In May 2019 I visited Uluru and Kata Tjuta in Central Australia. The explanations of these rock formations say that these sands and gravels were deposited about 500 million years ago. But where does this date come from? After all, it’s not written anywhere on these sedimentary rocks!
This post is based on a children’s book by Hughes and Cosner (2018).
Claims about the past?
If the Bible says that the earth is only thousands of years old, how do scientists know that fossils and rocks can be millions of years old? Fossils and rocks don’t have dates written on them like some historical events. This is explained by the fact that there are two stories about the past which are used to explain the facts we see today in different ways. One assumes the historical record in the Bible and the other a historical record constructed by those who disregard the Bible. Both of these stories are based on historical science.
There are two types of science. They are called operational science and historical science, and they deal with two very different things.
Operational science is the type of science that one might do in a laboratory, about how the world works today. It’s all based on what you actually see. You can perform tests and observe what happens. For example, at sea level, water will always boil at the same temperature (100 0C or 212 0F). In operational science, anyone can repeat an experiment and see if they get the same results. Testable and repeatable science is why we have smartphones, spaceships, and lots of other inventions.
Historical science deals with what happened in the past, but you cannot do experiments on events in the past. An example of this would be paleontology (the study of fossils). Scientists might unearth a dinosaur find and then tell a story of how long ago the dinosaur lived and died. But the scientist’s ideas about how old it is cannot be directly tested because it happened in the past without direct witnesses.
Is historical science real science? Can creationists use historical science?
Yes; creationists also use it to come up with ideas about what they think happened in the past, just like evolutionists. The difference is that creationists have eye witnesses for the big events of the past, and use historical science to explore the detail. For instance, creation geologists use what is known from small-scale disasters like the Mt St Helens volcanic eruption in 1980 to explain what may have happened during the global flood of Noah’s day (Gen. 7:11-19). The Bible has a better history than evolution (2 Tim. 3:16-17). The Bible is the history book of the universe, so it should be our authority when it comes to looking at the past.
Can historical science prove creation or evolution?
No, but it can give people ideas about what possibly happened in the past. Actually, creationists and evolutionists have the same set of facts – the same fossils, rocks, living things, and so on. Those facts are interpreted by creationists and evolutionists as evidence for one view or the other, but the facts themselves aren’t automatically ‘for’ one side or the other. So, everyone has the same evidence, just different interpretations. Different worldviews. A good example is what we think happened to the dinosaurs. An evolutionist might say it was the impact from an asteroid. And a creationist might say they became extinct due to changes in the weather after the catastrophic global flood, or even possibly as a result of humans hunting them.
Why do people only hear the evolutionary view?
For many reasons, evolution has long been the popular view of most scientists, but it wasn’t always that way. Almost all fields of science were started by Bible-believing thinkers. But, since creation is linked with Christianity and not natural processes, people argue that teaching creation in schools and museums is teaching ‘religion’, not science. What they don’t realize is that evolution is also linked with a religion – atheism, that denies God as the Creator (Rom. 1:20-23).
How do I know when historical science is right or wrong?
We can’t know for sure what happened in the past unless there is an eyewitness – and the Bible has a trustworthy eyewitness – God Himself! So when historical science disagrees with the Bible, it is wrong (Acts 17:10-11). For example, the age assumed for the Uluru and Kata Tjuta is an apparent (conditional, hypothetical, inferred) age that has been decided by the assumptions made in its determination. It’s about 5 orders of magnitude (about 100,000 times) different to the date of Noah’s flood when most of the sedimentary rock layers on earth were formed and eroded. That’s a huge difference! Appendix B shows why dating methods based on secular historical science are so unreliable.
Creationists try to develop scientific ideas based upon the Bible’s history in areas such as astronomy, geology, paleontology, and archaeology. But even these ideas can change when they make some new discovery.
There are two types of science: operational science and historical science. The dating of past events like the formation of sedimentary rocks and fossils uses historical science. But the accuracy of these dates depends on the accuracy of the assumed history. The Bible gives an accurate history (which provides actual dates), whereas evolutionists use an apparent (assumed, conditional) history (which provides hypothetical dates).
Appendix B: Methods used by secular historical science to date ancient events
No scientific method can prove the age of the earth or the age of events deduced in the fossil record, such as the date of extinction of the dinosaurs. No one saw these events, so we depend upon inferences made from present data, which is most cases relate to rocks and fossils. All dating methods are based on three main assumptions, and each method has its own particular additional assumptions. A dating method is a one that marks time by regular/systematic changes in a physical or chemical parameter over time. The three main assumptions are:
– The initial condition of the physical or chemical parameter.
– A knowledge between the initial time and now of the rate of a physical or chemical process that changes the parameter over time. This rate is usually assumed to be constant.
– A knowledge between the initial time and now of how much of the parameter has been lost or gained by other physical or chemical processes. This is usually assumed to be zero.
Secular historical scientists consistently choose the dating methods which they believe give sound ages (e.g. radiometric dating), and these are almost always the methods that yield the oldest dates. They choose to discard/ignore the dating methods that give much younger ages like: the salinity of the oceans, the decay of the earth’s magnetic field, and mutation rates, (Oard 2019). Likewise, they discard/ignore observations that give much younger ages like: fossils indicate rapid burial, parallel sedimentary rock layers with no erosion between them indicate that the layers were deposited rapidly in single a uninterrupted sequence, polystrate fossils, fragile organic molecules in dinosaur fossils, human observations of dinosaurs, C14 in coal and diamonds, and helium in zircon crystals.
So the dates that historical scientists determine for ancient events are extremely unreliable, particularly because dates are rejected unless they agree with the hypothetical geological time scale. Based on the little evidence that is available to the scientist, and the many assumptions that need to be made, and the lack of observations in the past, and the extreme extrapolation over eons of time, the supposed dates are speculative.
Hughes E and Cosner L (2018), Creation answers for kids, Creation Book Publishers, p.10-13.
Oard M J (2019) The deep time deception, Creation Book Publishers, p.79.
Finnish Biochemist/Bioengineer Dr Matti Leisola says that “The story of phlogiston (see Appendix A) shows how an established paradigm may persist in the face of contrary evidence because its supporters patch it up ad nauseum instead of following the evidence. The Darwinian theory of evolution is the phlogiston of our day, festooned with a myriad and growing number of patches.”
“Evolution is slow and gradual except when it is fast. It is dynamic and creates huge changes over time, except when it keeps everything the same for millions of years. It explains both extreme complexity and elegant simplicity. It tells us how birds learned to fly and yet also lost that ability. Evolution made cheetahs fast and turtles slow. Some creatures it made big and others small; some gloriously beautiful and others boringly grey. It forced fish to walk and walking animals to return to the sea. It diverges except when it converges; it produces exquisitely fine-tuned designs except when it produces junk. Evolution is random and without direction except when it moves toward a target. Life under evolution is a cruel battlefield except when it displays altruism. Evolution explains virtues and vice, love and hate, religion and atheism. And it does this with a growing number of ancillary hypotheses. Modern evolutionary theory is the Rube Goldberg (see Appendix B) of theoretical constructs. And what is the result of this speculative ingenuity? Like the defunct theory of phlogiston, it explains everything while explaining nothing well.”
Lesson for us
Let’s beware of theories like phlogiston and Darwinian evolution that are used to explain everything, despite contrary evidence. It’s better to follow the evidence and be aware of the presuppositions such theories are based on.
Appendix A: Phlogiston
For almost a century it was thought flammable materials burned because they contained a colourless, odourless, tasteless substance called phlogiston. Phlogiston is a nonexistent chemical that, prior to the discovery of oxygen, was thought to be released during combustion. In this theory of combustion, all flammable objects were supposed to contain a substance called phlogiston, which was released when the object burned. When loopholes were identified in this theory they were patched up with new variations and new terms – such as assuming that phlogiston had negative weight! And objections were consistently countered with new information.
The phlogiston theory received strong and wide support throughout a large part of the 18th century until it was refuted by the work of Lavoisier, who revealed the true nature of combustion and the role of oxygen. He reasoned that oxygen had gone into the burning substance (rather than phlogiston coming out). At this time experiments switched from purely observational efforts to quantitative analysis that tried to measure changes and reactions without giving in to notions of fancy expanded from what the eyes alone observed.
Phlogiston teaches us that just because a theory is widely accepted among scientists, is believed to explain all the evidence, and reigns supreme for a long time, does not mean that it is true. Phlogiston seemed to explain so much. But it was wrong.
Appendix B: Rube Goldberg
Reuben Garrett Lucius Goldberg (1883 – 1970) was an American cartoonist, sculptor, author, engineer, and inventor. Goldberg is best known for his popular cartoons depicting complicated gadgets performing simple tasks in indirect, convoluted ways.
The English equivalent is William Heath Robinson (1872 – 1944) who was a cartoonist who also drew elaborate machines to achieve simple objectives. The name “Heath Robinson” was used in the UK for complex inventions that achieved absurdly simple results.
Leisola M and Witt J (2018) Heretic: One scientist’s journey from Darwin to design, Discovery Institute Press, Seattle, 198-199.
The theory of biological evolution is the current scientific explanation of life on earth. This assumes that life has developed from simple to complex over time. So if we extrapolate backwards in time, we eventually reach the first living cell. As this theory relies on natural selection, it only operates on populations of species, and not on the original members of the species (like the first living cell). So where did the original living cell (which is assumed to be the ancestor of all life on earth) come from? It’s assumed that life originated from non-living chemicals via chemical evolution. Did you know that this theory includes a miracle that can’t be explained by modern science? According to the Macquarie dictionary, a miracle is “an effect in the physical world which surpasses all known human or natural powers and is therefore ascribed to supernatural agency”.
Complexity of life
In the 19th century many people believed the theory of spontaneous generation; that life arose from non-living matter. This is understandable because they knew little about the cell’s structure.
But today we know that even the simplest living single-cell organism is extremely complex, including numerous, complex machines and instructions to build them, all stored in a way that can be both decoded for use by the organism and passed on to offspring. In fact, a single cell is vastly more complicated than anything human minds have ever engineered.
Scientists agree that the first living cell possessed DNA, RNA and proteins, a universal genetic code, ribosomes (the protein-building factories), ATP and a proton-powered enzyme for making ATP. The detailed mechanisms for reading off DNA and converting genes into proteins were also in place. So it must have been like a modern cell. This is called “irreducible complexity” – all these components are required for a cell to function and reproduce. Because this complexity could never arise by chance, it was either designed or it was a miracle. Life can’t evolve from chemicals by chance.
Living cells are comprised of hardware and software. The software is information stored in the DNA molecule. Enormous amounts of coded information are stored in DNA. Each of the thousands of genes on a DNA molecule contains instructions necessary to make a specific protein that, in turn, is needed for a specific biological function. All the detailed chemical and structural complexity associated with the metabolism, repair, specialized function, and reproduction of each living cell is a realization of the coded messages stored in its DNA. This information is read by a RNA molecule and used to make proteins. But the RNA is also encoded in the DNA, which is a “chicken and egg” problem! And the energy to do this is produced by the nano-motor ATP synthase which is also encoded on the DNA and is decoded by machines needing ATP! So there are multiple “chicken and egg” problems.
ATP synthase is one of many enzymes which are biological catalysts that speed up vital chemical reactions. Without them many reactions essential for life would be far too slow for life to exist. These enzymes, as well as other processes, must exist in the first replicating cell in order for that cell to survive and pass on the DNA, and the DNA must code for the proteins required for those processes!
The naturalistic explanation of the origin of life from non-living matter has a problem because there is no known natural process which can cause information to originate by itself in matter. Information cannot arise by naturalistic processes. The DNA code within all plant and animal cells is vastly more compact than any computer chip ever made. Therefore, the originator of the information must be supremely intelligent.
The theory of the chemical evolution of life assumes that this information is produced by physical processes. But the chemical workings of the cell are controlled by information which does not reside in the atoms and molecules of that cell. For example, the order of the DNA base pairs (like letters in a message) cannot be predicted from the chemical characteristics of the individual base pairs (letters). And as there is no law of physics about creating information from nothing, this assumption is equivalent to a miracle.
Because of the impossibility of chemical evolution on earth, some have suggested that life began in outer space. In order to be able to start the evolution of life on earth, it has been proposed that life was seeded on earth by meteorites, comets or extra-terrestrials. Of course, there is no evidence of this and it doesn’t answer the question of the origin of life. It just transfers it to another place in the universe.
Besides the above, the theory of chemical evolution goes against the law of biogenesis (Appendix A).
And the Milller-Urey experiment, which is often quoted to support the theory of chemical evolution didn’t produce the amino acids necessary for life (Appendix B).
The theory of chemical evolution of life on earth involves a miracle that can’t be explained by operational science. This is a fatal flaw for a model that doesn’t accept miracles! But the theory of biological evolution can’t start without this miracle.
I’m skeptical of a model that claims to be based on naturalism, yet requires miracles! It’s like pulling a rabbit out of a hat! This kind of historical science isn’t consistent.
But the Bible is consistent when it attributes the creation of plant, animal and human life to the all-powerful spiritual God (Gen. 1:11-12; 20-27).
Appendix A: The law of Biogenesis
The law of biogenesis says that all life comes from life. Lois Pasteur disproved the idea of spontaneous generation (that life could come from non-living material). He demonstrated that life does not arise from matter that has not been contaminated by existing life. This means that life has never come from non-life.
Appendix B: The Miller-Urey experiment
This was a chemical experiment that simulated the conditions thought at the time to be present on the early Earth. In this experiment a mixture of water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen was exposed to an electrical current. It resulted in the production of amino acids that were claimed to be the precursors of life. But this experiment relied on the lack of oxygen in the atmosphere, whereas more recent studies indicate that oxygen was present in the earth’s atmosphere earlier than had been believed. And if there was no oxygen, there would be no ozone and the amino acids would be destroyed by ultraviolet solar radiation. Also, they had to isolate the amino acids from the mixture to stop them being destroyed (by hydrolysis, for example). And the amino acids produced were a mixture of left-handed and right-handed, which would be detrimental to life because all the proteins in animals and plants are only made up of left-handed amino acids. So this experiment didn’t produce the amino acids necessary for life.
Sarfati J. (2014), “The origin of life”, Evolution’s Achilles’ Heels, Creation Book Publishers, p.79-111.
Written, May 2019
Also see: Two Big-bang miracles
Was the universe small at the beginning and then grow to be huge or was it huge at the beginning? A common view is that because the universe is very large, it needed a long time to form.
What does the Bible say about this topic? We will look at the creation of vegetation, living creatures and people before looking at the creation of stars and galaxies.
Plants grow when a seed germinates. The seed grows to be a seedling, which grows to be a budding plant, which grows to be a flowering plant, which grows to be a ripened mature plant with seeds/fruit.
On the third day of creation, “The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds” (Gen. 1:12NIV). So the plants had seeds and the trees had fruit, indicating that they were mature.
On the sixth day of creation God told Adam and Eve, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food” (Gen. 1:29). So the trees had fruit that could be eaten, indicating that they were mature.
Genesis 2:5-25 focuses on the creation of man and woman on the sixth day of creation. On the sixth day of creation, “the Lord God commanded the man [Adam], “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die” (Gen. 2:16-17). So the trees had fruit that could be eaten, indicating that they were mature.
So the vegetation that was created on the third day of creation was unique because it didn’t come from seeds and had no seedling stage. Instead of developing from a seed, it began life as mature plants so that it could be eaten by the animals and Adam and Eve on the sixth day of creation (Gen. 1:29-30; 2:16-17).
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This is an old riddle. All chickens hatch from eggs, and all chicken eggs are laid by hens, which are adult chickens. That’s a rule of nature that applies since the time of creation, but not on the sixth day of creation when God created chickens (and other living creatures) that didn’t hatch from eggs. God told the living creatures that He created to “be fruitful and increase in number” (Gen. 1:22). It’s stated specifically for marine creatures and birds (on the fifth day of creation) and by inference for land creatures (on the sixth day of creation). This implies that the creatures were mature so they could reproduce.
So the creatures that were created on the fifth and sixth days of creation were unique because they didn’t come from eggs and had no juvenile stage. Instead of developing from an egg, they began life as mature creatures so that they could be named and enjoyed by Adam and Eve on the sixth day of creation.
As God created mature plants and mature animals during the days of creation, this implies that He also created mature ecosystems. All the cycles of nature were established and in equilibrium by the end of the sixth day of creation. They didn’t have to develop from simple to complex as imagined by the uniformitarian hypothesis.
Adam and Eve
Human beings begin as a single cell called a zygote. A zygote grows into a blastocyst. A blastocyst grows into an embryo. An embryo grows into a fetus. And a fetus grows until the baby is ready to be born. These stages of human development occur within the mother’s uterus.
After birth the newborn grows to be an infant, which grows to be a toddler, which grows to be a preschooler, which grows to be preadolescent, which grows to be an adolescent, which grows to be a nature adult.
Today people are created as a zygote. At what stage of human development were Adam and Eve when they were created? On the day they were created:
– Adam was strong enough to work, because he was placed “in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it” (Gen. 2:15).
– Adam was old enough to understand and choose to obey or disobey a verbal instruction (Gen. 2:16-17).
– Adam understood language well enough to name the livestock, birds and wild animals (Gen. 2:19-20).
– Adam and Eve were mature enough to be married (Gen. 2:18, 20-25).
– Adam and Eve were mature enough to have children (Gen. 1:28).
But a zygote, a blastocyst, an embryo, a fetus, a newborn , an infant, and a toddler can’t do these tasks. A pre-schooler can understand and choose to obey or disobey a simple instruction, but they couldn’t take care of the Garden of Eden. An adolescent may be able to name the livestock, birds and wild animals, but they wouldn’t be mature enough to be married and care for children.
So Adam and Eve, who were created on the sixth day of creation, were unique because they had no mothers and no childhood. Instead of developing from a zygote, they began life as mature adults.
Sun, moon and stars
According to the Big Bang model, about 14 billion years ago there was a “big bang” and stars like the sun formed from the exploding gases. Then about 5 billion years ago, planets like earth formed around the stars. It is assumed that the complexity of the universe increased with time. It began with quarks and then to protons and neutrons, and then to hydrogen and helium atoms, and then stars were formed, and in the last stage of a star (supernova) it explodes and new chemical elements are formed, and eventually the solar system and earth were formed.
On the fourth day of creation, “God made two great lights—the greater light [sun] to govern the day and the lesser light [moon] to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness” (Gen. 1:16-18). This is a description of the creation of the sun, moon and stars. As is the case today, the sun provided direct and diffuse light during the day-time and the moon could provide reflected light during the night-time. So the sun and stars were already shining and visible on earth when they were created.
Like vegetation, animals and humanity were created in a mature state; the rest of the universe (sun, moon and stars) was also created in a functionally mature state. This means that the universe didn’t have to start out small in size and then grow to be very large. That didn’t happen with the vegetation. That didn’t happen with the animals. And that didn’t happen with people (Adam and Eve).
You may say, that’s impossible! Yes, under the laws of nature, divine creation is impossible. But God created the laws of nature and since the creation of the world and the universe, everything has operated according to these laws. But the creation itself is an exceptional case (like a singularity) because God used His miraculous powers during the six days of creation. Every part of the six-day creation was miraculous in some way because God creates in a supernatural way. When God creates, He doesn’t need a long time. In fact Jesus created wine and food instantaneously (see Appendix).
How did God do it? How did God create the stars and galaxies? The Bible says,
“By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
their starry host by the breath of His mouth …
For He spoke, and it came to be;
He commanded, and it stood firm” (Ps. 33:6, 9).
This is a poetic way of saying that by God’s command all creation came into being.
So the galaxies, stars and planets that were created on the fourth day of creation were unique because they didn’t come from a big bang (a massive expansion from a dense particle) and they didn’t go through the supposed stages of the development of stars and planets. Instead of developing from a big bang, they began life as mature galaxies, stars and planets to provide light and energy for the new vegetation, new creatures and Adam and Eve. The galaxies, stars and planets could also be used by Adam and Eve to track time with dates and seasons (Gen. 1:14). So the original galaxies, stars and planets, which were created about 6,000 years ago, were much like what we see them today.
According to the Big Bang model, the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old. This calculation is based on the assumption that the universe was small at the beginning and then grew to be huge. It’s also based on hypothetical inflation, hypothetical dark matter and hypothetical dark energy. But calculating the age of the universe using this model is accurate only if the assumptions built into the model are also accurate. All dates outside recorded history are inferred. So their accuracy depends on the accuracy of the assumptions used to determine them.
According to the Bible, which was inspired by the God who created the universe, the universe was enormous at the beginning and didn’t need a long time to form. The Bible says that God created the universe in six days about 6,000 years ago. This is the plain meaning of the Bible as it was intended by the authors and as it would have been understood by the Israelites. This written historical evidence trumps and invalidates the assumptions made in the Big Bang model.
This shows that a belief in uniformitarianism can lead to severe overestimates of age. The difference in this case is a factor of 230,000 which is over 5 orders of magnitude!
This also has implications in our understanding of the universe. When uniformity is used to say that we are seeing the universe as it was millions and billions of years ago we are crossing a boundary condition (the beginning of the universe) where the laws of the universe (such as General Relativity and cause and effect ) are no longer applicable. If the universe began 6,000 years ago, then calculations that give larger ages are due to the use of false assumptions in a uniformitarian model.
I know that this view isn’t generally accepted today because people usually assume that the universe was formed in accordance with known laws of physics (although there is no evidence of this). This is the assumption of uniformity (of physical laws) over long periods of time, with no allowance for a supernatural creation. Because of this assumption a straw man argument is often made, such as claiming that fossils are older than 6,000 years in age or that God created fossils in sedimentary rocks (false evidence).
The Big Bang model is non-falsifiable. It cannot be subjected to the experimental method. It thus fails to satisfy the criteria of a scientific theory. The same can be said of creation. We do not see God creating anything today, and as a theory, creation is non-falsifiable. It cannot be subjected to the experimental method. Instead both the Big Bang (and evolution) and creation are worldviews used to understand the world and the universe. So the Big Bang model and evolution model are just as “religious” as the creation model. They are creation stories for those who rule out the possibility of a divine Creator.
Because God created a functionally mature universe, the universe was huge at the beginning and didn’t need a long time to form. The universe and the earth were complete right from the start. From the beginning, all the components of the universe and the earth were able to fulfill the purpose for which they were created.
This brief look at Genesis shows that the Big Bang model is radically wrong. And based on the Biblical age of the universe, there is not enough time available for the supposed evolution of species. So the theory of the evolution of species is also radically wrong.
Appendix: Jesus’ miracles
Most of Jesus’ miracles while was upon earth were instantaneous. They didn’t take a long period of time. For example:
– Creation of wine from water (Jn. 2:1-10).
– Creation of bread and fish (Jn. 6:1-13).
– Curing diseases (Mt. 9:6-8).
Written, March 2019
After some Australian motorists drowned when their cars were swept away by floodwaters in June 2016, university researchers investigated how much force it takes to wash cars away from the road. A 1 tonne vehicle was moved by water 15 centimeters deep flowing at 3.6 km/hr. It was carried away in 60 centimeters of water. A 2.5 tonne vehicle was moved by 45 centimeters of water and began floating in 95 centimeters of water. The cars were moved so easily partly because even shallow water can be deceptively strong, and partly because modern cars are so air-tight that instead of taking on water they get pushed along by it. Even slow-moving water is powerful because water is heavy: each cubic metre weighs 1 tonne. They concluded that vehicles became vulnerable to moving floodwaters once the depth reached the floor of the vehicle. This is consistent with Queensland advice that “Water deeper than the bottom of your car door is enough to float your vehicle away, or splash the engine and cause it to stall”.
If a shallow river can be so powerful, a global flood would be an enormous catastrophic disaster. If this happened about 4,350 years ago, surely there would be some evidence of it still visible today. This blogpost is a summary of eight main points that were made by Dr Tasman Walker in a presentation on “Evidence of Noah’s flood in Australia”.
What would we expect to find on earth if there was a global flood as described in Genesis chapters 6-8 in the Bible?
Fractures in the earth’s crust
The two main sources of the water for the flood are described as “all the underground waters erupted from the earth, and the rain fell in mighty torrents from the sky” (Gen. 7:11-12NLT). Subterranean water burst from beneath the earth and there was torrential rain for 40 days. The flood waters rose to cover the highest mountains of the pre-flood world by 8 meters (Gen. 7:17-20). By the way, Mt Everest didn’t exist before the flood because there are sedimentary rocks with marine fossils on its summit.
If underground water was erupting from the earth on a global scale you would expect that the earth’s crust would be fractured. Today major fractures are seen in the earth’s crust around the edges of the continental plates. When these continental tectonic plates move against each other there are earthquakes and volcanic activity. Such geological activity around the Pacific Ocean is called the “ring of fire”.
So we would expect to find fractures in the earth’s crust and we do. These fractures are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Billions of dead things
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find billions of dead things all over the earth. “Everything (except those on the ark) that breathed and lived on dry land died” (Gen. 7:22NLT). Because such a flood would transport huge amounts of sediment across the earth, most of the creatures that drowned would be buried in the sediments. Because such a flood would also transport huge amounts of sediment into the ocean and cause a depletion in oxygen levels, many marine creatures would die and be buried as well.
At Winton in Queensland, there are many well-preserved fossils of dinosaurs and marine creatures. Dinosaur fossils have also been found at Muttaburra (Queensland). These fossil-bearing sediments extend across the Great Artesian Basin into New South Wales, South Australia, and the Northern Territory, while marine fossils are found in other parts of Central Australia.
So we would expect to find billions of dead things (fossils) in sedimentary rocks and we do. These fossils are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Evidence of rapid burial
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of rapid burial.
At Richmond in Queensland an exceptionally well-preserved marine reptile fossil was discovered in 1990. It’s a plesiosaur that’s over 4 meters long. In order to be preserved so well it must have been buried rapidly. Fossils of land animals are also found in this region, such as the ankylosaur (an armored dinosaur).
So we would expect to find evidence of rapid burial and we do. These fossils of creatures that were buried rapidly are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Sediment covering huge areas
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of sediment covering huge areas.
Geologists find that layers of sedimentary rocks extend across large areas called sedimentary basins. They can contain coal, oil and gas that’s used as fossil fuels. For example, the Great Artesian Basin and the Sydney Basin. There are also examples in other continents. And there are also offshore sedimentary basins on the continental shelf of countries around the world.
So we would expect to find evidence of sediment covering huge areas and we do. These layers of sedimentary rock across huge areas are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Evidence of raging waters
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of raging waters. As these flood waters would have been highly energetic, they would have transported material along with the flow.
The Three Sisters rock formation at Katoomba is composed of sandstone, which was laid down by water. This layer extends across the Sydney sedimentary basin. An examination of the sedimentary layers evident in road cuttings shows layers 1-2 meters thick, which indicates that a lot a water was involved in transporting and depositing this sediment. This water must have been continually rising (to enable continual deposition). There are many cross-beds that go at an angle across the strata. They are formed when the sediment layer builds sideways.
Uluru (Ayers Rock) in the Northern Territory is made of sandstone and the layers have been tipped up so they are almost vertical. These strata are visible as parallel lines on Uluru. This shows that there hasn’t been any significant erosion between the deposition of the strata. So there was rapid deposition – one layer was laid upon the other quite quickly. When we look at a geological cross-section through Uluru it is evident that a lot of sandstone has been eroded from above Uluru. The grains that comprise Uluru are angular, poorly sorted (a large range of particle sizes) and well-preserved (not weathered) which is consistent with rapid deposition.
Kata Tjuta (the Olgas) is a group of large, domed rock formations 25km west of Uluru. They are comprised of large boulders (30-50cm in size). These all face in a similar direction, which is the direction of the water flow that transported them to this site. They indicate highly energetic flood waters.
So we would expect to find evidence of raging waters (which transport and deposit lots of sediment) and we do. These cross-beds, parallel sedimentary strata and boulders are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Evidence of massive erosion
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of massive erosion. After the flood waters peaked and subsided, they would have flowed off the continents and eroded material away as they flowed back into the ocean.
When you stand at Echo Point overlooking the Three Sisters, you see that Jamison valley is cut into a flat plateau. How did it get so flat? As the floodwaters moved across the continent, they eroded the surface flat. That’s how plateaus formed all around Australia and around the world. Jamison valley is much larger than any valley caused by Kedumba River that flows through it (the same is true for the Grand Canyon in USA). Geomorphologists call these overfit valleys – the valley is too big for the river. How did it get to be such a large valley? The valley was carved by a lot of water and not by the current river. As the floodwaters subsided, when hills became exposed, the water carved out large valleys transporting the sediment out of the area.
This is also evident at Carnarvon Gorge in Queensland at the intersection of the Great Artesian Basin and the Bowen Basin. A large valley has been cut into a sandstone plateau that’s capped by basalt. As material has been eroded away, these sedimentary layers originally covered a much larger area.
As a result of such erosion, rivers can flow through mountain ranges rather than around them. For example, the Heavitree Gap in the MacDonnell Ranges near Alice Springs. How did that happen? Many explanations have been proposed, but none of them work. As the floodwaters subsided, the higher parts of the ridge become exposed and the water flows between the gap between them. As the waters continue to drop, they continue to erode through this gap until when the water has all subsided the gap remains and a river flows through this gap today. It’s called an air gap if it doesn’t go down to the level of the adjacent surface.
So we would expect to find evidence of massive erosion and we do. These large overfit valleys are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Evidence of youthfulness
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months about 4,350 years ago, you would expect to find evidence of youthfulness.
At Kata Tjuta there are a few boulders lying around, but not many. And there is a small apron around it, but not a large one as if it had been eroding for millions of years. And there’s very little debris around the base of Uluru or Kata Tjuta. This indicates that it was eroded recently.
So we would expect to find evidence of youthfulness and we do. The lack of erosional debris is evidence of Noah’s flood.
Worldwide memories of the flood
All of the people of the earth are descendants of the eight people on Noah’s ark. As the global flood occurred about 4,350 years ago, you would expect to find memories of Noah’s flood in the different people groups around the world.
Cultures around the world have flood legends (or stories). For example, the Bundaba Flood Story of the Aboriginals at Broome is given in the appendix. Common features in the stories are that there was a moral cause, people were drowned, there were people saved in a boat, and there was a bird.
So we would expect to find worldwide memories of the flood and we do. These flood stories are evidence of Noah’s flood.
There’s plenty of evidence in Australia of Noah’s flood. Evidence of eight aspects of Noah’s flood show that what we observe is consistent with what the Bible says. This flood is a key to connecting the Bible to the world around us. It explains the sedimentary rocks and the fossils. And it washes away the millions of years that are assumed by evolutionists.
It also helps us understand the world. It makes sense of biblical creation. Death and suffering came after Adam and Eve and not before them because they were a consequence of sin. Whereas according to the idea of evolution, death and suffering over millions of years brought about our existence.
Questions and answers
What is rapid burial?
When animals and fish die today they disintegrate and are recycled. They aren’t fossilized. So, how were the fossils preserved? If they are buried quickly it stops them being scavenged and it affects how bacteria destroys animal’s bodies. So rapid burial is necessary to produce fossils.
What about continental drift?
Like evolutionists, creationists fit the evidence into their world view. There is a creationist model of how the continents were all together before the flood and they broke apart during the flood (catastrophic plate tectonics). The earth’s mantle (beneath the earth’s crust) can suddenly lose its strength under high temperature and high pressure. So the continental movement could have happened very quickly (continental sprint) during Noah’s flood. In the second half of the flood the ocean basins sank and the continents rose: “Mountains rose and valleys sank to the levels you decreed” (Ps. 104:8NLT).
What does “the earth was divided” in the time of Peleg mean (Gen. 10:25)?
This is just before the tower of Babel when God divided the people into different language groups and they dispersed across the earth (Gen. 11:1-9). This is what we believe it means. It couldn’t be the separation of the continents because if it happened a few hundred years after the flood that would be a huge catastrophe and many people would perish and there is no evidence of this in Scripture.
When was Mt Everest formed?
The earth’s crust moved during the flood. The mountain ranges like Mt Everest were elevated towards the end of the flood. The mountians we see today rose up at this time. The shapes of the mountains were carved by the waters of the flood (and any post-flood ice).
Do we know how high the mountains were before the flood?
No. We know there were mountains before the Flood because the Bible speaks of them (Gen. 7:19-20). But we don’t know how high they were. Some creation geologists speculate that they weren’t as high as those today.
What about the ice age?
It happened after the flood. The flood is the only thing that explains the ice age. It was due to warm waters after the flood caused by the addition of hot subterranean water and by heat from volcanic activity. And large amounts of volcanic dust and aerosols in the atmosphere would have reflected solar radiation back into space causing low atmospheric temperatures. Warm oceans evaporate water, which then moves over the land. Cold air over the continents results in this water precipitating as snow. And the snow accumulates forming ice. Because the ice was not fully melted the following summer, the ice built up from year to year. It has been estimated that the ice accumulated for 500 years after the flood and then retreated to where it is today over another 200 years. But evolutionists don’t have an adequate explanation for the ice age.
What about global warming?
Climatic modelers try to include the ice age, but they don’t include Noah’s flood. They think that the earth’s atmosphere is unstable and a little change will tip it over the edge. Whereas the earth’s climate is very stable – after the huge climatic disturbance of the global flood, it took about 700 years to come back to equilibrium.
What about the decrease in longevity?
Before the flood people typically lived over 900 years. After the flood this decreased exponentially towards 100 years (David) and then 70 years. It was probably a genetic change and not an environmental one because after the flood Noah lived 350 years (Gen. 9:28) and Shem lived 500 years.
What about the Behemoth described in Job 40?
We believe it was a brachiosaur (sauropod) dinosaur. The size of its tail is one of the reasons. We believe that dinosaurs and people lived together. They were called dragons and other names because “dinosaur” is a modern name.
Appendix: The Bundaba Flood Story
Long, long ago there was a great flood. It happened because some children found the “winking” owl and plucked out all its feathers. The bird flew without wings, into the heavens and showed himself to Ngowungu, the Great Father. Ngowungu became very angry and decided to drown the people.
Later the people saw a small cloud rising which grew bigger and bigger till it spread all over the sky. The thunder began to roll and crash and the people were greatly afraid. With the rain and thunder was a terrible wind which broke great limbs off trees and rooted up others. During this terrible storm there was a noise above the awful crashes of thunder. This noise was coming from the north. The salt water, the sea, came pouring over the ranges from the north. The flood rose higher and higher till all the land was covered except the tops of two or three mountains.
A bird with a leaf in its mouth flew in front of them showing them the way to Mt. Broome. From further west a man and his wives with a dog were battling their way in a canoe when a bird with a leaf in its mouth flew in front of them showing them the way to Mt. Broome. They eventually reached Mt. Broome and landed there where some other survivors were.
Then Djabalgari, the great left-handed man incised his little finger and let the blood trickle down into the flood waters. The waters began to go down and eventually disappeared off the country. All other people were drowned.
This blogpost was sourced from a presentation by Dr Tas Walker (a geologist with Creation Ministries International) on “Evidence of Noah’s flood in Australia”.
Written, July 2016
In March 2016 the NSW Environment Protection Authority served notice requiring a company to conduct a mandatory environmental audit of its waste oil processing facility near Maitland. This followed a pattern of environmental non-compliance at the facility, including serious breaches involving air emissions and water discharges. The audit of site practices and procedures includes assessment of testing waste products, operation and maintenance of pollution control equipment, bunding and spill management, and potential impacts on groundwater. In this post we carry out an audit of the naturalistic explanation of the origin of life.
In 1999 New Holland published a book, ‘In six days: why 50 scientists choose to believe in creation’. The editor, Dr John Aston, noted in the preface that:
‘Why would educated scientists still believe in creation? Why wouldn’t they prefer to believe in Darwinian evolution or even theistic evolution, where an all-powerful intelligence is seen as directing the evolutionary processes? Could scientists believe that life on earth is probably less than 10,000 years old? How would they deal with the evidence from the fossil record and the ages suggested by the radioactive dating of rocks as millions and billions of years old?’
‘During the past century, the biblical story of Genesis was relegated to the status of a religious myth and it was widely held that only those uneducated in science or scientific methods would seriously believe such a myth. However, my experience in organizing this book, is that there is a growing number of highly educated critically thinking scientists who have serious doubts about evidence for Darwinian evolution and who have chosen to believe in the biblical version of Creation.’
The scientists gave their personal response to the question: ‘Why do you believe in a literal six-day biblical Creation as the origin of life on earth?’ The responses were divided into two categories ‘Science and Origins’ (dealing with the scientific critique of evolution as well as the scientific basis for creation) and ‘Religion and Origins’ (dealing with a more philosophical approach to the question of evolution and creation). My contribution was in the latter section (p.322-327).
There are two main views about the origin of the universe and the origin of life: those based on naturalism and those based on an intelligent Creator. As these events occurred long ago and are not subject to direct observation or experimental tests, both of these perspectives are mainly philosophical beliefs based on certain assumptions about the physical world.
This fact is ignored or distorted in most modern treatments of the topic of origins. For example, the March 1998 issue of National Geographic included an article titled, ‘The rise of life on earth’. The editor of the magazine wrote concerning this article on the origin of life: ‘Science is the study of testable, observable phenomena’, and religious faith is ‘an unshakeable belief in the unseen’. This ‘straw man argument’ diverts the discussion away from the issues of science and logic to the separate topic of science versus religious faith. It also ignores the fact that there are no obvious ‘testable, observable phenomena’ on the origin of life. Furthermore, the language used in the article demonstrates that naturalism also relies on faith in the unseen.
The naturalistic view of origins is that everything that exists can be explained by physical and chemical processes alone. This differs from the view that matter, energy, physical and chemical processes and life were established by a Creator as revealed in the Holy Bible.
Searching for truth
An environmental auditor relies on two main factors: objective evidence and agreed standards. The outcome of each part of an audit depends on comparing the observable evidence against the relevant standard. Of course, environmental standards change in time and space across the world. Similarly, any explanation of origins should be consistent with the body of ‘observable evidence’ and any relevant ‘standards’. This is complicated by the fact that the evidence is viewed today, a long time after the beginning of the universe and life. Also, in a changing world, it is not immediately obvious which standards are relevant. The Bible is the only reliable and consistent source of truth; it is like a fixed frame of reference. Other authorities, such as science and logic, are not sufficient, as they may change in time and space; they are like a changing frame of reference.
The laws of physics and chemistry are examples of the relative standards of science, which change with time as knowledge develops. They were developed under present conditions and assume that the universe already exists. Two of these fundamental laws are that life always comes from earlier life and that mass/energy is conserved. Applying them to the origin of life assumes that all these conditions were true at that time. To say; then, that naturalism explains the origin of life is ‘circular reasoning’, as the outcome is largely determined by the assumptions made. Although these laws may describe the present world, it would be a gross assumption to extrapolate them back to the unobserved initial conditions. Yet this is done frequently by those with a naturalistic viewpoint, without acknowledgement of the uncertainties involved and the limitations of the scientific method.
The assumptions of both naturalism and biblical creation and the principles of the scientific method are stated clearly in W Gitt’s ‘Did God Use Evolution?’ 1993, CLV Christliche Literatur-Verbreitung e. V.
The Bible is a source of ‘absolute’ truth that has stood the test of time much longer than any other document or philosophy. Of course, as in the case of any literature, it requires interpretation as to what is historical and what is metaphorical or symbolic. Besides obvious literary techniques, the most reliable method is to use the whole message of the Bible to interpret any particular passage. Otherwise, an interpretation may not be consistent with the rest of the Bible.
The Bible contains three clear tests for determining whether a belief, teaching or philosophy is true or false. To be true it must pass each of the three tests:
The Jesus test: This test states that, ‘Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist … This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood’ (1 Jn. 4:2-6NIV). The question to be answered in this test is: What does it say about Jesus Christ? The Bible teaches that Christ was unique: divine and human, sinless, eternal and the Creator. It is false to deny that Christ was the divine Son of God. Beliefs that fail this test usually claim that Christ was, at best, a great teacher or a prophet. They may even encourage the view that Christ and other events in the Bible are mythical.
The gospel test: The Bible warns about those promoting a different gospel, ‘If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!’ (Gal.1:9). The question to be answered in this test is: What is its gospel? In other words: what is the core belief or hope? The Bible says that the root cause of all our problems is that everyone has sinned and fallen short of God’s requirements—resulting in death. The only means of rescue is salvation by faith in Christ. ‘Different gospels’ are those that differ from this. They either add to it or take away from it. There is a warning against adding to or taking away from the words of the Bible (Rev. 22:18-19). Broader aspects of the gospel include the original creation and the ultimate restoration of all things (Rev. 4:11; 21:1-22:6). We need to be careful when applying this test because a ‘different gospel’ may deceive by using words similar to the true gospel but give them different meanings.
The fruit test: Jesus Christ warned, ‘Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them’ (Mt. 7:15-20). The question to be answered in this test is: What kind of fruit is evident? In other words, what type of attitudes and behavior does it encourage? Is the divine nature or the sinful nature most evident? The former is characterised by the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. The sinful nature may involve: idolatry, sexual immorality, selfish ambition, pride, hostility, quarrelling and outbursts of anger (Gal. 5:19-23).
These tests will now be used to assess the naturalistic view of origins.
The Jesus test: As naturalism means that nature is all there is, it is associated with atheism. For example, the American Association of Biology Teachers states, that; ‘The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments.’
This view of origins has no need for a Creator or the divine, and so is consistent with a belief that Jesus Christ was only a human being and not divine. Naturalism clearly fails the Jesus test.
The gospel test: As naturalism assumes there is no God, it accepts no absolute standards of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, and rejects the existence of ‘sin’ in the sense of falling short of God’s standard. Therefore, it teaches that there is no need of a savior. Its gospel is that nature has made itself and the Genesis account of origins is not true. A biblical consequence of this is that if there was no paradise at the beginning as described in Genesis, then there can be no hope for a future paradise (Acts 3:21). In fact, naturalism rejects all the basic biblical truths, such as: creation, the beginning of evil, the need for salvation and the ultimate destiny of human beings. So, naturalism fails the gospel test.
The fruit test: Naturalism supports and is associated with: materialism, humanism (humanity is self-sufficient, capable of solving all their difficulties) and pantheism (‘nature’ replaces God). Its acceptance leads to: less value on human life (practices such as abortion and euthanasia are more acceptable). Another example from the past is racism; less value on family life (biblical marriage is less important; divorce is more acceptable); less value on morals (truth is now relative, not absolute); a ‘might is right’ attitude that supports the strong, but not the weak (survival of the fittest; a competitive world; compassion involves saving ‘weak genes’). As these are opposite to the values of the Bible, naturalism fails the fruit test.
It is clear from this that the viewpoint of naturalism fails all the three biblical tests for determining what is true. Therefore, it is false and is not consistent with the overall message of the Bible.
Due to the influence of the above philosophies, claims are often made in the name of ‘science’ that go far beyond the available evidence, and some aspects of modern science have become increasingly tenuous and speculative. In fact, the everyday use of the word ‘science’ has changed from dealing with things that are observable and testable to meaning ‘naturalism’ and so includes conjecture and dubious hypotheses.
Although we live in a ‘cause-and-effect’ universe, ultimate causes, such as origins, are outside the realm of reliable science. Science can only reliably deal with the present world; it cannot reliably deal with the past (such as origins) or the future (such as ultimate destinies), as it cannot directly observe these. I believe all scientists should be wary of their assumptions, as these can largely determine their findings. They should also be wary of extrapolations outside the range of observation. The further the extrapolation, the less reliable the prediction. Changes in the assumptions will change the prediction. This applies in particular to boundary conditions, such as those involving initial conditions (or origins). Therefore, scientists can only speculate, imagine and guess about the origin of life.
Dr Hawke is a Senior Environmental Consultant with an electricity supply company in Sydney, Australia. He holds a BSc with first class honors in Physics from the University of Sydney, and PhD in Air Pollution Meteorology from Macquarie University. Over the past 22 years, Dr Hawke has worked as an environmental scientist and environmental consultant for a state government regulatory authority and the electrical power industry. He is also a Certified Environmental Auditor with the Quality Society of Australasia.
Published in 1999
Made to be inhabited
A letter in a newspaper stated that Genesis chapter 1-11 is pre-history and is probably best described as a ”saga”, which is a story. They said it was a different genre to the rest of Genesis, which I assume was considered to be real history which had been verified by archaeology. Well, what does the evidence show us?
The history of the universe from the beginning of time according to those who reject the Bible and the God of the Bible is often told as follows:
- About 15 billion years ago – there was a “big bang” and stars like the sun formed from the exploding gases
- Then about 4.6 billion years ago – planets like earth formed around the stars
- 3.5 billion years ago – the first life appeared in deep water when molecules combined to form single-celled organisms
- 1 billion years ago – multi-cellar organisms evolved
- 600 million years ago – invertebrate animals and fish evolved
- 475 million years ago – land plants evolved
- 360 million years ago – amphibians and then the first land animals evolved
- 250 million years ago – reptiles ruled
- 200 million years ago – birds and mammals ruled
- 90 million years ago – flowering plants evolved
- 200 thousand years ago – the first humans evolved
Bill Gates is funding a project to present this information online for high school students. Let’s look at what the Bible says about such “big history”.
According to Jesus
When Jesus was discussing divorce and marriage He went back to Genesis and quoted from Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female’. ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife …” (Mk. 10:6-7NIV). These verses refer to the first people Adam and Eve. Here He links the “beginning of creation” with the beginning of the human race.
When Jesus was condemning the Pharisees, he quoted the range of martyrs in the Old Testament, “the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah” (Lk. 11:50-51). Abel was in the first family (Genesis 4) and Zechariah was mentioned in 2 Chronicles 24, the last book in the Jewish Old Testament. Here He links the “beginning of the world” with the first family.
Clearly Jesus believed that early Genesis was real history, not just a story.
We can also learn something about the beginning of everything from Jesus. It is instructive to consider how Jesus demonstrated God’s power. He did many miracles; more than is recorded in the Bible (Jn. 20:30). For example:
- A storm was calmed straight away (Mk. 4:39)
- 5,000 men plus women and children were fed from five loaves and two fish (Mk. 6:30-44)
- People were healed immediately: the blind could see (Mt. 20:34); the crippled could walk (Lk. 13:13) and the dead stood up (Mk. 5:42; Jn. 11:43-44).
So Jesus could change the physical world instantly. He didn’t need time to do it in gradual steps. Likewise, God can create physical things instantly. He doesn’t need time to do it in gradual steps from the simple to the complex.
According to Paul
When looking at why people who have not heard the gospel still face God’s judgment, Paul wrote “since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—His eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Rom. 1:21). God’s attributes have been evident to people “since the creation of the world”, not just since people have been on the earth. The implication is that people have been here since the creation of the world. This is consistent with what Jesus said about Adam, Eve and Abel.
Paul also believed in Adam and Eve (Rom. 5:12-14; 1 Cor. 15:21-22, 45; 2 Cor. 11:3; 1 Tim. 2:13-14). For example, He contrasted Adam and Jesus in three passages of the New Testament:
- “If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit” (1 Cor. 15:44-45). From Adam we have physical life in a natural body, but from Jesus we can have eternal life now and a redeemed body at the resurrection.
- “sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin … through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous” (Rom. 5:12-21). So death entered the world because of Adam’s sin, but eternal life is possible through Jesus.
- “For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive” (1 Cor. 15:21-22). From Adam we have physical death, but from Jesus people can be resurrected from the dead.
So Paul viewed both Adam and Jesus as true historical characters, not as mythical figures. He saw the creation and fall into sin of early Genesis as historical events that had a significant impact on our world, not as “pre-history” stories.
According to historical records
If there has been a crime or a car accident, the police determine what happened from the evidence and by interviewing witnesses. The Biblical writers witnessed what they wrote about, except for situations such as creation when God was the witness.
History is the study of past events. We don’t use operational science because it’s only reliable for present events – we can’t do experiments on the past or the future unless we make assumptions (then the finding relies on the assumptions made). Documentary evidence is the best form of historical record. Let’s look at what the historical records in the Bible meant for its original readers, the Children of Israel.
When God gave them the ten commandments, He said “in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but He rested on the seventh day” (Ex. 20:11). This was a model for their working week. In this context, the heavens are the stars and galaxies. God took 6 days to create the universe, but could have taken 6 hours, 6 minutes or 6 seconds. After all, God is outside the time of our finite world. He is infinite and all powerful.
God didn’t use a long process to create everything. He commanded and it was done immediately (Ps. 33:6-9; Heb. 11:3). I am not aware of any Scriptures which indicate long ages of time were involved in creation.
This is also supported by the resurrection which is described as “we will all be changed in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye” (1 Cor. 15:51-52). So our resurrection bodies will be created instantly. This is consistent with the original creation taking a short period of time and Christ’s miracles happening instantly. God doesn’t need lots of time to create something new.
The creation was finished on day 6, which was when Adam and Eve were created. So we know that people have been on earth since then.
A mature universe
On the day they were created, Adam named the animals and Adam and Eve were married (Gen. 2:19-20, 24). They were created as mature adults. The universe and the earth that God created were mature. Its complex interacting systems functioned properly from the beginning. The animals and plants lived in mature and functioning ecosystems. So the creation was mature and fully functional from the beginning. It didn’t need to develop gradually over time from simple to more complex.
This means that at that time the apparent age of things didn’t match the actual age. Scientists calculate the age of the universe by assuming that all the stars and galaxies have expanded to their positions after a big explosion. It is an assumption that is also based on using the red- shift of light and the Hubble law to calculate the expansion rates and the distances of galaxies. However, the Bible says that God placed them in their positions on day 4 of creation by stretching them out (Gen. 1:14-19; Ps. 104:2). So the difference between their apparent age of 15 billion years and the Biblical age of thousands of years represents the miracle that God did on day 4.
When did this happen? Is Genesis 1-11 pre-history? It is followed by Genesis 12-25 which is about Abraham. Do we know much about before this time? Yes we do. In Genesis 5 and 11 we have detailed genealogies from Adam to Abraham (Gen 5:1-32; 11:10-26). These are not just lists of ancestors and descendants. Their ages at the birth of their child in the family tree and their death are also given. Some Biblical genealogies have gaps because their purpose is to show their main ancestors (Ezra 7:1-5; Mt. 1:1-16). But these ones are worded in such a way as to exclude omissions and gaps. They are the most comprehensive genealogies in the Bible. Because they cover 19 generations, we know more about these people than our own ancestors!
Besides this, there are two other genealogies that cover this period in the Bible (1 Chron. 1:1-27; Lk. 3:33-38). There are three genealogies in the Bible covering the period back to Adam that some allege is pre-history! So it’s real history. It seems as though in recent times some people call it pre-history to explain the inconsistency with the recent extra-biblical account.
When you add up that dates given in Scripture you find that Adam lived about 6,000 years ago and the global flood was about 4,500 years ago. That’s a long time, thousands of years, but it’s not millions of years. When compared to the extra-biblical timeline, the historical timeline:
- Is documented historically instead of being calculated
- Is shorter (about 6,000 years compared to about 15 billion years)
- Has people appearing near the beginning (people have been here for 99.9998% of the time); instead of near the end (people have been here for 1.3% of the time). People have been here most of the time. After all, God made the world to be inhabited, “For this is what the LORD says—He who created the heavens, He is God; He who fashioned and made the earth, He founded it; He did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited … I, the LORD, speak the truth; I declare what is right” (Isa. 45:18-19).
The extra-biblical account is inconsistent with recorded history. As it relies on assumptions of people who were not there when it happened, clearly these assumptions are wrong. What are these incorrect assumptions?
- They rule out a God of miracles. This means they have to rely on current physical processes and forces to explain the past.
- Consequently, they believe that the present is the key to the past, but according to the Bible the past is the key to the present – after all history goes forwards, not backwards!
- They believe that given enough time everything can create itself and organisms always evolve or build up gradually over time from simple to complex. Therefore the biological world has become more complex with time.
- They believe simple organisms are primitive and developed earlier than more complex organisms.
Does it matter if the extra-biblical explanation of the past history of the world is wrong? Yes, because it destroys the gospel message. It destroys the source of sin and death, removes the need for a Savior, and ruins the possibility of future restoration of the earth when Christ reigns (Acts 3:21). That’s what happens if the first three chapters of Genesis are not historical, but a story that isn’t necessarily true. This means removing creation, the Garden of Eden and the fall into sin as real events in real places.
This explanation moves the source of sin, disease, decay and death from Adam and Eve’s disobedience to making it be a part of our world (which Christians call God’s creation). In this case disease, decay and death have always been a part of our world. They are the normal situation; and not viewed as being abnormal. It takes away the lack of disease and death before the fall. It puts death before sin, not after it. It puts evil before sin, not after it. It means that the created world, which God said was “very good” (Gen. 1:31), was marred by disease and death. It takes away the fact that the original sin affected all of God’s creation (Rom. 8:19-23). It takes away the promise that all creation will be liberated from its “bondage to decay” when Christ returns to rule over it.
Lessons for us
As believers, our thoughts and opinions should be controlled by God, not by the views of those who reject God. This means that our thoughts and opinions should be controlled by the Bible, not by the extra-biblical theories which rule out the possibility of divine intervention in the natural world, such as miracles. The Bible says that God has intervened in our big history and He will intervene again. We ignore that at our peril.
Sin, death and salvation are important aspects of the Bible and Christianity. Let’s be aware of the implications of ideas such as extra-biblical big history which are inconsistent with the Biblical record.
Finally, the Bible is not a science book; but it is a history book. It is the best record of ancient history we have today; a supreme example of ancient history; and a big history book. It contains documentary evidence by eyewitnesses which has been accurately preserved over the years. So we can trust the Bible on big history.
Written, June 2012