Yes, of course. All creationists believe in a creator God, but (IMO) not all those who believe in a crreator God are "creationists."
I'm almost afraid to ask, but what is it YOU think creationism or creationist means?
I think it means a belief, rooted in their interpretation of the Bible and opposed to evolution, that God made the plants and animals we see (and the ones we have fossil records of) (especially humans) fully formed, as individual and immutable (except for minor variation) "kinds."
I showed in post 243 that this is the sense used by the owners of creationist.org, creationists.org, and creationism.org, plus the author of a book on how he became a "creationist."
It's the sense used by participants in another thread going on at the moment. The person who starts all these threads has labeled the Gallup poll option, "God created man pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000 years," as the "creationist view." Another poster--one you often chime in in support of--wrote "Considering the numbers that keep showing up in polls, belief in creation is still ahead of belief in evolution." (I'm not going to use their names because I'm not going to bother to ping them to this old thread. If that's improper etiquette, let me know.)
Some believe in a creator that may have created all we know slowly over ga-jillions of years, perhaps used evolution/monkeys to men, humans are mere great apes,
See, you say that "creationists" can believe in evolution. I say nobody uses the word that way. I've found numerous examples, including here on FR, of people using the word to include anti-evolutionism. No one has shown me an example of the word being used in the more general sense you're talking about--except posters in these topics insisting it has that more general meaning.
One of course "can" believe in God and evolution, but to then assert He didn't know what He was doing by not having a plan or purpose and all this just happened willy-nilly without intelligence or design, seems utterly non-sensical and illogical at best.
Belief in evolution does not imply that God did not have a plan or purpose, or not know what He was doing. Did you ever play the kids' board game Mousetrap? If you assemble the machine properly, the boot kicks the ball and the man jumps into the tub and the cage comes down right where you want it. To believers in God and evolution, He created a wondrous machine that through the actions of the pieces of the machine itself achieved His plan. He didn't have to step in and place the cage in the right place as a special action (creationism) or give the ball a flick to keep it moving (ID). (Note please: I know these are caricatures of creationism and ID. The Mousetrap metaphor can only go so far.)
I hope that's clear, if long-winded.
Well, then this is to mis-understand the terms 'creation' and 'creationists'. Alot of people on your side of the aisle try to define 'conservative' in a certain less than honest way also. I've seen it, same for "liberal/liberalism"....saying liberalism is an ideology of people that somehow care more about their fellow man, social problems, blah blah blah.
IIRC, one of their "citations" in bashing conservatives while putting positive spin on liberalism, was the NYT no less!
If the left had it their way, when one looks up the word creationist in the dictionary it would look something like:
"A retarded Bible-thumping person that hates science".
See, you say that "creationists" can believe in evolution. I say nobody uses the word that way. I've found numerous examples, including here on FR, of people using the word to include anti-evolutionism. No one has shown me an example of the word being used in the more general sense you're talking about--except posters in these topics insisting it has that more general meaning.
Yes, I understand it's a contentious subject, but mis-using a word over and over doesn't make it right.
For instance, I correct people everytime I'm able when I hear "occupation" or "invasion" of Iraq/Afghanistan, with the more accurate terminology "liberation" of Iraq. And yet I don't even hear people like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter or virtually ANYONE using liberation if Iraq. To this day.
The same point could be made of "homicide bomber" vs. "suicide bomber", IMO.