Must We Reconcile The Bible With Science?

When I was in college, there was a great debate on just "how" God created the earth. Some maintained that the days described in the chapter could have been ages long each, and thus account for the apparent age of the earth observed scientifically these days.

Others suggested that there had been a creation and that this first creation was ruined by the sin and subsequent casting from heaven of Satan. They postulate a "gap" between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2. Still other theorize that we basically evolved from the state God created us in to the state we are in now. A variation on this is the idea that God oversaw the evolution process and "helped" man over the different "thresh-holds" that would prevent his further development.

Of course, there are other theories that I have not mentioned here. I simply wish to point out that there are many approaches to the concept of "God created the heavens and the earth".

I am no learned man of science. I don't have the in-depth knowledge necessary to properly evaluate the "scientific-ness" of these theories. I can only comment on what I do know about. None of those creation theories satisfies the plain sense of the chapter! The Scripture was written to be understood. It is clear and it speaks plainly to the reader.

The Reformers called this the "Perspicuity" of the Bible. The normal and plain sense of a passage is probably the correct one. This is not to say that there aren't figures and/or difficult to understand things in the Bible, there certainly are! But, on the whole, I believe the Bible is clear and plain in what it tells us. What chapter one tells us is that God created the world in six days. It mentions morning and evening for each day. It appears that these six days were concurrent and to proclaim them not to be is to bring a presupposition to the text that is not there naturally.

It is always safest to allow the passage to say what it says and to work on our adjusting our understanding accordingly! It can be disastrous to do the reverse! One might think this all a minor, unimportant detail, but I would disagree. The moment we begin to view the Scripture through any lens but the lens of the teaching of God's Spirit we stand in danger of repeating mistakes made by those who have abandoned God's Word and its standards.

Certainly, there are many well-meaning scholars, pastors and other students of the Bible who are caught up in this ... accommodation; but it is a mistake, one that will lead to grave consequences as time wears on. Why is it significant that we believe that God created the world in 6 literal, concurrent days? Because our minds are to be subject to the plain sense of Scripture! Why "couldn't it be this way or that way?". Because that denies that the Scripture is not sufficient to teach truth concerning all that it touches.

If the content of the Bible is not enough for us to understand the acts of God as revealed to us in its pages, then we are at a loss to know if we understand it at all? What other parts may need the enlightening presence of science? How can I trust what it says anywhere if I need more than what is written to understand any of it?

Some will say that I am overstating my case. I think not. The sufficiency of the Scripture is a key doctrine, essential if we are to confidently call men and women to repentance and redemption by the blood of Christ.

This is especially true of the doctrine of creation, wherein there is much confusion and false teaching among unbelievers. If the matter is clouded yet more by we who profess to know the truth, then that makes the road to Christianity needlessly hindered and places barriers unnecessary and even damaging.

Let's keep in mind the sufficiency of Scriptural Revelation and the significance of these "small" issues in the larger picture!

The God Who Cannot Be Seen

Genesis 1:1

   Of course, we would be considered remiss if we did not pause and consider the obvious truth that the Scripture begins and ends with the presence of God, doing and accomplishing His purpose.

   The existence of God is an assumed matter in the Scripture. Nowhere does the Scripture undertake to categorically "prove" the existence of the True and Living God. Quite a large number of philosophers and theologians have undertaken the task over the centuries and have succeeded, to a point, in demonstrating the probability (though not the absolute certainty) that God is Who the Bible claims He is.

   They use a number of logical, philosophical, and theological arguments to accomplish this. They argue many very valid points and, in my view, those arguments establish the existence of a personal God far beyond any reasonable doubt.

   However, we must realize that the aim of the Scriptures is to call men to believe what they cannot see. The familiar words of Hebrews 11:6 remind us: "... without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." I believe that God could have given more than adequate proof of His existence. He could have designed us and the world in such a fashion as to prove categorically His existence to the most skeptical of observers. Yet we are left with the truth that He did not so do.

   This is not to say that there is not abundant "evidence" that God does, indeed, exist that is available to the unredeemed. Romans 1:19-20 declares "... that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse". These "proofs" are both clearly seen and understood Paul says, by the combination of exposure to the presence of Creation and the "showing" of them by God Himself to each person. When coupled with true faith, this evidence is sufficient, more than sufficient really, to convince the heart of God's existence. Apart from true faith, the evidence of God's existence is, to the unredeemed, not convincing at all! In fact, Romans goes on to say that they universally reject that knowledge and persist in their sin, "holding the truth in unrighteousness" (Romans 1:18).

   No one can convince and unbeliever of the existence of God. Evidences can be shown and they are useful for removing barriers that would obscure the truth of the Gospel, but only up to a point. Ultimately, as with the Scriptures assumption here in Genesis One, the existence of God must be embraced by faith, despite the lack of empirical and categorical evidence. Again we note that this is non-rational, but rather is the way God intended it to be. those who would please Him must believe that He is!

God's Eternaltiy & What It Means To Us

   At the beginning of all things. At the beginning of all we know, God already was and thus can be said to have had no beginning. There was never a time when God was not, because He already was at the beginning.
   There is a strange logic and yet an illogic in the thought. One might consider that this is speaking of the beginning of our existence alone, and that it says nothing beyond that about God's eternality. In the strictest of senses, I suppose that one would have to conclude, on the merits of this verse alone, that it says nothing about whether God had a beginning or not.
   What it does say is that that alleged beginning, if there was one, was "before" our beginning. Thankfully, we are not left with this verse alone, but have the rest of the testimony of the Scripture to rely on for more information.
   The short list of verses in the Bible that speak of the Eternality of God would include: Gen. 21:33; Deut. 32:40; Deut. 33:27; 1 Chron. 16:36; Neh. 9:5; Job 36:26; Ps. 29:10; Ps. 33:11; Ps. 41:13; Ps. 45:6; Ps. 48:14; Ps. 90:1-2, 4; Ps. 93:2; Ps. 102:25-27; Isa. 26:4; Isa. 40:28; Isa. 41:4; Isa. 44:6; Isa. 57:15; Lam. 5:19; Dan. 4:34; Hab. 1:12; Hab. 3:6; Rom. 1:20; Rom. 16:26; 1 Cor. 2:7; Eph. 1:4; 1 Tim. 1:17; 1 Tim. 6:15; Heb. 1:10-12; 2 Pet. 3:8; Rev. 1:8; Rev. 4:8-9.
   That our God is eternal is of little doubt to any real believer in the Scripture. There are some interesting implications to this idea that bear considering. If God is indeed eternal, that the God we know cannot have ever been mortal, and hence, have never been a man as the Mormons claim. Their position is that God as he is now, is as man can some day be. Not if the Bible is true! God is eternal and had no beginning! Every man is mortal and had a beginning.
   That God is eternal also speaks of His essential difference from us. He is eternal and we are immortal. He and we share the fact that we will have no end. Yet, He had no beginning while there was a time when you and I were not thought of, except in the mind and purposes of God Himself. There a real security, in my mind, I knowing that there is a Being Who is greater than I am, in essence. With other men, we share the bottom line that we are all creatures and that we share a common nature, handed down from Adam over the years.
   While we are related to God by faith, there is also that real difference between us. That comforts because I can know that I am in the care of One whose experience and wisdom transcends that of myself and my compatriots. There is indeed a God Who is eternal and Who's knowledge and understanding far outstrips my own! It is good for me to put myself in the place of a small son and take comfort from the knowledge that my Father knows how to fix what is wrong!
   We should also note that the verse indicates that all that the chapter reveals happened at THE beginning, no A beginning. There were not multiple tries at starting things as some would suggest. God did not create and then allow His first creation to be destroyed, and then remake the earth. There was "the beginning" and no other beginning. It is into that frame that we must fit the details of the chapter, not alter the basic frame of reference to fit what we would make of the details of the chapter.
   You might wonder why this is important? Let me suggest a couple reasons.
   First, it is important because it is what the text says. These are clear and simple words, easily understood. We need not stretch to allow them to fit some other understanding that we bring with us to the text. It is folly to pursue the "well, it could be this way or that" method of interpretation.
   Secondly, it is important because of the directness with which it speaks to man and his origins. We are not an evolved creature, a happenstance meeting of amino and other acids in a primordial sea. God set out, a particular moment and He created. The results of that creation came to be in an instant and not over millennia.
   Thirdly, it is important because it lays the foundation, in the very first verse of the Bible, of trustworthiness and clarity of understanding. This phrase, and the greater concepts of the following verses all appear to say one thing. If they do not, indeed, say those things, then we have some problems, do we not?
   Occam's Razor applies here I believe. the simplest explanation is probably the correct one. We need not try and explain these words in any other fashion other than what the clearly intend to say. That is an important precedent to get straight, and God gets it straight in the verse first few words of the Book.
   The reference to the beginning also implies and ending. Not an ending to your and my existence, but an ending to that which gives the verse and the chapter a frame of reference, the creation of the world.