Where Young Earth Creationism Gets the Bible Wrong

0
31

Hello, I'm Rich Deem of GodAndScience.org and I'm going to discuss where a young earth creationism gets the Bible wrong. First, some quotes. This one is from Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis: "And we must as God's people stand against the compromise reinterpreting Genesis to fit in with evolution and millions of years which undermines biblical authority." Henry Morris III of Institute for Creation Research says, "It is the avowed 'Bible believers' that are leading their followers down a broad road of compromise with philosophical amalgams like the progression creation theory or framework hypothesis." Jesus complain that the Pharisees nullified the Word of God by their traditions. Likewise, in young earth creationism young earth dogma takes precedence over the words the Bible. Young earth creationism can be a Bible honoring interpretation of Scripture, but the current rendition is not, as we shall see.

Every error in young earth dogma ultimately hinges on their claim that there was no death of any kind before the fall. The young earth claim that there was no death of any kind before the fall supposedly comes from Romans chapter 5, which is about mankind's fall and redemption through Jesus Christ. The chapter has nothing to do with animals or creation. Romans 5 makes it clear that death came to all men through sin. It has nothing to do with animals. Young earth creationists also cite first Corinthians 15:21, which says death came through a man. They don't usually cite the next verse, which makes it clear that this is a reference to human death. "for as in Adam all die so in Christ all will be made alive." Both these chapters discuss death and resurrection, which applies only to human beings. Animals do not sin and are not resurrected, so none other supplies to them. According to young earth creationists carnivores did not exist until after the fall of Adam and Eve.

Genesis 1:29-30 is often cited as evidence that animals once ate only plants. "Then God said, "Behold I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of the earth…" Who was got talking to? This command was given to Adam and Eve, and it was rescinded for human beings in Genesis 9:3 after the flood. However, there is no scripture anywhere in the Bible proclaiming that animals could eat meat. Does Genesis talk about the creation of carnivores? Let's look at the creation animals on day 6. Genesis 1:24-25 Then God said, "let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind:; and it was so. God made the beasts of the earth after their kind… So, what are these "beasts of the earth?" The translation "beasts of the earth" comes from the Hebrew word Chayah which is used to 127 times in 98 verses of the Old Testament. We can get an idea about what this word means from the context of the 98 verses.

In most verses the context tells us nothing. However, in the verses that we can determine the meaning most of these verses suggest that chayah are carnivores. Some examples include when Joseph's brothers were planning to kill them they said a wild beast [Chayah] devoured him. In Leviticus 26:6 God promises the Israelites in the land, saying "I show also eliminate the harmful beasts [Chayah]. In Ezekiel 34:5 the Lord says "they [referring to the Israelites] became food for every beast of the field," again the word Chayah. In Hosea 13:8 God says, "I will also devour them like a lioness, as a wild beast with tear them." So it is clear that the term beasts of the field is a reference to the creation of carnivores.

One of Adam's tasks on the sixth day was the naming of the animals. It turns out that Adam used some very creative word pictures to name some of the animals. For example, lion comes from a root meaning "in the sense of violence." Many of these creatures are "birds of prey." And vulture comes from a root meaning "to break in pieces" or "tear." Eagle comes from a root meaning "to lacerate." Cobra has the meaning "to twist." The names of these carnivores do not refer to how they ate their vegetables! Young earth creationists counter that Adam probably didn't speak Hebrew, but used some now lost proto-language. If this is true, then they expect us to believe that Adam's naming of the animals was an exercise in futility, and the Holy Spirit failed in retaining their original names given to the animals in the Hebrew Old Testament. The more likely alternative is that Adam saw these creatures behaving in this manner in the Garden of Eden. Young earth creationists say that God would never create a world in which there is death and suffering. According to Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis "When Christian leaders try to add millions have years into God's Word then they are making got a responsible for for death, disease, thorns, carnivory and suffering millions of years before sin.

The Bible makes it clear that such things are the result of man sin." Ken Ham never says how sin can create "disease, thorns, and carnivores." When pressed for an answer, young earth creationists are forced to admit that God cause all those things to happen, but that He was justified in judging the animals because of mankind's sin. Contrary to the claims of young earth creationists, God approves of or was involved in the killing of animals. First, God approved of Abel's animal sacrifice, but disapproved of Cain vegetable offering. God Himself killed animals to clothe Adam and Eve after the fall. And, God commanded the killing of animals as a sacrifice for sin. So, the idea that God does not approve animal death is contradicted by the Bible. In fact, the Bible says that God Himself feeds the carnivores. In Job 38 God feeds Ravens and lions in Psalm 104 God feeds lions and swarms of sea creatures. In Luke 12:24 God feeds the Ravens.

So, scripture makes it clear that God is not against the killing animals. Young earth dogma says that killing animals is evil, and God would never create a world in which animal death was designed. However, the Bible clearly says that God created the carnivores, and personally provides them food. When forced to choose between their dogma and the Bible young earth creationists reject the Bible. Believe it or not, most young earth creationists claim that there was no plant death before the fall. The main young earth claim is the plants are not alive. John Morris from ICR said, "The Bible never refers to plants as living. They may grow or flourish but they do not live. Neither do they die. Answers in Genesis writer Bodie Hodge says, "Plants are not alive in the biblical sense nephesh chayyah, only animals and man. Does the Bible really support the idea that plants aren't alive and don't die? The Hebrew word Chay is an adjective usually were translated as "living." Although young earth creationist like to claim that the word only refers to animals, it is used 11 times in reference to water, which of course is not living.

So, the word is more a reference to the movement rather than being alive. Since plants don't move, they aren't chay. Let's see if plants really don't die. In a reference to Cedar, Ezekiel 31 says that all trees are destined for death and compares that death to that of mortal man. So, the Bible seems to say that trees do die. Deuteronomy 20:11 says, "do not destroy its trees by putting an axe to them." Jeremiah 11:19 says, "let us destroy the tree with its fruit and let us cut him off from the land of the living." Is destruction equal to death? The Hebrew word translated "destroy" in both these verses is shachath, the same word God used in Genesis 6:13 and three other flood verses to describe what he is going to do to rebellious mankind.

It is same word used to describe what God did to Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 13:10 and six related verses. The same word is used for what God did to the Egyptian firstborns during that judgment. And, in Judges chapter 20 shachath is used to describe battles between Benjamites and Israelites in which over 65,000 men were "destroyed." So, the use of shachath in reference to trees really does refer to death. Isaiah 15:6 says, "the tender grass died out." Is this real death? The Hebrew word translated "died out" is kalah. How is kalah used and the rest of the Old Testament? Here are three of the many Old Testament verses that use the word kalah. Exodus 32:10 says, "now them let me alone that my anger may burn against them and that I may destroy [kalah] them. 1 Samuel 15 18 says, "Go and completely destroy those wicked people the Amalekites; make make war on them until you have wiped them out; again the word kalah. Jeremiah 11:19 says, "I will send the sword after them until I have annihilated [kalah] them.

So, the Hebrew word kalah referring to death of grass really is referring to death. Contrary to young earth teaching, many Old Testament verses compare plant death to human death. Job 8:11-13 it compares the fate of a papyrus without water with that of the godless. Job 14:7-10 compares a tree cut down with the death of a man. Psalm 37:1-2 compares the fatal evil doer with grass that withers. Psalm 103:15-16 compares the days of a man's life to that of a flower. Isaiah 40:6-8 compares the lives of people to those of grass and flowers and contrasts that with the Word of God, which stands forever. Likewise, the New Testament compares human death to that of trees, grass, and flowers. Young earth dogma requires that there be no death of any kind before the fall.

In order to support this dogma they feel compelled to claim that plants aren't alive and do not die. However, the Bible clearly says that plants are alive and do die. When forced to choose between their dogma and the Bible, young earth creationists reject the Bible. Does the Bible really say that the universe was created in 4004 BC? Next we're going to look at the age of the earth according to the Bible. Contrary to what many Christians believe the chronology of archbishop Ussher was not just a sequential list of continuous genealogies, despite his dating the creation to exactly Sunday October 23rd 4,004 BC. This is a timeline of Ussher's chronology. Biblical genealogies exist only from Adam to Solomon, and there are many provable gaps in some of the genealogies.

Ussher used the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, for part of his genealogy to get rid of a 150 year gap found in the Hebrew Old Testament. From Solomon to the Babylonian captivity, the chronology depends on a succession of kings, which are not necessarily complete. The intertestamental period depends upon Chaldean and Persian histories. Ultimately, Ussher determined that there were exactly 4,000 years between the beginning of creation and the birth of Jesus, which seems a very unlikely coincidence. Although Ussher came up with less than a hundred generations from Adam to Jesus, many Old Testament verses indicate that there were actually one thousand generations even up to the time of King David. At forty years per generation this would put the Creation of Adam at least 40,000 years ago. Youg Earth dogma says that the universe and the earth are only six thousand years old.

However the Bible clearly indicates the humanity has been commanded by God for at least 40,000 years. When forced to choose between their dogma and the Bible young earth creationists reject the Bible. Young earth creationist say the creation days were ordinary days. Does the Bible really say that the creation days were exactly 24 hours in length? Genesis 1:9-13 is the account the third creation day. Did all these events happen in exactly 24 hours? So, God created the continents on the third day Next, God created the plants. How did he do this? The Hebrew word dasha means "to sprout" or "shoot forth." So, God, like any good farmer, planted seeds and let them sprout and grow. The Genesis text indicates that grass not only sprouted and grew, but grew to maturity and form seeds. Clearly, this process took longer than 24 hours.

It gets worse for young earth creationist. The verb to dasha refers not only to the plants but also to the fruit trees that sprout, grow to maturity, and form fruit. This process typically takes at least several years. Young earth creationists have a 'solution' to the problem saying that God speeded up the process. However the text clearly says, "the EARTH brought forth vegetation," indicating a natural process. There is no suggestion anywhere in the Bible that God sped up the process of plant growth on day three. So, at minimum, the third creation day lasted at least several years. Creation day 6 is another day that would have required a long amount of time to accomplish. Contrary to the claims of skeptics, Genesis 2 is not a different version of the creation account, but a more detailed account of how God created human beings on the sixth day. Young earth creationist say the sixth day is exactly 24 hours long, but let's see what really happened during that "day.

" First, God created the animals. Then, God created Adam and planted a garden in Eden. What does the Hebrew text mean when it says God planted a garden? The word meaning to plant comes from the Hebrew nata, which can refer to physical planting or can be is metaphorically, usually referring to the establishment of a people group at a specific geographical location. If we look through the Bible we find 55 verses using the Hebrew word nata. Here's the table the first 13 instances in the Old Testament. Most of these verses refer to the planting of seeds to grow crops. A few refer to the metaphorical usage. So, in all instances where crops or trees are mentioned, the word refers to the planting of seeds. So, from the uses of the Hebrew word nata, we conclude that God planted the garden of Eden from seeds and let it grow.

After planting a garden, God put Adam into the garden and instructed him what to eat and not to eat. Then God instructed Adam to "cultivate and keep it." The Hebrew word to cultivate is a abad, which means to labor or do work. The exact same word is used of Adam's cultivation work outside the garden after the fall, in Genesis 3:23. The Hebrew word translated to keep is shamar, which means to guard or protect. Since there were no other humans at the time one assumes that the other part of Adam's job was to keep the animals from destroying the garden. After Adam had been put to work cultivating the garden, God brought all the cattle, the birds of the sky, and every beast of the field to Adam to name.

This list would be expected to include all birds (over 10,000 species) in addition to mammals (5,000 species) amphibians (6,000 species) and reptiles (8,000 species). Since young earth creationist believe the entire record of nature, including extinct species, were present when Adam was created, this would include at least 10 to 100 times the number species – at least 300,000. Even if we include only genera, the "kinds," instead of species, Adam would have to name at least one genus per second for 12 hours straight. Following this, God put Adam to sleep, took a piece from his side, and formed Eve. Upon waking, Adam exclaimed, "now at length." The Hebrew word paamah has been variously translated "at last," "finally," and "now at last," showing that Adam had waited a long time for Eve's appearance. The Answers in Genesis response to the problem of fitting all the activities of day 6 are reproduced here.

Of course, they get some of the events wrong because they were wearing their young earth glasses. AiG says God creates the garden. However, the Bible says God plants the garden. There's a big difference since planting involves putting seeds in the ground and letting them grow. They say it only took an hour to grow, which seems unlikely, and Adam took only four hours to name the tens of thousands of genera. AiG says God told Adam and Eve what they should and shouldn't eat. However, in Genesis 1 God's first command was to be fruitful and multiply. Then he told them to eat plants. However, only Adam was told not to eat the forbidden fruit, before Eve was even created. Noticeably missing from the list was a lunch break for Adam. According to AiG God forced Adam to work six hours straight without a break.

However, if these events actually occurred over a period of days to years, Adam would have needed to know what not to eat during that time. Hence, the Bible says God told Adam immediately after he was put into the garden what not to eat. I felt the need to add another line to their table since Adam complained about getting lonely. So I sort of added it between 2:59 and 3:00 p.m., right before Adams operation. So, it's pretty clear that AiG's timeline is completely unrealistic. Day 7 is technically not a creation day, since Genesis says God rested from all his creation work. However, unlike the other six days there is no familiar closing, "there was evening and morning the seventh day." It's just not there. In addition, the book of Hebrews regarding God's seventh day of rest says "let us therefore be diligent to enter into that rest." So God's seventh day of rest is ongoing even today, having lasted at least several thousand years. Young earth dogma says the creation days were exactly 24 hours long.

However, the Bible clearly indicates that at least 3 days were longer than 24 hours. When forced to choose between their dogma and the Bible, young earth creationists reject the Bible. Let's look more closely at the Garden of Eden. Answers in Genesis and Institute for Creation Research both say that Adam was created as an immortal being. Dr. Bill Greenshaw from Answers in Genesis wrote, "Adam was created immortal. ICR's Alene Oestreicher says, "Adam and Eve were apparently meant to be a immortal. If this is true, why did God create the tree of life? And, when Adam sinned, why did God protect the tree with cherubim and a flaming sword? The truth is that Adam was created mortal and if he had eaten from the tree of life he would have become immortal, though spiritually dead, because if this sin. As late as August 2013, Ken Ham said, "Ultimately we don't know where the Garden of Eden was located." Is the Bible really silent on the location up Eden? Why would young earth creationist take this position? The Bible is actually pretty explicit about the location Eden.

Genesis 2 describes the rivers of Eden, "The name the first is Pishon; it flows along the whole land Havilah, where there is gold… The name in the second as Gihon; it flows around the whole land of Cush The name of the third is Tigris; it flows East of Assyria. And the fourth is Euphrates (Genesis 2:11-14). Three of the four rivers exist today, with the fourth being a dry river bed due to climate change that occurred following the end of the last ice age. It is likely Adam was created during the last ice age, when sea levels were lower because extensive continental glaciation, and the Persian Gulf region was much more temperate and wetter. This is what the Persian Gulf looked like at the end of the last glacial maximum. So, Eden was probably just south the split at the four rivers. in what is now the northern part the Persian Gulf. The reason why young earth creationist don't know were Eden was is because their belief in flood geology. Flood geology says that a massive global flood formed essentially all the current geographical locations that we see today.

If flood geology were true, we would not expect to see the same four pre-flood rivers described in Genesis chapter 2. It actually gets much worse for young earth creationism. Mesopotamia and the Persian Gulf reagion sits on top of nine thousand meters of sedimentary rock. Under much that rock are petroleum deposits. Flood geology says that all that oil came from creatures killed in the flood. The problem is that all that oil and rock is now up to six miles below sea level. How could that happen? Young earth dogma of flood geology says that all pre-flood sites mentioned in the Bible were destroyed by the global flood, so we can't know where the Garden of Eden was located. However, the Bible clearly says that Eden was located near the four rivers that empty into the Persian Gulf. When forced to choose between their dogma and the Bible young earth creationists reject the Bible. We don't have time to do a complete study of the flood since such a study would take an entire video on its own. So we're only gonna hit a couple highlights how young earth creationism distorts what the Bible says about the flood.

Contrary to the teachings of young earth creationism, the Bible actually teaches a local flood. The clearest teaching on this is found in Psalm 104, the creation psalm. "He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. You covered it with the deep as with the garment. The water stood above the mountains. But at your rebuke the waters fled; at the sound Your thunder they took flight; they flowed over the mountains that went down into the valleys to the place you assigned for them. You set a boundary they cannot cross; never again will they cover the earth." Young earth creationists have a difficult time trying to explain how the flood could be global if the waters never again covered the earth. Young earth creationist try to get around the obvious biblical conflict by saying that psalm 104 is really about the flood. Terry Mortenson of Answers in Genesis says, "Psalm 104:6-9 clearly refers to Noah's Flood, not to the third day of Creation Week.

" However, all the commentaries say that psalm 104 is a psalm about creation. Even the third century BC Greek translation of the psalm, the Septuagint, calls it "a psalm of David concerning the formation of the world." So everybody other than young earth creationists say that the psalm 104 is about creation and not about the flood. Why do all the commentaries say Psalm 104 is a creation psalm? Nearly all the verses in question have parallel verses in other creation passages, including Genesis 1. So, the context makes it clear that Psalm 104 is a creation psalm, and not about the flood. If you've read English translations of the Genesis flood text you'll come away at the idea that the flood was global. However, according to Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew definitions, the Hebrew word erets, translated "earth" in the Genesis flood passage has several literal definitions.

It can refer to the entire planet. But, mostly it refers to local areas of land or territory. It can also have the meaning of "ground" or "soil." Quite often erets refers to people of a land. Examples include God judging the whole earth, and all the earth worshiping God and singing his praises. Here are some examples of erets being used in the flood text. Verse 6:11 says, "the earth [erets] was corrupt." Verse 6:12 says, "God looked upon the earth [erets] and behold it was corrupt for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth" And verse 9:13 says, "it should be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth." So, in these verses erets is used to describe the people of the earth and not the planet. The Genesis flood text itself tells us the perspective is local. Genesis 8:5 says, "the tops of the mountains became visible." Then Noah send out a raven and a dove, both of which returned to the ark.

After this, verse 8:9 says, "water was on the surface of all the earth." So, how could the mountains be visible if "water was on the surface a all the earth?" The reason is because the correct translation erets in the flood passages is "land," not planet Earth So, the Bible itself eliminates the global flood, and supports a local flood. So, in conclusion, young earth creationism invents doctrines not found in the Bible, such as no animal or plant death before the fall, an earth that is only six thousand years old, creation days that are exactly 24 hours long, the location up even can't be known, and a global flood. However, the Bible clearly contradicts such dogma. When forced to choose between their dogma and the Bible young earth creationists reject the Bible. This video is just a brief introduction into how young earth creationism distorts the Bible.

We actually have dozens of articles refuting young earth creationism from the scriptures. So, if you want more studies on any of these topics mentioned in this video, please visit our website at GodAndScience.org. May God bless your study at his Word!.

NO COMMENTS

LEAVE A REPLY