I was asked to write a post on the issue of Creation vs Creationism. Let me define terms here first. When I am talking about Creationism I am talking about the Young Earth Creationism theory propounded by Robert Morris and others a number of years ago. They basically try to find a ‘scientific’ theory based on the literal interpretation of Creation in Genesis and the creation of the universe in a literal six 24hour days.
By Creation I am talking about using science to understand and expose more of the Glory of God in a more and more detailed understanding of His Creation. To make this sensible I need to define a few more terms and ideas. When I am talking about science I am talking about those using the scientific method, of examining the observable universe and attempting to understand it by collecting data, analyzing data, and constructing theories from that data. Anything that goes beyond this process is defined as a Meta science, ie Metapysical theories that are built on something other than observed fact.
In the philosophy of science a theory is an attempt to take all available data about a subject and organize it in such a way that it makes internally logical sense, does not conflict with other known fact, and creates new questions that are themselves testable and that create new data. In other words, a theory is never static and should always be changing and reforming as new data is added. When a ‘theory’ becomes static it is no longer science, it is now a statement of faith. An example of this is the way Evolution is often taught, as established fact and not something open to question. In Psychology Freudian Theory fits this definition.
I assume it is obvious that I do not accept the arguments of the Young Earth Creationists. It is arguable on both a Biblical and a scientific basis. For a combination of both of these arguments I would refer you to a book that is unfortunately out of print – you will have to haunt Amazon or used book stores to find a copy. It is: Schroeder, Gerald, Genesis and the Big Bang, ISBN 0-553-35413-2. The ISBN number is now the only reference one needs to identify a book in a search. A more specific book that comprehensively destroys the ‘science’ behind the Young Earth argument is: The Grand Canyon: Monument to an Ancient Earth, ed. Hill, Davidson, Helble, & Ranney ISBN 978-0-8254-4421-0. The Grand Canyon is something that both sides accept and try to describe how it happened – and one is completely unsuccessful. This book is currently available, very readable and full of pictures as well.
Intelligent Design is the current name for the philosophical/scientific defense of God in the picture. Our son Kyle (MDiv, working on PhD - Comparative Ethics) gave me some names for those who wish to pursue this – you may or may not. John Lennox, John Polkingham, and Allistair McGrath are all scholars at Oxford (or were at Oxford) who have taken this up. He also suggested the IanRamseyCenter on Youtube. This is the only one that I have currently followed.
I do not read Hebrew, Kyle does. I have been told that it is not necessary to interpret the six days of creation literally for a number of reasons. One is that if the sun was not yet created there was no 24 hour day established at least until it was, and who knows when the Earth settled into a 24hr orbit once the sun was created? Another is that time is a variable in God’s kingdom different than in ours –“A day is to a thousand years and thousand years to a day” is a scriptural quote, and it is usually taken as a statement of hyperbole rather than a literal thousand years – i.e. it simply points out that God is outside of time and not constrained by it. Another is that the entire Bible is written so that the original readers could understand it, not so that we should read our understanding back into it. Probably the best example of this is God’s description of how to build the lake for the temple – he defines the circumference as three times the diameter – or Pi. Issac Asimov once wrote a commentary on the Bible where he states that God was wrong, Pi is an infinite number, not 3. My wife pointed out to me that Pi is 3, it is also 3.1, it is also 3.14, it is also 3.141, etc. and etc. My point is that God was not defining Pi to mathematicians; He was teaching people how to make something round. When He described His Creation to early man he described it in a way they would understand, not how Cosmologists now understand. They had no referents to understand the Big Bang nor did they understand galaxies.
When I talk about Creation I am talking about understanding God’s creation on deeper and deeper levels. For example, if you read Ecology you know that the trees on the opposite side of a forest from a fire will start producing more and more water. The forest communicates! No, I am not arguing for intelligence or anything close, but trees totally uninvolved with the fire are reacting to it. I am willing to bet, if you study any science, you will see the Glory of God in greater and greater depth. Who can look at the Hubble Telescope pictures and not see God? Only those who refuse. A number of years ago NASA published the lowest musical note ever discovered, and gave the numbers. For those of us in the bass section of the choir this, of course, proved that God is a bass! (Yes, we can have fun with it, too.) If one is willing to look, one sees infinity in all directions, infinite space, infinite complexity, infinite simplicity, infinite smallness (subatomic particles, maybe smaller), etc. If you look at numbers, there is infinity between 1 and 2 – those spaces can be divided infinitely (I’m no mathematician, but I’m told Mandelbrot sets can be found here). Can infinity be created other than by an infinite God?
Fundamental to Creation is the Creator. Science simply tries to understand what he has done. The Bible is our manual for moral development and behavior – our owner’s manual as it were. It is not a book of mathematics or of science or even of history beyond a specific time and geographical area and should not be used as one.
I was taught that all truth is God’s truth and should be seen as such. If you were to refine all of today’s knowledge into its minimal essence you would still have a library. Certainly not something you can carry around in a large pocket. I am not surprised that God did not include a discussion on gravitational theory in the Bible, he gave us minds and charged and challenged us to use them. Gravity is fundamental to our lives and always has been. Just because it is not mentioned in the Bible does not mean we should not endeavor to understand it. (Wow – I wrote a triple negative!)
I expect this will result in considerable discussion. Please read the entire post above thoughtfully - there are a lot of assumptions packed in there, I have only unpacked some of them. It is a result of considerable study and consultation and thinking. Please use the same thoughtful and considered approach in your responses.