Creationism Table

This clearly means that:

Er, no, it actually means that:

Why there is such a wide split[edit]

Note that the place of Theistic evolution is problematic, due to definition problems.

Each side claims the entirety of the "middle ground".

This is a confusing mishmash:

My impression is that this is basically correct, and it is a good observation (although there are many details that are not in this simplified version, but it still has value even if it is simplified). Possibly we should include one or more of these in another article, or maybe an article of its own. Comments?--Filll 19:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Once it's clarified a bit more, I'll hazard an article. But I get trounced a couple of years ago for "repeated starting". This time I'd rather err on the side of caution and slowness.

Anyway, the aspect that interests me at the moment is what is meant by "God's guidance". Surely theological evolution posits that God used evolution in some way to bring species into being. The fine print concerns whether this was a one-time set up (aka Blind Watchmaker) or a micromanaged (nix on dinosaurs, time for mammals) kind of thing.

I appreciate your input. I don't want to forget the various details about minority beliefs (Adamites? Two creations?) But let's not lose the forest for the trees. We need a structure to hang it all on, preferably one which pro-evolution and anti-evolution Wikipedians won't fight over. --Uncle Ed 21:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)