Evolutionism - Revision history

Aschlafly at 02:13, November 3, 2026

2026-11-03T02:13:55Z

RoadtoEmmaus2: improved Evolutionism

2026-11-03T00:10:22Z

improved Evolutionism

Dataclarifier: linked detraction

2019-09-09T19:39:22Z

linked detraction

DavidB4-bot: HTTP --> HTTPS #3, replaced: http://www.icr.org → https://www.icr.org (2), http://web.archive.org → https://web.archive.org (2)

2019-04-09T11:57:59Z

HTTP --> HTTPS #3, replaced: http://www.icr.org → https://www.icr.org (2), http://web.archive.org → https://web.archive.org (2)

DavidB4-bot: /* Quotes supporting the position that evolutionism requires faith[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionquotes.html "Evolutionism quotes"] (2004). Northwest Creation Network. Retrieved on September 15, 2014. */HTTP --> HTTPS [#1], replaced:...

2018-09-26T15:52:14Z

Quotes supporting the position that evolutionism requires faith<ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionquotes.html "Evolutionism quotes"] (2004). Northwest Creation Network. Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref>: HTTP --> HTTPS [#1], replaced:...

DavidB4-bot: clean up & uniformity

2016-07-13T12:14:32Z

clean up & uniformity

DavidB4-bot: Spelling/Grammar Check, typos fixed: based off of → based on, Therefore → Therefore, (5), less people → fewer people

2016-06-27T16:46:01Z

Spelling/Grammar Check, typos fixed: based off of → based on, Therefore → Therefore, (5), less people → fewer people

VargasMilan: Reverted edits by Chinken (talk) to last revision by VargasMilan

2015-06-22T23:38:51Z

Reverted edits by Chinken (talk) to last revision by VargasMilan

Chinken: make more concise

2015-06-22T17:37:47Z

make more concise

Chinken: explain exactly what the myth of evolution is

2015-06-22T17:36:14Z

explain exactly what the myth of evolution is

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 {{cquote|''Evolutionism is a '''world-view''', which seeks to explain every aspect of this world in which we live. It encompasses a wide variety of topics, from astronomy to chemistry to biology. At its core, it teaches that there were different stages in the evolution of our universe...''<ref>[http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/evolutionism.htm "Evolutionism—A broad overview"] (2007).  All About Philosophy.  Accessed on September 14, 2014.</ref>}}
-Evolutionists think of themselves as well-read and learned, but know virtually nothing about the Bible (unless they learned it in their childhoods).  Evolutionists almost never read the Bible or are even willing to discuss it.
+Evolutionists think of themselves as well-read and learned, but know virtually nothing about the [[Bible]] (unless they learned it in their childhoods).  Evolutionists almost never read the Bible or are even willing to discuss it.
 ==Theistic Evolution==
-[[Theistic Evolution]]ists believe that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in the evolutionary process. In general, theistic evolutionists accept the evolutionist ideas of the age of the earth and common descent. Theistic evolutionists believe that at some point God intervened in a metaphysical fashion to give souls to some small group of human ancestors. The Catholic Church holds that this is consistent with the Catholic faith.<ref>Brumley, Mark (January/February 1997). [https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html "Evolution and the pope"].  ''Catholic Dossier''.  Retrieved from Catholic.net as archived at Internet Archive on September 14, 2014.</ref>
+[[Theistic Evolution]]ists believe that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in the evolutionary process. In general, theistic evolutionists accept the evolutionist ideas of the age of the earth and common descent. Theistic evolutionists believe that at some point God intervened in a metaphysical fashion to give souls to some small group of human ancestors. The [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic Church]] holds that this is consistent with the Catholic faith.<ref>Brumley, Mark (January/February 1997). [https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html "Evolution and the pope"].  ''Catholic Dossier''.  Retrieved from Catholic.net as archived at Internet Archive on September 14, 2014.</ref>
 Roughly twice as many people in the U.S. believe in this type of evolution (30%), as opposed to godless evolution that most atheists believe in (just a mere 13% of people). However, both of these combined are still fewer than the number of people who believe in Young Earth Creation (48%), as told by the Bible.<ref>College politico (2008).  [http://hubpages.com/hub/Poll-Most-Americans-Dont-Believe-Evolution "Poll: Most Americans don't believe evolution"].  ''HubPages''.  Retrieved on September 14, 2014.</ref>
@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 ===According to Atheistic Evolutionists===
-Some proponents of the scientific theory of evolution reject the idea of a philosophy or worldview that guides their conclusions in scientific experimentation.  However, evolutionists who are 'strong atheists' and who make a positive assertion that there is no God, do in fact have a worldview; whereas 'weak atheists', who maintain there is probably no God due to lack of any objective evidence of Him, rely on science.
+Some proponents of the scientific theory of evolution reject the idea of a philosophy or worldview that guides their conclusions in scientific experimentation.  However, evolutionists who are "strong atheists" and who make a positive assertion that there is no [[God]] do, in fact, have a worldview; whereas "weak atheists," who maintain there is probably no God due to lack of any objective evidence of Him, rely on science.
 '''Strong Atheism'''

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Theistic Evolution==
 [[Theistic Evolution]]ists believe that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in the evolutionary process. In general, theistic evolutionists accept the evolutionist ideas of the age of the earth and common descent. Theistic evolutionists believe that at some point God intervened in a metaphysical fashion to give souls to some small group of human ancestors. The Catholic Church holds that this is consistent with the Catholic faith.<ref>Brumley, Mark (January/February 1997). [https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html "Evolution and the pope"].  ''Catholic Dossier''.  Retrieved from Catholic.net as archived at Internet Archive on September 14, 2014.</ref>
-Roughly twice as many people in the U.S. believe in this type of evolution (30%), as opposed to godless evolution that most atheists believe in (just a mere 13% of people). However both of these combined is still fewer people than the amount of people who believe in Young Earth Creation (48%), as told by the Bible.<ref>College politico (2008).  [http://hubpages.com/hub/Poll-Most-Americans-Dont-Believe-Evolution "Poll: Most Americans don't believe evolution"].  ''HubPages''.  Retrieved on September 14, 2014.</ref>
+Roughly twice as many people in the U.S. believe in this type of evolution (30%), as opposed to godless evolution that most atheists believe in (just a mere 13% of people). However, both of these combined are still fewer than the number of people who believe in Young Earth Creation (48%), as told by the Bible.<ref>College politico (2008).  [http://hubpages.com/hub/Poll-Most-Americans-Dont-Believe-Evolution "Poll: Most Americans don't believe evolution"].  ''HubPages''.  Retrieved on September 14, 2014.</ref>
 ==Foundational question/starting point==
@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 ===According to Atheistic Evolutionists===
-Some proponents of the scientific theory of evolution reject the idea of a philosophy or worldview that guides their conclusions in scientific experimentation.  However evolutionists who are 'strong atheists' and who make a positive assertion that there is no God, do in fact have a worldview; whereas 'weak atheists', who maintain there is probably no God due to lack of any objective evidence of Him, rely on science.
+Some proponents of the scientific theory of evolution reject the idea of a philosophy or worldview that guides their conclusions in scientific experimentation.  However, evolutionists who are 'strong atheists' and who make a positive assertion that there is no God, do in fact have a worldview; whereas 'weak atheists', who maintain there is probably no God due to lack of any objective evidence of Him, rely on science.
 '''Strong Atheism'''
@@ Line 127: / Line 127: @@
 * [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/the-lie/chapter2.asp Evolution is Religion]
 '''CreationWiki'''
-*[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_requires_as_much_faith_as_creationism Evolution requires as much faith as creationism] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
+* [http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_requires_as_much_faith_as_creationism Evolution requires as much faith as creationism] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
-*[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion Evolution is a religion] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
+* [http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion Evolution is a religion] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
 '''Institute for Creation Research'''
 * [https://www.icr.org/article/201/ Evolution is Religion, not Science (1)], [https://www.icr.org/article/455/ (2)]

@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 {{cquote|''Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with '''religious fervor''', and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith.''<ref name="mgreen" />}}
-Evolution has been a recent source of controversy in the [[United States]].<ref>Linder, Doug (2014). [http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTrials/conlaw/evolution.htm "The evolution controversy"].  University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law website.  Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref> Some prominent Americans seriously question evolution,<ref>BSR (May 6, 2007). [http://mikehuckabeepresident2008.blogspot.com/2007/05/mike-huckabee-does-not-believe-in.html "Mike Huckabee does not believe in evolution alone"].  Mike Huckabee President 2016.  Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref> based on a feeling that it conflicts with religious beliefs. However, according to Evolutionists, at least one aspect of religion and evolution is not mutually exclusive. Some deeply religious evolutionists believe that God set evolution into effect, which is no detraction to His majesty. This is referring to the theory of [[Theistic Evolution]].
+Evolution has been a recent source of controversy in the [[United States]].<ref>Linder, Doug (2014). [http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTrials/conlaw/evolution.htm "The evolution controversy"].  University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law website.  Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref> Some prominent Americans seriously question evolution,<ref>BSR (May 6, 2007). [http://mikehuckabeepresident2008.blogspot.com/2007/05/mike-huckabee-does-not-believe-in.html "Mike Huckabee does not believe in evolution alone"].  Mike Huckabee President 2016.  Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref> based on a feeling that it conflicts with religious beliefs. However, according to Evolutionists, at least one aspect of religion and evolution is not mutually exclusive. Some deeply religious evolutionists believe that God set evolution into effect, which is no [[detraction]] to His majesty. This is referring to the theory of [[Theistic Evolution]].
 ===Religiosity and the cult of personality surrounding Charles Darwin===

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ==Theistic Evolution==
-[[Theistic Evolution]]ists believe that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in the evolutionary process. In general, theistic evolutionists accept the evolutionist ideas of the age of the earth and common descent. Theistic evolutionists believe that at some point God intervened in a metaphysical fashion to give souls to some small group of human ancestors. The Catholic Church holds that this is consistent with the Catholic faith.<ref>Brumley, Mark (January/February 1997). [http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html "Evolution and the pope"].  ''Catholic Dossier''.  Retrieved from Catholic.net as archived at Internet Archive on September 14, 2014.</ref>
+[[Theistic Evolution]]ists believe that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in the evolutionary process. In general, theistic evolutionists accept the evolutionist ideas of the age of the earth and common descent. Theistic evolutionists believe that at some point God intervened in a metaphysical fashion to give souls to some small group of human ancestors. The Catholic Church holds that this is consistent with the Catholic faith.<ref>Brumley, Mark (January/February 1997). [https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html "Evolution and the pope"].  ''Catholic Dossier''.  Retrieved from Catholic.net as archived at Internet Archive on September 14, 2014.</ref>
 Roughly twice as many people in the U.S. believe in this type of evolution (30%), as opposed to godless evolution that most atheists believe in (just a mere 13% of people). However both of these combined is still fewer people than the amount of people who believe in Young Earth Creation (48%), as told by the Bible.<ref>College politico (2008).  [http://hubpages.com/hub/Poll-Most-Americans-Dont-Believe-Evolution "Poll: Most Americans don't believe evolution"].  ''HubPages''.  Retrieved on September 14, 2014.</ref>
@@ Line 70: / Line 70: @@
 ===Biblical Young Earth Creationist's problem with a Biblical Old Earth===
-Taking the Bible literally, there are no gaps permitting an undocumented period of time between the creation week and the fall of the temple in Jerusalem in 587 BC,<ref>Redinger, Ruby (2007). [http://web.archive.org/web/20070701035655/http://web.newsguy.com/rubyredinger/age.html "Biblical age of the Earth"].  Biblical Age of the Earth.  Retrieved on September 15, 2014 from July 1, 2007 archive at Internet Archive.</ref> which is well established by archaeology and secular history.  Accordingly, the creation of Adam can be placed at approximately 4,163 BC and the initial creation of the universe six days prior.
+Taking the Bible literally, there are no gaps permitting an undocumented period of time between the creation week and the fall of the temple in Jerusalem in 587 BC,<ref>Redinger, Ruby (2007). [https://web.archive.org/web/20070701035655/http://web.newsguy.com/rubyredinger/age.html "Biblical age of the Earth"].  Biblical Age of the Earth.  Retrieved on September 15, 2014 from July 1, 2007 archive at Internet Archive.</ref> which is well established by archaeology and secular history.  Accordingly, the creation of Adam can be placed at approximately 4,163 BC and the initial creation of the universe six days prior.
 ==Quotes supporting the position that evolutionism requires faith<ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionquotes.html "Evolutionism quotes"] (2004).  Northwest Creation Network.  Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref>==
@@ Line 130: / Line 130: @@
 *[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion Evolution is a religion] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
 '''Institute for Creation Research'''
-* [http://www.icr.org/article/201/ Evolution is Religion, not Science (1)], [http://www.icr.org/article/455/ (2)]
+* [https://www.icr.org/article/201/ Evolution is Religion, not Science (1)], [https://www.icr.org/article/455/ (2)]
 |}
 [[Category:Naturalism]]

@@ Line 73: / Line 73: @@
 ==Quotes supporting the position that evolutionism requires faith<ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionquotes.html "Evolutionism quotes"] (2004).  Northwest Creation Network.  Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref>==
-{{cquote|'''J.W.N. Sullivan (science author)'''<br />''The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith....''<ref>Sullivan, John W.N. (1933).  ''The Limitations of Science'' (New York:  The Viking Press), p. 95.  Quoted in review by [http://books.google.com/books?id=EPoPAAAAIAAJ&q=%22The+hypothesis+that+life+has+developed+from+inorganic+matter+is,+at+present,+still+an+article+of+faith,+although+various+chemists+have+put+forward+various+hypothetical+accounts+as+to+how+they+think+it+might+have+been+done%22&dq=%22The+hypothesis+that+life+has+developed+from+inorganic+matter+is,+at+present,+still+an+article+of+faith,+although+various+chemists+have+put+forward+various+hypothetical+accounts+as+to+how+they+think+it+might+have+been+done%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LzwaVKkn5_PwAd-cgeAP&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA ''New Catholic World'' [preview&#93;], vol. 138, p. 520.  Preview retrieved from GoogleBooks on September 17, 2014.</ref>}}
+{{cquote|'''J.W.N. Sullivan (science author)'''<br />''The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith....''<ref>Sullivan, John W.N. (1933).  ''The Limitations of Science'' (New York:  The Viking Press), p. 95.  Quoted in review by [https://books.google.com/books?id=EPoPAAAAIAAJ&q=%22The+hypothesis+that+life+has+developed+from+inorganic+matter+is,+at+present,+still+an+article+of+faith,+although+various+chemists+have+put+forward+various+hypothetical+accounts+as+to+how+they+think+it+might+have+been+done%22&dq=%22The+hypothesis+that+life+has+developed+from+inorganic+matter+is,+at+present,+still+an+article+of+faith,+although+various+chemists+have+put+forward+various+hypothetical+accounts+as+to+how+they+think+it+might+have+been+done%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LzwaVKkn5_PwAd-cgeAP&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA ''New Catholic World'' [preview&#93;], vol. 138, p. 520.  Preview retrieved from GoogleBooks on September 17, 2014.</ref>}}
-{{cquote|'''Dr. M.G. Grene'''<br />''Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with religious fervor, and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith.''<ref name="mgreen">Grene, Marjorie (November 1959).  "The Faith of Darwinism".  ''Encounter'', p. 49.  Reprinted in Grene, Marjorie (1974), [http://books.google.com/books?id=BUL8BAAhg4YC&pg=PA187&lpg=PA187&dq=%22characteristically+Darwinian+theory+has+itself+become+an+orthodoxy,%22&source=bl&ots=QmawriJpLu&sig=6Gu2gx0X5pIQkM31bX9PkMs5Klk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eCwaVM6gG5TP8QHNhIGQCg&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22characteristically%20Darwinian%20theory%20has%20itself%20become%20an%20orthodoxy%2C%22&f=false ''The Knower and the Known''] (Berkeley, CA:  University of California Press), p. 187.  Retrieved from GoogleBooks on September 17, 2014.</ref>}}
+{{cquote|'''Dr. M.G. Grene'''<br />''Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with religious fervor, and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith.''<ref name="mgreen">Grene, Marjorie (November 1959).  "The Faith of Darwinism".  ''Encounter'', p. 49.  Reprinted in Grene, Marjorie (1974), [https://books.google.com/books?id=BUL8BAAhg4YC&pg=PA187&lpg=PA187&dq=%22characteristically+Darwinian+theory+has+itself+become+an+orthodoxy,%22&source=bl&ots=QmawriJpLu&sig=6Gu2gx0X5pIQkM31bX9PkMs5Klk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eCwaVM6gG5TP8QHNhIGQCg&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22characteristically%20Darwinian%20theory%20has%20itself%20become%20an%20orthodoxy%2C%22&f=false ''The Knower and the Known''] (Berkeley, CA:  University of California Press), p. 187.  Retrieved from GoogleBooks on September 17, 2014.</ref>}}
 {{cquote|'''Dr. L.H. Matthews'''<br />''The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory—is it then a science or faith?''<ref>Matthews, L. Harrison (1972), "Introduction" to Darwin, Charles (1872), ''The Origin of Species'', 6th ed. (London:  J. M. Dent), pp. x-xi.  Quoted in "Evolutionism quotes".</ref>}}
-{{cquote|'''Dr. [[R.L. Wysong]]'''<br />''"Evolution requires plenty of faith; a faith in L-proteins that defy chance formation; a faith in the formation of DNA codes which, if generated spontaneously, would spell only pandemonium; a faith in a primitive environment that, in reality, would fiendishly devour any chemical precursors to life; a faith in experiments that prove nothing but the need for intelligence in the beginning; a faith in a primitive ocean that would not thicken, but would only haplessly dilute chemicals; a faith in natural laws of thermodynamics and biogenesis that actually deny the possibility for the spontaneous generation of life; a faith in future scientific revelations that, when realized, always seem to present more dilemmas to the evolutionists; faith in improbabilities that treasonously tell two stories—one denying evolution, the other confirming the creator; faith in transformations that remain fixed; faith in mutations and natural selection that add to a double negative for evolution; faith in fossils that embarrassingly show fixity through time, regular absence of transitional forms and striking testimony to a worldwide water deluge; a faith in time which proves to only promote degradation in the absence of mind; and faith in reductionism that ends up reducing the materialist's arguments to zero and forcing the need to invoke a supernatural creator."''<ref>Wysong, R.L. (1976). [http://books.google.com/books?id=yNev8Y-xN8YC&pg=PA419&dq=wysong+controversy+%22requires+plenty+of+faith%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RzgaVKW4FMXy8AHjgYGwAQ&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=wysong%20controversy%20%22requires%20plenty%20of%20faith%22&f=false ''The Creation-Evolution Controversy''] (Midland, MI:  Inquiry Press), p. 419.  Retrieved from GoogleBooks on September 17, 2014.</ref>}}
+{{cquote|'''Dr. [[R.L. Wysong]]'''<br />''"Evolution requires plenty of faith; a faith in L-proteins that defy chance formation; a faith in the formation of DNA codes which, if generated spontaneously, would spell only pandemonium; a faith in a primitive environment that, in reality, would fiendishly devour any chemical precursors to life; a faith in experiments that prove nothing but the need for intelligence in the beginning; a faith in a primitive ocean that would not thicken, but would only haplessly dilute chemicals; a faith in natural laws of thermodynamics and biogenesis that actually deny the possibility for the spontaneous generation of life; a faith in future scientific revelations that, when realized, always seem to present more dilemmas to the evolutionists; faith in improbabilities that treasonously tell two stories—one denying evolution, the other confirming the creator; faith in transformations that remain fixed; faith in mutations and natural selection that add to a double negative for evolution; faith in fossils that embarrassingly show fixity through time, regular absence of transitional forms and striking testimony to a worldwide water deluge; a faith in time which proves to only promote degradation in the absence of mind; and faith in reductionism that ends up reducing the materialist's arguments to zero and forcing the need to invoke a supernatural creator."''<ref>Wysong, R.L. (1976). [https://books.google.com/books?id=yNev8Y-xN8YC&pg=PA419&dq=wysong+controversy+%22requires+plenty+of+faith%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RzgaVKW4FMXy8AHjgYGwAQ&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=wysong%20controversy%20%22requires%20plenty%20of%20faith%22&f=false ''The Creation-Evolution Controversy''] (Midland, MI:  Inquiry Press), p. 419.  Retrieved from GoogleBooks on September 17, 2014.</ref>}}
 {{cquote|'''Dr. T.M. Lessl'''<br />''By calling evolution fact, the process of evolution is removed from dispute; it is no longer merely a scientific construct, but now stands apart from humankind and its perceptual frailties. Sagan apparently wishes to accomplish what Peter Berger calls "objectification," the attribution of objective reality to a humanly produced concept . . With evolution no longer regarded as a mere human construct, but now as a part of the natural order of the cosmos, evolution becomes a sacred archetype against which human actions can be weighed. Evolution is a sacred object or process in that it becomes endowed with mysterious and awesome power.''<ref>Lessl, Thomas M. (1985). "Science and the sacred cosmos: the ideological rhetoric of Carl Sagan".  ''Quarterly Journal of Speech'', vol. 71, no. 2, p. 178.  Quoted in "Evolutionism quotes".</ref>}}
 {{cquote|'''Dr. [[Michael Ruse|M. Ruse]] (evolutionist)'''<br />''Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a [[secular religion]] — a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint — and Mr. Gish is but one of many to make it — the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.''<ref>Ruse, Michael (May 13, 2000). [http://www.omniology.com/HowEvolutionBecameReligion.html "Saving Darwinism from the Darwinians."].  ''National Post'', p. B-3.  Retrieved from Omniology.com as "How evolution became a religion" on September 15, 2014. Caution:  may be copyrighted; for fair educational use only.</ref>}}

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-'''Evolutionism''', as opposed to [[Creationism]], is the ''advocacy of or belief in biological evolution''.<ref>[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Usage+and+context+of+%22evolutionism%22 "Evolutionism"] (2009). ''The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language'', 4th ed. (Boston:  Houghton Mifflin).  Retrieved from The Free Dictionary on September 14, 2014.</ref> Therefore one who ''believes in or supports a [[evolution|theory of evolution]]''<ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionist "Evolutionist"].  ''Random House Dictionary''.  (New York:  Random House).  Retrieved from Dictionary.com Unabridged on September 14, 2014.</ref> would be referred to as an ''evolutionist''. Evolutionism, used in a general sense, encompasses ''any'' type of biological evolutionist. Broken down into two categories, "Evolutionism" and "Evolutionists" usually involve Atheistic/Agnostic Evolutionists (evolution without God) and Theistic Evolutionists (evolution with God). Those categories can be further broken down, but they are the main two.
+'''Evolutionism''', as opposed to [[Creationism]], is the ''advocacy of or belief in biological evolution''.<ref>[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Usage+and+context+of+%22evolutionism%22 "Evolutionism"] (2009). ''The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language'', 4th ed. (Boston:  Houghton Mifflin).  Retrieved from The Free Dictionary on September 14, 2014.</ref> Therefore, one who ''believes in or supports a [[evolution|theory of evolution]]''<ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionist "Evolutionist"].  ''Random House Dictionary''.  (New York:  Random House).  Retrieved from Dictionary.com Unabridged on September 14, 2014.</ref> would be referred to as an ''evolutionist''. Evolutionism, used in a general sense, encompasses ''any'' type of biological evolutionist. Broken down into two categories, "Evolutionism" and "Evolutionists" usually involve Atheistic/Agnostic Evolutionists (evolution without God) and Theistic Evolutionists (evolution with God). Those categories can be further broken down, but they are the main two.
-The term evolutionism is used differently in different circles of thought. Generally [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth Creationists]] use it as a reference to what they believe is the [[worldview]] or [[presupposition]] aspect of the scientific theory of evolution. The term is not necessarily used as a worldview unto itself, but is more based off of and is possibly an extension of a variety of other worldviews including [[Materialism]], [[Naturalism (philosophy)|Naturalism]]<ref>Multiple references:
+The term evolutionism is used differently in different circles of thought. Generally [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth Creationists]] use it as a reference to what they believe is the [[worldview]] or [[presupposition]] aspect of the scientific theory of evolution. The term is not necessarily used as a worldview unto itself, but is more based on and is possibly an extension of a variety of other worldviews including [[Materialism]], [[Naturalism (philosophy)|Naturalism]]<ref>Multiple references:
 *[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA601.html "CA601: Evolution and naturalism"] (2004).  TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved on September 14, 2014.
 *CreationWiki response:  [http://creationwiki.org/CA601 "Evolution requires naturalism (Talk.Origins)"] (2014).  CreationWiki.  Retrieved on September 14, 2014.</ref>, and [[Humanism]] in its broadest sense. Many that hold to the theory of evolution have been known to be [[Atheism|atheists]] as well, but this does not represent the entirety or whole.
@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Theistic Evolution==
 [[Theistic Evolution|Theistic Evolutionists]] believe that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in the evolutionary process. In general, theistic evolutionists accept the evolutionist ideas of the age of the earth and common descent. Theistic evolutionists believe that at some point God intervened in a metaphysical fashion to give souls to some small group of human ancestors. The Catholic Church holds that this is consistent with the Catholic faith.<ref>Brumley, Mark (January/February 1997). [http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html "Evolution and the pope"].  ''Catholic Dossier''.  Retrieved from Catholic.net as archived at Internet Archive on September 14, 2014.</ref>
-Roughly twice as many people in the U.S. believe in this type of evolution (30%), as opposed to godless evolution that most atheists believe in (just a mere 13% of people). However both of these combined is still less people than the amount of people who believe in Young Earth Creation (48%), as told by the Bible<ref>College politico (2008).  [http://hubpages.com/hub/Poll-Most-Americans-Dont-Believe-Evolution "Poll: Most Americans don't believe evolution"].  ''HubPages''.  Retrieved on September 14, 2014.</ref>.
+Roughly twice as many people in the U.S. believe in this type of evolution (30%), as opposed to godless evolution that most atheists believe in (just a mere 13% of people). However both of these combined is still fewer people than the amount of people who believe in Young Earth Creation (48%), as told by the Bible<ref>College politico (2008).  [http://hubpages.com/hub/Poll-Most-Americans-Dont-Believe-Evolution "Poll: Most Americans don't believe evolution"].  ''HubPages''.  Retrieved on September 14, 2014.</ref>.
 ==Foundational question/starting point==
@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 ===According to biblical Creationists (Young Earth)===
 * God exists (worldview)
-** Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
+** Therefore, we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
 *** Thus science is done on the basis that "God exists"
 **** The Bible comes ''before'' science. The science is based on the worldview.
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 '''Impersonal God'''
 * There is no personal/involved God (worldview)
-** Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
+** Therefore, we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
 *** Thus science is done on the basis that God is not involved in His creation
 **** ''Theistic Evolutionism'' comes ''before'' the ''Scientific Theory of Evolution''. The science is based on the worldview.
@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 '''Personal God'''
 * There is a personal/involved God (worldview)
-** Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
+** Therefore, we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
 *** Thus science is done on the basis that there is a "personal God"
 **** ''Theistic Evolutionism'' comes ''before'' the ''Scientific Theory of Evolution''. The science is based on the worldview.
@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 '''Strong Atheism'''
 * There is no God (worldview)
-** Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
+** Therefore, we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
 *** Thus science is done on the basis of there being no God (i.e. [[naturalism]])
 **** Naturalism comes ''before'' the science. The science is based on the worldview.

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:36, June 22, 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	'''Evolutionism'''~~, as opposed to [[Creationism]],~~ is the ''advocacy of or belief in biological evolution''.<ref>[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Usage+and+context+of+%22evolutionism%22 "Evolutionism"] (2009). ''The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language'', 4th ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin). Retrieved from The Free Dictionary on September 14, 2014.</ref> Therefore one who ''believes in or supports a [[evolution\|theory of evolution]]''<ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionist "Evolutionist"]. ''Random House Dictionary''. (New York: Random House). Retrieved from Dictionary.com Unabridged on September 14, 2014.</ref> would be referred to as an ''evolutionist''. Evolutionism, used in a general sense, encompasses ''any'' type of biological evolutionist. Broken down into two categories, "Evolutionism" and "Evolutionists" usually involve Atheistic/Agnostic Evolutionists (evolution without God) and Theistic Evolutionists (evolution with God). Those categories can be further broken down, but they are the main two.	+	'''Evolutionism''' is the ''advocacy of or belief in biological evolution'' - the idea that all humans and animals are continually changing to adapt to their environment.<ref>[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Usage+and+context+of+%22evolutionism%22 "Evolutionism"] (2009). ''The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language'', 4th ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin). Retrieved from The Free Dictionary on September 14, 2014.</ref> It is a contrast to [[creationism]]. Therefore one who ''believes in or supports a [[evolution\|theory of evolution]]''<ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionist "Evolutionist"]. ''Random House Dictionary''. (New York: Random House). Retrieved from Dictionary.com Unabridged on September 14, 2014.</ref> would be referred to as an ''evolutionist''. Evolutionism, used in a general sense, encompasses ''any'' type of biological evolutionist. Broken down into two categories, "Evolutionism" and "Evolutionists" usually involve Atheistic/Agnostic Evolutionists (evolution without God) and Theistic Evolutionists (evolution with God). Those categories can be further broken down, but they are the main two.

	The term evolutionism is used differently in different circles of thought. Generally [[Young Earth Creationism\|Young Earth Creationists]] use it as a reference to what they believe is the [[worldview]] or [[presupposition]] aspect of the scientific theory of evolution. The term is not necessarily used as a worldview unto itself, but is more based off of and is possibly an extension of a variety of other worldviews including [[Materialism]], [[Naturalism (philosophy)\|Naturalism]]<ref>Multiple references:		The term evolutionism is used differently in different circles of thought. Generally [[Young Earth Creationism\|Young Earth Creationists]] use it as a reference to what they believe is the [[worldview]] or [[presupposition]] aspect of the scientific theory of evolution. The term is not necessarily used as a worldview unto itself, but is more based off of and is possibly an extension of a variety of other worldviews including [[Materialism]], [[Naturalism (philosophy)\|Naturalism]]<ref>Multiple references: