The Heresy of an Older Planet?

Should believers who need to grow further in their understanding of the Old Earth/New Earth controversy be put up on charges at a heresy trial?  When we look at the basics of the faith, we have a grand heritage to draw from.  Historic creeds, confessions and catechisms.  For example, consider the Apostle's Creed:

 

I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth;

And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord,

Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,

born of the Virgin Mary,

Suffered under Pontius Pilate,

was crucified, dead, and buried.

He descended into hell;

The third day he rose again from the dead;

He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty;

From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Ghost;

I believe in the holy catholic church, the communion of saints;

The forgiveness of sin;

The resurrection of the body:

And the life everlasting. Amen.

 

Note that God's role as Creator is brought forth at the very beginning, but the exact dating of t₀ is not provided.

 

Francis Schaeffer* spoke of the "heart of the Christian faith" and includes three truths: authority of the Bible, Christ's deity and the real meaning of salvation.  He went on to give a positive affirmation of the series of books known as The Fundamentals published from 1910 to 1915 which had such authors as B.B. Warfield & G. Campbell Morgan.[1]  These writings did not set a date for Creation Week.  Instead, they made the case for these Bible basics:

 

•   Inspiration of the Bible
•   Inerrancy of the Scripture
•   Deity of Christ
•   Virgin birth of Christ
•   Substitutionary atonement
•   Literal resurrection of Jesus
•   A literal return of Christ

 

I have documented elsewhere that Schaeffer belongs more so in the camp that take Genesis as true history than those who mix the first two chapter of the Bible with Deep Time.

 

According to Matt Slick (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry, CARM), "A heretic denies an essential Christian belief and asserts some error in its place."  That of course bring up the query, "What are those key doctrines?"  Matt gives us this list:

 

• The Deity of Christ
• Salvation by Grace
• The Resurrection of Christ
• The Gospel
• Monotheism
• Jesus is the only way to salvation
• Jesus' virgin birth
• Doctrine of the Trinity

 

Nothing in here about an Earth that's around six millennia old.

 

Erwin Lutzer (Hitler's Cross) summarizes the Gospel around six key points:

 

•   God is holy (Lev. 11:44)
•   Jesus is God in the flesh (1 Jn. 4:1-3, Heb. 1:8)
•   Substitutionary Atonement (1 Peter 3:18)
•   We are sinners by nature & choice (Eph. 2:1)
•   Salvation is by faith alone (Rom. 3:28)
•   Assurance of Salvation (1 Jn. 5:11-13).[2]

 

Although I have a high admiration for Lutzer's writing and radio ministry, I must sadly admit that he does hold to the traditional reading of Genesis as implying a young world:

 

... the earth was not created in 4004 BC as the study notes in one Bible affirm. Many of us hold to a "young earth," but since the Bible does not tell us when God created the heavens and the earth, we must respect those who believe that the earth is much older than some creationists have believed.[3]

 

We read this in 2 Peter 2:1, "But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them …"

 Robert Bowman, writing in Orthodoxy and Heresy, tags heresy as “a teaching which directly opposes the essentials of the Christian faith, so that true Christians must divide themselves from those who hold it.”[4]  I would call rejection of a young earth as errant teaching and would label it an Old Earth Fallacy (OEF), but I would not call it heresy.  I am willing to dialog/debate my brothers and sisters in Christ on the age-of-the-earth controversy in order to improve our mutual understanding.  A few months ago I bought a book advocating Deep Time from a Christian view with respect to the Grand Canyon.  I want to represent the other side respectfully.  I have written two book documenting a young earth from history and science:

 

   Is a Young Earth Possible?

   YES - Young Earth Science

 

You can find my biblical argument you a recent creation here.

Let me know what you think:  ned_oa_1657@yahoo.com

 

 

Notes:

1) Complete Works of Francis Schaeffer by Francis Schaeffer (Crossway, Wheaton, IL, 1982), Vol. 4, p. 349.

2) Who are You to Judge? by Erwin Lutzer (Moody Pub., Chicago, 2002), pp. 69-72.

3) 7 Reasons Why You Can Trust The Bible by Erwin Lutzer (Moody Pub., Chicago, 2015) p. 160.

4) Who are You to Judge? by Erwin Lutzer (Moody Pub., Chicago, 2002), pp. 65, 66.

 

* we named our son after Francis Schaeffer

Kudos:  special thanks to Justin Derby for the 2nd Lutzer ref.

JD Greear, Christianity Today & the Six Day Apocalypse

J.D. Greear is the pastor of The Summit Church in North Carolina and the President of the SBC.  He was recently on an Ask Me Anything (AMA) podcast hosted by Matt Love.  Unfortunately, Greear waffles on the First Six Days:

I know godly, biblically faithful theologians who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible and who think that the timetable of Genesis 1 was not a literal week (which, by the way, isn’t a new interpretation, but is a position that has been around since the first few centuries of Christianity).

He mentions Augustine in the podcast.  Augustine actually held to a young earth.  In general, the Early Church Fathers held to creation in six days and a young earth. [1]

Thankfully, Greear opposes theistic evolution (Theo-Evo).  One wonders if he has read Theistic Evolution: A Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Critique by Moreland and Meyer et al.  One chapter by Christopher Shaw is on "Pressure to Conform Leads to Bias in Science."  I think many preachers are influenced by the culture more that Scripture.

The Summit Church has this on their "Beliefs" page:

We believe the Bible to be God’s Word, a true and fully accurate account of God’s love for us. Its purpose is to teach us how to have a relationship with him, worship him, and bring him glory.Psalm 19:7-10; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; 2 Peter 1:19-21

Is it not loving that the Lord gives us a day of rest?

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 day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy (Ex. 20:11, cf. Ex. 31:16,17).

Both Muslims and Jews agree that the earth is younger than mainstream science claims.  The traditional Jewish calendar states that Creation Week was 5780 years ago. [2]  Maybe Greear should read Is a Young Earth Possible? to get the deep info that favors a youthful planet.  

Where does the apocalypse come in?  That's the slippery slope - once church leaders compromise on Genesis, this often leads to other errors.  Harold Lindsell was at one time the editor of Christianity Today and died in Laguna Hills in 1998 (I've been there).  His book The Battle for The Bible exposed the trend towards theological liberalism.  Lindsell took a very strong stand for the Historical Adam.   

Who's the editor of Christianity Today now?  Daniel Harrell is, former senior minister at Colonial Church (MN) and before that the pastor of the famous Park Street Church in Boston.  Here's Harrell's conclusion on the creation/evolution controversy:

The Bible says six days, but there's no way that's right unless astrophysics and geology are patently false.  ...The scientific evidence is too strong in evolution's favor to reasonably deny its occurrence.  You can refuse to believe it, but that still won't make it untrue any more than denying God exists proves that he does not exist.

Harrell even wrote a book supporting Darwin - Nature's Witness: How Evolution Can Inspire Faith (2008).  Yet, in a talk in 1992 at Park Street Church, he admitted that evolution can't be proven and went further to say that Darwinism is not strictly science since it can't be disproven either.  Did Harrell's position on origins evolve?  He even mentioned Phillip Johnson, the father of the Intelligent Design (ID) movement in a positive light.  Johnson seems to lean towards the young earth view and has visited the Creation Museum in Kentucky.  Has Harrell done the same?

Now let's look at the theological connection.  Park Street Church has a very streamlined "Statement of Faith" including points on the Father, the Son and the Spirit, the authority of the Scriptures, salvation by grace through faith etc.  In contrast, Colonial Church has "Five Core Values" where we find this ...          

Immerse in Sacred Spaces & Rhythms: There are places, traditions and particular practices of faith and worship wherein we tangibly encounter the holy and living God.  Regular immersion in such places and practices forms and reforms us in line with the good and acceptable and perfect will of God (Romans 12:1-2).  In these transcendent places and moments, we experience realties larger than ourselves and realize the fullness faith in Christ makes possible.

Jesus surely favored a youthful world ... shouldn't that end the argument (Mk. 10:6, Mk. 13:19, Lk. 11:50,51)?  Please check out TotalYouth.us for more powerful young earth evidence. 

   >>  for Total truth, support earth's Youth  <<

Notes:

1) Coming to Grips with Genesis ed. by Terry Mortenson and Thane Ury (Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2008), pp. 23-51.

2) Is a Young Earth Possible? by Jay Hall (Institute for Catastrophism and Tectonics - iCAT, Big Spring, TX, 2019), p. 339.