Why Are Creation and the Flood Important?
First, let’s acknowledge why some people reject Genesis and are not willing to carefully consider
The following reflects attitudes I once held.
In our scientifically “enlightened” and media-driven age, don’t educated people accept that evolution happened? Most of my teachers and professors, people I greatly respected, accepted evolution. Prior to 1970, it appeared to me that those who believed in the biblical version of creation did not grasp the immense age of the Earth and universe. Don’t we sense great age when we see the Grand Canyon or galaxies that are billions of light-years away? Given billions of years, vast changes will occur. To believe that a worldwide flood occurred seemed ridiculous. Just look at a globe. Where could so much water come from to cover, as the Bible clearly states, all the mountains of the Earth? Mount Everest rises 5 1/2 miles above sea level. If that much water once covered the Earth, where did all that water go? Obviously, the Bible was written in an age when people were relatively uneducated and little was known about the Earth—or so I thought.
Was I curious enough to study origins? No. I thought it was a complex, time-consuming subject. Besides, I felt that the case was closed a century ago—certainly after the famous Scopes Trial in 1925. Those who accepted the biblical version of creation and a global flood were a little embarrassing to be around. I became a Christian in high school, but held the above attitudes until my early 30s. I was at Position 1, shown in Figure 224.
Others reject the theory of evolution, accept a global flood, and believe that God created everything relatively recently. Although their beliefs, usually based on a literal interpretation of the Bible, clash with evolution (taught in almost all schools and universities), they tend to ignore the conflict. The reasons are many: they may be too busy, they may not recognize all the contradictions between evolution and the Bible or may feel powerless to resolve them. They may wish to avoid controversy or involvement in unfamiliar scientific topics. They may have only a vague understanding of the flood. (Major consequences of the flood have been incorrectly interpreted as supporting evolution.) They may not realize that evolution (1) is scientifically bankrupt, (2) is a major stumbling block for countless nonbelievers, and (3) has caused many children raised in Christian homes to later reject their faith, feel their parents misled them, or view church as irrelevant. This is Position 3.
Other people know how foundational Genesis 1–11 is to the entire Bible. (Genesis 1–11 tells of the creation, fall, and flood—three of the most significant events of all time.) Every New Testament writer and many Old Testament writers refer to those chapters. [See “Does the New Testament Support Genesis 1–11?” on pages 553–556.] If those writers were wrong about ancient history, why should we believe them when they say that a man rose from the dead? Jesus Christ also spoke of events described in each of the first seven chapters of Genesis. If Christ was mistaken about ancient history, why should we believe Him when He speaks of eternity? If Genesis 1–11 is in error, then many other portions of the Bible that refer to those chapters are equally wrong, opening the door to differing interpretations of the entire Bible and a comfortable, pick-and-choose view of Scripture. If evolution happened, then death existed for a billion years before man evolved. Death would not be a consequence of Adam’s sin; Adam’s sin would simply be a fiction, believed only by “literalists.” And if sin is a fiction, we don’t need a Savior ! (Also, if there is no such thing as sin—or a Creator—there are no moral absolutes. See “Does a Belief in Evolution have Social Consequences?” on pages 551–553.)
These are scary thoughts for countless Christians. Some search for ways to reinterpret the Bible to harmonize it with evolution. They are called “theistic evolutionists.” The last thing they want to do is argue with scientists. Preserving image and intellectual respectability is important, and scientific answers may seem more credible and objective than various theological positions. Others who have great confidence in and knowledge of the Bible know that these Bible reinterpretations produce more contradictions than they resolve. [See “Is Evolution Compatible with the Bible?” on pages 537–545.] A Christian leader, whose primary interest is increasing church attendance and donations, may wish the whole, creation-evolution issue would just go away. Churches strive for internal harmony; raising the origins issue could bring disharmony, even church splits. Therefore, many church leaders, unaware that the science is clearly on their side, avoid the origins issue, even if evangelism suffers. They hold Position 4.
Figure 224: Five Views on Origins. People generally fall into five categories when it comes to the question of origins. Individuals of all ages and academic, scientific, and theological backgrounds occupy each category.
In our society, indeed throughout the world, the one issue that screams most loudly that the Bible is not accurate or relevant is evolution. Yet, church leaders who say they want to teach the Bible often ignore the issue, either out of a lack of interest, understanding, confidence, or courage. How sad, because the scientific case for creation and the flood is so compelling—and fatal to evolution.
Finally, those holding Positions 2 and 5 are examining the evidence. Most are surprised and excited by what they are learning. After seeing the evidence, the frequent reaction is, “Why haven’t I been told this before?” Instead of being intimidated by science, a subject they may have disliked in school, they are amazed at the simple, compelling evidence for creation and a global flood. Hundreds of topics and scientific discoveries supporting creation and the flood fascinate most people and are easy to discuss, even with strangers. In effect, this becomes a powerful pre-evangelistic tool. While no one has all the answers concerning origins, be assured that the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly consistent with Genesis 1–11 and opposes evolution. In fact, it is extremely difficult to find any knowledgeable evolutionist willing to debate the issue—orally or in writing—with someone who understands this evidence.
Most Christians feel the responsibility to evangelize—to take seriously the great commission. What are the major obstacles to evangelism? People give many reasons for rejecting Christ:
- Christians are hypocrites, judgmental, dogmatic, legalistic, and out of touch with reality.
- My past misdeeds could never be forgiven.
- I prefer to live without biblical constraints.
- I am too busy to consider the matter.
- I prefer another religion.
- Evolution proves that the Bible is wrong.
- There is no God—and therefore, no moral absolutes.
- A loving God would not allow the suffering and evil we see in the world.
- The Bible is outdated; it contains myths and errors.
A correct understanding of origins overcomes several of these objections directly. Other objections result primarily from a lack of confidence in or understanding of the Bible. For those who do not believe the Bible is accurate, it does little good to say, “Believe because the Bible says so !” What better way to establish the remarkable accuracy and authority of Scripture than by showing that Genesis 1–11 (the most discredited portion of the Bible to the secular world) is scientifically accurate and is real history involving real people—our not-so-distant ancestors. The Bible comes alive. Ignoring the origins issue leaves evolution, a major stumbling block to many, unopposed. For the church, evolution is like an elephant that has occupied the church’s living room for over a century. Instead of accommodating the beast, why not remove it?
Some theologians are uncomfortable with science and the subject of origins. They know what the Bible clearly says, but may not know (or want to know) the scientific evidence that is so consistent with a literal creation and a global flood. Therefore, they—spooked by science—avoid the subject, which leaves their congregations and students in the dark. As Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote: “The religion that is afraid of science dishonors God and commits suicide.”
When speaking to the Jews, all of whom knew there was a Creator, the Apostle Paul could begin with Jesus Christ and the gospel. However, when speaking to Greek pagans, Paul first had to explain that there is a Creator (Acts 14:15, 17:24–28). Because we live in increasingly pagan societies with growing moral decay—all seemingly consistent with evolution and survival of the fittest—helping others recognize the Creator seems to be a logical first step in bringing them to Christ. But Christ was more direct. When confronting some of the religious leaders, Jesus said in John 5:46–47,
For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote of Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?
What did Moses compile that has been so widely rejected for the last 150 years? Genesis 1–11, the most ridiculed—and to many Christians—embarrassing portion of the Bible. Elsewhere (John 1:3, Colossians 1:16) we are told that Christ was there in the beginning and “all things have been created through Him and for Him.” Also, Genesis 3:15 gave us the first hint of Christ and His work of salvation.
God reveals Himself in two ways: by special revelation (the Scriptures) and general revelation (all that He created). How tragic that a false interpretation of general revelation (evolution), now taught throughout the world, is used to discredit special revelation. Correct teaching can reverse this.
For the first half of my life, I held Position 1. During the next few years, I shifted to Position 2, then to Position 5. Christians are in all five positions. Where are you?