The idea that God used the millions (or billions) of years in a process of the development of earth and life in this world is both unbiblical and impossible. Here are many of the reasons why:
(1) God inspired Moses to write of an instantaneous creation of both heaven AND earth. The earth was created at the same time as the rest of the universe.
"in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." vs 1 as compared to Psalm 33:6-9.
6
By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses.
8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him.
9
For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.
This is instantaneous creation and not something that occurred over millions or billions of yrs. The 14 billion yr estimate (Gamov said 20 billion yrs, other more, others less) is a myth.
The fact is that in Genesis one there is internal evidence as to this instantaneous creation of things by the Lord as it progressed through the six days.
"And God said, Let there be light and there was light". vs 3
(2) Each day of creation was assigned both a 'morning' & an 'evening'. This is done six times. The TE objection that this is not literal because the sun was not created until the fourth day is illegitimate. Why? Because God provided light on earth by what was indicated in vs 3. Whatever that light was provided the natural time divisions that was eventually assigned to the sun on the 4th day.
If the above point is somehow incorrect then what meaning does the 'morning and the evening were the first day...second day...third day', etc. have as it relates to millions or billions of yrs? Answer: none. There can be no relation, even poetically. Therefore the 'evening and the morning were the....day" is to be taken literally.
(3) the natural divisions of time are given by God in the first chapter: vs 14.
"And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years."
signs = constellations that can provide the exact date and time depending on ones location in viewing the position of the stars.
seasons = spring, summer, fall, winter which God said would continue indefinitely in Gen. 8:22. Those are natural time divisions marked by the change in weather since then until now. It's still a legitimate operation of nature.
days: the circuit of the sun on ancient sundials in approx. 24 hrs still stands as a 'day' until this period of history. The fact that the word 'day' (Hebrew 'yom') sometimes refers to longer period of times does not affect the necessity of a one 24 hr day in Genesis, as we shall continue to see.
years: The Hebrew year of 360 days per year and one 'leap month' was observed and later the
now recognized 365 1/4 days occur in one orbit of the earth around the sun...again observed from ancient times until now.
God's Word is final on this point and not human opinion to the contrary. The fact is that history bears up the fact that ancient man used those natural divisions to establish the measurement of the passing of time...unto this very day.
(4) the literal six days of creation are referred to in three places, one we have already covered: Genesis one. The others are in Exodus 20:11 & 31:17. That makes three direct references to the six day creation of the world by Almighty God. Did anyone in Moses time believe the world evolved? Let the compromising theistic evolutionists name him/her.
"For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."
The fact is that creation week became the basis for the six day working week with one day of rest that is still observed by many in our world to this day.
"Six days thou shalt do thy work, and on the seventh day thou shalt rest"
Exodus 23:12.
Nothing is more obvious than the literal nature of this command, for no one could work for six thousand yrs nor ever need a rest of one thousand yrs, still less 6 million yrs of work and 1 million yrs of rest.
The fact that God commanded six years of planting with one year of summer fallowing the ground concerned the land. The command in Ex. 23:12 (i.e.) was a command as it relates to man. There are more deeply spiritual reasons why God used that time frame than I have time to explore here.
(5) The chronologies of Genesis 5, I Chronicles 1, and Luke 3 give exactly the same names of the antediluvian forefathers which gives us excellent reason to respect the ages mentioned in Gen. 5
The Chronologies compared
Genesis: I Chronicles: Luke:
Adam Adam Adam
Seth Sheth Seth
Enos Enosh Enos
Cainan Kenan Cainan
Mahalaleel Mahalaleel Maleleel
Jared Jared Jared
Enoch Henoch Enoch
Methuselah Methuselah Mathusala
Lamech Lamech Lamech
Noah Noah Noe
Shem Shem Sem
Why would the Holy Spirit inspire the writers of three different books of the Bible about the people who were the earliest inhabitants of our world if they were not real, literal, historical people who did exactly what scripture tells us they did?
The lineage mentioned in Luke is Jesus family tree...noted from Jesus himself all the way back (77 names) to Adam. If that family lineage is not legitimate then any claim that the Lord Jesus might have as heir to the throne of David is not legitimate. Yet some TE's on this website have had the gall to attack the chronologies of the Bible (in agreement with the atheists who make the same charge!) as if we cannot trust the Word of God as to the right of Jesus Christ to have that claim!
(6) There isn't a single passage of the New Testament that mentions the creation week, Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, Seth, Enoch, Noah, or his family members, or even Abraham, Lot, and his wife that places in question the literal historical events and occurrences of their lives and acts. Yet the TE's do so with most of them.
Observe:
Lu 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
Ro 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1Ti 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
1Ti 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Now, which of those verses place a question in Adams literal, historical existence?
2Co 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
1Ti 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
Which of these verses tell us that Eve was not a real, historical character?
Mt 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Lu 11:51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.
Heb 11:4 ¶ By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.
Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Which verse above places in question the literal, historical existence of Abel?
Heb 11:4 ¶ By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.
1Jo 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.
Jude 1:11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.
Which verse above places question in the literal, historical existence of Cain or what he is recorded as doing in his life?
Lu 3:37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.
Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Which verse above places in question the existence of, or historical acts of Enoch?
Mt 24:37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Mt 24:38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
Lu 3:36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Lu 17:26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
Lu 17:27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
Which verse above leaves us to believe Noe(Noah) was not a real person or that the flood was not real and/or world wide?
(7) The entrance of sin and the subsequent ruin of our world and the human race in particular is mentioned in Genesis 3 and it is treated as a literal, historical matter in Romans 5:12
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned."
Not only so but it is clear that this ruin of death in the world began with Adam and continued throughout history:
"Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses,..." vs. 14.
The theistic evolution position must deny that sin began literally with the fall of man in rebellion to God in the garden of Eden in order to maintain the concept of death for millions of years of evolution. But even if that were true, none of those who defend such an idea have any clue as to when sin acutally began...or when death actually orginated. Some are so far removed from the truth they don't even connect death with man's sin in the first place, nor do they think such a connection is necessary. But that being so they have no idea where physical death originated...or why.
Finally,
the theistic evolution position (which is neither biblical nor scientific) is therefore refuted and there are even more reasons I have not posted here. The theistic evolution position is a shame and disgrace to the Christian world and a tool of Satan to lead weak-minded believers into unbelief about God's creation.