Answers Research Journal 12 (2019) 53–71. www.answersingenesis.org/arj/v12/hugh_ross_progressive_day_creationism.pdf Critical Analysis of Hugh Ross’ Progressive Day-Age Creationism Through the Framework of Young-Earth Creationism David McGee, Instructor, Liberty University, Rawlings School of Divinity Online Abstract Since the early 1800s, the evangelical community has sought to harmonize the scientific interpretations of long periods of time and the early chapters of Genesis to determine the appropriate age of the universe. There are primarily two groups—those who believe the universe is billions of years old and those who believe the universe is thousands of years old. One view within the former group is called Progressive Day-Age Creationism. This view is taught by Hugh Ross and is quite popular within the evangelical community. This article analyzes primarily the writings of Ross and the implications that his view may have towards understanding the early chapters of Genesis, the trustworthiness of the Bible, and the Gospel. Keywords: progressive day-age creationism, six-day creationism, day, hermeneutics, Genesis Introduction before the 1860s (Sexton 2018, 5). This view was When it comes to the topic of origins, the challenged by Hutton, Lyell, and Darwin to suggest evangelical community agrees that God is the creator western society should discard the Genesis story of the universe. Where this agreement usually ends, and replace it with their scientific view that sought however, is on the question how and when did God to remove the necessity of a creator. Consequently, create. Did God begin the creation process billions of the evangelical community, primarily because of years ago or thousands of years ago? Did He create Darwin’s popularization of the philosophical theory ex nihilo (out of nothing), through the evolutionary of evolution, has sought to harmonize the scientific process of natural selection, or some combination interpretations of long periods of time with the early thereof? Whereas some evangelicals are convinced of chapters of Genesis to determine the appropriate an older earth (billions of years old) and debate the age of the universe. means by which God created, others maintain that Because of the influence of Darwin’s book, two the earth is younger (thousands of years old) and groups have emerged from this topic of reconciling affirm a literal meaning of Genesis 1. Genesis with the prevailing scientific hypotheses and Ernst Mayr, an evolutionary biologist, opined that interpretations. One group are old-earth proponents, Christianity’s biblical account of creation as told in who believe the universe and earth are billions the book of Genesis, chapters 1 and 2 “was virtually of years old, and the other group are young-earth unanimously accepted not only by laypeople but proponents, who believe the universe and earth are also by scientists and philosophers. This changed thousands of years old. There are a few proposals overnight, so to speak, in 1859 with the publication within the old-earth group. Proposal #1 is the Gap of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species” Theory, which believes the universe was created as (Mayr 2001, 12). However, prior to Darwin, James recorded Genesis 1:1, then there was a long period Hutton published Theory of the Earth in 1795 and of time (a gap) of billions of years. Subsequently, in Charles Lyell published the volumes Principles of Genesis 1:2, God recreated the billion-year-old earth Geology in the 1830s. They sought to dethrone the in six 24-hour periods of time. Proposal #2 is Theistic catastrophism of Noah’s Flood and replace it with Evolution, which affirms that the earth is billions of uniformitarianism, the belief that the present is years old but asserts that God used the mechanism the key to the past. Darwin’s book popularized their that Darwin discovered, natural selection, to theories, arguing that the God of the Bible was evolve the flora, fauna, and human beings that are not necessary to explain the origin of the universe. present on the earth. Proposal #3 is The Framework And the creation event in Genesis 1, which would Hypothesis, which seeks to reclassify Genesis 1 as indicate the universe is thousands of years old, was poetic literature rather than historical narrative not the correct interpretation. The interpretation of literature, thus allowing the possibility of billions of Genesis 1 that creation is a recent event can trace years (or whatever the prevailing scientific view of its roots to the church fathers (Mook 2012, 29–32), the day) to be inserted into Genesis 1 without doing and was the prevailing view of Hebrew scholars hermeneutical harm. Proposal #4 is Progressive ISSN: 1937-9056 Copyright © 2019 Answers in Genesis, Inc. All content is owned by Answers in Genesis (“AiG”) unless otherwise indicated. AiG consents to unlimited copying and distribution of print copies of Answers Research Journal articles for non-commercial, non-sale purposes only, provided the following conditions are met: the author of the article is clearly identified; Answers in Genesis is acknowledged as the copyright owner; Answers Research Journal and its website, www.answersresearchjournal.org, are acknowledged as the publication source; and the integrity of the work is not compromised in any way. For website and other electronic distribution and publication, AiG consents to republication of article abstracts with direct links to the full papers on the ARJ website. All rights reserved. For more information write to: Answers in Genesis, PO Box 510, Hebron, KY 41048, Attn: Editor, Answers Research Journal. The views expressed are those of the writer(s) and not necessarily those of the Answers Research Journal Editor or of Answers in Genesis. 54 D. McGee Day-Age Creationism, which believes that the earth Berney with Intervarsity. Buttressed that PDAC is is billions of years old and that each creation day prominent within the evangelical community is that represents many millions of years of time, but God none of the larger denominational seminaries, such didn’t use the Darwinian process to evolve the flora, as, the Southern Baptist, Methodist, and Reformed, fauna, and human beings. or the non-denominational seminaries, such as The effect of proposal #4, Progressive Day-Age Dallas Theological, Denver, or Trinity Evangelical, Creationism (PDAC), chiefly reinforced by Hugh Ross, affirm a young-earth position, which is an indication is prominent within the evangelical community. For that old-earth theology is permitted.3 example, Douglas Groothuis, professor of philosophy Thus, given the influence of old-earth views in at Denver Seminary, references Ross’ book Creation general, and the PDAC in particular within the and Time in his footnotes before opining “there is evangelical community, the purpose of this paper overwhelming evidence that the universe is 13–15 is to (1) analyze Proposal #4, PDAC, and (2) the billion years old and that the earth is ancient as well” implications that the PDAC view may impart to (2011, 274). Norman Geisler, who taught at Dallas Christians seeking to understand the early chapters Theological Seminary, Trinity Evangelical Divinity of Genesis.4 In addition to analyzing PDAC, the School, and founded Southern Evangelical Seminary young-earth view of Genesis—the Six Day Creation and Veritas Evangelical Seminary is quite open to Theory (SDC)—will be presented to allow the reader Progressive Day-Age Creationism. He writes, “Not to contrast (or compare) each view. This will be only is it possible that there are time gaps in Genesis accomplished by (1) describing the central tenets of 1, but there is also evidence that the ‘days’ of Genesis each view, (2) describing a critical analysis of each are not 6 successive 24-hour days” (Geisler 2014). view, and (3) summarizing the theological and Immediately after writing his theological assertions, practical implications for each view. What this paper he refers his readers to Creation and Time by Ross. will not address in great detail is the Gap Theory, Geisler adds, “It seems plausible the universe is Theistic Evolution, Framework Hypothesis, and the billions of years old . there is no demonstrated genealogical debate of Genesis 5 and 11. The goal conflict between Genesis 1–2 and scientific fact . a after reading this article will be that the reader will literal interpretation of Genesis is consistent with be able to compare and contrast PDAC and SDC a universe that is billions of years old” (Geisler view, recognize the hermeneutical dangers that the 2003, 650). Wayne Grudem, who taught at Trinity PDAC view presents when interpreting the Bible, Evangelical Seminary, and is currently teaching and properly crown the Bible to a magisterial role at Phoenix Seminary and the author of Systematic and science to a ministerial role when interpreting Theology, has affirmed that Progressive Day-Age the creation account. Creationism is a valid “option for Christians who believe the Bible today” (Grudem 2000, 297–300).1 Central Tenets of the J. P. Moreland from Biola University, who is open to Progressive Day-Age Creationism the possibility of Progressive Day-Age Creationism, The most vocal proponent of PDAC is Hugh Ross but not committed,2 remarks “My own views about and those connected with the ministry Reasons To the creation-evolution controversy are divided Believe (RTB).5 Ross earned his Doctor of Philosophy between old and young earth creationism. While in Astronomy from the University of Toronto and I lean heavily toward old earth views, I do not see founded RTB in 1986.6 He has written dozens of the issue as cut-and-dried” (Moreland and Reynolds books and articles on this topic and most recently, 1999, 142). Add that when Ross published Creation in 2017, was one of four contributors to the book and Time, his book received the endorsements from Four Views on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Walter Kaiser from Gordon-Conwell Seminary, Earl Design.