Age of the Earth and Universe
( Part 1: Theological Perspectives )
An overview of this page is in the homepage for Views of Creation.
Sections in this page:
Searching for Truth in the Two Books of God
Linking The Gospel with a Young Earth
Interpreting Genesis 1 & The Bible
Animal Death before Human Sin
Adam & Eve in Historical Context
Noah's Flood — Was it local or global?
Appearance of Old Age in a Young Creation?
Searching
for Truth in the Two Books of God
When we ask five important questions about creation (who,
what, when, how, why) we can use information from two sources provided for us
by
God: the
Word of God (in the Bible) and the Works of God (in
nature).
What is the best way to learn from these two revelations,
and find harmony in what we learn? Is harmony impossible
because there
is inherent
conflict
between the information we see in scripture and nature? Can science provide
reliable information about the history of nature? These questions, and
others, are explored in SEARCHING
FOR TRUTH IN THE TWO BOOKS OF GOD and in the rest of this page.
We should
use both of God's informative revelations, in scripture and nature, so
usually the reasons for adopting a particular view are both theological (the
focus in
THIS PAGE)
and scientific (the focus
in AGE OF THE EARTH — SCIENTIFIC
PERSPECTIVES).
Is it wise to link The
Gospel with a Young Earth?
Is a young earth an essential foundation
for Christianity, because the Bible clearly states that the earth is young? Or
should we avoid this claim because it is theologically questionable (if there
are reasons to question the Biblical support for young-earth claims) or is
scientifically questionable (due to strong support for old-earth theories)
and because a claim that "if
the Bible is true, the earth is young" is logically equivalent to declaring
that "if
the earth is not young, the Bible is not true"? Is it wise, for
faith and evangelism, to imply that a young-earth view is necessary for Bible-based
theology?
When we examine its certainty and importance by asking, "Is this view taught with certainty in the Bible, and is it theologically important?", should we conclude that a young earth is an essential doctrine for Christians?
• A
Young Earth — it's not the issue! by Ken Ham, founder of Answers
in Genesis, explains that "AiG's main thrust is
NOT ‘young Earth’ as such; our emphasis is on Biblical authority. Believing
in a relatively ‘young Earth’ (i.e., only a few thousands of years old, which
we accept) is a consequence of accepting the authority of
the Word of God as an infallible revelation from our omniscient Creator."
(7 k)
• Should
a church take a stand on creation? by John Morris, explains why "beliefs
in creation and a young earth are integral parts of Christianity" so
they "should
be a requirement for Christian leadership! No church should sanction
a pastor, Sunday school teacher, deacon, elder, or Bible-study leader who
knowledgeably and purposefully
errs on this crucial doctrine." (3 k)
• Does
the method of creation matter? — no, says Billy Graham (1 k)
• But when a Christian who thinks "believing the Bible requires
belief in a young earth" examines the scientific evidence and concludes "the
earth is old" and then "if the Bible is wrong about the earth's age, maybe
it's also wrong about the rest," faith can be weakened or abandoned, as
described in Personal Experiences
of Former Young-Earth Creationists (17 k) which contains quotations
from (and links to) their web-pages.
• Biblical Theology
for "young
earth" Christians by
Craig Rusbult, encourages
respect (for other Christians) and faith (in God and the Bible)
because "the full gospel of Jesus... is fully
compatible with a young earth or old earth."
(27 k + 15k)
• Can
you be a Christian and believe in an old earth? by Greg Neyman (13 k) who
explains (6 k) why
young-earth rigidity can be harmful to Christian faith and (6 k) how
to become a Christian
• A New Look at an Old Earth, by Don Stoner,
Chapters 1 (Judging
Ourselves First), 2 (Science,
Theology, and Truth), and 7 (Repairing
the Damage)
• IOU — We'll find an introductory overview
by Hugh Ross, and will use Creation
and Time (one of his books) as an example of the intensity of feelings,
illustrated in positive and negative book reviews:
• positive reviews from the publisher, endorsements
by prominent evangelical Christians,...
• negative reviews from AIG & ICR, including one by authors who mimicked
his title:
•
A
Key Tactic of Progressive Creationism by Mark Van Bebber and Paul Taylor,
argues against a claim (made by Ross and other old-earth creationists)
that the earth's age is not an essential doctrine; this is Chapter
1 of their book, Creation and Time: A Report on the Progressive
Creation Book by Hugh Ross, and the Table
of Contents links to
four chapters: 1, 2, 3, and conclusion. (Ch 1 is 19 k)
• Unfortunately, selected chapters FROM the book by Ross (which used
to be on the web) are no longer available for free (you must purchase the
book), although Amazon has a brief
excerpt with
the cover, contents, and first 4 pages.
• Why
shouldn't Christians accept millions of years? by Terry Mortenson
in AIG's New Answers Book (11 k)
• IOU —
more young-earth pages; many are available
from AIG & ICR
& and others (please
tell me if you know any excellent non-AIG/ICR pages), I just
have to decide which pages best express their views; but I think the
first page above ("it's
not the issue") and the page below ("the necessity for believing")
will remain as the first and last pages, and Ken Ham's "Two Views of
Death"
(below) also describes the "two models" view, popularized by Henry
Morris, that simplifies the situation to YEC versus atheism,
with all old-earth views being included along with atheistic anti-creationism.
•
Ken Ham explains the
necessity for believing in six literal days. (6 k)
In another page you can
see ACTION STRATEGIES by proponents of young-earth and old-earth
views.
Interpretations of Genesis 1
and The Bible
Does Genesis 1 describe a 144-hour creation? Or
when we examine the text, are other interpretations possible and preferable? And
when we carefully study the Bible as a whole, should we conclude that
the universe
is young, or old, or that neither view is clearly taught?
This section, which describes different interpretations of Genesis —
as chronological history (day-age, consecutive 24-hour days, nonconsecutive
days, days of proclamation, or restoration after a gap), nonchronological
history
(in a logical framework), and/or only theology (using ancient near-east cosmology)
— is in a separate page, CREATIONIST
INTERPRETATIONS OF GENESIS 1.
Death and Sin
Among those who think young-earth theology is essential, the two strongest
claims are that a young-earth history is clearly stated in Genesis
1, and death before sin is theologically unacceptable. For
example, the section asking "is it wise to link the
gospel with a young earth?" ends with Ken Ham emphasizing
the need for a young-earth intepretation of Genesis, and his strongest
claim is
about death and sin: "The Bible is adamant that
death, disease, and suffering came into the world as a result of sin. ...
As soon as Christians allow for death, suffering, and disease before sin,
then the whole foundations of the message of the Cross and the Atonement
have
been destroyed. ... The whole message of the Gospel falls apart if one allows
millions of years for the creation of the world."
Before human sin entered the world in Genesis 3, was there no death in nature? Or, due to sin, was the full supernatural death-protection provided by God in Eden — symbolized by the "tree of life" — removed by God (in Genesis 3:22) so Adam and Eve would begin to perish, with natural processes temporarily allowing life while leading gradually to their death? If the earth is old, can the sinless life and sacrificial substitutionary death of Jesus be sufficient for salvation, to convert sin and death into grace and life?
• Death
before Sin? — John Morris says "no" and explains why "If
death existed before Adam, then death is not the penalty for sin; ... life
is not tied to Christ’s death and resurrection, and the Christian
faith is all in vain."
(2 k)
• TWO
Histories of Death (young-earth Christian and old-earth atheistic)
by Ken Ham (7 k)
• THREE Histories of
Death — Theology for Humans not Animals by Craig Rusbult,
explains how old-earth Christian is similar
to young-earth
Christian (not old-earth atheistic) in an
overview of what the Bible
clearly teaches
about death
and sin (18 k
+ 4k)
• Theological
Analysis of Selected Recent Creationist Assertions Concerning the Occurrence
of Death Before Sin by Gary Emberger, concludes that "an
old-earth position... is theologically compatible with accepted approaches
to biblical interpretation." (37 k, PSCF)
• Evolution
and the Wages of Sin by John Morris, explains why "if
the earth is old, if fossils date from before man's sin, then Christianity
is wrong!" (12 k)
• Why
is there death and suffering? is a young-earth view from Ken Ham &
Jonathan Sarfati (28 k + 1k)
• Why
Were Dangerous Animals Created? by David Snoke, who looks at scripture
and sees that "violent and dangerous creatures
are affirmed as good creations of God in the Bible" and discusses "the
biblical rationale for their creation." (40 k,
PSCF)
• Chronology
of the Fall by Randy Isaac, looks at history and the effects of sin,
in a comprehensive examination of five possible time scales — instantaneous,
double, retroactive, gradual, atemporal — and (for the instantaneous
time scale) four ideas about the scope of the curse — physical, physiological,
anthropological, and spiritual plus psychological. (40 k
+ 1k, PSCF)
• Later, I'll make a links-page
with quotations (from Henry Morris,...) claiming that The Second Law of Thermodynamics
began at The Fall, plus criticisms of this claim by fellow YECs (AIG/Ham)
and by old-earthers, to supplement scientific evaluations of young-earth claims
about EVOLUTION AND ENTROPY.
• Links to articles about Death
before Sin by nine authors, from the old-earth creationist website of
Answers in Creation.
Human Origins — Adam and
Eve in History
When and where did Adam & Eve live? Are they the parents of all
humans? Did nonhuman "hominids" exist before them? Are
the lists of their descendants complete, and what about the long lifespans?
HUMAN ORIGINS: THEOLOGY & SCIENCE
Noah's Flood — Was it
local or global?
Did this flood cover a local region or the entire world? When we consider
all questions — by asking "how could all species fit on the ark?
does erets mean "planet" or "land"? what does geological
evidence show us?" and more — which type of flood (local or global)
is more consistent with evidence from scripture and nature? These
questions are examined in NOAH'S FLOOD:
THEOLOGY & SCIENCE which looks at our interpretations of scripture
and nature, although most age-science questions are in AGE
OF THE EARTH: SCIENCE.
Appearance of Old Age in a Young Creation
Was the universe created recently in a mature state, so it has a false "apparent
history" and appears to be much older than it really is?
This question is explored in APPEARANCE
OF AGE — THEOLOGY
and DISTANT STARLIGHT — SCIENCE.
• INFORMATION for readers is in a brief page about our Goal (a quick education for you), Quality (because we've made choices) and Variety (you'll see multiple positions, hence the disclaimer below), Exploring with Freedom (you can use sections and page-links in any order), Size ("20 k + 5k" is for main body + appendices/references), and Links (that open in a new window).
A DISCLAIMER: |
THREE TYPES
OF LINKS in this website for Whole-Person Education:
An ITALICIZED LINK keeps you inside a page, moving you to another part of it. Above, a NON-ITALICIZED LINK is page-adding, opening a new page in a new window. Below, a NON-ITALICIZED LINK is page-replacing, opening a new page in this window. |
this page, written by Craig Rusbult (editor of ASA's website
for Whole-Person Education), is
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/agetheology2.htm
and was revised
May 6, 2008
all links were checked-and-fixed on July 3, 2006
other links-pages about Origins Questions are at the top
of this page,
or you can Search the Website