The Case for Day-Age Creation
By Hugh Ross
No one approaches the Bible completely free of bias. Mine was a secularist’s assumption that this book, like other texts considered “sacred,” would be easy to dismiss as a culturally important yet humanly crafted document. I did not disbelieve in a Being beyond the universe. I had studied enough to see growing evidence for the universe’s transcendent beginning and, thus, the reality of a transcendent Beginner. I felt no compelling need, however, to find the Bible either true or false.
Some may consider my early attraction to astronomy as a bias, but I see no basis for discounting a researcher’s truth filters — such as the rules of logic and evidence — as if they are inappropriate study tools. So this is where I started. I could not have imagined where my inquiry would lead.
From where I stand today, with full confidence in the truth of Scripture and high regard for the prolific scientific enterprise that sprang from widespread access to the Bible, I cannot help but wonder if something other than exegetical difficulties is fueling the creation controversy. The push to choose either a high view of the Bible or a high view of nature’s record seems to come from a sense of vulnerability — an apprehension that discoverable facts might somehow, someday clash irreconcilably with biblical theology. And then what? I simply do not see that danger as real. God’s constancy and consistency of character, observed in both Scripture and nature, takes it away.
Before summarizing the basis for my day-age position, as set forth in The Genesis Debate, A Matter of Days, More Than a Theory, and other books and articles, I focus attention on some concerns that repeatedly interfere with the interpretive process. They arise with such frequency and emotional intensity that we cannot ignore them.
'Like' The Poached Egg on Facebook! Follow @ThePoachedEgg
Many Christians seem to have forgotten one of Christendom’s historic declarations of faith — the Belgic Confession. This document affirms that God has conveyed His truth in “two books,” one of words, the other of works. Both the Bible and features of nature “speak” to us of God — His glory, power, righteousness, wisdom, love, and more. The difference is that verbal communication is uniquely authoritative, propositional, and specific in ways that nonverbal expression cannot be.
The authority of words, however, in no way diminishes, as some suggest, the reliability of God’s revelation through what He “spoke” into existence. Both forms of His expression require study and interpretation…
FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO CONTINUE READING >>>
RECOMMENDED APLOGETICS RESOURCES FOR FURTHER READING:
|Please show your support by sharing this post:|