|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 3:37 am
I've stumbled in the ED every now and then over it. Atheists "accusing" every Christian of being a Creationist without dividing between those who take the Bible literally, people believing in Intelligent Design, those who follow Darwin's theories and so on.
That's why I need a proper explanation what the term "Creationism" contains. Is Creationism only used for Literalists? Is there something like... er... "Evolutionary Creationism"? Is it a rather wide field with several parts it can be divided into reaching from radical to liberal?
Is there an official definition for it?
Help me out! wink
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 2:42 pm
Creationism - The belief that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing. Biblical creationists believe that the story told in Genesis of God's six-day creation of the universe and all living things is literally correct. Scientific creationists believe that a creator made all that exists, though they may not hold that the Genesis story is a literal history of that creation. Creationism became the object of renewed interest among conservative religious groups following the wide dissemination of the theory of biological evolution, first systematically propounded by Charles Darwin in On the Origin of Species (1859). In the early 20th century some U.S. states banned the teaching of evolution, leading to the Scopes Trial. In the late 20th century many creationists advocated a view known as intelligent design, which was essentially a scientifically modern version of the argument from design for the existence of God as set forth in the late 18th century by the Anglican clergyman William Paley. http://www.answers.com/topic/creationismhttp://dictionary.reference.com/browse/creationism
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 1:13 pm
Thanks. But according to the links you posted creationism is only used for those taking the Bible literally... How does that fit with the term "scientific creationist"? question sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 7:23 pm
Kittie2038 Thanks. But according to the links you posted creationism is only used for those taking the Bible literally... How does that fit with the term "scientific creationist"? question sweatdrop Nothing. Scientific creationists just use science to 'prove' young earth theory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:01 am
Oh. So what am I now? I believe that god is the creator in some (yet unknown/unimaginable) way, while I do agree to Darwin's theories of evolution and Hawkin's theories of a multiverse.
According to most atheists I (tried to) discuss(ed) with, my believes make me a creationist, since they claim creationism to be a rather wide field. While the links you posted tell me that I ain't. So what is the correct term to describe people like me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:00 pm
Intelligent evolutionist? I don't actually know, and I really should, seeing as I hold to exactly the same theory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:26 pm
Theoretically, creationism and the Big Bang can have the beginning. From my knowledge, the Big Bang = all matter in the universe in a single massively dense point in the "middle" of the universe (pretty much the incident of the big bang) exploding at one point in time, and spreading out. It's been proposed many times that it's possible that the Big Bang is constantly repeating, because it's possible that the force of the explosion isn't strong enough to compete with the force of gravity pulling everything back towards the middle.
See, gravity is actually referred to as the "fourth" dimension. It has almost no effect on anything the atomic size, but when you start to reach Earth's size, for example, gravity is the #1 force. Think of putting a bowling ball in the middle of a trampoline. The bowling ball will make the bottom of the trampoline sag closer to the ground. Now, imagine dropping a marble on the side of the trampoline. It's going to roll towards the middle, right? Well, that's gravity, and every object in the entire universe has this "trampoline sag" effect on everything else in the universe, in every direction. It's kinda confusing, and will make your brain explode if you think about it too much.
Anyways, this massive pull on everything to itself is what could make the single point of mass "crunch" back together if the force of the bang from that single point in the universe wasn't strong enough. The big dilemma is:
Where did this point of matter originally come from?
The way we know where the point of matter is from, is the doppler effect. Wikipedia it, it's fascinating.
Anyways, to give a quick explanation, as something moves closer to you, the sound waves, if it's giving a sound off, are squished together, which makes the sound higher. As the sound moves away from you, it's lower because the sound waves are being spread out more from each other. Speed has a big difference on this, as does how loud the sound is, and the original frequency of the sound. Frequency decides the pitch of sounds.
The same thing can be applied to light. Light is actually just radioactive waves. Radio, and micro, waves are actually just light, but we only have a little bit of Ultraviolet that we can see, which is visible light. Anyways, depending on the frequency, it'll switch on the light spectrum. Things that are "higher" (a higher frequency) are shifted towards blue. Things that are "slower" (a slower frequency) are shifted towards red. So, if something is moving away from you, it's shifted towards red. This is definitely NOT noticable to the human eye, but machines can recognize it. We used this effect, the red shift, to see that the entire universe is moving away from us, therefore spreading out. By seeing how fast they are moving, and measuring the geometry of their movement, we can see that all matter, all stars, can from one point in the universe.
I believe that this one point in the universe was created by the higher power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 1:11 am
No problem agreeing to that, Max, but that still doesn't answer my question... sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
