Scriptural evidence of YEC.

Status
Not open for further replies.

philadiddle

Drumming circles around you
Dec 23, 2004
3,719
56
43
Canada
Visit site
✟4,522.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Having become a TE recently, and really enjoying the debate, I often bring up the subject with Christian friends of mine. One of my friends wrote me an email one day with an intereting POV in it. I'll quote what he said.

Ex 20:1-11
20:1 And God spoke all these words:

8 "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy... 11 For 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. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."
(from New International Version)

If God spoke the words in Exodus 20:11, it would seem that he meant that he created the world in 6 24 hour days, as was recorded in Genesis 2:2-3. If the Sabbath rest was something that God intended for humanity, he could have simply commanded it with no reason given, but it is interesting that he went out of his way to say that it is because he created everything in 6 days
and rested on the 7th day, and therefore we should do likewise. Not only us, but the Sabbath was for the land as well, as God declared every seventh year a Sabbath for the land when they could not plant or tend their fields.

It seems that there are some significant implications regarding how we understand the Bible when it says "God spoke these words" and what we believe about creation. If the creation account is an allegorical expression of evolution, then we are confronted with God's own words regarding the issue.

If we accept the allegorical view as truth, then it makes me wonder why God wouldn't have been more up front with humanity at the beginning, avoiding the tension caused by his affirmation of something that did not actually happen the way that he said it did (in terms of time frame and order of creation), his own assertion of his character:

Num 23:19
9 "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; "
He could have avoided the whole problem by saying, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. It took a really long time, and it was a complicated procedure, but in the end we have plants, water, land, light, and people that had a spirit in them, breathed in by God himself. But humanity rebelled against God, and the nature of the offence, if it could be boiled down and summarized, was like this: "It was as if there was a perfect garden, untainted, pure, etc, and..."

If God stated it that way, we would be even more amazed at how big and complex he is and how small we are, as we could not fathom how God did it all, especially when he used a time frame well beyond anything we could have ever imagined.
I've talked with him a lot since this email so i'll try to fill you in on what we've discussed.

I've tried explaining that Genesis could be taken as literal or as allegory (or myth or whatever you prefer). But we need to take evidence into account to find out which is true. I explained i believe, based on the evidence that Genesis is myth, but it is still 100% true that God made everything, just not literally how it happened. I tried using other passages such as when Satan showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the earth from a high point, which implies a flat earth and obviously can't be true. But my friend pointed out that those passaged contain the phrases "in an instant" and "and all their splendor" which implies a visionary experience. In the case of Ex. 20:1-11, there is no room left for allegory because it so strongly says "And God spoke all these words... 11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth..." This is the first thing I need some help with. Does anyone who is better educated on theology have any input into this passage?

The second thing is and interesting point as well. I said that all the evidence of the earth points to an old earth and evolution, and that YECs always turn to theological arguments. I explained inductive reasoning and said "Lets say there is a certain type of rock in a layer found only at the top of a mountain, and there is a boulder at the bottom of the mountain of the same type of rock. In the layer of rock there is a hole the rock would fit into quite well (minus a little erosion). It's logical to conclude the rock fell from that hole and that's how it got to the bottom of the mountain. "
His response was quite interesting. He said, "okay lets assume that's all true, but what if God told you in an audible voice that He created the rock there, and that it never fell from the mountain, what would you think then?"
For this i don't have a specific question, just looking for comments.
 

Willtor

Not just any Willtor... The Mighty Willtor
Apr 23, 2005
9,713
1,429
43
Cambridge
Visit site
✟32,287.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The 6 days of Creation have a definite purpose with respect to the Sabbath. This is part of the purpose of mythology. It was so that He could say that Israel had to observe the Sabbath. If he had given a factual account of Creation (one in which 14 some odd billion years had transpired), nobody would ever see a Sabbath day.

Ask your friend what he would think of observance of the Sabbath once every 14 billion years.
 
Upvote 0

philadiddle

Drumming circles around you
Dec 23, 2004
3,719
56
43
Canada
Visit site
✟4,522.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Willtor said:
The 6 days of Creation have a definite purpose with respect to the Sabbath. This is part of the purpose of mythology. It was so that He could say that Israel had to observe the Sabbath. If he had given a factual account of Creation (one in which 14 some odd billion years had transpired), nobody would ever see a Sabbath day.

Ask your friend what he would think of observance of the Sabbath once every 14 billion years.
I tried explaining that God was re-using the allegory as an example of the sabbath. I said that if it's literal then the evidence we see in the earth is a lie from God. his response is that if it's not literal, He lied to the ppl at that time by telling them it only took 6 days. He also has said that God didn't need to use the creation story as a reason for the sabbath, He could have just said "rest every seven days because I said so, for I am the Lord." but instead He went out of His way to say quite plainly He did it in 6 days.
 
Upvote 0

Willtor

Not just any Willtor... The Mighty Willtor
Apr 23, 2005
9,713
1,429
43
Cambridge
Visit site
✟32,287.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
philadiddle said:
I tried explaining that God was re-using the allegory as an example of the sabbath. I said that if it's literal then the evidence we see in the earth is a lie from God. his response is that if it's not literal, He lied to the ppl at that time by telling them it only took 6 days. He also has said that God didn't need to use the creation story as a reason for the sabbath, He could have just said "rest every seven days because I said so, for I am the Lord." but instead He went out of His way to say quite plainly He did it in 6 days.

The problem lies (pun intended) with our culture's understanding of myth. It was not a lie by God because myth was a common form, and no deception was intended, nor received. Myth, as our culture looks at it is equivalent to dishonesty, or at the very least nothing more than a story. Not so with ancient civilizations.

God could, very legitimately, make reference to a mythical 6 days as a reason for making a particular command.
 
Upvote 0

LoG

Veteran
Site Supporter
May 14, 2005
1,363
118
✟70,204.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
philadiddle said:
I've tried explaining that Genesis could be taken as literal or as allegory (or myth or whatever you prefer). But we need to take evidence into account to find out which is true.

It is not necessarily an either/or conclusion. The creation story can be literal and the scientific data valid. It is called the Gap or Ruin/Reconstruction interpretation..
Check it out here: http://www.christiangeology.com/
 
Upvote 0

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
37
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟26,381.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship
Here's a bit of an interesting exercise.

1. List all the theological points contained in the story of creation of Genesis 1.

Suggested answers:

- God is the Creator. (obviously, and going on from there?)
- Everything else is created, and therefore nothing else deserves to be worshiped as god. (the most important answer, IMHO, in the light of Israel surrouded by idolatrous cultures practising mainly advanced animism with fertility gods.)
- Man is made in God's image. (another obvious one.)
- Man has responsibilities as God's representative in nature. (plain to see.)
- God's prescribed pattern for the Sabbath. (yep.)
- The establishment of God as Warrior Yahweh standing against chaos and defeating it to produce order. (Bonus marks! This is interesting in the light of statements where God proclaims His authority as "maker of Heaven and Earth" and then uses this authority to proclaim His protection and favour towards Israel. The implication is that just as God was able to defeat chaos to produce order, so God will defeat the chaos of the Gentile nations to protect and prosper the order He has founded in Israel.)

Extra credit: Look up some Babylonian or Mesopotamian creation myths. Other cultures may help but I doubt you'll find many useful "compare and contrast" points. How do they compare?

2. How would you scientifically describe the universe to a prescientific culture? Play at it. Roleplay, where one person is a 10-year-old kid (a useful approximation :p) and the other is an adult trying to explain evolution / the Big Bang theory. Remember that the Israelites, at the time they were told the Creation story, did not have much scientific knowledge - not to the level of electricity etc. Even during the time of Saul they had to go to the Philistines for metalwork, implying that they themselves couldn't work metal.

You will need a good grasp of the theories to point out just how inaccurate any reasonable explanation would be. For example, you might say "The universe started as a big explosion." But firstly would they have understood the universe as we understand it - as a large vacuum within which the spherical earth rests? Or would they understand the sky as a literal something spread out over their heads? When you understand ancient science you will realize why it is unrealistic to expect God to give them an accurate scientific account of the beginning.

3. If you can even get a good story out of q2, try putting all the theological points of q1 into it!

4. Through this exercise, we can see the difficulty of what I call "accommodation". How do you explain evolution to people whose experience isn't long enough to notice any adaptive radiation, or the Big Bang to people who are still thinking in pre-Aristotelian physics? You can't, can you? God decided that when He was to tell them the story of creation, He needn't bother with the scientific details. His purpose in telling them the story of creation was to root them down into creation and to tell them where they belonged in it and where He belonged in it. This was an answer to the questions:

"What is all this stuff made for?"
"What am I made for?"
"Am I allowed to worship anything? They all look so powerful!" etc.

This was a story for theological purpose. I believe that God also foresaw that man would in time understand the scientific principles of the world's making, and therefore that man needed no divine special revelation in order to illuminate that region of nature.

Of course, none of this is going to work if the other person isn't even interested in understanding how you think. In which case, first invest as much time as you can in understanding how s/he thinks. Then refute all his arguments as a creationist but continue to love and edify him as a Christian brother.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stumpjumper
Upvote 0

rmwilliamsll

avid reader
Mar 19, 2004
6,006
334
✟7,946.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Green
to the excellent posting of #6 i would add to section 1:

the reduction of the neighboring gods of the sun, moon to mere timekeepers. a direct frontal assault on the religion of mesopotamia with its careful observation of the heavens. The beginning of the de-sacralization of the world.

The presentation of providence, in that kingdoms are created (water, land sea) then made ready for their occupants. God's good provision and foresight. This comes from the 2 triad structure, see Kline's framework interpretation for more detail.


btw:
with reference to the questions asked in the OP, i too have struggled with questions like yours. i really don't have any well written up answers to refer you to, however i am collecting pieces at: http://rmwilliamsjr.livejournal.com/180119.html
at this point, i am looking at Genesis from the POV of Moses and what was needed for those Israelites to know about their ancestry, what oral traditions might have existed and what God had in mind at that time to create the Torah in writing. Looking at it that way the issue of the Sabbath in Gen 1 becomes even more important.

it's a good question, i hope more thoughtful answers are forthcoming. #6 is a good start, thanks to both posters for the writing.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.