“These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens” (Gen 2:4).The age of the universe is one of the hottest debates in the Church today, so we need to discuss it briefly.
I said before that there are primary issues (things that determine whether or not we are Christians), secondary issues (things that determine whether we are, for example, Baptists or Anglicans), and tertiary issues (things that people can differ on and still be part of the same local church body). The doctrine that God created everything from nothing is a primary issue. Christians have always believed that, and if someone does not believe that, their theology quickly unravels into something that is not Christianity.
Exactly when and how God created everything is a tertiary issue. Though some want to treat it as if it were a secondary, or even primary, issue, Christians who hold different beliefs can and do maintain fellowship within the same local congregation all over the world. We do not have to divide over this, therefore we should not. To divide over such an issue is sin.
So what are the acceptable views that Christians can hold? Here are the major positions that are considered to be within the pale of orthodoxy:
Young Earth Creationism (YEC)
This view holds that God created everything miraculously in six 24-hour days somewhere between 6,000 to 50,000 years ago. This has the advantage of being the most straightforward way of reading Genesis 1-11. This view has the burden of explaining why the universe looks so much older than it is, including fossil evidence.
Old Earth Creationism (OEC)
This is a broad term that encompasses several different theories, but the thing they all have in common is that they hold that the universe is 14ish billion years old and the earth is 4ish billion years old. Even though this view has mostly taken off in the last century or two, the first theologian I know of who wondered if the creation “days” of Genesis might have been longer than 24 standard hours was Augustine of Hippo (354-430), based on passages like Psalm 90:4 (“A thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night”). Proponents generally believe God specially intervened to create some or all species — humans at a minimum — but some are open to the idea that God may have used some kind of “descent with modification” to achieve his ends at some points.
Within this group we have:
The Gap Theory: The view that the creation of the universe and earth is recorded in Gen 1:1 and that there is a gap between verses 1 and 2 wherein the earth was laid waste, perhaps by a war between the loyal angels and the fallen angels. Verse 2 picks up with the restoration of the earth that is accomplished in the six recorded days. This view is not very common today. It has to deal with the fact that there is little to no evidence for that destruction between 1:1 and 1:2 in the scriptures or anywhere else.
The Day-Age Theory: The view that the “days” of Genesis 1 were really long spans of time. It appeals to some quirks of the Hebrew text of Gen 1 that adherents find meaningful and verses like Ps 90:4 and Gen 2:4 which suggest that “day” in the Bible doesn’t always mean a 24-hour span. Proponents see various stages in the development of the earth that correspond to the creation “days” from the right frame of reference. This view has to contend with the apparent use of the creation days as the basis for the work six, rest one pattern of the sabbath.
The Framework Theory: The view that the creation days of Genesis were never intended to be taken as literal days and that the events of the creation story are arranged theologically rather than scientifically. This view’s primary weakness is the same as the last’s.
Theistic Evolution
I set this one apart, not because it’s not an OEC view, but because it’s pushing the limits of being considered orthodox. Some use the term “theistic evolution” for the idea that God may have used some kind of descent with modification in his creation. The major use for this term today, though, refers to a particular view that says God set the whole thing off and then stepped back, never intervening in the process after that first moment. Therefore, they believe in naturalistic, Darwinian evolution. I would rather call this “Deistic Evolution”, but proponents want to stress their Christian bona fides and insist on using that term. What really sets them apart is the view that there was no literal Adam and Eve, no literal Garden, and no literal fall event (Gen 3). They view Gen 1-11 as purely mythical. Their biggest problem is explaining how their view of Gen 2 and 3 works with New Testament views of salvation that seem to hinge on a literal Adam and a literal fall.
Intelligent Design
I include this for completeness, but this view is not creationism per se, though creationists may find their theories useful. Most proponents believe the universe is old. What sets them apart is they do not, officially, say who designed the universe. They only hold that the universe, the earth, and life on earth show signs of being put together by an intelligence. This view takes no actual position on Gen 1-11.
In summary, pretty much any position that holds that God created everything from nothing at some point is within the pale of orthodoxy. If they hold that mankind was a special creation and that Adam and Eve were historical people who had a literal fall from innocence, people will be much more comfortable with that position. And one day we’ll finally get to find out who’s right.
No comments:
Post a Comment