Creation Ministries International

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Creation Ministries International (CMI) is a non-profit group of autonomous Christian apologetics ministries [1] with a particular focus on Young Earth Creationism, and a plain (sometimes called "literal"—see Methodology) interpretation of the first chapters of the Book of Genesis. The autonomous ministries are located in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States.

CMI's statement of faith stresses that

The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator, Redeemer and Judge.
The doctrines of Creator and Creation cannot ultimately be divorced from the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

CMI offices employ staff, including Ph.D. scientists, such as Dr. Don Batten Ph.D [2]and Dr. Jonathan Sarfati Ph.D [3], both senior scientists for the Australian office of CMI. [4] Its managing director is Carl Wieland [5]. CMI also operates with volunteer support.

CMI publishes the popular Creation magazine as well as a peer reviewed technical Journal of Creation. Creation has subscribers in 140 countries [6], with 60,000 copies of each issue produced. [7] Creation is published four times a year, and boasts no paid advertising. The Journal of Creation is published three times a year.

1 History
2 Approach to Science and Education
3 Methodology
4 External links

[edit] History

In 1977, the Creation Science Association (CSA) was organized in Adelaide, Australia by Carl Wieland. In 1978 the organization began the magazine Ex Nihilo (from the Latin phrase Creatio ex nihilo, meaning "Creation out of nothing"). Soon after, the Creation Science Foundation (CSF) took over production of Ex Nihilo (later renaming it Creation Ex Nihilo, and eventually simply Creation). In 1984, CSF started the Ex Nihilo Technical Journal for more in-depth analysis of creation issues (it was later renamed Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal, then simply TJ, and is now the Journal of Creation).

In the mid-1990s, Ken Ham, formerly of the Creation Science Foundation and then part of the Institute for Creation Research, formed an autonomous ministry in the United States. This ministry, along with the Australian Creation Science Foundation, were branded as Answers in Genesis; eventually, legally-autonomous Answers in Genesis offices were opened in Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.

In late 2005/early 2006, differences in "operating philosophy" caused the US and UK offices of Answers in Genesis to "withdraw" from the Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, and South African offices. The new direction of AiG included a stronger focus on a Christian worldview with a creation emphasis. CMI wished to retain its evidence based approach to Creation Science. For differentiation, the latter four offices chose to rebrand under the name "Creation Ministries International" and create a unique website. [8]

As of late 2006, CMI has established its own offices in the UK and USA. [9] CMI now distributes Creation magazine in the USA [10] while Answers in Genesis now has its Answers magazine [11].

In late 2006, AiG-USA and CMI became engaged in a legal dispute, though both AiG and CMI stress that they have no doctrinal dispute [12].

[edit] Approach to Science and Education

Science

CMI has a very high regard for science and the scientific method which often surprises critics. For example, some people are surprised to learn that Creationists fully agree with Natural Selection, seeing it as essential to biology. CMI freely admits their religious bias, and point out that all scientists have biases which influence their research, even if they are unwilling to admit this. They note that all evidence (fossils, genetics etc) must be interpreted, and this is where a bias exerts influence [13].

"Creationists don’t pretend that any knowledge, science included, can be pursued without presuppositions (i.e., prior religious/philosophical beliefs). Creationists affirm that creation cannot ultimately be divorced from the Bible any more than evolution can ultimately be divorced from its naturalistic starting point that excludes divine creation a priori" [14].

CMI also holds its scientific evidence tentativly, as all scientists must. Some "fundamentalist" creationists object when old theories are overturned, yet CMI maintains that "All theories of science are fallible, and new data often overturn previously held theories. Evolutionists continually revise their theories because of new data, so it should not be surprising or distressing that some creationist scientific theories need to be revised too[15]. One such argument that "ill informed" creationists sometimes cite is the "no new species have been produced" argument, of which CMI says "This is not true—new species have been observed to form. In fact, rapid speciation is an important part of the creation model[16].

Education

It is commonly thought that creationists want their views aired in science class rooms. However, CMI takes the opposite view. They say:

Many people think we should be out there battering away at the education system... ...What would be the point if it were compulsorily in the hands of an anti-Christian teacher, forced to teach something they didn’t believe in? It would become twisted out of recognition, and would be used against the Bible and Christianity, not for it. Changing hearts and minds in order to change the laws works better than the other way round[17].

Many stereotypes about Creationists are confounded by CMI, who insist on a rational, scientific and open discussion - whilst acknowledging presuppositional biases.

[edit] Methodology

CMI describes their biblical hermeneutical method as "plain" (or sometimes "Historical-grammatical"), rather than "literal":

Simply put, our bottom line is that the proper interpretation of Scripture is to take it "plainly", meaning "as the author intended it to be understood by the original audience". This incorporates a literal interpretation of a literal context, poetic interpretation of poetic context, etc. This is covered in depth in the article "Should Genesis be taken literally?" [18]

E.g., with Genesis, we can tell it is meant to be historic narrative because it has all the grammatical features of Hebrew narrative, e.g., the first verb is a qatal (historic perfect), and the verbs that move the narrative forward are wayyiqtols (waw consecutives); it contains many "accusative particles" that mark the objects of verbs; and terms are often carefully defined. [19]

CMI notes that its scientists and speakers "consciously spend time interacting with our peers both inside and outside the organisation..." [20]. Many of its teachings and beliefs are identical to those of its former sister organization, Answers in Genesis. In the past, much of AiG's articles and intellectual content was written by people who are now part of CMI.