In The Beginning part one

 Dominic Rizzo

In this article we will examine the Biblical and scientific evidences which shows that Genesis can be taken literally and that the six day creation spoken of in Genesis fits the Biblical and scientific evidences. The theory of evolution is not believed because of scientific evidence, science is against the theory of evolution.

The next three articles will cover the issues of time and the age of the universe. If it can be shown that the Bible and scientific evidence points to a young universe/earth, then evolution doesn’t stand up.

Before we start, lets define some terms.

 

Many of the modern controversies in the Bible can be solved with hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is the science of Biblical interpretation. The purpose of hermeneutics is to establish guidelines and rules for interpretation. One of the principles of hermeneutics is to always exegete (pronounced ex-a-gete) a passage. To exegete is to take out from the verse, deriving its meaning from the context. For example, where the Bible says that God created everything in six days (Ex. 20:11), the context allows for only six literal days. Where people misinterpret the Bible is when they eisegete (pronounced ice-a –gete), which is adding to or reading into a verse.  For example New Age and Hinduism take Psalm 46:10, “Be still and know that I am God,” as a proof text to claim that everything is God.  However, if read in context, you will see that God is making this statement about Himself! 

 

There are two types of evolution, macro and micro. Microevolution is provable, but macro has never been proven. Micro speaks of small changes within a species. There are certain amounts of change and adaptability (natural selection) that God has provided in His creation for survival. Natural selection can never produce new genes, it only selects among the preexisting types of genes. Farmers use Microevolution to grow better tomatoes, but they remain tomatoes.

Macroevolution suggests that these small changes can cross over to different species using natural selection, for example a reptile evolving into a bird.

 

Quoting from Job 38:2-4, God asks Job, “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Now gird up your loins like a man, and I will ask you, and you instruct Me! Where were you when I laid the foundations of the Earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding."  When God created the universe and everything in it, there were no Christians or evolutionists around to instruct Him. Evolution is not a science, it is a belief system just like other religion and worldview. You will need more faith to believe the macro evolution idea that everything that exists came from nothing by chance, without a purpose or plan or mind (thought) behind it. Within the Church this issue is controversial. There are some Christians who take the Bible literally where it should be taken literally (some parts should be taken figuratively, for example Jesus is the door) and believe that God created everything in six literal days. There are other Christians who believe in progressive creationism, or Theistic evolution. Both progressive and Theistic evolutionist believe that God started creation, but used the principles of evolution to create, accepting evolution in varying amounts and accepting long ages of the universe and earth. The only difference between these two is that progressive creationist allows God to do a little more. Both systems put God and  the unproven theory of evolution together. There is another theory called the day age theory. This theory says that each of the six days represented large amounts of time. The problem is that to believe in any of the theories that supports God using evolution in any way, you will have to rely on non-Biblical material, and read into the Bible what is not there (eisegete). The cults and false religions usually read into the verse rather than taking out or drawing from the verse. If evolution was in any way involved, you will have death (as one of the agents of change) on the scene for millions of years, the weak species die and the strong survive passing on their better genes. But the Bible says that death came through Adam. There was no death until Adam sinned. The Theistic, or progressive creation scenario, you have many hominoids (soul-less man like creatures) living and dying, and then one day God chooses to give one of them a spirit. The reason that God created earth was for man. Why would He create the world billions of years before He would be able to put man into the world? Man who is made in His image, not a soul-less hominoid.

Jesus said in Matt 19:4, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female?" When was this Beginning? Using the Biblical genealogy of man from Adam to Christ, even if you have some “missing” generations you will not get more than 10,000 years. Since man was made in the beginning there couldn’t be any long ages from day one to day six, or any long gaps of time. Neither were there any ages of death and struggle, because after God created everything, He said that it was good. Death came through Adam’s sin (Romans 5: 12). Jesus said that God created him in the beginning.  So from the time of Gen.1, “Let there be light,” to Gen. 3 the fall of man, there was no death.  This totally excludes any form of evolution for the Bible believing Christian, because, death is needed for evolution to continue. Death is not natural; it is a corruption, life is natural. God is life and choosing the opposite of His will is death.

 

In the early 1900’s, many leaders in Church were fooled into thinking that science had proven that evolution was true and that it’s methods of dating the earth were valid. So they began to compromise, looking for a way to have the Bible fit into the "scientific" discoveries of the day. The liberal "Christian” groups didn't mind this, they didn't believe in a God of miracles or that Genesis was fact. Quoting from Dr. Henry Morris,

“The sad fact is that evolutionism has also deeply affected evangelical schools and churches. After all, even modern ultra-liberal theological schools (e.g. Harvard, Yale) and denominations (e.g. Methodist, Episcopalian) were once orthodox and zealous for the Scriptures.  These institutions have traveled down the road of compromise with evolutionary humanism farther than most, but many evangelicals today seem to have embarked on the same icy road, unaware of the dangers ahead and impatient with those who would warn them. Evangelicals (meaning those who accept the inerrant authority of the Bible.)"generally dare not call it compromise" and perhaps are not even aware of it. But compromise they have, in many, many instances. Some have accepted full-blown theistic evolution, but many more believe in either "progressive creation" or reconstructive creation " (i.e., the so -called Gap Theory)... the sad truth is that many evangelical leaders, who profess to believe in Biblical inerrancy and authority, have also compromised with evolution."

 

When Christians start accepting the beliefs of fallible science (which is almost always changing), this will lead to other false un-Biblical beliefs. For example, Hugh Ross, a Christian Progressive creationist, (featured many times on Focus on the Family), believes that science has proven that the earth was formed over millions of years by slow gradual erosion, layering of sediment and soil. Because he believes what he thinks science has proven, he is forced to say that the flood of Noah was a local flood. Why? Because if you have a worldwide flood, then there is no need for millions of years to carve the earth and layer the geological columns. The flood of Noah’s day lasted a year. This would be enough to change the earth. We have further evidence of this. Mt. St. Helen erupted in 1980. In one day it carved out a miniature sized Grand Canyon. The eruption of Mount St. Helen produced many feet of stratified rocks, which look millions of years old, but were produced in days or hours. Radioactive measurements* of these rocks show them to be millions of years old, but we know they were formed in 1980 because scientists saw them formed. What would have resulted from the worldwide flood in Noah’s time, which lasted about one year, with a thousand times the activity of Mt St Helen? Science needs billions and billions of years to have their theory become workable, but even that is not enough time. In my article titled “not a chance I pointed out that it would take not billions of years but quadrillions of years just a "simple" cell to evolve from pure chance.

Suppose a brilliant scientist came up with a theory that states "modern man evolved from a single celled amoebas in just ten seconds”. The scientific world would say that is ridiculous. Then suppose that this scientist changed his theory and said it took 2 to 3 billion years for amoebas to evolve into man. The scientific world would accept this. Do you see what happened? Give it billions of years and the ridiculous becomes acceptable!

 

Actually, time is the enemy of evolution. They demand that the simple becomes more complex. But time and the second law of thermal dynamics (not theory) states that orderly things become disordered, new things get old and break down, living things age and wear out. Since a simple cell and other complex life forms would take more than a quadrillion years, projecting any time is useless to evolutionist, Progressive creationist, and Theistic Evolutionist.

 

Lets look at what the Bible and scientific evidence has to say.

First lets start with a question. The Bible says that God will destroy the earth and create a new heaven and earth. Will He take billions of years to do this? Or will He do it like He has done in the past, by speaking it into existence? When Jesus was on earth He performed His miracles instantly. He turned water into the finest wine, normally this kind of wine has to be aged to be this fine. Smelly Lazarus was raised from the dead, instantly.

With God nothing is impossible. Paraphrasing a class that A.E. Wilder Smith, a scientist with three earned doctorates, gave at Calvary Chapel: time is not a problem for God. God invented time. Before time was invented He had all the "non-time" in the non-world to think up, or plan in detail His creation, if that is what He needed to do.

 

It is beyond our capacity to fathom a being who existed before time and space and is not affected by time. He is not subject to the ways of man. He is not limited by creating in a step by step fashion, moment by moment. He is the unchanging, all knowing God, His wisdom in all things is unfathomable. Isaiah 40:28, “Do you not know? Have you not heard? The Everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth does not become weary or tired. His understanding is inscrutable.” Isaiah 55:8,9,11, “For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways, declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts. So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to me empty, without accomplishing what I desire, and without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.”

Psalm 33:9, “For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast.” The context of this verse shows it is talking about God’s creation. There is no room in this verse to put in millions of years. If some thing is done, this means it is completed, and not, still in process!

From the above scriptures it is obvious that God’s Word is all that was needed. He doesn’t have to rely on His (time) Creation. This is the God that we can worship and adore.  Jesus holds all things together by the word of His power. Matter is not eternal it had a beginning. We are talking about a being who creating things out of nothing. He made the elements from nothing by using His power. Why would time stop Him?  He created time for us. Time can never be an issue for the uncreated Creator.

 

In the scientific world, the long ages of the universe is not believed by all:

 The age of our globe is presently thought to be some 4.5 billion years, based on radio-decay rates of uranium and thorium. Such `confirmation' may be short-lived, as nature is not to be discovered quite so easily. There has been in recent years the horrible realization that radio-decay rates are not as constant as previously thought, nor are they immune to environmental influences. And this could mean that the atomic clocks are reset during some global disaster, and events which brought the Mesozoic [the dinosaur age] to a close may not be 65 million years ago, but rather, within the age and memory of man."-Fredrick B. Jeaneman, "Secular Catastrophism," in Industrial Research and Development, June 1982, p. 21.

 

 We shall now cover some of the Biblical support for a young universe. First, if you were God and you wanted to tell your creation that you created every thing in six 24-hour days how would you do it? The Bible is plain enough on this point. Exod. 31:17 says for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor... Genesis1: 5 says "and there was evening and there was morning, one day." This is the natural way the Hebrews describe a day, it starts in the evening and ends in the morning. All Hebrew scholars agree that when there is a number in front of the Hebrew word Yom (day) it should always be taken literally. If God did not mean six literal days, then why did God say in the fourth commandment: “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and sanctified it.”  There is no astronomical reason to have seven days.  The 24 hour day, and 12 months cycle that makes a year, came about because the earth revolves around the sun, and this is the time it takes to complete each action. But the seven-day week came about by a command of the Lord. He set the example for man. If He created everything in six thousand years and rested for one thousand, and that is to be the example, then I sure would hate to go to work on Monday morning!

Some say, since he created the Sun on the fourth day how was there light on the first day? This is not a problem to God, it says in Revelation that the sun will be no more and God will be the light. In Genesis it said that on day one,

God created light it means just that, there were not particles and waves that make up light before he created them. The Sun and stars are not the only source of light.

This Biblical account presents a creation in which each thing was fully functional when it was made. The trees did not come from seeds; they had fruit on them. Adam was not an infant. All things appeared mature as if they had a history. God created with the appearance of age. When Adam looked down at the rock that he was standing on, it looked old, as if it was there for along time, yet it was a couple of older than he was. John D. Morris points out “I suspect that if modern scientist had been able to examine Adam immediately after he had been created, they might have been able to discern that he had just been created, that he had not lived a life of, say twenty-five years or so. Certainly they would have found no decay in his teeth, no calcification in his bones, no cholesterol in his arteries, and no defective genes. Careful investigation might have shown that the only way he could be in that state was to be newly created that he showed no objective evidence of deterioration caused by age.  Superficially, he appeared to be a grown man. He was functionally mature, but only minutes old. The same could probably be said for the plants and animals.” The Young Earth pg.41.

 Quoting from the book In Six Days, Why 50 Scientists Choose to Believe in Creation, pg. 120, “ I then realized that had God wanted to say a billion years rather than six days, he could have said it, very simply, in the way he spoke to Abraham: ‘I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your offspring could be counted’ (Gen. 13:16).   In the same way He could have said, ‘I took as many years as there are particles of dust on the earth to create the heavens, the earth, the seas and all that is in them…’ and it would have sounded very impressive but he said six days. Would he have said this if it were of no concern?”

 

Christians who are progressive creationist have to put general revelation (what they see in nature) above special revelation (what is revealed in Scripture) that’s a problem because general revelation is imperfect. Our minds are effected by the fall, by bias, by men who do not know everything, by a fallen creation. IF we treated the rest of scripture like many treat Genesis Chapter 1 to 11 you would end up with nothing worth while. A progressive creationist believes that God created over millions and millions of years, What about a progressive resurrectionist, who believes that Jesus gradually rose from the dead.

It all comes down to this; in Who do we place our trust? Will we trust God’s word? If not, we will have to deny a lot of the fundamental truths of the Christian faith.  Quoting from Doug Phillips “There are only two ways that we can be absolutely sure of anything. Either you know absolutely everything! Or you know somebody who does. (God) A scientist might not be asking the right questions. He might be asking the right questions but not all the right questions. He might not have all the facts; there are thousand of reasons why we have a limited perspective. This is why we believe it is critical that we trust God at his word…Our reason is tainted by the effect of sin. We know that the world is effected by sin. When we look at that world it isn’t a perfect revelation of the original perfect world that God created. The world we see is and imperfect example tainted by sin of the glorious creation that God made.”

God will one day resurrect everyone who ever lived, no matter where his or her dust happens to be. Is that too hard for him? He can not lie, He will do it. Our God is an awesome God, no else exists.

 

Below we enclose a very interesting conversation between a Bed and Breakfast owner and his guest from The Biologist by George V. Caylor.

 

“One of the best aspects of my wife JoAnne’s Bed and Breakfast is the chance for a great conversation with an interesting guest. People fascinate me, and the laid-back atmosphere of the bed and breakfast allows me to get to know our guests well. I was with a congressman the moment the Monica Lewinsky story broke, and discussed the possible impeachment. I enjoyed visiting with a Russian attorney who wrote the post-communism Russian Constitution. But all our guests have good stories, and I like to hear them all. I ‘replay’ them later, and I have the ability to remember conversations nearly word for word. That memory skill comes from either thirty years as a financial planner, or six years as a touring musician.

One of the most interesting, and disturbing conversations, was with a molecular biologist working in genetic research. Jeff and his wife were in from New York to celebrate the 2000 New Year. I think they just wanted out of New York City, and Lynchburg is about as "out" as he could get! Jeff described himself as a "secular Jew," which meant that he was not into practicing his religion. (There seems to be a lot of secular Jews and secular Christians around these days.) I asked Jeff about his profession and he told me that he was a molecular biologist, specializing in genetic research. He and his team were scientific "detectives" tracking down the cause of disease.

Our conversation went something like this:

G: "Sounds like pretty complicated work."

J: "You can’t imagine how complicated!"

G: "Try me."

J: "I’m a bit like an editor, trying to find a spelling mistake inside a document larger than four complete sets of Encyclopedia Britannica. One hundred volumes, thousands and thousands of pages of small print words."

G: "With the computer, you can just use ‘spell check’!"

J: "There is no ‘spell check’ because we don’t know yet how the words are supposed to be spelled. We don’t even know for sure which language. And it’s not just the ‘spelling error’ we’re looking for. If any of the punctuation is out of place, or a space out of place, or a grammatical error, we have a mutation that will cause a disease."

G: "So how do you do it?"

J: "We are learning as we go. We have already ‘read’ about two articles in that encyclopedia, and located some ‘typo’s’. It should get easier as time goes by." G: "How did all that genetic information get there?" J: "Do you mean, did it just happen? Did it evolve?"

G: "Bingo. Do you believe that the information evolved?"

J: "George, nobody I know in my profession believes it evolved. It was engineered by ‘genius beyond genius,’ and such information could not have been written any other way. The paper and ink did not write the book! Knowing what we know, it is ridiculous to think otherwise."

G: "Have you ever stated that in a public lecture, or in any public writings?"

J: "No. It just evolved."

G: "What? You just told me ---?"

J: "Just stop right there. To be a molecular biologist requires one to hold on to two insanities at all times. One, it would be insane to believe in evolution when you can see the truth for yourself. Two, it would be insane to say you don’t believe in evolution. All government work, research grants, papers, big college lectures - everything would stop. I’d be out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where I couldn’t earn a decent living."

G: "I hate to say it, Jeff, but that sounds intellectually dishonest."

J: "The work I do in genetic research is honorable. We will find the cures to many of mankind’s worst diseases. But in the meantime, we have to live with the ‘elephant in the living room’."

G: "What elephant?"

J: "Creation design. It’s like an elephant in the living room. It moves around, takes up an enormous amount of space, loudly trumpets, bumps into us, knocks things over, eats a ton of hay, and smells like an elephant. And yet we have to swear it isn’t there!"

I didn’t use Jeff’s family name, although I doubt many New Yorkers read the "Ledger." After all, Jeff is a good man who deserves to earn a good living. I am just a bit angry that we allow him to be bullied by evolutionists. It makes me yearn for the day when all molecular biologists will be able to say: "Hey, there’s an elephant in our living room! Maybe we can make friends with it!"

 

In part two, we will answer some of the objections that the old earth groups bring up.

 * In the next article, we will cover some of the reasons why Radiometric dating measurements can not be trusted.