2. THE CREATION ACCOUNT

 

With so many theories going around today concerning the beginning of the world it is worthwhile to consider this question before we launch ourselves into a study of the Book of Genesis proper. This study assumes the Biblical account as being the accurate and correct account. The study will be approached not to exhaustively consider every theory, nor will it consider the theories raised in detail, but it will draw attention to a few theories that are out there.

This study will also present some Biblical evidence for the traditional view of the Genesis creation account. It may prove inconsequential and unsatisfactory for proponents of some of the other views, but Lord willing will prove helpful to those who hold to the traditional view of the creation account.

As Christians who believe the Bible, we are required to accept what the Bible says regarding creation. All other viewpoints that come from other sources, whether they are geology, history or mythology, must all submit to the final authority of the Word of God. If they are contrary to this standard, then these theories are to be cast aside, no matter how attractive they may at first appear.

QUESTION: By what are we to determine the origins of the universe and the world? Give reasons for your answer.

 

SCRIPTURE VERSUS MAN-MADE THEORIES

It has been widely thought that the Bible’s creation account was derived from any number of ancient creation myths and stories, such as the Babylonian epic, which is divided into seven tables. In the Babylonian epic there are two beings called Apsu and Tiamat who bring forth a generation of various deities. These deities become extremely powerful and so the two original deities attempt to slay them with the result that Tiamat is slain. Tiamat is split in two to become the heavens and the earth, with men and women being made from the blood of Tiamat’s chief minister. From this extremely brief description it can be seen that though there may be similarities at some points, there is plenty that is different.

However, the theory that the Bible’s creation account came from such mythological accounts can be countered by the thought that these myths and stories are more than likely perversions of the original creation account as outlined in the Scriptures, having been modified through a history of oral transmission from generation to generation. It should be noted that the Biblical account was held in trust by Israel and not Babylon or other ancient civilisations.

Then there is of course the current day debate over creation and evolution. Any attempt to blend or marry the two views of creation and evolution is thwart with danger for the person who professes to be a Christian. The Bible gives clear indications that the theory of evolution will not stand the scrutiny of Scripture. Yet the counter argument is that scientific proof shows evolution to be correct and so Christians feel pressure to adjust what they interpret the Scriptures to teach in order to fit in with the so-called irrefutable evidence of modern science. Such scientific proof is said to exist in the fossil record, geology, etc. The theory of evolution more-or-less calls for the eternity of matter and spontaneous generation, for what is made must come from something that has always existed. It is generally regarded as a ‘fact,’ rather than a theory. However, the non-existent simply cannot develop into existence.

Theistic Evolution seeks to combine ‘science’ with the Bible, achieving neither science nor Biblicism. God is seen as the one who begins the evolutionary process, stepping in at periodic intervals to help nature cross the impossible gaps. In this theory, ‘the missing links’ of evolution are the periodic interventions of God. But is this an honest understanding of what the Bible teaches on creation?

The Genesis account (and indeed that of all Scripture - Acts 17:26; Rom 5:12-19) points to the beginning of the human race in two created beings, Adam and Eve (Gen 3:20). Without this understanding much of Biblical theology falls apart. There is no account in Scripture of man evolving from the creation, but the act of Divine creation by the Word of God.

 

THE BIBLICAL ACCOUNT OF CREATION

The first thing to note regarding the Biblical account of creation is that it was written in an ‘everyday’ manner. The account was not written for scientists, nor was it written in a secret code that requires special skills of interpretation to understand. The account was written to everyday people in everyday language in order to get a very simple message across to its readers. This may seem a very straightforward and unnecessary comment to make here, but it holds important ramifications for the way that the account is interpreted. What I am saying is that this idea needs to be in the forefront of our minds as we seek to understand the text. If we understand this simple principle, we will not see any need to go hunting for hidden meanings and complicated interpretations of the passage.

One area where this principle comes into play is the chronology of creation. Are the lengths of days mentioned in Genesis one 24-hour days or great geological ages? People trying to bring the creation account and modern-day science together would like to find many millions (if not billions) of years in each of these days. Yet it must be remembered that the account was written to people in everyday language clearly suggesting a normal 24-hour period for each of the days.

Add to this the normal Scriptural usage of the Hebrew word ‘yom’ and the traditional understanding of the Biblical account becomes obvious to the person who is not swayed by the pressure of modern-day science.

The prevailing view over the centuries has been that the days of the Genesis account were calendar days. The Hebrew word ‘yom,’ has a primary meaning of a literal day and proper exegesis requires it to be regarded as such, unless the context shows otherwise. The addition of, ‘and there was evening and there was morning’ confirms a literal day as the correct interpretation of the text. By comparing Scripture with Scripture, the same conclusion is reached (Ex 20:9-11; 31:15-17). Certainly from day four (creation of the sun), these were literal solar days.

Prior to day four the days could not have been solar days for the sun was not yet created. This being so, the calendar day theory has been a subject of almost constant controversy. Various views have been put forward to answer this problem, including those supporting the calendar days theory. Calvin believed that the light was interchanged with darkness, but was not sure whether this was the same as what we know in our experience as night and day. Perhaps the answer lies within God’s revealed Word (Rev 21:22).

The Biblical evidence certainly indicates that these first three days were of equal duration as the following three, and therefore it can be concluded that these were normal calendar days. A normal reading of the Genesis account clearly gives this impression.

There are of course those who merely see the creation account as symbolic truth, along with the entire portion of Genesis 1-11. However, the text of the Genesis account is clearly to be understood as historical narrative, for both geographical (Gen 2:8-17) and genealogical (Gen 5; 10; 11) material is included in the text. It is written as a simple eyewitness account and not as a scientific manual or textbook. Elsewhere in Scripture, the Genesis account is also regarded as historical fact (1 Chron 1; Job 38:4ff; Ps 33:6,9; 90:2; 102:25; Is 40:26,28; 42:5; 45:18; Jer 10:12-16; Lk 3:23-38; Jn 1:1ff; Acts 17:24; Rom 1:20,25; Col 1:16; Heb 1:2; 11:3).

What a number of the theories relating to the beginning of the world fail to recognize in contradiction to the Biblical creation account (especially when held to by Christians who claim to be Bible believing) is the ‘ex nihilo’ aspect of it. In other words the Bible clearly teaches a creation which originally began out of nothing. Creation was not formed from any pre-existent matter, but the materials of which it was formed were brought into existence at the exact time when the things themselves were created (Gen 1:1; Heb 11:3).

Creation came about simply (to God anyhow) by the Word of God’s power, called ‘The Divine Fiat (Ps 33:6,9; 148:5; Heb 11:3).’ God spoke and it came into existence out of His command. Previous to God’s command nothing existed. Therefore all theories of origins regarding the eternity of matter are false. However, a point is to be made for secondary creation, where something is made out of pre-created matter. For example, man was made out of the dust (Gen 2:7) and the animals and birds from the ground (Gen 2:19).

The theory of evolution clearly implies that there was matter to begin with, out of which evolved what we see today. To believe evolution then is to disbelieve the Scriptural account of creation out of nothing. Clearly the two cannot be logically upheld, it is an impossibility to do so.

QUESTION: Why should modern-day science be keen to push evolution at the expense of creation? What part does Romans 1-3 play in this process?

 

Creation is the free act of God whereby He, according to His own sovereign will and for His own glory, in the beginning brought forth the whole visible and invisible universe, without the use of pre-existent material and thus gave it an existence, distinct from His own and yet always dependent upon Him.

 

RESTITUTION THEORY

Another view that has held ground from time to time among Christians is the Restitution theory. According to Restitution Theory, a long period of time elapsed between the primary creation (Gen 1:1) and the secondary creation (Gen 1:3-31). The earth was originally a place for the angels and the fall of the angels resulted in the destruction and chaos of Genesis 1:2. Therefore the creation account in Genesis 1 is essentially a re-making of the universe.

The Gap Theory (Restitution Theory) believes Genesis 1:2 should read, ‘and the earth became without form and void.’ The theory says that the world was created perfect long ago, before the judgment brought down upon the fallen angels, and the resulting chaos of destruction and rebirth. The whole period previous to the period of judgment accounts for the geology of our earth. The process following the judgment, or the account in Genesis 1, is how the earth was ‘restituted’ for man. The days of this theory are calendar days.

 

INDIVIDUAL DISCOVERY

For this study there are no questions. However, if you have not already read through the Book of Genesis, it is recommended that you actually read through the entire book of Genesis prior to undertaking the next study.

 

© All Bible Studies by the webmaster may be freely copied, printed and distributed. We ask only that they remain unedited (unless approved by Kevin Matthews) and contain the Aussie Outpost name and site URL: http://particularbaptist.com/index.html. This Bible Study is by Kevin Matthews. It is suggested that this notice be included as is. Thankyou.

To assist in the study of Genesis Aussie Outpost is developing The Outpost Study Bible and other Bible Study Aids. Links to these further resources are listed below:

 

Outpost Homepage
GENESIS BIBLE STUDIES
BIBLE STUDIES PAGE
NEXT STUDY IN SERIES
TOP

19/10/2008

AN OUTPOST PRODUCTION