|
Creation:
Literal or Figurative
A
project done by Chad Shaffer and Mike Stine
Contents
Intro
We come from similar backgrounds that make this project
very real and very needed to us.
We both attended the same secular public university
(Shippensburg University) our freshman years before coming to
school here. We
both have a science background.
Mike was a physics major.
Chad was a chemistry major.
We have both seen and heard secular arguments for a “Big
Bang” and for evolution.
We have sat under professors who loudly proclaim
evolution as the only logical conclusion to the origin of man. We do not think so.
Likewise, we have both come into contact with Christians
who attempt to water down the account of creation by trying to
reconcile it with scientific “evidence.”
It is our goal to show that this attempt to water down
creation does not hold true to what the Bible states about
creation.
But there are some things that we believe are very
clear,
so let's begin with them.
To top of page
What
is Clear
There
is much debate over creation in the world today.
There are many who do not accept creation at all nor any
of the Bible for what it says.
However, there are also many people who believe the Bible
who still believe that evolution is possible and that God may
have created through a “Big Bang.”
For this project, we aim to
look at what the Bible says about creation.
Taking it as inerrant and as absolute truth, we will not
consider things that are strictly non-biblical.
However, we must first decide what is biblical.
To do so, we must look into the book of Genesis at what
God did at the beginning of the world.
Genesis 1:1 states clearly
“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”
Therefore, we believe that God is the creator of these
things. Anything
that doesn’t allow for God to be creator will not be accepted.
Also, the account of
creation in Genesis chapters one and two are quite explicit that
everything was made in six days.
This is not a point of contention.
We will later discuss how people interpret what a
“day” actually is.
However, there is many
things that are unclear within these passages that has lead to
much confusion among Christians.
We will next look at these things.
To
top of page
The
Gap Theory
There are some people who
see a gap, a possible amount of time that would account for the
millions of years that scientists believe the world has existed,
in the Genesis creation account.
This is known as the gap theory.
This idea can be first
traced back to Dutchman Episcopius (1583-1643)
(Answers 58). It was championed later on by Thomas Chalmers and Rev.
William Buckland in the 1800’s.
The Dakes Annotated Reference Bible says this about the
Gap theory: “When men finally agree on the age of the earth,
then place the many years (over the historical 6,000) between
Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, there will be no conflict between
the Book of Genesis and science.”
According to Ken Ham, the
gap theory consists of three parts. 1. A literal
view of Genesis. 2. Belief in an extremely long but undefined age for the earth.
3. An
obligation to fit the origin of most of the geological evidence
between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
Gap theorists oppose evolution, but believe in an ancient
origin of the earth.
According to W.W. Fields,
this view involves Satan ruling on earth between Genesis 1:1 and
1:2. Satan ruled
over a soulless “man” and at some point rebelled against
God. This caused
God to flood the earth and destroy his creation.
This accounts for the water that is on the earth in 1:2.
Also, the concept of the earth being “formless and
void” has been held as something negative.
Thus it was not in the state that God had originally
created it.
The gap theory has largely
been replaced by progressive creation and theistic evolution today.
To
top of page
Theistic
Evolution
There are two main forms of
theistic evolution. The
first is the Day-Age theory; the second progressive creationism.
Both of these are used to reconcile the scientific
information and the biblical account of creation.
It has also been used to integrate evolutionism with the
Bible. Ken Ham
says:
“This
move to integrate Evolutionism with the Bible later proved
premature. Increasing
numbers of scientists, including former ardent evolutionists,
eventually rose up in opposition to the dogmatic belief in
Evolution and abandoned it as unproven, if not impossible”
(Genesis Solution 55)
The main push behind the Day-Age theory is that a day is
not a literal day. It
is instead meant to be understood as figurative and could be
representative of any length of time.
The reason this length of time was needed was to be able
to reconcile evidence for evolution into the biblical account of
creation.
Progressive creationists accept most evolutionary ideas
such as the “Big Bang” theory.
They also believe that God created matter and started the
evolutionary process but then stepped back.
“Some in this group theorize that man evolved from apes
and that God breathed a soul into two highly evolved ape-people,
Adam and Eve.” (Genesis
Solution 59)
If one rejects the idea of
man coming from apes, whether it was set in motion by God or
product of random chance, they are still left with one other
choice: God as
creator of all in a personal way.
To
top of page
Biblical
Evidence of a Literal Six Days
If one does not accept the
evidence of science- as it is contrary to the Bible- then they
must evaluate the claims of the Bible.
These claims would be that God created all that is in six
literal days. We
propose to examine evidence that the Bible gives for six literal
days.
It would make sense to first examine what “day”
actually means as it is translated in the Bible.
The Hebrew word for day, “yom”, means simply day in
this instance.
“All
the uses of ‘yom’ elsewhere in the Bible mean a literal
24-hour day when prefixed by a numerical adjective, as it is in
Genesis 1 (first day, second day, etc.). The repeated reference to “evening and morning” after
each of the Creation days makes it all the more clear that these
are to be understood as literal days, not ages”
(Genesis Solution 56)
The original audience of the book of Genesis must be
taken into account when interpreting the book.
Moses wrote the book to the Israelites as they were
wandering in the wilderness.
We have no reason to believe that these people were
intellectual scholars who would have worried about whether the
word “yom” was to be taken figurative or literal.
Rather, this was a common word, written to a common
people, in a common language.
There is simply no evidence to suggest that the
Israelites saw it in any other way than a literal six days.
Genesis is explicit in
making reference to morning and evening of each day.
While some people try to place a gap in between each day-
thousands or millions of years- the wording of Genesis simply
does not allow for this. Genesis
follows a logical progression of time.
There is evening and morning, evening and morning, etc.
“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into
the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all
men, because all have sinned…Nevertheless death reigned from
Adam… ” Romans
5:12,14a (NASB)
Physical death was a
punishment for the sin of Adam and has been passed on through
the generations. However,
the penalty of sin is not only physical death but is physical
death. Christ came into the world to save us from the penalty of
sin. If you
have never received forgiveness for your sins through Christ
please read here.
Death had not entered the
world before Adam sinned in the garden of Eden.
But if there are thousands or millions of years between
each day in Genesis, we run into problems.
If this is true, there would have been a massive
overpopulation of animals in the world. Likewise some animals never stop growing.
If this were the case, we’d have some very large, very
old animals around before Adam sinned and death entered into the
world. This does
not seem very feasible at all but would have to be true if the
Bible is to be believed and there is a large amount of time
between days in Genesis.
To
top of page
Genesis
1-2 Debate
One reason a literal
interpretation of Genesis 1 & 2 has come under fire is
because chapter 2 repeats the events of chapter 1.
Critics of a literal interpretation state that the
creation account in Genesis is to be taken figuratively because
of the poetic nature of the first two chapters.
Upon closer examination of
these two chapters one would see that while the same story is
told it is seen from two different perspectives. Chapter 1 is creation from God’s perspective while chapter
2 is creation from man’s perspective.
We see much the same thing done in the beginning of the
New Testament. The
four gospels all tell the same story as well but from different
perspectives. However,
no one questions the literalness of the gospels.
Likewise, no one should question the literalness of the
account in Genesis because it is written from two different
perspectives. Once
we look at this account from the viewpoint of the same account
from two different perspectives one will see that they are not
contradictory but rather complimentary.
Although
the Biblical evidence may be enough for Christians, other may
wish to see scientific evidence for creation. For this
reason, we have scientific evidence.
To
top of page
Evidence
used by Evolutionists
The old standby used by evolutionists has been the
faithful ape-man. If
man really evolved from apes, it would only make sense that
skeletons would remain that are half ape, half man.
Lucy is probably the most famous of these “early
humans.”
Upon close examination of the skeleton of Lucy,
scientists discovered that she was nothing more than the
skeleton of a chimpanzee. However,
evolutionists still use her as an example of a partially evolved
ape (Skeletons 52). Another
famous skeleton used by evolutionists is known as Piltdown man.
This was a human head with an ape’s jaw.
The bones were stained to make them look older.
Ultimately this was a hoax.
It took over 40 years for people to discover that this
was a hoax however (Skeletons 31).
If such an
evolution ever took place, there should be thousands of such
skeletons around (after all there’s lots of dinosaur skeletons
and they supposedly were around long before man) however, no
credible skeletons have yet to be found.
Another fact that
evolutionists have used is the fact that there has been nitrogen
found throughout the universe.
Some scientists state that this is conclusive evidence of
a “Big Bang” (which they conclude is the only thing that
could have spread the nitrogen throughout the whole universe.)
However, we find no actual reason to conclude this.
It in no way disproves that God could have created
nitrogen throughout the universe.
Darwin proposed
the idea of natural selection; strong species would survive
while the weak ones died off.
This was used to explain both the giraffe’s long neck
and the hippopotamus’s short one.
This seemed logical to many people.
However, natural selection does not explain how an amoeba
could become a man. It
could explain variations within a species of animal but does not
explain how a single cell organism could become a very complex
one like a man.
Also, in natural
selection, the strong survives- therefore the weak would die
out. If man evolved from apes, man is obviously the stronger
species and there was something incomplete with apes that made
man evolve. However,
apes should then have gone extinct because they are the weaker
species. This
obviously has not happened.
To
top of page
Scientific
Evidence Supporting Creation
Evolutionists like to use the fossil record against
creationists and try to prove with it the creation did not
occur. However,
careful examination of the fossil record shows exactly the
opposite.
Scientists have found human and other very complex
skeletons in the same strata layers of some very simple
organisms. This
would give credence to the idea that complex organisms and
simple organisms lived at the same time.
Also other things, known as polystrate fossils, have been
found growing between strata layers.
“Tree trunks, for example, running through strata
supposedly representing many millions of years (these are common
in coal) show that the strata must have been deposited in quick
succession, otherwise the tops of the trunks would have rotted
away” (Answers
192).
As for the missing links that evolutionists claim are in
the fossil records, well these are still missing.
The largest argument used in support of creation which
has been used for years is the intelligent design of the
universe. This
argument has been further solidified by the discovery of DNA. While evolutionists argue that man evolved from a simple,
single celled organism DNA has shown us that the single cell
isn’t even so simple. Thus
the chances of it happening by chance get worse all the time.
Our solar system also points out an intelligent designer
behind it. If the
earth was just a bit closer to the sun, we would all fry and if
we were just a bit farther away, we’d freeze.
Likewise there are laws that govern how our universe
works. These laws
are universal. One
such law that has been used often to prove creation is the 2nd
law of thermodynamics. This
law states that essentially everything will begin to degenerate
unless energy is added to it.
The “Big Bang” was an input of energy.
From this point this would begin to degenerate because
energy was not added into it.
However, evolutionists believe that instead of
degenerating things actually become more complex! This is a direct violation with one of the physical laws of
the universe.
Finally we will offer you our
view and conclusion on creation.
To
top of page
Our
View
We hold to a literal six day, 24 hour creation where God
was the creator of the universe and all that is in it.
We believe that this is strongly backed by both scripture
and by scientific evidence.
We believe that it is clearly stated in the Bible that
God created all things and the dual accounts of creation in
Genesis lend to clarity and understanding of creation.
We believe that there is much more evidence supporting
creation that we have not even begun to discover, just as DNA
was unthinkable 30 years ago.
We believe that the evidence speaks for itself on
creation. If one does not desire to accept the evidence, then our own
words will not persuade them most likely.
But they will be held accountable as Romans 1:20 states. “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible
qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been
clearly understood from what has been made, so that men are
without excuse.”
To
top of page
Resources
Books
|
The
Book |
Author |
ISBN |
|
The
Revised & Expanded Answers Book |
Ken
Ham |
0890511616 |
|
The
Genesis Solution
|
Ken
Ham |
0801043328 |
|
Creation
Evangelism for the New Millennium |
Ken
Ham |
0890512477 |
|
The
Lie |
Ken
Ham |
0890511586 |
|
Creation:
Facts of Life |
Gary
Parker |
0890512000 |
|
Refuting
Evolution |
Jonathan
Sarfati |
0890512582 |
|
Kids
Books |
|
|
|
Skeletons
in your Closet |
Gary
Parker |
0890512302
|
Magazines
Creation
Magazine: ex nihilo
TJ
In-depth Creation Journal
Websites
Answers
in Genesis
Creationism.org
ScientificCreationism.org
Institute
for Creation Research
To
top of page |
