In the years I've spent engaged in apologetics, one of the most frustrating things I've had to put up with are the word games employed by unbelievers. “Evolution” doesn't mean humans are descended from apes, an “atheist” doesn't deny there's a God, and what most people call a “theory” isn't really a theory. You see, militant unbelievers who might use these words have a different meaning for them than the general public has. As a result, much of any debate between believers and unbelievers is spent haggling over terminology. See red herring.
One of the most contended words is, “evolutionist.” In heated “creation v. evolution” debates, using the terms “creationist” and “evolutionist” helps everyone know who is being discussed. It's a term of convenience because it's easier to say “evolutionist” than to say “a person who subscribes to the theory of evolution.” Though some evolutionists might have contempt for creationists (and vice versa), the terms creationist and evolutionist are rather benign.
Let me give a brief grammar lesson. Words that end in “ism” describe a belief or philosophy (atheism, socialism, fundamentalism, etc). People who subscribe to those beliefs are identified with the suffix, “ist” (atheist, socialist, fundamentalist, etc). Capitalism, for example, is the belief that capital (goods, property, and labor) is owned by individuals. Proponents of capitalism are called capitalists. See? It's easy.
The belief that God created the world as described in Genesis is called, creationism. People who believe God created the world as described in Genesis are called, creationists. By the way, it does make me laugh to see people say things like, “there is no evidence for creationism.” Isn't that funny? They're saying there is no evidence that people believe in creation. //RKBentley chuckles// Creationist and creationism are fine words (when used correctly) and I welcome them. I even use them myself.
The fuss is over the term, evolutionist. For some reason, many evolutionists despise the term. I'm not sure why. I suspect it's because they usually mean “creationist” to be a pejorative term and, so, think creationists are using the term evolutionist the same way. It could be, too, that they feel “ism/ist” are terms used to describe belief systems and they don't like the “fact” of evolution being described with similar terms.
For example, a person I was debating on FaceBook (I don't link to FaceBook on my blog because people use their real names and I don't intend to dox anyone) took exception to my use of the term, evolutionist. He said, “Evolutionists aren’t a thing any more than gravitationalists or blue skyists.” What these people don't seem to understand is that the word “evolutionist” is probably as old as the theory itself.
After having been called, “Mr. Darwin, an Atheist,” Charles Darwin wrote the following to the Grimsby News (source here, bold added):
Dear Sir,
It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent Theist and an evolutionist.... What my own views may be is a question of no consequence to anyone except myself. But, as you ask, I may state that my judgment often fluctuates.... In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an Atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. I think generally (and more and more as I grow older), but not always, that an Agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind.
Dear sir, yours faithfully,
Ch. Darwin
There you have it. The man who literally invented the theory of evolution called proponents of his theory, evolutionists. I know this is news to many of you but you just need to chill and not go into full defense mode whenever you hear the word.
https://unsplash.com/@hulkiokantabak |
Misotheists and other anti-creationists do not exhibit much capacity for original thought, relying instead on boilerplate reactions. I've seen the "nobody says gravitationists" and similar remarks many times. In fact, the word evolutionist is something I addressed in an article about feigned insults. You made some good points here, and it seems to this child that they just want to be obstreperous.
ReplyDeleteBob Sorensen,
DeleteThanks for visiting and for your comments. As I said in my post, the word games the creation-deniers is a continuous source of frustration. Every now and then, though, their abuse of the language gives me a laugh. It's like when they use the word “creationism” when they mean “creation.” I think they do this because they want creation only viewed as a religious belief. Thus they make ridiculous comments like, “What is the evidence for creationism?” Isn't that hilarious? They're literally asking for evidence that people believe in creation! What a hoot!
As far as “evolutionist” goes, I've heard more than one person say, “There's no such thing as an 'evolutionist'.” Oh, if only that were true!!
Thanks again for visiting. Keep up the good work on your sites, bro. God bless!!
RKBentley