The surface features of limestone deposits have several puzzling aspects that have stymied uniformitarian (‘slow and gradual’) geologists for well over a century. Especially puzzling are tower karst and tall sharp pinnacles. Eminent uniformitarian geomorphologists Baker and Twidale stated:
Domical forms in limestone, sandstone, and granite are converted to steep-sided towers. Such steepening through time is contrary to the expectable consequences of any of the conventional models of landscape evolution.
Template v36
Tower karst consists of isolated, steep-sided limestone hills surrounded by a generally flat surface.There are a number of types of tower karst ranging from tall vertical-sided towers to cones and hemispheres. Tower karst commonly protrudes above a flat or nearly flat planation surface produced by erosion, and capped by gravel. Some towers are isolated while others are in groups rising from a common base.
Tower karst is said to be many millions of years old. Based on fossils, the top of the tower karst in southwest China has been assigned an age of 75 million years. But such old dates defy present erosion rates that show the towers could not last more than tens of thousands of years. They also demonstrate that the dating methods that give such old ages are unreliable. Distinguished Chinese hydrogeologist Yuan Daoxian stated it is inconceivable how they could have survived.
According to Michael Oard, karst pinnacles provide strong evidence that they formed underwater from tower karst while the waters of Noah’s Flood were still covering the area. However, it would have occurred in locations where the velocity of the floodwater was relatively low.
Article TOWER KARST AND SHARP PINNACLES – Fascinating Flood-formed Limestone Structures by Michael Oard in Creation magazine Vol 46 issue 3
Recent developments in creationist cosmology offer an elegant explanation of the distant starlight question which is consistent with the Genesis account of creation and is based on recent astronomical observations and Einstein’s General Relativity equations. Whilst a detailed explanation of this new cosmology is beyond the scope of this Feedback article, it is explained more fully in Harnett’s article “Has dark matter really been proven?” http://www.creation.com
This article provides a framework for understanding the answer to the distant starlight question. The key elements are time dilation, the recent observations showing that we live in a galactocentric universe, and the Scriptural references to God ‘stretching out the heavens’ on Day 4 of the Creation Week.
An experimentally verified prediction of Einstein’s General Relativity Theory is a phenomenon called gravitational time dilation. It has long been established that gravity affects the rate at which time flows in any particular location in the universe.
Another mechanism for time dilation is a rapid acceleration of the fabric of space in an expanding universe. This is explained more fully in Hartnett’s article referenced above.
We live in a galactocentric universe: Standard Big Bang theory has it that the universe has neither a centre nor an edge which is an assumption, called the Cosmological Principle, designed to avoid the earth being a special place. If the Earth was special in any way, it would imply design and thus a Designer which flies in the face of atheistic evolutionary belief. When Edwin Hubble discovered the redshift in the spectra of stars and galaxies and interpreted them as distance (known as the Hubble Law), he was horrified at the implication that the Earth could be in a special place. He wrote: ‘Such a condition [red shifts] would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe … But the unwelcome supposition of a favoured location must be avoided at all costs … [and] is intolerable … moreover, it represents a discrepancy with the theory because the theory postulates homogeneity.’1
Recent surveys3,4 have measured the galactic redshift for around 250,000 galaxies and have revealed an over abundance of galaxies at certain redshifts in which the data departs from the expected theoretical distribution in a series of large spikes. A straightforward interpretation of this data is that the galaxies are distributed with a spherical shell-like symmetry with the Milky Way galaxy at or near the centre! Such a result is entirely consistent with the biblical picture but is at odds with standard big bang beliefs and is not consistent with the Cosmological Principle.
In at least 11 places, the Scriptures speak of God ‘stretching out the heavens’ (e.g. Job 9:8, Isaiah 40:22 and 42:5, Jeremiah 10:12, Zechariah 12:1) and in Genesis 1:15 the words ‘And it was so.’ are recorded in connection with the events of Day 4 of Creation Week, implying the completion of the events described on that Day. It is a reasonable conclusion to draw that God stretched out the heavens to the vast extent of the observable universe in just one 24 hour day and then ceased the action of ‘stretching out’. This is more rational than the inflation fudge of big bangers discussed above. That is, where the universe just happened to expand much faster than light, although there is no known physical cause for starting or stopping this superluminal expansion.
We should also note that God created the Earth first before the sun, moon and stars (and by inference the planets etc) so it would seem reasonable to assume the universe was stretched out with the Earth at or very near its centre. Furthermore, Psalm 147:4 and Isaiah 40:26 imply that there is a finite number of stars in the universe. So, the Bible seems to teach that we live in a finite universe that has, at the very least, our Milky Way galaxy at its centre.
We now have the keys to understanding how starlight can reach us from such vast distances in just a few thousand years of Earth time. The days of the Creation Week were recorded from the point of view of an observer on the earth so the time reference in Genesis is Earth time. On Day 4, as God commenced stretching out the heavens, the mass of the universe (presumably including the ‘waters above’ which were separated out on Day 2) would have been confined to a much smaller volume of space than is the case today. Assuming the Hartnett–Carmeli theory is correct, the Universe rapidly expanded with massive time dilation as a result of very rapid acceleration of the fabric of space on Day 4. By the end of Day 4, when God completed his work of creating the sun, moon and stars, and had stretched out the heavens to their vast extent, billions of years of cosmic time could have elapsed at the outer edges of the cosmos in just one 24 hour earth day. There would have been more than enough time for the light from distant stars to have reached the earth so that when Adam gazed at the night sky on that sixth night he would have seen much the same as what we see today.
6,000 years have passed since the Creation Week. If the models outlined above are correct, the light we see today from any star that is greater than 6,000 light years away from the earth will have originated on Day 4 itself. This would include most of the visible stars, all of which are part of the Milky Way galaxy. We are effectively looking at God’s creative activity on Day 4 as we gaze into the universe!
So what do we make of supernova 1987A? At 170,000 light years away we are looking at an event that occurred on Day 4 but whose light did not reach us until 1987.
Is an exploding star consistent with a perfect creation? God said that the stars were created to be for signs and seasons (Genesis 1:14) and God foreknew all that would happen right from the very beginning. What to us seems to be destruction is actually just a physical process which does not necessarily denote any lack of perfection in the original creation. Importantly, there is no loss of biblical life involved (the creatures affected by death brought about by the Fall were those the Bible calls נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה (nephesh chayyāh)).6
Another excellent resource on the light travel dilemma is previewed in the video below.
In an era when biblical narratives are often relegated to the realm of mythology, the “Ark and the Darkness” documentary seeks to reframe one of history’s most debated tales: Noah’s Flood.
“There are a lot of misconceptions about the flood. Hollywood not only doesn’t represent the true biblical account, they add a lot of mythologies and a lot of themes that are just clearly not biblical. … The two biggest misconceptions would be mythologizing the flood, saying it’s an allegory, it didn’t really happen. The other one that’s actually within Christian circles is, ‘It was just a local flood, God’s judgment was only pertaining to the people living in Mesopotamia Valley.’ … Our movie shows it wasn’t an allegory; it happened in real-time just thousands of years ago, and it was a worldwide event.”
“The Ark and the Darkness,” from Sevenfold Films in collaboration with Genesis Apologetics, bridges the gap between various scientific disciplines — geology, paleontology, the study of fossils, ancient civilizations, volcanic activity, and Earth sciences — all pointing unanimously to the reality of Noah’s Flood.
The documentary features experts, including scientists from Answers in Genesis and Liberty University, like Dr. Andrew Snelling, paleontologist Dr. Gabriela Haynes and researcher and speaker Dr. Terry Mortenson, who uncover the factual basis of Noah’s Flood.
The film hit theaters on Wednesday and Thursday.
Biddle pointed to a variety of scientific findings he said corroborate the biblical account, including the discovery of bioorganic materials in dinosaur bones, which suggests they were buried rapidly and relatively recently.
“There’s no way that these tissues could have lasted for millions upon millions of years,” he said.
The documentary, directed by Ralph Strean, explores the Morrison Formation, a geological site spanning 13 states in the middle of America, which contains a vast number of dinosaur fossils intermingled with marine life.
“How could you take a 13-state zone region and bury land creatures and marine creatures together over that much of an expanse?” Biddle asked. “The answer has to be a worldwide flood.”
Beyond presenting physical evidence, “The Ark and the Darkness” also delves into the implications of Noah’s Flood for understanding the state of the world today. Drawing parallels between the days of Noah and contemporary times, Biddle highlighted a perceived increase in lawlessness and moral decay, echoing biblical prophecies of the End Times.
“We just look around the world today, and it seems like a stage is being set for some interesting things,” he said. “I’m not a doomsayer, I’m not a sensationalist, I’m not even really a prepper. But I would just say that most Christians nowadays can look around the landscape and say, ‘Yeah, there’s a lot of shift going on.’ It’s not a time to be fearful. It’s a time to trust in the Lord, to run in our lanes, and to trust Him for both our short-term lives and what’s going to happen in a longer play. Jesus Himself draws that parallel between the flood and End Times, and so we do the same thing in the movie.”
The film counters evolutionary arguments, suggesting that Noah’s Ark could indeed have housed representatives of all animal kinds necessary to repopulate the Earth post-flood. Biddle challenged the notion that the ark’s capacity would have been insufficient, proposing that only around 7,000 animals were needed to account for the biodiversity seen today.
“One of the most popular allegations is … there’s no way that Noah could have taken all of those different species on Earth today on the ark because there are millions and millions of species. … But that’s one of the things that the Bible addresses straight out of Genesis and chapter one,” he said.
“The experts at Answers in Genesis believe that you only need 7,000 animals total on the ark to reproduce all the different species and all the different breeds that we see today. So that would be one aspect of how we go against evolution theory in the movie,” Biddle added.
Biddle also expressed concern over the growing trend among Christians to interpret the story of Noah’s Flood as allegorical rather than historical.
“We hear a lot of people say they’re just New Testament Christians,” he said. “If that’s true, please explain to me the Gospel without citing Genesis, and no one can do it.”
Biddle stressed that understanding the Gospel’s message of salvation is impossible without acknowledging the reality of sin introduced through Adam in the Garden of Eden. According to Biddle, denying the historical truth of events like Noah’s Flood undermines the entire biblical narrative, including the teachings of Jesus and the writings of New Testament authors who referenced the flood as a factual event.
“It really cripples the Gospel message to say that either the garden or Adam or the flood was a myth,” he said.
Biddle hopes viewers, regardless of their religious or scientific background, reconsider the historical validity of Noah’s Flood.
“I think every person who watches this movie, from a hardened, licensed geologist who’s a complete atheist all the way to a homeschool Christian who believes every word of Scripture, … will be shifted, shifted towards believing more about historic Christianity,” he said. “It would be really hard to sit through an hour and 52 minutes worth of this avalanche of evidence and not come out believing, ‘My gosh, I think they have a case.’ And, we do.”
Christians serve the One who claimed He was “the truth” and follow a book that asserts its own divine inspiration (John 14:6, II Timothy 3:16). It’s important to remember that our faith in these claims is grounded not in wishful thinking but credible facts and arguments.
First, the Bible is full of historical information that can be verified. For example, as documented by Old Testament scholar John D. Currid, “In 1868, a missionary in Jerusalem found a stone tablet for sale that appeared to be from ancient times. … On the tablet is a text written in Moabite dating to the ninth century BC.” Currid reports that the first line of the table reads, “I am Mesha son of Chemosh, king of Moab.” What’s especially noteworthy is that the tablet records Mesha’s account of a war he fought with Israel. In 850 B.C., Moab rebelled against Israel’s northern kingdom, an event recounted in II Kings 3.
Probably the most controversial Biblical truths are the worldwide flood of Noah’s day and the age of the Earth. However, finally, geologists are realising that the topography of Earth must have been formed by catastrophic flood conditions Evidence 1: 70% of Earth’s land surface is covered by sedimentary rock, Evidence 2: Underfit rivers, Evidence 3: Water gaps, Evidence 4: 40% of Earth’s land surface is covered by plateaus, Evidence #5: Absence of bioturbation in rock layers (fluvial geomorphologist Dr. Ron Neller: Flood Expert Finds Evidence for Noah’s Flood · Creation.com). Moreover, billions of dead things all over the world, fossils including fossil fuels (buried vegetation) should be evidence enough. Actual red blood cells in fossil bones from a Tyrannosaurus rex? With traces of the blood protein hemoglobin (which makes blood red and carries oxygen)? It sounds preposterous—to those who believe that these dinosaur remains are at least 65 million years old. It is of course much less of a surprise to those who believe Genesis, in which case dinosaur remains are at most only a few thousand years old.
The New Testament is also filled with reliable historical references and events. Purdue University professor Lawrence Mykytiuk has confirmed 30 New Testament figures “who can be identified in the archaeological record and extra-biblical writings.” As Tim McGrew of Western Michigan University documents, the Book of Acts alone contains literally scores of references to people, places, and events that are found in extra-biblical sources or that can still be found in the ruins of the eastern Mediterranean region.
In sum, no one can point to Scripture and dismiss its texts as founded in hearsay or third-hand reports. Similarly, the internal consistency of the Bible is astonishing, not only in what it claims about time-and-space matters but in the view of God, the universe, humanity, and redemption it presents from Genesis to Revelation. David Dockery, former president of Union University and now at Southwestern Baptist Seminary, argues that “there is a definite Christian view of things, which has a character, coherence, and unity of its own, and stands in sharp contrast with counter theories and speculations.” Dockery writes that the “Christian worldview has the stamp of reason and reality and can stand the test of history and experience. A Christian view of the world cannot be infringed upon, accepted or rejected piecemeal, but stands or falls on its integrity.”
This does not mean there are not things in the Bible that are hard to grasp. But mystery and contradiction are two different things, and an extraordinary claim is not the same thing as an illogical claim. God does not disclose everything about Himself or His plan for the world, but these things make the claims of Scripture no less true.
The Christian “lens” through which we see reality enables us to make the most sense of what we observe and experience of any philosophy or faith. As C.S. Lewis wrote, “I believe in Christianity as I believe that the Sun has risen not only because I see it but because by it I see everything else.”
Finally, the pattern of life envisioned and encouraged in Scripture leads to human flourishing. Unlike other religions or philosophical systems, Christianity does not demand exotic forms of worship, soul-deadening stoicism, or adventures into the occult. It deals with life as it is, in the practical Tuesday afternoon realities of life. It offers joy instead of happiness, peace instead of placation, and hope instead of longing.
This article is based on an article by Rob Schwarzwalder January 6, 2024, How Do We Test for Truth, in The Washington Stand and info from http://www.creation.com
For me fulfilled prophecies are what convinced me the Bible is the inspired Word of God. Over 300 prophecies of Jesus first coming to Earth were fulfilled to the letter and many of the 2000 prophecies of Jesus second coming to Earth have already been fulfilled including a major one, Israel being miraculously established as a nation again in 1948 even with its original language.
Are you one of the last days scoffers?
“You should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by these means, the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.” 2 Peter 3:2-7
In this video clip “Mountains After the Flood”, geologists John Whitmore and Andrew Snelling talk with Del Tackett about the importance of their research project in the Grand Canyon. They discuss creation science and why it provides answers to evidence not found in the conventional scientific paradigm. This four-minute segment shows convincing evidence that the Coconino Sandstone was laid down by a catastrophic flood. This formation spreads across the Colorado Plateau province of the United States, including northern Arizona, northwest Colorado, Nevada, and Utah. Make sure you watch the entire film to see the fascinating results of their research.
In 1980, Mount St. Helens (in Washington State, USA) erupted, blasting the top and side off the mountain. Then, as volcanoes do, it began to rebuild. In 1992, samples of new volcanic rock—KNOWN to be only about 10 years old—were dated using standard radiometric dating techniques (3 samples from the same rock, 350,000 years, 900,000 years, and 2,800,000 years). The results were eye-opening. Radiometric dating is not all it’s cracked up to be! In fact, it’s fair to ask: “Can radiometric dates be trusted at all?” Join geologist Dr Tas Walker for a discussion of the Mount St. Helens eruption and its aftermath, the fundamental flaws in radiometric dating methods, and the relevance of the age of the earth to people’s view of the world.
TIMESTAMPS ⌛ 00:00 Teaser 00:40 Introduction: What’s the deal with Mount St. Helens? 02:33 Dating rocks from Mount St. Helens 04:34 Assumptions underlie radiometric dating 05:57 Three samples, three dates: 350,000 – 2.8 million years 07:36 Story-telling accompanies radiometric dating 11:10 How can we get ACCURATE dates? 12:29 How were the Mount St. Helens dates received? Handling objections 17:05 Carbon dating gives good evidence for a YOUNG earth! 18:37 The only way to be sure of the age of something 19:58 Different kinds of radiometric dating 21:19 Radiometric dating seems so SCIENTIFIC – How can it not be right? 23:00 What to do when the dates don’t fit the expectations 27:56 Is it okay to publish dates/perspectives that don’t match existing expectations? 31:51 The age of the earth is a critical part of people’s worldview 33:38 So, what do long-age geologists think of Mount St. Helens? 35:55 Other lessons from Mount St. Helens: 36:09 → Geologic layers can be deposited rapidly 36:59 → Erosion can happen rapidly 38:02 Geologists are now more accepting of catastrophism, but won’t let go of long ages 39:17 In conclusion: The age of the earth matters to both the biblical and the naturalistic worldviews
If you have not viewed the film “Is Genesis History” then you need to as Dr. Del Hackett has done a thorough and convincing job of putting it together. He interviews leading Ph.D. scientists across all the relevant fields of science.
Is Genesis History? features over a dozen scientists and scholars explaining how the world intersects with the history recorded in Genesis. From rock layers to fossils, from lions to stars, from the Bible to artifacts, this fascinating film will change the way you see the world. Evolution and random chance cannot explain its existence.
The film’s goal is to provide a convincing case for Creation in six normal days just 6000 years ago, a real Adam and Eve, an actual Fall that resulted in the entry of death into this world, God’s judgement of a Global Flood which caused the burial of billions of dead things (fossils) all over the world including fossil fuels, and the establishment of nations at the confusing of languages by God at the Tower of Babel.
Dr. Del Tackett, creator of The Truth Project, serves as your guide—hiking through canyons, climbing up mountains, and diving below the sea—in an exploration of two competing views … one compelling truth.
This is such an important issue in the world at this time when people who attend school in most Western civilizations are taught that this Cosmos came into existence through the Big Bang and evolution. God was not necessary and the Bible is just a book of fairy tales and myths. God warned us with many end-times prophecies in the Bible that this would be the case at the time of Jesus’ prophesied second coming to Earth. The following Scripture is one of them.
“Knowing this, first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these, the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.” 2 Peter 3:3-7
“Is Genesis History will strengthen confidence in Scripture, clarify understanding of the relationships of revelation, science, history, and faith, and enhance understanding of difficult questions all the while being both beautiful and entertaining.” – E. Calvin Beisner, PhD
In Exodus 20:8–10, God gave the children of Israel the fourth commandment: work for six days and then on the seventh day, take a Sabbath rest. He could have given the command without providing a reason for the command, as he did in the first and the fifth through the tenth commandments and other times when he commanded a Sabbath rest. Or he could have given a different reason for the Sabbath command (e.g., so their animals could rest, to avoid death for disobedience, to humble their souls, to remember their exodus from slavery in Egypt, or simply because he is the Lord. But as in the second and third commands in Exodus 20, God gave a reason for the Sabbath command. The Israelites should work six days and rest on the seventh, “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” And he repeated that reason in Exodus 31:15–17.
In Exodus 20:11, God used the same Hebrew word for “days”11 (yamim, the plural form of yom [day]) that he used in verse nine, showing that God’s days of creation in Genesis 1 were the same kind of days (the same length) as the days of the week for the Israelites. It is doubtful if any faithful Jew ever interpreted it any other way until the idea of millions of years started to take control of people’s minds about two centuries ago.
We should note that if God really created over the course of millions of years (as most Christians around the world today believe), he could have clearly indicated that in the Hebrew. He could have used the Hebrew word dor (דּוֹר), which is translated in English Bibles as time, period, or generation.12 Or he could have borrowed an Aramaic word, as he did in the books of Nehemiah and Daniel, such as zeman (זְמָ֑ן) or iddan (עִדָּן), which are translated as season, time, or period.13 Or he could have used some phrase such as “after many days,”14 “after some years,”15 “after thousands of ten thousand years,”16 or “after years of many generations.”17 But instead, God used the only Hebrew word, yom (יוֹם), which means a literal, 24-hour day, and it means that (or the light portion of a literal, 24-hour day, in contrast to night) in the majority of the 2,320 times it is used in the Old Testament.
One more point for this discussion: Exodus 20:8–11 clearly implies that the days of Genesis 1 (and therefore the events on those six days) are in sequential order, just as the days of a human week are. Sunday always comes before Monday, which always comes before Tuesday, etc. So, in Genesis 1, God created the earth completely covered with water and then he created light (day 1), then the expanse (firmament) to separate the water into two parts (day 2), and then the dry land and all kinds of land plants (day 3). After that, he created the heavenly bodies to serve as timekeepers for man (day 4), then the sea creatures and birds and other flying creatures (day 5), then all the kinds of land animals and, finally, the first man and woman to be the progenitors of mankind (day 6). Given that truth, we can readily see the many contradictions between the order of creation and the order of events in the evolution story.18 We cannot remove those contradictions no matter where we might try to fit millions of years.
It is clear: God created everything in the beginning in six literal, sequential, 24-hour days. The events on those days were not normal but were unique and supernatural as God spoke things into existence (Genesis 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26; Psalm 33:6–9). He didn’t speak and then wait millions of years for things to happen. But the days were normal days (approximately 24 hours), just like our days, “all the days” of Adam’s 930 years of life (Genesis 5:5), and “all the days” of Noah’s 950 years of life (Genesis 9:29).
No Place to Put the Millions of Years
So, we can’t spread the millions of years over “figurative” or “symbolic” creation “days” (ages), as in the day-age view. And because God equated the human workweek with his creation week, there is no basis for saying that, in Genesis 1, long stretches of time (millions of years) transpired between the literal days, as in the “day-gap-day” view of John Lennox.
But we also can’t fit millions of years before the six literal days, as in the old gap theory, the more recent “promised land” view of John Sailhamer, the view of John Lennox, or the “analogical day” view of C. John Collins. Nor can we fit the millions of years before Genesis 1:1, as in the “cosmic temple view” of John Walton and others. There was no time before the six days, because notice what God said he created in those six days: the heaven,20 the earth, the sea, and all that is in them. He didn’t make anything before the six days. He made everything during those six days. But when did God make the earth according to Genesis 1? He made it in verse 1, not in verse 3, which is where many Christians try to say that the six days begin. So, combining Exodus 20:11 with Genesis 1:1 unmistakably informs us that the six days begin in Genesis 1:1, not in 1:3.
There simply is no place to put millions of years of geological and cosmological time into or before Genesis 1—not in the days, between the days, or before the days of creation. Exodus 20:11 completely rules out those interpretations. There are many biblical, historical, philosophical, and scientific reasons to reject the millions of years, but Exodus 20:11 is a very important biblical reason. Another very important reason that nearly all old-earth proponents ignore is the problem of accepting millions of years of animal predation, death, disease, extinction, and other natural evils. This is seriously incompatible with the Bible’s teaching regarding the original “very good” creation, regarding God’s curse on the whole creation when Adam sinned, and regarding the future removal of the curse on creation when Jesus comes again to create a new heaven and earth.
Evasions of Exodus 20:11
As I said at the beginning, I have found in my reading and experience that most Christians who accept millions of years have not thought very carefully, if at all, about what Exodus 20:11 says in relation to the question of the age of the creation.
To see the truth and importance of Exodus 20:11 more assuredly, let’s now consider how some influential Christian scholars who accept the millions of years have handled this verse.
Through his 1955 book, The Christian View of Science and Scripture, Baptist theologian Bernard Ramm moved many to accept millions of years as he advocated the day-age view of Genesis 1. This is all he said about verse 11 in the fourth commandment: “The argument against the [day-age, progressive-creation] theory on the grounds of Exodus 20:11 is not at all significant. The verse simply means that the human week of seven days takes its rise from the divine week of seven creative epochs.”24 Following the scientific consensus by faith, he had already interpreted the days of Genesis 1 as “epochs.” Then he used this to silence Exodus 20:11. This is not a sound interpretation of Scripture, for he ignored God’s own commentary.
Millard Erickson’s Christian Theology is widely used in seminaries in English and other languages. In his first edition in 1983, he showed no awareness of recent young-earth creationist literature, gave a shallow treatment of the view, and undogmatically leaned toward the day-age view of Genesis 1. But his only mention of Exodus 20:8–11 was not in his chapter on creation but in the chapter on Christology regarding Jesus’ view on keeping the Sabbath. In spite of saying in his 1983 first edition that the subject of creation warranted further study, his third edition in 2013 showed no improvement on his awareness of young-earth literature or our biblical and scientific arguments, and he still ignored Exodus 20:8–11.25
In his book, Genesis in Space and Time, the great apologist Francis Schaeffer devoted merely a single paragraph to the question of the length of the creation days and said he did not know how long they were (p. 57). His book makes no reference to Exodus 20:8–11.
Gleason Archer was a leading evangelical Old Testament scholar in the twentieth century. In an article defending the day-age view, he stated about Exodus 20:11 in regard to the six days of Genesis 1, “By no means does this [verse] demonstrate that 24-hour intervals were involved in the first six ‘days,’ any more than the eight-day celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles proves that the wilderness wanderings under Moses occupied only eight days.” This argument fails because Leviticus 23:33–43 does not connect the number of days of the feast to the number of years Israel wandered in the wilderness. Rather those verses link the command for the Israelites to dwell in booths during the feast with the fact that they dwelt in tents in the wilderness after they left Egypt.
Another influential, twentieth-century Old Testament scholar was E. J. Young. In his Studies in Genesis One, he says that the first chapter of the Bible is a “straightforward trustworthy history.” He asserts that Exodus 20:8–11 tells us the days of creation were “consecutive” and “chronological.” But he says the Bible does not tell us how long the days were and how old the earth is, thereby leaving the door open to the acceptance of millions of years as secular geologists claim.27 It is no surprise then that his son, Davis Young, went on to get his PhD in geology and teach for decades at Calvin College, convincing many students and evangelical theologians to believe in millions of years.
The late John Sailhamer is another prominent evangelical Old Testament professor who has had an impact on many, including John Piper, to accept millions of years. In Genesis Unbound, he argues that Genesis 1:1 refers to the creation of nearly everything over the course of millions of years. But verses 2–31 describe the creation of the promised land (which he equated with the garden of Eden) and the creatures in, above, and around the promised land. He said that Exodus 20:8–11 refers to six literal days of “preparing the [earth’s] sky, the land, and the sea,” but not the earth and universe. His novel interpretation of Genesis is seriously flawed.
The highly respected British apologist John Lennox and well-known Old Testament professor C. John Collins try to evade the implications of Exodus 20:11 by saying that God’s work is different from man’s work. True, unlike man’s work, God’s work in Genesis 1 is supernatural, out-of-nothing, and not repeated, and God doesn’t get tired. But Exodus 20:8–11 is not comparing and contrasting man’s work and God’s work. Rather, the commandment is equating man’s week with God’s week of creation. Lennox and Collins have missed the point completely.
Wayne Grudem is arguably the most influential evangelical theologian in the world as a result of his many helpful writings, especially his Systematic Theology, which is translated into more than 12 major languages. He tries to get around Exodus 20:11 by saying that in the very next verse “‘day’ means ‘a period of time’”—so, since yom is used non-literally in the context, it therefore is not necessarily literal in verse 11. But two points expose the fallacy of this argument. First, yamim (plural of yom and used in 20:8–12) always means literal days everywhere else in the Old Testament. Second, in 20:12 it is not the word “days” (yamim) that is non-literal (figurative). Rather, it is the verb “may be long” (ESV, or “may be prolonged” as in NASB) that is used figuratively. In other words, verse 12 does not mean that if Israelites would keep the Sabbath, they would have longer days (say, 36-hour days) but that they would have many more (literal, 24-hour) days in the promised land to which they were going. Their disobedience would shorten their time of prosperity and residence in the promised land. Their obedience to God would enable them to stay and thrive as a nation in the land for a long time. Verse 12 simply does not say or imply that the six days referred to in Exodus 20:11 are figurative of long periods of time rather than being literal days.
In A Biblical Case for an Old Earth, David Snoke says, “It may sound trite to say that ‘with the Lord one day is as a thousand years’ (2 Peter 3:8; see also Ps. 90:4), but we do well to remember that God’s timing is not always our time.” It is indeed trite and irrelevant. Peter is referring to the second coming of Christ, not defining the length of the days in Genesis 1 or Exodus 20:8–11. Moses’ words in Psalm 90:4 are (in the context of 90:1–3) referring to the eternal nature of God, not defining the days of creation. The rest of Snoke’s argument quotes Leviticus 25:2–11 to say that “the Sabbath law was clearly not restricted to periods of seven twenty-four-hour days. Leviticus 25 gives the Sabbath year law, as well as the Jubilee law, which was a Sabbath of Sabbath years, a period of seven times seven years.”34 Of course Scripture speaks of more than one kind of Sabbath. But those Sabbath years are literal years, just like the Sabbath day of Exodus 20:11 is literal. Furthermore, in Exodus 20:11, the question is not how to interpret “Sabbath” but “day.” And the Israelites did not have or take the liberty of deciding whether they would work six literal days before a Sabbath rest or work six long, indefinite periods of time and then rest a seventh long, indefinite period of time. Leviticus 25 is as irrelevant to the correct meaning of Exodus 20:11 as is 2 Peter 3:8 and Psalm 90:4.
John Walton is a famous Old Testament scholar at Wheaton College. His influence in the church is growing in America as well as in other countries. In his book, The Lost World of Genesis One, he argues that God didn’t create anything in Genesis 1—it is not an account of material origins. Rather, he says, it is a description of God giving or assigning function to a preexisting creation. Everything was created before Genesis 1:1, and the Bible is silent about when and how God created. So, he contends, we can accept whatever the scientific majority says is true about the origin and history of the creation. His brief comments about Exodus 20:11 focus completely on persuading his readers that “made” (asah, עָשָׂה) means “gave function to” or “assigned function to” something that was made earlier. Walton’s view fails on so many points. He assumes cosmological, geological, and biological evolution over millions of years are proven scientific facts, which they are not. He assumes that all Ancient Near-Eastern cultures had the same worldview and that ancient Israelites shared that view, which they did not. And then he uses the ancient pagan thinking as the grid through which he interprets Genesis 1–11. Furthermore, Genesis 1 does not say that God transformed the preexisting creation to become a cosmic temple in which to reside. In fact, Isaiah 66:1–2 says,
Thus says the Lord: “Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, and what is the place of my rest? All these things my hand has made, and so all these things came to be, declares the Lord. But this is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit and trembles at my word.”
Walton and others using the same hermeneutical approach are “trembling at” (believing) the words of scientists, rather than humbly trembling at (believing) the Word of God.
Furthermore, Genesis 1:14 says that the sun, moon, and stars were to serve a function—for man to measure time (literal days, years, and seasons). God assigns a function for Adam and Eve—to rule over the creation (1:28). But God doesn’t assign a function for the firmament (made on day 2), or for sea creatures, birds, or land animals (made on days 5 and 6). And Genesis 1 says nothing about the creation functioning as a cosmic temple at the end of day 6. But also, if God really created the sun, moon, and stars to exist for billions of years before man (as Walton believes), then for most of their existence, they did not fulfill the purpose for which he created them. Or are we to think that, for billions of years, the heavenly bodies also did not function to separate the day and night until God gave them that function just before he created Adam and Eve? Isaiah 45:12 and 18 says that God created the earth to be inhabited by man. So, if God really created the earth 4.5 billion years before man, it did not fulfill the purpose to which God created it. What kind of God declares purposes like this and then waits billions of years to fulfill it? Not the God revealed in Scripture. Neither Genesis 1 nor Exodus 20:11 says or even suggests, “For in six days, God gave function to the heavens and the earth and the sea and all that is in them which he had made before the six days.”
Finally, I want to comment on Hugh Ross’ handling of Exodus 20:11, because so many Christian leaders and scholars have endorsed his work that promotes the acceptance of the big bang, billions of years, death before the fall, and a local flood of Noah. Ross tries to neutralize this verse with two points. First, he says that of the five passages addressing the Sabbath command, three make no connection to God’s creation week and man’s week. But that doesn’t tell us anything about the meaning of Exodus 20:11 (and 31:17) which does make that connection. The fact that God gives more than one reason (or no reason) for keeping the Sabbath, does not negate the reason he gives in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17.
He then says, “For the remaining two passages, the ‘proof’ would hold only if neither the word for ‘day’ nor the word for ‘Sabbath’ were ever used with reference to any time period other than 24 hours.” Relying on Archer’s fallacious argument about the Feast of Tabernacles (noted above), Ross says there is more than one kind of Sabbath (e.g., a Sabbath day, a Sabbath year), just as in his many writings he contends that yom (“day”) doesn’t always mean a literal day, which young-earth creationists have always acknowledged. And so he says, “day” and “sabbath” in Exodus 20:11 can be understood to allow Christians to insert billions of years into Genesis 1.
But sound Bible interpretation is not done by looking up all the possible meanings of a word and then picking the one we want to insert into the verse(s) we are studying. That is eisegesis (reading into Scripture our opinion or belief), not exegesis (reading out of Scripture what God wants us to understand, do, or believe). No, we correctly interpret the Bible by looking at the context around the word in the verse(s) we are studying and by considering other verses that relate directly to that verse. When we do that, it is obvious biblically that the days of Genesis 1 and Exodus 20:8–11 are literal, normal, 24-hour days.
Conclusion
More attempts to ignore or evade the clear truth of Exodus 20:11 could be discussed. But the failed attempts discussed here reinforce the obviously correct interpretation. God made everything in the beginning in six literal, normal days just like ours.
It should also be noted that nobody has any trouble understanding the other nine commandments (although everyone has trouble obeying all of them). So, why all the convoluted arguments in order to explain away the obvious meaning of Exodus 20:11? Because these Christians have allowed the scientific consensus (i.e., the majority view of geologists and astrophysicists) about the age of creation to control their interpretation of God’s Word. The fallible opinions of sinful human beings (who don’t know everything, who make mistakes requiring revisions of their textbooks, and who weren’t there to observe the origin and history of the creation) have trumped the inerrant Word of our eternal, omnipresent, omniscient, infallible Creator in their mind.
If God really created over millions of years, then Exodus 20:8–11 could not be more misleading. Conversely, if God did create in six literal days, he could not be more clear in this commandment and in Genesis 1.
Exodus 20:11 stands as an insurmountable stone wall against any attempt to fit millions of years anywhere into Genesis 1, either in the days, between the days, or before the days of creation. And Scripture is clear that those literal days of creation were just a little more than 6,000 years ago
Returning to a no-frills practice of following Jesus will be good for all of us. We will remember what our faith is all about. This is why in the last days before Jesus returns He needs to purify His church. Apostasy in denominational churches is rife as demonstrated by the acceptance of gay marriage and homosexual pastors. They no longer believe in the inerrancy of God’s Word. Like the world, they have been caught up in the evolutionary myth of billions of years of Earth’s history. They no longer believe that God judged mankind with the worldwide flood of Noah’s day and yet it is the only explanation for the existence of billions of dead things buried quickly all over the world, including the fossil fuels: coal, oil, and natural gas (the result of buried forests). They have discounted both Noah’s flood and the short timescale of Scripture determined by Genesis 1-11. When you study geology from a biblical standpoint and use the geological model of the Flood to connect the real-world observations of geology you discover it is superior to the prevailing old-earth frameworks in explaining the data. (Biblical Geology 101 by Michael Oard and Robert Carter 2021).
An exciting training development, one which could help us prepare for church without buildings, has gained great popularity in the body of Christ over the past several years by readying people for possible service on the mission field, particularly among Muslims. TOAG, or “Training Ordinary Apprentices to Go,” (Global Mobilisation Network). It seeks to teach people to “do church” in small group settings, away from large worship gatherings that will not be available abroad. Participants spend ten months learning how to reach unreached people groups and develop an authentic community in a small group setting. Families with children are welcomed in, and future workers for Christ are much better prepared than earlier generations of believers. I’ve heard from a few that have participated in TOAG that it is difficult, yet rewarding. The method’s founders state the goal of the training: During TOAG, interns learn to be a Kingdom Community without including Western structures that often hinder movements. They experience life in community with other interns, something more akin to the Book of Acts. By taking them out of present ecclesiastical structures, which include powerful (& professional) music, well-crafted homilies (by highly trained professionals) in safe, comfortable surroundings (expensive buildings), interns experience first-hand what is and is not required for believers to be a ‘Kingdom-Community,’ experimenting with simple, organic structures capable of sharing the life-changing power of God’s Kingdom and reproducing into movements. … These are just some of the reasons why many Americans benefit from the hands-on learning experience of TOAG.
We need to prepare for the prophesied persecution that is coming and expect God to grow us through it as never before. Literally, millions of Christians around the world can testify to this truth, as Paul testified clearly in this Scripture.
“We also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.” Romans 5:3-5:
Whether you use TOAG or some other training method you need to get with like-minded believers who understand the times and get into step with what God is calling us to do in these last days to make sure we complete the Great Commission in the community where God has placed us.
Check out http://www.lastdaysovercomer.org for the free ebook Prepare for the Last Days – Fulfilling God’s Purposes at the End of the Age.
Scientists have developed a new method for discovering which animals inhabited an area. This method analyzes the environmental DNA (eDNA) in the soil from plants and animals that once lived in the region. The method was applied to the Kap København Formation in northeast Greenland, where research has been conducted for nearly 40 years. The area today is a polar desert, home to just a few plants, hares, and musk oxen. Scientists had previously found macrofossils from coniferous boreal forest trees and rich insect fauna, but they were greatly surprised by what they discovered recently.
Scientists found what they believe to be 2-Ma-old DNA, which pushed back the occurrence of ancient DNA almost 1 Ma. They obviously do not accept discoveries of DNA in dinosaurs. Comparing the eDNA to a data bank of DNA from modern plants and animals, the researchers were amazed to find DNA from mastodons, reindeer, rodents, geese, and rabbits that inhabited a forest ecosystem of poplar, spruce, cedar, and yew trees combined with present-day polar vegetation. They identified 102 genera of plants, whereas earlier paleontologists had only identified eight. Some have disputed whether the mastodon DNA is truly from a mastodon or some other elephant.
Such an ecosystem requires much warmer temperatures than today. The present-day average temperature is –17°C. The researchers estimated it would have been 10°C warmer 2 Ma ago, but there are indications that it may have been even warmer since many of the plant fossils found do not grow on permafrost. No one predicted such an ecosystem, and there are no modern analogues. One researcher was quoted as saying: “Not in a million years would you expect a mastodon up there.”
Mastodon remains are found in forests in the United States but are never found in Greenland. And reindeer supposedly had not evolved by that time, as admitted by paleogeneticist Eske Willerslev: “Reindeers, according to paleontologists, should not have survived; they shouldn’t even exist at that time.”
Biblical interpretation
Creation scientists do not accept the date of 2 Ma but have no trouble accepting that this DNA would still exist since all of this eDNA is only thousands of years old. Two Ma lies at the outer edge of DNA’s theoretical shelf life. We have two choices in determining where the organisms fit into biblical Earth history. First, the organisms could be from the worldwide Flood of Noah’s day. A great number of warm-climate Cenozoic fossils exist in the polar areas of the Northern Hemisphere. For instance, trees typical of the southeast United States are found with alligators, crocodiles, large tortoises, and lemurs on Ellesmere and Axel Heiberg Islands, and are dated as early Cenozoic. However, these fossils indicate a climate that would be too warm for the early Ice Age. For instance, sea surface temperatures would have cooled too rapidly after the Flood to sustain the observed tropical and subtropical paleo flora. Moreover, winters would have been too cold to sustain them. Furthermore, the preserved leaf-litter sequences on Axel Heiberg Island are preserved as well at the bottom of each layer as they are at the top. This indicates rapid deposition during the Flood rather than prolonged exposure afterward. Therefore, these Cenozoic fossils are from the Flood.
The other option for the Greenland eDNA is that the organisms could be left over from the Ice Age. The oceans would have been warm early in the Ice Age due to the heat produced during the Flood. The Arctic Ocean could have been over 20°C, keeping coastal areas mild by onshore airflow early in the Ice Age. Plants and animals that preferred temperate climates could have lived comfortably for hundreds of years in the far north, especially along the coastal areas of the Arctic Ocean. Considering the eDNA evidence, the organisms from northeast Greenland are typical Ice Age animals, such as reindeer and mastodons. Thus, the evidence from eDNA for northeast Greenland, in contrast with that for Axel Heiberg Island, indicates a post-Flood environment. In other words, the fossils in the Kap København Formation were buried early during the temperate climatic conditions during the post-Flood rapid Ice Age, while the Arctic Ocean was relatively warm.
How did the mammals make it to northern Greenland?
There is the question of how the animals would have been able to migrate to northern Greenland across multiple straits, the last being the Nares Strait between Ellesmere Island and Greenland (figure 1). The large mammals could have swum, especially since the water would have been relatively warm. Mammoths made it to the Channel Islands off the southern California coast by swimming since there was no land bridge. Elephants are excellent swimmers: “My research shows that modern elephants are excellent distance swimmers, among the best of all land mammals, and skilled at crossing water gaps.” Or, the animals of northeast Greenland may have been aided by log and vegetation mats left over from the Flood that would have floated for many years on the post-Flood oceans. This transportation would be especially likely for small mammals.
To be aided by log mats, the animals had to first cross the Bering Land Bridge. This land bridge was more likely exposed early in the Flood when animals could more easily journey through Siberia into Alaska, when winters were mild, not at the end of the Ice Age, when winters were colder than today. Further evidence of this early Ice Age land bridge is the finding of Columbian mammoth fossils at the bottom of Ice Age debris in central British Columbia. These mammoths could only arrive at this location from the ice-free corridor and through the Peace River water gap before the mountain ice caps inundated the lowlands of British Columbia. eDNA evidence of animals in northeast Greenland also adds to the indirect evidence that the Bering Land Bridge existed early, but not late in the Ice Age. Moreover, some log mats would still have existed for transportation. Northern Canada also needed to be warm enough for forests to grow, which need not have been large for them to shed pollen and eDNA and for animals to survive in northern Greenland.
Conclusion
Researchers were amazed to find DNA evidence of a temperate ecosystem in the Kap København Formation in northeast Greenland. The most likely explanation is that these fossils were buried during the early part of the post-Flood rapid Ice Age but the world rejects God and His Word just as the Apostle Peter warns us they would in God’s Word.
“You should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these, the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.” 2 Peter 3:2-7
Article adapted from the Creation Journal Volume 37, Issue 2, 2023 by Michael J Oard. It is the Technical Journal produced by Creation Ministries International (CMI). The must-have journal from CMI is CreationMagazine. Check it out at http://www.creation.com
LIVING ETERNAL NOW 