Pastor to Pastor
06/27/08
What About Creationism?
QUESTION: Hi, Roger. Recently two of my young friends have raised questions about the creation story. One, a young lady, had been deeply hurt when another gal at a Casas evening group told her that if she didn’t believe in a literal 7 days, she might not even be a Christian! The other, a young guy science major whose father is a scientist and atheist, was beginning to question the whole “faith-thing,” since he can’t reconcile literal 7 days with scientific method. I know you’ve done some excellent teaching on this topic. I got copies of a couple of old sermons from Rhonda for my gal friend and suggested that the young man e-mail you, as his questions went pretty deep. I don’t know if you want to address something this controversial and divisive, but … since the elephant is in the room, I think maybe we (er, that would be you, as “we” doesn’t have the answers…) should talk about it. Glad you’re doing this. Can’t wait to have access to read it!!!
ANSWER: I will give you my own faith journey through this issue, but I also would encourage you to read the eloquent testimony of a scientist and beloved Christian man, Mark Marikos, who is a part of our church family. His comments follow my answer.
Since I almost lost my faith over this issue, I would gladly address your question. I grew up in a church which clearly taught Genesis one as proclaiming a literal-seven-day creation. Any other interpretation or perspective was a slap at the veracity of the Bible. Those not falling “into line” were considered outside the historic Christian Faith since they failed to “believe in the Bible”!
My spiritual and intellectual struggles in this area began near the end of my senior year in high school. After taking courses in biology, chemistry, physics, advanced physics, geometry, trigonometry and calculus, I came across the book World’s In Collision by the Russian physicist, Immanuel Velikovsky. Velikovsky’s premise that the ten plagues and the supernatural events of the Exodus could be verified by examining contemporary world events during the Exodus was fascinating. While most everyone would reject his causal explanation for the events of the Exodus, his concept of using the scientific method to verify Biblical truths deeply influenced me.
My faith struggles began several years later when I came across The Red Limit by Timothy Ferris. His overview of the universe from its beginning about 13.5 billion years ago to the present clashed with my Genesis understanding of a seven-day creation just 6,000 years ago. My search for reconciling truth began in earnest. My belief in God depended on it. Fifteen years later I finally found peace.
I studied materials from the Center for Scientific Creationism. I learned about the young-earth theories and the mature-earth creation conjectures. I considered the day-age ideas that attempted to reconcile the Hebrew word for day, “yom”, which also can refer to long ages with million-year-time spans.
Then, I decided that I must look at this from a scientific viewpoint as well. So, I started by getting conversationally comfortable with Einstein’s relativity theories, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, quantum theory, chaos theory and string theory (which provides a vibrational explanation for every subatomic particle in the universe). I studied ideas concerning multiple dimensions in our universe and how gravity might be explained by warps in “space time”, or perhaps by massive objects in worm holes, or maybe by otherwise undetectable parallel universes.
I wanted to know how the entire universe could come from a singularity and what was a singularity and how the inflation of the early universe paved the way for the formation of stars and galaxies. I wanted to know why the only elements in the early universe were hydrogen and helium—so, where did the other elements come from.
I bought a telescope to look for myself at various stars, nebula, stellar nurseries and galaxies in an effort to comprehend. I was fascinated by the six-critical-numerical constants that make our own earth and universe possible. A small variation in any one of them would have rendered the universe as we know it impossible.
Then I turned to anthropology and evolution to try to get a working understanding of just how long man may or may not have been on earth—and where he might or might not have come from (And, how does Adam fit into this? And, when did the dinosaurs live?) Next, it was time to delve into genetics and chromosomal studies.
After fifteen years I finally concluded three things. First, it seemed to me that the universe was much older than 6,000 years. Second, the Genesis one creation account might have other interpretations or perspectives besides a literal one. Finally, The Lord God Almighty accomplished an absolutely stellar work in making our universe and mankind!
(By the way, I wondered if I could be a man of integrity and still continue preaching while I was working out my doubts. I found my answer in Psalm 73 as Asaph himself also struggled with doubts. God told him to continue his ministry; however, he was to keep his mouth shut until he reconciled his questionings. I decided that I could take by faith that the Word of God is living and powerful, and if I proclaimed its truths and teachings the Bible was certainly capable of standing on its own two feet as it changed and enriched the lives of those who heard it. With solid integrity I decided that II could continue my pastoring as I struggled through.)
Unfortunately, I still failed to comprehend how the seven-day-Genesis creation story and what I observed in the natural world could be reconciled.
Then I came across the book, The Meaning of Creation, by Conrad Hyers. His explanation of the Genesis’ creation story was for me a completely satisfying reconciliation. As many Bible students and scientists have discovered, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. Reconciling the Bible and science doesn’t get any simpler than Hyers’ analysis.
Hyers understands the Genesis creation story to be structured as Hebrew poetry. The language is prose—not poetry—but the structure used by Moses is most likely poetic.
Postulating that Genesis One may be written in a poetic structure does not mean that I question the truth or reliability of the Bible. I believe that the Bible is 100% God’s word and totally infallible. I believe that with all my heart.
I also believe that Genesis One was most likely written in a Hebrew poetic structure. This does not mean that I think that the Bible is not literally true. It means that I recognize that the Bible is filled with commonly used literary devices which the Biblical writers used to communicate truth. Before we go further I want to explain some of these devices. Then, when I describe what I think is the literally device Moses used, my thoughts may make more sense.
For example, much of the Bible is written in prose and understood as literally true just as it is written. The Bible is replete with narrative stories which I believe actually occurred as recorded. So, we interpret prose as prose.
The Bible also contains metaphors. A metaphor is a comparison not using the words “like” or “as.” For example, Jesus declared, “I am the door.” None of us believe that statement as literally true. He is not made out of wood. He used a metaphor to describe Himself as the way into eternal life. We understand metaphors as metaphors.
The Bible is filled with similes. A simile is a comparison using the words “like” or “as.” In the Olivet Discourse Jesus described the end times as follows: “As it was in the days of Noah, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be.” The end will not come with the days of Noah; however, the end will be like the days of Noah. So, we understand that similes are not literally true, but they use one thing to help make something else easier to understand. So, we interpret similes as similes.
An onomatopoeia is a literary device that uses a word that sounds like the meaning of the word itself. For example, when the Rich Young Ruler turned His back on Jesus, Jesus “looked upon him with compassion.” Compassion is translated from a Greek word that actually sounds like someone’s inner-most body parts being spilled out. Jesus’ insides did not literally pour out. But, we experience from that particular word an insight into Christ’s deep, emotional, heart-broken feelings of compassion for the young man who made the wrong choice. We interpret onomatopoeias as onomatopoeias.
Jesus often used Greek chiasms to teach truth. A chiasm is a Greek literary device used to invoke deep thought and consideration. Four clauses are arranged like an “X” in the rhyme scheme “abba.” For example, Jesus said in Matthew 7:6: "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.” His statement is only understood by unraveling the chiasm. The first and fourth clauses go together as do the second and third. Now, His words make sense. Otherwise they seem like gibberish. We interpret chiasms as chiasms.
In the same way, we interpret poetry as poetry. For example, in Psalm 91:1-4 the Psalmist declares: “He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty. I will say of the LORD, ‘He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust.…He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge…’” Of course, God is a spirit. He does not have wings and feathers. This is a poet’s way of using word pictures to describe literal truth. In essence the Psalmist is giving us a picture experience of God’s love and care—like a mother hen gathers her chicks under her wings when threatened (remember similes?), so God brings protection and care to His children when they are threatened. We understand that poets paint pictures with words and interpret poetry accordingly.
As I examine Genesis one I see what I consider to be a Hebrew rhyming structure used to teach powerful truths about the creation.
Most English poetry rhymes words. For example, “hickory, dickory dock, the mouse ran up the clock.” Dock rhymes with clock. Hebrew poetry rhymes thoughts. The rhyming schemes vary but the rhyming thoughts are easily observed in Job, Psalms, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes.
I found reconciliation and peace regarding the seeming conflict between Science and the Bible when I understood what Moses wanted to express (the affirmation of God as creator of all things and the subjugation of the Egyptian “gods” to Him) and the manner by which he conveyed the truth (Hebrew poetical rhyming schemes). He wrote in Genesis 1:1-2: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.”
We could spend many hours analyzing and discussing the meanings, nuances and interpretations of these two verses. However, let’s make this quite simple.
In verse one Moses declared that God is the creator of all things! All true Christians can agree on this.
Now, notice that Moses also declared that the earth was formless and empty. Moses used this simple formless and empty outline to describe the creation—and proclaim the Lord Almighty as the God above all “gods.”
On day one God created Light and Darkness, day and night (1:3-5).
On day two God created and separated the Sky and Waters (1:6-8).
On day three God created dry Land and Vegetation (1:9-13).
On day four God created the Sun, Moon and Stars (1:10-19).
On day five God created Birds and Fish (1:20-24).
On day six God created Animals and Man (1:25-26).
On day seven God rested (2:2-3).
As recorded in verse two the earth was formless so God gave it some form. Once the earth had form, God was able to fill in the empty form. This was an accepted Hebrew poetical way of rhyming thoughts.
Day one rhymes with day four. On day one He formed light and darkness. He filled it on day four with the Sun, Moon and stars.
Day two rhymes with day five. On day two the Almighty formed sky and sea. On day five He filled the sky with birds and the waters with fish.
Day three rhymes with day six. On day three God formed dry land and vegetation. One day six He filled dry land and vegetation with animals and man.
The formless and empty of verse two rhymes with the forming and filling of verses 3-31.
Now, I really don’t think Moses was attempting to describe scientifically the timing nor the “hows” of creation. Remembered that Moses had just engineered the Exodus from Egypt. The people knew well the Egyptian gods and we know that many were struggling with leaving them behind. This struggle continued even to the days of Joshua a generation later (Joshua 24:14: "Now fear the LORD and serve him with all faithfulness. Throw away the gods your forefathers worshiped beyond the River and in Egypt,and serve the LORD.”).
The Egyptians worshipped gods of light and darkness; sea and sky; land and vegetation; sun, moon and stars, birds and fish; and animals and man. Even Pharaoh and his son were gods.
Now, think about it, on each of the six days of creation Moses knocked down one or more of the Egyptian gods. Moses declared that these Egyptian gods were not gods at all. Instead, they were creations of the one God who stands tall above all! In today’s vernacular Moses was thumbing his nose at the Egyptians by saying, “My God is better than your god! My God is better than your god! In fact, your gods are not gods at all! They are just creations of my God!”
This understanding of Genesis one reconciled for me the seeming conflict between the Bible and Science. As far as I am concerned, there is no conflict at all. My heart is at peace in this matter—finally.
The Bible is not trying to explain or be understood by Science and Science is not trying to explain or be explained by the Bible.
Now, let’s circle all the way back to the teachings of the church I grew up in and my initial struggles with the things I was taught. As far as I am concerned, no one needs to believe in a literal seven-day creation to be a Christian—neither should they be dismissed as not believing in the Bible. In the same way, those who choose to take the teachings of Genesis One as a literal account need not be ridiculed or dismissed either.
How we interpret Genesis One is never a test of faith according to the Bible. Three things really matter. First, we believe that Jesus is both 100% God and man (the inscrutable hypostatic union). Second, we believe that Jesus lived a sinless life so that He might die crucified in our place in order to pay the debt of sin we all have incurred. Third, we believe that Jesus was bodily resurrected from the grave as both a validation of His divine work and His present indwelling of those who choose to follow Him. These three beliefs are life changing. Jesus said, “By their fruit you shall know them.” Now we are experiencing the real tests of Bible believing, true followers of Jesus Christ.
My hope is not that every one reach the same conclusion as I. There is plenty of room for diversity and individual decision making. However, I am deeply concerned that we Christians don’t turn people away from Christ by making them think that they cannot follow Christ unless they believe in seven-literal-twenty-four-hour days of creation, six thousand years ago—when, from their perspective, everything in the universe seems to shout otherwise.
I hope that my journey might be of help to you and others. At least, here are some things you might consider as you are reconciling the Bible with Science—or not— in your own spiritual journey.
Love, Roger
Comments
Thank you for your comments on Genesis and creation. One of the first times Mary and I attended Casas, you spoke on this topic. It was refreshing to hear a Baptist Pastor teach that way. Coming from a strong background in the sciences, especially the earth sciences, I had seen too many friends told they could not be Christians or church members unless they embraced the “creation science” dogma, and it made me angry. They were being kept from saving faith because no one was willing to do the hard work of reconciling science and Scripture. Hearing you teach as you did, made me comfortable settling into Casas without reservation. It was a place I could invite my scientist friends to “come and see”.
I traveled much the same path as yours. In my junior and senior years of college, I realized that I needed to reconcile what I knew from science and the Bible. A compromise between the two would not do, it had to be a full reconciliation. They either had to agree, or I would have to reject one or both of them as untruth. I spent several years researching it, as I continued my walk as a new Christian and my studies and career as a geologist. I eventually came to the conclusion that the scientific evidence and the Word of God were both truth, though not everyone’s interpretation of either was reliable.
I came to realize that many who insist upon conflict between science and scripture (from one camp or the other), often ignore or oversimplify important facts from both fields. I also realized that many of these folk have less than Godly agendas and exhibit prideful arrogance. In the “scientific” camp, such arguments are well outside the realm of science, and are actually deeply philosophical or even fervently religious (e.g. “There is no room for God in my beliefs. Therefore, He cannot exist! I say so!”). On the other hand, some in the “Bible” camp exhibit a complete lack of love and compassion for unbelievers and those earnestly searching for the truth. They appeal to the same anti-intellectual undercurrents in our culture that contribute to the sales of tabloid newspapers. They are willing to throw up a roadblock on the road to Christ, to keep out those who do not agree with their under-educated opinions. There is only one stumbling block God ever set up, and that is sufficient.
Even though I do not claim to have all of the answers (or to even know all of the questions), I have come to a place of peace - that God created a marvelous universe, and it is understandable through diligent study, observation, and application of scientific principles. My study of the sciences only leaves me with a greater sense of awe at the Creator, and my study of His Scriptures makes me more fervent to understand His handiwork. My science has made me a stronger believer, and my faith has increased my love for the physical sciences. I do not need to waste my time trying to explain away “inconsistencies” between the two; those no longer exist in my mind.
In addition to your teachings, I am fortunate to have been exposed to materials from authors like J. Edwin Orr (Faith That Makes Sense), Bernard Ramm (The Christian View of Science and Scripture), Hugh Ross (The Creator and the Cosmos), Howard Van Till and Davis Young (Science Held Hostage), and Gerald Schroeder (The Science of God), to mention a few. The quote that follows, did much to shape my current view on the whole “debate”.
“It often happens that a non-Christian derives from the clearest arguments, or from the evidence of his senses, certain scientific knowledge about the heavens and earth – about the size or distance or movements or revolutions of the stars, about certain eclipses of the sun and moon, about the course of the seasons and years, about the nature of animals and plants and minerals, and other such things.
It is both improper and mischievous for any Christian man to speak on such matters as if so authorized by Scripture and yet talk so foolishly that the unbeliever, observing the extravagance of his mistakes, is scarcely able to keep from laughing. And the real trouble is not so much that the man is laughed at for his blunders, but that the writers of Scripture are believed to have taught such things, and are thus condemned and rejected as ignorant people by people outside the Church, to the great loss of those whose salvation we so much desire.
They find one belonging to the Christian body so far wrong on a subject they themselves know so well; and on top of this, find him enforcing his groundless opinions by the authority of our Holy Bible. So they come to regard Scriptures as unsound on subjects they have learned by observation or by unquestioned evidence. Are they likely therefore to put their trust in these Scriptures about the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven?
What trouble and sorrow some presumptuous men bring on their more careful brethren. When charged with wrong notions by non-Christians, they try to bolster their wrong assertions by the Bible, even quoting inaccurately what they think will suit their purpose and putting forth a lot of talk without understanding what they are saying.”
When I first read this (quoted in Orr, Faith That Makes Sense, pp38-39), I was surprised by its original source. It was not from the 20th century, or even the 19th century, but from the 4th century. It was translated from the Latin, written by Augustine (De Genesi ad Litteram, Book I, Chapter xix, 39). Obviously, this is not a new issue, but I believe Augustine gives us pause, as Christians, to exercise a bit more humility in this debate, especially when “witnessing” to those more educated.
Thanks again for your comments, and for all of the great teaching you provide.
The more one studies the sciences, the more spectacular is the evidence of His creation!
Thank you for your thorough explanation, and your dedication to deeper understanding of scripture.
I am a fairly new Christian, about a year and a half now, and am really new to Casas, just since this past Christmas. I have just read your piece on Genesis 1 and Creation. I am so thankful for it. I have been struggling every single day for the past year and a half, it's been awful for me. I have been trying to actually believe what the Bible says, and I . If I cannot understand what Genesis actually says, in it's literal form, then I don't know how to interpret the passages on the Resurrection. How can someone to come back to life? I've been trying to convince myself about Christianity, My family and I are at odds about this.
Perhaps you might consider not sleeping in on Sunday morning just yet.
My heart ached as I read your comments. Since I have added to your struggles with the veracity of the Bible and I grieve for that.
Perhaps you might allow me to respond in an enlightened way.
Like many books, the Bible contains all sorts of literary devices--like prose and poetry and metaphors and similies and onomatopoeia. There are narrative sections and allegorical sections and "wisdom" sections and narrative sections.
Think about it, when Jesus says, "I am a door," we don't take that literally and say He is made out of wood.
When Jesus taught about the ends and said, "as it was in the days of Noah, so shall the end times be" He used a simile.
When the psalmist talked about God having wings and feathers and gathering his children under his wings, he is using poetical language to describe God's care and protection. God is a spirit. This is poetic language Poetry often paints truth in word pictures.
One of the basic principles of Biblical hermaneutics (interpretation)is to interpret prose as prose and metaphors as metaphors and poetry as poetry.
As I look at the literary structure of Genesis and the ceration truths I personally that this passage is written in a Hebrew poetical style. This in no way says that the Bible is not true or trustworthy. I am trying to figure out what Moses meant when he wrote what he wrote.
Understanding literary devices helps me get to the real truths of the Bible.
As to the resurrection I believe frimly that the passages describing this truth are clearly written in narrative prose. We can stake our lives on the truths of the resurrection. I can see no poetry or allegory or metaphors or whatever else in the resurrection passages.
I hope this is helpful. If you live in Tucson, I would be glad to talk to you personally, email me personally at rogerb@casaschurch.org and we will get together.
Again,thanks for sharing your thoughts--and I am sorry to have added hurt to your life.
Love, Roger
Look at light for example. Light travels at 386,000 per second. When you consider the distance stars are form the earth, if they were created say 6,000 ago, that would not allow enough time for the light to reach the earth. But God mentions the stars in the creation story. Adam did not have to wait to see them, What if God not only created the stars but also places the light beaming off of them in place.
What if the universe was created with age? God is outside of time. I do not believe he is limited in his creation. I believe he can create both new and old things at the same moment. Perhaps our universe that is dated billions of years old by our standard was created 6,000 years ago. Impossible? Not with God.
I hope I am not out of place with my comments and I welcome any correction.
In Christ,
Bill
At one time, I was convinced that the seven-day creation account was literal. After all, if every word in the Bible is true, then how could I handle it any other way? But later, as I attended college and graduate school, my faith was shaken to the core. Everything I learned about the universe seemed to contradict the Bible.
I was fortunate enough to study under some wonderful Christian professors. But when I asked them how they were able to reconcile faith and science, the great majority of them gave me the same answer. They separated them completely. I didn't (and still don't) understand. I can't separate my rational mind and my spiritual heart like that. So then what?
I dropped out of graduate school and entered seminary for one reason: I wanted to reconcile my faith with the world around me. And after six years (yes, I squeezed a two-year program into six), I realized that I had been pursuing the wrong issue all along. I can't reconcile fath and science. My belief in the infinite God cannot rest on my finite understanding.
So I would never presume to judge another Christ-follower's view on any subject except one. Faith has to come down to ten words: Jesus died for my sins and rose from the dead. Period. And all of our theological questions and anwers must be rooted in this truth.
You know the phrase "on a need to know basis"? I truly believe that God has shared with us everything that we need to know to come to faith in Him. But by definition, faith will always involve an element of mystery, a sense that we have to choose whether or not we will believe because we don't have all the answers.
Earthly risk . . . heavelny reward. Are you willing to jump?
My personal favorite right now is one proposed by Gerald Schroeder in "The Science of God", where he invokes relativity theory to explain how it could be 15 billion years from our reference frame, and only seven days from a "universal" reference frame. Pretty heady stuff - it can cause brain hernias if not properly equipped!
But ultimately, as Brie points out, these issues are not that important. They are fun to play with and hypothesize about, but they should never be used to trip someone up and keep them from the central truths of scripture.
I know I was barren for ten years and struggled to conceive. The best doctors with all their degrees had no hope for me. Their answer was for me to adopt because I only had 1% to ever be able to conceive and 99% of never having a baby. Now I have two beautiful baby boys. God loves to create something from nothing.
Roger, you have said before that the bible is ultimately not a science book but God's plan in restoring our relationship with him. Jesus is the main character and we are his love. I think about how I'm going to teach my baby boys the story of creation in Genesis. I once thought I knew but now I'm thinking I need to keep it simple.
I'm so thankful for all the knowledgeable people in our church who continue to seek God and his truth. We may all struggle with some truths in the bible but God delights in revealing himself to us as we grow and mature in our faith. Faith, hope and love but the greatest of these is love.
I am the person who posted some time back re: Gen.1, and I said that if Gen.1 is not to be taken literally because it makes no scientific sense, then perhaps the Ressurrection should be reconsidered also since it too does not make scientific sense. In regard to eyewitnesses to the Ressurrection, logically that's simple to answer...they simply lied. Now where am I going with this? I'm going to the Ten Commandments in Ex.20:8-11. First let me say that I do completely believe in the literal version of the Creation, and that I will only quote two verses from scripture because for me, they are the only ones needed here.
"Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do your work, 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 manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. 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. Therefor the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy". Now, I truly know that this seventh day is a 24 hour day, otherwise if this too shouldn't be taken literally, then church on Sunday wouldn't exist, and also, He just said again that it is a 24 hour day. Now, I don't really know all of the science and how they have come to the conclusions about the Creation that they profess. But, I do know that God is His Word, that God is never wrong, and that we should "Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding", Proverbs 3:5. Also, I've seen a lot of great breakthroughs from science in my 60 odd years on this planet (remember the polio vaccine on the sugar cubes?). But, I wish I had a penny for the number of times they have had to admit their errors...far too many times for me to keep count. I don't believe that the Lord's Word has ever been proven to be in error, and trying redefine what he gave Moses about His Creation by calling it a form of poetry is, in my opinion, simply wrong. I will also say this. I am convinced that the United States has come to it's end, that this Nation's time is up, and I don't mean years, but months. We have let our country go to Hell in a handbasket, we are hanging on by a thread, the signs are everywhere and multiplying every day. I really don't hear Christians talking about this, much less preparing for it. It's as if we're living in a parallel universe the way this subject is being ignored by the Church. My point is this. I am not brave enough, or smart enough, to mess around with anything in God's Word at any time, but especially now. The only way that I would be willing to concede a different meaning behind any of His Words is if He told me Himself, and that He has not done. I attended Casas for a short time, just since this past December, but I won't be returning. I do wish you, and all members God's favor, but I will go where I know that God's Word is being taught without compromise, although that's becoming pretty hard to find these days.
Sincerely,
Marilyn Berwick
My approach was to have several principles to follow that were non-negotiable. They are, in order of importance from highest to lowest. 1) God is Supreme; 2) God was, and is, and will be; 3) God is the creator of all things good; 4) God can not be constrained to our limited understanding; 5) The Bible is God’s Holy Word perfect without error; and 6) God is not trying to hide from or deceive us. All other things I was taught about the creation were “under the microscope” so to speak as was those things “scientific”.
Since God is not trying to hide from us and scripture says that He is evident in all of His creation, investigating creation is not unchristian. Rather, I would argue that it is highest form of honor to examine what He has made. He made the universe for a reason just as He made us with the ability to reason. Though science is often wrong (I seem to remember that the Titanic was unsinkable), it constantly questions itself. On a side note, it was the religious people that declared that the earth was the center of the universe. Obviously we don’t understand scripture as well as we would like to believe.
Without all of the boring scientific baggage and to make a long story short, I am convinced that the earth is older than 6000 years. I know that science will never uncover all of God’s “secrets”. Every answer they find will have dozens more to uncover. All is does is remind us of how much He is God and we aren’t. But for those that believe in the literal interpretation, you are still family. After all, in the beginning, only God was there and only He knows what happened for sure. We just stumbled upon the scene later afterward.
One more note, as far as scientific examination goes my wife and I agree to disagree. I see God under ever rock that science “discovers”. He was already there; He didn’t have to discover it. As we examine the universe I am awestruck how it all works together. That which I don’t know just prods me on more to look under more rocks. My wife sees things differently. “Looking under the rocks” are a distraction. She is awed by the majesty of it all. Not knowing is just more evidence of God’ supremacy. Who is right and who is wrong? I have my opinion of course, but because I have learned to be sensitive to her views, I will say, God knits us uniquely in our mother’s womb in His image with different gifts, different strengths, and different weaknesses. Maybe God is bigger than one simple approach of viewing His creation. I can live with the uncertainty of not knowing for sure. He is big enough to handle the universe without my supervision.
You can find out more on their website: http://south.azosa.org
or call 663-5626
or e-mail them at 7Gen11@earthlink.net
This is obviously a topic of keen interest to still be generating responses over 6 months after the original post!
Post a Comment
