After scanning a few apologetics blogs today, I came away with the impression that many of them are content with the idea that Old Earth Creationism is a legitimate position to take with regards to the authority of God’s Word. This worries me because taking God’s Word as mythological when it is clearly teaching history will deteriorate the foundation of scripture. Once the foundation is mythologized, is it really even necessary anymore. The next thing you know, the Christian church will be ordaining homosexual ministers…ooops.
Unfortunately, none of the bloggers could adequately defend their belief. One of the bloggers simply referred dissidents to Hugh Ross’s website instead of engaging in the arguments. Another thought it was more appropriate to attack the character of young earth creationists. There were also a few that thought it a good idea to accuse young earth creationists of being ridiculous when rejecting the “proven” age of the earth at almost 14 billion years.
But I’ve never heard good hermeneutical arguments for converting to OEC. Below are some questions that need to be dealt with by OECers within the framework of scripture:
- What was the writer’s intent in Genesis?
- Since the chrono-genealogies of Genesis limit the amount time between creation and Abraham to under 3000 years (even with liberal interpretations of missing names), how can OEC account for this time limitation?
- Where in scripture does it say that there was death of the nephesh before Adam sinned?
- What did Jesus mean when in Mark 10:6 “At the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.” ? Since mankind was created at the beginning of creation, according to the Creator, how does this fit with the OEC view that mankind has come into existence at the end of the old earth timeline of billions of years?
- The YEC view fits nicely with what scripture teaches without contradictions or epicycles. Using only scripture, how could one build a case for OEC at the exclusion of YEC?
This would be a good start for an enterprising OEC apologist to answer.