The Ancient of Days


What do Billy Graham, James Dobson, Lee Strobel, Chuck Colson,, CS Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, the Southern Baptists Convention, Dr. John Lennox, the Assemblies of God, Christian Reformed Church, Evangelical Free Church of America, the Mennonites, William Lane Craig, Timothy George, Walter Martin, Hank Hanegraaff, Norman Geisler, the vast majority of the science faculty at Baylor University and Wheaton College, and Dr. Walt Kaiser, President Emeritus of Gordon Conwell have in common?


They believe that Old Earth creationism is a rational and Biblical choice for Christians.


Take a look at the list.  These folks are hardly radicals.  Interestingly, when I showed “Bob” this list, his first response was, “I never trusted Billy Graham!”  So even Billy doesn’t get a pass from the deliberately uneducated Christian.


I have anticipated the response of the rabid YE crowd because I have heard it all before…  Let’s list them.  I don’t care what anyone else thinks.  I follow the Bible; you on the other hand are following men.  You are just following the crowd; we are standing firm on the Word.  In the last days, there will be a great falling away …


The purpose of this post is not to convince anyone to believe in an old earth.  It is to convince the minority that the majority may actually have a point.  In spite of the attempts of the YE crowd to “prove” that YE is the only Biblically viable point, they are failing to convince the majority of Christians that they are the “only way”.  And why is this?


In spite of protestations to the negative, the preponderance of scientific evidence indicates that the earth is old.  Why does this matter?  There are many people in the world, some of which are scientists, who truly believe the earth is old.  Some even believe that evolution has some merit. Some are willing to believe in God and Jesus but cannot jump a hurdle that says believe in Jesus and a young earth.  Dr. John Lennox told me that the insistence on an adherence to a young earth is having deleterious effects on the spreading of the Gospel in Europe.


Unfortunately, the response of those who hold to YE has been, “So what?”  This crowd is willing to put stumbling blocks in the way of those looking to the faith for answers so their secondary agenda is protected.  One only has to go to and spend some time reading the sad stories of folks abandoning the faith to realize that YE creationism plays a major part in some of these stories.  One of my former pastors said his “research” didn’t show this.  Yet he never once read the stories on the site.  He never once met with a young man who left the faith in college over this issue?  Why?  Because he has a blind allegiance to some secondary issue that he must believe is salvific.  How do I know?  Because he is willing to sacrifice leading someone to Christ in order to keep this issue front and center.


Am I being harsh?  I don’t think so.  I will never forget the ugly, mean looks on the faces of the YE Calvary when they invaded our Sunday school class.  And we are Christians!  Can you imagine how they would treat a card carrying, evolution-believing atheist?


What is Old Earth Creationism?  The following is from Wikipedia. “Old Earth creationism (OEC) is an umbrella term for a number of types of creationism, including Gap creationism and Progressive creationism.  Their worldview is typically more compatible with mainstream scientific thought on the issues of geology, cosmology and the age of the Earth.”


Gap creationism (also known as Ruin-Restoration creationism, Restoration creationism, or "The Gap Theory"), is a form of Old Earth creationism that posits that the six-day creation, as described in the Book of Genesis, involved literal 24-hour days, but that there was a gap of time between two distinct creations in the first and the second verses of Genesis, explaining many scientific observations, including the age of the Earth


Progressive Creationism is the religious belief that God allows certain natural process (such as gene mutation and natural selection) to affect the development of life, but has also directly intervened at key moments in life’s history to guide those processes or, in some views, create new species altogether (often to replenish the earth.


The Framework Interpretation (or framework hypothesis) notes that there is a pattern or "framework" present in the Genesis account and that, because of this, the account may not have been intended as a strict chronological record of creation. Instead, the creative events may be presented in a topical order.


Summary of the Genesis 6-day creation account, showing the pattern according to the framework hypothesis.


Days of creation:

 Day 1: Light; day and night  Day 2: Sea and Heavens  Day 3: Land and vegetation

Day 4: Sun, moon and stars Day 5: Sea creatures; birds Day 6: Land creatures; man



Day-Age Creationism is an effort to reconcile the literal Genesis account of Creation with modern scientific theories on the age of the Universe, the Earth, life, and humans. It holds that the six days referred to in the Genesis account of creation are not ordinary 24-hour days, but rather are much longer periods (of thousands or millions of years). The Genesis account is then interpreted as an account of the process of cosmic evolution, providing a broad base on which any number of theories and interpretations are built. Proponents of the Day-Age Theory can be found among theistic evolutionists and progressive creationists”.


Theistic evolution and evolutionary creationism are similar concepts that assert that classical religious teachings about God are compatible with the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. In short, theistic evolutionists believe that there is a God, that God is the creator of the material universe and (by consequence) all life within, and that biological evolution is simply a natural process within that creation. Evolution, according to this view, is simply a tool that God employed to develop human life”.


The following are several organizations which minister in the area of old earth creationism or theistic evolution.


Reasons to Believe:


Dr. Hugh Ross became concerned that young earth creationists were creating a new definition of Christianity, which included a mandatory acceptance of YE, beliefs.  He believed that these ideas were a stumbling block to faith for many.  Ross has endured claims of heresy as he developed his organization, which gives reasons to believe to those who will not give up their scientific understanding in order to become a Christian.  They present current research, news, and resource materials.


Their mission:  ” Many people assume that science and faith are at odds with one another. The common response: we must either choose between them or keep them apart. The mission of Reasons To Believe is to show that science and faith are, and always will be, allies, not enemies. Our goal is to bring that life-changing truth to everybody who needs to know, both believers and nonbelievers. It is our conviction that since the same God who "authored" the universe also inspired the writings of the Bible; a consistent message will come through both channels. In other words, the facts of nature will never contradict the words of the Bible when both are properly interpreted. We want to help seekers of truth to find answers to those questions that bar them from entrusting their lives to Christ. And we want to help Christians find new joy and confidence in worshiping the Creator as they shed their fear of science”.



Answers in Creation


“The website clearly states its objectives. “Welcome to Answers In Creation, a creation science ministry dedicated to supporting old earth creationism.  Because of the false teachings of young earth creationism, many people do not realize that a Christian can…

Believe in an inerrant Bible

Believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis, AND

Believe God created the world over a period of billions of years

This website exists to provide rebuttals to the false claims of young earth creation science.  We currently have over 1,500 articles disputing the claims of young earth creationism.  Want to read a typical rebuttal to see what this website is about?  Click here.  If you have more time, consider taking our One Hour Tour”. 


This organization faces Ken Ham’s Answers in Genesis head on, providing rebuttals to most of his “scientific” articles. They also do the same for articles coming from the Institute for Creation Research, another young earth website which can be found at:





Francis Collins is “an American physiciangeneticist, noted for his landmark discoveries of disease genes and his leadership of the Human Genome Project (HGP) and described by the Endocrine Society as "one of the most accomplished scientists of our time currently serves as Director of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. “After his book The Language of God hit shelves in 2006, Collins received thousands of e-mails from individuals seeking to explore the relationships between scripture and science. Responding to these emails directly proved impossible, so Collins established the BioLogos Foundation to provide responses to these questions and promote a view of harmony between science and faith.


His goal is to "contribute to the public voice that represents the harmony of science and faith." BioLogos addresses the core themes of science and religion, and emphasizes the compatibility of Christian faith with what science has discovered about the origins of the universe and life.”


Here we interject a comment about Collins by Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis, self-appointed sin exposer. “How we need to pray that Collins and his group will repent of their compromise and return to biblical authority. They honor man’s fallible ideas instead of God’s infallible Word.” Ken Ham needs to repent of his officious self-righteousness and deceptive practices! How dare this untrained “scientist “ and “theologian” judge a world-class scientist and honest Christian. Methinks that Ham needs to take the log out of his eye long before he judges Collins!



American Scientific Affiliation


“The American Scientific Affiliation (ASA) is a fellowship of men and women in science and disciplines that relate to science who share a common fidelity to the Word of God and a commitment to integrity in the practice of science. In matters of science and Christian faith, we offer Christian scholarship, education, fellowship and service to ASA members, churches, educational institutions, the scientific community, and society”.


Although this organization is not primarily “old earth”, most of its membership would likely fall under the umbrella of that general description. They produce an excellent journal and have resources on their site to help both scientist and interested nonscientist.


We have provided these resources to our readers so that they can begin to explore the varying viewpoints that are found in orthodox Christianity. A real Christian would seek to understand all points of view in this complex matter before insisting that there is “only one way” to believe. The one way part should be reserved for Jesus.



Yesterday we said that we would provide alternative answers to three of Ken Ham’s beliefs or research.

1.  The first is Ham’s “backed into a corner “statement.  He always counters with “Were you there?




Yes, because "there" is here.  Events in the past leave traces that last into the present, and we can and do look at that evidence today. 


If this response were a valid challenge to evolution, it would equally invalidate creationism and Christianity, since they are based on events that nobody alive today has witnessed. 

A more useful and more general question is, "How do you know?" If the person making a claim cannot answer that question, you may consider the claim baseless (tentatively, as someone else may be able to answer). If the answer is subjective — for example, if it rests on the person's religious convictions — you know that the claim does not necessarily apply to anyone but that person. If you cannot understand the answer, you probably have some studying to do. If you get a good answer, you know to take the claim seriously.


1.   Ken Ham claims that there could not have been death before the fall.  Old earth creationism believes that there were deaths of animals before the fall; therefore, it is not a Biblical possibility.  An alternate answer can be found at Reasons to Believe.  The answer is lengthy yet understandable for the nonscientific types.  I have included the beginning of the answer.  Click on the link to continue.


“This re-examination of the original-animal-immortality theory is based primarily on Scripture. Views of some interpreters past and present are discussed, but without any claim of complete coverage. The conclusion in brief is that Scripture does not demand the absence of animal death before the fall.


To properly examine the issue requires a lengthy treatment necessitated by the interrelatedness of many issues. These include the properties of Adam, animals and the universe both before and after the fall”.


I would also like to add my own thought to this dilemma.  All Christians believe that man is the only creation to have a soul and to become the image bearers of the Almighty.  When Adam and Eve sinned, they were to experience two deaths.  The first was the death of their perfect communion with their Creator.  The second was actual physical death.  I believe it is problematic to confer the punishment of the immortal onto the plants and animals.



3. For the brave, the issue of chalk and the flood.  Here is the link to the rebuttal by Answers in Creation.


We leave you with a challenge.  Each of us want to see our children withstand the forces that would have them retreat from the faith.  You expect them to learn the rebuttals and the science to face off with their professors.  Yet how many of you firmly stick your head in the sand because well, “It’s just too hard?”  If you are one of those, take the time to read extensively outside of your comfort zone.  Just as we have read most of Answers in Genesis and books by atheists without “losing our faith,”  you, too, can do the same.  Or perhaps you will remain as children and refuse to face the issues of our day.



We leave you with two stories.  One is the story of why Kurt Wise stopped believing in an old earth.  The other is why Glenn Morton almost lost his faith and turned to Old earth creationism as the answer.  We have one word of caution.  We provide two differing stories. However, the majority of the stories available are for those leaving the belief in young earth creationism.


“Why I left Young Earth Creationism” by Glenn Morton


For years I struggled to understand how the geologic data I worked with everyday could be fit into a Biblical perspective. Being physics major in college I had no geology courses. Thus, as a young Christian, when I was presented with the view that Christians must believe in a young-earth and global flood, I went along willingly.  I knew there were problems but I thought I was going to solve them. When I graduated from college with a physics degree, physicists were unemployable since NASA had just laid a bunch of them off. I did graduate work in philosophy and then decided to leave school to support my growing family. Even after a year, physicists were still unemployable. After six months of looking, I finally found work as a geophysicist working for a seismic company. Within a year, I was processing seismic data for Atlantic Richfield. Read more at:



Young-earth' creationists value literal reading of God’s word over human intellect


"LOUISVILLE, Ky. (ABP) — In his 2006 best-selling nonfiction book, The God Delusion, British biologist Richard Dawkins said he is hostile toward religion because of what it did to Kurt Wise.


Wise, a Harvard graduate who studied under paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould, gave up his dream of teaching at a major university because he could not reconcile claims of science with his faith.

At one point, Wise took out a newly purchased Bible and a pair of scissors. Beginning at Gen. 1:1, he cut out every verse that would have to be removed in order for him to believe in evolution."  

To read more go to this link: (link updated)

Comments are closed.