Since
young-earth creationists comprise such a large segment of the population, it
seems proper to begin by restating that it is not against the Bible to admit that the earth is much older than
the 6,000 years. The Biblical case for an old earth has been presented in the
previous chapter. Here we will examine what Scripture says about evolution.
The Beginning of Plant Life
Most of us were
taught as children that when God created the earth he simply spoke the word
“tree” and there appeared a fully formed tree, or “grass” and there appeared
grass. Nearly half the adults in the United States believe this is true. Is this what Scripture says?
Gen 1:11 And God
said, Let the earth bring forth
grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in
itself, upon the earth: and it was so. Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding
fruit, whose seed was in itself, after
his kind: and God saw that it was good.
If one throws out all
the evidence for an old earth, Let the
earth bring forth has no real significance when interpreting these verses.
24 hours is close enough to instant that it just doesn't matter. But when one
accepts the evidence of cosmology, geology, paleontology and all the other
“-ologies”
as basically true, this phrase becomes very interesting. God's command let the Earth bring forth plant life
suggests a passage of time and
indicates the earth is God's chosen instrument
through which He will create. The implication is that God's creative act might
appear perfectly natural to humans when examining it millions of years later in
the fossil record. This interpretation harmonizes
Scripture with the fossil record.
Does this mean random evolution from a common ancestor is
God's chosen method of creation? Scripture clearly states that it was God who
planned, ordered, and formed all of creation, and the phrase after his kind is a pretty direct
statement of limits. Note in particular that grass, the herb yielding seed,
produces after his kind, and the tree
yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind. Scripture does not say
“Oak tree you will produce only exact duplicates of yourself until the end of
time.” But isn't this the way we tend to think? So there appears to be room for
variation of plant life in Scripture by what would appear to be natural
selection with limits. Not random chance, but God's hand guided the creation of plant life on Earth.
The question remains to be asked: did all plant life
originate from a few plant cells that God developed into individual forms of
grass, herb, and tree, or were many types of fully formed plants created
initially? We cannot be certain since Scripture is silent on this issue, but
the first view seems to be more consistent with the fossil record. Either way
this should not be of great concern to us. The fossil record is very clear;
plants have changed tremendously through time. No matter what mechanism has
been used by the earth to bring forth plant life, it is God's command that
caused it to happen. “The lot is cast
into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD” (Prov
16:33 NIV).
The Creation of Dinosaurs and Birds.
If God allowed
room for his creation to change in the plant world is it possible He did the
same in other areas? Again let's examine the Scriptures.
“And God said, Let the waters bring
forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly
above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth
abundantly, after their kind, and
every winged fowl after his kind: and
God saw that it was good” (Gen 1:20-21).
Here the same pattern
emerges as in the earlier passages. This time it is the waters that bring forth but
it is God that created the moving
creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above
the earth. Another pattern is repeated as well — notice God created... that... which the waters brought forth... after their
kind, and every winged fowl after his
kind. Again limits have been set but specific species have not been
mentioned, with the exception of great whales.
Dinosaur fossils
would not be discovered for 250 years after the translating of the King James
Bible. If this is a correct understanding of God's word then this means that
the creatures of the waters developed until one day God made some of them able
to live on land. This is a proper understanding of current scientific theory
and, if correct, is not a violation of Scripture.
It is
interesting to note that the waters are mentioned as bringing forth the fowl that fly above the earth. This is a
totally foreign idea to the old understanding of Biblical creation, yet that is
what the Scripture says. It is also interesting that science has been unable to
decide how to classify birds, how they originated and whether they were
originally reptiles. The Bible says they were created after their kind. It is
possible that the birds have no predecessor. Archaeopteryx may have been a
flying reptile just as bats are flying mammals. This does not mean they are related
to birds. Archaeopteryx may also have been legitimately one of the first birds,
despite its reptile features. The possibility remains that birds were
descendants of reptiles through God's guiding hand on this “fifth” creation
day. There is no conflict here except in our old views and in our bias.
God is in
control. The Biblical account of creation is literal, and science agrees with
the Bible — again.
Doesn't this
diminish God's authority and power? In no way, but it does destroy long held
views. The Bible is literally true. It is the creationist’s interpretation that
is in error. This interpretation was not built on a denial of the truth but
upon the amount of available information. It was a belief based upon what was known.
If rejection of
the old views causes you to stumble or weakens your faith, don’t blame the
science. You will never meet anyone who became a Christian because they heard
the earth was 6,000 years old, but you may meet people who have rejected the
Bible and Jesus because of the young earth teaching.
The Making of Mammals.
What does
Scripture really say about mammals? “And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living
creature after his kind, cattle, and
creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. Gen 1:25 And God made the
beast of the earth after his kind,
and cattle after their kind, and
every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was
good” (Gen 1:24).
The words “let the
earth bring forth... after his kind,” indicate God's chosen instrument through which He will create. What is
created at this time needs some discussion. Specific species are not mentioned
here, only broad categories. The Hebrew word for cattle is behemah and it means a large quadruped.
This covers a broad range of mammals, but is best understood as meaning grazing
animals. The Hebrew word for creeping
things is remes
and it means a rapidly moving animal. It can mean reptile, but probably refers
to rabbits, squirrels and that type of mammal. Beast of the earth is chay in Hebrew and refers to wild creatures.
Another interesting thing about these verses is that God made these creatures whereas the
creatures mentioned previously were created.
Why the word change? Is it possible this verse is not
as simple as the creationist interpretation has held? The mammals may have been
created from the earth directly or they may have been genetic alterations of
previously existing land dwelling life forms that had been created during day
five. The Hebrew word for created is bara and it means “cut out” or “formed” and
is traditionally considered to mean “out of nothing.” Since we are told that
the sea brought forth the creations of day five, the idea might better be understood
as a lump of clay being used to form a piece of pottery. In this case the
pottery is a living creature. Asah, the Hebrew word translated made, means to bring forth. Carrying the pottery analogy further,
this might mean using the existing pottery (from day five) and reshaping it
into something new (the mammals of day six),
understand that the “potter” is still necessary. God is the Creator and force
responsible for the genetic alterations. He is in control of everything.
Why should God
make mammals in this way? Looking at this question from another angle we could
just as easily ask: why do we believe God must have done it in a certain way?
We should never be so arrogant as to demand that God follow our idea of what is
the proper method to create a universe, or a mammal. We should never be so
arrogant as to demand that God follow our limited understanding and
interpretation of Scripture.
Did God make all
mammals from a few pair of creatures or did He make many different kinds of
mammals initially? Again, Scripture is silent — we do not know. One idea may be
more palatable to us than the other but it is folly to demand a preferred
method is correct. Science is also uncertain on this point. Current theory is
that mammals descended from Therapsida, a large order
of reptiles (an order contains many species). This would indicate that several
cold-blooded reptile creatures developed along parallel lines to become
warm-blooded mammals. This seems too unlikely by unguided random natural
selection, but with God all things are possible.
Interestingly, the origin of mammals appears to be
mentioned already in day 5. Indeed, in Gen 1:21 we read “And God created... every living creature that moveth.” The Hebrew for
“creature” here is different than “creature” mentioned in verse 20. The Hebrew
word is nephesh
and it is often translated as “soul” — not to be confused with spirit. Spirit
refers to the immortal; soul in Scripture refers to life, having limited mind
and emotions. Unlike reptiles, mammals are capable of emotional expression.
The fossil record tells us that until 65 million years ago
mammals were confined to rodent-sized creatures scurrying about at the
dinosaurs’ feet. When the dinosaurs became extinct the mammals quickly came to
dominate the earth, exploding in numbers and variety. Isn't this what the Bible
tells us that God did on the sixth day?
Science and the Bible are once again in complete agreement.