Skip to content

Today's Creation Moment

Nov
23
New Scientific Evidence for the Flood
Genesis 7:20
"Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered."
If there was a great worldwide Flood, as described in Genesis, such a catastrophe certainly should have left obvious evidence of itself all over the world. Scientists who believe in creation say that...
RSS

Do Christians Need to Believe in a Young Earth?

On page 24 of his book The Bible, Rocks and Time, Davis Young writes: “… Christians who believe that the earth is extremely old have interpreted the creation account of Genesis One in a variety of alternative ways, and they also maintain that Genesis does not necessarily require belief that the flood of Noah cover the entire globe. We present evidence that the biblical text does not demand adherence to the traditional interpretation that God created the world in six successive, 24 hour days only a few thousand years ago. On that basis we claim that the Bible does not demand assent to any specific age for the planet.” 
Then he states on page 473: “... certainly the Gospel of Jesus Christ does not demand acceptance of a young earth. Nor is the eternal salvation of anyone anywhere ever dependent on acceptance of a young earth. It is the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that saves us from the wrath to come, not belief in a young earth.”
The employment of good exegetical and hermeneutical processes used to arrive at the theological position that Jesus Christ was and is absolute GOD and absolute man are the same exegetical and hermeneutical processes used to arrive at the theological position that GOD in fact is Triune. The exercise of these same exegetical-hermeneutical processes causes one to arrive at the theological position that Jesus Christ was born of a Virgin. These same processes cause us to arrive at the theological fact that Jesus will one day return physically to the earth. It is those same exegetical-hermeneutical processes that cause us to arrive at the theological position that Jesus rose from the dead on the third day according to the Scriptures. Therefore, when one uses these same exegetical-hermeneutical processes applied to Genesis One to Eleven, they cause us to arrive at the theological position that creation took place over 6 normal rotational days of the earth about 6,000 year ago; that Adam and Eve are historical people and they historically disobeyed GOD, bringing about the fall and curse; that Noah was a real person who built an Ark, that saved his family and the land animals from a real, historic, global cataclysm.
The issue here is not over one’s “interpretation” or “personal preferences.” It is over the integrity of GOD and the perspicuity of Scripture. One cannot use one type of hermeneutical-exegetical set of principles just for Genesis, then another set of hermeneutical-exegetical principles for the rest of Scripture. One must be CONSISTENT in the use of these principles to arrive at good Biblical theology. When this hermeneutical-exegetical CONSISTENCY is maintained, one will hold to Truths such as the Divinity of Christ, a 6 normal day creation taking place around 6,000 years ago, and a global – not local – Flood. This IS what Bible Believing Christians are to believe IS FACT, based on the use of consistently applied exegetical-hermeneutical principles in understanding – NOT interpreting – Scripture. This inconsistency is the failure of “Old” earth ideas.
Today’s guest blogger is Allen J. Dunckley, a contributor to our Facebook group and CEO and presenter for Beginning with Genesis Ministries, an Apologetic ministry defending the normal (literal) truth of Scripture, especially Genesis.

On page 24 of his book The Bible, Rocks and Time, Davis Young writes: “… Christians who believe that the earth is extremely old have interpreted the creation account of Genesis One in a variety of alternative ways, and they also maintain that Genesis does not necessarily require belief that the flood of Noah cover the entire globe. We present evidence that the biblical text does not demand adherence to the traditional interpretation that God created the world in six successive, 24 hour days only a few thousand years ago. On that basis we claim that the Bible does not demand assent to any specific age for the planet.” 

Then he states on page 473: “... certainly the Gospel of Jesus Christ does not demand acceptance of a young earth. Nor is the eternal salvation of anyone anywhere ever dependent on acceptance of a young earth. It is the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that saves us from the wrath to come, not belief in a young earth.”

The employment of good exegetical and hermeneutical processes used to arrive at the theological position that Jesus Christ was and is absolute GOD and absolute man are the same exegetical and hermeneutical processes used to arrive at the theological position that GOD in fact is Triune. The exercise of these same exegetical-hermeneutical processes causes one to arrive at the theological position that Jesus Christ was born of a Virgin. These same processes cause us to arrive at the theological fact that Jesus will one day return physically to the earth. It is those same exegetical-hermeneutical processes that cause us to arrive at the theological position that Jesus rose from the dead on the third day according to the Scriptures.

Therefore, when one uses these same exegetical-hermeneutical processes applied to Genesis One to Eleven, they cause us to arrive at the theological position that creation took place over 6 normal rotational days of the earth about 6,000 year ago; that Adam and Eve are historical people and they historically disobeyed GOD, bringing about the fall and curse; that Noah was a real person who built an Ark, that saved his family and the land animals from a real, historic, global cataclysm.

The issue here is not over one’s “interpretation” or “personal preferences.” It is over the integrity of GOD and the perspicuity of Scripture. One cannot use one type of hermeneutical-exegetical set of principles just for Genesis, then another set of hermeneutical-exegetical principles for the rest of Scripture. One must be CONSISTENT in the use of these principles to arrive at good Biblical theology. When this hermeneutical-exegetical CONSISTENCY is maintained, one will hold to Truths such as the Divinity of Christ, a 6 normal day creation taking place around 6,000 years ago, and a global – not local – Flood. This IS what Bible Believing Christians are to believe IS FACT, based on the use of consistently applied exegetical-hermeneutical principles in understanding – NOT interpreting – Scripture. This inconsistency is the failure of “Old” earth ideas.

Today’s guest blogger is Allen J. Dunckley, a frequent contributor to our Facebook group and CEO and presenter for Beginning with Genesis Ministries, an Apologetic ministry defending the normal (literal) truth of Scripture, especially Genesis.

Comments

If we don't apply the same "day" meaning throughout the Bible we run into additional problems. ie-Ex.20:11; Ex.31:17; Mk.2:27-28; Acts 20:7. I don't feel that it is by chance or man's ability that somehow we came up with a 24 hr. day and a seven day week. God bless! Psalm 20.

Ac.4:12 ~ Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven
given among men, whereby we MUST be saved. ~ This is a MUST. Believing Scripture is a MUST. But constant focus on SHOVING the young earth issue down people's throats is a waste of air-time. Preach Jesus, people -- preach Jesus.

Questions, George,

Why should we "preach Jesus"? Was Jesus a real, historic person? Was Adam a real, historic Person? Was the Garden a real, historic place?

Geesh. If you don't know the Lord for yourself, why don't you just quit talking. Quit exposing your ignorance. If you are so completely ignorant of the historical reality of the Lord and his mission on earth, you are certainly among those who have made themselves unfit for heaven. And nothing you can do will change that, except you humble yourself before the Creator.

Neither the earth nor the sun existed for the first few days of Genesis. Therefore we can conclude that these Genesis "days" were NOT our present 24-hour, one rotation of the earth, days. "one day is like a thousand years....."

There is a necessity for differentiating prophecy from historical fact. In fact, one day being like a thousand years means each generation of the 6,000 years is each as one day. Each 1,000 years is as one day. Or, in other words, all humans are treated equally in the sight of the Lord. There is no generational difference, for all are children of God. I can tell you absolutely that the temporal creation of earth was fast, but the planning took some time, no more than the 6 days mentioned in the Bible. Which, if you check with the Lord, you will find had more to do with heaven than temporal existence, i.e. the temporal creation of the sun and the earth. Everything was planned, and then put in place, complete and entire. DESIGNED.

On a flight to Europe, I discovered this quote:
"May 5, 2000: The date that Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn will line up with the sun and moon--the first time in 6,000 years." TIME Magazine, January 17, 2000, European Edition.

Intuitively, they were aligned "6000 years" ago when God put lights in the sky "for signs and seasons."
Based on this, I believe the 6,000 years ended in 2000 AD as Sir Isaac Newton's chronology also supports. Ussher's Chronology supports 6,000 years in 1996 +/- 4 years, so all of this is compatible with 2000 AD.

"Be not ignorant...1000 years are as a day and a day as 1000 years, God is not slack...the day of the LORD will come" 2 Peter 3:8-10. The day of the LORD is the end-time apocalyptic period that in initiated with an earthquake as seen in Joel 2:10,11. It's the sudden destruction" that Paul linked to "the day of the Lord so comes as a thief" 1Thess 5:1-6. <a href="http://MayJudgmentDay.com" title="http://MayJudgmentDay.com">http://MayJudgmentDay.com</a>

Yes. It is a fact that the 6,000 years ended around 2000 A.D., or, more likely 2001, given the way the first year after Christ's birth was treated in the calendar. So we're just waiting for the "little season" mentioned in the New Testament to expire. How long that is, I do not know. But I do know the Lord's coming is likely to be on a Sunday close to the Feast of Tabernacles, or, I should say, just before. The year of his coming, however, will depend on just what exactly Jesus meant in Luke 13:6-9.

The term "good exegetical and hermeneutical processes" never appears in Scripture. We are to believe Paul, Christ's commissioned apostle to the body of Christ in knowledge and truth, not rely on man made "processes." Theology (another unscriptural term, like triune) is mankind's vain reasoning, when what saves us is faith in God's word. I highly recommend "A Truer God: The Supreme Spirit of Light and Love in the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures."

If Christians don't believe in a young earth, then they will run into problems all through the Bible. If it really took God thousands of years to make the earth, there would have been death before Adam sinned. If there was death before Adam's fall, what did Jesus die for? Jesus died to save us from death, so that we might have eternal life with Him. If Jesus died for nothing, then we have no hope. And that destroys the entire belief of Christians. Because "Faith (belief) is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." KJV Hebrews 11:1

Pretty much if you do not accept the Lord is smarter than you are, you're in trouble. Unless you go to Him and confirm Genesis 1, then you're just going to be an unprofitable servant. I remember well how the Lord said the people hate the King and persecute and kill his servants. Yes, and that's what you see. Evolutionists hate the Lord and they persecute those who stand on His word. Moreover, I can say absolutely that if you are an evolutionist or consider yourself to be "educated" by subscribing to their theories, you know not the Lord, and you shall have no place with Him, unless you humble yourself and get some wisdom.

I read a blog regarding the professor who was fired for his belief, and I could not understand the anger in the words. Then I remembered something I used to tell my students: If you have three 55 gallon oil drums, one full, one half full and one empty, and you strike each one with a mallet which makes the most noise?

The empty one.

Steve Sohn
<a href="http://www.sohn.org" title="www.sohn.org">www.sohn.org</a>

How did God define "Day" in the context of Genesis 1?
I missed the part where he associated it with 360 degrees of rotation of the _formless_ earth and 9,192,631,770x60x60x24 oscillation cycles per day of Cesium-133.

I've heard people nitpick about the meaning of a day, mixing up prophecy with historical fact. Truly, you actually have to read the Old Testament as well as the New Testament, and study it, and ask questions of the Lord, not just go by what self-described scholars say. So I went to the Lord and bugged him about it. I figured if he said seek and you shall find, he meant I could get him to explain by seeking his answer. I finally just had to say that I would throw out anything I had been taught and just go with whatever he said. Then the eyes of my understanding were opened and I saw what was under my nose all the time. The 6 days of creation are planning for the 6 generations of time, 6,000 years. It was not the creation of the temporal earth that took 6,000 years. No. Read Genesis 1. There's no possibility of it. And I was shown that the creation itself was fast, but the planning and design were done carefully in advance.

So there are six generations between us and Adam, but it is no time at all, for we are all connected through heaven.

In short, in case you missed it, the earth was created quickly. It was not created in 6,000 years.

And if you want to talk about an actual space of time that was 6,000 years, you could certainly say accurately that's the approximate age of the earth. But those 6,000 years are nothing. And all of us are part of one family, with the time on earth being rather short.

But still not as short as the physical creation of the earth and its solar system, which was fast. Super fast.

Which is why it's quite ridiculous to criticize Young Earthers, because they have the right timetable, approximately, and the right idea: We are all one in Christ, and the time is short for us to repent.

AGAIN, THE PHYSICAL CREATION OF THE EARTH WAS NOT 6,000 YEARS.

Any questions, check with the Lord.

I'm so sorry, but you can't just pick and choose when and what you will listen to the Lord on. Okay, so you want salvation. So you want to believe he'll save you. (By the way, you're probably leaving out the part where you have to repent and obey him to accept your salvation. You're probably rejecting salvation because you feel like you should be dictating to the Lord, not the other way around.) But you don't want to believe the creation account, neither do you check with him directly to confirm it. You just want to go around rejecting the word of God and lifting yourself up in pride.

Look, the Lord did not take millions of years to feed the multitude with bread and fishes. He duplicated the bread and fishes and provided food for the people. I can tell you making a planet is a lot like that. It's not a big deal. And it takes very little time. A lot of thought went into the planning of this temporal planet since it is not yet on the eternal order and is here for a specific training purpose, but it was created quickly.

If anyone bothered to check their facts with the Lord, they would not only have to agree with Genesis 1, but they would increase and expand their understanding, so they are not limited to the minuscule thinking and inflated hubris of human thinking. They could catch a glimpse of heaven by humbling themselves and telling the Lord that they will accept his direct word to them on the subject.

You want to argue with that? Do your homework with the Lord before you open your mouth, because I can tell you haven't. Thus you will perish in your ignorance.

What language was the Bible written in?