Creation is a doctrinal position in many religions and philosophical belief systems which maintains that one or more deities is responsible for creating the universe. The theological implications of creation may take a variety of forms, the most innocuous being that of a religious dogma, although there are varieties of such a belief fully compatible with a scientific point of view. There are religious believers who extend this to a strident advocacy of creationism, but the doctrinal belief is not necessarily synonymous with such advocacy.

Scientific creationism

The European Enlightenment, in adopting a materialist mechanistic "clockwork" metaphor for the organization and structure of the universe, accepted as a general principle the "transcendental idealism" of Immanuel Kant that the deity was "first cause". The belief that the universe itself was rationally organized and capable of being investigated using reason was a development of the medieval view that the cosmos itself was the primary revelation of the divinity of the creator, and it is this scientific ideology that has propelled the development of modern science over the last three centuries.<ref>Tarnas, (1993), "The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas that Have Shaped Our World View" (Balantine)</ref>

More recently a second organicist view of scientific creationism has developed which looks at the hylozoic argument that the sacred is immanent in the creation process itself. This view, closer in some respects to animism, accepts that there may or may not have been a transcendental creator, but in the unfolding of the cosmos, meaning can be found that lifts the processes observed by scientists from the mundane. Rather than an absent transcendental "watchmaker" divinity of the first cause, the immanent view accepts that the entire cosmos is sacred, and that we human beings too are part of this evolutionary process.<ref>Swimme, Brian and Berry, Thomas (1994), "The Universe Story : From the Primordial Flaring Forth to the Ecozoic Era--A Celebration of the Unfolding of the Cosmos" (Harper, San Francisco)</ref>

Biblical neo-creationism

In the 1920s the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy in the USA led to an upsurge of fundamentalist religious fervor. Anti-evolutionary sentiment stopped U.S. public schools from teaching evolution, through state laws such as Tennessee’s 1925 Butler Act,<ref>s:Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District/2:Context#Page 19 of 139</ref><ref name=BF07> Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. (pdf) A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy Barbara Forrest. May, 2007.</ref> and by getting evolution removed from biology textbooks nationwide.<ref name=tolenny> TalkOrigins Archive: Post of the Month: March 2006, The History of Creationism by Lenny Flank.</ref>

The launch of the Soviet artificial satellite Sputnik in 1957 created fears that the U.S. had fallen behind in science, leading to the promotion of science by the 1959 National Defense Education Act. Biological Sciences Curriculum Study textbooks teaching evolution were used in almost half of U.S. high schools. However, the prohibitions against teaching evolution were still in place, and a 1961 attempt to repeal the Butler Act failed.<ref name=lenny> Creationism/ID, A Short Legal History, Lenny Flank, Talk Reason </ref>

In 1961, the book The Genesis Flood by theologian John C. Whitcomb and Baptist engineer Henry M. Morris brought the Biblically-literal Young Earth creationist theories of Seventh-day Adventist George McCready Price to a wider audience,<ref> .</ref><ref name=mclean> McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, Decision January 5, 1982.</ref> and by 1965 the term "scientific creationism" had gained currency.<ref name=mclean/> The 1968 Epperson v. Arkansas judgement ruled that state laws prohibiting the teaching of evolution violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which prohibits state aid to religion.<ref name=eva> Edwards v. Aguillard</ref> In 1975, the Daniel v. Waters decision required state laws constraining biology textbooks which included "origins or creation of man and his world" to give equal treatment to Genesis creation accounts was unconstitutional. Therefore, creationists instead started to promote "creation science" which omitted explicit biblical references.<ref name=lenny/> More recently, creationists have championed the concept of "intelligent design", reviving the creationist views of William Paley of the 19th century.

"Scientific creationism differs from conventional science in numerous and substantial ways. One obvious difference is the way scientists and creationists deal with error." <ref> Scientific Creationism and Error, Robert SchadewaldCreation/Evolution, v. 6, n. 1, pp. 1-9, 1986.</ref> While science is based in the scientific method, Biblical neo-creationism is based in doctrine & Biblical faith.

Judaism and Christianity

Traditional Judaism and Christianity holds the belief in a divine creation of the cosmos as it is recounted in the Bible. This is affirmed by most scientific creationists. It is wrongly asserted by some that scientific creationists believe that the process of creation is uncovered best through scientific investigation, experiment and observation. This is incorrect. Scientific creationists believe that the processes present at the beginning of the world are not observable, and therefore the process of creation itself cannot be uncovered. (Incidentally, evolutionists believe the same thing about the "Big Bang.") What scientific creationists do believe, however, is that the observable creation itself will, by scientific investigation, experiment and observation, yield results that align best with the theory of a recent creation by God.

Many of the non-traditional scientific Christian and Jewish scientific creationists assert that there is no contradiction between the account of Genesis and the scientific account if one considers the Biblical stories are the best scientific account available at the time the Bible was written, and that the Book of Genesis was written in language that people alive at that time would understand. The truths of the Biblical account are therefore theological, moral and ethical in nature, and the text was composed before our modern conception of science even existed.

Genesis 2:4-25

Some Biblical scholarship maintains that the creation story found starting in Genesis 2:3 is the earlier of the two Genesis accounts. This is not the traditional view, which is that this section is a retelling of the same creation history, but with a focus on the creation of mankind.

The concern in the book of Genesis 2 seems mainly in the origins of humankind and the earth. There is a clear connection between humans and the land (Gen. 2:7) and the notion that people are a special creation of God.

Genesis 1:1-2:3

This section was is traditionally ascribed to Moses, although the books themselves are annonymous. He may have used copies of written history extant at the time. Or he may have simply penned the oral traditions that came down through the Jewish tradition. However, the exactness with which he records the genealogies indicates that an earlier source was used.

Some Protestant readings since Martin Luthor have maintained that these books should be read in a straightforward manner, or just as we read historical accounts today. Read in this manner, it teaches that God created the entire universe, including mankind in his present form, in six twenty-four periods, and then he rested on the seventh twenty-four hour period. This is controversial as traditional authors such as Augustine did not read it in this way. Many writers both ancient and modern argue that there