"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen. 1:1) What a simple, beautiful, and concise statement that is. I firmly believe that all people who call themselves Christians accept that opening verse of God's Word as being literally true. The difficulty seems to arise among some believers when they get to verse 2 and go on through chapter 2 verse 26.

Every article I have written up to this point has been based upon my understanding that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. (see Acts 4:25, Jer.1:12, II Pe.1:21, I Thes.2:13, Ps.18:30, Ps.12:6, II Tim.3:16, Ex.9:35, Prov.30:5, Ps.119:89,152&160, I Pe.1:15, Isaiah 40:8, Ps.33:4, Ps.111:7, Ro.15:4, and Prov.30:6) They have also been based upon a literal interpretation of Biblical words and phrases within the context in which they appear. This book has been written upon these same two assumptions. By no means is it intended to be an all encompassing treatment of the subject of 'creation vs evolution.' It is however intended to address some of the major issues of this topic as presented by both the Bible and what many people maintain is the 'scientific' theory of evolution.

Some Christians, in an attempt to correlate the Scriptural account of creation with what they perceive to be irrefutable proof of the evolutionary theory, discount the first two chapters of Genesis as mere poetry. If in fact these chapters were poetic in nature, then it would not be necessary to apply the literal meaning to the word 'day' found therein. The problem with doing this is that the repetition, parallelism, and meter found in ALL Scriptural poetry is conspicuously absent. More importantly though, any attempt to correlate the two divergent concepts of the origin of man presented by Evolution and Genesis 1 & 2, requires that some very specific statements of Jesus Christ must also be dismissed as either poetic or fictional.

Jesus not only refers to the fact that God created the world, but He specifically states that man was "created...at the beginning of creation..." (Mk.10:6; see also Matt.19:4). This verse does not require us to believe that man was created on the first day, rather that he was created within the confines of the seven day week of creation, and not 4 billion years after the process began. We notice similar vein, in Ro.1:20 (NEB), which clearly implies that someone has been around from the beginning to perceive God's handiwork when it says, "...His everlasting power and Deity have been visible ever since the world began." In order to bring the Biblical account of creation into line with evolution, it would be necessary to rewrite this verse to read, "...His everlasting power and Deity were not visible until about 4 billion years after the world began."

In I Cor.15:45 Paul gives further credence to a literal interpretation of Gen. 1 & 2 because he accepts as reality the fact that the first man was named 'Adam' and not 'Olduvai George-Homo Erectus'. (The later being a rather satirical name given to one of the fossil discoveries of the Leakey family as reported in Newsweek, February 13, 1967, p. 101.) Paul reaffirms his faith in the Genesis account of creation by stating that all the nations on earth camefrom Adam (through Noah), and not from the simultaneous development of the same species at several different locations throughout the world (Acts 17:26). He further states the fact that females did not evolve along with males, but were created by God as described in Gen.2:21-22 (see I Cor.11:9).

Do not be confused by those who claim that Genesis chapters 1 & 2 actually contain 2 separate conflicting accounts of creation. As is so often the case, any perceived conflict is only in the eye of the beholder. Many people choose to see a conflict where none in fact exists. Gen.1:1 - 2:3 provides us with one narration of the events which occurred during the 7 day week of creation. Gen.2:4 - 2:24 contains a separate account of the same period. By no means are these reports conflicting. As is so often the case, any perceived conflict is only in the eye of the beholder.

Just because one statement highlights, or expands upon some portion of an event does not mean that it conflicts with another description which emphasizes other areas. Genesis 1 and 2 do not contain conflicting accounts of creation, but complimentary ones. You need not rely upon my word alone for this either. In Matt.19:4 Jesus specifically refers to Gen.1:27 when He states that God created "male and female". He then refers to Gen. 2:24 as He continues His thoughts in Matt.19:5-6 by telling us that husbands and wives are "one flesh." Needless to say, by quoting from both chapters during His discussion of the single act of creation, it can easily be seen that Jesus saw no conflict.

The point however is still the same. More than just Genesis 1 and 2 must be dismissed if evolution is to be accepted, because the Genesis account of creation is referred to as fact throughout the Bible. Moses specifically restates it in Ex. 31:17 as does Isaiah in Isa. 45:12 & 18, Nehemiah in Neh.9:6, Jeremiah in Jer.27:5, Solomon in Prov.8:29, Zechariah in Zech.12:1, and David in Ps.148:3-5. Genesis 1:16 informs us that God "made the stars",and Amos 5:8 and Job 38:32 and 9:9 even list some of the specific constellations. Genesis 1:10 tells us that God gathered the waters together and called them "seas" and so does Ps.95:5, Ps.78:13, and Rev. 10:6. Genesis 1:24-25 says that the animals, both wild and domestic, were created by God, and Jeremiah 27:5 reaffirms this. As we saw earlier, Jesus left no room for doubt when He said that God created man, but then neither does Gen.5:5, Gen.6:7, and Deut.4:32.

Not only do we have those specific verses which say that God did the creating, but we can turn to Col. 1:17, Heb. 1:3, and Jer.33:25 and find that it is His power which sustains the universe and assures us of its continuing existence. (see also Ps.148:6) There are numerous other verses which speak of God's creation. As examples see: II Ki.19:15, I Chron.6:26, Ps.96:5, Ps.115:15, Ps.121:2, Ps.124:8, Ps.134:3, Ps. 46:6, Prov.8:26, Ps.24:1, Ps.119:90, Ps.136:6, Ps.104:4, Job 38:31, Isa.51:13 & 16, John 1:3, Acts 14:15, Acts 17:24, Mk.13:19, Isa.48:13, Col.1:16, Rev.4:11, Amos 4:13, Isa.40:28, Ps.89:11-12, Ps.148:5, Jer.27:5, €Isa.17:7, Prov.20:12, Ps.94:9, Ps.136:9, and Ps.33:6. Throughout Scripture God reminds us that He did the creating and that He did it exactly as He said He did.

Does that then mean that of necessity a literal 24 hour day is referred to in Gen. 1:5,8,13,19,23 & 31? I believe that that is exactly what the Scriptures do show us. These six verses clearly state that with each day there was an 'evening' and a 'morning'. The Hebrew word for morning used therein is boker which means "dawn, as the break of day" (Strong's Concordance #1242). According to Wigram's Hebrew Concordance, which lists every verse in which the Hebrew word is used in the original Hebrew text regardless of how it may have been translated into English, the word boker is used 182 other times in the Old Testament. Every time it is used it is referring to those hours in the early part of the day we customarily think of as 'morning'. How can I now say that the word boker means a literal morning 182 times, but something else the 6 times it is used in Genesis chapter 1?

The Hebrew word for 'evening' used in the above 6 verses of Genesis chapter 1 is erev and means "dusk - eventide" (Strong's Concordance #6153). The other 124 times it is used throughout the Old Testament it refers to those hours at the end of a 24 hour day we usually associated with 'evening.' Again, how can I now give a meaning to the word erev in Genesis 1 other than the literal 'evening' it implies the other 124 times it is used? If each day was in fact a thousand years and had a morning and evening then each of those times would have been about 500 years long. Needless to say, it would have gotten very very hot in the 'morning' and very very cold in the 'evening'. These are not exactly ideal growing conditions for plants which require photosynthesis to survive.

This does not put us in conflict with II Pe. 3:8 which says: "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like a day." In the context, we see that Peter was discussing a topic for which God had given no exact time reference, namely, the coming judgment of mankind. Then as now critics were saying, "Where is this coming He promised? Ever since our Fathers died everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation." (II Pe.3:4) Peter was answering those skeptics by saying in effect, "Don't make the mistake of thinking that just because it hasn't happened yet, it won't happen." To assume that Peter's statement in verse 8 deals with the fleeting reference made by those skeptics to creation is to violate every concept of both literary criticism and Biblical interpretation. It would make as much sense to say that the Feast of Tabernacles mentioned in Lev.22:24 was to last seven thousand years simply because it was to last for "seven days."

God has given us a specific time frame concerning the topic of creation, and it is found in the word "day" which is the correct interpretation of the Hebrew word yom (#3117 Wigram's Concordance and listed as yom #3117 in Strong's Concordance.) In Gen.1:5,8,13,19,23 & 31 it is used in direct conjunction with a numeral to indicate a specific day. Aan example of this is verse 5, "And there was evening and there was morning - the first day." Throughout the Old Testament the word yom is used 350 additional times in direct conjunction with an ordinal or a numeral. Every single time it is so used, it refers to a literal 24 hour period of time. Where is the justification for now saying that it means something other than that in Gen.1: 5,8,13,19,23 & 31?

Since we know that God usually speaks to us twice concerning major theological issues (Job 33:14 and Gen.41:32) we should expect to find a second reference to creation within the framework of a literal 24-hour period, if in fact that is what God intends for us to believe. Ex. 20:8-11 tells us that God established the Sabbath day for Israel because, "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but He rested on the seventh..." (see also Ex. 31:7). Here God is speaking to Moses (Ex. 20:1) and He is making a direct correlation between man's 6 literal days (yom) of work and His six literal days (yom) of creation. He is directing man to rest one day (yom) just as He rested one day (yom). Furthermore, we are shown in Ex. 31:18 that God not only spoke these words to Moses, but wrote them Himself on the stone tablets. One additional point to consider while on this topic is that it cannot be said that God's rest on the 7th day lasted a thousand years, or as some would have us believe, is still going on, because as we have already seen in Col.1:17 and Heb.1:3, God is still sustaining the world and holding it together by His power.

There is still another theological concept which deals with the issue of time and which needs to be mentioned here. This is known as the 'Gap Theory', or the 'Restoration Theory.' According to this theory Gen. 1:1 is indeed correct. So is Genesis 1:2. However, its adherents believe that between 4 1/2 and 5 billion years separate the two verses.

Adherents to this position believe that the dinosaurs roamed the earth during this gap period. At some point, an overwhelming cataclysm occurred which may very well have been the result of the rebellion referred to in Ezekiel 28. As a result of this event, God's first creation became desolate. They interpret Gen. 1:2 to read, "Now the earth became formless and empty..." instead of "Now the earth was formless and empty..." In other words they would have us believe that Gen.1:2 through Gen.2:3 is actually the account of God's SECOND creation or recreation of the earth, with the first one having occurred almost 5 billion years earlier. To them, the fossils which the evolutionists refer to, both animal and human, are actually the remains of God's FIRST creation.

There are numerous conservative theologians who reject the theory of evolution, but who hold to this position for other reasons. However, there many other theologians who rely on the gap theory for no other reason than they are under the misguided impression that the evidence which supports the theory of evolution is so overwhelming that it must be true. In effect, they have attempted to reconcile their belief in the Genesis account of creation with the vidence for evolution by relying upon the gap theory.

This all sounds logical, but like the theory of evolution itself, the gap theory requires us to ignore numerous other verses of the Bible if we are going to believe it. It also causes us to give meanings to words which are contrary to those found throughout the rest of Scripture. For example, those who hold to the gap theory would translate the Hebrew word in Gen. 1:2 as 'became.' Now, this word is used 1500 times in the first five books of the Old Testament alone to denote the word 'was'. Whereas, the Hebrew word normally translated 'became' is haphak and that word is not found in Gen.1:2. Furthermore, the use of the Hebrew connective word vav at the beginning of Gen 1:2 emphasizes that the condition referred to therein follows immediately on the heels of the creating action mentioned in verse 1. ( Note also that the English Bible, the Jerusalem Bible, the New American Standard, Moffat, and every other modern translation of the Bible correctly use the word was in Genesis 1:2, not the word became upon which the gap theory advocates insist.)

Further proof that no gap exists between Gen.1:1 and Gen.1:2 is found in Gen.2:1-3 and Ex.20:11. Therein we are told that God created "the heavens and the earth" in six days. (emphasis added) Since the only place that the word 'heaven' can be found in Genesis chapter 1 is in verse 1, it must be assumed that the heavens and earth of verse 1 were part of the 6 day creation process referred to in the remainder of the chapter, not the product of some previous creation which occurred 5 billion years earlier.

Another point to consider is this. Evolutionists maintain that the fossil record proves that tens of thousands of species of animals existed before the first humans evolved. Most of these creatures died off before man appeared. As such, death existed long before Adam sinned. This of course puts the gap theory in direct conflict with Ro. 5:12 which says that death entered the world only after Adam sinned. Secondly, if the fossils we find today are in fact the remains of dead animals which lived on some previous earth, how could God have said that the earth He recreated in Gen. 1:9 was "very good?" Besides, when you consider the fact that evolution not only relies upon death and extinction in order to work, but also produces a great number of 'dead ends' in the process, it is illogical to assume that the God of the entire universe would use such an inefficient mechanism as evolution for his creating process. (I Cor.14:33) Finally, how could God have said in Heb.11:3 (NEB) "...that the visible came forth from the invisible" if the earth we see today was made from already existing elements (fossils)? Obviously, those fossils and the cataclysm which led to their formation must have occurred at some point after God's "very good" creation.

Keep in mind that there is no Scriptural evidence to support the claim that there was any earthly catastrophic consequence following after the events of Ezekiel 28 or Isaiah 14 as they are traditionally interpreted.) It is also equally incorrect to argue that there was some heavenly cataclysm associated with these events. Since only the earth is mentioned in verse 2 of Genesis chapter 1, there is no Scriptural evidence to even suggest, let alone prove, that the heavens 'became' void. Therefore, according to the gap theory, these heavens must have existed during the 5 billion year gap without a sun, a moon, or stars, because these heavenly bodies were not created for the first time until the 4th day of the six day creation week.

We need to be aware that those who attempt to correlate the Biblical account of creation with the theory of evolution run into still another problem. Evolutionists will tell you that the solar system was the first entity to come into existence; whereas, Gen.1:14-19 informs us that this did not occur until the fourth day of creation. Evolutionists will tell you that the planets (including earth) were flung out from the sun - which is a star -after the solar system appears. On the other hand, Genesis tells us that the earth came before any of the stars. Evolutionists will tell you that marine invertebrates and even fish evolved before land plants appeared. However, Gen. 1: 9-12 reveals the fact that ALL land vegetation preceded the creation of marine life. Finally, the evolutionists will say that animals, amphibians, and sharks were established prior to the appearance of the forests, but Gen. 1:20-25 indicates that these were in fact created after the forests.

There is however an even greater obstacle which must be overcome by any believer who desires to correlate Genesis and Darwin by saying that God used the method of evolution to accomplish the act of creation. That problem is the presupposition which evolutionists such as Niles Eldredge, a curator with the American Museum of Natural History, maintains is the cornerstone of their theory. To Eldredge, evolution is science, and science requires that the notion of a creator be set aside. #1 At a gathering of the national Science Teacher's Association in Kansas City, Carl Sagan expressed his disdain for the perfectly valid, nonevolutionary academic pursuit known as scientific creationism by referring to it as nothing more than an "oxymoronic subject." #2

By no means though is Eldredge and Sagan the only evolutionist who makes this assumption. Those of us who watch TV have undoubtedly heard similar sentiments expressed on PBS. For example, William B. Provine said

It has been said that Jesus Christ is one of three things. Either He is a liar, a lunatic, or He is who He says He is. (I believe that He is who He says He is.) The same type of thing can be said of creation. Either God created the world as He says He did or He didn't; in which case He would be a liar, and God is not a man that He should lie (Titus 1:2, Heb.6:18, I Sam.15:29, II Sam.7:28, Nu.23:19, and Isaiah 45:19).

1) Niles Eldredge - The Monkey Business - A Scientist Looks at Creationism, (New York: Washington Square Press, 1982) pp 82 & 104

2) Associated Press, "Humans not smart..." Charleston, IL Times Courier, Vol. 206, Tuesday, April 6, 1993, p. A2.

3) William B. Provine, "The End of Ethics?" Hard Choices, 1980 pp. 2-3 (This magazine was a companion to PBS TV series "Hard Choices" broadcast on KCTS TV, Channel '9', University of Washington, 1980) Quote taken from Francis Shaeffer - The Christian Manifesto, (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1981) p. 57

4) Wilbur E. Garrett, "Where Did We Come From", National Geographic Vol. 174, No. 4, (October 1988) p. 434

5) David Bender and Bruno Leons - Science and Religion: Opposing Viewpoints (St Paul ,MN: Green Haven Press, 1981), p. 51