| Home Page | Ancient Universe | |
Christian Apologetic
|
The Bible declares that during the first six “days” of
its existence, the Lord transformed a “formless and void” earth into a
suitable habitat for man. The really central issue to the proper
understanding of the first chapters in Genesis comes through an understanding
of what exactly is meant by the word “days.” As we have previously
seen, many sages of early Christianity – even before the current scientific
knowledge suggested a very old earth – also believed that it was not necessary
for the term “days” to mean 24 hours. There was instead a Biblical
reason for their interpretation that it might mean otherwise since they
lived many centuries before any scientific claims to the otherwise.
a. Genesis 1 is a log of the way events happened and not a strict definition of the time involved. To understand why this is significant, other logs in the Bible can be examined. When investigated, it can be seen that when the Bible provides a log of an event, it is time and event ordered. For example, Daniel 9:24-27 presents a timetable for the rebuilding of Jerusalem, the Messiah’s coming and death, the destruction of Jerusalem, years of desolation, restoration of temple sacrifices, the abomination, and then the end. Daniel 11:2-45 presents a log of the victories and defeats of the various kingdoms and kings, including the final world rules. Finally, Revelation 8-9 presents a sequential list of dooms prior to the second coming of Christ back to earth. The point is that the important aspect to the Bible is not the time taken by these evens, but rather that the events would occur in a specific order. In the case of the Creation log, long periods of time in which various life forms were introduced in increasingly complete manner are discernible and significant for validating the author’s statements. If all these events occurred in six 24 hour days, then it would be very difficult to discern the sequence of events. b. A long creation time is clearly acceptable with the definitions of the Hebrew words yowm, ‘ereb, and boqer. The Hebrew word “yowm” translated “day” in the Bible, is used within the Bible to indicate any of four time periods; i. From sunrise to sunset, ii. From sunset to sunset, iii. A segment of time without any reference to solar days (usually seven years), and iv. An age or an epoch.. It is the latter sense of the word that is probably being used in the Genesis account. The Hebrew word ‘ereb, translated “evening” also means “sunset,” “night,” or “ending of the day.” And the word “boger” translated “morning” also means “sunrise,” “coming of light,” “beginning of day,” or “dawning.” (see Brown, Driver, and Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980, also Harris, Archer, and Waltke, Theological Workbook of the Old Testament, Chicago: Moody Press, 1980). Some have argued for the 24-hour day on the basis that the word “yowm” when attached to an ordinal (second, third, fourth, etc.) elsewhere in the Bible indicates a 24-hour time frame. However, this is inconclusive since the Bible has no other occasion to enumerate epochs of time. Furthermore, Hebrew scholars also agree that there is no grammatical rule that the word “youm” when attached to an ordinal always must refer to 24-hour days. Others have asserted that if the writers of Genesis had wanted to talk about long epochs of time, they would have used the word '‘’olam” as opposed to “youm.” However, Hebrew lexicons indicate that the word “’olam” is only used to refer to long ages in post-Biblical writings. c. The unusual syntax of the sentences listing specific creation days suggests indefinite time periods. The Hebrew text, the phraseology indicates, “and was evening and was morning day Xth.” The New International Version of the Bible states, “And there was evening, and there was morning, the Xth day.” The word arrangement is a departure from the way it would have read had the authors simply meant the day to be a complement for the evening and morning put together, where it would have read, “And the evening and the morning were the Xth day.” This syntactical ambiguity does not represent proof of what the authors meant, but it does suggest an indefinite period for each phase of creation. d. The Seventh Day of Genesis 1 and 2 is not closed out. On the first six days of creation, the writer states, “…there was evening and there was morning – the Xth day.” This statement indicates that each of the first six creation days had a beginning and an end. However, this is not the case for the seventh day. Given the parallel structure for the first six days of creation, it is highly significant that the seventh day differs, and would strongly suggest that the seventh day has not yet ended! Further information about the seventh day of creation is provided in Hebrews 4 and Psalm 95, where we learn that God’s day of rest continues to even now. Hebrews states, “On the seventh day God rested from all his work” … It still remains the some will enter that rest. … There remains, then, a Sabbath rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God’s rest also rest from his own work, just as God did from his. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest (Hebrews 4:4-10, NIV). This seems to state that God’s seventh “day” of rest has been carried on through the centuries from the time of Adam up until the present. From these passages, we may rightfully gather that the seventh “day” of Genesis 1 and 2 represents a minimum time of several thousand years and a maximum time that is open ended (though finite). Therefore, allowing for parallelism of the entire account of creation through the first six days, it is not unreasonable to conclude that the first six days also are open ended time periods. What is really fascinating to me is that the fossil record also agrees with this understanding of creation. According to the fossil account, more and more species of life came into existence through the millennia before modern man. Through time, the number of new species generally balanced the number of extinctions, but introductions remained slightly more numerous. Then cam man. In the years of human history, the extinction rate has remained very high, and has accelerated tremendously in recent years. However, the introduction rate measures a virtual zero. The extinction rate varies widely from one species per day, to a high of about five species per hour; but even without man’s impact, at least one species a year goes extinct. At the same time, the introduction of even a single new animal species in nature has yet to be documented, according to biologists Paul and Anne Ehrlich. Furthermore, “…in the vast majority of cases, the rate of change is so slow that it has not even been possible to detect an increase in the amount of differentiation.” The reason for this difference becomes clear when the Genesis account of creation is considered. For six days God was introducing new species and new life forms. After the creation of man, however, God ceased from the work of creating and His rest continues to this day! e. The events of the sixth day cover more than 24 hours. Genesis 1 indicates that all of the land mammals and both Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day. Genesis 2 provides some amplification listing events between the creation of Adam and the creation of Eve. But there was a lot of work done by Adam between his creation and the creation of Eve. First, he had to plant a garden in Eden, making “all kinds of trees to grow out of the ground.” Then, Adam worked and cared for the Garden of Eden. Then, he had to name all the animals, and discovered in the process that none of the animals was a suitable helpmate. Then, God put Adam into a deep sleep, performed an operation, awakened Adam, and introduced him to his new mate, Eve. Adam’s expression upon seeing Eve for the first time was “happa’am” roughly equivalent to “at last.” This terminology would not have made sense it if just referred to a period of time less than a day! Finally, Adam and Even received instructions from God regarding their responsibilities in managing creation. It is much more logical to think that many weeks, months, or even more likely years of time took place in the latter portion of the sixth day. Some 24 hour apologists have assumed that Adam must have been much more intelligent than modern man, or that he simply was given extraordinary ability by God to perform these functions in the time period of a day. However, this argument fails to justify Adam’s response to Even when he first saw her, and also: i. There is no Biblical a prior basis for assuming Adam functioned at superhuman speed, ii. Merely greater intellect would not have significantly introduced Adam’s speed, iii. Adam in his perfect pre-sinful state would be the more meticulous in performing his God-assigned role, iv. Jesus, though perfect in every way, did not perform his earthly duties and everyday activities at a faster than normal rate. f. The wording of Genesis 2:4 suggests a long time for the creation week. This verse represents a summary statement of what has gone on previously, “These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created in the day of their making …” Here, the word “day” refers to the entire creation time period and not just to each day of creation. Obviously, then, this usage refers to a time period greater than 24 hours. The word “generations” is defined in Hebrew lexicons are referring to the time period between when a baby is born until that baby becomes a parent, or to some time arbitrary time period. In Genesis 2:4, there are multiple generations described as the creation time. g. The Bible frequently compares the eternity of God’s existence to the longevity of the mountains or the foundations of the earth. The immeasurable antiquity of God is often literally compared to the foundations of the world. If the world were only about 6000 years old, then this figurative comparison would certainly not make much sense. Rather, the earth must be many orders of magnitude longer than the mere 6000 years some ascribe to it, more like multiple billions of years. Habakkuk 3:6 declares the mountains to be “ancient” and the hills to be “age-old”, and even in the New Testament, 11 Peter 3:5 says that the heavens existed “long ago.” The sense in these descriptions is that the heavens and the earth are extremely old, not just a few thousand years old. h. The Bible declares God does not lie, and that it is His purpose to reveal truth both in creation as well as in the written word. Therefore, to suppose that God would create an earth or creation only with the appearance of looking old would be incompatible with His nature. God does not deceive, and certainly this would be a deception. It is much more in keeping with what we understand of God’s nature, and what the Bible declares to be God'’ nature, that correctly applied and interpreted scientific analysis of creation will declare its age. Indeed, to suppose that the entire universe is only 10,000 years old is to assume that 99.999999999999999999999% of the universe is an illusion – a deception. The abundant and internally consistent evidence from multiple independent areas of science (geology, astronomy, physics, paleontology) all declare that the age of the universe is truly ancient – many billions of years. i. The Bible declares that the Universe reveals God’s existence, power, and divine nature. The Bible makes it clear that the physical universe we see is enough to prove that "god really exists," that God created all things, but also that God’s has qualities of love, provision, protection, etc. so that “men are without excuse.” Therefore, since creation leads us toward God, we must assume that creation is not a deception, and that the extent, magnitude, and age of the universe are all enormous – just like God. The revelation of God through nature and the cosmos in no way detracts from the importance of His written revelation. While we can gain some understanding of the Creator from examining His creation, the finer points of the gospel of Christ are only revealed through His written word. However, the Bible more than once notes that God speaks through His creation:
Job agreed that nature has much to teach when he discussed theology with his friends,
It would thus appear that in addition of the words of the Bible being "God-breathed ... useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16), so are the words God spoken through the works of His hands. Many young-earth creationists limit the Word of God to the Words of the Bible. Since the Bible indicates that only God and His Word are truth, these creationists therefore consider any information gathered from any source outside of the Bible as necessarily suspect. To them, extra-biblical data holds little value for clarifying what the Bible might teach on any issue or for prompting correction of faulty interpretation. Certainly, there is some validity to this approach, for more often than not, the application of extrabiblical data has been in an attempt to belittle or discredit the Bible, or to fundamentally limit its application. In the context of our discussion, his approach is often applied using data which might favor Darwinian evolution or promote the self-sufficiency of man, or other humanist philosophies. We need to be careful when examining the religious implications of extra-biblical data for since it is obtained out of context from the Written Word, it is necessarily inferior to this the primary revelation of God to man. Yet, The Bible clearly teaches we can understand more of God through his Creation, and that Creation - and all of science - bespeaks of the Glory of God. God has revealed Himself through the words of the Bible and in the facts of nature. According to Psalm 19:1-4, the "words" of God proclaimed through the stars and galaxies are constantly being ready by all peoples unto the ends of the earth. In this modern day, we have the unimaginable privilege of seeing more of God's Universe than ever has been possible; The Hubble Space Telescope has glimpsed galaxies that are so distant they have never been seen by man before even using the most powerful ground based telescopes. In Romans 1:19-20, the Bible declares that everyone is "without excuse" as he or she faces god's eternal judgment (including people who have never read the Bible or heard the Gospel from believers), since what may be known about God has been made plain to all through what has been created. Colossians 1:23 states that salvation "has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven." j. The Bible declares the Universe to be vast. Genesis 22:17, Jeremiah 33:22, and Hebrews 11:12 all declare the number of God’s children is compared to the number of stars in the sky and the number of grains of sand on the seashore – a “countless” number. Interestingly, according to recent findings, the number of stars in the universe totals approximately 10^23 – a number that also approximates the number of grains of sand on the seashores. The Hebrew and Greek numbering systems included numbers up to the billions. "Countless" would probably therefore indicate a number at least an order of magnitude greater than a billion; such as tens of billions. Thus, these biblical statements concerning the "countless" nature of the stars in the sky would indicate a minimum number of 100 billion. Noting that the stars in our galaxy are separated from each other by an average of about ten light years, we can use the standard equation for the volume of a sphere to indicate that eh diameter of the Universe must be no less than 56,000 light years. Since no material in our universe moves more rapidly than the speed of light, and since the velocity of light must remain constant for life to exist, we can thus conclude that the Biblical stated minimum age of the Universe is 56,000 years. In reality, the size of the Universe is tremendously greater than this minimum dimension. The galaxy of which our sun is a member star contains one-hundred billion stars. Its shape resembles a flattened disk rather than a sphere - as per the above calculations. That disk has a measured diameter of 120,000 light years. These light years translate into a minimum age for the cosmos of 120,000 years. According to recent estimates, the number of stars in the universe totals approximately 10^23 stars which, if each were separated from its fellow stars by an average of 10 light years, would suggest a minimum diameter of 580 million light years or a minimum age of 580 million years. Certainly, God could have constructed the Universe at a more rapid rate than the velocity of light, but the physical evidence would indicate that He did not do so. A consistent pattern in God's revelation is that where He does perform miracles, He does not purposefully remove or intentionally hide the evidence of those miracles from us. k. The Sabbath day for man and the Sabbath year for the land are all based on analogy with God’s workweek. We should not conclude that the Sabbath is only a week long – or a thousand years long, because the Bible indicates that there are many “Sabbaths”. For example, the Sabbath can be a full year (Leviticus 25:4), and not a day. The emphasis in Exodus 20 is not on a day, but rather on the principle of one out of seven. God's fourth commandment says that the seventh day of the week should be honored as holy, "For in six days the LORD made the heavens adn the earth ... but he rested on the seventh day" (Exodus 20:10-11). This passage is often cited as a poof text for the 24-hour creation day interpretation. Evangelical Hebrew scholar Gleason Archer disagrees: "By no means does this demonstrate that 24-hour intervals were involved in the first six 'days,' any more than the eight-day celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles proves that the wilderness wanderings under Moses occupied only eight days." Just as the high priests of Israel served "at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven "(Hebrews 8:5), the days demarcated by the rotation of the earth are shadows or copies of the days distinguished by God in the Genesis creation record. The human and the temporal always are copies and shadows of heavenly and divine events - not vice versa. The seven days of our calendar week simply follow the pattern established by God. God's "work week" gives us a human-like picture we can grasp. This communication tool is common in the Bible. Scripture frequently speaks of God's hand, His eyes, His arm, even His wings. The context of each of these passages makes it obvious that none of these descriptions is meant to be taken concretely; rather, each word presents a picture to help us understand spiritual reality about God and His relationship to creation. The difference is not between literal and figurative. The difference is between an interpretative method that does not recognize context (including the immediate textual context, the literary genre of the passage, and the broader theological context0 and one that does recognize this interpretation. We need to recognize that the analog of our Sabbath to God's Sabbath does not demand seven twenty-four days; indeed, age-long creation days fit the analogy just as well, if not better. l. "Death through sin" is not equivalent to physical death. Romans 5:12 says, "Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned." Some have interpreted this passage as meaning there was no death of any kind for any creature prior to Adam's sin, and therefore, only a brief time could have transpired between the creation of the first life-forms and Adam's sin. However, the difficulties associated with the lack of physical death would post just as great a problem for three twenty-four hour days as it would for three billion years. Many species of life cannot survive for even a few hours without food, and the mere ingestion of food by animals implies and requires death of at least plant or plant parts. Some have suggested that this "death" refers only to "soulish" death rather than physical death. In the Genesis creation account, soulish creatures (birds and mammals endowed by their creator with mind, will, and emotions so that they can form relationships with human beings), and spirit creatures (human beings who in addition to "soulish" attributes can also form a relationship with God Himself_ are distinguished from other species (invertebrates and lower vertebrates). The difficulty with this adjusted interpretation remains: Are birds and mammals condemned to "death through sin"? Of all life on earth, only man has achieved the title of "sinner." Only humans can experience "death through sin." The death Adam experienced carefully qualified in the text as being visited on "all men" - not on plants and animals, just on human beings (Romans 5:12, 18-19). The book of Romans discusses four kinds of death: (a) death to the law, (b) death to sin, (c) physical death, and (d) spiritual death. Romans 5:12 addresses neither physical nor soulish death, but rather spiritual death. When Adam sinned, he instantly "died," just as God said he would ("IN the day that you eat of it, you shall surely die" - Genesis 2:17). Yet, he remained alive physically and soulishly (i.e., mentally, volitionally, and emotionally). Rather, he died spiritually - the fourth kind of death listed above. He broke his harmonious fellowship with God and introduced the inclination to place one's own self way above God's. Similarly, 1 Cor. 15:21 ("since death came through a man") must also refer to spiritual death rather than to a physical death and it must refer to mankind and not to animals in general. First Corinthians also explains, "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him" (verses 22-23). Christ therefore grants eternal life through His crucifixion and resurrection and will give believers indestructible bodies at His return. Christ's crucifixion and resurrection completely conquered sin and death and removed any barrier that Adam erected between humanity and God. Any person choosing spiritual life through Christ will receive this future body; eventually, at Christ's second coming, the eternal spiritual life that the believer in Christ already possesses will result in eternal physical life. But only human beings, spiritual beings, are "made alive in Christ." First Corinthians 15 refers only to those creatures who experience sin and desire to be delivered from sin, thereby excluding all species of life on earth except humans. Therefore, just as with Romand 5, there is no rrason found to deny physical desth for nonhuman life previous to Adam's sin. Genesis 3 records that after Adam and Eve died (spiritually) through sin, God sent an angel to block their access to the tree of life. Apparently, Adam and Eve had the potential for eternal physical life before and after sinning against God. However, God knew that eternal physical life in their newly acquired sinful condition ultimately would be disastrous for them and their descendants, God barred their access to it. God would not allow His plan to be thwarted. Physical death for humans became a blessing designed to restrain the spread of evil and make way for the redemption of willing men and women. Some people have asserted that the death of plants and animals before Adam ascribes evil to the Creator; some have asserted that a God of love and compassion could not be responsible for carnivorous behavior. They therefore believe that carnivorous behavior and death must be the result of Adam's sin and not of God's creation. However, carnivorous animals have to eat animals in order to sustain their behavior. The differences in daily activity between those animals that consume low-calorie leaves and those that consume high-calorie seeds, and between those that consume seed and those that consume other animals are dramatic. Elephants, for example, are vegetarians and, even though they are large, must expend more than half of their waking hours harvesting and eating, and they cannot do any more vigorous physical activity such as hopping or jumping. The destruction they wreak on their environment in attempting to devour sufficient calories in order to maintain their limited physical abilities is substantial arguably resulting in more death and destruction than is caused by large carnivores. There is an obvious emotional side to the matter of killing and eating animals as well. We humans tend to anthropomorphize and thus distort the suffering of animals. But even plants suffer when eating; they rxperience bleeding, bruising, scarring and death. Why is the death of plants acceptable and not those of animals. Obviously, the difference between the death of a spiritual creature and the death of any other creature is in some ways very profound. Due to the soulish characteristics of some domestic animals, we tend to treat them and see them as persons. However, these other animals are not persons, and we cannot realistically compare the suffering and death of animals to that of humans. Finally, and most importantly, it is important to have the right perspective when examining suffering and pain in this life and in the life of others. God has designed the Universe and this earth so that willing humans can be led forward into the new creation (Rev. 21). A relatively brief time of pain and suffering by us and by the entire universe will be replaced by a reward so great that none of us can ever imagine how wonderful it will be (1 Cor. 2:9). m. Bloodshed before Adam's sin does not alter the doctrine of atonement. Some have argued that to assert there was death before Adam's transgression implies a misunderstanding of the doctrine of atonement. Hebrews 9:22 says, "in fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness." Ken Ham of the Institute for Creation Research interprets this passage of Scripture by saying, "The basis of the Gospel message is that God brought in death and bloodshed because of sin." He notes, "If death and bloodshed of animals (or man) existed before Adam sinned, then the whole basis of atonement - the basis of redemption - is destroyed." While it is certainly true that there can be no remission of sin without the shedding of blood (as noted in the above Scripture verse), it does not necessarily follow that all shed blood is for the remission of sins. (To say there could have been no bloodshed before sin is to make the same interpretative error as those who might say there 3were no rainstorms or rainbows before the Genesis flood.) Hebrews 10:1-4 explains that indeed, the shedding of animal blood (as opposed to the blood of Christ) does not take away sin either. The sacrificial killing of animals was a physical picture of the spiritual death caused by sin, which necessitated the death of a substitute to make atonement, as well as a foreshadowing of the ultimate, efficacious sacrifice that God Himself would one day provide. Since the penalty for sin is spiritual death, no animal sacrifice could ever atone for sin as the crime is spiritual. The atonement for spiritual death had to be made by a spiritual Being - and that Being ws Jesus Christ. The spilling of blood before Adam's time in no way affects or detracts from the doctrine of atonement...Similarly, the doctrine of atonement in no way demand a creation account in which none of god's creatures received a scratch or other blood-letting experience before the fall of Adam. Any form of bloodshed is just as big a problem for animal life existing for forty-eight hours as it would be fore animal life existing for millions of years if one were to adhere to the atonement doctrine as espoused by the Creation Institute. Even in an ideal environment, animals could be scratched, pricked, bruised, and even accidentally killed which would then produce blood shed. No, the only logical resolution is the obvious one; that only the death of Christ was able to take away sins, and the shedding of blood by animal sacrifices held in Jewish Temples prior to the birth of Christ was only an image of Christ's perfect sacrifice for our sins which could never be accomplished otherwise by animals. n. The Creation has been subject to "its bondage of decay" since the beginning. Romans 8:20-22 discusses this bondage this way,
This passage has been interpreted by some to indicate that decay (and death) was brought into creation by Adam's sin. They assume that the law of entropy, which describes the natural tendency of the universe toward increasing disorder with time, did not take place until Adam and Even sinned. Based upon this assumption then, the time between the creation of the Universe and the fall of Adam and Eve must be brief indeed to explain why the physical evidence shows no period when decay and death were not in operation. This appeal fails on several accounts. While it is obvious that freedom from decay, suffering and pain could not possibly extend through billions of years - as the Universe could not exist under these constraints, it is also obvious that it could not last for even one twenty-four hour period. Without decay, work (at least in the Universe God designed), would be impossible without which physical life would be impossible for work is essential to breathing, circulating blood, contraction of muscle, digestion of food, and multiple other processes required for life. But life did exist prior to the fall of Adam which would be impossible without decay. Similarly, Adam was performing physical work tending the Garden of Eden prior to his Fall which also could not happen without the process of decay. Thus, Romans 8 could not imply that Adam's sin started the decay process for the physical evidence is to the contrary. The second law of thermodynamics states that heat will always flow from hot bodies to cold bodies, and that there will always be a tendency toward greater disorganization. The universe follows this principle as it becomes progressively more mixed or disordered. This increasing disorder with time is the principle of decay - also called "entropy." In this principle of increasing decay or increasing entropy lies the potential to perform work. Heat energy can be transformed into mechanical energy (or work) if the heat flow is channeled through an engine. The maximum amount of heat energy that can be transformed from heat into mechanical energy is related to the relative temperatures of the hot body and the cold body; the maximum amount of energy that can be so produced is proportional to the difference between the temperature of the hot body and the temperature of the cold body divided by the temperature of the hot body (all temperatures are measured relative to absolute zero in degrees Kelvin - where 0 degrees Kelvin is absolute zero. For organisms, the temperature difference between the hot and cold bodies must be small enough so as to preserve the lives of the organisms. Thus, the work efficiencies are very low compared to those which might be produced by a mechanical engine. In any case, given the laws of physics that have been ordained by God for the Universe, without the process of decay - and death, no work at all would be possible and therefore, all life would be impossible. Furthermore, Romans 8 only indicates when the bondage to decay will end but says little about when this bondage first began. However, there is reference to "the creation" and "the whole creation" (verse 22) implying the entire creation - the whole universe. This might therefore imply that the process of decay has been in progress since the inception of the universe. The text might also apply to another sort of decay - the dis0order in people's lives and environment that has resulted from rebellion against the will of God. In Genesis 1:28, God commanded us to tend the environment. However, because we have sinned, the environment has been ruined. The human effect upon the environment of the earth has been compared to the effect of sending a two-year-old child to tidy up a closet. Left alone, the child will produce even more disorder in the closet due to the natural tendency toward decay and disorder. Isaiah 24:5 describes the devastation that has been wrought upon this planet due to the insubordination of the human will toward God. The interpretation of Romans 8 in this manner is not new. Rather, Origin - a third-century church leader - notes in chapter V, book III of On First Principles, "That the world is originated and subject to decay, since it took its beginning in time." Origin says that Romans 8:20-22 implies that decay has been in effect in the natural world since the creation of the universe. Because Origin preceded by many hundreds of years the discovery of the laws of thermodynamics and entropy, it is unreasonable to accuse him of unfairly applying modern scientific knowledge to the ancient Scriptures. There is further evidence to suggest that life prior to the Fall was not idyllic as some might suggest. In Genesis 3:16, God says to Eve, "I will greatly increase [or multiply] your pains in childbearing." God does not say "introduce" but rather says "increase" implying there would have been pain in any case prior to man's first Sin. Though we frequently dislike pain, we have good reason to be thankful for it - it is necessary for our safety and survival. There are diseases in which pain is alleviated to an extremity. While this might initially be thought to be a blessing, generally, these painless extremities are gradually destroyed as people injure them repeatedly and often severely as people with painless extremities are unaware of this trauma. Thanks to our nervous system and our quick response to pain, we are protected from many of the dangers of our hostile environment. Our sensation of pain is even more amazing as it appears God has given us enough pain to protect us from environmental danger, but not enough to make life entirely miserable. We naturally have a negative reaction to decay, work, physical death, pain, and suffering. However, there is nothing in Scripture that compels us to conclude that any of these entities did not exist prior to Adam's first act of rebellion. On the other hand, God's revelation to us through nature provides overwhelming evidence that all of these aspects of our physical and environmental nature existed for a long time period prior to God's creation of Adam. o. God's rest (cessation) from creating will someday end, and He will create again. One of the most fascinating aspects of the Bible is the clear indication that creation and the current universe will be changed. According to Revelation 21, once God permanently conquers evil, the present universe will be permanently replaced by a brand-new one. Although God has not physically created since Eve was formed, His Sabbath day of rest is scheduled to end. With evil no longer a factor, the purpose for our universe will have been fulfilled, and God will remove from existence this universe with its current laws of physics to be replaced with a new universe with its own laws of physics. We will be living someday in a new heaven, a new earth, and a new Jerusalem, with laws of physics designed to make possible our eternal life and rewards in His presence. The Lord's Sabbath day began just after the creation of Eve, and will end at a point in the future. Thousands of years are passing between this beginning and ending. The parallel structure in the description of the seven Genesis creation days once again suggests then, that the other days are also longer than twenty-four hours. p. God is no less powerful for taking longer than 144 hours to create the current universe. Some young-earth creationists have expressed the idea that the proposition that God has taken longer than 6 literal days to create the universe somehow diminishes His power and Glory. Just as the runner who covers a mile in four minutes must be stronger than one who takes longer, so must God who takes billions of years to create weaker than a God who only takes six twenty-four hour days. Two fallacies underlie this argument, however. One is that God's creating is six twenty-four-hour days proves Him all-powerful. Not so. Even that time frame is too long. For that matter, six nanoseconds might be too long. God could have created everything in one immeasurable instant if time were a measure of his power! The second fallacy is that an all-powerful God is under some compulsion to exercise all His power all the time. Just as a man capable of running a four-minute mile has the option to take more time and walk at a slower pace, so God can choose whatever time frame He might for whatever purpose He might have. God's deliberate action is emphasized by Peter in 2 Peter 3:9, "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness." The rushing and hyperactivity of our current twenty-first century civilization in no way reflects upon the Creator. God is never anxious, always patient, and always willing to trade the temporal for the eternal. Throughout the Bible, we see indication that God frequently refrains from using His full power. This restraint is most clearly indicated in the personage of Jesus Christ who resisted pressure to unleash the full force of His divine power, instead choosing to achieve a higher, more permanent goal. Conclusions In the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19, Luke 24:47), Jesus commands His followers to make disciples of all nations. The Greek word for "nation," ethnos, refers to a group of people associated with each other by some common characteristics or experiences. The redeemed people pictured in Rev. 7 comes from "every nation, tribe, people, and language." In 1 Corinthians 1:26, Paul notes that not many believers are from the earthly group of those considered "wise" and "influential" by the standards of the world. However, since the Lord uses the word for "not many" and not "none," then there must be some intellectuals and other leaders who give their lives to Jesus Christ included in this pictured of the redeemed. The community of scientists can be a part of this group. Though God warns that the childlike simplicity of needing to trust Jesus as a child will be a stumbling block for many, we have unwittingly placed another barrier in front of scientists - the unnecessary and I believe, false dogma of a four-thousand-year old earth. There cannot be a doctrine that would be more offensive to scientists and intellectuals than this doctrine which simply cannot be supported by scientific knowledge. Since all of their research and understanding clearly convinced them that the universe thye are studying is real, they understandably resist embracing the belief that it is all a mirage. Then, there is a barrage of anti-intellectual prejudice leveled at scientists from some corners of the church. Some young-earth creationists (such as Russel Akridge) insist that the worldwide community of secular astrophysicists and astronomers are banded together in a god-hating conspiracy to deceive the public about the creation date, the offense is driven even deeper. Given the competition, independence, and nonconformity among scientists, it's absurd to suggest that tens of thousands of them would or could unanimously carry out a plot through four decades to deceive the public. Another explanation must exist for their strong and united confidence in the creation date of billions of years ago. I believe god wants us to remove the artificial stumbling block presented by the young earth creationists so that attention can be focused on the central issue of salvation in Christ. As I have attempted to show, the theological case supporting a young earth and a twenty-four hour creation day is largely untenable under close scrutiny. History reveals, however, the driving force behind theological artifice: It is fear rather than fact. Fear says long creation days somehow accommodate the Darwinian claim that by strictly natural processes operating over four billion years, life arose from a primordial soup and evolved on its own into human beings. If there were any foundation to this fear, then the reaction of young-earth creationists would be understandable. The the question must be asked: Is this fear well founded? Do long creation days and an old earth and universe really make room for naturalistic evolution? The answer is a resounding NO! - as this next page indicates. A recent national news publication, Insight on the News, reported on the political stance of the religious right and concluded with this comment,
This quotation clearly represents the fear of the public at large regarding the Christian agenda. Secularists fear that we will push through laws enforcing our moral beliefs about abortion, homosexuality, and young-universe creationism. This perception of creationism as a moral issue helps explain why emotions flare when the age of the universe and the earth comes into discussion. Linking Creation Days to Immorality A large segment of the Christian community has unfortunately been indoctrinated to equate acceptance of an old universe with a slide into immorality. The most vocal and articulate promoters of this equation come from the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and the Bible-Science Association (BSA). The equation of the old-universe, old-earth views with immorality begins with the assertion that the old-earth concept promotes naturalistic evolutionism. Henry Morris, founder and president of the ICR, states the link,
Morris's son, John, also of the ICR, restates these words,
To these men, evolutionism is "an unmitigated evil," the philosophical root of "fascism, racism, Marxism, social Darwinism, and imperialism.' In their view, the "modern ills of promiscuity, homosexuality, abortion, humanism, new-age pantheism, eetc.," all "flower from the same evil root." In this paradigm, old-earth beliefs = evolutionism, evolutionism = unmitigated evil, therefore, old-earth beliefs = unmitigated evil. Morris calls the old-earth view "anti-Biblical" and "anti-theistic," and adds that "there can be no justification for a Christian adopting the old-earth concept. He ends one article with a special exhortation to Christian leaders who "hold and perhaps teach the old-earth concept knowledgeably" to "abandon their compromise of Scripture" and to "eschew the evils of a failed scientific theory." Henry Morris wrote regarding social disintegration,
He also made the following charge,
Morris also regards progressive creationism (including the belief that God instantly performs miracles of creation on many different occasions over long time periods) "a compromise with the enemy." In fact, he labels progressive creationism with its day-age theory the worst of all options, for it "compounds the offence [of evolutionism] by making God have to redirect and recharge everything at intervals." He reasons, "The very concept of the geological ages implies divine confusion and cruelty." These are strong words and certainly relate to strong feelings. However, as previously noted, these feelings partly spring from the belief on the part of many young-earth creationists that natural biological evolutionary processes really do work. Some Christians take John Morris's theorem even further. Since old-earth beliefs = unmitigated evil, then old-age proponents - evil people. The Bible Science Association in Bible Science news expressed outrage toward old-earth proponents, claiming that they are "dangerous" and not orthodox Christians. Ken Ham of the ICR makes similarly severe charges against old-earth creationists. In an article, he berated Christian leaders who "believe that God created various groups of animals and plants throughout the supposed millions of years of the history of life, and that then He created Adam and Eve." He noted the following,
Linking Long Creation Days to Apostasy Both the Institute for Creation Research and the Bible-Science Association assert that upholding twenty-four-hour creation days and recent creation dates as essential requirements for salvation. Those who believe God created over billions of years are said to deny the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith. John Morris noted that billions of years of new species appearing and old species becoming extinct is "inconsistent with God's omnipotence, omniscience, purposiveness, loving nature, and even His grace." He also claims that old'earth view negates the doctrine of Christ's atonement for sins to give believers eternal life:
Ken Ham's view is that the old-earth view of creation "destroys the basis of the Gospel message" and "the message of redemption." The Bible-Science Association agrees, [Old-earth] theology denies the central teaching of Christianity ... and rejects the connection that Scripture establishes between sin, death, and Christ's atonement. ... In [this] theology death is natural. Death was a reality for millions of years before man ever arrived to sin. This leaves Christ's death on the cross as, at best, well-meaning, but beside the point. An old-earth perspective is presented as a fundamental challenge to Biblical authority. Referring to Christians who accept "billions of years," Ham says, "They have put man in judgment of God. Man becomes the authority." He then continues with this emotional appeal: "For me to accept an old age (billions of years) for the earth is to accept that fallible man's fallible methods are in authority over God's infallible Word. I can't do that!" Furthermore, Russell Humphreys, who is an adjunct professor of physics for the ICR, equates old-age creationism with a sadistic God and a denial of the second coming of Christ. Henry and John Morris claim that the ministries of old-earth creationists do not lead to soul-winning or spiritual growth.These men and organizations have widely influenced the beliefs of many Christians throughout the world who seem to strongly believe that the foundational doctrines of the Christian faith are destroyed in the acknowledgement that the universe and the earth may be older than just a few thousand years. This being the case, there should be little wonder that young-earth creationists brand others as being apostates, deceivers, underminers of the faith, false prophets, and purveyors of sin and evil. Polarization Those believing in a young earth have portrayed others as being apostate and as being guilty of destroying the Christian faith. In doing so, they have seriously polarized Christians and have created dissent and division where there need be none. In reviling what old-earth creationists say, many Christians' ears and minds are closed for there is no need to hear or weigh any evidence to the contrary. There's no openness to rethinking their positions for too much is at stake. There can be little hope of a meaningful dialogue among Christians concerning the age of the universe unless this supposed link between old-earth creationism and immorality is broken. The crux of the argument linking old-age creationism with immorality has to do with the following syllogism; namely, that since old-earth creationism = evolutionism, and evolutionism = unmitigated evil, then old-earth creationism = unmitigated evil. I believe another web page has already the falsehood of the connection between long-earth creationism and evolutionism; namely, that the many billions of years the universe is said to have been in existence does not provide sufficient time for naturalistic evolution to have occurred. The second portion of this syllogism, namely that evolutionism can be equated with evil, also needs to be considered. Certainly, it is possible that these people are deceived, or have inconsistent ideas concerning naturalistic evolution, or just simply believe in evolution because that is what they were taught in school. This belief system certainly does not indicate that the people themselves are any more evil than anyone else; rather, evolutionists just need re-education as to the unscientific nature of their belief system. An equally important idea to confront is that proposed by Henry Morris that "an omniscient God could devise a better process of creation than the random, wasteful, inefficient trial-and-error charade of the so-called geological ages," and that "a loving merciful God could never be guilty of a creative process that would involve the suffering and death of multitudes of innocent animals." If these assertions are true, then what could be said concerning the current era? God could do much right now to reduce the suffering of mankind - the epitome of His creation. God even calls the death of His saints previous (Psalm 116:15). Could it be that somehow God's purposes are fulfilled through our experiencing the "random, wasteful, inefficiencies" of the natural realm He created? Were conditions somehow significantly different in the past? Is the suffering and death of grasses, leaves, and protozoa that must have occurred before Adam and Eve sinned (even in Morris' system of theology) totally tragic, meaningless, and without any purpose? While it may be certainly true that God could have devised another plan of creation, we would be arrogant to decide that God "could devise a better process of creation." Given God's grand plans and goals for the new creation, the new heavens, and the new earth (Rev. 21), the groanings experienced by the current creation may represent a relatively grief but essential experience along the way. Furthermore, to label animals as "innocent" is inappropriate. Animals are not spirit creatures for they have no capacity to form a relationship with God or to rebel against His authority. This indicates the human tendency to anthropomorphize - we tend to endow other creatures with human qualities and characteristics. We know that life cannot exist without death in the present creation, and God has a reason for this order. Finally, there are many who profess an old-earth theology who are not evil apostates, but rather are earnest for the faith, establishing churches throughout the world and winning others to God. Perhaps one reason why old-earth beliefs are held in such derision by so many is due to old-universe proponents' lack of prominence. |