Talk:Genesis creation narrative/FAQ

To view the response to a question, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Summary of this FAQ

A large number of these questions are relating to the term creation myth, its meaning and its proper usage in this article.

• Creation myth is a formal and proper term used by a wide range of academics and scholars (religious and secular) to define a supernatural account of how life, Earth and everything in general came into existence. This term does not imply falsehood unlike the way that the informal use of the word myth can.
• Wikipedia:WTA#Myth and Legend clearly states that myth in its informal sense should not be used but also clearly states that we should treat all faiths and beliefs the same (e.g. Not referring to a Christian belief on the one hand and a Hindu myth on the other). Thus all faiths' creation myths are referred to as such in their respective articles as well.
• Wikipedia:RNPOV states "editors should not avoid using terminology that has been established by the majority of the current reliable and notable sources on a topic out of sympathy for a particular point of view, or concern that readers may confuse the formal and informal meanings." This is also the main thrust of WP:NOT#CENSORED.

Q1: What is the definition of creation myth?

A1: Creation myth is a widely accepted term that has a precise definition that is "a supernatural story or explanation that describes the beginnings of humanity, earth, life, and the universe (cosmogony), often as a deliberate act by one or more deities." Since there is a consensus among reliable sources on this definition, it is used here for the purpose of accuracy and proper word use.

Q2: Why do we use creation myth to describe the subject, even if it might offend readers or conflict with their beliefs?

A2: The term creation myth is used for reasons related to scholarship and research, not out of a desire to offend the feelings or beliefs of Wikipedia's readers. While some readers, especially those not familiar with the scholarly terminology referenced when using the term creation myth, might take offense at seeing this subject called a creation myth, Wikipedia should not be rewritten just so that certain readers will be more comfortable. The goal in writing the article is to be as neutral and dispassionate in describing this subject, but, as with any contentious topic, it is sometimes not possible to accommodate everyone's feelings while writing a neutral, accurate, verifiable, and sourced-based reference work.

Further information: WP:RNPOV

Q3: Isn't calling this a creation myth the same thing as calling it a fairy tale, since that is one of the informal definitions for the word myth?

A3: No. The term creation myth is a coherent term in its own right that should not be parsed into separate words. The term has a unique meaning different from the informal definitions of the word myth. Just as an electoral college is not an institute of higher learning even though it contains the word college, a creation myth is not necessarily a fairy tale even though it contains the word myth. Formally defined terms provide unambiguous meaning that aid in the presentation of a more accurate and scholarly encyclopedic article.

Further information: WP:WTA § Myth and Legend

Q4: Does this article say or imply that Genesis is not literally true? And if so, is that neutral?

A4: The viewpoint that Genesis is literally true is held by only a tiny minority of sources. Wikipedia's neutrality policy does not say that articles must "give equal validity" to such views (see WP:GEVAL). In writing this article it also becomes necessary to proceed with some implicit assumptions that many readers are bound to find controversial (see WP:MNA).

Q5: Why does the article name have "narrative" rather than "myth"?

A5: This has been discussed several times, and there has not been sufficient consensus to change the name of the article.

See also Creation Myth Creationism Bible

References