Creation FAQ
General
Q: Is
it not true that the real reason
you reject young-earth creationism (YEC) is due to modern science that dates the earth as billions of years old?
A: No.
The real reason is that the events in the creation week cannot be restricted to solar days of twenty-four hours,
specifically the growth of vegetation in Day 3 and the Garden of Eden in Day 6. (Genesis 1:11-12; 2:8-9) Vegetation,
especially the fruit trees in the Garden of Eden, takes time to grow to maturity—time that greatly exceeds twelve-hours
of daylight allowed for in YEC. Also, the claim that Adam would have had enough time to settle in the garden, name
the animals, and get married after his “deep sleep” in a period of some hours less than twelve is strained to absurdity.
(Genesis 2:15, 19-22) A plain reading of the Genesis account leaves no room for YEC.
Q: Do
not apparent symbiotic problems prove that YEC must be true?
A: Since
the creative works of flora and fauna were completed on Day 6, this does not pose a problem.
Q: Jesus
said at Mark 10:6, “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.” This only makes sense
with a time-line beginning with the creation week thousands of years ago, right? How does it make sense if man
appeared at the end of billions of years?*
A: If
we understand Jesus’ words above in that manner, then the Genesis account is upside down—for it places the couple’s
creation, not at the beginning of the creation, but at the end of Day 6. If, however, we understand Jesus’ words
above to encompass the Genesis creation account as a whole, or simply as “the beginning of the creation (of the
first human couple),” then the Genesis account is right side up.
*
Question taken from: Ham, Ken et. al. The Answers Book—Revised & Expanded. “Chapter 4. What about carbon
dating?” 2002. <http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/carbon_dating.asp> (17 December 2004)
Q: If
God wanted to convey a much longer period of time than 24 hours, why didn’t he use other words, like “age” (dohr) or “unlimited time” (ad), or qualify the meaning of “day” (yohm), like in Joshua 24:7—which has yohm rab, literally meaning “a long day”?*
A: We
must look at intent. Genesis chapter 1 lays before us a creative sequence of events in a simple, condensed format.
Chapter 2, however, actually does qualify the meaning of “day,” by adding that the Garden of Eden was planted and
grew to maturity, apparently in Day 6 (verses 8-9). Consider too that in verse 4 all six days are included in the
term “history,” literally “historical origins” (thohledohth), and are included in a yohm.
Additionally, Adam was to “settle” in his garden home and ‘cultivate it and take care of it’—all before getting
married after his “deep sleep” (verses 15, 21-22). So God did indeed qualify the meaning of Genesis 1’s “days,”
and even used other words to convey a much longer period of time than 24 hours.
*
Question taken from: Grigg, Russell. “How long were the days of
Genesis 1? What did God intend us to understand from the words He used?” Creation. 19 (1) December 1996. <http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i1/days.asp>
(21 December 2004)
Q: Do
you expand the creative days to mean periods of time?
A: Genesis
rules out of court the notion that they were solar days. The natural growth of flora, and Adam’s involved, complex
assignments and privileges in the garden show that “solar days” are a woefully inadequate reading—and in reality
is compressing the meaning of the Genesis creation account and preventing it from flowing freely.
Q: Do
you believe in creatio ex nihilo, “creation out of nothing”?
A: As there is no basis for a pre-creation existence, it is reasonable to conclude that God created everything. While the word ktizo in Colossians 1:16, translated as “created,” may mean transforming something existing, the verse compares material creation with spiritual creation, which had no pre-existence. God created first to populate his spiritual realm and then created and filled our lower realm. This dichotomy is expressed in John 8:23.
Q: Since
Adam was made fully mature as an adult, having the appearance of age, does this not show that the earth and trees
can be young and have the appearance of age too?
A: While
it is true that Adam was made with the outward appearance of age, this would not mean that everything about him
had the appearance of age. For instance, all his surroundings were new to him and he would have no evidence of
healing. Thus, the comparison with him to the earth and trees is superficial, like his outward appearance of age.
|
Insight:
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
The chicken, so it can lay the egg.
Eggs cannot survive on their own.
Which came first, the tree or the seed?
The seed, so it can grow into a tree.
|
Q: What
about the fossil species within the genus Homo,
like Homo erectus and Neanderthal
man?
A: If
a hominid fossil is indeed human—a descendant of Adam, then it represents an extinct variety. If, however, it can
be shown that it was more simian than human, then it represents an advanced, extinct variety of simian.
Q: What
affect do you think YEC is having?
A: It
causes people to view the Bible superficially. It also stumbles others into regarding the Bible as mythological.
The later ones may become agnostic or atheistic. However, when these see that the creative works are not being
confined to six solar days, it can help them see how reasonable the Bible really is.
Q: What
do you think is the biggest problem YEC is facing?
A: Aside
from the plant growth problems for Days 3 and 6, as well as the time constraint problem for Adam’s activities, as
explained in the first answer, the biggest problem that overshadows these has to do with Day 4. (Genesis 1:14-19)
YEC holds that the sun and moon were created then, as opposed to merely appearing then to an earthly observer.
Creating the sun in Day 4 would mean that God was micromanaging earth by placing and maintaining temporary light and heat
sources for the first three days. This would not reflect wisdom. The Creator does not micromanage
his creation, but establishes physical laws for it to function
in. Thus, the earth was created in the circumsolar habitable zone, where it can support life without his constant
attention or micromanagement. The earth with no sun and moon for three days also violates the fact that they were
created in Genesis 1:1, which declares that “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” “The heavens
and the earth” were created before
the first creative day began. This is important because Genesis 1:2 begins, not with the creation of the earth,
but with its development. God evidently
used the sun’s natural forces of gravity and heat while he proceeded with the creative days. He used natural forces
that he created to aid his development of the earth. Thus, the Creator in YEC is a micromanager, and not the Creator
found in Genesis or in nature.—Romans 1:20.
Animals
Q: When
did animal predation begin—after the Fall or after the Deluge? Did Satan cause animal predation?
A: Satan
caused Adam’s rebellion (or, Adam allowed him to cause it)—he is not the cause of animal predation. Predation,
I believe, is natural, as 2 Peter 2:12 may indicate. That scripture compares rebellious men to “unreasoning animals
born naturally to be caught and destroyed.” Also, Genesis 1:30 does not by itself mean that all animals were vegetarian, but simply means that they were permitted to consume vegetation: “I have given all green vegetation for food.” Furthermore, Genesis 4:7 describes sin like a predatory animal: “there is sin crouching at the entrance, and for you is its craving.” Or, as the Contemporary English Version has it: “sin is waiting to attack you like a lion. Sin wants to destroy you, but don’t let it!” Taken at face value, this is an allusion to an antediluvian predator.Additionally, since animals die, their corpses need to be scavenged. Thus, Genesis 1:30 must permit animals to eat meat. By way of comparison, the statement in Genesis 1:29 for the human couple concluded with the direct command: “To you let it [,vegetation ,] serve as food.” This command was seen again after their eviction from the garden, as Genesis 3:18 states: “you must eat the vegetation of the field.” This command was relaxed only after the Deluge, as stated in Genesis 9:3: “Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to you.”
Q: Were
animals meant to live forever like humans?
A: The
Bible offers everlasting life to humans only. Animals are never given this hope, and for good reason. Remember
that the earth is finite: it can only hold so many inhabitants. The first family was to “fill the earth and subdue
it.” (Genesis 1:28) If animals never died, it would complicate matters considerably!
Q: How
could God say that animal predation and death were “very good”? (Genesis 1:31a)
A: While
this divine appraisal was given in Genesis 1:31a, (New World Translation: “After that God saw everything he had made and, look! [it was] very good.” New Living Translation: “…it was excellent in every
way.”) it would be a mistake to see this as an appraisal of animal predation and death. Instead, this appraises
“everything he had made.” This sums up a succession of similar divine appraisals all in Genesis 1, namely: God’s creation of light (v. 4), sea-earth division (v. 10), flora (v. 12), night-day division (v. 18), sea and winged creatures (v. 21), land animals (v.
25), and climactically, after humans (v. 31), as working as he meant them to work. They are all “good,” and together
with human creation, they are “very good.” This divine appraisal, taken in context of Genesis chapter one, does
not mean that animals had everlasting life. That being said, I must add that one problem with this question is
that it appeals to emotion, which is not the most stable place to build reasoning from. One will never understand
the mind of God in creation if one appeals to human emotion. (See: Psalms 92:5-6 and Isaiah 55:9.)
Q: Since the Garden of Eden was peaceful, how could there have been faunal predation?
A: The
Bible never really describes the Garden of Eden as being free from faunal predation. As there is fossil evidence of ante-Adamic faunal predation, the “very good” peaceful environment of this beautiful garden would not necessarily discount the biological necessity of faunal predation. Indeed, faunal predation would have added to the peace and beauty of the garden by establishing checks on faunal populations.
Q: Did the serpent that spoke to Eve have legs, and why was it told to eat dust?
A: Short answer: the condemnation of the serpent in Genesis 3:14 to slither on its belly and to “eat” dust as it flicked its tongue slithering on the ground was illustrative of Satan’s spiritual debasement. The serpent was not physically punished in any way. Long answer.
Dinosaurs
Q: If
dinosaurs existed prior to man’s creation, what happened to them? Were they created and then somehow destroyed?
This does not seem consistent with Jehovah’s way of doing things. We know that he does not make mistakes and always
achieves his purpose. Why were they here? When and how did they disappear?
A: The
Awake! of 2/8 1990 p. 11 states:
“The vast array of dinosaurs with their huge appetites would have been appropriate considering the abundant vegetation
that evidently existed in their time.—Genesis 1:20-24. When the dinosaurs had fulfilled their purpose, God ended
their life. But the Bible is silent on how he did that or when. We can be sure that dinosaurs were created by Jehovah
for a purpose, even if we do not fully understand that purpose at this time.” I believe they were an engineering
project for Jehovah and the spirit creatures, plus they were able to cultivate the earth by moving trees and clearing
landscapes of plants. On their disappearance, I believe Jehovah wanted the earth dominated by “warm-blooded” animals
(mammals and birds) before Adam was created. So, the dinosaurs and other monstrous reptiles had to go. How he did
that, I cannot say with certainty. But we humans simply respond to mammals and birds better than we do to reptiles.
We still enjoy them, but we don’t warm up to them like we do to mammals and birds.
Q: Are
not human footprints found amongst dinosaur footprints?
A: YEC
used to use this as supporting evidence, but appears to be more cautious regarding it now.* Even IF we have a genuine mixture of human and dinosaur footprints, this would not be conclusive.
We would need corroborating fossils of human and dinosaur bones in the same matrix (never found). After all, the
hypothetical genuine human footprints may be from an angelic humanoid visitation. While that may sound surprising, it simply cannot be ruled out.
* For instance, it is listed under “Which arguments should definitely not be used?” (emphasis original) by
a YEC group, who explains: “In 1986 a number of leading creationist researchers decided that the evidence of supposedly
human and dinosaur footprints, found together at the Paluxy River in Texas, had serious
problems. They decided that, pending further research to establish the
correct interpretation of the prints, they could no longer be safely used
as evidence supporting the [YEC contention] that man and dinosaur lived
at the same time.” (underscore added)
(“Arguments we think creationists should NOT use.” Questions & Answers. Answers
in Genesis. <http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp> [21 April 2005]. Ham, Ken. “Searching
for the ‘magic bullet’.” Creation.
25 (2) March–May 2003: 34 <http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/docs/v25n2_bullet.asp> [1
November 2004])
Also, after referring
to two Russian newspaper articles (the English version of Moscow News, 1983 No. 24, p. 10 and Komsomolskaya Pravda, January 31, 1995 edition, article by Alexander Bushev) claiming that human and dinosaur
footprints had been found together on the Kughitang-Tau Plateau in Turkmenistan, the following disclaimer is provided:
“However, one needs to be cautious about accepting the prints described on the basis of just this report. None of our sources has been able to obtain any further
information on the prints, nor any photograph to this date.” (underscore added)
(Golovin, Sergei. “Human and dinosaur footprints in Turkmenistan?”
Creation. 18 (4)
September 1996: 52 <http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i4/dinosaurs.asp> [2 March 2005])
Q: What
about dragon legends, behemoth (Job 40:15-24), and ancient art that resembles dinosaurs and other extinct reptiles?
A: Some
possibilities are in order: 1) Ancient dragon folklore and artwork may find its origin—not in living dinosaurs—but
in ancient paleontology. Ancient—even modern—people would discover monstrous assemblages of alien bones and conclude
that those beasts may still be alive somewhere—and then made restorations and legends of them! (Please refer to
The First Fossil Hunters by Adrienne Mayor.) 2) Also possible are mixtures of animals, like mixing a snake with an elephant to produce an animal that resembles a sauropod dinosaur. 3) A third, more remote possibility involves demonic inspiration. As for Job’s behemoth, and why it simply cannot be a dinosaur, please see Excursus: Identifying Behemoth.
Deluge
Q: Was
Noah’s Flood global?
A: This
was no local flash flood or cloudburst. In fact, the Greek word used in the Bible to refer to the Flood, or Deluge,
is ka·ta·kly·smos´,
a cataclysm. (Lu 17:27 [uses the same word]) Local floods come and go in a matter of days; this one lasted over
a year, the greater portion of which was required for the water to subside. How unreasonable to believe that Noah
spent perhaps 50 or 60 years building a huge vessel of approximately 40,000 cu m (1,400,000 cu ft) for the survival
of his family and a few animals through a mere local flood! If only a comparatively small area was affected, why
the need of bringing into the ark specimens of “every living creature of every sort of flesh [including flying
birds!]” in order to “preserve offspring alive on the surface of the entire earth”? (Ge 6:19; 7:3) Definitely this
was a global deluge, the like of which had never occurred before nor has since. “The waters overwhelmed the earth
so greatly that all the tall mountains that were under the whole heavens came to be covered. Up to 15 cubits [c.
6.5 m; 22 ft] the waters overwhelmed them and the mountains became covered.” (Ge 7:19, 20) “The end of all flesh
has come before me,” Jehovah said, hence “I will wipe every existing thing that I have made off the surface of
the ground.” And it was just so. “Everything in which the breath of the force of life was active in its nostrils,
namely, all that were on the dry ground, died…only Noah and those who were with him in the ark kept on surviving.”—Ge
6:13; 7:4, 22, 23. (“Deluge.” Insight on the Scriptures.)
Q: Was
Noah’s ark a chest or a boat?
A: The
ark (Heb., te·vah´;
Gr., ki·bo·tos´)
was a rectangular chestlike vessel presumably having square corners and a flat bottom. It needed no rounded bottom
or sharp bow to cut rapidly through the water; it required no steering; its only functions were to be watertight
and to stay afloat. A vessel so shaped is very stable, cannot be easily capsized, and contains about one third
more storage space than ships of conventional design. (“Ark No. 1.” Insight
on the Scriptures.) As to why a tevah is a chest, see: The Shape of Noah’s
Ark.
Unless otherwise indicated, Bible quotations are from the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures.
Genesis Defended
11/5/04, 12/13,17,21/04, 1/11,12,25/05, 2/3,28/05, 3/2/05, 4/21,26/05,
4/11/05, 10/5,7/05, 8/11/06, 2/13/07, 4/9/07, ex nilhilo question: 6/28/07, added Gen 1:29 and peaceful garden question: 2/22/09, added serpent legs question: 2/27/09, deleted ref. to LXX Job 40:14.