My oldest daughter and I had a fun conversation this afternoon. She’s a 4th grader who is super smart and curious. I have a hard time keeping up with all of her questions. In fact, our new game includes her trying to ask me questions that I don’t know the answer to that she does. So she is constantly asking me random questions.
Today she asked me if human beings and dinosaurs coexisted. Then she asked me how old the earth is. As we discussed creation, she had many more questions related to the relationship between the Bible and science.
My own view is a non-committed-open-but-cautious perspective. I tend to hold to a form of the Literary-Framework view which means I read Genesis 1 theologically as a piece of literature. I know others read it differently, but that’s where I’m at. I do, however, see that this literary reading takes the days literally too., though I’m not sure the author’s intention is to communicate a chronological rendition of the creation account. All that is to say that I think Genesis 1 is primarily communicating to us that God created everything out of nothing. It’s not a science text book. I tend to view the earth’s age older than young earth creationists (YEC) but not nearly the billions of years that evolutionists claim. I think things are a bit more ambiguous than some are willing to concede. I’ve read the books on the subject and considered the arguments and simply don’t have a strong commitment to any of them. I’m non-committed, after all!
I’m not convinced that theistic evolution is a good option because it raises many exegetical issues and doesn’t fair well with my understanding of hermeneutics. I know others disagree with that as well.
At any rate, these are the questions I’m left with:
- If God created everything under 10,000 years ago, how do YEC’s explain the many neanderthal fossils that have been found? What of these subspecies of modern human beings? Some of the YEC literature I have read has been less than convincing in it’s explanation as most has simply ignored the actual issue. I read Bones of Contention and found it quite helpful, but still have questions. Since I’m not a scientist, all of the discussion on DNA and genetics and fossils doesn’t make a lot of sense to me, but I’m still left curious (and so is my daughter!!!)
- Were dinosaurs really on the ark with Noah and his family? I’ve read that there are about 700 named dinosaur species, while only about half are based on full skeletons. No matter what number is accepted, there were a lot of them. Were they all babies on the ark? Or eggs?
- Both YEC’s and Old Earth Creationists have a lot of “scientific evidence,” so how in the world are non-scientists supposed to evaluate their presuppositions without getting master degrees? Seriously… how am I, a pastor with a lot of theological training and little science training, supposed to evaluate the scientific side of things? What’s the best book
If you have thoughts and ideas, feel free to share them. If you are a Young Earth Creationist who is convinced that all other views are a sign of apostasy and that families who do not home school are wicked, please refrain from commenting. 🙂
Luke is a pastor-theologian living in northern California, serving as a co-lead pastor with his life, Dawn, at the Red Bluff Vineyard. Father of five amazing kids, when Luke isn’t hanging with his family, reading or writing theology, he moonlights as a fly fishing guide for Confluence Outfitters. He blogs regularly at LukeGeraty.com and regularly contributes to his YouTube channel.
Luke – I’m old earth, but certainly not a theistic evolutionist. I think it creates huge problems for the nature of the atonement, theology of the fall/sin nature (esp. how Paul seems to talk about it as if it has been passed down “genetically” from Adam. It seems to me that therefore there must be a first human being/literal Adam/Eve). Since my undergrad degree is in Physics I guess I am privileged to be able to call myself both a scientist (day job) and a trained theologian. I have a paper I wrote in seminary called Cosmology & the Cosmological Argument which attempts to integrate the two, if you think it would be helpful. It is more about the creation of the universe/earth than about creation of humanity (i.e. doesn’t so much address whole evolution debate). Not 100% sure if I would agree with everything in there now, but could send it to you for what it’s worth.
Brad, send that to me!
I teach science and have graduate degrees in Bible as well, so I have a great interest in the field. For many years I was uncertain. The book that convinced me of the great age of the Earth was God’s Time-Records in Ancient Sediments by Dan Wonderly. (half.com has copies). In the book Dan describes various fossils such as coral reefs and drilllings in ocean floors that indicate that these formations are millions of years old – with annual records being preserved for tens of thousands of years and more. When you add the age since they were formed, and the fact that they had be formed on something, the ages add to at least tens of millions.
About Noah – I don’t know how Noah could all of today’s species on the ark and feed them for a year or more, let alone the extinct species.
And what about the fish – some salt, some fresh that would die in the mixed water and sludge in a year long flood?
And all the seeds that would die after being soaked in a briny solution for a year?
anyway, appreciate the questions.
Erwin McMannus says that God didn’t create out of nothing, but rather out of something that is invisible. That could account for the age thing.
“Scientific evidence” aside, from a scriptural standpoint I have a problem with deep time. There’s just no way to get that out of the text without approaching it with the presupposition of an old earth. In light of Exodus 20:11, scripture seems to indicate in plain language that the account of the creation process was a literal six days.
Additionally, deep time is a requirement for evolution and evolution is the atheist’s only answer to question of origins. Being that the scientific community is primarily atheistic, I think it’d be naive to think it isn’t a factor when the experts weigh in with their “evidence”. And in fact a few of them admit as much.
There’s a lot of truth to that.
However, I’d push back on the “plain language” of the Genesis account. It’s rather easy to understand it more in the sense of “literary.” Or, as Dr. Richard Averbeck (http://evangelicalexegeticalcommentary.com/richardaverbeck/) says, it’s either literal or literary.
I think it might be both/and 🙂
The link you referenced was cut short some how. Wasn’t able to view the page.
But, I actually was referring to Exodus 20:12 being plain language, specifically with regards to the creation week being six literal days:
“9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.”
The author makes no distinction between the days of the creation week and God’s rest and the days of the work week and the Sabbath. Just my thoughts, but I don’t think you can get a gap theory or day-age theory with out a heavy dose of eisegesis.
The page was just a link to Averbeck. He’s a great guy… and OT prof at TEDS.
Anyway, I agree that Exodus 20 is probably the most difficult for a non-literal reading of the Creation account.
However, that’s different than Genesis 1. Genesis 1 does not require a literal reading, in my opinion.
Some see evolution in a static way where God is aloof (deist) from his creation others (like myself) see God capable of moving and acting in a dynamic and personal way with his creation (e.g. superintending evolution) This makes room for a theistic evolution and science that makes room for the miraculous because it is informed (special revelation) by the character of the biblical God. I think most of the theistic evolution I hear about (without respect to special revelation) is more like “deistic” evolution.
http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/350notes.html is by an Evolutionary Creationist, which I am also. At least you now have some way to see what is being taught at the graduate level, which I find compelling. And his intro teaching give a framework for the discussion that I find very helpful.
Thanks! I’ll check these things out a bit more…. appreciate it!
Another thought: If the earth is millions or billions of years old, where does all that time chronologically fit in scripture? I don’t think it could be before Adam and Eve, since Jesus says that they were “from the beginning.” Additionally, evolution prior to Adam’s creation is theologically problematic (to say the least) since it puts death before the fall. And I don’t think anyone would argue that evolution from simple cell organisms took place after Adam’s creation.
Noah took two of each kind, not species. He only needed approximately 16,000 animals on the ark total.
The God who would use evolution is cruel wasteful and retarded, certainly not the God of the Bible or one worthy of worshipping. If you look at Jesus’s miracles, they happened instantly, he spoke and it happened, the grapes didn’t need to ferment, the lame didn’t need physical therapy,the storm didn’t pass hours later. Jesus miracles prove He is God and had authority to speak and things happen.