My apologetics book and view of inerrancy of the scriptures and of the days of creation
My book is primarily a literature review by topic. I try to give the views of the major apologists; It has over 200 references. I describe the views; I do some pros and cons of the differing views, and try to not take sides too much. Then the reader can pick their own view. There is General revelation (GR) ( truths from nature and science) and Special revelation(SR) ( the bible, Jesus and the Holy spirit). God gave us both and they should agree, but I feel SR should be given greater priority. I favor the Full inerrancy view of the bible. Truths from GR change with time and discoveries. For example, At one time science and the church fathers believed the sun revolved around the earth. Galileo held from science- the the earth and planets revolved around the sun. The church put him in prison for this. Now both the church and science hold the latter view. So just because the majority of scientists hold to view X, while christian scientists hold to Y, doesn’t mean X is completely true. Today, the majority scientists are atheists and would be in fear of loosing their job, if they held a christian view on creation.
If one holds to Full inerrancy, I think The historical books in the bible should be interpreted somewhat literally, not figuratively. Genesis is classed as a historical book. In my book, appendix 7 gives a very brief pro and con of different world views, including old earth and young earth creation. I have added a scan of it to this write-up. I hold that the full details of creation are still a mystery to me, with more discoveries to be found. I will add to this. There is strong scientific evidence of the universe being old and possibly the early rocks of earth.(but not the sedimentary fossil layers). There is strong evidence of small elementary particles smaller than an electron or atom exist, and it would be logical that they and light would be created early on as part of the creation process and likely from the Big Bang. God is a God of logic and order, so to me, it would be nonsensical to think the earth was created before light or elementary particles, as some might guess in Gen. 1:2 Many apologists say Genesis is not intended to be a science book and God omitted some details of science that occurred. It is possible the Big Bang occurred before verse 2 and was omitted. We do have the classic formula: E= MC2 It is logical one would have matter M and energy E and light C, before the mass of the earth. A major Old Earth christian apologist is Hugh Ross. I discuss his views of this – “The Genesis Question” in my book appendix 5. He maintains the Heavens including the sun and stars were created in verse 1 “IN the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth” Note heavens, before earth. He also says the early earth had and opaque atmosphere due to debris. So in verses 14-15, the verses are written from the viewpoint of an imaginary observer (what they would see from earth) The debris cleared, and the sun moon and stars were now visible (they appeared, thus allow the cosmos to be before the earth). This viewpoint could also be used in verse 3 “let there be light” on earth. In my book some scientists- cosmologists, hold time dilation is possible so ages could pass in the universe, while appearing as days on earth. If the above is accepted as true, then Perhaps you would agree with me we may have not yet done a great deal to destroy a somewhat literal Genesis. Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis(young earth) my not agree, and provided good arguments from bible scholars, that days in Genesis are 24 hr days. However, we have now somewhat aligned with what main line scientists hold- the universe and possibly the earth forming rocks are likely old. In addition many apologists(young and old earth) hold that the universe is very finely tuned for life on earth, with the milky way, sun and planets and moon, being just in the right places for life to exist on earth. Here logic may say that, If so, the earth was put in place after the sun and stars.
Then there are places, I do not agree with Ross’s views, because I think it does to much damage to scriptures in historical books, forcing one to almost the limited inerrancy view. Ross holds the flood was local- maybe 100 miles, invalidating the world flood in Genesis Chapters 7-8. See the very brief comments in the attached scan(from appendix 7). In addition, there is, in my view, strong evidence of a world wide flood, and catastrophic earth changes, and rapid plate tectonics as noted in my book. Many layers of fossils were then quickly deposited by the flood.(negating the millions of year for this). (In a paragraph below in italics, I give more documentation for this). Ham holds that the fall was the start of death , disease, thorns and thistles, cursing of the earth. Before that, the earth and creation was very good, in God’s view. Sometimes Christians argue disease came with the fall, due to man’s sin. If this is not true, it then lessens the need for a savior, as disease was always there. Ross holds there was always death and disease before the fall. Ross holds man-Adam was 50,000-100,000 years ago, invalidating the genealogies in several historical books. Many scholars interpret the genealogies as maybe giving about 6000-6500 years. There are also young earth creation scientists with Answers in Genesis who have science DNA arguments that man may only be about 6500 years old, as noted in my book.
In my book chapter on biology, I cover That micro-evolution, small genetic changes within the biblical kinds, is true , but there is very little evidence for macro-evolution- big changes across biblical kinds. Any upward change in genes by evolution is highly improbable, and most mutations are degrading. On pg. 122 I note – Most scientists agree that past fossils were formed by rapid deposition by floods, or catastrophic events . The old belief that fossil formation occurred by slow deposition, has been cast aside, because organisms would decay and rot to dust. The evolutionary belief is that the fossil layers occurred by many little floods, eons apart. The Young Earth creations belief is that many of the layers were deposited by the great flood of Noah, greatly shortening the time spans. The Morrison Formation with it’s dinosaur remains, covers much of the mountainous US west , while the St. Peters sandstone goes from Canada to Texas. Scientists agree these were caused by a big flood(s), over a very large areas. A chapter on Geology and the Flood is also in my book. Dr. Snelling wrote a massive 2 volume text, of about 2000 pages on this, in “Earth’s Catastrophic Past.” He agrees with what was just stated above. He talks of the geologic strati-graphic column with fossils. He states that the Paleozoic and Meoizoic( P&M) strata were deposited during the great flood of Noah. Modern geology allocates 480 million yrs for this. With the bible flood, this would be about a year. On p 100 of my book, Snelling gives strong arguments for a global biblical flood. There is some evidence rapid plate tectonic movement occurred during the global flood. Radioisotope dating is used by conventional scientists to validate the geologic column. Some assumptions in this are weak and some scientists noted on my pg 111- dating experiments, that documented much younger dates and time frames. So days 5 and 6 of creation could be a total of 1000’s of years, not millions as claimed by old earth creationists. The young earth scientists give credible arguments and data for this , but they are in the minority. Still, this does not make them wrong.
I think one should decide your inerrancy view first, after study, and put GR in 2nd place. I think Ross puts GR in a high place and tries to bend scripture to agree with the latest main line science. Nevertheless, Ross is a great scientist and apologist with many very good insights and many books.