© Copyright 06/09 Tom Miller and M. Power tomnancy@colorado.edu

50¢

IV. Young Earth Creationism (“Day” in Genesis 1 Means 24 Hours) (i.e., a 6,000 Year-Old Earth):

• Some Arguments for a Young Earth:

1. Genealogies add up to 4,000+ years B.C. (Gen 5,10,11; 1 Chron 1; cf. Mt 1; Lk 3; et.al.) Patriarch and the age when his son was born: Adam: 130; Seth: 105; Enosh:90; Kenan: 70; Mahalalel: 65; Jared: 192; Enoch: 65; Methuselah: 167; Lamech:182; Noah: 150; Shem: 102; Arpachshad: 35; Shelah: 30; Eber: 34; Peleg: 30;Serug: 30; Nahor: 29; Terah: 70; Abraham: 100. Total: 2,048 years. Based onthis chronology, Adam and Eve lived 2,000 years before Abraham. Biblicalgenealogies, and many historians, teach that Abraham lived approximately2,000 B.C. Therefore, people were created 6,000+ years ago (not 50,000 yearsago, as Progressive Creationists maintain). But are Adam and Eve virtually as oldas the earth? Probably. Jesus’ statement: “from the beginning of the creation,God ‘made them male and female’” (Mk 10:6; cf. Mt 19:4; Rom 1:20; Heb 9:26)implies that Adam and Eve were not created billions of years after God created theheavens and the earth (on day 1). Similarly, the phrase “before any herb of thefield had grown” (Gen 2:5) implies a young earth. The antecedent Biblicalphrase, combined with the phrase (2 verses later), “the LORD God formed man”implies that the young earth and Adam were created during the same timeperiod. A million year gap is not the way the text flows.

2. The answers to the questions above (listed under “Some Questions forProgressive Creationists”) infer a young earth.

3. Ex 20:11 cf. 31:15—“In 6 days the LORD made the heavens and the earth...andrested the 7th day.” The 7th day (the Sabbath) was 24 hours and the 6 workdays were 24 hours as well.

4. There are words in Biblical Hebrew (such as olam or qedem) that are verysuitable for communicating long periods of time or indefinite time, but noneof these words is used in Genesis 1.

5. The formula, “the evening and the morning,” infers axial rotation and a 24-hour day. WindexVhtmlhat’s the evening and morning of a million years?

6. The earth appears older than it is. [See above, III. 1. Expansion of the universe.]

• Some Questions for Young Earth Creationists:

1. Because the young earth theory isn’t a “believe or burn” doctrine, why evendiscuss it?[Response]: 1) WindexVhtmlhen the topic of “origins” is discussed, Young Earth almostinevitably comes up. 2) God may want us to believe the earth is relatively young.

2. WindexVhtmlhat about scientific dating methods? WindexVhtmlhat about the geologic column? [See“My Response,” above, under III. “Some Arguments for ProgressiveCreationists.”]

3. WindexVhtmlhat about the rocks? WindexVhtmlhen God created rocks, they necessarily had anappearance of age. WindexVhtmlhat would a new rock look like? Also, if the rocks werecreated with an appearance of age, many of our dating methods would bewrong. Admittedly, creationists can’t easily and instantaneously answer allquestions. But as we continue to do research, we may find answers in ourlifetime. In the meantime, creationists place their confidence in theunchanging WindexVhtmlord of God before science textbooks.

4. Could God have created the universe over a span of billions of years?[Response]: Of course! But the issue is not God’s omnipotence. Rather, it is“WindexVhtmlhat does the text say?”

5. Is Genesis 1 poetry? [Response]: I believe that Genesis 1 is structured prose.But even if Genesis 1 is poetry, poetry artistically accentuates the literalmeaning (ex., the literal plagues poetically repeated in Psalm 136). Moreover,the heavens, earth, light, sun, moon, stars, plants, animals, ground, people,serpent, pain in child bearing, Cain, Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham,circumcision, et. al. are literal. That ubiquitous pattern favors a literalinterpretation of the few (3) arguable words ("day," "dust," and "rib").

6. Is it possible that “day” in Genesis 1 could mean a long period of time?[Response]: Admittedly, “day” in Hebrew and English has a semantic range.But in Genesis 1 the sun, moon, and stars were created to be “for signs and forseasons and for days and years” (1:14). It would be nonsensical to translatethat phrase, “for signs and for seasons and for vast geological ages and years.”

7. Even if the days after the sun was created were 24 hours, how do you knowthat the days before the sun were 24 hours? [Response]: If the days after thesun was created were literal, it's not a leap to infer that the days before the sunwas created were literal. Also, see the antecedent section: Ex 20:11, the “evening / morning formula”, et. al.

8. WindexVhtmlhat about the verse, “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years...” (2 Pet3:8)? [Response]: 1) “As” indicates simile, a figure of speech. Figures ofspeech are found in many books of the Bible, such as The Revelation. However,very few figures of speech occur in the entire Book of Genesis! (Abraham,Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph were literal, historical people in Genesis.) As with allliterature, genre dictates interpretation. 2) The context of 2 Peter 3 isapocalyptic. 3) “Day” means 24 hours in 2 Peter 3:8 as well!

9. Are there gaps in the genealogies? [Response]: There are few gaps, if any, inGenesis 5 and 10. (See previous section.) Also, the N.T. helps (again): “Enoch,the seventh from Adam” ( Jude 1:14). Matthew’s “14 generations” (3 timesover) inherently implies elasticity and mnemonic purposes. But the gaps inMatthew are few and disallow even hundreds of years, and certainly notthousands of years. A "genealogy" with gaping gaps of thousands of years isnot a genealogy (and it wouldn't legitimize Jesus' right to David's throne).

10.Did Methuselah live 969 years? [Response]: That’s what the text says! WindexVhtmlhy not letGod speak for Himself? Also, living conditions (such as enriched oxygen, a watercanopy, an electro-magnetic field to shield radiation) could have been superiorbefore Noah’s Flood. Also, after the Flood, the gene pool was diminished.

11. WindexVhtmlhat about dinosaurs? [Response]: Before the Flood, dinosaurs livedconcurrently with humans. If pre-Flood conditions enabled humans andplants to live and thrive longer, then animals presumably lived longer. Somereptiles continue to grow throughout their lives. So if reptiles lived for a verylong time, some could have grown to the size of dinosaurs. Althoughdinosaurs have become extinct, presumably because of inferior post-Floodatmospheric conditions, some people have speculated that sea dinosaurs maystill live in the deep, dark sea, much of which has not been plumbed.Could Noah’s Flood have caused the earth to tilt differently, thereby causing post-Flood conditions to be radically different than pre-Flood conditions? The Bibledoesn’t says so, but there may be explanations that we haven’t yet thought of.

12.WindexVhtmlhat about fossils? [Response]: Groups of fossils are the remains of plant andanimals once living in different ecological zones at the same time and theywere buried in rapid succession. Many fossils were made as rockscataclysmically crashed together, trapping animals as they were franticallytrying to find shelter from the torrential rain (during Noah’s Flood). Thetectonic activity of the Flood also caused things such as the Grand Canyon.

13.WindexVhtmlhere did Cain get his wife? [Response]: Cain married his sister. At that time,it would not have been a problem for close relatives to marry, because thehuman gene pool had not yet suffered significant degradation.

14.If the earth is not as old as it appears, did God deceive us? [Response]: Not ifGod has told us otherwise. WindexVhtmlhen Jesus turned the water into wine, did Jesusdeceive the people by making them think that the wine had naturally aged? Idon’t think so.

15. Isn’t “God” the overarching theme of Genesis 1? [Response]: Yes. But "allScripture is ... profitable" (2 Tim 3:16).

Science works extremely well when it is used as a tool to understand nature(God's created order: Gen 1:1; Ps 24:1, 50:10-11, 104:24) and to responsiblyharness and develop the forces and materials found in our world (Gen 1:28; Eccl9:10). However, given its necessarily-limited scope and task, it cannotsatisfactorily answer the most fundamental questions of human existence: whoam I? WindexVhtmlhere did I come from? WindexVhtmlhy am I here? WindexVhtmlhere am I going? Moreover, therationale for (and the amazing success of) the natural sciences presuppose abiblical worldview (or something very similar). WindexVhtmlhy does the world operateaccording to regular, predictable laws (Ps 19:2-3)? WindexVhtmlhy is it that the world can beinterrogated and understood by using the methods of scientific investigation ( Jn1:1-3)? WindexVhtmlhy is the human mind uniquely suited to study and understand the worldusing empirical means (Ps 8:7)? WindexVhtmlhy have human beings been so successful in"taking dominion" of the earth (Gen 11:6)? An atheistic worldview cannotprovide satisfactory (or even remotely plausible) answers to these questions.WindexVhtmlhen examining the detailed findings of modern science, then, don't lose sightof the big picture: "...All things were created through Him [Jesus] and for Him"(Col 1:16). How does our Creator command us to respond to Him? "WindexVhtmlorship Himwho made heaven and earth" (Rev 14:7). This moment, I urge you to pray: "DearJesus, I believe you are the Creator and that you shed your blood on the cross androse again, thereby paying the penalty (that I deserved to pay) for my heinoussins. Please bring me to God. Thank you! Amen."

pg. 6 pg. 7 pg. 8

Universe3:Universe 6/26/09 10:20 AM Page 1

4. Jesus stated, "...He who made [Adam and Eve] at the beginning 'made themmale and female' (Mt 19:4). But would not (supposed) animal ancestors havebeen male and female already?

5. WindexVhtmlas the first man a mere one degree superior to his most immediate ape-manancestor? If so, was he capable of ruling, "over all the earth and over all thecreatures that move along the ground" (Gen 1:26)-including apes? WindexVhtmlas the firstman after the ape-man capable of naming the animals? WindexVhtmlas he capable of trulyunderstanding God's prohibition regarding the forbidden fruit? WindexVhtmlas headvanced enough to be blamed for passing sin to all his posterity? (Rom 5:12).

6. Can you harmonize the sequence of Genesis 1 and the sequence of evolution?John Morris records in his book, “The Young Earth:”

Conclusion: The Bible and Common Descent cannot be harmonized. (This isnot the same as saying: “The Bible and science cannot be harmonized.”)

III. The Day-Age Theory (“Day” in Genesis 1 Means “Age”):

• Some Arguments for Progressive Creationists:

1. EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE [My response]: Assuming that the universe isexpanding, if we extrapolate backwards, we can calculate when the Big Bangtook place. However, God did not necessarily create the universe at “point 0.”In point of fact, when God created the universe it necessarily had anappearance of age. The newly-created universe was mature: the light from thestars reached the earth instantaneously. Moreover when God created Adamand Eve, God created them as adults, with an inevitable appearance of age.

2. SCIENTIFIC DATING METHODS [My response]: If the earth is severalthousand years old, dating methods would frequently be wrong. Also, if pre-Flood conditions were considerably different than what they are today, datingmethods may be distorted. Specifically, if the rate of radioactive decaychanged in new conditions after Noah’s Flood, radiocarbon dating may bedistorted. Furthermore, scientific dating methods are sometimes incrediblyinaccurate. Finally, as stated above, when God created the earth, the earthnecessarily had an appearance of age (as did Adam and Eve).

3. THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN [My response]: Frequently, evolutionists date fossilsby the strata where they find the fossils and they date the strata by the fossilsthey find in the strata.

4. FOSSILS [See “My response” under IV. “Young Earth Creationism”].

• Some Questions for Progressive Creationists:

1. Can you harmonize the sequences of evolution and Genesis 1? (See above: II. 2.)2. Are you sure that you’re not abnormally interpreting “day,” in order to make it

fit your understanding of science?3. Is it realistically possible that “day” in Genesis 1 could be a 24-hour day? (Gen

1:14-“... let [the lights] be for signs and seasons, and for days and years.”)4. If "day" means a billion years in Genesis 1, could it mean that when it rained

40 days (in Noah's day - only 6 chapters later) it rained 40 billion years?5. If each day was a billion years, then half of that day would be 500 million years.

How did the plants, insects, and animals survive through a 500-million-yearstretch of darkness, followed by a 500-million-year stretch of light?

6. Did the fish and birds (created on day 5) live for a million (or billion) yearsbefore the other animals were created (on day 6)?

7. Did some of the trees (created on day 3) need to be pollinated by insects(created on day 6)?

8. In that God designated man to be the steward over the earth, who was thesteward the millions of years before man was created?

9. How do you answer the “Arguments for Young Earth Creationism”? [See nextsection.]

[This writer’s wishes: 1) Don’t haphazardly leap to the conclusion that “day” isa long period of time and that “day” doesn’t mean a literal, 24-hour day.2) Don’t caricature young earth proponents with the disparaging one-liner:“Oh they’re literalists,” as in hyper-literalists.]

This flier discusses: 1. Atheistic Evolution (evolution without God); 2. TheisticEvolution (God-ordained evolution); 3. The Day-Age Theory (“day” in Genesis 1means “age”); 4. Young Earth Creationism (“day” is a literal 24-hour day). After eachof those 4 categories, I have listed “arguments for,” followed by appropriate questions.

I. Atheistic Evolution (Evolution without God):

• Some Arguments for Evolution:

1. THE APE-MAN [My response]: 1) Many of the proto-human fossils aresubstantially incomplete and often their reconstruction involves aconsiderable amount of conjecture. 2) The number of fossils upon which suchsweeping conclusions are based is fairly small. 3) A fair amount ofinterpretation is involved in reconstructing primate/hominid transitionalforms, even when the fossils are relatively complete and intact. On the basis ofthe fossil evidence alone, then, is it really more plausible to suppose thatAustralopithecines (for example) are a transitional humanoid creature ratherthan merely a kind of ancient ape (roughly the intellectual equivalent ofchimpanzees or orangutans)?

2. HOMOLOGY [My response]: Many similarities are just as (if not more) plausiblyexplained as the result of a common designer as they are as the result of acommon ancestor.

3. THE GALAPAGOS FINCHES [My response]: Speciation—the God-given abilityof animals to undergo minor evolutionary modifications within boundaryconditions that limit the amount of change that genetic mutations and naturalselection can produce—is not the same as Common Descent (the view that allliving organisms share a common ancestor).

4. FOSSILS [My response]: The fact that the fossil record, taken as a whole,is consistent with Common Descent doesn’t entail that it is uniquely in supportof (or even best explained by) Common Descent.

• Some Questions for Atheistic Evolutionists:1. Do you affirm atheistic evolution because it’s “the educated thing to believe”

or have you examined the evidence and arguments for yourself?2. How did an irreducibly complex, fully-functional, single-celled

organism–with its millions of interdependent parts and processes andstaggeringly-high information content–arise from inorganic chemicals withnothing but the laws of physics to assemble it?

3. Is it plausible to suppose that the information content of, say, the DNA of anamoeba, with its highly specified complexity, was put together by mechanistic,impersonal forces, which had no goal in mind?

4. Given that non-directed evolution is driven (fundamentally) by nothing butthe laws of physics and chance, how it is that the following biological systemsdisplay remarkable complexity (irreducible and specified) that betraysintentionality?Human beings: Our DNA, cells, brains, eyes, ears, hearts, lungs, kidneys, skin,immune systems, blood clotting mechanisms, etc. are made up of finelycalibrated, interdependent and interconnected parts whose goal-directedfunctioning defies naturalistic explanations.Animals: Dolphins’ highly-sophisticated sonar; bats’ high-precision radar;the life cycle of salmon; the highly-specific migration patterns of the

monarch butterfly; the outboard motor of the bacterial flagellum. The dance of the honeybee communicates complex, specified information tothe other honeybees in its hive, which in turn are able to correctly interpretthat information and act upon it. (WindexVhtmlhere did the honeybee come up with theidea of such a dance in the first place? And how do the other bees know whatthe dance means? WindexVhtmlhy don’t they view the dance as a lecture on honeyproduction or as sheer entertainment?)Summary: Human beings, animals, plants (as well as the fine tuning of theuniverse) ("things that are made"-Rom 1:20) demonstrate Intelligent Design,which points to a Designer.

5. How can you account for objective moral values in a universe without God? Onan atheistic Darwinist worldview, it is very difficult (if not impossible) tojustify the claim that behaviors and attitudes like rape, racial prejudice,environmental destruction, bullying or ridiculing handicapped persons andreligiously-motivated warfare are objectively, morally evil. For example, didHitler oversee the slaughter of 6 million Jews without doing anything that wasreally, truly wrong? Did Hitler violate any objective moral standard (a standardthat transcended 1930-40s German culture)? WindexVhtmlill he be accountable to atranscendent Law-Giver, or did he get away with his crimes by committingsuicide?

6. Can the laws of nature plus time plus chance endow human life with objectivemeaning?

7. If you are made in the image of God and accountable to Him for your beliefsand actions, might you be “suppressing the truth in unrighteousness” bydenying that He is the Creator of life ( Jn 1:3; Rom 1:19ff; Col 1:16-17)?

II. Theistic Evolution (God-Ordained Evolution):

• An Argument for Theistic Evolution: God is the creator; Evolution istrue; Therefore God micromanaged evolution.

• Some Questions for Theistic Evolutionists (who believe the Bible andevolution can be harmonized):

1. According to the Bible, "God formed man of the dust of the ground" (Gen 2:7;cf. 1 Cor 15:47). Also, "the rib which the LORD God had taken from man Hemade into a woman" (Gen 2:22). Some people argue that "dust," "rib," (and"day") can be interpreted allegorically. But does the genre truly allow forthat? Also, some people argue that the semantic range of "dust" can includeanimals. But in that God tells Adam, "... to dust you shall return" (Gen 3:19),does this mean that at death man turns into an animal, i.e., reincarnation?Also, did Eve's "rib" truly mean "animal?" (cf. Gen 1:23-"she was taken out ofMan;" 1 Cor 11:8-"man is not from woman, but woman from man").

2. Genesis 2:7, "... and man became a living being." But if humans evolved from(living) animals, humans couldn't have become living. Also, in order to become"living" (back to the antecedent argument), Adam and Eve would have to havecome from non-living matter, which means "dust" and "rib" were non-living,not living animals.

3. God said to the male and female, "Be fruitful and multiply" (Gen 1:28). But ifhumans evolved from sexually active animals, would not God's words havebeen unnecessary?

Biblical Order:1) Matter created by God in the beginning2) Earth before the sun and stars3) Oceans before the land4) Light before the sun5) Atmosphere between two water layers6) Land plants, first life forms created7) Fruit trees before fish8) Fish before insects9) Land vegetation before sun10) Marine mammals before land mammals11) Birds before land reptiles12) Man, the cause of death

Evolutionary Order:1) Matter existed in the beginning2) Sun and stars before the earth3) Land before the oceans4) Sun, earth’s first light5) Atmosphere above a water layer6) Marine organisms, first forms of life7) Fish before fruit trees8) Insects before fish9) Sun before land plants10) Land mammals before marine mammals11) Reptiles before birds12) Death, necessary antecedent of man

pg. 2 pg. 3 pg. 4 pg. 5

Universe3:Universe 6/26/09 10:20 AM Page 2