In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth.
In the Beginning God Created the Heavens and the Earth
Introductory Reading: Genesis 1
One of the vexatious questions of science today concerns the age of the earth. Why would this be an important issue? It is an issue because it has a profound influence on the way people understand the origin and purpose of life, and because if we can understand origins, we are better able to develop new things as we will understand how the plans work.
Ancient records from many cultures speak of the origin of life as a fairly recent phenomena, the result of the creative power and acts of a great being; scientists of this era suggest life is millions of years old, and the earth even older. There are strong opinions for both viewpoints, which cannot be reconciled. Is it possible to come to any undisputable position of truth in the matter?
Fundamentally, it is not possible to come to an indisputable position, and the reason is quite simply because we cannot turn back the clock! What we have to do instead is evaluate the various belief systems, and choose the one which makes most sense, the one which has the most secure foundation. Even within the ranks of the main opinions we find experts sniping at their own colleagues, both in the scientific and the religious communities. It is little wonder then that ordinary folk might be perplexed, or even worse, just accept whatever proposition happens to be presented to them, without wanting to question or understand the issues.
If the boffins and propeller heads cannot agree among themselves how this world and our creation came about, then what chance have we of coming to grips with the answers, if there be any? There are answers, and there are good answers, and there are different and often mutually exclusive answers. The answer which is right is the one which satisfies our personal need to know, and which is consistent with all the evidence we can understand.
When we discuss this topic, there are so many things we cannot know, cannot test, cannot prove, cannot repeat, that we have to accept them at face value. The crucial thing is to understand the value, then we will be able to accept what we cannot prove, where it is consistent with the value. We move into the realms of faith.
We make no apology for thinking of this subject in terms of faith where others may require hard and incontrovertible facts. Faith is required whatever position you adopt, whether the idea that this entire solar system, including our earth, came into being about six thousand years ago, or six million years ago, or however many billions of years we want to think. None of the arguments concerning the physical nature of the development of our earth are as secure as the fossils are embedded in the rocks! What we do know undeniably as facts, can only lead us to conclusions which depend upon our interpretation of the facts. Our conclusions will therefore be sensitive to the context in which we examine them.
How many have heard the story of the men of the Blind Men of Indostan and the Elephant?
The Story of the Blind Men and the Elephant, by John Godfrey Saxe
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
Though all of them were blind,
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.
The First approached the Elephant
And, happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me, but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"
The Second, feeling the tusk,
Cried, "Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis very clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"
The Third approached the animal
And, happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up he spake:
"I see," quoth he, "The Elephant
Is very like a snake!"
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee:
"What most the wondrous beast is like
Is very plain," quoth he;
"Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said, "Even the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can:
This marvel of an elephant
Is very like a fan!"
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong.
Though each was partly in the right,
They all were in the wrong!
Why is this a cautionary tale in our context? We, and the scientific experts who have studied the matter of the beginnings of the earth, are like these blind men of Indostan, we can only see one small part of the picture, and our conclusions may not be consistent with the whole, although individually they may be reasonable. The impediment we have is the inability to see what happened before we were here to witness it.
Now we can go back to an earlier point, that we need to evaluate the various belief systems, and choose the one which in context makes most sense. This is likely to lead us closest to the path of truth. It will come as no surprise that we are to discuss the Biblical approach to the problem. What may come as a surprise is that the Bible is not in conflict with scientific evidence, rather, it conflicts from time to time with the interpretations made on the basis of that evidence. Different interpretations arise because of different perspectives, like the blind men and the elephant.
As a starting point, assume this creation dates back to 4004 BC. An English Bishop named Ussher took his Bible and after carefully going through all the dates and time spans, suggested the earth was created about four millennia before the birth of Christ. His work was quite thorough, and can be checked by anyone with the patience to work out the genealogies given in the early Biblical records. Many Bibles, even today, use Ussher's chronology, and if yours has a date at the top of the page, it probably derives from Ussher's work.
Geochronological Time Measurement
We would also like to quote some figures in a discussion by an evolutionist about the age of the earth as determined by various methods of geochronology. The book is called "The Facts of Life", and it was written by Richard Milton, who indicates in this book that he does not believe in creation. His book was written to illustrate the serious flaws in the methods and conclusions used by the evolutionist community in its assessment of dates and its interpretation of the fossil and geological records. Milton explains how he gets these figures, ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Geochronological Time Measurement
We would also like to quote some figures in a discussion by an evolutionist about the age of the earth as determined by various methods of geochronology. The book is called "The Facts of Life", and it was written by Richard Milton, who indicates in this book that he does not believe in creation. His book was written to illustrate the serious flaws in the methods and conclusions used by the evolutionist community in its assessment of dates and its interpretation of the fossil and geological records. Milton explains how he gets these figures, and we commend his work to you, this evening we just wish to present some of his conclusions.
Method
Indicated Age of Earth
Radiogenic Helium in Atmosphere
Less than 175,000 years
Poynting-Robertson Effect
Less than 100,000 years
Persistence of Interplanetary dust
Less than 100,000 years
Non-equilibrium of carbon 14
Less than 30,000 years
Persistence of short period comets
Less than 10,000 years
Magnetic field decay
Less than 10,000 years
Dissolved nickel in oceans
Less than 9,000 years
Meteoric dust in atmosphere
Recent origin of earth
Continental drift (ice-cap rupture)
Recent origin of earth
If we might pick one for an example that is easier to understand, perhaps it would be the issue of meteoric dust. There is dust falling to earth from space all the time. The rate at which it arrives here has been measured to be about 14 million tons each year. The total amount which has fallen can be reasonably estimated, because it contains materials which are not otherwise commonly found on earth. When all the numbers are crunched, it turns out that from the amount of dust known to have fallen if the current rate of deposition has been constant, the earth has only been collecting dust for about 9,000 years or less! This figure is supported by the known depth of the same dust on the moon of just a few centimetres, not the 180ft depth required if the planets had been collecting this stuff for 450 million years.
Genesis Creation
Let us see what the Bible actually has to say about the creation. Where better to start than at Genesis 1?
What does the first verse or two in the Bible say?
(Gen 1:1-2 KJV) "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. {2}And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
When was the beginning? Was it 4000 years before Christ, six millennia before our time? We do not think anyone will argue that it was at least this long ago, and we suggest that it was at least this length of time, perhaps not 6000, but rather 12000 or more years ago. We would even suggest that a few million years may not be out of line for the length of time this lump of stuff in space we call the earth has been knocking around. We do draw the line at billions of years, because there is no incontrovertible scientific evidence to support billions of years, but much which appears to support hundreds of thousands of years. The hundreds of millions of years propounded by geologists, paleontologists, and others of that ilk are conjectures based on reasoning and theory which needs that sort of time span, not on measurements made in the laboratory! Dubious laboratory methods have been grasped gleefully by the evolutionists because they support their cause, but there has been improper evaluation of the true meaning of the measurements.
As we have seen, laboratory measurements suggest the earth is in fact very young, with nine different methods coming up with ages of the earth of less than 175,000 years.
The Bible allows us to have an old earth, i.e. the earth existed for a long time before it bore the current inhabitants. It was also covered in water at that time, noted from verse 2 in conjunction with verse 9 of that first chapter. A lot of the geological structure is said by those who study it to have been laid down by water, and formed as a consequence of being under great depths of water for long periods of time. This is fine as far as it goes. The Genesis record allows for this phenomenon, without placing any time limitations upon it! The important point here is that God created the earth, however many millennia ago is not at this time important. It is important we recognize that he created it, it did not just materialize.
In this connection, consider what is written in the Epistle to the Hebrews. In Hebrews 11 the writer is discussing various manifestations of faith. What is written in Heb 11:3?
(Heb 11:3 KJV) "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."
Why is it that faith is required to understand? It is because we were not there to see it happen, we can only appreciate the consequences of the work. The same idea is relevant to the viewpoint of the non creationism believers as to the creationists, because none of us was there to witness the activity when the world order was created and set into motion. In fact the writer in Hebrews 11:3 is pointing out that any order of things has a beginning, and is not created out of nothing. We have no need for a miraculous 'big bang', the world we know was created by the commandment of God.
We have made no apology for turning to the scriptures for support. The self consistency of the word of scripture confirms its reliability. These are ancient writings, and yet show a remarkable correspondence with modern discovery, even though conventional wisdom of previous ages has been different. Many early civilizations have depicted the earth as being supported by something in space, by Atlas, a tortoise, by pillars. All of these ideas derive from an undeveloped knowledge of 'primitive' minds. The Bible, on the other hand, has on record things which have only relatively recently been appreciated. If you will look at the Book of Job, written at least a thousand years before Christ, and perhaps almost two thousand years BC, there are some interesting ideas expressed in chapter 26. Job speaks about the Almighty God:
(Job 26:7 KJV) "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
Even the early records of the Bible show that God had suspended the earth in space, not supported it as the wisdom other civilizations would have it. The reality of this fact has been understood in recent times, but only since the spacecraft have been broadcasting pictures of earth from space have we been able to appreciate the beauty of this situation. Job understood it well before the birth of Christ, and many since his time have pictured it differently, as folklore will testify. We therefore have reason to have confidence in the scriptures for their technical accuracy, bearing in mind they are not intended to be a technical reference manual!
First Day
Going back to Genesis 1, we have this hunk of waterlogged shapeless stuff floating around in space just waiting for some action. The time for action has come.
(Gen 1:3-5 KJV) "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. {4}And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. {5}And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."
It is the daily rotation of the earth which gives us day and night, here is the record that it started, and thus defined a day, the first day in fact. It has been said in some circles that this was the start of a creative epoch, divided into six periods, each of which must have taken millions of years, or at least, these periods were not, it is suggested, literal days of 24 hours duration. Thus an opportunity is created for evolution to have been the mechanism by which God created.
If God had wanted us to believe in an evolutionary type of process, would he have couched this record in such clear terms? He did not just say that on the first day light and darkness was created, on the second something else. He very specifically mentions that the day was opened in the morning, and closed in the evening, and he mentions it for every day of creation. We have no justification for speaking of these days as anything other than 24 hours duration. There is also the logical reason that the work could only have occurred in the sequence given if it occurred within the time-span the record gives.
Second Day
Creation proceeded. On day two, water was moved from the surface of this planet to form a separate layer above the surface in preparation for the creation of land mass. This would leave the earth a little different from what we know today, because there is now no water body above the atmosphere, except as vapour in the clouds.
(Gen 1:8 KJV) "And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."
Third Day
This arrangement prepared the earth for living things. The water belt above would keep things warm and moist over all the earth, and the rotation of day and night was ideal for plant life. The next day's work was to make dry land rise above the water still on the earth's surface. Once there was land, the planting could begin, and begin it did until the earth was verdant. What does it say in verses 11 and 12?
(Gen 1:11-12 KJV) "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. {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."
There are some important ideas here, do not miss them. The plants were created bearing seed, in other words they were able to propagate from the beginning in a manner with which we are still familiar, and they were unique within their species, they did not change into some other plant when they propagated. This situation still exists, where even by carefully controlled selective breeding, scientists cannot produce a self propagating robust new species. The best they can do is accentuate the inherent characteristics of the stock they have. Genetic engineering may allow them to make strides in this direction, but even so, they are merely moving characteristics from one organism to another, not creating new characteristics or species.
The day was concluded with a statement.
(Gen 1:13 KJV) "And the evening and the morning were the third day."
Thus the 24 hour period is reinforced. Do we find it fantastic that so much work could be accomplished in 24 hours? If so, we have forgotten, or do not believe that the Almighty God is omnipotent. He knows no limits, we are limited not only by our feeble strength, but also by our puny imagination!
Fourth Day
What of the fourth day? With the plant life beginning to have an impact on the atmosphere, and the rotation of the earth causing even warming, the vapours between the earth surface and the waters above began to clear. The sun was now made visible, and the moon set in her course. The sun was evidently present before, it is the only source of illumination in this solar system, now it was revealed on the earth, together with the moon, and they were set not only to mark the passage of time between day and night, but also to be for signs.
(Gen 1:16 KJV) "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also."
The day concluded with the same pronouncement as the previous days, reinforcing the 24 hour nature of the time period.
(Gen 1:19 KJV) "And the evening and the morning were the fourth day."
We know that plants do not depend upon animals for life, but there are some plants which need animals, birds or insects for propagation. It would be impossible for the plants to reproduce without the bees to pollinate, or the furry animals to carry the hooked seed cases. It was essential for their survival that the animal world come into existence in a very short time after the plants themselves were created.
Fifth Day
Plant life is essentially self supporting. It benefits from animal population, but animals cannot survive long without plant life. It is logical therefore that animals were created after plants. The plants are, after all, the major source of food for animals. The animal creation was made over two days, on the fifth day the aquatic creatures were created, and the birds.
(Gen 1:21-22 KJV) "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. {22}And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth."
Notice the emphasis, that these creatures brought forth after their kind, the distinction of the species, separately created, not derived from each other. Again this reflects current experience, that species are fixed, there is no change from one species to another, no robust modification of the genetic code which is responsible for different species. Salmon only produce salmon, eagles only produce eagles.
The day was ended with the usual pronouncement.
(Gen 1:23 KJV) "And the evening and the morning were the fifth day."
We cannot get away from the insistence that this happened in a twenty-four hour period.
Sixth Day
The land animals were created on the sixth day.
(Gen 1:24-25 KJV) "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. {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."
The insistence that each brought forth of his own kind ought to alert us to the problems with the evolutionary scheme of things. The record in the scriptures which is known to date back at least 2000 years before Christ, is accurate in this regard even 4000 years or more later. Scientific exploration has been unable to provide proof that one species turns into another. At every step the evolutionist is bedeviled by missing links. One would have thought that with such diversity in creation there would be some indisputable evidence of the process. Evidence, there is none. The lack of evidence makes it necessary to have faith if we are to accept the evolutionary process as the explanation. It actually requires more faith than the simple and logical explanation given in Genesis 1 by the Creator himself. One should not be surprised that the Creator's own account is much more believable.
Creation of Man
The final day of creation, the sixth day, was very special, for in it man and woman were created.
(Gen 1:26-27 KJV) "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. {27}So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."
These verses are a summary of what was actually done. Before we look at the more detailed record, note that man was to be made in the image and likeness of the Creator, and that he was to have dominion over the rest of the creation. He was a special part of creation, not one of the beasts, as we shall see. This too corresponds with experience. Mankind is above the beasts, albeit regrettably able also to sink to the lowest of levels too. Man was created in this elevated position for a reason, and that reason is what makes the whole creation story outlined here so much more believable and realistic than the alternative concepts of man's device. It is what makes this explanation the only correct and true account of how we got here. It provides the rationale which makes the picture complete, so we are not like the evolutionists, and like the blind men and the elephant, who have lots of information about the problem, but no cohesive solution to the question.
Look at Genesis 2:7
(Gen 2:7 KJV) "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."
Man was made a complete individual, then given life. The language is clear, not ambiguous. There is no hint of development over a long period of time, with careful refining of the characteristics of the form until it was just right. Man was created from the earth, then made alive. He was not left to roam about like the beasts, but was put into a specially prepared place which we call the garden in Eden. His job was to look after the garden.
(Gen 2:15 KJV) "And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it."
Man had a job to do. This is not required of the beasts, only man had this responsibility. This was why he was created, to look after the rest of creation, to keep it beautiful for the Almighty Creator, to give his creator pleasure.
We will remember that Man was created in the image and likeness of God. You may also have noticed that in Genesis 1 the plural is often used, indicating God had help in the creative work. This help was from the angels. If man is in the same image and likeness as the Almighty, and God himself has angels working with him, it will not surprise us to find that man had need of companionship.
(Gen 2:18-20 KJV) "And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. {19}And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. {20}And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him."
Had the Creator made a mistake? Had he tried to make man like himself, having no peers, and then found man could not work in that capacity? Why, when man was made, did God not make woman also, as he did the beasts, the male and his female? Why were there none of the animals able to provide the companionship the man needed? In the answers to these questions is evidence that the simple creation record here recounted is accurate and unembellished.
The animal creation was made for decorative purposes perhaps, but is unable to give any more glory to its maker than a wooden model of a ship can give to the craftsman. Adam had a more honourable rôle, he was required to reflect not only the glory, but also the attributes of his Creator. This the animal creation could not do. This was why there was no suitable companion found for Adam in the animal kingdom. Adam's companion had to have sympathy with him, and had to be able to help him reflect the glory of his creator. A special creation was required to do this.
Creation of Woman
The woman was not created out of the dust as was Adam, and as were the beasts. Read from Genesis 2 how she was made.
(Gen 2:21-24 KJV) "And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; {22}And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. {23}And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. {24}Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."
In order that the woman should be a suitable companion, she was made out of the man, of his own flesh and bone. This is the reason why the relationship between a man and a woman is the way it is. This is why it is a different relationship than that which exists between a beast and its mate. There is a sympathy between man and woman which has to do with the likeness of God. As woman in a very practical way, and in an emotional way, is part of man, and the pair of them can rise to great heights of companionship, so mankind has been created and put upon the earth to reflect the same sort of association with the Creator. This is a very difficult thought to grasp, but once we can appreciate it, we can begin to understand God, and what he wants, and what he will give to the deserving. As a man and woman, separated by creation, can be joined by marriage, so God desires to be joined to his creation, from which he has been separated by disobedience.
Replenish the Earth
Let us go back to Genesis 1 and read from verse 27 again.
(Gen 1:27-28 KJV) "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. {28}And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."
Notice again the emphasis on the fact that the creation of the man and the woman was special, of the beasts it was not said, "male and female created he them". Notice also that little word 'replenish'. You know what it means, it means 'fill again'. This word is important because it implies that before Adam and Eve, this first pair we have been talking about, there was another creation which populated the earth, a creation which has nothing to do with our purpose, and about which we are told nothing. If it existed here, it did so at a time before the earth became void and without form, as we read from the early verses of Genesis. Speculation is very interesting.
Conclusion
We have intentionally devoted most of our time to the scriptures, because they alone have any authoritative message concerning creation. They are known from other testimony to be accurate, and their approach to creation is totally consistent with the overall message, summarized in the book of the Revelation this way.
(Rev 4:11 KJV) "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created."
Creation begs us to consider that we are here for a purpose, and that we have a responsibility to a higher power. This is one reason why specific creation is no longer appreciated, it places a responsibility upon us which many choose not to have. Other theories to account for how we got here do not have this characteristic, and furthermore they elevate man to the highest point, not considering there may be a relevant greater authority or power.
The record of Adam and Eve immediately after creation is also a logical and enlightening reason for the act that life does not go on for ever, even though living things ought to be able to maintain the ability to regenerate and recover from physical damage. In this connection an explanation is also provided why people do wrong, a phenomena which is hard to understand in the evolutionary context, and which for this reason is leading to general decline in the moral state of civilization.
We would like to draw to your attention the fact that science supports the concept of a 'young earth', and that evolutionary theory does not have the sound backing we are lead to believe. Specific creation is the only logical explanation why we are here, and indeed nature around us cries out that it has a creator, that is has purpose in its beauty and glory.
We would close these remarks by quoting from the Prophet Isaiah.
(Isa 42:5,8 KJV) "Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein: ... {8}I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images."