By Erik Martin
-Continued from yesterday-
5. Jesus’ Teaching
Jesus also embraced a straightforward reading of Genesis 1. He affirmed the common Jewish interpretation of Genesis when He cited, without reservation, Genesis 5:2 in Matthew 19:4. If the Jews erroneously understood Genesis chapters one and two, Jesus would have corrected them as was His practice (Matthew 23:1-23; Luke 13:1-4).
Jesus was eager to correct the misinterpretations and false teaching of Second-Temple Judaism (Matthew 22:29). He firmly upheld the accuracy and truthfulness of God’s Law (John 10:35; 17:17) while also carefully fixing Jewish misconceptions by freeing the text from their bogus traditions (Matthew 5:17-19, 21-48).
6. Historical Evidence
A recent creation has always been the predominant, if not the universal, position of the people of God. A young earth was embraced by Judaism for thousands of years. A recent genesis is the universal position of the historic church. Until the Enlightenment, orthodox Christianity never questioned the Genesis account.
If God took millions of years to create and intended Christians (and Jews) to embrace an old earth, then why did He allow the church to get it wrong for 2,000 years and Judaism for the previous 1,500 years? If God created over long periods of time and then intentionally lied to His people or allowed them to misunderstand for thousands of years, then He is not truthful or good.
Furthermore, He would be an impotent communicator and the rest of His revelation is likewise unreliable and inaccurate. Furthermore, why would God finally enlighten His children to the truth by revealing it through the scientific speculations of those who hate Him? God, as a loving Father, always communicates accurately by speaking to His children through His prophets and now the Scriptures. Any other belief undermines the foundation of Christian faith. Christian epistemology requires no less.
7. Scientific Evidence
Finally, science does not actually prohibit a young earth. We have no extant humanly-generated eyewitness record of the origin of the universe. No man observed the beginning; even Adam only got in on the very end. This does not leave us in the dark. God was present and provided a reliable record.
Since no human witnessed the foundation of the world, and creation cannot be replicated, modern science can only hypothesize theories about the origins of time, matter, and life. Science applies uniformitarianism and assumes that the current patterns of the cosmos have never changed. This overlooks several important factors.
A. The earth was created without sin and sin has altered the way things work.
B. A global flood destroyed the past ecosystem and severely altered the world.
C. God created with apparent age.
He made Adam an adult, capable of naming all the animals, old enough to seek a mate, able to tend the Garden and competent to provide for His own needs.
God created the heavenly bodies as a celestial clock. Their function visibly marks out times and season requiring their light to have been instantly apparent on earth. The sun testifies to, rather than sets, the length of days. The length of a day was established on day one, not day four.
Science tries to undermine the Genesis account and gives many evidences to prop up macro-evolution. Even so, evolution cannot produce a battering ram able to definitively discredit the Genesis record. The question of origins comes down to epistemology. What do we trust as reliable? How do we know what we say we know? Do we trust the Scriptures or do we trust science?
Read part 1: https://modernpuritan.com/2014/03/14/what-happened/