In
an article for Answers in Genesis (Aig) entitled “Old-Earth Creationism – Is It
a Sin?”, young-earth creationist Terry Mortenson argues that “despite sincere
intentions to the contrary,” old-earth creationists have “severely damaged the
Bible’s teaching about death and unknowingly assaulted the character of God,
thereby undermining the authority and reliability of the word of God and
subverting the gospel.”[1]
The point of the article is to argue that, even though old-earth creationists
may be sincere, they are still sinning by teaching (in Mortenson’s opinion)
false doctrine:
“Let’s
consider whether error must be intentional to be sin. Deceiving others is
clearly sinful because it is deliberate and premeditated. But what about the
times we are unintentionally wrong due to our finite knowledge, human weakness,
and sin nature? Few, if any, Christians are intentionally deceiving others
about the age of the earth. In fact, few have studied the topic or seem to care.
Yet,
doing wrong or teaching what is false, whether done intentionally or
unintentionally, is sin. God required sacrifice for unintentional sins as He
did for the other sins (Leviticus 4:2-3, 13-14, 22-23, 27-28).”[2]
In
all candor—and, I think, without malice—I have to say that this is a ready
example of the type of over-simplified biblical treatments and
sweeping denouncements that characterize the young-earth movement. Yes, under
the Law of Moses it was possible to sin unknowingly, and sacrifices were
required for such sins once they became known, but let’s look at a few examples
from the list of scriptures that Mortenson cites in support for his claims.
Note especially the phrases in bold:
“Speak
to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘If a person sins unintentionally in any of the things which the Lord has
commanded not to be done, and commits any of them, if the anointed priest
sins so as to bring guilt on the people, then let him offer to the Lord a bull
without defect as a sin offering for the sin he has committed. – Leviticus 4:2-3
“Now
if the whole congregation of Israel commits error and the matter escapes the
notice of the assembly, and they commit any
of the things which the Lord has commanded not to be done, and they become
guilty; when the sin which they have committed becomes known, then the assembly
shall offer a bull of the herd for a sin offering and bring it before the tent
of meeting.” – Leviticus 4:13-14
The
issue of unintentional sin in the passages Mortenson references is not a matter
of exegetical misunderstanding. It has to do with known aspects of the Law that
the people, whether individually or corporately, had unknowingly violated. An
example of a provision of the Law that might be unknowingly violated is found
in Numbers 19:16:
“Also,
anyone who in the open field touches one who has been slain with a sword or who
has died naturally, or a human bone or a grave, shall be unclean for seven
days.”
Jesus
references this commandment in his indictment of the Pharisees in Luke 11:44:
“Woe
to you! For you are like concealed tombs, and the people who walk over them are
unaware of it.”
Here,
Jesus is talking about innocent people who had been defiled by the teachings of
the Pharisees, just as those who unknowingly walked over a grave were
considered ceremonially unclean under the Law of Moses, and might afterward
unwittingly enter the Tabernacle or the temple in that unclean condition.
Yes,
false teachings can lead us into sin, but as the apostle Paul states in Romans
4:15, “where there is no law, there is no violation.” Sin results from false
teaching when that teaching somehow causes a person to violate some clearly
stated biblical principle, prohibition, or admonition, just as the “Jezebel” of
Revelation 2:20 led some of the people of the church at Thyatira to commit
sexual immortality. God is not in the “gotcha” business. He doesn’t spring
traps on people for fun. As the apostle John writes in I John 3:4, “sin is
lawlessness.” One cannot violate the law unless there is a law in the first
place.
Furthermore,
Jesus himself shows us that being mistaken about something does not
automatically equate with sin. In Mark 12, when the Sadducees present him with
a parable concerning a woman who died after having seven husbands, they ask
him: “In the resurrection, whose wife will she be, since all seven had her?”
Jesus responds that they are “mistaken” about the resurrection because they do
not understand the scriptures or the power of God. He corrects them from the
scriptures and finishes his reply with “You are greatly mistaken.”
Compare
this account with how Jesus rebuked the Pharisees, whom he accused of setting
aside the Law of God in favor of their traditions (Matthew 15:3-6). In his
indictments of these religious leaders, Jesus was telling them that they knew
the provisions of the Law and had purposely set them aside in favor of their
own mandates. Had the Sadducees been likewise sinning in their misunderstanding
of the resurrection, there is no reason for us to believe that Jesus would not
have plainly told them so.
In
lumping those who hold to inaccurate views of scripture in with those who
sinned unknowingly under the Law of Moses, Terry Mortenson is drawing an
unnatural and entirely unjustified comparison. There is no biblical mandate of
any kind to affirm any particular view of the creation account. No particular
understanding of animal death and the fall of man are required to be a
Christian or to qualify for Christian service. One may think that the
young-earth perspective is the correct interpretation—even obviously so—but
that is a far cry from establishing that it is actually sinful to believe
otherwise. Nor can it be demonstrated that the old-earth interpretation somehow
leads to sin, or as AiG president Ken Ham likes to argue, to unbelief:
However,
we also know that around two-thirds of young people are leaving the church in
America by college age, and the research we detailed in the book Already Gone shows clearly that the
teaching of evolution and/or millions of years is a major factor in these young
people doubting and then disbelieving the Scripture. The solution to this
problem is not to offer them a
contorted creation “story” that claims to accept the truth of Scripture while
all the time denying it![3]
Young
people who are leaving the church over faith versus science conflicts are doing
so because they see the Bible as teaching things that have been disproven by
modern scientific discoveries, and the specific sticking point is the
young-earth interpretation of Genesis. I have seen the testimonies of a number of
believers who nearly forsook the faith because they were taught that accepting
the Bible as God’s authoritative revelation also meant accepting a young
creation, which was entirely incompatible with the findings of the rigorous
scientific disciplines in which they were trained. Discovery of the old-earth
interpretation ended a tremendous crisis of faith for these believers, allowing
them to embrace and defend Genesis—and theism as a whole—with a new vigor. Indeed,
some have even come to faith in Christ as a direct result of old-earth
teachings, after having been hindered by the perception that they had to
embrace young-earth teachings to be a Christian
The
following story from well-known Christian apologist William Lane Craig demonstrates
this quite clearly:
I
remember when I was speaking at the University of Northern Ireland once, and a
student after my talk came up to speak with me and he said to me, “My friends
have been sharing with me about Christ. In order to become a Christian, do I
have to believe that the world was created in six twenty-four days?” And I
said, “No, you don’t have to believe that to be a Christian.” And this kid
threw up his hands in the air and said, “Hallelujah! That’s been the one thing
that’s been keeping me from giving my life to Christ.” So, just explaining to
him that there’s a range of options was all he needed to hear...
I do
say…in all candor, at least in my talking with high school kids and college students…they
think that if you’re a Christian you’ve gotta believe the world was created six
thousand years ago in six consecutive twenty-four hours days, and they can’t
believe that. Even good-willed kids, like my friend in Northern Ireland, they
just can’t believe that. For them, it’s like committing intellectual suicide.[4]
As
this story illustrates, old-earthers are not running young people out of the
church. It is Ken Ham’s young-earth-or-nothing dogma that is creating the
conflict that is resulting in this exodus. He has persuaded many that they must
either accept his interpretation of Genesis or else reject the Bible entirely. It’s
a tragic state of affairs, and all the more so because it is completely
unnecessary. The Bible does not impose any sort of test of orthodoxy with
regard to creation.
The
conflict that we find here in the church is no different than other theological
conflicts that have arisen among Christians throughout the centuries. Calvinists and Arminians have
long disagreed on what the Bible has to say about the sovereignty of God and
the nature of salvation. Proponents of various prophecy schools—such as
pretribulationism, posttribulationism, and preterism—read the same passages of
scripture, pronounce them “perfectly clear,” and yet come to radically
different conclusions as to their meaning, sometimes even denouncing their
opponents as heretics and agents of the devil.
All of
these groups—and others that could be named besides—believe in the authority of
the scriptures. All of them see themselves as defending what God has said
against what men have said to the contrary. Thus, contrary to what Ham,
Mortenson, and others are arguing, authority is not the central issue in these debates; interpretation is the central issue. Unfortunately, this truth is
often obscured in the heat of debate, just as it has been obscured in other
theological controversies over the centuries.
For my
part, I would argue that it is Terry Mortenson who is mistaken about creation
and the related issues of sin and death. I would argue that he does not
understand the character of God as well as he thinks he does. I would argue
that he and other young-earth teachers have unwittingly undermined the
authority of scripture and discredited the gospel message by tying the faith to
hyper-literal interpretations and pseudo-science. Yet, I do not accuse them of
sin in these matters. I believe that they are acting in good faith, genuinely
trying to uphold the authority of scripture against what they perceive as attacks
by liberalism and atheism.
Where I
would caution Mortenson and others in the young-earth movement is that some of
their material and rhetoric drifts dangerously close to slander and bearing
false witness. They know very well that their old-earth brethren hold a high
view of scripture and its authority, and that we affirm the gospel, yet they
consistently behave as though we twist scripture and “compromise” from the
corrupt motivation to earn the praise of men.[5]
Some of their rank-and-file followers carry the rhetoric even further, actually
asserting that anyone who does not share the young-earth view is probably not
even a genuine believer.
I call
upon young-earth leaders to dial this rhetoric back to a more responsible and
productive level. Accusing a brother of sin is a weighty matter, and you have
not met the burden of proof required to sustain the charge. Your
interpretations are potentially as fallible as anyone else’s. It’s time you admitted
this.
***
For
those who are interested, I have been writing a series of articles on aspects
of the creation controversy in the church, beginning here.
In this series, I explain in detail why I believe that Terry Mortenson and
other young-earth leaders are wrong in their interpretations and the
conclusions they derive from them.
* Unless
otherwise noted, all scriptures are taken from the NASB.
**
If you enjoyed this article and would like to support the author, you can
donate via PayPal to rhawes73@gmail.com
(or send an email to this address if you would like to donate by some other
method).
*** Click here to
visit my YouTube channel.
[1] Terry Mortenson, “Old-Earth
Creationism—Is It a Sin?”Answers in Genesis, July 1, 2012, accessed July 23,
2020. https://answersingenesis.org/hermeneutics/old-earth-creationism-is-it-a-sin-to-be-wrong/
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ken Ham, “Hugh Ross Twists The
Bible to Fit Man’s Fallible Opinion,” WVW Broadcast Network.com, September 29,
2014, accessed July 23, 2020. https://www.worldviewweekend.com/news/article/hugh-ross-twists-bible-fit-mans-fallible-opinion.
[4] “Doctrine of Creation: Excurses on Creation and
Evolution Part 12,” YouTube video, 23:51 – 24:23, 26:36 – 27:03, posted by “ReasonableFaithOrg.”
July 12, 2013.
[5] Ham, “Hugh Ross Twists the Bible.”
Another good one. Thanks.
ReplyDelete