Category Archives: Creation

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

April 22, 2014

Posted under

Creation, Evolution

Genealogies Post-Abraham

I spent a bit of time on the genealogies from Adam to Abraham. I think these prove the point that the Bible leaves no room for gaps of any substance between Adam and Abraham. I wanted to take a little more time and look at the genealogies from Abraham onwards. Do these genealogies show that there are large gaps between the men listed? The text will answer that question for us.

Here are the main dates in the Biblical timeline from Abraham onward. These are accepted by most, if not all orthodox, Bible-believing Christians, as the approximate dates of key events. All dates are general and can be flexed a few years in either direction.

2100 B.C. Abraham Leaving Ur
1450 B.C. The Exodus
1010 B.C. David Become King
931 B.C. The Kingdom Splits
586 B.C. Southern Kingdom Falls to Babylon

The entire time from Abraham to the exile was only about 1500 years. Let’s look at the data and see if there is proof of gaps in the genealogies. This would not be a strong argument for those who believe there are thousands of years of gaps in the genealogies, but it could at least prove there were gaps.

We know that the chronology from Genesis is Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and then his twelve sons. Without this exact chronology the narrative of Genesis falls flat. Then you have a c. 400 year gap between Joseph and Moses. After Moses you have Joshua entering the promise land and then the time of the Judges. It is clear from Judges 2:10 that generation of Judges immediately follows Joshua’s generation. So there is no huge gap between Joshua and Judges. Then we enter the time of the Kings. So there are no gaps in the genealogical record from Abraham to David in the narratives.  Now let’s look at various genealogical records of that time period and compare them with Matthew 1.


First we can compare the genealogies in Ruth to the one in I Chronicles and then to Matthew 1. I highlighted the names in I Chronicles and Matthew 1 to help the reader.

Ruth 4:18-22
(18)  Now these are the generations of Perez: Perez fathered Hezron,
(19)  Hezron fathered Ram, Ram fathered Amminadab,
(20)  Amminadab fathered Nahshon, Nahshon fathered Salmon,
(21)  Salmon fathered Boaz, Boaz fathered Obed,
(22)  Obed fathered Jesse, and Jesse fathered David.
1Chron. 2:4-15
(4)  His daughter-in-law Tamar also bore him Perez and Zerah. Judah had five sons in all.
(5)  The sons of Perez: Hezron and Hamul.
(9)  The sons of Hezron that were born to him: Jerahmeel, Ram, and Chelubai.
(10)  Ram fathered Amminadab, and Amminadab fathered Nahshon, prince of the sons of Judah.
(11)  Nahshon fathered Salmon, Salmon fathered Boaz,
(12)  Boaz fathered Obed, Obed fathered Jesse.
(15)  Ozem the sixth, David the seventh.
Matthew 1:3-6
(3)  and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram,
(4)  and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon,
(5)  and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse,
(6)  and Jesse the father of David the king.
The Biblical record of the line from Judah (Perez’s Father) to David is consistent across the Scriptures. No proof of any gaps.
Here is the genealogy from Solomon to the Exile in Babylon. It is a little trickier. Why? Matthew’s list leaves out numerous people men that the writer of I Chronicles puts in. Here are the two genealogies side by side with ones Matthew leaves out in red.
Matthew 1:7-11
Solomon
Rehoboam,
Abijah
Asaph,
Jehoshaphat
Joram
Uzziah
Jotham
Ahaz
Hezekiah,
Manasseh
Amos
Josiah,
Jechoniah
 and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.
I Chronicles 3:10-17
Solomon
Rehoboam,
Abijah
Asa
Jehoshaphat
Joram
Ahaziah
Joash
Amaziah
Azariah=Uzziah
Jotham
Ahaz
Hezekiah
Manasseh
Amon
Josiah
Jehoiakim,
Jeconiah
Shealtiel
A couple of comments need to be made about this.
First, the problem here is not a gap in the Old Testament genealogy, but rather in Matthew. We have no proof from the Old Testament that there are gaps in the genealogical record. It would have been more convenient for those who believe in large gaps in the genealogies if Matthew had included people that I Chronicles left out. That would prove that there are gaps. But he didn’t. Therefore I am not sure how this helps their case. How does the fact that Matthew left certain men out of his genealogical record help prove that Adam was born 20,000 years ago?

Second, Matthew is squeezing the genealogical record into 14 generations (Matthew 1:17). He purposely chose to leave certain men out, men who are in II Kings and who are in the list in I Chronicles to make a balanced picture of 14-14-14. Why Matthew did this is hotly debated, but that he did it is beyond question. So Matthew was not ignorant nor was he missing some information. He got his list from II Kings and/or I Chronicles. He made a decision to leave some men out.

Third, proof that Matthew left men out is not proof that other writers did. It must be proven that I Chronicles or Genesis 5 have large gaps. This has not been proven.

Finally, given the time frame (late Israelite history) of this genealogy there is not room for large gaps anyway. Again the entire timeline from Abraham to the exile is only 1500 years.  How can we find thousands of more years in there? We can’t.

So again, we come to the same conclusion as we did in our other blog posts.  There are no examples in the Bible of large gaps in the genealogies. The examples of Cainan in Luke and Matthew’s genealogy are weak. There are very plausible explanations for why it was done this way that do not include inserting thousands of years into the genealogies.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

April 22, 2014

Posted under

Creation, Evolution

The Lines of Japheth and Ham

Earlier I pointed out how the Bible supports the idea that Adam was created around 6,000 years by looking at the genealogy from Adam to Noah and then from Shem to Abram.

I wanted to bring in two more genealogies. These are not as important biblically because the Bible is focused on the line that leads to Christ, that is Shem’s line. But they still prove my point that the genealogical records in the Bible do not support thousand year gaps in the genealogical record. 

The Line of Japheth
Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. From these three sons and their wives the entire earth was repopulated following the flood. Here are the places where we see Japheth’s line mentioned in the Scripture

Genesis 10:2-4 (Japheth’s line)
(2)  The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras.
(3)  The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.
(4)  The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim.
I Chron. 1:5-7 (Japheth’s Line)
(5)  The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras.
(6)  The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.
(7)  The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Rodanim.


These are exactly the same word for word.  Japheth, Gomer, or Javan are not mentioned in any other passages. Now I understand this is only three generations, Japheth, his sons, and his grandsons. But the point still stands. There is no evidence of gaps in the genealogy of these men. I Chronicles written hundreds of years after Moses gives us the same list as Genesis does. 

Here are the two places Ham’s line is mentioned. I highlighted the corresponding questions in the same color to make them easier to read. I also took out the extended section about Nimrod in Genesis 10:9-12. 

Gen 10:6-8, 13-18 (Ham’s Line)
(6)  The sons of Ham: Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan.
(7)  The sons of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and Sabteca. The sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan.
(8)  Cush fathered Nimrod; he was the first on earth to be a mighty man.
(13)  Egypt fathered Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim,
(14)  Pathrusim, Casluhim (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorim.
(15)  Canaan fathered Sidon his firstborn and Heth,
(16)  and the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites,
(17)  the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites,
(18)  the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites..
1Chron. 1:8-16 Ham’s Line
(8)  The sons of Ham: Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan.
(9)  The sons of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabta, Raama, and Sabteca. The sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan.
(10)  Cush fathered Nimrod. He was the first on earth to be a mighty man.
(11)  Egypt fathered Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim,
(12)  Pathrusim, Casluhim (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorim.
(13)  Canaan fathered Sidon his firstborn and Heth,
(14)  and the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites,
(15)  the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites,
(16)  the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites.
This is a similar situation to Japheth’s line. It goes from father, to son, to grandsons. There are no further mentions of Cush, Egypt, or Canaan as men in the Old Testament to compare this genealogy to. This one is also more complicated because tribes are listed not just men. But there is no proof in either list of gaps in the genealogy. 
Standard

Posted by

Posted on

April 11, 2014

Posted under

Creation, Genesis

What is an Old-Earth Creationist?

Wikipedia defines a young earth creationist as someone who believes the earth is between 5,700 and 10,000 years old. They believe that the Lord created the world from nothing in six, 24 hour days. They do not believe in evolution. This is all very clear.

But when it comes to the old earth creationist, clarity is lacking.Wikipedia gives no time frame for the old earth creationists. Some believe in evolution and some do not. What is an old-earth creationist? I am not being snarky here. I really want to know. I feel like this term is thrown around with only a very fuzzy definition. So here are some questions for Christians who would describe themselves as old-earthers or those who who have interacted with them.

Do you believe the world is millions of years old or tens of thousands? (Are there even Christians arguing that the earth is 25,000 years old? 50,000 years old? 100,000 years old? I have not heard this. This is not what secular old earthers argue for. My understanding is that old-earth creationists believe the earth is millions/billions of years old, not tens of thousands.)

If you believe the earth is only thousands of years old, why? (Again I have not heard this theory said or implied in any of the study I have done of old earth creationists.)

For those who believe the earth is millions of years old:

Do you believe that only land +water has been around for millions of years (Creation days 1-2)? Or do you also believe that plants, fish, birds, and animals have been around for millions of years (Creation days 3-6)? (I have not heard anyone argue that only the first two days are millions of years, but I guess this is possible.)

Do you believe man has been around for millions of years? If you believe men lived prior to Adam, when did Adam come into existence and did those men who lived prior to Adam die ? If you don’t believe men lived prior to Adam and you do believe there are millions of years between us and Adam where do you find the millions of years in the Biblical chronology?

Do you believe evolution is part of the process by which God populated the globe? Do you believe man evolved from a lower species?

There are two reasons I would like to see these questions answered. First, old earth creationists need to be clear about what they are and are not saying. Saying, “I believe in the Framework Theory” or “Yom can mean great ages of time” is insufficient. It allows one to slide out the back door without really stating his opinion on what is really the point: the age of the earth and evolution. Old-earth Christians need to clearly explain their position on these two things. If they say they do not know how old the earth is, then I will ask, “Could it be less than 10,000 years?” If they answer, “No” then I will know they are not age of the earth agnostics. They do know how old they think the earth is, they just won’t say.

The other point is that in secular science the age of the earth and evolution are two sides of the same coin. The reason the earth needs to be millions/billions of years old is to support the theory of evolution. Without evolution, why posit an earth that is millions of years old? I think old earthers want to say the earth is old without saying they believe in evolution. It is possible to say this. I know many evangelical men do. But can one logically separate an old earth from evolution?

I know there is variety among the old-earthers, but clarity on the age of the earth, evolution, and the link or non-link they see between the two would be very helpful.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

April 9, 2014

Posted under

Bible, Creation, Genesis

Comments

7 Comments

Initial Thoughts on the Age of the Earth

I have been doing some study on the age of the earth. I am just beginning to scratch the surface of the research out there. I have my assumptions about its age. These assumptions come from a straight forward reading of Genesis 1-3 and related texts. However, I know many evangelicals disagree on this point.  Here are some of my initial thoughts on this subject. These are a bit random but they put fences around my further exploration of the topic.

The three books I have used so far have been Jim Jordan’s Creation in Six Days, Douglas Kelly’s Creation and Change, and Henry Morris’ The Genesis Record. I have also read some articles that deal with this including Kline and Waltke. I read some of Philip Johnson a long time ago. I have also read various secular men who are working to refute or at least modify the prevailing views of evolution.

First, the Biblical chronology from Adam to us is a few thousand years. Even if we put gaps in the genealogies (and it must be proven they exist), we cannot get thousands (much less millions) more years. If you look at Genesis 5, 11, and other genealogies, such as Luke 3, it is clear that they are intended to be pretty straight forward accounts of who was born to whom. For example, compare Genesis 5:1-24 with I Chronicles 1:1-3, Luke 3:36-38, and Jude 1:14. All of these show that Enoch was the seventh generation after Adam. There may be gaps (and there may not be) but these gaps are not thousands of years. Thus from Adam to us will be around 6,000 years maybe a bit  more. If thousands or millions of more years are to found they must be found earlier than Adam. One cannot posit an old earth (unless by old-earth one means 10,000 years or less!) from the Biblical chronology post-Adam. In other words, from the day six creation of Adam to us is not very long.

Second, the Bible treats the creation account as history. It assumes a literal Adam and Eve with a literal fall in the garden that happened exactly as the Genesis account says it does. Christ assumes the creation account is accurate in Matthew 19:3-9. Paul assumes the creation account in I Corinthians 11:8-9 and I Timothy 2:13-14. Henry Morris has an extensive list of New Testament allusions and quotations to Genesis. Not all of these are from the first few chapters of Genesis. But the list proves that New Testament treated Genesis as real history.

Third, Adam was created from the dust of the earth. He did not evolve. Eve was created from his side. She did not evolve either. There is nothing in the Genesis text to point to the animals evolving either. Theistic evolution is compromise of highest order.

Fourth, death came with Adam’s sin. There was no death prior to Adam’s sin. This is clear in the New Testament passages which refer to Adam (Romans 5:12-21 and I Corinthians 15:21-22). The phrase, “It was good” throughout Genesis 1 could point to this as well. To say there was death prior to Adam is to undo the fabric of Scripture.

Fifth, the concept of evolution necessarily involves death. I understand this is simplistic. But evolution means organisms that do not adapt die. For evolution to be a part of the creation week there must be death. But death does not come until Genesis 3. What about plants? Did they die prior to Adam’s sin? There is no reason to assume that to be the case. It would appear there is a difference between plants and animals in this regard. Plants could be eaten prior to the fall and may be eaten in the New Heavens and Earth (Isaiah 11:6-9, 65:25). (These passages in Isaiah probably involve some type of symbolism. But even if that is the case the symbol is one of peace. Thus eating straw implies peace, not death.) Another thought is eating a plant does not require it dying. Eating an animal usually does.

Sixth, God created all things from nothing (See Jeremiah 32:1, Acts 4:24, Colossians 1:16-17, and Hebrews 11:3). Matter is not eternal (See II Timothy 1:9 and Titus 1:1). Only God is. There was a time when there was only God.

Seventh, there is no reason to pit literary form against literal chronology. The Bible often punctuates historical narratives with literary structures. For example, the entire book of Genesis is structured by the idea of generations (See Genesis 2:4, 5:1, 6:9, etc.). Does this literary device make the story non-chronological or unhistorical? Does a chiasm in I Kings make it unhistorical and non-chronological? My point here is that to argue for a literary/poetic reading of Genesis 1 does not have to lead one away from a 24-hour, six day creation. It must be proven that the literary structure denies a 24-hour, six day creation.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

May 10, 2012

Posted under

Creation

Creation and Technology: Part II

1.   Sin does not live inside of technology or things. Computers do not make us sin. Cars do not make us sin. Sin is always what we do with things and how we corrupt them. Someone who gets rid of their TV is not getting rid of sin. They are putting one particular area of temptation out of reach. This is not bad. It will prevent sinning. But it is not a permanent answer. If a man lacks self-control with his computer, he does not gain self-control by getting rid of the computer.  But he does close a gate where his lack of self-control tended to take him off the right road. The important thing to remember is the computer was not the problem. The man is. A righteous man will recognize those situations where he is tempted and avoid them. But a righteous man will also know that the sin and temptation are in his own heart not in the machine.  

2.   Though sin does not live inside of machines, etc. technology does have direction. It shapes our lives in particular ways. The biggest problem Christians have is we don’t think about how technology shapes our lives. We just keep buying things and using things without a care for how they are changing the way we think and live. Technology rules over us instead of us ruling over it.  We fail to be faithful kings and priests with our technology.
a.    Example: How has our world changed by the automobile?  We used to rarely travel outside of our community. People could live their entire lives and never leave their city or town. Teens would not be able to travel to other cities. We could not drive 45 minutes to a church that we liked better. We could not move across the country in a couple of days.  Much of what we bought, especially food, was bought locally because there was not any way to ship it. Now I can get food from all over the world.  The automobile has completely reshaped our lives.  How does this reshaping hurt the Christian life? How does it help? We need to ask these types of questions. Unfortunately we rarely do.
b.    Example 2: What happens when we substitute a teacher on video for a teacher in the classroom?  How does this reshape the learning experience? Is it good or bad? How should we as Christians approach video technology like this?

3.   With all technology something is gained and something is lost. Figure out what it is. Should what was lost be kept? Is the gain worth it? Should we actually desire what the new technology is giving us?
a.    Example: For hundreds of years men and women farmed. Some farmed for their family. Others farmed for their community. But farming, or something like it, was essential to the life of most people. Now, due primarily to technology, farming represents a very small percentage of our population.  That, by itself, is not bad. But something was lost when we made the transition from plowing to typing.  Should what was lost with farming be kept? I think the answer is yes. We need ask these types of questions. 

4.       Here are some current dangers with technology, especially the internet, cell phones, etc.
a.   We think we are connected with other people, but it is only an illusion. We are only connected with their picture or voice. 
b.   Our lack of self-control with technology leads to laziness and squandering of time.
c.   Everything has got to be fast. There is not time to slow down and go deep. We don’t stop and think about our lives and where they are going. We just go, go, go.
d.   Those who sell technology try to cultivate in our hearts a deep desire to “keep up/be cool.”  The Bible calls this greed or covetousness. There is nothing wrong with having an up to date phone or computer.  But to long for and covet the latest thing is usually a sin.  The eyes are never satisfied. (Proverbs 27:20) The advertisers know this.
e.   We are too mentally scattered to be effective.  This is closely related to “c” above.  Instead of sitting down and spending a couple of hours focusing on one thing, we leap from thing to thing. We go to a friend’s house, but answer the cell phone several times while we are there. We are at the movies, but we are texting during it. We are working on a project in our cubicle, but we keep thinking about whether or not there is a new email. Our minds are fragmented.  Focus has been lost.