foundright

As Pope Pius XII once stated, �Man learns from two books: the universe for the
human study of things created by God; and the Bible for the study of God�s
superior will and truth. One belongs to reason, the other to faith. Between them
there is no clash� (Frye 199).

One of the most greatly debated topics of our times is the origins of the universe. The two
main beliefs are �intelligent design,� and �products of chance,� better known as Creationism and
Evolution. Creationism is the belief system that God created the universe. The Young Earth
Creationist believe that God created the universe in six 24 hour period days, and that the earth is
between 10,000 - 60,000 years old. Creationism in this paper reflects the latter view. Evolution is
the belief system that all things have evolved from simple organisms, and through millions of years
these simple organisms have evolved into millions of species.

For the most part, creationism was the accepted belief system until 1858 when Charles
Darwin presented the theory of evolution. Through the years, schools struggled over whether to
teach evolution or creationism in the classrooms. As of today, the majority of public schools
teach evolution, and not as a theory, but as a fact. Because of this, many Christians have
abandoned their faith in creation. But there is a group of Christians who have tried to reconcile
creationist and evolutionist ideas. These people are called Theistic Evolutionists. Theistic evolution, in the most simple of terms, is the belief that God used evolution to create the universe.

It is understandable that theistic evolution came about. Both creationists and
evolutionists claim that the opposing belief has major errors, and that their side is accurate, so
who do we trust? Which one is lying and who�s telling the truth? Are both wrong and right? Did
theistic evolution find a suitable compromise?

In the end, scientifically, we can�t state who is wrong or who is right. It ultimately comes
down to a matter of faith. Evolution and Christianity are both religions. Many evolutionists would
argue against this point. Evolutionists believe evolution is a science. However, evolution is no
more of a religion then Christianity is.

Pure science is based on the scientific method which observes, repeats, and records.
However, no one person was there to observe and record the millions of years it supposedly took
for the earth to evolve, and nobody was there to observe and record when God supposedly
created the universe. These were one time events that cannot be repeated.

The only evidence we have are the things that are in the present. Through these things
man try to explain the past (Ham, The Lie 16). So, in reality, �The controversy is not religion
versus science . . . it is religion versus religion, the science of one religion versus the science of
the other� ( Ham 12).

When evolutionists and creationists come to observe science they come with their own
set of biases, and through those biases they come to view the world. But as Ken Ham says,
�It is not a matter of whether one is biased or not. It is really a question of which bias is the best
bias with which to be biased.� (9)

To begin with, theistic evolutionists look at the Genesis account of creation and do not
take it literally but symbolically, like the parables Jesus would have used. They believe it is only
used to teach us that God is the Creator, and the rest symbolically represents God�s use of
evolution to create the Universe ( Ham 196).

However, when Jesus taught a parable or when something is symbolically used in the
Bible, it is stated clearly in the passages surrounding it. Nowhere in Genesis or the rest of the
Bible does it imply that the creation account was a parable or symbolic.

Genesis 1 & 2 Controversy:

Most theistic evolutionists take one quick look at the King James Version accounts of
creation in Genesis 1 and in Genesis 2 as two separate accounts that contradict each other, and
claim that Genesis cannot be taken literally.

In the Genesis 1 account it says that God created animals before man, but in the beginning
of Genesis 2, God created Adam, and in Genesis 2:19 it says, �out of the ground the Lord God
formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air,� and shortly after Eve was created. So
what truly happened?

   As Genesis 1 clearly states, animals were created before man. When considering the
Hebrew language, which the Old Testament is written in, �The precise tense of a verb is
determined by the context . . . Jewish scholars would have understood the verb �formed�
in Genesis 2:19 to mean �had formed� or �having formed� (Batten).

As Genesis 1 makes reference to the creation as a whole-land, water, sun, moon, stars,
animals, and man-Genesis 2 specifically focuses onAdam and Eve and their life in the Garden. Genesis 1 is an overview of Creation, and the author then goes back and focuses on the
highlight of creation in Genesis 2. Without Genesis 2 we wouldn�t understand Genesis 3. But
Genesis 2 also offers a detailed account of how man and woman were created, helping us
understand their different roles in the marriage relationship.

Even some theistic evolutionists, like Hugh Ross, know how faulty the Genesis 1 and 2
contradiction argument is.

            Without question, the description of creation in Genesis 1 is markedly different from that
            in Genesis 2. However, an examination of the point of view in each passage clarifies why.
            Genesis 1 focuses on the physical events of creation; Genesis 2, on the spiritual events.
            More specifically, Genesis 1 describes those miracles God performed to prepare the earth
            for mankind. Genesis 2 presents God�s assignment of authority and responsibility.
            Careful attention to verb tenses and to the purpose of each account eliminates the
            supposed contradiction between Genesis 1 and 2. Plants, rain, man, animals, and woman
            are subjects of discussion in Genesis 2, but creation chronology is not the issue. The man
            (Adam) simply interacts first with the plants, then with the animals, and last of all, with the
            woman (Eve). His role with respect to each is delineated (164).

24 Hours / 1,000 Years Controversy:

To be a theistic evolutionist you have to believe it took thousands if not million�s of years
for God to have created the earth. This contradicts the Creationist Belief and the Genesis
account of creation. If read literally, the six days God used to create the earth were 24 hour
periods. However, as already stated, theistic evolutionists do not read Genesis literally. They
believe in the day-age theory (Niessen). They say the days in Genesis symbolically meant a long

period of time. The key word in the Genesis passage is the word �day.� The Hebrew word that is
used is yom. When the word yom is used it could mean one of three things-24 hour period,
the daylight portion of a 24 hour period, or an indefinite period of time (Ham, The Lie 157).
Because yom has different meanings, Theistic evolution interprets yom to mean an
indefinite period of time, so that it can match up with the evolutionary time scale. They back
this up with 2 Peter 3:8, �but, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one
day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.�

But, as Ken Ham says,
In Genesis 1, the Hebrew word for day, as used for each of the six days of Creation,
would be looked at in regard to context and the type of literature. Genesis is written in
typical Hebrew historical narrative-this is important to understand when interpreting the
words of this book . . .One will find that whenever yom is qualified by a number of the
phrase evening and morning, it always means an ordinary day.�

As Richard Niessen says, �Verse 8 was never intended to be a mathematical formula of
1 = 1,000 or 1,000 = 1.� The Bible verse was only stating that God created the whole universe,
even time, and therefore is not bound by it. He is omnipresence; present everywhere
simultaneously. �The verse could have equally been worded, �Five minutes is with the Lord as ten
thousand years,� and still have conveyed the same message� (Niessen).

But let us just for a moment imagine the day-age theory is right. One day equals 1,000
years, so six days must equal 6,000 years. Already we know that the evolutionary time scale says
it took several million years for the earth to evolve. Interpreting the Bible verse to mean one day
equals 10,000, or 100,000, or 1 million years, does not work because that would be twisting the Scriptures to say a certain thing, rather then what it actually meant (Eisegesis 17).

Another argument against the creationist theory is that on day six, Adam named all the
animals. How could have Adam named all of them in 24 hours? We must remember that the
Garden of Eden did not have the large variety of animals we have today because of
microevolution. Microevolution �only involves minor chemical alterations or changes in size,
shape, or color� (Brown 5).

There is no argument that microevolution exists. It clearly does not contradict the Word
of God. We have observed it happening. Take for example dogs. We have a large variety of dogs,
but they are all still dogs. Unlike macroevolution, which is the belief that one animal evolves into
another, and which no one has observed, no fossil records prove, and which contradicts the Bible
(5).

Another inconsistency with the day-age theory is the age of Adam when he died. As we
already know God created Adam on the sixth day of creation. That must mean he lived the sixth
day and the seventh day, so he must have been really old when he died! But we read in Genesis
5:5 that he died at the age of 930. We know that Adam had his son Seth at age 130, and
that Adam�s first sons, Cain and Abel were born before. They had already lived awhile, because
Seth was born after Cain had killed Abel (Genesis 4:25). Also, who knows how long it was after
the fall when Adam and Eve had Cain & Abel? Less than 130 years does not leave many years for
the sixth and seventh day of creation that theistic evolutionists say it took for animals to evolve.

Also, how would animal and plant life survive? In Scripture, light is called day, and
darkness is called night, and each day had one period of each. Plants and animals could not
survive if 50 percent of those �days� were spent in darkness (Niessen).

Why would God use millions of years to bring about His Creation? An omnipotent God
can do whatever He wants in a split second. The same question could be applied to Creationism-
why did He use six 24 hour period days?

As we read in Exodus 20:8-11,
�Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all
your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall
not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or
maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. For in six days the
Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but He rested
on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.�

As you can see, God sat up the pattern of the seven day week as an example to us.
We work for six days, but on the seventh day we must rest (Ham 161).

Death Controversy:

In order for evolution to happen, and for life to evolve into man as we know it, there must
have been a lot of death before the fall. However, in Romans 5:12 we read that death was the
result of man�s sins, but Jesus came to bring forgiveness.

�When Adam sinned, sin entered the entire human race. Adam's sin brought death,
so death spread to everyone, for everyone sinned . . .And what a difference

between our sin and God's generous gift of forgiveness. For this one man,
Adam, brought death to many through his sin. But this other man, Jesus Christ,
brought forgiveness to many through God's bountiful gift.�

If death was not a result of Adam�s sins, then Jesus� life and death was meaningless, as Dr. Walter Brown states. �If evolution happened, then death was widespread before man evolved.
But if death preceded man and was not a result of Adam�s sin, then sin is a fiction. If sin is a
fiction, then we have no need for a Savior� (200).

We also read in the Bible that man was made in the image of God from the dust (Genesis
1:27). If man evolved, how was he created in the image of God?

Recently Theistic Evolution has seen the error in this way of thinking and has
stated that all animals did indeed evolve, but it stopped before man, and as Scripture states,
God created man after His own image from the dust of the ground. They go on to explain
that animals did die before the fall, but man did not. They claim there is no Biblical backing for
no death of animals. Passages such as Romans 5 only talk about human death because of Adam,
not animal death.

However, many Creationist argue that when God created the earth He pronounced it
�very good.� What is very good about decay and death? But theistic evolution argues that
�very good� does not mean perfect, and who is to say that our definition of very good matches
with God�s definition of very good?

We both agree that God is not just very good, but He is perfect. But, if we read
Matthew 19:17, �Jesus said to him, "Why do you ask me about what is good? Only God is good.
If you want to have eternal life, you must obey His commandments." (NLT). Does that mean
God is less than perfect? No, by no means! So why would a perfect God create something less
than perfect? We read in Romans 8:20 that creation (nature, not just man) was subjected to
frustration and decay because of man�s sins.

So what about animals who are carnivores, physically designed to eat meat and who would die without it? They surely couldn�t have been herbivores? Creationists answer that animals
physically changed after the Fall. As Robert Sungen�s states,

We know, according to a literal reading of Genesis, that, after the Fall, the serpent�s body
was changed from a creature that apparently walked on limbs to a creature that slithered
on the ground and ate dust. If such physiological changes occurred in one species of
animals due to the Fall, it is not prohibited for other physiological changes to occur in
other animals, e.g. change a herbivore to a carnivore.
And it�s not absolutely neccesary that carnivores eat meat to survive.

Earlier in this century a lion by the name �Little Tyke� never ate any meat in her life. Her
diet consisted of grains, eggs, and milk. In fact, even if her meal had one drop of blood in it she
would refuse to eat it. �The Lioness not only survived on this diet, she thrived. One of America�s
most able zoo curators apparently said that the lioness �was the best of her species he had ever
viewed�� (Catchpoole).

So what did animals eat in the Garden of Eden? As we read in Genesis 1:29-30 God gave
man and animals plants for food. Nowhere does it say he allowed man and animals to eat meat in
the Garden of Eden.

But if there was no death before the fall, wouldn�t plants be included in this? They�d have
to die in order for animals to eat them. If we read the Bible, we see that God never gave plants life
like he did man and animals. The word used for man and animal life is �naphesh� which refers to a
life with a certain level of consciousness. Plants have biological life but they aren�t conscious. The
Bible states they wither and fade (Isaiah 40:6-8, James 1:10) but they don�t die in the Biblical
sense.

We also read in Romans 3:21, �He must remain in heaven until the time comes
for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through His holy prophets.� The key word
in this passage is �restore.� The Greek word used is �apokatastasis� which means restitution (A
return to or restoration of a previous state or position.)

So how are things going to be restored? After Jesus arrives in the second coming the
Word of God states in Isaiah 11:6-9 that the lion will lie down with the lamb, and they�ll eat
plants, and in Revelation 21 and 22 sin is also gone, and there is no more death, pain, or sorrow.

Cain and Abel�s Wives:

Another issue that arrives in Genesis is the issue of where Cain and Abel got their wives. It
doesn�t say anywhere in the Scriptures specifically where they came from, so naturally theistic
evolutionist assumes there was another population of people who evolved.

Creationists answer that Cain an Abel actually married their sisters. Though it doesn�t say
any of Adam and Eve�s daughters names in Scriptures, it does mention in Genesis 5:4 that
Adam and Eve had many sons and daughters. Back in Genesis intermarriage was permitted by
God so the earth could be populated. Intermarriage didn�t have the biological problems like it
does today, because Adam an Eve were created genetically perfect. It wasn�t until later that God
forbid it, most likely because of genetic issues (Gish, 158-159).

Noahs Flood:

Many theistic evolutionists reject a universal flood because of the 300 or so various stories
of such events in other cultures (Cohn 1), the impossibility of all the animals fitting on the ark, or
the lack of archaeological or geological evidence (Teeple 73). Because of this, many have come to
believe that Noah�s flood was another one of the 300 various stories, or that it was only a local flood. However, all the 300 different stories could prove there was an actual universal flood, and
as the story was passed down it took on different twists and turns. Noah�s flood would be the
only accurate account written down by Moses, who was inpsired by God.

If that�s the case, a local flood doesn�t fit scripture. If the flood was local why couldn�t
Noah and the animals have flocked to another part of the world that wouldn�t be affected by the
flood? Lastly God would have broken His promise numerous times to never send such a flood on
earth again. (Noah�s Flood)

Many still debate that the account of Noah�s Flood in Genesis couldn�t be
accurate because there is no possible way he could have fit all the animals on the ark. In Genesis
God told Noah he was going to destroy the world with a universal flood because of man�s
wickedness, but because Noah was righteous He�d save him and his family. He also told Noah to
take two of every land vertebrate and reptile animal after their own kind, male and female. He
also instructed him to take seven of certain animals for sacrafice.

The key term in this passage is, �kind.� Every animal belongs to a group of
species. �One common definition of a species is a group of organisms which can interbreed and
produce fertile offspring, and cannot mate with other species . . . for example, dogs, wolves,
coyotes, and jackels are probably from a canine (dog-like) kind.� (Sarfati). Noah only needed to
take one certain kind of a each animal, and overtime they�d procreate and make the varying forms
of animals we see today because of genetic mutations. In John Woodmorappe�s book Noah�s Ark:
A Feasibility Study, he calculates the ark was more than large enough to fit all the required
animals (Harvest Baptist).

Fossils:

A complete fossil record is the one thing that could prove evolution to be true. If
evolution is true there should be many fossils of the �intermediate� stage. Such as an ape in the
intermediate stage of evolving into a man. But as Gish, a former evolutionist says, �The fossil
record is often cited by evolutionists as support for the theory of evolution. Actually, the fossil
record is an embarrassment to the theory of evolution and provides support for the concept of
direct special creation� (Harvest Baptist).

We read in many text books and hear on TV shows that scientist have found fossils to be
millions of years old. However, the age of fossils is actually just another theory. Many of the
techniques in dating fossils have major errors. For example, if you gave a scientist a fossil he
would determine its age by first discovering what kind of animal the fossil was and what layer of
rock the fossil was buried in. Based on that, he decides the fossils age. But if you asked him
how he knew how old the layer of rock was he�d tell you by the fossils buried in them (Harvest
Baptist).

Theistic evolutionists believe the earth�s layers and fossils are the result of millions of
years. As Ken Ham states, �These processes are said to have involved the slow formation of
sedimentary layers associated with the trapping of organisms and their subsequent fossilization
(153). However, evaluations attempt at trying to explain how fossilization happens is a theory.
Geological studies have proven in order for fossils to form they have to be buried rapidly. This
only happens in unusual situations. Noah�s flood would be an excellent explanation of the the
fossils we have today (Bebber).

There has been fossilization of human footprints with dinasour tracks in the same
layer found by the Paluxy River near Glenrose, Texas. Many evolutionist believe it�s impossible that man and dinasour lived at the same time. They say that dinasours existed at least 70 million
years before man evolved.

Noah�s flood could explain the many sedimentary layers that evolutionist say took
millions of years to form. But we know that isn�t the case. Mt. St. Helens erupted May 18, 1980
causing catastrophic conditions. In a matter of hours, �in one area, 25 feet of sediment was laid
down in a single pass of an ash flow and formed multiple layers� (Harvest Baptist).

Another issue is the formation of coal. Evolutionist believe �coal was formed by the laying
down of plants under layers of rock over millions of years.� They say coal was formed over 300
million years ago, and humans came into existence about 3 million years ago. However, human
remains have been found in coal layers in Germany and the east coast of the United States.
Creationist believe coal was formed during Noah�s flood when �plant material was transported to
a certian location by flood waters and deposited under layers of sediment� (Harvest Baptist).

As Gish states,
It is believed that most of the important geological formations of the earth can be
explained as having been formed as a result of the worldwide Noachian Flood
described in Genesis, along with attendant vast earth movements, volcanic action,
dramatic changes in climatic conditions, and other catastrophic events. The fossil
record, rather than being a record of transformation, is a record of mass
destruction, death, and burial by water and its contained sediments (61).

Conclusion:

I have grown up in a Christian home and was taught the literal interpretation
of Genesis and that evolution was wrong. Later, at my Christian highschool, I was taught more in depth about the subject that gave me a firm foundation to stand up against the attacks of
evolution. As Christians, Genesis is the foundation for our faith, and if it�s destroyed then
everything will be destroyed. As the Bible verse Psalms 11:3 says, �When the foundations are
being destroyed, what can the righteous do?� Either we believe the Bible is 100 percent true or
else we don�t. There is no inbetween. We cannot pick out the parts we like and leave the ones we
don�t, because then who is to say what is right or wrong? We have to start looking at the world
through the Bible, instead of the Bible through the world.

I have come in contact with people on Internet message boards who are theistic
evolutionists. I feel, in the attempt to share the creationists view we need to know the subject to
be able to present a well thought out view. As Christians, we need to be �ready to give an answer
to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.� (1 Peter 3:15). I know
for myself I couldn�t scramble around looking for answers in books or on the Internet to refute
what they were saying, and then get back to them. I needed to give an answer to them right away.
This is why I chose this topic for my Exit Paper.

So far I haven�t been able to put into practice what I have learned through writing this
paper, but I know it has given me an even more firm foundation to stand upon and has reassured
me that the literal interpretation of Genesis is truth and evolution is a lie.

There are many errors in evolution, only a few were presented in this paper, but hopefully
there were enough to cast doubt and cause some to reconsider their position. Unfortunately
we will never be able to prove who is right or who is wrong. As Romans 1 states, man will
willingly disbelieve God as the Creator. It is not that there isn�t enough evidence to prove them
wrong, it�s just that they do not want to believe.

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Works Citied

Batten, Don. �Genesis Contradictions?� Answers in Genesis. (Sept-Nov 1996) 29 March 2003.
<http://answersingenesis.org/docs/1272.asp>.

Bebber, Mark Van. �What Does the Fossil Record Teach us about Evolution?� Christiananswers.net (1995) 28 April 2003. <http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c006.html>

Brown, Walt. In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood. Phoenix, AZ: Center for Scientific Creation, 1995.

Cohn, Norman. Noah�s Flood The Genesis Story in Westren Thought. New Gaven & London: Yale University Press, 1996.

�Evolution: A Conspiracy?� Harvest Baptist Church   28 April 2003
<http://www.harvestbaptistministries.com/creation/fossil.htm>.

Frye, Roland Mushat, ed. Is God a Creationist?:The Religious Case Against Creation-Science. New York: Charles Scribner�s Sons, 1983.

Gish, Daune T., Ph. D. Creation Scientist Answer their Critics. El Cajon, CA: Institute for Creation Reasearch, 1993.

Gish, Daune T., Ph. D. Evolution the Fossils Say No! San Diego, CA: Creation-Life Publishers, 1979.

Gopi, Krishna. The Biological Basis of Religion and Genius. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1971.

Grigg, Ressel. �Do I Have to Believe in a Literal Creation to be a Christian.� Creation June-Aug 2002: 10-12

Ham, Ken. �Eisegesis A Genesis Virus.� Creation June-Aug 2002: 16-19

------The Lie Evolution. El Cajon, CA: Creation Life Publishers, 1987.

Niessen, Richard. �Theistic Evolution and the Day-Age Theory.� Institute For Creation Research (March 1980) 29 March 2003. <http://icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-081.htm>.

�Noah�s Flood Covered the Whole Earth.� Creation June-August 1999: 49.

Ross, Hugh. The Fingerprint of God. Orange, CA: Promise Publishing Co., 1991.

Schaeffer, Francis A. Genesis in Space & Time. Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1972.

Stambaugh, James S. �The Relationship Between Sin and Death in Genesis: Death before Sin?� (27 Oct. 1995) 1 May 2003 <http://www.ldolphin.org/icrdeath.html>

Sungenis, Robert. �Animals Before the Fall.� Catholic Apologetics International (15 Nov. 2001) 29 Marchl 2003 <http://catholicintl.com/epologetics/questions/herbivores.html>.

Teeple, Howard M. The Noah�s Ark Nonsense. Illinios: Religion & Ethics Institute Inc., 1978.

The Foundations of the Righteous:
Creationism versus Theistic Evolution
by Jennifer Osterlund

I wrote this paper my Senior year of Highschool. I posted it on this website, to help those make an informed decision about the beginnings of the world.