One can also click on the poster's name and then on "In Forum" to review their posts, which is what I did before. I just did it your way to make sure. You have not presented examples of a generic use of "creationism" or "creationist." Simple as that. Keep blustering if you want, or go find one if you think you did. Your choice.
If it was obsolete, then why did you cite it?
In the interests of honest and completeness. I find that anti-evolutionists have a habit of quoting only the parts of sources that appear to support their position, leaving out parts that contradict or modify it. It's not a habit I wish to emulate, and I didn't need to--the part about which definition is usual in America today made my point just fine.
All that is necessary for me to refute your assertion is to show one exception to your declaration. See Post #198: Creationism noun 1 the belief that the universe and living creatures were created by God in accordance with the account given in the Old Testament. . . . . . Compact Oxford English Dictionary, revised edition 2003.
I also offered, as support showing some historical continuity, Webster’s Universal Dictionary of the English Language, unabridged, 1937 and The original 1828 Webster’s Dictionary.
New, not so new, old. Simple as that.