First Seminary Assignment

The assignment was to read an article by Mark Driscoll and discuss my view of creation. Here's what I came up with. To find the Driscoll article, go to

http://theresurgence.com/2006/07/03/answers-to-common-questions-about-creation

In his article entitled “Answers to Common Questions about Creation,” Pastor Mark Driscoll states that the reason it is necessary to have an educated and Biblical opinion about creation is because “the question of origins has implications for everything else.”

In my personal study, I have found this to be an accurate statement, and I believe creationism to be an important doctrine for my Christian life. This essay will attempt to offer a Biblical perspective on creation as written in Genesis 1-3 while using Pastor Driscoll’s article and other sources to explain where Biblical creationism and science compliment each other and where the two must agree to remain at odds.

The viewpoint of creation that I hold to is the historic creationism perspective. I believe that Genesis 1:1 tells of a long period of time in which God created the universe out of nothing. At some point long after “In the beginning,” Genesis 1:2 begins the story of God creating the earth as we know it in six literal twenty-four hour days. I adhere to this view for two primary reasons. First of all, the age of the earth is not recorded in Scripture, so it is not necessary for Christians to remain adamant of a young earth. Secondly, as a result of remaining open to the possibility of an old earth, I have noticed opportunities to share Christ with nonbelievers who otherwise would have dismissed Christianity altogether at the claim of the earth being only a few thousand years old.

Pastor Driscoll’s article has contributed to my viewpoint on creation in several ways. It has educated me on several other perspectives such as the gap theory, the literary framework view, and theistic evolution. In addition, it has provided information about non-Christian theories, which will undoubtedly aid future dialogues with nonbelievers. Most importantly, the article has convicted me of my need to be able to argue effectively for Biblical creationism and formulate solid doctrine on the subject. I am thankful for Driscoll’s research and insight into the topic of creation and all of the ways that it has impacted my own beliefs.

Turning to the first three chapters of Genesis, there are two main reoccurring themes that influence the interpretation to which I adhere. First of all, in Genesis 1, the words “God said” are used eight times in regards to how the universe came into existence. Secondly, Genesis 2:2-3 says, “And on the seventh day God finished His work that He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work that He had done. So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all His work that He had done in creation.”

The first idea leads me to believe that God said the word and creation came into being. Looking at Genesis 1:24, 25, there is no reason to believe that the animals God created evolved into other species at any point in time. It is important to take these words literally and accept as truth that the Bible speaks of God creating the heavens and the earth and all animals “according to their kinds” without leaving room for the possibility of macroevolution.

The other primary influence from Genesis on my beliefs is the beginning of Chapter 2, which indicates creation occurred in six literal twenty-four hour days. When compared to Exodus 20:11, there does not appear to be room for making these six days into longer periods of time. When the author of Genesis concludes each day by saying, “And there was evening and there was morning,” we should accept this to indicate a twenty-four hour day.

In an attempt to explain how the scientific evidence for an old earth impacts the Bible’s account of creation, one can understand why the view of one day being taken as a long period of time rather than twenty-four hours could come about. However, applying the historical creationism stance to Genesis 1, it becomes unnecessary to interpret Scripture figuratively in this instance. One can reconcile the literal twenty-four hour days with an old earth. In light of this, I adhere to the belief that the universe is potentially billions of years old as science indicates, but remain confident that God worked for six literal days to form the universe as we know it today. Since the age of the earth is not recorded in Scripture, Christians should allow science an opportunity to give the earth an old age without fearing God’s Word has been proven wrong.

While Christians can intellectually accept an old earth, evolution is another issue entirely. On the issue of evolution, I would echo Jude’s exhortation that we must contend for the faith. Darwin’s theory of macroevolution is not compatible with the creation account in Genesis 1-3. The most evident irreconcilability has to do with the creation of Adam versus the idea that we evolved from primates or even cavemen. In Genesis, God made Adam from dust. Adam was created as a self-aware, grown human whose intelligence enabled him to name every animal on earth. There is no possibility for evolution to intertwine with Scripture given the evidence from Genesis 1-3. Agreeing on this point is atheistic scientist Jerry Coyne who says, “Attempts to reconcile God and evolution keep rolling off the intellectual assembly line. It never stops, because the reconciliation never works.” While coming down on the opposite side of Christianity, Coyne nevertheless agrees that the two camps are incompatible.

It has become clear to me that the doctrine of creation is a central part of the Christian faith. As Christians, we must be sensitive to the discoveries of science on certain issues and remain immovable on such things as evolution. John Calvin writes, “Since the infinite wisdom of God is displayed in the admirable structure of heaven and earth, it is absolutely impossible to unfold the history of the creation of the world in terms equal to its dignity.” While it may be impossible for us to unfold and comprehend the history of creation completely, we can rejoice in the provision of God’s Word, which provides us with extraordinary insight into God’s loving design of the universe.

Bibliography

AlbertMohler.com, “Science Trumps the Bible? — An Amazingly Candid (and

Disastrous) Argument.” http://www.albertmohler.com/2010/10/27/science-

trumps-the-bible-an-amazingly-candid-and-disastrous-argument/ (accessed

October 28, 2010).

Calvin, John. Commentaries on The First Book of Moses Called Genesis. Translated by John King. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2009.

Driscoll, Mark. “Answers to Common Questions About Creation.”

http://theresurgence.com/2006/07/03/answers-to-common-questions-about-

creation (accessed October 28, 2010).