Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Commenting on Creation

This short article was on the back page of this month's Answer's Update, the newsletter of Answers In Genesis.


Many theologians today declare that Christians should believe in evolution and millions of years of earth history. Why is that?


As we researched this topic, we discovered that theologians who compromise with Genesis are putting their trust in secular science’s fallible dating methods. They do not fully believe the infallible Word of God as it relates to origins, though they may be sincere Christians.


In the Bible commentaries before the 1800’s, almost all Christian theologians accepted the six literal days of Creation and a global Noah’s Flood. There was no hint that they argued for a universe that is billions of years old.


In the past two centuries, as Darwin’s ideas have taken root in society, Bible commentaries have been increasingly teaching that the days of Creation were not literal days—and that the Flood of Noah was just a local event (not global). As you read through them carefully, you will find that the underlying reason the commentaries question the length of the Creation days and the global nature of the Flood is almost always because of accepting the fallible theories of scientists about the age of the earth. It rarely has to do with what the biblical text might teach.


It’s so sad that many theologians today—and most Bible colleges and seminaries—take Genesis figuratively but man’s theories literally!

8 comments:

Jonathan said...

You can either believe the whole of the Bible, or none at all. Science has proved the Bible right time and time again. This shouldn't come as a surprise since the same creator brought it all together.

We now have "educated" people writing commentaries on the Bible, not believing what they read, but rather interpreting it according to their own understanding. What does this say for the future of biblical study?

More and more people rely on commentaries, sermons, and other interpretations instead of just drinking from the source. The Church is already anemic, barely drinking in milk from others' interpretations rather than eating the meat from their own personal study.

Robert Tewart said...

I agree to a point Jonathon. God gave gifts including teaching and preaching. Much of this comes in the form of writing and commentaries. Our challenge is to eat the tasty watermelon and spit out the seeds.

The MacArthur study bible is a great resource from a gifted teacher and preacher who is totally committed to the inerrant, infallible Word of God. THAT'S the kind of teachers we need to be seeking out. Even though, it's through persoanl study and learning that we can make such decisions.

ExPatMatt said...

I'm pretty sure the age of the Earth/Global Flood issue was first questioned by Creationists at the turn of the century who had set out in search of evidence for a young earth/global flood.

The commentaries probably started to change when they realized their was no evidence for either.

Do you think the interpretation of Scripture should remain static, even in the face of compelling evidence that the current interpretation is wrong?

ExPatMatt said...

Jonathan,

I was just wondering what, in particular, you were referring to when you said;

"Science has proved the Bible right time and time again."

What about the Bible has science 'proved' right?

Thanks

Jonathan said...

Robert,
I wasn't trying to say that commentaries and other helps should be avoided, just that they have replaced personal, individual Bible study among a great many Christians. Sadly, most don't know how to do their own research and the lack of mentorship in the Church does nothing to nurture new Christians. I'm all for assistance. I don't know it all, and there are greater men then I who I love to learn from.

Jonathan said...

ExPatMatt,
It's been a few years since I've looked at the material and verses regarding science proving the Bible right. A quick Google search should help you out. A couple that I do remember were that the Bible mentions the Earth is round, the Earth sits in outer space, the flood was global, evidenced by the grand canyon. Geologists like to say that the grand canyon was formed by the Colorado River, but the surface level at the beginning of the Canyon is lower in elevation than the end of the canyon. This means water would have to travel uphill when the canyon was first formed. The flood was global and washed out the area. There is more concerning the sediment rings and such in the canyon.

Robert Tewart said...

No worries brother. Just clarification for those who might not know where you were coming from.

ExPatMatt said...

Jonathan,

I must say, I'm disappointed.

A couple that I do remember were that the Bible mentions the Earth is round,

Actually the Earth is an oblique spheroid and was understood to be 'round' by many cultures before the Bible was written.

Also, a literal reading of the Bible indicates that the author thought the Earth was round like a disc i.e, flat. That's how the Heavens could be stretched out 'like a tent' over all the land.


the Earth sits in outer space,

It doesn't. The Earth falls through space and is kept in orbit around the Sun by way of the Sun's gravitational pull. No 'sitting' going on there at all.

the flood was global, evidenced by the grand canyon.

Oh boy.

Geologists like to say that the grand canyon was formed by the Colorado River,

And what do they know? They're only professionally trained experts in their field who have meticulously studied all the available evidence and submitted their thoughts to the process of peer review; who do they think they are, eh?

but the surface level at the beginning of the Canyon is lower in elevation than the end of the canyon. This means water would have to travel uphill when the canyon was first formed. The flood was global and washed out the area.

When you have a theory about the 'Global Flood' that explains why we don't see a single sedimentary layer containing the remains of all the 'kinds' of animals that were killed during the deluge, then we can talk. Until then, all you have is hand-waving and ad hoc excuses.

I'm sorry Jonathan, there are elements of the Bible that give me pause for thought, but those don't even come close.