2005, a team of scientists at the
Human history
Young Earth creationists reject almost all of the results of
The literal belief that the world's linguistic variety originated with the tower of Babel is pseudoscientific, sometimes called pseudolinguistics, and it is contrary to what is known about the origin and history of languages.[79]
Flood geology, the fossil record, and dinosaurs
Young Earth creationists reject the geologic evidence that the stratigraphic sequence of fossils proves the Earth is billions of years old. In his Illogical Geology, expanded in 1913 as The Fundamentals of Geology, George McCready Price argued that the occasionally out-of-order sequence of fossils that are shown to be due to thrust faults made it impossible to prove any one fossil was older than any other. His "law" that fossils could be found in any order implied that strata could not be dated sequentially. He instead proposed that essentially all fossils were buried during the flood and thus inaugurated flood geology. In numerous books and articles he promoted this concept, focusing his attack on the sequence of the geologic time scale as "the devil's counterfeit of the six days of Creation as recorded in the first chapter of Genesis."[80] Today, many young Earth creationists still contend that the fossil record can be explained by the global flood.[81]
In The Genesis Flood (1961) Henry M. Morris reiterated Price's arguments, and wrote that because there had been no death before the Fall of Man, he felt "compelled to date all the rock strata which contain fossils of once-living creatures as subsequent to Adam's fall", attributing most to the flood. He added that humans and dinosaurs had lived together, quoting Clifford L. Burdick for the report that dinosaur tracks had supposedly been found overlapping a human track in the Paluxy River bed Glen Rose Formation. He was subsequently advised that he might have been misled, and Burdick wrote to Morris in September 1962 that "you kind of stuck your neck out in publishing those Glen Rose tracks." In the third printing of the book this section was removed.[82]
Following in this vein, many young Earth creationists, especially those associated with the more visible organizations, do not deny the existence of dinosaurs and other extinct animals present in the
As the term "dinosaur" was coined by
A subset of adherents of the pseudoscience of cryptozoology promote young Earth creationism, particularly in the context of so-called "living dinosaurs". Science writer Sharon A. Hill observes that the young Earth creationist segment of cryptozoology is "well-funded and able to conduct expeditions with a goal of finding a living dinosaur that they think would invalidate evolution."[92] Anthropologist Jeb J. Card says that "Creationists have embraced cryptozoology and some cryptozoological expeditions are funded by and conducted by creationists hoping to disprove evolution."[93] Young Earth creationists occasionally claim that dinosaurs survived in Australia, and that Aboriginal legends of reptilian monsters are evidence of this,[94] referring to what is known as Megalania (Varanus priscus). However, Megalania was a gigantic species of monitor lizard, and not a dinosaur, as its discoverer, Richard Owen, realized that the skeletal remains were that of a lizard, and not an archosaur. Some creationists believe that Mokele-mbembe, a cryptid said to dwell deep in the Congo rainforest, may be a living sauropod, though the scientific consensus is that this is extremely unlikely.[95]
In a 2019 issue of Skeptical Inquirer science author Philip J. Senter details many 16th and 17th century hoaxes who constructed composite dragons which Senter calls the "Piltdown Men of Creationism" stating that many young Earth creationists believe these hoaxes even though "the fakes don't even resemble the very animals the creationist authors claim they are". Other more recent hoaxes such as the Cardiff Giant, the Silverbell artifacts, the Burdick tracks and the Acámbaro figures are still being cited as proof of a young earth even though some of the hoaxers confessed. Young Earth creationists according to Senter are quick to point out the embarrassing forgeries that some scientists believed for years, such as the Piltdown Man. Senter continues "But it is also somewhat hypocritical, for the YEC literature is replete with cases in which its own authors have fallen for taxidermic 'dragon' hoaxes".[96]
Attitude towards science
Young Earth creationism is most famous for an opposition to the theory of
Young Earth creationists disagree with the
Compared to other forms of creationism
As a position that developed out of the explicitly
Old Earth creationism
Young Earth creationists reject old Earth creationism and day-age creationism on textual and theological grounds. In addition, they claim that the scientific data in geology and astronomy point to a young Earth, against the consensus of the general scientific community.
Young Earth creationists generally hold that, when Genesis describes the creation of the Earth occurring over a period of days, this indicates normal-length 24-hour days, and cannot reasonably be interpreted otherwise. They agree that the Hebrew word for "day" (yôm) can refer to either a 24-hour day or a long or unspecified time; but argue that, whenever the latter interpretation is used, it includes a preposition defining the long or unspecified period. In the specific context of Genesis 1, since the days are both numbered and are referred to as "evening and morning", this can mean only normal-length days. Further, they argue that the 24-hour day is the only interpretation that makes sense of the Sabbath command in Exodus 20:8–11. YECs argue that it is a glaring exegetical fallacy to take a meaning from one context (yom referring to a long period of time in Genesis 1) and apply it to a completely different one (yom referring to normal-length days in Exodus 20).[102]
Hebrew scholars reject the rule that yôm with a number or an "evening and morning" construct can only refer to 24-hour days.
Gap creationism
The "gap theory" acknowledges a vast age for the universe, including the Earth and solar system, while asserting that life was created recently in six 24-hour days by divine fiat. Genesis 1 is thus interpreted literally, with an indefinite "gap" of time inserted between the first two verses. (Some gap theorists insert a "primordial creation" and Lucifer's rebellion into the gap.) Young Earth creationist organizations argue that the gap theory is unscriptural, unscientific, and not necessary, in its various forms.[105][106]
Omphalos hypothesis
Many young Earth creationists distinguish their own hypotheses from the "Omphalos hypothesis", today more commonly referred to as the apparent age concept, put forth by the naturalist and science writer
Today, in contrast to Gosse, young Earth creationists posit that not only is the Earth young but that the scientific data supports that view. However, the apparent age concept is still used in young Earth creationist literature.[107][108][109] There are examples of young Earth creationists arguing that Adam did not have a navel.[110]
Criticism
Young Earth creationists adhere strongly to a concept of
Creationists also discount certain modern Christian theological positions, like those of French Jesuit priest, geologist and paleontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who saw that his work with evolutionary sciences actually confirmed and inspired his faith in the cosmic Christ; or those of Thomas Berry, a cultural historian and ecotheologian, that the cosmological 13-billion-year "Universe Story" provides all faiths and all traditions with a single account by which the divine has made its presence in the world.[113]
Proponents of young Earth creationism are regularly accused of
In defending against young Earth creationist attacks on "evolutionism" and "Darwinism", scientists and skeptics have offered rejoinders that every challenge made by proponents of YEC is either made in an unscientific fashion, or is readily explainable by science.[116]
Theological considerations
Few modern theologians take the Genesis account of creation literally. Even many Christian
Genesis contains two accounts of the Creation: in chapter 1 man was created after the animals (Genesis 1:24–26), while in chapter 2 man was created (Genesis 2:7) before the animals (Genesis 2:19).[118][119] Proponents of the Documentary hypothesis suggest that Genesis 1 was a litany from the Priestly source (possibly from an early Jewish liturgy), while Genesis 2 was assembled from older Jahwist material, holding that, for both stories to be a single account, Adam would have named all the animals, and God would have created Eve from his rib as a suitable mate, all within a single 24 hour period. Creationists responding to this point attribute the view to misunderstanding having arisen from poor translation of the tenses in Genesis 2 in contemporary translations of the Bible (e.g. compare "planted" and "had planted" in the King James Version and New International Version).[120]
Some Christians assert that the Bible is free from error only in religious and moral matters, and that, where scientific or historic questions are concerned, the Bible should not be read literally. This position is held by a number of major denominations. For instance, in a publication entitled The Gift of Scripture, the
Aside from the theological doubts voiced by other Christians, young Earth creationism also stands in opposition to the creation mythologies of other religions (both
Scientific refutation
The vast majority of scientists reject young Earth creationism. Around the start of the 19th century mainstream science abandoned the concept that the Earth was younger than millions of years.
The
Chemist Paul Braterman has argued that young Earth creationism "bears all the hallmarks of a conspiracy theory" by "offering a complete parallel universe with its own organisations and rules of evidence, and claims that the scientific establishment promoting evolution is an arrogant and morally corrupt elite", adding that "This so-called elite supposedly conspires to monopolise academic employment and research grants. Its alleged objective is to deny divine authority, and the ultimate beneficiary and prime mover is Satan."[134]
Adhering church bodies
- Amish Mennonites[135][136]
- Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches[137]
- Evangelical Lutheran Synod[138]
- Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod[139]
- Protestant Reformed Churches in America[140]
- Seventh-day Adventist Church[141]
- Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod[142]
See also
- Antediluvian
- Biblical cosmology
- Chronology of the Bible
- Chronology of the universe
- Cosmogony
- Cosmological argument
- Creator deity
- Generations of Noah
- Geoscience Research Institute
- Higher criticism
- History of creationism
- International Conference on Creationism
- Theism
Notes
- ^ "The Age of the Earth – Creationism and a Young Earth: Professor Heaton". apps.usd.edu. Archived from the original on 30 October 2021. Retrieved 11 April 2019.
- ^ Numbers 2006, p. 8
- ^ Ruse, Michael (Winter 2018). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). "Creationism (First published Aug 30, 2003; substantive revision Sep 21, 2018)". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2018 ed.).
- ISBN 978-0-520-24650-8. Retrieved 3 June 2014.
Creationism is about maintaining particular, narrow forms of religious belief – beliefs that seem to their adherents to be threatened by the very idea of evolution.
- ^ a b James-Griffiths, P. "Creation days and Orthodox Jewish tradition". Creation. 26 (2): 53–55. Retrieved 3 July 2007.
- ^ Numbers 2006, pp. 10–11
- ^ Eugenie Scott (13 February 2018). "The Creation/Evolution Continuum". NCSE. Retrieved 24 April 2019.
- ^ McIver, Tom (Fall 1988). "Formless and Void: Gap Theory Creationism". Creation/Evolution. 8 (3): 1–24.
We can allow geology the amplest time … without infringing even on the literalities of the Mosaic record
- ^ "Theistic Evolution: History and Beliefs – Articles". BioLogos. Retrieved 5 August 2021.
- ^ "'Scientific' Creationism as a Pseudoscience – NCSE". 15 December 2008.
- ISBN 978-0190258856.
- ^ a b "IAP Statement on the teaching of evolution". the Interacademy Panel on international issues. 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 July 2011. Retrieved 23 December 2010.
- S2CID 119262962.
- S2CID 119271232.
- ^ a b "In US, Belief in Creationist View of Humans at New Low". Gallup. 22 May 2017.
- ^ Branch, Glenn (2017). "Understanding Gallup's Latest Poll on Evolution". Skeptical Inquirer. 41 (5): 5–6.
- ^ Brenan, Megan (26 July 2019). "40% of Americans Believe in Creationism". Gallup. Retrieved 5 May 2020.
- ISBN 978-0-226-09277-5.
- ^ "Creationism and Evolution in Jewish Thought". My Jewish Learning. Retrieved 27 February 2023.
- ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 6 February 2023.
- ^ "Philo's writings". Archived from the original on 29 May 2008. Retrieved 19 September 2011.
- ^ "Bishop James Ussher Sets the Date for Creation: 23 October 4004 B.C." Law2.umkc.edu. Retrieved 19 September 2011.
In 1701, the Church of England adopted Ussher's dates for use in its official Bible. For the next two centuries, Ussher's dates so commonly appeared in Bibles that his dates 'practically acquired the authority of the word of God.'
- ^ William Hales New Analysis of Chronology and Geography, History and Prophecy, vol. 1, 1830, pp. 210–215.
- ^ Young's Analytical Concordance of the Holy Bible, 1879, 8th Edition, 1939 – entry under 'Creation', quoting William Hales New Analysis of Chronology and Geography, History and Prophecy, Vol. 1, 1830, p. 210
- ^ Epoch of Creation according to various authorities in Pre-Adamites by Walter Winchell, 1880
- ISBN 978-0-8204-3992-1.
I have said above, that six days were employed in the formation of the world; not that God, to whom one moment is as a thousand years, had need of this succession of time, but that he might engage us in the consideration of his works.
- ISBN 978-0-87552-182-4. Retrieved 17 December 2010.
Nor will they abstain from their jeers when told that little more than five thousand years have elapsed since the creation of the world.
- ^ Luther, Martin (1958). Jaroslav Pelikan (ed.). Luther's Works vol. 1: Lectures on Genesis Chapters 1–5. Fortress Press.
...the Decalog (Ex. 20:11) and the entire Scripture bear witness that in six days God made heaven and earth and everything in them. (p. 6)"; "We know from Moses that the world was not in existence before 6,000 years ago. (p. 3)
- ^ Young & Stearley 2008, pp. 44–46
- ^ Shakespeare's (1599) line given to Rosalind addressing Orlando in As you like it (IV, 1:90).
- ^ 'Theory of the Earth', a paper (with the same title of his 1795 book) communicated to the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and published in Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 1785; cited with approval in Arthur Holmes, Principles of Physical Geology, second edition, Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., Great Britain, pp. 43–44, 1965.
- ^ James Hutton. "'Theory of the Earth' (1788 version)". Archived from the original on 29 July 2003. Retrieved 12 October 2011.
- ISBN 978-0-226-06862-6.
- ^ Herbert, Sandra. Charles Darwin as a prospective geological author, British Journal for the History of Science 24. 1991. pp. 170–173
- ^ Dana, James Dwight (1856–1857). Science and the Bible, a review of and the six days of creation of Prof. Lewis Taylor. Bibl. Soc.
- ^ "Bible.org, Darwinism and New England Theology". 2004. Retrieved 8 July 2007.
- ISBN 0-226-73102-2, pp. 42–44
- ^ McNatt, Jerrold L. (September 2004). "James Clerk Maxwell's Refusal to Join the Victoria Institute" (PDF). Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith. 56 (3): 204–215. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 July 2012. Retrieved 8 November 2009.
- ^ a b Numbers 2006, pp. 97–100.
- ^ Numbers 2006, pp. 88–119
- ISBN 978-1-57910-661-4.
- ^ Radiocarbon Dating and American Evangelical Christians. Asa3.org. Retrieved 20 May 2012.
- ISBN 978-0-87552-338-5
- ^ (Gilkey, 1998, p. 35; quotations from Henry Morris).
- ^ Myers, PZ (18 June 2006). "Ann Coulter: No evidence for evolution?". Pharyngula. scienceblogs.com. Retrieved 7 November 2015.
- National Science Teachers Association's position statement on the teaching of evolution. Archived 19 April 2003 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution Archived 17 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society (PDF file)
- ^ From the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world's largest general scientific society: 2006 Statement on the Teaching of Evolution (PDF file), AAAS Denounces Anti-Evolution Laws Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine
- S2CID 144682524.
- ^ As reported by Newsweek: "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'."Martz & McDaniel 1987, p. 23
- ^ Finding the Evolution in Medicine Archived 22 November 2008 at the Wayback Machine, Cynthia Delgado, NIH Record, 28 July 2006.
- ^ "Beliefs of the U.S. public about evolution and creation".
- ^ "Many Scientists See God's Hand in Evolution – NCSE". 2 March 2016.
- ^ Overton, William R. (5 January 1982). "McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education". McLean v. Arkansas. TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 10 May 2011.
- ^ Isaak, Mark (2005). "CA325: Creationists publishing". TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 10 May 2011.
- ^ Isaak, Mark (2004). "CA320: Scientists challenging established dogma". TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 10 May 2011.
- ^ Philip Porvaznik. "Dialogue on Evolution versus Creationism". Catholic Apologetics International. Retrieved 10 October 2007.[dead link]
- ^ .
- ^ .
- Gallup.
- ^ Bishop, George F; Thomas, Randall; Wood, Jason A; Gwon, Misook (2010). "Americans' Scientific Knowledge and Beliefs about Human Evolution in the Year of Darwin". National Center for Science Education. Retrieved 6 September 2014.
- Gallup.
- ^ a b c d "What Kind of Creationism?". Addressing Creationism.
- ^ Numbers 2006, p. 219
- ^ Numbers 2006, p. 58
- ^ ISBN 978-0-89051-291-3.
- ISBN 978-0-89051-293-7.
- ^ John Baumgardner (2002), "Catastrophic plate tectonics: the geophysical context of the Genesis Flood", Journal of Creation
- ^ Answers In Genesis, Noah's Flood – Where did the water come from?
- ^ "Claim CD010: Radiometric dating gives unreliable results". TalkOrigins Archive. 18 February 2001. Retrieved 28 September 2010.
- ^ "Claim CF210: Constancy of Radioactive Decay Rates". TalkOrigins. 4 June 2003. Retrieved 28 September 2010.
- ^ "Oklo: Natural Nuclear Reactors". U.S. Department of Energy. November 2004. Archived from the original on 14 November 2009. Retrieved 28 September 2010.
- ^ Henke, K. R. (24 November 2005). "Young-Earth Creationist Helium Diffusion "Dates" Fallacies Based on Bad Assumptions and Questionable Data". TalkOrigins. Retrieved 28 September 2010.
- ^ Meert, J. G. (6 February 2003). "R.A.T.E: More Faulty Creation Science from The Institute for Creation Research". Gondwana Research. Retrieved 28 September 2010.
- ^ Wiens, R. C. (2002). "Radiometric Dating, A Christian Perspective". American Scientific Affiliation. Retrieved 28 September 2010.
- ^ Isaac, Randy (June 2007). "Assessing the RATE project". American Scientific Affiliation. Retrieved 24 September 2015.
- ^ Ken Ham, Don Batten & Carl Wieland, One Blood, Creation Ministries International, archived from the original on 22 April 2009, retrieved 15 April 2014
- ^ Harold Hunt with Russell Grigg (1998), The sixteen grandsons of Noah
- ISBN 978-0262661652.
- ^ Numbers (2006) pp. 79–81
- ^ "Evolution Resources from the National Academies".
- ^ Numbers (2006) pp. 202–03
- ^ Powell, Michael (25 September 2005). "In Evolution Debate, Creationists Are Breaking New Ground". The Washington Post.
- ^ "Dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark: US museum". ABC News (Australia). 26 May 2007. Retrieved 6 November 2007.
- ^ Powers, Ashley. Los Angeles Times, 27 August 2005. "Adam, Eve and T. Rex: Giant roadside dinosaur attractions are used by a new breed of creationists as pulpits to spread their version of Earth's origins." pp. 1,2,3,4,5. Retrieved on 29 December 2009.
- Austin Chronicle. Retrieved 16 July 2013.
- ^ a b "Dinosaurs and the Bible". Clarifying Christianity'. 2005. Retrieved 14 March 2007.
- ISBN 978-1-86105-831-7.
- ^ "CH711: Behemoth a Dinosaur". Retrieved 13 September 2007.
- ISBN 978-0-262-66165-2.
- ^ "Claim CH711.1: Leviathan as a dinosaur". TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 3 June 2014.
- ISBN 978-1476630823
- ISBN 978-0817319113
- ^ Driver, Rebecca. "Australia's Aborigines ... did they see dinosaurs?". Creation. 21 (1). Retrieved 14 March 2007.
- ISBN 978-0-231-52681-4.
- ^ Senter, Philip J. (2019). "Dragon Hoaxes: Piltdown Men of Creationism". Skeptical Inquirer. 43 (2): 51–55.
- ^ "Talk Origins Archive – Claim CH210: Age of the Earth". 2 October 2004. Retrieved 11 April 2011.
- ^ a b "Talk Origins Archive – Claim CH200: Age of the Universe". 24 February 2005. Retrieved 11 April 2011.
- ^ "Talk Origins Archive – Claim CH200: Age of the Universe". 13 June 2003. Retrieved 11 April 2011.
...there is an approximately sixty-four-million-year gap in the fossil record when there are neither dinosaur nor human fossils.
- ^ Numbers 2006, p. 237
- ^ Schadewald RJ (24 November 2008). "Six "Flood" Arguments Creationists can't answer". National Center for Science Education. Retrieved 24 April 2010.
- ^ Russell Grigg. "How long were the days of Genesis 1?". Creation. 19 (1): 23–25.
- ^ Whitefield, Rodney (12 June 2006). "The Hebrew Word "Yom" Used with a Number in Genesis 1" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 September 2021. Retrieved 24 September 2015.
- ^ Ross, Hugh (1 February 2005). "Creation update #259" (Interview). Retrieved 24 September 2015.
- ^ Henry M. Morris (December 1987). "The gap theory – an idea with holes?". Creation. 10 (1): 35–37. Retrieved 14 February 2007.
- ^ Don Batten (June 2004). "'Soft' gap sophistry". Creation. 26 (3): 44–47. Retrieved 14 February 2007.
- ^ Apologetics Press – Apparent Age. Apologeticspress.org. Retrieved 20 May 2012.
- ^ The Apparent Age Argument. Don-lindsay-archive.org (2 January 1999). Retrieved 20 May 2012.
- ^ Appearance of Age – theology overview & web-links. Asa3.org. Retrieved 20 May 2012.
- ^ Parker, Gary. (1996-06-01) Did Adam have a belly-button?. Creation 18:3 p. 6. Retrieved 20 May 2012.
- ^ "Foundational Principles". Institute for Creation Research. Retrieved 2 May 2014.
- ^ [none] (1998). "Amazing admission". Creation. 20 (3): 24.
- ^ See references and further information given at Objections to evolution, Atheism for support of this paragraph.
- ^ Quote Mine Project: Examining 'Evolution Quotes' of Creationists. Talkorigins.org. Retrieved 20 May 2012.
- ^ Robert Larmer. "Is there anything wrong with 'God of the gaps' reasoning?". Archived from the original on 24 October 2007. Retrieved 26 June 2009.
- ^ "TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy".
- ISBN 978-0-664-22464-6.
- ISBN 978-0-684-86913-1.
The first question was whether Moses could really have been the author of the Five Books of Moses, since the last book, Deuteronomy, described in great detail the precise time and circumstances of Moses' own death. Other incongruities soon became apparent: the biblical text was filled with literary asides, explaining the ancient names of certain places and frequently noting that the evidences of famous biblical events were still visible "to this day." These factors convinced some seventeenth century scholars that the Bible's first five books, at least, had been shaped, expanded, and embellished by later, anonymous editors and revisers over the centuries.
By the late eighteenth century and even more so in the nineteenth, many critical biblical scholars had begun to doubt that Moses had any hand in the writing of the Bible whatsoever; they had come to believe that the Bible was the work of later writers exclusively. These scholars pointed to what appeared to be different versions of the same stories within the books of the Pentateuch, suggesting that the biblical text was the product of several recognizable hands. A careful reading of the book of Genesis, for example, revealed two conflicting versions of the creation (1:1–2:3 and 2:4–25), two quite different genealogies of Adam's offspring (4:17–26 and 5:1–28), and two spliced and rearranged flood stories (6:5–9:17). In addition, there were dozens more doublets and sometimes even triplets of the same events in the narratives of the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, and the giving of the Law. - ISBN 978-0-8028-0512-6.
- ^ "And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed." —Genesis 2:8 KJV
"Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed." —Genesis 2:8 NIV - ISBN 978-1-86082-323-7. Retrieved 13 January 2011.
- ^ Gledhill, Ruth (5 October 2005). "Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible". The Times. London.
- ^ N.p., n.d. Web. 9 May 2017. <https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a3.htm>.
- ^ Jonathan Sarfati. "But Genesis is not a science textbook". Creation. 26 (4): 6.
- Gale A168213654.
- ISBN 978-0-8028-3843-8.
- ^ Allegorical Interpretation.
- ISBN 978-0-19-510275-8.
- ^ Johnston, Ian (May 2000). ". . . And Still We Evolve: A Handbook on the History of Modern Science". Vancouver Island University. Archived from the original on 1 July 2008. Retrieved 2 June 2014.
- . Retrieved 23 November 2020.
- S2CID 58927815.
- ^ "Gallup Poll 1997".
- ISBN 0-262-66111-X.
- ^ Braterman, Paul (4 February 2021). "Why creationism bears all the hallmarks of a conspiracy theory". The Conversation. Retrieved 10 August 2022.
- ^ "Susan Trollinger – Amish Studies". Elizabethtown College Groups. 19 August 2015. Retrieved 29 July 2018.
- ^ "Creation Science Resources: Church Denominations and Old-Earth Belief". Old Earth Ministries. Retrieved 29 July 2018.
- ^ "Book of Memorials" (PDF). Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches. Retrieved 19 October 2020.
- ^ "We Believe, Teach and Confess". els.org.
- ^ "Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod".
- ^ Dykstra, Brian. "Considering God's Wisdom and Understanding". Covenant Protestant Reformed Church. Retrieved 28 September 2016.
Proverbs 3:19 speaks of God's wisdom founding the earth and His understanding establishing the heavens, not His patience over billions of years as He directed slow changes in the works of His hands.
- ^ "The Official Site of the Seventh-day Adventist world church, Fundamental Beliefs". adventist.org. 2011. Archived from the original on 10 March 2006. Retrieved 14 October 2011.
- ^ "What We Believe". wels.net.
References
- Martz, Larry; McDaniel, Ann (29 June 1987). "Keeping God Out of the Classroom". ISSN 0028-9604.
- ISBN 978-0-674-02339-0.
- Young, Davis A.; Stearley, Ralph F. (2008). The Bible, Rocks, and Time: Geological Evidence for the Age of the Earth. Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic. ISBN 978-0-8308-2876-0.
External links
- National Center for Science Education. Ten Major Court Cases about Evolution and Creationism
- Moss, Stephen. "Defying Darwin". The Guardian, 2009.