When believers attempt to add evolution and millions of years to Genesis, they lay down a foundation of death and suffering on which to build their worldview. If Christians believe the lie that Genesis cannot be trusted, they are paving the way for the trustworthiness of the gospel message to be called into question.
The Framework Hypothesis is essentially an attempt to reclassify the genre of Genesis 1 as being something other than historical narrative. Proponents have attempted to identify figurative language or semi-poetic devices in the text.
The age of the Earth does matter, and the Bible is clear about it! The age of the Earth is not important because God for some reason hates big numbers—He doesn’t. Ultimately the issue of the age of the Earth is about the authority of the Word of God versus the authority of the words of sinful men.
One popular interpretation of Genesis 1 shoehorns a millions-of-years gap between verses 1 and 2. Is this a valid interpretation?
Theistic evolution, the idea that God used evolution to create life, poses great danger to the gospel, the Bible’s authority, and the character of the Creator.
Satan has craftily used the same lie since the Garden of Eden, “Did God really say . . . ?” How has this lie manifested itself in our modern world?
Gleason Archer is a defender of biblical inerrancy, but he allowed himself to be intimidated by “science.”
Dr. Davis Young left the day-age theory due to the eisegetical gymnastics required to harmonize the Genesis order with the order of events of long-age geology.
Does Dr. Ross’s view (particularly about the origin the earth, sun, moon, and stars) really stand up to scrutiny with an open Bible?
All old-earth interpretations of Genesis unintentionally assault the character of God, undermine the truth and authority of Scripture, and subvert the gospel.
How the John Templeton Foundation has financed evolutionary compromise in the church through BioLogos, Science for Seminaries, and other anti-biblical efforts.
Problems with progressive creation, including non-historical reading of Genesis 1, multiple animal creation events, manlike creatures before Adam & others
Hugh Ross contends that “creation passages” in Ephesians through Revelation also teach that the age of the universe is on the order of billions of years.
Hugh Ross contends that “creation passages” in Matthew through 2 Corinthians also teach that the age of the universe is on the order of billions of years.
Hugh Ross contends that “creation passages” in Jeremiah through Zechariah also teach that the age of the universe is on the order of billions of years.
Hugh Ross contends that “creation passages” in Proverbs through Isaiah also teach that the age of the universe is on the order of billions of years.
Hugh Ross contends that “creation passages” in the Psalms also teach that the age of the universe is on the order of billions of years.
Hugh Ross contends that “creation passages” in Exodus through the book of Job also teach that the age of the universe is on the order of billions of years.
Hugh Ross contends that “creation passages” in Genesis teach that the age of the universe is on the order of billions of years.
As we trace the history of this idea of millions of years, we will see that it is the product of speculation rooted in anti-biblical philosophical assumptions.
Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell reviews Dr. Hugh Ross’s Navigating Genesis, which, sadly, steers the uninformed into a shipwreck of faith.
Navigating Genesis is, sadly, a tool for steering the uninformed into a shipwreck of faith, not for removing stumbling blocks as Dr. Ross claims.
Dr. Hugh Ross wrings “reasons to believe” out of God’s Word, not by simply reading what’s there, but by twisting and distorting it.
Like so many other theologically conservative theologians, Dr. Norman Geisler has adopted two different hermeneutical principles by which he interprets Scripture. This inconsistency causes problems.
Many pastors and teachers today unfortunately no longer exhort or instruct their congregations correctly.
Clergy Letter Project founder inaugurates his “no name-calling” policy by misrepresenting creationists.
The entire cosmos with all its countless stars, all basic types of life, as well as man, were created directly by God in one week, as described in Genesis.
Old-earth interpretations each have several problems. These selected examples should be more than enough to make the point.
Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell, AiG–U.S., examines a special issue of the Christian Research Journal devoted to the origin of life.
The previous chapter looked at some of the attempts made by old-earthers to respond to young-earth biblical arguments. This time we will direct our attention to their theological arguments.
The fundamental features of geological study, namely, field work, collection, and theory construction, were not developed until the 16th to 18th centuries.
Many theories have been proposed to harmonize the early chapters of Genesis with the idea of long ages. The Framework Hypothesis is simply the latest in a long line of attempts.
An old-earth proponent wonders if progressive creationism is better than theistic evolution. But as Tim Chaffey, AiG–U.S., shows, any view that undermines biblical authority is equally corrosive.
A zoo near Bristol, England, has been attacked for its promotion of “creationist ideas,” even though a zoo spokesperson called life “the product of both God and evolution.”
Dr. Robert McCabe continues to unravel the framework interpretation of Genesis.
PDF DownloadA Critique of the Framework Interpretation of Creation (1 of 2)
PDF DownloadDr. DeRemer gave us permission to post an email exchange he had with an anonymous person (“Mr. C”) who, while a Christian, is an old-earth creationist (OEC).
I have been asked many times as to my response to the teachings of Dr Hugh Ross—probably the world’s leading Progressive Creationist.
Many Christians, including most Christian leaders, don’t understand the connection of evolution to the social ills of our culture and the difficulties in getting people interested in Christianity.
Imagine if a skeptic of Christianity came to your church and looked for a Christian leader to answer some questions about the Christian faith.
This spring I had the wonderful opportunity to speak many times about Genesis and creation in Poland, Moldova, Russia, and Hungary.
So could God have used evolution? It depends. For the true God, the answer is no—for He cannot lie, and He told us plainly what He did.
Several months ago, Dr. Gerald Schroeder was a guest on the Zola Levitt TV program.
Several months ago, Dr. Gerald Schroeder was a two-time guest on the Zola Levitt TV program.
“I visit this site everyday, finding the news articles fascinating and informative, and in truth shocking. They stir my soul!”
The “progressive creation” view of Dr Hugh Ross has received wide publicity and endorsement from many christian organizations and leaders.
Some of the bitterest attacks on creation science come not from declared atheists or even deists1, but from theistic evolutionists and progressive creationists.
A revolutionary new model shows that the compromises urged by Hugh Ross and others on the age of the universe are not only scripturally unsound, but scientifically uncalled for.
Many years ago a biblical scholar named Scofield produced a Bible with notes for Christians. He was probably the most influential of those scholars who tried to reconcile evolution and creation.
Answers in Genesis is an apologetics ministry, dedicated to helping Christians defend their faith and proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ.