Country of origin | United States |
---|---|
Manufacturer | Blue Origin |
Predecessor | BE-3[2] |
Liquid-fuel engine | |
Propellant | Liquid oxygen / liquid methane |
Under development | |
Performance | |
Thrust (SL) | 2,400 kN (550,000 lbf) |
Chamber pressure | 13,400 kPa (1,950 psi) |
Gimbal range | ±5° |
Used in | |
Vulcan New Glenn |
The Blue Engine 4[3] or BE-4 is an oxygen rich[4]staged-combustionrocket engine under development by Blue Origin. The BE-4 is being developed with private and public funding. The engine has been designed to produce 2,400 kilonewtons (550,000 lbf) of thrust at sea level.[5]
It was initially planned for the engine to be used exclusively on a Blue Origin proprietary launch vehicle, New Glenn, the company's first orbital rocket. However, it was announced in 2014 that the engine would also be used on the United Launch Alliance (ULA) Vulcan launch vehicle, the successor to the Atlas V launch vehicle.[6] Final engine selection by ULA happened in September 2018.[7]
First flight test of the new engine is expected no earlier than 2021.[8]
- 2Applications
History[edit]
Blue Origin began work on the BE-4 in 2011 and the new engine marks a change in that this is their first engine that will combust liquid oxygen and liquid methanepropellants. Blue Origin did not announce the new engine to the public until September 2014.[9] In September 2014—in a choice labeled 'a stunner' by SpaceNews[10]—the large US launch vehicle manufacturer and launch service provider United Launch Alliance selected the BE-4 as the main engine for a new primary launch vehicle.[10]
As of April 2015, the engine development work was being carried out in two parallel programs. One program is testing full-scale versions of the BE-4 powerpack, the set of valves and turbopumps that provide the proper fuel/oxidizer mix to the injectors and combustion chamber. The second program is testing subscale versions of the engine's injectors.[11] Also in early 2015, the company indicated it is planning to begin full-scale engine testing in late 2016, and that they expected to complete development of the engine in 2017.[11]
As of September 2015, Blue Origin had completed more than 100 development tests of several elements of the BE-4, including the preburner and a 'regeneratively-cooledthrust chamber using multiple full-scale injector elements'. The tests were used to confirm the theoretical model predictions of 'injector performance, heat transfer, and combustion stability', and data collected is being used to refine the engine design.[12] There was an explosion on the test stand during 2015 during powerpack testing. Blue Origin built two larger and redundant test stands to follow, capable of testing the full thrust of the BE-4.[13]
In January 2016, Blue Origin announced that they intended to begin testing full engines of the BE-4 on ground test stands prior to the end of 2016.[14] Following a factory tour in March 2016, journalist Eric Berger noted that a large part of 'Blue Origin’s factory has been given over to development of the Blue Engine-4'.[6]
Initially, both first-stage and second-stage versions of the engine were planned. The second stage of the initial New Glenn design was to have shared the same stage diameter as the first stage and use a single vacuum-optimized BE-4, the BE-4U.[15]
The first engine was fully assembled in March 2017.[16] Also in March, United Launch Alliance indicated that the economic risk of the Blue Origin engine selection option had been retired, but that the technical risk on the project would remain until a series of engine firing tests were completed later in 2017.[17] A test anomaly occurred on 13 May 2017 and Blue Origin reported that they lost a set of powerpack hardware.[18]
In June 2017, Blue Origin announced that they would build a new facility in Huntsville, Alabama to manufacture the large BE-4 cryogenic rocket engine.[19]
The BE-4 was first test fired, at 50% thrust for 3 seconds, in October 2017.[20] By March 2018, the BE-4 engine had been tested at 65% of design thrust for 114 seconds[21] with a goal expressed in May to achieve 70% of design thrust in the next several months.[22] By September 2018, multiple hundreds of seconds of engine testing had been completed, including one test of over 200 seconds duration.[23] The BE-4 engines will not be flight tested until 2021.
In October 2018, Blue Origin President Bob Smith announced that the first launch of the New Glenn had been moved back to 2021.[8]
By February 2019, the BE-4 had acquired a total of 1800 seconds of hot fire testing on ground test stands, but had yet to be tested above 1.8 meganewtons (400,000 lbf) pounds of thrust, about 73 percent of the engine's rated thrust of 2.4 MN (550,000 lbf).[24]
At the 35th Space Symposium,[when?] Bob Smith disclosed that the design of BE-4's powerpack was undergoing a major change.[citation needed]
Blue Origin BE-4 rocket engine powerhead and combustion chamber, April 2018—liquid methane inlet side view. This was the first BE-4 engine to be hotfire tested; test occurred on 18 October 2017.
Applications[edit]
As of 2017, the BE-4 was being considered for use on two launch vehicles currently in development. Prior to this, a modified derivative of the BE-4 was also being considered for the experimental XS-1spaceplane for a US military project, but was not selected.
Atlas V successor - Vulcan[edit]
In late 2014, Blue Origin signed an agreement with United Launch Alliance to co-develop the BE-4 engine and to commit to use the new engine on the Vulcan launch vehicle, a successor to the Atlas V, which would replace the single Russian-made RD-180 engine.[10] Vulcan will use two of the 2,400 kN (550,000 lbf) BE-4 engines on each first stage. The engine development program began in 2011.[2][25][9]
The ULA partnership announcement came after months of uncertainty about the future of the Russian RD-180 engine that has been used in the ULA Atlas V rocket for over a decade. Geopolitical concerns had come about that created serious concerns about the reliability and consistency of the supply chain for the procurement of the Russian engine.[26] ULA expects the first flight of the new launch vehicle no earlier than 2019.[9][10]
Since early 2015, the BE-4 has been in competition with the AR1 engine for the Atlas V RD-180 replacement program. While the BE-4 is a methane engine, the AR1, like the RD-180, is kerosene-fueled.[27] In February 2016, the US Air Force issued a contract that provides partial development funding of up to US$202 million to ULA in order to support use of the Blue BE-4 engine on the ULA Vulcan launch vehicle.[28][29]
Initially, only US$40.8 million will be disbursed by the government with US$40.8 million additional to be spent by a ULA subsidiary on Vulcan BE-4 development.[30] Although US$536 million was the original USAF contract amount to Aerojet Rocketdyne (AJR) to advance development of the AR1 engine, as an alternative for powering the Vulcan rocket,[28] by June 2018, the USAF had renegotiated the agreement with AJR and decreased the Air Force contribution—5/6ths of the total cost—to US$294 million. AJR is putting no additional private funds into the engine development effort after early 2018.[23]
Bezos noted in 2016 that the Vulcan launch vehicle is being designed around the BE-4 engine; ULA switching to the AR1 would require significant delays and money on the part of ULA.[31] This point has also been made by ULA executives, who have also clarified that the BE-4 is likely to cost 40% less than the AR1, as well as benefit from Bezos capacity to 'make split-second investment decisions on behalf of BE-4, and has already demonstrated his determination to see it through. [whereas the] AR1, in contrast, depends mainly on U.S. government backing, meaning Aerojet Rocketdyne has many phone numbers to dial to win support'.[32]
New Glenn launch vehicle[edit]
The engine is to be used on the Blue Origin large orbitallaunch vehicleNew Glenn, a 7.0-meter (23 ft)-diameter two-stageorbitallaunch vehicle with an optional third stage and a reusable first stage. The first flight and orbital test is planned for no earlier than 2021,[8] although the company had earlier expected the BE-4 might be tested on a rocket flight as early as 2020.[15]
The first stage will be powered by seven BE-4 engines and will be reusable, landing vertically. The second stage of New Glenn will share the same diameter and use two BE-3 vacuum-optimized hydrolox engines.[33] The second stage will be expendable.[15]
XS-1 engine[edit]
Boeing secured a contract to design and build the DARPAXS-1 reusable spaceplane in 2014. The XS-1 is to accelerate to hypersonic speed at the edge of the Earth's atmosphere to enable its payload to reach orbit.[34] In 2015, it was believed a modified derivative of the BE-4 engine was to power the craft.[35] In 2017, the contract award selected the Space Shuttle main engine-derived Aerojet Rocketdyne AR-22 engine instead.[36]
Availability and use[edit]
Blue Origin has indicated that they intend to make the engine commercially available, once development is complete, to companies beyond ULA, and also plans to utilize the engine in Blue Origin's own new orbital launch vehicle.[26] As of March 2016, Orbital ATK was also evaluating Blue engines for its launch vehicles.[6][needs update]
The BE-4 uses liquid methane rather than more commonly used rocket fuels such as kerosene. This approach allows for autogenous pressurization, which is the use of gaseous fuel to pressurize remaining liquid fuel. This is beneficial because it eliminates the need for costly and complex pressurization systems which require storage of a pressurizing gas, such as helium.
Although all early BE-4 components and full engines to support the test program were built at Blue's headquarters location in Kent, Washington, production of the BE-4 will be in Huntsville, Alabama.[37] Testing and support of the reusable BE-4s will occur at the company's orbital launch facility at Exploration Park in Florida, where Blue Origin is investing more than US$200 million in facilities and improvements.[31]
Technical specifications[edit]
The BE-4 is Staged combustion engine, with a single oxygen rich Preburner, and a single turbine driving both the fuel and oxygen pumps [38]. The cycle is similar to the RD-180 currently used on the atlas V, although it uses only a single combustion chamber and nozzle.
The BE-4 is designed for long life and high reliability, partially by aiming the engine to be a 'medium-performing version of a high-performance architecture'.[6]Hydrostatic bearings are used in the turbopumps rather than the more typical ball and roller bearings specifically to increase reliability and service life.[39]
- Thrust (sea level): 2,400 kN (550,000 lbf) at full power[39][9]
- Chamber pressure: 13,400 kPa (1,950 psi), substantially lower than the 26,000 kPa (3,700 psi) of the RD-180 engine that ULA wants to replace[6]
- Designed for reusability[39][6]
- Design life: 100 launches and landings[40][41]
- Restartable during flight, via head-pressure start of the turbine during coast[13]
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ^https://twitter.com/JeffBezos/status/838748973598900225
- ^ abAchenbach, Joel (2014-09-17). 'Jeff Bezos's Blue Origin to supply engines for national security space launches'. Washington Post. Retrieved 2014-09-27.
- ^Alan Boyle (17 September 2014). 'Bezos vs. Musk: Blue Origin and ULA Turn Up the Heat in Rocket Battle'. NBC News.
- ^'Rocket Engines Designed for Reuse'. Blue Origin. Retrieved 28 February 2019.
- ^'Spring Meetings 2017 - GNF 'A step by step approach to low-cost access to space''. 7 April 2017. Retrieved 27 May 2017.
- ^ abcdefBerger, Eric (2016-03-09). 'Behind the curtain: Ars goes inside Blue Origin's secretive rocket factory'. Ars Technica. Retrieved 2016-03-09.
- ^'United Launch Alliance Building Rocket of the Future with Industry-Leading Strategic Partnerships'. 28 Sep 2018.
- ^ abc[1], Alan Boyle, 10 October 2018.
- ^ abcdFerster, Warren (2014-09-17). 'ULA To Invest in Blue Origin Engine as RD-180 Replacement'. Space News. Retrieved 2014-09-19.
- ^ abcdGruss, Mike (2015-04-24). 'Evolution of a Plan : ULA Execs Spell Out Logic Behind Vulcan Design Choices'. Space News. Retrieved 25 April 2015.
- ^ abFoust, Jeff (7 April 2015). 'Blue Origin Completes BE-3 Engine as BE-4 Work Continues'. Space News. Retrieved 8 April 2015.
- ^'Blue Origin Completes More Than 100 Staged-Combustion Tests in Development of BE-4 Engine'. Blue Origin. 20 September 2015. Archived from the original on 21 September 2017. Retrieved 12 January 2016.
- ^ abde Selding, Peter B. (2016-03-16). 'ULA intends to lower its costs, and raise its cool, to compete with SpaceX'. SpaceNews. Retrieved 2016-03-19.
[Blue Origin] did blow up one of their engines on the test stand .. restart the engine .. head pressure start of the turbine .. [Blue] blew up a powerpack under test .. [Bezos] opened up his checkbook, .. need to rebuild test stand, move up to 500 k powerpack for the Vulcan BE-4 engine; not one but two test stands .. agility to .. write with own checkbook is just refreshing
- ^Berger, Brian (2016-01-23). 'Launch. Land. Repeat: Blue Origin posts video of New Shepard's Friday flight'. SpaceNews. Retrieved 2016-01-24.
Also this year, we’ll start full-engine testing of the BE-4
- ^ abcBergin, Chris (12 September 2016). 'Blue Origin introduce the New Glenn orbital LV'. NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 13 November 2018.
the two-stage New Glenn is 270 feet tall, and its second stage is powered by a single vacuum-optimized BE-4 engine (the BE-4U).
- ^'1st BE-4 engine fully assembled. 2nd and 3rd following close behind'. 2017-03-06. Retrieved 2017-03-06.
- ^http://spacenews.com/bruno-vulcan-engine-downselect-is-blues-to-lose/
- ^http://spacenews.com/blue-origin-suffers-be-4-testing-mishap/
- ^https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/06/heres-why-jeff-bezos-is-building-rocket-engines-in-alabama/
- ^Berger, Eric (19 October 2017). 'Blue Origin just sent a jolt through the aerospace industry'. Ars Technica. Retrieved 19 October 2017.
- ^Blue Origin (2018-03-14), BE-4 Engine test: 65% power level and 114 seconds, retrieved 2018-03-20
- ^SpaceNews writer Jeff Foust.
- ^ abFoust, Jeff (25 September 2018). 'Aerojet Rocketdyne seeks other customers for AR1 engine'. SpaceNews. Retrieved 27 September 2018.
It’s performing quite well,” Blue Origin Chief Executive Bob Smith said of BE-4 on the same panel as Bruno. “We’ve gone through several hundred seconds of firing, including an over 200-second firing of that engine, so we’re feeling very good about its progress and what we’re going to be able to deliver to the market, as well as for our own consumption.
- ^Mosher, Dave (23 February 2019). 'Jeff Bezos just gave a private talk in New York. From utopian space colonies to dissing Elon Musk's Martian dream, here are the most notable things he said'. Business Insider. Retrieved 2019-02-25.
- ^'ULA taps Blue Origin for powerful new rocket engine'. Spaceflightnow.com. September 17, 2014. Retrieved 2015-04-08.
- ^ abFoust, Jeff (2014-09-22). 'Commercial crew and commercial engines'. The Space Review. Retrieved 2014-10-01.
- ^Mike Gruss (27 February 2015). 'Timing of Russian Engine Ban Puts ULA, Air Force, in a Bind'. Space News. Retrieved 2015-04-08.
- ^ abGruss, Mike (2016-02-29). 'Aerojet Rocketdyne, ULA win Air Force propulsion contracts'. SpaceNews. Retrieved 2016-03-01.
- ^http://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/682238
- ^'Contracts: Press Operations Release No: CR-037-16'. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. 2016-02-29. Retrieved 2016-03-01.
United Launch Services LLC, a majority owned subsidiary of United Launch Alliance, Centennial, Colorado, has been awarded a $46,629,267 other transaction agreement for the development of the Vulcan BE-4 and Advanced Cryogenic Evolved Stage (ACES) rocket propulsion system prototypes for the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. .. This other transaction agreement requires shared cost investment with United Launch Services for the development of prototypes of the Vulcan BE-4 rocket propulsion system, which is a booster stage engine, and .. The Vulcan BE-4 award is for $45,820,515, or 98.3 percent of the total awarded amount. .. intended for use on United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan launch vehicle. .. The work is expected to be completed no later than Dec. 31, 2019. Air Force fiscal 2015 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $26,344,603 are being obligated at the time of award. United Launch Services is contributing $40,828,213 at the time of award. The total potential government investment, including all options, is $201,655,584. The total potential investment by United Launch Services, including all options, is $134,196,971.
- ^ abPrice, Wayne T. (2016-03-12). 'Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin could change the face of space travel'. Florida Today. Retrieved 2016-03-13.
- ^Foust, Jeff (2016-03-17). 'ULA VP resigns following remarks on company's competitive position, strategy'. SpaceNews. Retrieved 2016-03-17.
- ^'Blue Origin switches engines for New Glenn second stage - SpaceNews.com'. SpaceNews.com. 2018-03-29. Retrieved 2018-04-28.
- ^'Work Commences on Experimental Spaceplane (XS-1) Designs'. Darpa.mil. 15 July 2014. Retrieved 20 September 2016.
- ^David Axe (2015-08-03). 'Pentagon Preps for Orbital War With New Spaceplane'. The Daily Beast. Retrieved 2015-08-03.
- ^Jason Rhian (2017-05-07). 'DARPA selects rocket engine for XS-1 experimental spaceplane'. SpaceFlightInsider. Retrieved 2017-07-12.
- ^Emre Kelly (2017-06-26). 'Blue Origin selects Alabama for rocket engine production, ending Florida's hopes'. Florida Today. Retrieved 2017-07-12.
- ^https://www.blueorigin.com/engines/be-4
- ^ abcBoyle, Alan (2017-03-20). 'Jeff Bezos does a deep dive into bearings in Blue Origin's BE-4 rocket engine update'. Yahoo Finance. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
[550,000 lbf thrust rocket engine] performance can involve a lot of wear and tear, particularly if you’re using traditional ball and roller bearings. To maximize the engine’s reusability, Blue Origin’s team is taking a different approach. To keep the BE-4 running smoothly, Bezos says the turbine at the heart of the engine’s turbopump will use a thin film of the fluid propellants as its bearings.
- ^Henry, Caleb (2018-06-25). 'Correction from Ariane: New Glenn first stage can do 25 missions, BE-4 engines designed for 100 flights each'. @CHenry_SN. Retrieved 2019-05-27.
- ^Sheetz, Michael (2018-04-18). 'Blue Origin's new rocket engine will be able to launch '100 full missions,' CEO says'. CNBC. Retrieved 2019-05-27.
External links[edit]
- Irene Klotz (Oct 27, 2017). 'Blue Origin Fires Up BE-4 Methane-Fuel Rocket Engine'. Aviation Week & Space Technology. Blue Origin marks successful first hotfire of BE-4 rocket engine.
Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BE-4&oldid=904297999'
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
List of numbers — Integers | ||||
Cardinal | four | |||
Ordinal | 4th (fourth) | |||
Numeral system | quaternary | |||
Factorization | 22 | |||
Divisors | 1, 2, 4 | |||
Greek numeral | Δ´ | |||
Roman numeral | IV | |||
Roman numeral (unicode) | Ⅳ, ⅳ | |||
tetra- | ||||
quadri-/quadr- | ||||
Binary | 1002 | |||
Ternary | 113 | |||
Quaternary | 104 | |||
Quinary | 45 | |||
Senary | 46 | |||
Octal | 48 | |||
Duodecimal | 412 | |||
Hexadecimal | 416 | |||
Vigesimal | 420 | |||
Base 36 | 436 | |||
Greek | δ (or Δ) | |||
Arabic, Kurdish | ٤ | |||
Persian | ۴ | |||
Urdu | ||||
Ge'ez | ፬ | |||
Bengali | ৪ | |||
Chinese numeral | 四,亖,肆 | |||
Korean | 넷,사 | |||
Devanagari | ४ | |||
Telugu | ౪ | |||
Malayalam | ൪ | |||
Tamil | ௪ | |||
Hebrew | ד | |||
Khmer | ៤ | |||
Thai | ๔ | |||
Kannada | ४ | |||
Burmese | ၄ |
4 (four) is a number, numeral, and glyph. It is the natural number following 3 and preceding 5
- 4In religion
- 7In science
- 13In music
In mathematics[edit]
Four is the smallest composite number, its proper divisors being 1 and 2.
4 is the smallest squared prime (p2) and the only even number in this form. 4 is also the only square one more than a prime number.
A number is a multiple of 4 if its last two digits are a multiple of 4. For example, 1092 is a multiple of 4 because 92 = 4 × 23.
In addition, 2 + 2 = 2 × 2 = 22 = 4. Continuing the pattern in Knuth's up-arrow notation, 2 ↑↑ 2 = 2 ↑↑↑ 2 = 4, and so on, for any number of up arrows. (That is, 2 [n] 2 = 4 for every positive integer n, where a [n] b is the hyperoperation.)
A four-sided plane figure is a quadrilateral (quadrangle) which include kites, rhombi, rectangles and squares, sometimes also called a tetragon. A circle divided by 4 makes right angles and four quadrants. Because of it, four (4) is the base number of the plane (mathematics). Four cardinal directions, four seasons, the duodecimal system, and the vigesimal system are based on four.
A solid figure with four faces as well as four vertices is a tetrahedron, and 4 is the smallest possible number of faces (as well as vertices) of a polyhedron. The regular tetrahedron is the simplest Platonic solid. A tetrahedron, which can also be called a 3-simplex, has four triangular faces and four vertices. It is the only self-dual regular polyhedron.
Four-dimensional space is the highest-dimensional space featuring more than three convex regular figures:
- Two-dimensional: infinitely many convex regular polygons.
- Three-dimensional: five convex regular polyhedra (the five Platonic solids).
- Four-dimensional: six convex regular polychora.
- Five-dimensional and every higher-dimensional: three regular convex polytopes (regular simplexes, hypercubes, cross-polytopes).
Four-dimensional differential manifolds have some unique properties. There is only one differential structure on ℝn except when n = 4, in which case there are uncountably many.
The smallest non-cyclicgroup has four elements; it is the Klein four-group. Four is also the order of the smallest non-trivial groups that are not simple.
Four is the only integer n for which the (non trivial) alternating groupAn is not simple.
Four is the maximum number of dimensions of a real associativedivision algebra (the quaternions), by a theorem of Ferdinand Georg Frobenius.
The four-color theorem states that a planar graph (or, equivalently, a flat map of two-dimensional regions such as countries) can be colored using four colors, so that adjacent vertices (or regions) are always different colors.[1] Three colors are not, in general, sufficient to guarantee this. The largest planar complete graph has four vertices.
Lagrange's four-square theorem states that every positive integer can be written as the sum of at most four square numbers. Three are not always sufficient; 7 for instance cannot be written as the sum of three squares.
Each natural number divisible by 4 is a difference of squares of two natural numbers, i.e. 4x = y2 − z2.
Four is the highest degree general polynomial equation for which there is a solution in radicals.
The four fours game, there are known solutions for all integers from 0 to 880 (but not 881).[citation needed]
List of basic calculations[edit]
Multiplication | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 50 | 100 | 1000 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 × x | 4 | 8 | 12 | 16 | 20 | 24 | 28 | 32 | 36 | 40 | 44 | 48 | 52 | 56 | 60 | 64 | 68 | 72 | 76 | 80 | 84 | 88 | 92 | 96 | 100 | 200 | 400 | 4000 |
Division | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 ÷ x | 4 | 2 | 1.3 | 1 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.571428 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.36 | 0.3 | 0.307692 | 0.285714 | 0.26 | 0.25 |
x ÷ 4 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.75 | 1 | 1.25 | 1.5 | 1.75 | 2 | 2.25 | 2.5 | 2.75 | 3 | 3.25 | 3.5 | 3.75 | 4 |
Exponentiation | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4x | 4 | 16 | 64 | 256 | 1024 | 4096 | 16384 | 65536 | 262144 | 1048576 | 4194304 | 16777216 | 67108864 |
x4 | 1 | 16 | 81 | 256 | 625 | 1296 | 2401 | 4096 | 6561 | 10000 | 14641 | 20736 | 28561 |
Evolution of the glyph[edit]
Two modern handwritten fours
Representing 1, 2 and 3 in as many lines as the number represented worked well.[citation needed] The Brahmin Indians simplified 4 by joining its four lines into a cross that looks like the modern plus sign. The Shunga would add a horizontal line on top of the numeral, and the Kshatrapa and Pallava evolved the numeral to a point where the speed of writing was a secondary concern. The Arabs' 4 still had the early concept of the cross, but for the sake of efficiency, was made in one stroke by connecting the 'western' end to the 'northern' end; the 'eastern' end was finished off with a curve. The Europeans dropped the finishing curve and gradually made the numeral less cursive, ending up with a glyph very close to the original Brahmin cross.[2]
While the shape of the 4 character has an ascender in most modern typefaces, in typefaces with text figures the character usually has a descender, as, for example, in .
On the seven-segment displays of pocket calculators and digital watches, as well as certain optical character recognition fonts, 4 is seen with an open top.
Television stations that operate on channel 4 have occasionally made use of another variation of the 'open 4', with the open portion being on the side, rather than the top. This version resembles the Canadian Aboriginal syllabics letter ᔦ or the Coptic letter Ϥ. The magnetic ink character recognition 'CMC-7' font also uses this variety of '4'.
In religion[edit]
Buddhism[edit]
- Four Noble Truths – Dukkha, Samudaya, Nirodha, Magga
- Four sights – observations which affected Prince Siddhartha deeply and made him realize the sufferings of all beings, and compelled him to begin his spiritual journey—an old man, a sick man, a dead man, and an ascetic
- Four Great Elements – earth, water, fire, and wind
- Four Foundations of Mindfulness – contemplation of the body, contemplation of feelings, contemplation of mind, contemplation of mental objects
- Four Divine Abidings – loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity
- Four stages of enlightenment – stream-enterer, once-returner, non-returner, and arahant
- Four main pilgrimage sites – Lumbini, Bodh Gaya, Sarnath, and Kusinara
Judeo-Christian symbolism[edit]
- The Tetragrammaton is the four-letter name of God.
- Ezekiel has a vision of four living creatures: a man, a lion, an ox, and an eagle.
- The four Matriarchs (foremothers) of Judaism are Sarah, Rebekah, Leah, and Rachel.
- The Four Species (lulav, hadass, aravah and etrog) are taken as one of the mitzvot on the Jewish holiday of Sukkot. (Judaism)
- The Four Cups of Wine to drink on the Jewish holiday of Passover. (Judaism)
- The Four Questions to be asked on the Jewish holiday of Passover. (Judaism)
- The Four Sons to be dealt with on the Jewish holiday of Passover. (Judaism)
- The Four Expressions of Redemption to be said on the Jewish holiday of Passover. (Judaism)
- The four Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. (Christianity)
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse ride in the Book of Revelation. (Christianity)
Hinduism[edit]
- There are four Vedas: Rigveda, Samaveda, Yajurveda and Atharvaveda.
- In Puruṣārtha, there are four aims of human life: Dharma, Artha, Kāma, Moksha.
- The four stages of life Brahmacharya (student life), Grihastha (household life), Vanaprastha (retired life) and Sannyasa (renunciation).
- The four primary castes or strata of society: Brahmana (priest/teacher), Kshatriya (warrior/politician), Vaishya (landowner/entrepreneur) and Shudra (servant/manual laborer).
- The swastika symbol is traditionally used in Hindu religions as a sign of good luck and signifies good from all four directions.
- The god Brahma has four faces.
Islam[edit]
- Eid al-Adha lasts for four days, from the 10th to the 14th of Dhul Hijja.
- There are four Rashidun or Rightly Guided Caliphs: Abu Bakr, Umar ibn al-Khattab, Uthman ibn Affan and Ali ibn Abi Talib.
- The Four Arch Angels in Islam are: Jibraeel (Gabriel), Mikaeel (Michael), Izraeel (Azrael), and Israfil (Raphael)
- There are four months in which war is not permitted: Muharram, Rajab, Dhu al-Qi'dah and Dhu al-Hijjah.
- There are four Sunni schools of fiqh: Hanafi, Shafi`i, Maliki and Hanbali.
- There are four major Sunni Imams: Abū Ḥanīfa, Muhammad ibn Idris ash-Shafi`i, Malik ibn Anas and Ahmad ibn Hanbal.
- There are four books in Islam: Torah, Zaboor, Injeel, Quran.
- Waiting for four months is ordained for those who take an oath for abstention from their wives.
- The waiting period of the woman whose husband dies, is four months and ten days.
- When Abraham said: “My Lord, show me how You give life to the dead,” Allah said: “Why! Do you have no faith?” Abraham replied: “Yes, but in order that my heart be at rest.” He said: “Then take four birds, and tame them to yourself, then put a part of them on every hill, and summon them; they will come to you flying. [Al-Baqara 2:260]
- The respite of four months was granted to give time to the mushriks in Surah At-Tawba so that they should consider their position carefully and decide whether to make preparation for war or to emigrate from the country or to accept Islam.
- Those who accuse honorable women (of unchastity) but do not produce four witnesses, flog them with eighty lashes, and do not admit their testimony ever after. They are indeed transgressors. [An-Noor 24:4]
Taoism[edit]
- Si Xiang of I Ching
Other[edit]
- In a more general sense, numerous mythological and cosmogonical systems consider Four corners of the world as essentially corresponding to the four points of the compass.
- Four is the sacred number of the Zia, an indigenous tribe located in the U.S. state of New Mexico.
- The Chinese, Vietnamese, the Korean and the Japanese are superstitious about the number four because it is a homonym for 'death' in their languages.
- In Slavic mythology, the god Svetovid has four heads.
In politics[edit]
- Four Freedoms: four fundamental freedoms that Franklin D. Roosevelt declared ought to be enjoyed by everyone in the world: Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, Freedom from Want, Freedom from Fear.
- Gang of Four: Popular name for four Chinese Communist Party leaders who rose to prominence during China's Cultural Revolution, but were ousted in 1976 following the death of Chairman Mao Zedong. Among the four was Mao's widow, Jiang Qing. Since then, many other political factions headed by four people have been called 'Gangs of Four'.
In computing[edit]
- 0x04 is the ASCII code of the character End of Transmission, which is abbreviated to EOT.
- Four bits (half a byte) are called a nybble
In science[edit]
- A tetramer is a thing formed out of four sub-units.
In astronomy[edit]
- Four terrestrial (or rocky) planets in the Solar system: Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars.
- Four giant gas/ice planets in the Solar system: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune.
- Four of Jupiter's moons (the Galilean moons) are readily visible from Earth.
- Messier objectM4, a magnitude 7.5 globular cluster in the constellation Scorpius.
- The New General CatalogueobjectNGC 4, a faint galaxy in the constellationPisces
- The Roman numeral IV stands for subgiant in the Yerkes spectral classification scheme.
- The Roman numeral IV (usually) stands for the fourth-discovered satellite of a planet or minor planet (e.g. Jupiter IV)
In biology[edit]
- Four is the number of nucleobase types in DNA and RNA – adenine, guanine, cytosine, thymine (uracil in RNA).
- Many chordates have four feet, legs or leglike appendages (tetrapods).
- The mammalianheart consists of four chambers.
- Many mammals (Carnivora, Ungulata) use four fingers for movement.
- All insects with wings except flies have four wings.
- Insects of the superorder Endopterygota, also known as Holometabola, such as butterflies, ants, bees, beetles, fleas, flies, moths, and wasps, undergo holometabolism—complete metamorphism in four stages—from (1) embryo (ovum, egg), to (2) larva (such as grub, caterpillar), then (3) pupa (such as the chrysalis), and finally (4) the imago.
- In the common ABO blood group system, there are 4 blood types (A, B, O, AB).
- Humans have four canines and four wisdom teeth.
- The cow's stomach is divided in four digestive compartments: reticulum, rumen, omasum and abomasum.
I Keep Seeing The Number 4
In chemistry[edit]
- Valency of carbon (that is basis of life on the Earth) is four. Also because of its tetrahedral crystal bond structure, diamond (one of the natural allotropes of carbon) is the hardest known naturally occurring material. It is also the valence of silicon, whose compounds form the majority of the mass of the Earth's crust.
- The atomic number of beryllium
- There are four basic states of matter: solid, liquid, gas, and plasma.
In physics[edit]
- Special relativity and general relativity treat nature as four-dimensional: 3D regular space and one-dimensional time are treated together and called spacetime. Also, any event E has a light cone composed of four zones of possible communication and cause and effect (outside the light cone is strictly incommunicado).
- There are four fundamental forces (electromagnetism, gravitation, the weak nuclear force, and the strong nuclear force).
- In statistical mechanics, the four functions inequality is an inequality for four functions on a finite distributive lattice.
In logic and philosophy[edit]
- The symbolic meanings of the number four are linked to those of the cross and the square. 'Almost from prehistoric times, the number four was employed to signify what was solid, what could be touched and felt. Its relationship to the cross (four points) made it an outstanding symbol of wholeness and universality, a symbol which drew all to itself'. Where lines of latitude and longitude intersect, they divide the earth into four proportions. Throughout the world kings and chieftains have been called 'lord of the four suns' or 'lord of the four quarters of the earth',[3] which is understood to refer to the extent of their powers both territorially and in terms of total control of their subjects' doings.
- The Square of Opposition, in both its Aristotelian version and its Boolean version, consists of four forms: A ('All S is R'), I ('Some S is R'), E ('No S is R'), and O ('Some S is not R').
- In regard to whether two given propositions can have the same truth value, there are four separate logical possibilities: the propositions are subalterns (possibly both are true, and possibly both are false); subcontraries (it is possible that both are true, but not that both are false); contraries (it is possible that both are false, but not that both are true); or contradictories (it is not possible that both are true, and it is not possible that both are false).
- Aristotle held that there are basically four causes in nature: the efficient cause, the matter, the end, and the form.
- The Stoics held with four basic categories, all viewed as bodies (substantial and insubstantial): (1) substance in the sense of substrate, primary formless matter; (2) quality, matter's organization to differentiate and individualize something, and coming down to a physical ingredient such as pneuma, breath; (3) somehow holding (or disposed), as in a posture, state, shape, size, action, and (4) somehow holding (or disposed) toward something, as in relative location, familial relation, and so forth.
- Immanuel Kant expounded a table of judgments involving four three-way alternatives, in regard to (1) Quantity, (2) Quality, (3) Relation, (4) Modality, and, based thereupon, a table of four categories, named by the terms just listed, and each with three subcategories.
- Arthur Schopenhauer's doctoral thesis was On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason.
- Franz Brentano held that any major philosophical period has four phases: (1) Creative and rapidly progressing with scientific interest and results; then declining through the remaining phases, (2) practical, (3) increasingly skeptical, and (4) literary, mystical, and scientifically worthless—until philosophy is renewed through a new period's first phase. (See Brentano's essay 'The Four Phases of Philosophy and Its Current State' 1895, tr. by Mezei and Smith 1998.)
- C. S. Peirce, usually a trichotomist, discussed four methods for overcoming troublesome uncertainties and achieving secure beliefs: (1) the method of tenacity (policy of sticking to initial belief), (2) the method of authority, (3) the method of congruity (following a fashionable paradigm), and (4) the fallibilistic, self-correcting method of science (see 'The Fixation of Belief', 1877); and four barriers to inquiry, barriers refused by the fallibilist: (1) assertion of absolute certainty; (2) maintaining that something is absolutely unknowable; (3) maintaining that something is absolutely inexplicable because absolutely basic or ultimate; (4) holding that perfect exactitude is possible, especially such as to quite preclude unusual and anomalous phenomena (see 'F.R.L.' [First Rule of Logic], 1899).
- Paul Weiss built a system involving four modes of being: Actualities (substances in the sense of substantial, spatio-temporally finite beings), Ideality or Possibility (pure normative form), Existence (the dynamic field), and God (unity). (See Weiss's Modes of Being, 1958).
- Karl Popper outlined a tetradic schema to describe the growth of theories and, via generalization, also the emergence of new behaviors and living organisms: (1) problem, (2) tentative theory, (3) (attempted) error-elimination (especially by way of critical discussion), and (4) new problem(s). (See Popper's Objective Knowledge, 1972, revised 1979.)
- John Boyd (military strategist) made his key concept the decision cycle or OODA loop, consisting of four stages: (1) observation (data intake through the senses), (2) orientation (analysis and synthesis of data), (3) decision, and (4) action. Boyd held that his decision cycle has philosophical generality, though for strategists the point remains that, through swift decisions, one can disrupt an opponent's decision cycle.
- Richard McKeon outlined four classes (each with four subclasses) of modes of philosophical inquiry: (1) Modes of Being (Being); (2) Modes of Thought (That which is); (3) Modes of Fact (Existence); (4) Modes of Simplicity (Experience)—and, corresponding to them, four classes (each with four subclasses) of philosophical semantics: Principles, Methods, Interpretations, and Selections. (See McKeon's 'Philosophic Semantics and Philosophic Inquiry' in Freedom and History and Other Essays, 1989.)
- Jonathan Lowe (E.J. Lowe) argues in The Four-Category Ontology, 2006, for four categories: kinds (substantial universals), attributes (relational universals and property-universals), objects (substantial particulars), and modes (relational particulars and property-particulars, also known as 'tropes'). (See Lowe's 'Recent Advances in Metaphysics,' 2001, Eprint)
- Four opposed camps of the morality and nature of evil: moral absolutism, amoralism, moral relativism, and moral universalism.
In technology[edit]
4 as a resin identification code, used in recycling.
- The resin identification code used in recycling to identify low-density polyethylene.
- Most furniture has four legs – tables, chairs, etc.
- The four color process (CMYK) is used for printing.
- Wide use of rectangles (with four angles and four sides) because they have effective form and capability for close adjacency to each other (houses, rooms, tables, bricks, sheets of paper, screens, film frames).
- In the Rich Text Format specification, language code 4 is for the Chinese language. Codes for regional variants of Chinese are congruent to 4 mod 256.
- Credit card machines have four-twelve function keys.
- On most phones, the 4 key is associated with the letters G, H, and I, but on the BlackBerry cellular phone, it is the key for D and F.
- On many computer keyboards, the '4' key may also be used to type the dollar sign ($) if the shift key is held down.
- It is the number of bits in a nibble, equivalent to half a byte
- In internet slang, '4' can replace the word 'for' (as 'four' and 'for' are pronounced similarly). For example, typing '4u' instead of 'for you'.
- In Leetspeak, '4' may be used to replace the letter 'A'.
- The TCP/IP stack consists of four layers.
In transport[edit]
- Many internal combustion engines are called four-stroke engines because they complete one thermodynamic cycle in four distinct steps: Intake, compression, power, and exhaust.
- Most vehicles, including motor vehicles, and particularly cars/automobiles and light commercial vehicles have four road wheels.
- 'Quattro', meaning four in the Italian language, is used by Audi as a trademark to indicate that four-wheel drive (4WD) technologies are used on Audi-branded cars. The word 'Quattro' was initially used by Audi in 1980 in its original 4WD coupé, the Audi Quattro. Audi also has a privately held subsidiary company called quattro GmbH.
In sports[edit]
- In the Australian Football League, the top level of Australian rules football, each team is allowed 4 'interchanges' (substitute players), who can be freely substituted at any time, subject to a limit on the total number of substitutions.
- In baseball:
- There are four bases in the game: first base, second base, third base, and home plate; to score a run, an offensive player must complete, in the sequence shown, a circuit of those four bases.
- When a batter receives four pitches that the umpire declares to be 'balls' in a single at-bat, a base on balls, informally known as a 'walk', is awarded, with the batter sent to first base.
- For scoring, number 4 is assigned to the second baseman.
- Four is the most number of runs that can be scored on any single at bat, whereby all three baserunners and the batter score (the most common being via a grand slam).
- In basketball, the number four is used to designate the power forward position, often referred to as 'the four spot' or 'the four'.
- In cricket, a four is a specific type of scoring event, whereby the ball crosses the boundary after touching the ground at least one time, scoring four runs. Taking four wickets in four consecutive balls is typically referred to as a double hat trick (two consecutive, overlapping hat tricks).
- In rowing, a four refers to a boat for four rowers, with or without coxswain. In rowing nomenclature, 4− represents a coxless four and 4+ represents a coxed four.
- In rugby league:
- A try is worth 4 points.
- One of the two starting centres wears the jersey number 4. (An exception to this rule is the Super League, which uses static squad numbering.)
- In rugby union:
- One of the two starting locks wears the jersey number 4.
- In the standard bonus points system, a point is awarded in the league standings to a team that scores at least 4 tries in a match, regardless of the match result.
In other fields[edit]
International maritime signal flag for 4
- The phrase 'four-letter word' is used to describe many swear words in the English language.
- Four is the only number whose name in English has the same number of letters as its value.
- Four (四, formal writing: 肆, pinyin sì) is considered an unlucky number in Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese and Japanese cultures mostly in Eastern Asia because it sounds like the word 'death' (死, pinyin sǐ). To avoid complaints from people with tetraphobia, many numbered product lines skip the 'four': e.g. Nokiacell phones (there is no series beginning with a 4), PalmPDAs, etc. Some buildings skip floor 4 or replace the number with the letter 'F', particularly in heavily Asian areas. See tetraphobia and Numbers in Chinese culture.
- The number of characters in a canonical four-character idiom.
- In the NATO phonetic alphabet, the digit 4 is called 'fower'.
- In Astrology, Cancer is the 4th astrological sign of the Zodiac.
playing cards for 4
- In Tarot, The Emperor is the fourth trump or Major Arcana card.
- In Tetris, a game named for the Greek word for 4, every shape in the game is formed of 4 blocks each.
- 4 represents the number of Justices on the Supreme Court of the United States necessary to grant a writ of certiorari (i.e., agree to hear a case; it is one less than the number necessary to render a majority decision).
- Number Four is a character in the book series Lorien Legacies
In music[edit]
- In written music, common time is constructed of four beats per measure and a quarter note receives one beat.
- In popular or modern music, the most common time signature is also founded on four beats, i.e., 4/4 having four quarter note beats.
- The common major scale is built on two sets of four notes (e.g., CDEF, GABC), where the first and last notes create an octave interval (a pair-of-four relationship).
- The interval of a perfect fourth is a foundational element of many genres of music, represented in music theory as the tonic and subdominant relationship. Four is also embodied within the circle of fifths (also known as circle of fourths), which reveals the interval of four in more active harmonic contexts.
- The typical number of movements in a symphony.
- The number of completed, numbered symphonies by Johannes Brahms.
- The number of strings on a violin, a viola, a cello, double bass, a cuatro and a ukulele, and the number of string pairs on a mandolin.
- 'Four calling birds' is the gift on the fourth day of Christmas in the carol 'The Twelve Days of Christmas'.
Albums[edit]
- Four, British rock band Bloc Party's fourth full-length album.
- Four, British-Irish boy band One Direction's fourth full-length album.
- 4, American artist Beyoncé's fourth album.
- 4, British–American band Foreigner's fourth studio album.
Groups of four[edit]
- Four rules: addition, subtraction, multiplication, division.
- Greek classical elements (fire, air, water, earth).
- Four seasons: spring, summer, autumn, winter.
- A leap year occurs every four years.
- Four is the minimal number of contemporary continents: Americas, Eurafrasia, Sahul, Antarctica.
- Approximately four weeks (4 times 7 days) to a lunar month (synodic month = 29.53 days). Thus the number four is universally an integral part of primitive sacred calendars.
- Four weeks of Advent (and four Advent candles on the Advent wreath).
- Four cardinal directions: north, south, east, west.
- Four Temperaments: sanguine, choleric, melancholic, phlegmatic.
- Four Humors: blood, yellow bile, black bile, phlegm.
- Four Great Ancient Capitals of China.
- Four-corner method.
- Cardinal principles.
- Four cardinal virtues: justice, prudence, temperance, fortitude.
- Four suits of playing cards: hearts, diamonds, clubs, spades.
- Four nations of the United Kingdom: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland.
- Four provinces ofIreland: Munster, Ulster, Leinster, Connacht.
- Four Noble Truths in the Buddhist religion.
- Four estates: politics, administration, judiciary, journalism. Especially in the expression 'Fourth Estate', which means journalism.
- Four Corners is the only location in the United States where four states come together at a single point: Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona.
- Four Evangelists – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
- Four Doctors of Western Church – Saint Gregory the Great, Saint Ambrose, Saint Augustine, and Saint Jerome
- Four Doctors of Eastern Church – Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Basil the Great, and Gregory of Nazianzus and Saint Athanasius
- Four Galilean moons of Jupiter – Io, Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto
- The Gang of Four was a Chinese communist political faction.
- The Fantastic Four: Mr. Fantastic, The Invisible Woman, The Human Torch, The Thing.
- The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Leonardo, Michelangelo, Donatello, Raphael
- The Interesting Four: Seiko, The Human Stapler, Weather Woman, and Mr. Wonderful. Parody superhero team featured on NBC's Saturday Night Live.
- The Beatles were also known as the 'Fab Four': John Lennon, Ringo Starr, George Harrison, Paul McCartney.
- Gang of Four is a British post-punkrock band formed in the late 1970s.
- Four rivers in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:10–14): Pishon (perhaps the Jaxartes or Syr Darya), Gihon (perhaps the Oxus or Amu Darya), Hiddekel (Tigris), and P'rat (Euphrates).
- There are also four years in a single Olympiad (duration between the Olympic Games). Many major international sports competitions follow this cycle, among them the FIFA World Cup and its women's version, the FIBA World Championships for men and women, and the Rugby World Cup.
- There are four limbs on the human body.
- Four Houses of Hogwarts in the Harry Potter series: Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, Slytherin.
- Four known continents of the world in the A Song of Ice and Fire series: Westeros, Essos, Sothoryos, Ulthos.
References[edit]
- ^Bryan Bunch, The Kingdom of Infinite Number. New York: W. H. Freeman & Company (2000): 48
- ^Georges Ifrah, The Universal History of Numbers: From Prehistory to the Invention of the Computer transl. David Bellos et al. London: The Harvill Press (1998): 394, Fig. 24.64
- ^Chevalier, Jean and Gheerbrant, Alain (1994), The Dictionary of Symbols. The quote beginning 'Almost from prehistoric times..' is on p. 402.
- Wells, D. The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Numbers London: Penguin Group. (1987): 55–58
External links[edit]
Look up four in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. |
Wikimedia Commons has media related to 4 (number). |
- A few thoughts on the number four, by Penelope Merritt at samuel-beckett.net
Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=4&oldid=903343886'
Part of a series on | ||
Creationism | ||
---|---|---|
Types | ||
| ||
Biblical cosmology | ||
| ||
Creation science | ||
Creation–evolution controversy | ||
Religious views | ||
|
Young Earth creationism (YEC) is a form of creationism which holds as a central tenet that the Earth and its lifeforms were created in their present forms by supernatural acts of a deity between approximately 6,000 and 10,000 years ago.[1][2] In its most widespread version, YEC is based on the religious belief in the inerrancy of certain literal interpretations of the Book of Genesis.[3][4] Its primary adherents are Christians who believe that God created the Earth in six 24-hour days[5][6] in contrast with old Earth creationism (OEC), which holds literal interpretations of Genesis that are compatible with the scientifically determined ages of the Earth and universe.[7][8]
Since the mid-20th century, young Earth creationists—starting with Henry Morris (1918–2006)—have devised and promoted a pseudoscientific explanation called 'creation science' as a basis for a religious belief in a supernatural, geologically recent creation.[9] Contemporary YEC movements arose in protest to the scientific consensus, established by numerous scientific disciplines, which demonstrates that the age of the universe is around 13.8 billion years, the formation of the Earth happened around 4.5 billion years ago, and the first appearance of life on Earth was at least 3.5 billion years ago.[10][11][12][13][14]
A 2017 Gallup creationism survey found 38 percent of adults in the United States held the view that 'God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years' when asked for their views on the origin and development of human beings, which Gallup noted was the lowest level in 35 years.[15] This level of support could be even lower when poll results are adjusted after comparison with other polls with questions that more specifically account for uncertainty and ambivalence.[16]
- 1Background
- 2History
- 3Characteristics and beliefs
- 3.1View of the Bible
- 4Compared to other forms of creationism
- 5Criticism
Background[edit]
Biblical dates for creation[edit]
Young Earth creationists have claimed that their view has its earliest roots in ancient Judaism, citing, for example, the commentary on Genesis by Ibn Ezra (c. 1089–1164).[5] Shai Cherry of Vanderbilt University notes that modern Jewish theologians have generally rejected such literal interpretations of the written text, and that even Jewish commentators who oppose some aspects of science generally accept scientific evidence that the Earth is much older.[17]
Spear of destiny game ps4. According to legend, no man can be defeated when he has the Spear. In the midst of the German Blitzkrieg, the Spear that pierced the side of Christ is taken from Versailles by the Nazis and secured in the impregnable Castle Wolfenstein.
The chronology dating the creation to 4004 BC became the most accepted and popular, mainly because this specific date was printed in the King James Bible.[18] The youngest ever recorded date of creation within the historic Jewish or Christian traditions is 3616 BC, by Yom-Tov Lipmann Heller in the 17th century[19] while the oldest proposed date was 6984 BC by Alfonso X of Castile.[20] However some contemporary or more recent proponents of Young Earth Creationism have taken this figure back further by several thousands of years by proposing significant gaps in the genealogies in chapters 5 and 11 of the Book of Genesis. Harold Camping for example dated the creation to 11,013 BC, while Christian Charles Josias Bunsen in the 19th century dated the creation to 20,000 BC.[21]
A number of prominent early Church Fathers and Christian writers, including Origen and Augustine, did not believe that the creation myth in Genesis depicted ordinary solar days and read creation history as an allegory as well as being theologically true.[citation needed] Several early Jews also followed an allegorical interpretation of Genesis, including most notably Philo (On the Creation, III.13).[22]
The Protestant reformationhermeneutic inclined some of the Reformers, including John Calvin[23][24] and Martin Luther,[25] and later Protestants toward a literal reading of the Bible as translated, believing in an ordinary day, and maintaining this younger-Earth view.[26]
An Earth that was thousands of years old remained the dominant view during the Early Modern Period (1500–1800) and is found typically referenced in the works of famous poets and playwrights of the era, including William Shakespeare:
..The poor world is almost 6,000 years old.[27]
Scientific Revolution and the old Earth[edit]
Support for an Earth that was created thousands of years ago declined among the scientists and philosophers from the 18th century onwards with the development of the Age of Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution, and new scientific discoveries. 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 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 accepting 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.[28]
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 a great change from the literalist view of an Earth that was only a few thousand years old.[29]
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, mainstream science had abandoned a young Earth as a serious hypothesis.
John H. Mears was one such scholar who proposed several theories varying from a mix of long/indefinite periods 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.[30] With the acceptance by many biblical scholars of a reinterpretation of Genesis 1 in the light of the breakthrough results of Lyell, and supported by a number of renowned (Christian) scientific scholars, a new hurdle was taken in the future acceptance of Developmentalism (based on Darwin's Natural selection).[31]
The decline of support for a biblically literal young Earth during the 19th century was opposed by first the scriptural geologists[32] and then by the founders of the Victoria Institute.[33]
History[edit]
Christian fundamentalism and belief in a young Earth[edit]
The rise of fundamentalist Christianity at the start of the 20th century brought rejection of evolution. Its leaders explained an ancient Earth through belief in the gap or in the day-age interpretation of Genesis.[34] In 1923, George McCready Price, a Seventh-day Adventist, wrote The New Geology, a book partly inspired by the book Patriarchs and Prophets in which Seventh-day Adventist prophet Ellen G. White described the impact of the Great Flood on the shape of the Earth. Although not an accredited geologist, Price's writings, which were based on reading geological texts and documents rather than field or laboratory work,[35] provide an explicitly fundamentalist perspective on geology. The book attracted a small following, with its advocates almost all being Lutheran pastors and Seventh-day Adventists in America.[36] Price became popular with fundamentalists for his opposition to evolution, though they continued to believe in an ancient Earth.[34]
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,[37] 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!'[38]
This became the foundation of a new generation of young Earth creationist believers, who organized themselves around Morris' Institute for Creation Research. Sister organizations such as the Creation Research Society have sought to re-interpret geological formations within a Young Earth Creationist viewpoint. Langdon Gilkey writes:
.. 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.[39]
Impact[edit]
Young Earth creationism directly contradicts the scientific consensus of the scientific community. A 2006 joint statement of InterAcademy Panel on International Issues (IAP) by 68 national and international science academies enumerated the scientific facts that young Earth creationism contradicts, in particular that the universe, the Earth, and life are billions of years old, that each has undergone continual change over those billions of years, and that life on Earth has evolved from a common primordial origin into the diverse forms observed in the fossil record and present today.[11] Evolutionary theory remains the only explanation that fully accounts for all the observations, measurements, data, and evidence discovered in the fields of biology, ecology, anatomy, physiology, zoology, paleontology, molecular biology, genetics, anthropology, and others.[40][41][42][43][44]
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'.[45] An expert in the evolution-creationism controversy, professor and author Brian Alters, states that '99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution'.[46] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5 per cent of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[47][48] For their part, Young Earth Creationists say that the lack of support for their beliefs by the scientific community is due to discrimination and censorship by professional science journals and professional science organizations. This viewpoint was explicitly rejected in the rulings from the 1981 United States District Court case McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education as no witness was able to produce any articles that had been refused publication and the judge could not conceive how 'a loose knit group of independent thinkers in all the varied fields of science could, or would, so effectively censor new scientific thought'.[12] A 1985 study also found that only 18 out of 135,000 submissions to scientific journals advocated creationism.[49][50]
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 individual church members support young Earth creationism and do so without those churches' explicit condemnation.[51]
Views on human evolution in various countries.[52][53]
Adherence to Young Earth Creationism and rejection of evolution is higher in the U.S. than in most of the rest of the Western world.[52][53] A 2012 Gallup survey reported that 46 per cent of Americans believed in the creationist view that God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years, a statistic which has remained essentially the same since 1982; for those with a postgraduate education, only 25 per cent believed in the creationist viewpoint. About one third of Americans believed that humans evolved with God's guidance and 15 per cent said humans evolved, but that God had no part in the process.[54] A 2009 poll by Harris Interactive found that 39 per cent of Americans agreed with the statement that 'God created the universe, the earth, the sun, moon, stars, plants, animals, and the first two people within the past 10,000 years', yet only 18 per cent of the Americans polled agreed with the statement 'The earth is less than 10,000 years old'.[55] A 2017 Gallup creationism survey found that 38 per cent of adults in the United States inclined to the view that 'God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years' when asked for their views on the origin and development of human beings, which Gallup noted was the lowest level in 35 years.[15]
Reasons for the higher rejection of evolution in the U.S. include the abundance of fundamentalist Christians compared to Europe.[53] A 2011 Gallup survey reported that 30 per cent of Americans said the Bible is the actual word of God and should be interpreted literally, a statistic which had fallen slightly from the late 1970s. Fifty-four per cent of those who attended church weekly and 46 per cent of those with a high school education or less took the Bible literally.[56]
Characteristics and beliefs[edit]
The common belief of Young Earth creationists is that the Earth and life were created in six 24-hour periods,[57] 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:[57]
- Believers in flood geology attach great importance to the biblical story of Noah's Flood in explaining the fossil record and 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.[57]
- 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 Ronald Numbers this belief, which does not necessarily try to explain scientific evidence through appeal to a global flood, has not been promoted as much as the former example given.[58] Such YECs believe that fossils are not real and that major extinctions never occurred, so dinosaurs, trilobites, and other examples of extinct organisms found in the fossil record would have to either be hoaxes or simply secular lies, promoted perhaps by the devil.[57][59]
View of the Bible[edit]
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.'[60][61] According to Morris, Christians must 'either .. believe God's Word all the way, or not at all.'[60] 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[edit]
Young Earth creationists interpret the text of Genesis as strictly literal. Young Earth Creationists reject allegorical readings of Genesis and further argue that if there was not a literal Fall of Man, Noah's Ark, or Tower of Babel this would undermine core Christian doctrines like the birth and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
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, Methuselah lived 969 years according to the genealogy. Differences of opinion exist regarding whether the genealogies should be taken as complete or abbreviated, hence the 6,000 to 10,000 year range usually quoted for the Earth's age. In contrast, Old Earth Creationists tend to interpret the genealogies as incomplete, and usually interpret the days of Genesis 1 figuratively as long periods of time.
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 flood geology which relies on the appropriation of late eighteenth and early nineteenth century arguments in favor of catastrophism made by such scientists as Georges Cuvier and Richard Kirwan. This approach which was replaced by the mid-nineteenth century almost entirely by uniformitarianism was adopted most famously by George McCready Price and this legacy is reflected in the most prominent YEC organizations today. YEC ideas to accommodate the massive amount of water necessary for a flood that was global in scale included inventing such constructs as an orbiting vapor canopy which would have collapsed and generated the necessary extreme rainfall or a rapid movement of tectonic plates causing underground aquifers[62] or tsunamis from underwater volcanic steam[63] to inundate the planet.
Age of the Earth[edit]
The young Earth creationist belief that the age of the Earth is 6,000 to 10,000 years old conflicts with the age of 4.54 billion years measured using independently cross-validated geochronological methods including radiometric dating.[64] Creationists dispute these and all other methods which demonstrate the timescale of geologic history in spite of the lack of scientific evidence that there are any inconsistencies or errors in the measurement of the Earth's age.[65][66]
Between 1997 and 2005, a team of scientists at the Institute for Creation Research conducted an eight-year research project entitled RATE (Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth) to assess the validity and accuracy of radiometric dating techniques. While they concluded that there was overwhelming evidence for over 500 million years' worth of radioactive decay, they claimed to have found other scientific evidence to prove a young earth. They therefore proposed that nuclear decay rates were accelerated by a factor of one billion during the Creation week and at the time of the Flood. However, when subjected to independent scrutiny by non-affiliated experts, their analyses were shown to be flawed.[67][68][69][70]
Human history[edit]
Young Earth creationists reject almost all of the results of physical anthropology and human evolution and instead insist that Adam and Eve were the universal ancestors of every human to have ever lived.[71]Noah's flood as reported in the book of Genesis is said to have killed all humans on Earth with the exception of Noah and his sons and their wives, so young Earth creationists also argue that humans alive today are descended from this single family.[72]
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.[73]
Flood geology, the fossil record, and dinosaurs[edit]
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.'[74] Today, many young Earth creationists still contend that the fossil record can be explained by the global flood.[75]
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.[76]
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 fossil record.[77] Usually, they claim that the fossils represent the remains of animals that perished in the flood. A number of creationist organizations further propose that Noah took the dinosaurs with him in the ark,[78] and that they only began to disappear as a result of a different post-flood environment. The Creation Museum in Kentucky portrays humans and dinosaurs coexisting before the Flood while the California roadside attraction Cabazon Dinosaurs describes dinosaurs as being created the same day as Adam and Eve.[79] The Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose, Texas, has a 'hyperbaricbiosphere' intended to reproduce the atmospheric conditions before the Flood which could grow dinosaurs. The proprietor Carl Baugh says that these conditions made creatures grow larger and live longer, so that humans of that time were giants.[80]
As the term 'dinosaur' was coined by Richard Owen in 1842, the Bible does not use the word 'dinosaur'. Some creationist organizations propose that the Hebrew word tanniyn (תנין, pronounced [tanˈnin]), mentioned nearly thirty times in the Old Testament, should be considered a synonym.[81] In English translations, tanniyn has been translated as 'sea monster' or 'serpent', but most often it is translated as 'dragon'. Additionally, in the Book of Job, a 'behemoth' (Job 40:15–24) is described as a creature that 'moves his tail like a cedar'; the behemoth is described as ranking 'first among the works of God' and as impossible to capture (vs. 24). Biblical scholars have alternatively identified the behemoth as either an elephant, a hippopotamus, or a bull,[82][83][84] but some creationists have identified the behemoth with sauropod dinosaurs, often specifically the Brachiosaurus according to their interpretation of the verse 'He is the chief of the ways of God' implying that the behemoth is the largest animal God created.[81] The leviathan is another creature referred to in the Bible's Old Testament that some creationists argue is actually a dinosaur. Alternatively, more mainstream scholars have identified the Leviathan (Job 41) with the Nile crocodile or, because Ugarit texts describe it as having seven heads, a purely mythical beast similar to the Lernaean Hydra.[85]
A subset of adherents of the pseudoscience of cryptozoology promote Young Earth creationism, particularly in the context of so-called 'living dinosaurs'. Science writerSharon 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.'[86]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.'[87] Young Earth creationists occasionally claim that dinosaurs survived in Australia, and that Aboriginal legends of reptilian monsters are evidence of this,[88] referring to what is known as Megalania (Varanus priscus). However, Megalania was a gigantic 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.
Attitude towards science[edit]
Young Earth creationism is most famous for an opposition to the theory of evolution, but believers also are on record opposing many measurements, facts, and principles in the fields of physics and chemistry, dating methods including radiometric dating, geology,[89]astronomy,[90]cosmology,[90] and paleontology.[91] Young Earth creationists do not accept any explanation for natural phenomena which deviates from the veracity of a plain reading of the Bible, whether it be the origins of biological diversity, the origins of life, or the origins of the universe itself. This has led some young Earth creationists to criticize other creationist proposals such as intelligent design, for not taking a strong stand on the age of the Earth, special creation, or even the identity of the designer.[citation needed]
Young Earth creationists disagree with the methodological naturalism that is part of the scientific method. Instead, they assert the actions of God as described in the Bible occurred as written and therefore only scientific evidence that points to the Bible being correct can be accepted. See Creation-evolution controversy for a more complete discussion.
Compared to other forms of creationism[edit]
As a position that developed out of the explicitly anti-intellectual side of the Fundamentalist–Modernist Controversy in the early parts of the twentieth century, there is no single unified nor consistent consensus on how creationism as a belief system ought to reconcile its adherents' acceptance of biblical inerrancy with empirical facts of the Universe. Although Young Earth Creationism is one of the most stridently literalist positions taken among professed creationists, there are also examples of biblical literalist adherents to both geocentrism[92] and a flat Earth.[93] Conflicts between different kinds of creationists are rather common, but three in particular are of particular relevance to YEC: Old Earth Creationism, Gap creationism, and the Omphalos hypothesis.
Old Earth creationism[edit]
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 exegeticalfallacy 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).[94]
Hebrew scholars reject the rule that yôm with a number or an 'evening and morning' construct can only refer to 24-hour days.[95]Hugh Ross has pointed out that the earliest reference to this rule dates back to young-earth creationist literature in the 1970s and that no reference to it exists independent of the young-earth movement.[96]
Gap creationism[edit]
401k Calculator
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.[97][98]
Omphalos hypothesis[edit]
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 Philip Henry Gosse. Omphalos was an unsuccessful mid-19th century attempt to reconcile creationism with geology. Gosse proposed that just as Adam had a navel (omphalos is Greek for navel), evidence of a gestation he never experienced, so also the Earth was created ex nihilo complete with evidence of a prehistoric past that never actually occurred. The Omphalos hypothesis allows for a young Earth without giving rise to any predictions that would contradict scientific findings of an old Earth. Although both logically unassailable and consistent with a literal reading of scripture, Omphalos was rejected at the time by scientists on the grounds that it was completely unfalsifiable and by theologians because it implied to them a deceitful God, which they found theologically unacceptable.
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.[99][100][101] There are examples of young Earth creationists arguing that Adam did not have a navel.[102]
Criticism[edit]
Young Earth creationists adhere strongly to a concept of biblical inerrancy, and regard the Bible as divinely inspired and 'infallible and completely authoritative on all matters with which they deal, free from error of any sort, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological'.[103] Young Earth creationists also suggest that supporters of modern scientific understanding with which they disagree are primarily motivated by atheism. Critics reject this claim by pointing out that many supporters of evolutionary theory are religious believers, and that major religious groups, such as the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Church, and Church of England, believe that concepts such as physical cosmology, chemical origins of life, biological evolution, and geological fossil records do not imply a rejection of the scriptures. Critics also point out that workers in fields related to biology, chemistry, physics, or geosciences are not required to sign statements of belief in contemporary science comparable to the biblical inerrancy pledges required by creationist organizations, contrary to the creationist claim that scientists operate on an a priori disbelief in biblical principles.[104]
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.[105]
Proponents of young Earth creationism are regularly accused of quote mining, the practice of isolating passages from academic texts that appear to support their claims, while deliberately excluding context and conclusions to the contrary.[106] For example, scientists acknowledge that there are indeed a number of mysteries about the Universe left to be solved, and scientists actively working in the fields who identify inconsistencies or problems with extant models, when pressed, explicitly reject creationist interpretations. Theologians and philosophers have also criticized this 'God of the gaps' viewpoint.[107]
In defending against young Earth creationist attacks on 'evolutionism' and 'Darwinism', scientists and skeptics have offered rejoinders that every challenge made by YECs is either made in an unscientific fashion, or is readily explainable by science.[108]
Theological considerations[edit]
Few modern theologians take the Genesis account of creation literally. Even many Christian evangelicals who reject the notion of purely naturalistic Darwinian evolution, often treat the story as a nonliteral saga, as poetry, or as liturgical literature.[109]
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).[110][111] 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).[112]
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 Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales comments that, 'We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision'. The Bible is held to be true in passages relating to human salvation, but, 'We should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other, secular matters'.[113][114] While the Catholic Church teaches that the Bible's message is without error, it does not consider it always to be literal.[115] By contrast, young Earth creationists contend that moral and spiritual matters in the Bible are intimately connected with its historical accuracy; in their view, the Bible stands or falls as a single indivisible block of knowledge.[116]
Aside from the theological doubts voiced by other Christians, young Earth creationism also stands in opposition to the creation mythologies of other religions (both extant and extinct). Many of these make claims regarding the origin of the Universe and humanity that are completely incompatible with those of Christian creationists (and with one another).[117] Marshaling support for the Judeo-Christian creation myth versus other creation myths after having rejected much of the scientific evidence is largely, then, done on the basis of accepting on faith the veracity of the biblical account rather than the alternative.
Scientific refutation[edit]
The vast majority of scientists refute young Earth creationism. Around the start of the 19th century mainstream science abandoned the concept that Earth was younger than millions of years.[118] Measurements of archeological, biological, chemical, geological, and cosmological timescales differ from YEC's estimates of Earth's age by up to five orders of magnitude (that is, by factor of a hundred thousand times). Scientific estimates of the age of the earliest pottery discovered at 20,000 BCE, the oldest known trees before 12,000 BCE, ice cores up to 800,000 years old, and layers of silt deposit in Lake Suigetsu at 52,800 years old, are all significantly older than YEC estimate of Earth's age. YEC's theories are further contradicted by scientists' ability to observe galaxies billions of light years away.
Spokespersons for the scientific community have generally regarded claims that YEC has a scientific basis as being religiously motivated pseudoscience, because young Earth creationists only look for evidence to support their preexisting belief that the Bible is a literal description of the development of the Universe. In 1997, a poll by the Gallup organization showed that 5 percent of U.S. adults with professional degrees in science took a young Earth creationist view. In the aforementioned poll, 40 percent of the same group said they believed that life, including humans, had evolved over millions of years, but that God guided this process, a view described as theistic evolution, while 55 percent held a view of 'naturalistic evolution' in which no God took part in this process.[119] Some scientists (such as Hugh Ross and Gerald Schroeder) who believe in creationism are known to subscribe to other forms, such as old Earth creationism, which posits an act of creation that took place millions or billions of years ago, with variations on the timing of the creation of mankind.
Adhering church bodies[edit]
- Amish Mennonites[120][121]
- Evangelical Lutheran Synod[122]
- Evangelical Reformed Presbyterian Church[123]
- Protestant Reformed Churches in America[124]
- Seventh-day Adventist Church[125]
- Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod[126][127]
See also[edit]
Notes[edit]
- ^'The Age of the Earth – Creationism and a Young Earth: Professor Heaton'. apps.usd.edu. Retrieved 11 April 2019.
- ^Numbers 2006, p. 8
- ^Ruse, Michael (Winter 2018). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). 'Creationism (First published Sat Aug 30, 2003; substantive revision Fri Sep 21, 2018)'. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2018 ed.).
- ^Scott, Eugenie Carol (with foreword by Niles Eldredge) (2004). Evolution vs. Creationism: an Introduction. Berkeley & Los Angeles, California: University of California Press. p. xii. ISBN978-0-520-24650-8. 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.
- ^ abJames-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
- ^''Scientific' Creationism as a Pseudoscience - NCSE'. 15 December 2008.
- ^Trollinger, Susan L.; Trollinger, Jr., William Vance (2017). 'Chapter 31:The Bible and Creationism'. In Gutjahr, Paul (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of the Bible in America. Oxford University Press. pp. 217ff. ISBN9780190258856.
- ^ ab'IAP Statement on the teaching of evolution'(PDF). the Interacademy Panel on international issues. 2006. Retrieved 23 December 2010.
- ^ abOverton, William R. (5 January 1982). 'McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education'. McLean v. Arkansas. TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 10 May 2011.
- ^Planck Collaboration (2016). 'Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters (See Table 4 on page 31 of pfd)'. Astronomy & Astrophysics. 594: A13. arXiv:1502.01589. Bibcode:2016A&A..594A.13P. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525830.
- ^Bennett, C.L. (2013). 'Nine-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Final Maps and Results'. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series. 208 (2): 20. arXiv:1212.5225. Bibcode:2013ApJS.208..20B. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/20.
- ^ ab'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.
- ^Cherry, S (2006). 'Crisis management via Biblical Interpretation: Fundamentalism, Modern Orthodoxy, and Genesis'. In Cantor, Geoffrey; Swetlitz, Marc (eds.). Jewish Tradition and the Challenge of Darwinism. University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0-226-09277-5.
- ^'Bishop James Ussher Sets the Date for Creation: 23 October 4004 B.C.' Law2.umkc.edu. Retrieved 19 September 2011.
- ^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
- ^'Philo's writings'. Archived from the original on 29 May 2008. Retrieved 19 September 2011.
- ^Calvin, John (1554). Genesis. ISBN978-0-8204-3992-1.
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.
- ^Calvin, John (2001). Institutes of the Christian Religion. ISBN978-0-87552-182-4. 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. (pg. 6)'; 'We know from Moses that the world was not in existence before 6,000 years ago. (pg. 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.
- ^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.
- ^The Great Devonian Controversy, Martin J. S. Rudwick, 1988, ISBN0-226-73102-2, 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.
- ^ abNumbers 2006, pp. 97–100.
- ^Numbers 2006, pp. 88–119
- ^Marston, P & Forster, R (2001). Reason Science and Faith. Monarch Books. ISBN978-1-57910-661-4.
- ^Radiocarbon Dating and American Evangelical Christians. Asa3.org. Retrieved 20 May 2012.
- ^Whitcomb, JC (1960). The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications. P&R Publishing. ISBN978-0-87552-338-5
- ^(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.
- ^The 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 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
- ^Almquist, Alan J.; Cronin, John E. (1988). 'Fact, Fancy, and Myth on Human Evolution'. Current Anthropology. 29 (3): 520–522. doi:10.1086/203672. JSTOR2743476.
- ^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 MedicineArchived 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.
- ^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]
- ^ abMichael Le Page (19 April 2008). 'Evolution myths: It doesn't matter if people don't grasp evolution'. New Scientist. 198 (2652): 31. doi:10.1016/S0262-4079(08)60984-7.
- ^ abcJeff Hecht (19 August 2006). 'Why doesn't America believe in evolution?'. New Scientist. 191 (2565): 11. doi:10.1016/S0262-4079(06)60136-X.
- ^Newport, Frank (1 June 2012). 'In U.S., 46% Hold Creationist View of Human Origins'. 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.
- ^Jones, Jeffrey M. (8 July 2011). 'In U.S., 3 in 10 Say They Take the Bible Literally'. Gallup.
- ^ abcd'What Kind of Creationism?'. Addressing Creationism.
- ^Numbers 2006, pp. 219
- ^Numbers 2006, pp. 58
- ^ abMorris, HM (2000). 'The Origin and History of the Earth'. The Long War Against God: The History and Impact of the Creation/Evolution Conflict. Master Books. ISBN978-0-89051-291-3.
- ^Morris, HM (2000). Biblical Creationism: What Each Book of the Bible Teaches About Creation & the Flood. Master Books. ISBN978-0-89051-293-7.
- ^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
- ^Pennock, Robert T. (2000). Tower of Babel: The Evidence against the New Creationism. Bradford Books. ISBN9780262661652.
- ^Numbers (2006) pages=79–81
- ^'Evolution Resources from the National Academies'.
- ^Numbers (2006) pages=202–203
- ^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.' Page 1,page 2,page 3,page 4,page 5. Retrieved on 29 December 2009.
- ^'Creation Evidence Museum, Glen Rose, Texas', Roadside America.
'Creationism Alive and Kicking in Glen Rose', by Greg Beets, 5 August 2005, Austin Chronicle. Retrieved 16 July 2013. - ^ ab'Dinosaurs and the Bible'. Clarifying Christianity'. 2005. Retrieved 14 March 2007.
- ^Bright, Michael (2006). Beasts of the Field: The Revealing Natural History of Animals in the Bible. London: Robson. pp. 26–27. ISBN978-1-86105-831-7.
- ^'CH711: Behemoth a Dinosaur'. Retrieved 13 September 2007.
- ^Pennock, Robert T. (2000). Tower of Babel: the evidence against the new creationism. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. ISBN978-0-262-66165-2.
- ^'Claim CH711.1: Leviathan as a dinosaur'. TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 3 June 2014.
- ^Hill, Sharon A. 2017. Scientifical Americans: The Culture of Amateur Paranormal Researchers, pp. 66. McFarland. ISBN9781476630823
- ^Card, Jeb J. 2016. 'Steampunk Inquiry: A Comparative Vivisection of Discovery Pseudoscience' in Card, Jeb J. and Anderson, David S. Lost City, Found Pyramid: Understanding Alternative Archaeologies and Pseudoscientific Practices, p. 32. University of Alabama Press. ISBN9780817319113
- ^Driver, Rebecca. 'Australia's Aborigines .. did they see dinosaurs?'. Creation. 21 (1). Retrieved 14 March 2007.
- ^'Talk Origins Archive – Claim CH210: Age of the Earth'. 2 October 2004. Retrieved 11 April 2011.
- ^ ab'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). 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 p6. 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'.
- ^Olson, Roger E. (2004). The Westminster handbook to evangelical theology (First ed.). Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press. p. 166. ISBN978-0-664-22464-6.
- ^Cf. Finkelstein, Israel; Silberman, Neil Asher (2002) [2001]. 'Introduction: Archaeology and the Bible'. The Bible Unearthed. Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and The Origin of Its Sacred Texts (First Touchstone Edition 2002 ed.). New York: Touchstone. p. 11. ISBN978-0-684-86913-1.
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. - ^Hyers, Conrad (25 September 2003). 'Comparing Biblical and Scientific Maps of Origin'. In Miller, Keith B. (ed.). Perspectives on an Evolving Creation. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. p. 22. ISBN978-0-8028-0512-6.
- ^'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 - ^Bishops' Conference of England and Wales (2005). The Gift of Scripture(PDF). Catholic Truth Society. ISBN978-1-86082-323-7. 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. <http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a3.htm>.
- ^Jonathan Sarfati. 'But Genesis is not a science textbook'. Creation. 26 (4): 6.
- ^Leeming, D.A.; Leeming, M.A. (1996). A Dictionary of Creation Myths. Oxford Paperbacks. ISBN978-0-19-510275-8.
- ^Johnston, Ian (May 2000). '. . . And Still We Evolve: A Handbook on the History of Modern Science'. Vancouver Island University. Retrieved 2 June 2014.
- ^'Gallup Poll 1997'.
- ^'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.
- ^'We Believe, Teach and Confess'. els.org.
- ^'Constitutional Documents of The Evangelical Reformed Presbyterian Church, Article of Alliance, Affirmations No. 13'(PDF). erpchurch.org. 2011. p. 3. Archived from the original(PDF) on 26 July 2011. Retrieved 14 October 2011.
- ^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. Retrieved 14 October 2011.
- ^'Questions Listed Under Creation'. wels.net.
- ^'Questions Listed Under Creation'. wels.net.
References[edit]
- Numbers, Ronald (2006). The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design. Harvard University Press. ISBN978-0-674-02339-0.
- 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. ISBN978-0-8308-2876-0.
External links[edit]
- Berg, Randy S. 'References for the Age of the Earth'. Retrieved 25 November 2011.
Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Young_Earth_creationism&oldid=903317741'