Talk:Evolutionary creation
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Evolutionary creation redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Evolutionary creation. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this redirect. You may wish to ask factual questions about Evolutionary creation at the Reference desk. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Should not be merged with Theistic Evolution
editThis article requires a lot of work, specifically a lot more information. However, it should not be merged with "Theistic evolution" because it is more closely related to old-earth creationism, as Eugenie C. Scott explains in the material cited in this article. Notwithstanding Flat-Earthism and Geocentrism (which seem to qualify as young-earth views), Scott identifies six genera of views on origins: (1) Young-Earth Creationism, (2) Old-Earth Creationism, (3) Intelligent Design Creationism, (4) Theistic Evolution, (5) Agnostic Evolutionism, and (6) Materialist Evolutionism. She takes a closer look at old-earth creationism, qualifying four views under this term, in descending order of conservatism: (1) Gap Creationism, (2) Day-Age Creationism, (3) Progressive Creationism, and (4) Evolutionary Creationism.
"The differences between [evolutionary creationism] and theistic evolution lie not in science but in theology," she says, "with [evolutionary creationism] being held by more conservative (Evangelical) Christians, who view God as being more actively involved in evolution than do most theistic evolutionists." The latter, she explains later in the article, believe that God either created the laws of nature and then stepped out of the picture or that he intervenes only at critical periods (such as the origin of humans).[1] This is clearly a theological difference, but nevertheless an important one.
The BioLogos Foundation, one of the most recognizable organizations advocating for evolutionary creationism, makes the same argument: "[Theistic evolution] has at times been associated with the idea that God created the world and all the natural laws, but is no longer actively governing or involved in the cosmos." This is consistent with what Scott said. However, "This is very different from how most [evolutionary creationists] understand God’s involvement. In the BioLogos community, we ... recognize that God works providentially through natural processes to accomplish his purposes." Whether natural processes or supernatural miracles, both are God’s handiwork. Furthermore, they reject the term theistic evolution because they are first and foremost creationists, not evolutionists or mere theists.[2]
They also make the point that "we do not talk about ‘theistic chemistry’ or ‘theistic physics.’ Neither should we speak about ‘theistic evolution.’ We do not propose a special Christian version of scientific facts."
"The God we [evolutionary creationists] believe in," writes Denis R. Alexander, "is the one who creates and providentially orders and sustains all that exists." Evolutionary creationists believe that "the only proper answer to the question ‘How does God interact with the world?’ is ‘At all times, in all places and in every way’." He goes on to say:[3]
So it is not particularly helpful to think of God as tweaking the occasional mutation here, or bringing about the extinction of a species there, because the unavoidable implication from such a suggestion is that then God is less involved in some other aspect of the process. If the immanence of God in the created order means anything, then it means God’s working through all the processes of the evolutionary process without exception ... God is the author of the whole story of creation, not just of bits of it.
— Denis R. Alexander, "Evolutionary Creationism", Creation or Evolution: Do We Have to Choose? (2008)
That is far more involvement from God than theistic evolutionists are willing to tolerate—which, again, is a theological difference. As Scott admits, the two views are essentially indistinguishable when it comes to science, but theologically there are significant and important differences.
JohnMBauer (talk) 04:23, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
References
- ^ Scott, Eugenie C. (January 22, 2016). "The Creation/Evolution Continuum". National Center for Science Education. Retrieved November 7, 2020.
- ^ "Common Questions: What is Evolutionary Creation? – 'Evolutionary Creation' Is Distinct From 'Theistic Evolution'". BioLogos. May 8, 2019. Retrieved November 7, 2020.
- ^ Alexander, Denis R. (2008). Creation or Evolution: Do We Have to Choose?. Oxford, UK: Monarch Books. pp. 184, 186–187. ISBN 978-0-85721-578-9.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=(help)
Merge to theistic evolution
editTo whom it may concern, I made the decision to boldly merge this page to Theistic evolution. The distinction is so minuscule that there is no reason for it to have its own article. Theistic evolution states that God created evolution, evolutionary creationism states that God used evolution. The distinction is barely notable, particularly when Francis Collins and Denis Lamoureux are cited as examples of theistic evolutionists on the corresponding page. There is room within the "Alternative terms" section to discuss any meaningful distinction, which I have already taken the liberty of doing. As always, I am open to discussion. TNstingray (talk) 21:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)