CREATION, not CREATIONISM

by Linda Gunderson

The battle between creation and evolution rages on, and we would do well to consider the subtlety of words. For instance, although most creationists and all evolutionists use the term CREATION "ISM", I believe creationists are shooting themselves in the foot by using it.

It could be compared to the days when those who call themselves pro-lifers were referred to as ANTI-abortionists. Pro-lifers have stopped using the term, but it took them awhile to realize the damage that label was causing. Anti is negative. It has a subtle negative influence on our thinking when we hear it. The same can be said for creationism. Isms are usually negative - Marxism, Nazism, racism, fascism, communism, socialism, etc.

Listen carefully to the way these words sound when you slowly repeat them out loud. Which sounds more factual?

           EVOLUTION     CREATIONISM

Now state it this way -

          EVOLUTIONISM     CREATION

Or you might try this -

          CREATION     CREATIONISM

          EVOLUTION     EVOLUTIONISM

Which sounds better? Which sounds worse?

Several top creationists have already started to use the terms creation and evolutionism, including Henry Morris of ICR, one of the pioneers in the creation movement. Notice that I didn't say 'pioneer in creationism'. Although some of Morris' books even use the word 'Creationism' in the title, I have noticed increasingly that in recent Acts & Facts articles he is using the terms creation and evolutionism.

Does it make any difference? Once a creationist was discussing scientific evidences with an evolutionist. After repeated use of the term 'evolution' by the latter, the creationist simply interjected, "Evolutionism". There was a long pause, and when the evolutionist continued he didn't seem very happy. The man didn't know exactly why, but he definitely didn't like what he heard.

Although both are belief systems and therefore 'isms', I believe in turning the tables and refuse to use the term creationism. I substitute creation, creation science, creation movement, belief in creation, etc. And I always use the terms evolutionism, belief in evolutionism, or the teaching of evolutionism whenever I have the opportunity to do so. And since evolutionism is not a scientific theory or hypothesis, as it does not follow the scientific method and is not falsifiable, one could use the term the philosophy of evolutionism.

I'd like to encourage all creationists to (at the very least) make an effort to use the terms in a more balanced way, and to encourage others to do the same. Yes, it will take effort to change; it took me many months. But I believe it is worth the effort. Let's not let an unwillingness to change stand in our way, or even let pride slip in to prevent us from correcting ourselves publicly. As those who believe in the authority of scripture in regards to Creation, we should be willing to change when a truth is brought to light. Might I dare go so far as to say that if the tables were turned, and I was speaking to evolutionists, that they would immediately see the value in what I am saying and make the change? Can we do any less? And maybe you would even consider following the path some of us have taken in refusing to even use the ISM at all with Creation, instead placing it squarely on Darwin's unproven theory, evolutionism.

If you would like to respond to this commentary, e-mail ross{at}rossolson.org and let us know if your remarks may be posted.