Preliminary Thoughts

The first five books of the Bible are known by several names: The Pentateuch (penta=five; teuchos=scroll or book), the Five Books of Moses, the Law of Moses, the (Hebrew for Law), the Law.

It is believed that Moses was the author of these books for several reasons.

Luke 24:27And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Matthew 18:4; 19:7-8; 23:2 Mark 1:44; 10:3-4; 7:10 Luke 5:14; 16:19, 31; 20:37; 24:27, 44 John 3:14; 5:39, 45-46; 6:32; 7:19, 22-23

The Torah, Pentateuch, Law, etc:

 Genesis – The Book of Beginnings  Exodus – The Birth of a Nation  Leviticus – The Law of the Nation  Numbers – The Wilderness Wanderings  Deuteronomy – The Law Renewed

There are those who question the historical validity of Genesis and in particular, the first 11 chapters. However, it is interesting to note:

is mentioned in Deuteronomy, Job, and I Chronicles, not to mention, the New Testament in Romans, I Corinthians, I Timothy, Jude and the Gospel of Luke 3:38 in the genealogy of Mary, “Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of .” No passage ever gives a hint to the effect that Adam was fictitious or symbolic.

appears in I Chronicles, Isaiah and Ezekiel. In the New Testament, Matthew, Luke, Hebrews, I & II Peter.

 Abraham appears 15 times in the Old Testament and 11 times in the New.

 Jacob appears 20 times in the Old Testament and 17 times in the New.

 The New Testament quotes Genesis 165 times with 200 allusions to the text, 100 from the first 11 chapters. In John 5:45-47 Moses and Jesus appear to be “interlocked.” – “Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

Preliminary Thoughts The 3 New Testament References from Genesis

The Creator and The Creation

Matthew 13:35; Mark 13:19; John 1:3; Acts 2:24; 14:15; Romans 1:20; II Corinthians 4:6; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:10; 11:3

Allusions to the Creation

Romans 1:25; 16:25; Ephesians 3:9; I Timothy 4:4; Hebrews 2:10; 4:10; 9:26; James 3:9; Revelation 3:14; 4:11; 10:6; 14:7

Creation of Man and Woman

Matthew 19:4-6; Mark 10:6; Acts 17:26; I Corinthians 6:16; 11:8-9; Ephesians 5:31; I Timothy 2:13-14; Revelation 2:7; 22:2, 14

The Flood

Matthew 24:37; Luke 17:26; I Peter 3:20; II Peter 2:5; 3:5-6

Augustine said, “The New Testament is in the Old concealed, the Old Testament is in the New revealed.”

In the Book of Genesis we have many “firsts” in Scripture:

creation childhood agriculture man sin city life woman murder races sabbath sacrifice language marriage grace a chosen people home trade

Genesis Anticipates False Philosophy

 Atheism – created by God  Pantheism – God is transcendent  Polytheism – one God  Materialism – matter had a beginning  Humanism – God, not man, is ultimate  Evolutionism – God created  Uniformism – God intervenes

Major Doctrines in Genesis

Election Incarnation Salvation Rapture Justification by Faith Death and Resurrection Believer’s Security Priesthood Separation Antichrist Chastisement Palestinian Covenant

4 The Study of Genesis The following is from The Bible Believer’s Commentary on The Book of Genesis, by Dr. Peter Ruckman, p.viii:

DATA: The book was written by Moses and is commonly called “The First Book of Moses.” It has 50 chapters, 1,534 verses and 38,267 words. It is found first in the list of Books in the Hebrew canon and in the English canon. The word “Genesis” is kin to “generations,” “genes,” or “generate,” and marks the book as “the Book of Begin- nings.” It records the beginning of the Heavens, the , Man, Sin Redemption, the Races, and the Covenants. Its outstanding characters are Adam and , Noah and Enoch, Cain and Abel, Lot and Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael, Esau and Jacob, Joseph and Judah. The types of Jesus Christ in the Book are Adam, Abel, the Lamb, Isaac, the Ark, Judah, Shiloh, and Joseph. The types of Anti-Christ are Cain, Ham, Nimrod, Laban, Ishmael, Esau, and Pharaoh (the office, not the man who befriended Joseph). Every major doctrine in both Testaments is found in the first 12 chapters, and the Book is a supplement to the Book of Revelation, making the Bible an infinite circle, with neither beginning nor ending, in regard to its inexhaustible riches.

Genesis vs. Revelation

Event Genesis Revelation

Earth created 1:1 Earth passes 21:1 Sun to govern Day 1:16 No sun 21:23 Darkness called Night 1:5 No night 22:5 Waters called Seas 1:10 No more seas 21:1 A River for Earth 2:10-14 A river for New Earth 22:1-2 Man in God’s Image 1:26 The image of 13 Entrance of sin 3:6 End of sin 21:27 Curse pronounced 3:14-17 No more curse 22:3 Death entered 3:19 No more death 21:4 Out of Eden 3:24 Restored Eden 22 Tree of Life guarded 3:24 Right to Tree of Life 22:14 Sorrow and Suffering 3:17 No more sorrow 22:4 A Bride for Abraham’s son 24 A Bride for Abraham’s seed 21

Preliminary Thoughts The Book of Genesis 5 Marriage for Adam 2 Marriage for the 2nd Adam 19 Satan, God of this World 3 Satan banished 20

6 The Study of Genesis Introduction

When was the “beginning”? How old is the Universe? How old is the Earth? How old is man? Where do we look for answers? Science or Scripture? Creation or Evolution? Chance or Design? Big Bang or God spoke? or primates evolving? Millions of years or six days? Do we look at Scripture through the lens of Science or vice-versa? The Debate rages on the question of origins.

Within Christianity there had not been a widespread debate on the of creation until the 16th Century. Nor was there much of a debate about the length of the six days of creation until the 19th Century. The reason – a simple straight-forward reading and interpretation of Genesis Chapters 1 & 2 gave us the simple facts and answers to our questions. But with the rise of modern science and evolutionary theory, the Biblical account of Creation came under continual attack which caused many to seek to reconcile Scripture with scientific discovery.

Although I believe that the Book of Genesis was not written primarily to be a science book, I do believe that it is scientifically accurate when it is read and interpreted properly. Here is the ‘rub’ – “interpreted properly.” Who decides the author’s intended meaning and interpreta- tion? This question leads to answers that go in several different directions. Knowing that I am fallible, I must be careful not to jump to conclusions that would disqualify others’ opinions and even their professed conversion to Jesus Christ. What I am saying is that I believe there is room for civil disagreement and discussion, and that is not to say that I do not have my own opinions.

The Book of Genesis is far more concerned about the God of creation than the creation itself. Two chapters give us essentially all of the information we need to understand the First Cause, i.e., God created. Hebrews 11:3, “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”

In Genesis Chapters 1 & 2 we learn that God is eternal, transcendent, creative, orderly, good, personal, powerful, gracious, alive, the author of life, and independent from the rest of the creation.

Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the sheweth his handywork.

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Receiving Genesis Chapters 1 & 2 as fact lays the foundation for what one believes about all of life, a philosophy of life, or a world view. Of course there are several other theories, philosophies or world-views:

 Deism teaches that God creates but is not present in the workings of His creation.

Introduction The Book of Genesis 7  Pantheism teaches that God is a part of (His) creation. “Pan” = god (Greek)

 Panentheism or Monism teaches that all is in God and all is one.

 Process or Open Theism teaches that God is a process, growing in knowledge with His creation.

 Naturalism teaches that matter comes forth from natural processes, without the aid of any supernatural entity. Matter and life are created by chance. Matter is either eternally existent or it comes into effect out of nothing (ex nihilo).

Pantheism and Panentheism both have a god that is part of the creation, making it impossible for Him to be the creator.

Naturalism, materialism and atheism leave us with an infinite regress of cause and effect, or the belief that everything came from nothing with no cause or purpose!

Evolutionary theory does not go back to the origin of the Universe. It focuses on life which came from matter already existent with no explanation concerning the origin of the matter.

Evolutionists believe that life came forth from lifeless matter. This has not been proven and cannot be reproduced with intelligence in the laboratory. Bible believers believe that God created the matter and imparted life to the lifeless matter.

Atheists love to ask, “Where did God come from?” A better question is, “Where did anything come from?” If matter is eternal (and it is not), why couldn’t God be eternal? If life can be spontaneously generated according to the naturalist’s hopes, why couldn’t God impart life to lifeless matter? God is the answer to the questions of which atheists have none. Maybe we are the result of alien seed? Where did they come from? What is the first cause? This question results in an infinite regression.

The Biblical creation story tells us that an eternal, necessary first cause (God), created the Universe and all that is in it. The Law of Causality demands that all effects (matter) need a cause, and that these changes take place in the current space dimension in which we live. God is eternal and lives in eternity (not time) and is not a part of His creation as the necessary first cause.

Psalm 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.

Evolution

Evolution seeks to explain life apart from God. As Christians I believe that we are free to accept the fact of micro-evolution, i.e., adaptation within a specific species. It is the theory of macro-evolution that is suspect, that one species could evolve into another and most specifi- cally that primates evolved into humans.

8 The Study of Genesis Macro evolution postulates that:

 The world sprang into existence from nothing and for no reason, or that matter is eternal and has no origin but cannot explain why or how.

 Impersonal matter created personal people from mud to Ph.D.

 Species evolved over long periods of time from one kind of plant to another, from one kind of animal to another. One of the great problems this theory faces is the fact of missing transitional forms.

 Given enough time, life will spring forth from death, lifeless matter.

 “abiogenesis” definition – the original evolution of life or living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances.

Introduction The Book of Genesis 9

10 The Study of Genesis Outline

The following is an Outline for Genesis Chapters 1-11 from the book entitled, “The Outline Bible,” by Harold Willmington, 1999, Tyndale House Publishers, pp.3-7:

THE CREATION OF ALL THINGS – GENESIS 1-2

I. God’s Working Schedule (1:1-2:19) A. First Day: Creation of Light (1:3-5) B. Second Day: Creation of Space and Water (1:6-8) C. Third Day: Creation of Plant Life (1:9-13) D. Fourth Day: Creation of Sun, Moon, and Stars (1:14-19) E. Fifth Day: Creation of Fish and Fowl (1:20-23) F. Sixth Day: Creation of Land Animals and People (1:24-31; 2:7-20) G. Seven day: God rests (2:1-6)

II. God’s Wedding Schedule (2:20-25) A. The Making of Eve B. The Marriage of Eve

THE CORRUPTION OF ALL THINGS – GENESIS 3-5

I. The Transgression of Adam A. Adam’s Disobedience (3:1-6) B. Adam’s Deceit (3:7-8) C. Adam’s Despair (3:9-11) D. Adam’s Defense (3:12-19) E. Adam’s Discipline (3:14-19) F. Adam’s Deliverance (3:15, 20-21) G. Adam’s Dismissal (3:22-24)

II. The Testimony of Abel A. Abel, the Godly Son (4:1-2, 4) B. Cain, the Godless Son (4:3-26) C. Seth, the Granted Son (4:25-26)

III. The Translation of Enoch (5:1-32) A. The First Patriarchs Living before the Flood (5:1-17) B. The Favored Patriarch Living before the Flood (5:18-24) C. The Final Patriarch Living before the Flood (5:25-32)

THE CONDEMNATION OF ALL THINGS – GENESIS 6-10

I. The Preparation for the Flood (6:1-22) A. God’s Grief (6:1-7) B. God’s Grace (6:8-10) C. God’s Guidance (6:11-22)

Outline The Book of Genesis 11 II. The Protection during the Flood (7:1-24) A. The Occupants Inside the Ark (7:1-9; 13-16) B. The Ordeal Outside the Ark (7:10-12, 17-24)

III. The Particulars Following the Flood (8:1-10:32) A. Noah’s Security (8:1-5) B. Noah’s Search (8:6-12) C. Noah’s Surveillance (8:13-14) D. Noah’s Summons (8:15-19) E. Noah’s Sacrifice (8:20-22) F. Noah’s Sign from God (9:1-17) G. Noah’s Shame (9:18-29) H. Noah’s Sons (10:1-32)

THE CONFUSION OF ALL THINGS (11:1-32)

I. The Sin of Babel (11:1-4)

II. The Sentence (11:5-9)

III. The Settlement (11:10-32)

12 The Study of Genesis Christian Views of Creation

Introduction

In this section, we will look at the following views of creation held by Christians:

1. Historic (Promised Land View) 2. Creationism 3. Gap Theory 4. Literary Framework (Framework Hypothesis) 5. Day-Age Theory 6. 7.

1. Historic Creationism

In this view, Genesis 1:1 records the making of all of creation by God out of nothing (ex nihilo) through the merism* of “heavens and earth” which means the sky above and land below, or the totality of creation.

*a figure of speech by which a single thing is referred to by a conventional phrase that enumerates several of its parts, or which lists several synonyms for the same thing.

Since the word used for “beginning” in Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew means an indefinite period of time, it is likely that all of creation was completed over an extended period of time (days to billions of years). Then Genesis 1:2 begins the description of God preparing the uninhabitable land for the creation of mankind. The preparation of this uncultivated land is said to have taken place in six literal 24-hour days. This view leaves open the possibility for both an old earth and six literal days of creation.

This view ties the first two chapters closely to the Garden of Eden. Eden is believed to be in the “promised land.” This is the land that is given to Abraham in Genesis 15:18. Historic Creationism attempts to interpret the creation in light of the Pentateuch and God’s dealings with the nation of Israel.

2. Creationism

In this view, God created the entire Universe, including Adam and Eve, in six literal 24-hour days. This view is almost always accompanied with a belief in a young earth (YEC) as it seeks to be faithful to the Biblical text while not giving much credence to the scientific claims of an old earth.

This view came under heavy attack during the 18th and 19th centuries. It was Darwin’s Origin of Species in 1859 that turned the negative spotlight on the backward thinking of the Bible believing-orthodox-Christians.

Literal creationists believe that evolution cannot adequately account for the history, diversity, and the complexity of life on Earth.

Christian Views of Creation The Study of Genesis 13 3. Gap Theory, , Ruin-Restoration or Restoration Creationism

Gap creationism is a form of old earth creationism that posits that the six-day creation, as described in the Book of Genesis, involved six literal 24-hour days, but that there is a gap of time between two distinct creations in the first and the second verses of Genesis, explaining many scientific observations, including the age of the Earth. It differs from Day-Age Creationism, which posits that the ‘days’ of creation were much longer periods (of thousands or millions of years), and from young Earth creationism, which although it agrees concerning the six literal 24-hour days of creation, does not posit any gap of time.

Wikipedia writes the following about the Gap Theory:

“Gap creationism was popularized by , a professor at the University of Edinburgh, founder of the Free Church of Scotland, and author of one of the Bridgewater Treatises, who attributed it to 17th century Dutch Arminian theologian Simon Episcopius. It gained widespread attention when a “second creative act” was discussed prominently in the reference notes for Genesis in the influential 1917

In 1954, a few years before the re-emergence of Young Earth Flood eclipsed Gap creationism, influential evangelical theologian Bernard Ramm wrote in The Christian View of Science and Scripture:

“The gap theory has become the standard interpretation throughout hyper-orthodoxy, appearing in an endless stream of books, booklets, Bible studies, and periodical articles. In fact, it has become so sacrosanct with some that to question it is equivalent to tampering with Sacred Scripture or to manifest modernistic leanings.”

4. Literary Framework View or Framework Hypothesis

In this view, Genesis 1 & 2 is intended to be read as a figurative framework explaining creation in a topical and not sequential order. In this view, the six days of creation listed in Genesis 1 are also to be interpreted metaphorically not as literal 24-hour days.

Forming Filling

Day 1 – light & darkness separated Day 4 – sun, moon, stars Day 2 – sky & waters separated Day 5 – fish & birds Day 3 – dry land & waters separated Day 6 – animals & man Plants & trees

Exodus 20:11 clearly states that the six days are literal, saying, “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”

14 The Study of Genesis The Framework View is held by many theistic evolutionists and some progressive creationists. Some argue that the view has precedent in Augustine. The Framework View has been successful because it supposedly resolves the conflict between the literal view of the creation narrative and the findings of modern science. It presents a “scholarly” alternative to the literalistic interpretations of the Genesis account. Proponents emphasize the “Book of Nature” and hold it in equality to the “Book of Words,” the Bible.

5. Day-Age View

In this view, God created the Universe, including Adam and Eve, in six sequential time periods that are not literally made up of 24 hours. This is a type of Old Earth Creation- ism. By making the “days” into ages, proponents reconcile the six days with science’s belief in an Earth that exceeds four billion years old. The theory is built on the under- standing of the Hebrew word “” which can be used to refer to a time period as well as a literal 24-hour day.

The Old-Earth figurative view can be traced back to Augustine (5th Century), who believed that the days in Genesis could not be literal days (DeGenesi ad Litteram).

William Jennings Bryan of the Famous Scopes Trial was a Day-Ager, as was W. B. Riley, and astronomer Hugh Ross of Day-Age Creationism ministry known as Reasons to Believe.

6. Theistic Evolution

In this view, God essentially began creation and then pulled back from working directly in creation instead to work through the process of evolution. The only exception would be God involving Himself again directly in the making of human life. For the most part, this view accepts the hypothesis of evolution but seeks to insert God as the Creator of matter and overseer of the evolutionary process. This view also believes that species evolved over long periods of time, which requires an old Earth.

The biblical problems with theistic evolution are many. Genesis 1 says that creation and its species came into existence because “God said,” not because of any process of evolution. Genesis also gives us the distinct impression that what God said brought immediate response, “it was so.”

Evolution teaches that one species evolved into another. Genesis says that species had offspring after its own “kind” (Genesis 1:21, 24, 25). The rest of Scripture shows continual involvement by God (Psalm 104:14, 21, 25-30; Matthew 6:26, 30).

7. Progressive Creationism

In this view, it is believed that God created new forms of life gradually over a period of hundreds of millions of years. Creation occurred in rapid bursts. This is a form of Old Earth Creationism. Species did not appear by the steady transformation of its ancestors; but they appeared all at once, fully formed. This view rejects macro-evolution and the concept of “universal descent.”

Christian Views of Creation The Study of Genesis 15 In contrast to Young Earth Creationism, Progressive Creationism accepts the geologi- cal column of the progressive appearance of plants and animals through time. Day-Age creationist Hugh Ross also accepts the idea of Progressive Creationism but seeks to disprove Darwinian evolution. Bernard Ramm says, “Creation was revealed (pictori- ally) in six days, not performed in six days.”

Wikipedia refers to Hugh Ross and Robert Newman in its definition of Progressive Creationism:

“Ross contends that at the end of each Genesis “day,” with the exception of the seventh “day,” the phrase, “…and there was evening and there was morning,” is used to put a terminus to each event. The omission of that phrase on the Seventh Day is in harmony with the literal translation of Hebrews 4’s continuing Seventh Day. From a theological perspective, Robert Newman addresses a problem with this particular model of lengthy Genesis days, in that it puts physical plant and animal death before the , which according to most Young Earth Creationism is considered unscriptural. Old Earth Creationists interpret death due to the fall of man as spiritual death specifically related to the context of man himself. Another problem with Progressive Creationism is due to the complicated nature of a model that arises from an attempt not to favor science over Scripture and vice versa, potentially angering both schools of thought with this compromise.

Omphalos Hypothesis

Wikipedia defines this hypothesis about the age of the Earth as follows:

“The Omphalos (Greek word for “navel”) hypothesis is the argument that God created the world recently (in the last ten thousand years, in keeping with ), but complete with signs of great age. It was named after the title of a book printed in 1857 entitled Omphalos by , in which Gosse argued that in order for the world to be “functional” God must have created the Earth with mountains and canyons, trees with growth rings, Adam and Eve with hair, fingernails, and navels, and that therefore no evidence that we can see of the presumed age of the Earth and Universe can be taken as reliable. The idea saw some revival in the 20th century by some creationists who extended the argument to light that appears to originate in far-off stars and (although other creationists reject this explanation). Many creationists believe that Adam and Eve had no navels, and that the trees in the Garden of Eden had no growth rings.”

Support:

Chateaubriand wrote in his 1802 book, Génie du christianisme (Part I Book IV Chapter V): “God might have created, and doubtless did create, the world with all the marks of antiquity and completeness which it now exhibits.” Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb supports a similar position, arguing further that the evidence for an old universe is strong: “The bones, artifacts, partially decayed radium, potassium-argon, uranium, the red-shifted light from space, etc.– all of it points to a greater age which nevertheless is not true.”

16 The Study of Genesis Creationists still argue the same way. For instance, John D. Morris, president of the Institute for Creation Research talks about the “appearance of age”:

“When Adam was created, he no doubt looked like a mature adult, fully able to walk, talk, care for the garden, etc. When God created fruit trees, they were already bearing fruit. In each case, what He created was functionally complete right from the start—able to fulfill the purpose for which it was created. Stars, created on Day Four, had to be seen to perform their purpose of usefulness in telling time; therefore, their light had to be visible on Earth right from the start.”

Criticisms:

When did false history begin? Though Gosse's original specifies a popular creation story, others have proposed that the idea does not preclude creation as recently as five minutes ago, including memories of times before this created in situ – “in its original place.” This idea is sometimes called “Last Thursdayism” by its opponents, as in “the world might as well have been created last Thursday.” The concept is both unverifiable and unfalsifiable through any conceivable scientific method—in other words it is impossible even in principle to subject it to any form of test by reference to any empirical data because the empirical data themselves are considered to have been arbitrarily created to look the way they do at every observable level of detail.

A deceptive creator? From a religious viewpoint, it can be interpreted as God having ‘created a fake,’ such as illusions of light in space of stellar explosions (supernovae) that never really happened, or volcanic mountains that were never really volcanoes in the first place and that never actually experienced erosion. Some theologians feel it is not consistent with most benevolent theistic that God would create appearances that are so completely deceiving to every level of detail.

Intelligent Design (ID)

Intelligent Design seeks to primarily deal with matters of science. Its findings point to the possibility of a “Designer,” who has purposely arranged creation. ID is compatible with Christianity in many ways. Because ID points to the possibility of a Designer, naturalists in the secular realm cry, “Religion!” And we know that religion and science are by necessity (their definition) mutually exclusive. Many see ID as a bridge between Theology and Science.

ID studies the signs of intelligence. ID postulates that the only reasonable explanation for biological origins and development is to recognize that life, as we know it, was designed in a purposeful manner by an external designer. This contradicts the time and chance of Darwinism.

Life begets life; order speaks of an Orderer; law, a Lawgiver, and design, a Designer.

Christian Views of Creation The Study of Genesis 17 Are the Six Days of Creation Literal or Metaphorical?

If one believes in a literal six day/24-hour per day creation, one may align with:

 Historic Creationism  Creationism (young Earth)  Gap Theory

If one does not believe in a literal six day/24-hour per day creation, one may align with:  Framework View  Day-Age View  Theistic Evolution  Progressive Creationism

It is my opinion that if we set science aside for a moment and simply read the Scriptures, it is apparent that the six days of creation are literal 24-hour days:  Each day is numbered so that there is a succession of days. Each day has an evening and a morning.  In Exodus 20:8-11 God tells us to remember the Sabbath day. This is a literal day.  There is no apparent reason, in the text, to believe otherwise.

When Science and Scripture Collide

The term “Sola Scriptura” means that the Scripture is our final authority. Whenever philo- sophy, science, or the opinions of man contradict the clear teaching of the Word of God, the Bible is always to be chosen. However, that is not to say that the Bible is the only source of information and knowledge and should be read exclusively.

As Christian people we are free to explore and study all types of academic disciplines. Again, when findings clearly contradict the Scriptures, the Scriptures are our final authority. At the same time, I must issue this disclaimer. It is imperative that the Scriptures be interpreted properly. What the Scriptures say and what they mean are often hotly contested. Thus it is wise to stay humble and cool to invite discussion on what may be different perspectives that cast a different light.

Scientists place the age of the Earth at somewhere near 4.5 billion years old. Some refute this finding on the basis of a universal flood that they claim has altered the Earth’s geology so greatly that the Earth merely appears old. Scientists have used radio metric dating to establish the age of the Earth. Many regard this system as flawed and inaccurate.

The apparent old age causes many Christians concern when considering the genealogies of Genesis. If reasonably accurate, the Earth would be between 6,000 and 10,000 years old. The year 2013 is actually the year 5,773 on the Jewish calendar. Archbishop Ussher dates creation at 4004 BC. That would make the Earth roughly 6,000 years old. There are many theories that add hundreds of thousands of years and even more to the creation calendar. Almost all of these have points of interest and questions that need to be answered.

18 The Study of Genesis How old is the Earth? The fact is that a straightforward reading of Genesis 1 & 2, along with Exodus 20:8-11 leaves us with the distinct impression that these “days” are six 24-hour days in the literal sense. Until the 18th Century there was little question about this.

In the end, the age of the Earth is not explicitly stated in the Bible and may be young or old. Although I have strong opinions I must admit that I do not have conclusive proof for my position.

The question may be asked, “Why does the Earth appear to be old?”  Scientists may be in error.  The Earth was created “mature” having the appearance of age.  The universal flood of Genesis 6-9 radically altered the topography and geology.  The days in Genesis are really extended and lengthy periods of time.  The Earth may in fact be billions of years old.

Ex Nihilo

When one says the Earth was created Ex Nihilo (Latin for “out of nothing”), this statement is important because it negates the possibility of evolution, an eternal Universe, and the possibility that the Universe was made out of some form of pre-existent matter.

Psalm 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth….For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

Psalm 148:5 Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.

II Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Christian Views of Creation The Study of Genesis 19

20 The Study of Genesis

The Origins Debate

When it comes to “Mapping the Origins Debate,” there are several ways of categorizing the various viewpoints. My intention is not to confuse, but here are some other models.

- The first is a summary of the “Blue Letter Bible” taken from the website, http://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/creation.cfm - The second is a chart from Mapping the Origins Debate by Gerald Rau, IV Press, p.41:

The Origins Debate The Study of Genesis 21 Theistic Evolution (TE)

TE embraces science at the expense of Scripture in the very worst way. Interpreters mythologize the Genesis account of creation. While maintaining that God was in control of the creative processes, the view strips Scripture of its accuracy by positing that Adam was not created a man, but that he came about through thousands of years of evolutionary process aided and directed by Divine touch. TE seriously questions traditional and conservative methods of Scriptural interpretation.

Note below my response to a Christian university professor who asked me to evaluate his position on Theistic Evolution:

Here are some of my thoughts on the subject of theistic evolution or progressive creationism.

I agree that it really does not matter how long it took to create the heavens and the earth. I do not draw a sharp line in determining my friendships on the basis of Old Earth, Young Earth, Creationism or Theistic Evolution. Frankly, I believe that God could have created any way He wanted to. This is not the issue with me. The real issue to me is the integrity of Scripture. The idea that the first 11 chapters of Genesis should not be interpreted literally on the basis of “literary genre” is interesting. I have read and do understand the concept of different literary genres even within the scope of Scripture. My question is why do we choose these eleven chapters to be allegorical, what parts are and are not allegorical, and what are the consequences to the interpret- tations of other passages that mention people and places mentioned in these eleven chapters?

We could start with Genesis 1:1. Is that verse to be interpreted literally or figuratively?

Here are some unintended consequences of committing Genesis 1-11 to a non-literal, but symbolic, allegorical interpretation.

There are 11 main characters and three major cities that are mentioned in Genesis Chapters 1-11. The question is are these real people or symbolic, are they real places?

If they are not real but merely allegorical or symbolic, how are we to interpret the use of their names in other books of the Bible?

Adam is mentioned in 8 other books of Scripture, Eve – 2; Cain – 4; Abel – 3; Seth – 1; Enoch – 3; Noah – 6; Shem – 1; Ham – 2; Japheth – 1; Nimrod – 2

There are three major geographical areas: Eden – mentioned 13x in five other books Babel – only mentioned in Genesis 10 Nineveh – mentioned 8 x in six other books

The question is, Are these real people or figurative, real places or symbolic? If they are symbolic, when we read the 65+ passages that mention these people and places in other books, what are we to think?

22 The Study of Genesis Some of the consequences:

When one of these people is mentioned in a genealogy, does the mention of their name de-legitimize the rest of the genealogy? Why mix symbolic and fictitious characters in the same passage?

In Ezekiel 14:14, 20, Noah, Daniel and Job are mentioned together. Which ones are real people?

Abraham’s genealogy begins in Genesis 11. Was Abraham a real person?

Adam is mentioned in Christ’s genealogy in Luke 3:38. Real or symbolic?

Luke, Paul, and Jude all mention Adam in the New Testament. None of them suggest that Adam was a symbolic or allegorical representation of mankind. In fact, there are some major New Testament doctrines built upon the idea that Adam was a real person:

Romans 5:14 - what does this verse mean if Adam is not real, how did sin come into the world? I Corinthians 15:22, 45? I Timothy 2:13-14?

Eve – see II Corinthians 11:3 Cain – Hebrews 11:4; I John 3:12 Abel – Matthew 23:35; Luke 11:51 Noah – Hebrews 11:7; I Peter 3:20, 21; II Peter 2:5

Questions:

Is Genesis 1:1 literal? Is Genesis 2:7 literal?

What is the purpose of having symbolic names in a genealogy (Genesis 5:9-20)?

By the way, Moses is supposed to have written this – what about Genesis 12 – Deuteronomy? Symbolic or history?

Lot is mentioned in Genesis 11:31, real or symbolic? How about Genesis 19, then? The first promise of Messiah is found in Genesis 3:15. What part, if any, did Satan have in the fall? Real or symbolic?

Was there a “tree of the knowledge of good and evil?”

George, I think that the real issue is not what God could or could not do, or even how creation was accomplished. The issue is the integrity of Scripture.

There is not a single statement or suggestion anywhere in Scripture that says that we are not to take the creation story as literally as we can.

I think that the “theistic evolution” position is an attempt to accommodate “modern science.” Creation scientists take a lot of flak from the Academie.

Again, God could create everything in an instant, seven days, or seven trillion years. Compromising the first 11 chapters of Genesis has significant negative impact on 65 other passages of Scripture, Old and New Testament.

The Origins Debate The Study of Genesis 23 The Biblical creation account should not be regarded as myth or allegory, but as a literal historical report:

In the 10 Commandments God bases a week (6 work, 1 rest) on the creation account (Exodus 20:8-11). In the New Testament Jesus referred to the fact of creation (Matthew 19:4-5). Nowhere in Scripture are there any indications that the creation account should be understood in any other way than a factual report. Taking an allegorical approach to the reading of Scripture, especially in an arbitrary way, undermines the basic way we normally read the Bible. Romans 5:12-18 and the Biblical explanation of the appearance of “death” is severely undermined.

Theistic evolution attempts to integrate the two, however, this reduces or waters down the message of Scripture to what some might see as relative insignificance.

“The biggest problem of non-literal interpretations of Genesis is that there would then have been billions of years of death, struggle and suffering before man’s fall. But Scripture teaches that human death is the result of Adam’s fall (Romans 5:12-19), and I Corinthians 15:21,22 states: “For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” – , PhD

Gap Theory (GT)

What may have been an attempt to reconcile science and Scripture, the GAP theorists postulated that the Universe was already in existence for an indeterminate amount of time before the creation week of Genesis 1:3-26 began. The GAP supposedly neatly fits between verses one and two of Genesis Chapter 1. This allows for both an old Earth interpretation and maintains the fact that man is a recent result of God’s creative acts.

This may also be known as Restoration Theory. Proponents believe that the Universe was created full form and populated only to be destroyed in a war between God and Satan. This war left the Earth without form and void. This seems to explain fossilized bones that appear to be millions of years old.

Hence, the creation week is really a re-creation or restoration of a world that once was. One of the greatest problems with this theory is Romans 5:12, which claims that death is the result of Adam’s sin, “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” If so, why death before Adam? Or what is this “death”?

On the following page is a chart depicting the Gap Theory Creation by Clarence Larkin from his book entitled Dispensational Truth:

24 The Study of Genesis

Day Age Theory (DAT)

This theory is very popular. It takes aim at reconciling an old Earth with a six “day” creation. The theory gains traction by the meaning and interpretation of the Hebrew word “yom” (English “day”) which can mean a 24-hour period of time or an era/age, lasting a great length of time. The latter is chosen.

Among proponents of the DAT, Progressive Creationism is very popular. In PC God has created the major types of plants and animals at the beginning of the sixth day (era). God watches and waits as they evolve naturally until the end of this age and God creates man out of the dust of the earth. Plants and animals evolve, man does not.

Many science-minded Christians are attracted to this model but it is not determined by a grammatical-historical understanding of Scripture. There is no hermeneutical reason to accept this model.

The Origins Debate The Study of Genesis 25 Apparent Age Theory (AAT) (Omphalos Hypothesis)

Apparent Agers see a contradiction between science and Scripture and feel that this may be the way to reconciliation. The theory: God created the Universe to look old. The argument is that Adam was created an adult man with apparent age. So was all the Universe.

One arrives at this conclusion by speculation not Scriptural evidence. How old was Adam? Thirteen? Thirty? Eight-five? He died when he was over 900 years old. Did he just look 900? Kidding, of course.

Those who oppose this view would accuse God of being deceptive, maybe even a liar. Since there are many stars in our Universe that are millions of light years away, when did the light begin to proceed from the star to reach Earth? Did God create the light already here?

Punctuated 24-Hour Theory (PHT)

The PHT tries “to have its cake and eat it too.” How? - By squeezing millions of years (to satisfy the geologists) between the literal 24-hour days of creation. Although the six days are literal 24-hour days, the sequential millions of years are tucked between each day!

Day One  millions  Day Two  millions  Day Three  etc. 24 hours of years 24 hours of years 24 hours

Creationism (Scientific Creationism) (SC)

Scientific Creationists support this hypothesis heavily leaning on Flood Geology. SC says that science demonstrates not that the Earth is ancient, millions/billions of years old, but that it is a comparatively young creation (6,000 – 20,000 years).

SC purports the Earth to be young even though scientists may report it to be old. Flood geology and errors in dating methods account for the apparent age of the Earth, scientifically. SC says that the scientific community of the day is generally in error.

24 Hour Creation (24HC)

The most traditional of interpretations, 24HC says that God created the whole Universe in the space of six solar days. Most will argue against an eternal seventh day of rest.

A straightforward reading of the text consistently supports 24HC. Verse one is seen as a summary of the creation week, rather than a chronological event occurring prior to the creation week.

One of the strongest arguments for this interpretation comes from “silence.” How so? While a figurative interpretation is possible, there is no textual reason to arrive at such a conclusion. The Day-Age-Yom argument appears to be based upon cosmological assumptions.

The 24HC interpretation is historical, traditional, and simple. It would seem that to those who disagree, they bear the burden of proof to disprove 24HC.

26 The Study of Genesis Questions, Thoughts on 24HC:

 Is Genesis 1:1 a summarization or event?  The eternality of the Sabbath, if true, would offer evidence for a figurative understanding.  The recapitulation of Days One and Four may confuse.  Genesis 2 may present problems.

Framework Hypothesis (FH)

FH sees the creation week as a topical guide unconcerned with real chronology. FH divides the works of creation into two triads, which is a literary device to demonstrate theological truths of covenant promises and the rule of the Sabbath.

Although the creative events refer to actual historical events, the creation week is presented in normal, solar days that function as a literary structure, presenting those events in a non- sequential, topical order.

FH sees the six creative days dividing into two parallel sets of three (two triads). The first triad – Days one, two, and three, deals with the creation kingdoms. The second, Days four through six, deals with the creature kings or rulers.

This explanation can get somewhat complicated and argues strongly against literal six 24- hour days. The fact that the explanation gets so complicated argues against its general acceptance.

The following is a chart for Framework Hypothesis:

The Origins Debate The Study of Genesis 27 Historical Creationism (HC)

The argument for this position goes like this:

Due to unfortunate choices by the translators of the KJV, an historical interpretation of the creation account has been overlooked with the Universe already created in Genesis 1:1 (this is akin to the Gap Theory). The six creative days refer not to the establishment of the Universe, but rather God’s preparation of Eden for Israel.

Because “heavens” and “earth” should be translated as “sky” and “land,” and “without form and void” should be “uninhabitable wasteland,” the creation account presents God’s preparation of the Promised Land.

HC offers a “gap-like” solution to the age of the Earth. The HC position maintains that the 24-hour interpretation only became so acceptable because of the KJV translators faulty cosmogony (theory of the origin of the Universe) and their desire to promote their own translation.

Conclusion

 One’s views on Creation are not essential to salvation other than the fact that one must believe in God and that God created.

 We should grant our brothers and sisters in Christ the responsibility of coming to their own decisions. There is room for civil discussion.

 We must understand general revelation through the filter of written revelation, the Word of God.

 We need to understand that language does allow “wiggle room” for meaning and interpretation.

 II Timothy 3:16, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

 We must be more concerned about what God has spoken than what science has declared.

 When we attempt to study creation, time lines, ages, young or old, literal days or not, remember, scientists and theologians are trying to understand the science of a miracle. What is the science of the Resurrection? Walking on water? Changing water to wine?

28 The Study of Genesis

Worldviews (Class taught by Scott Grace)

Brief Survey of Primary Worldviews

Worldview Defined: James Sire, worldview expert defines a worldview as, “a commit- ment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true or entirely false) that we hold (consciously or subconsciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basic constitution of reality, and that provides the foundation on which we live and move and have our being.”1

Fundamentally a commitment: Involves the mind, but it is a spiritual orientation more than it is a matter of mind alone. It is a matter of the heart (wisdom, emotion, desire and will, spirituality and intellect), the central defining element of the human person.

Sire notes there are seven basic worldview questions, plus one more, that when answered reveal (assuming a certain level of coherence) a person’s worldview. They are:

1. What is prime reality--the really real? This question is the primary foundation, sets boundaries for how the last seven questions are answered. 2. What is the nature of external reality, the world around us? 3. What is a human being? 4. What happens to a person at death? 5. Why is it possible to know anything at all? 6. How do we know what is right or wrong? 7. What is the meaning of human history? 8. What personal, life-orienting core commitments are consistent with this worldview?

Biblical admonition to understanding worldviews:

Mark 12:29-30 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the command- ments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

2 Corinthians 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

Colossians 2:8-9 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

1 James Sire, The Universe Next Door: A Basic Worldview Catalog, 5th ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2009).

Proofs for God The Study of Genesis 29