Wednesday, October 10, 2012

Creation – the Fiat theory or ‘Days of Proclamation’

With the Torah Portion returning to Genesis this week, it seemed a good time to reconsider creation! Here is a chapter of my book that I wrote over 2 years ago:




I loved Physics and Mathematics as a High School student and went on to university to study Physics. As a result of some significant distractions I did not go on to pursue a career as a Physicist, but I did end up with both a Bachelor and a research Masters degrees in Physics.

So when being born-again (or better, ‘born from above’[1]) in Tasmania in 1986, and being presented by the ‘church’ with the notion that the Bible informed us that the universe was only 6-10 thousand years old I was greatly challenged. Such an understanding of the age of the universe meant that I needed to reject almost all of the scientific methods of dating that I have learned and many other well-established scientific methodologies.

However, as a new believer I readily accepted the inerrancy of Scripture so found myself in a place of considerable intellectual conflict. I was reading Young Earth Creationist magazines and reading arguments such as Barry Setterfield’s that the speed of light had significantly decreased over time since the beginning of the creation. This hypothesis disturbed me as the extrapolation of data methods being applied seemed inappropriate and in error.

In researching for this book I have revisited Setterfield’s argument and found that he was not totally alone as there has been a Physics research paper published[2] in 1991 that to some degree suggested some support for his hypothesis[3]. Since this time though it appears few recognized Physicists have found sufficient merit in this proposal to follow up with further research, although there have been some experiments investigating related issues that may suggest further research in warranted.

At this time though, I still find the research and arguments unconvincing. For example, I find the resultant flow on affect on other well known laws of Physics to be most questionable[4].

There is another reason for being suspicious of this approach though.

It would appear that God has stated that His laws of the universe are fixed. Look at Jeremiah 33:25 “This is what the LORD says: 'If I have not established my covenant with day and night and the fixed laws of heaven and earth,…” (NIV). While a number of versions use something like ‘appointed the ordinances’ instead of ‘fixed laws’ the NIV, NASB, ESV, and Holmans Christian Bible to name a few use ‘fixed laws’. The Hebrew word (Strong’s 7760) translated here as ‘fixed’ can be translated as set or made or appointed, but fixed is also a possible and valid translation[5]. If God is stating here that the physical laws of the universe are fixed (and it seems there is overwhelming evidence from science that this is the case),  then a change in the speed of light would not be consistent with God’s word and therefore in error.

Returning to my intellectual conflict of 1986, it was at this time that I was invited to the National Conference of the Australian Institute of Physics (I was on the Tasmanian council for the AIP) in Adelaide. During the week I was in Adelaide I spent a bit of time in the Christian book-shops looking for answers. Incredibly,[6] I stumbled upon a book ‘Creation and Evolution – The Facts and Fallacies’ by physicist Alan Hayward.

I was immediately impressed by Alan’s approach as he was putting forward an argument for an ancient creation that was still very much in accord with Scripture. Even better, he introduced his approach by encouraging readers to reject it if they believed it was in conflict with clear scriptural truth. He also used geological successionism as the starting point for contrasting the various positions on creation such as Darwinian evolution; Young Earth Creationism and Old Earth Creationism.

He also presented the ‘Fiat Theory’, proposed publicly in 1902, which is still to my mind the most satisfactory understanding of the creation accounts in Genesis and the apparent conflicts between them.

Before explaining what the Fiat Theory is, I wish to take a moment to explain why I believe that the ‘young earth’ position has gained seemingly majority support amongst most denominations of Christendom (excluding the liberal church who are generally ‘theistic evolutionists’).

I believe a great many of the church have accepted the ‘young earth’ argument thanks to the efforts of a Bishop James Ussher back in the 1600’s. When Ussher first started speaking publicly on how he had calculated the age of the universe based on the biblical genealogies he was also publicly refuted by the great poet and theologian John Milton, though Ussher clearly carried the day amongst the mainstream mob. His estimate in fact found such favour with the publishers of the King James Bible (published 1611), that they placed his dates in the margins of the appropriate pages of Genesis, where they remained for centuries.

Ussher failed to appreciate the Hebraic mindset and approach when recording genealogies are as a result made a significant number of mistakes. For example he assumed when reading a genealogy of the form A begat B begat C that A was therefore the father of B who was the father of C. In many places in the Bible such a genealogy can have a great number of missing generations between each ‘begat’.

Very briefly some of the more obvious mistakes by Bishop Ussher are:

·       Matthew 1:8 lists King Joram as the father of King Uzziah, but the TaNaK (OT) tells as that Joram was the great-great-grandfather of Uzziah.
·       Ezra 7:1-5 traces Ezra’s line back about a thousand years to Aaron but only lists 16 generations. 
·       Luke 3:35-36 tells us that Arphaxad was the grandfather of Shelah but in Genesis 11 Arphaxad is listed as the father of Shelah.
·       The genealogy of Moses: (Exodus 6:16-20,  Numbers 26:57-59; 1 Chronicles 6:1-3;  1 Chronicles 23:6, 12-13)[7]
                   In these passages, his genealogy is given as Levi (the patriarch) to Kohath to Amram (and his wife Jochebed) to Moses. As straightforward as this seems, we can use other Bible passages to demonstrate that at least six names were likely skipped between Amram and Moses. And yet Exodus 2 does not mention the names of Moses parents: Now a man from the house of Levi went and took as his wife a Levite woman. Ex 2:1 (ESV)
Also, Kohath was born before the Israelites entered Egypt (Gen. 46:5-27; Exod. 1:1-4) and the exodus out of Egypt took place 430 years later (Exod. 12:40-41; Acts 7:6). Since Moses was 80 years old at the time of the exodus, that means that from Kohath to Amram to Moses spanned at least 350 years.

Jochebed, Amram's wife, is described as a daughter of Levi (Num. 26:59) and as Amram's father's sister (Exod. 6:20). This means that she would have been born along with Kohath some 350 years before Moses!

The descendents of Kohath at the time of Moses numbered 8,600 men (Num. 3:27-28) of which 2,750 were between the ages of 30 and 50 (Num. 4:30). Note that Moses is not listed among the descendents of Amram (1 Chron. 24:20).
          
There were 12 generations connecting the patriarch Ephraim to Joshua, son of Nun. Joshua, son of Nun, was also a part of the exodus and has his own genealogy (Numbers 13:8, 16; 1 Chronicles 7:20-27). 

Both sets of genealogies span the same 430-year period (Exodus 12:40-41; Acts 7:6) from the sojourn to Egypt till the exodus from Egypt, yet one lists 4 generations and the other has 12.

In 1 Chronicles 26:24 we read in a list of appointments made by King David (see 1 Chron. 24:3; 25:1; 26:26), that Shebuel the son of Gershom, the son of Moses, was ruler of the treasures; and again in 1 Chronicles 23:15, 16, we find it written, "The sons of Moses were Gershom and Eliezer. Of the sons of Gershom Shebuel was the chief."

Now it is surely absurd to suppose that the author of Chronicles was so grossly ignorant as to suppose that the grandson of Moses could be living in the reign of David (approx. a 500 year gap), and appointed by him to a responsible office.

Again, in the same connection (1 Chron. 26:31), we read that "among the Hebronites was Jerijah the chief; "and this Jerijah, or Jeriah (for the names are identical), was, according to  1 Chron 23:19, the first of the sons of Hebron, and Hebron was (v. 12) the son of Kohath, the son of Levi (v. 6). So that if no contraction in the genealogical lists is allowed, we have the great-grandson of Levi holding a prominent office in the reign of David . Here we have 3 generations spanning over 900 years!

These are just some of the major problems facing the approach used by Bishop Ussher.

WH Green in 1890 wrote a brilliant critique of Ussher’s calculations[8]. Green and others have shown that the biblical genealogies really only give us a ‘ballpark’ estimate of the number of years back to the creation of Adam and Eve. In fact, the gaps in the genealogies are so great that anything from 10,000 to 50,000 years may not be unreasonable.

The main point of all this is that a close examination of Scripture informs us that Scripture does not tell us how old man, the earth or the universe is. For whatever His reasons, the Creator has chosen not to reveal this detail to us. He has though given us the revelation of nature coupled with the skills and intellect to develop a great many scientific tests which give very strong evidence for a very old universe and for a significantly longer period of time back to Adam that a mere 6000 years.

There is still a problem though in any simplistic, Hellenistic reading of the creation account in Genesis. For example, look at how much happened on the 6th day: after a long procession of animals, there was no helper found for Adam, and Adam was lonely, despite the significant distraction and effort needed to appropriately name all the animals. He was then put to sleep and Eve created.

In Gen 2:23 we read … at last … (meaning now, at length, that is Adam had been waiting a long time). If the six days were literal 24 hour consecutive days as we might surmise, then how do we explain all that happened to Adam on the sixth day for example. This is just one of a great number of problems that are evident in a Hellenistic and simplistic reading.

Perhaps you have read the first two chapters of Genesis and not seen any major issues. To help clarify just a couple of these issues that are very easy to grasp, if you note where the word ‘day’ is used In your English translation and you will find it referring to 3-4 separate lengths of time. ‘Day’ is used to refer to a 12 hour period; a 24 hour period and the whole period of creation, and as a term to designate the time. From this point alone we should see that there is a need to go a little deeper into how the context determined the meaning and intent of this term.

Let us look at each use of ‘day’ to see if we can understand it better.

The first use of the Hebrew term ‘yom’ (day) is the 12 hour period from sunrise to sunset. Note the Genesis 1:5 states that there was evening and morning the first day and appears to include the night (darkness) in this statement. Therefore using ‘day’ to refer to a 12 hour period does not appear the main use of this term.

What about a 24 hour period. Look at Gen 1:12-13:

The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

Note that it is the ‘earth’ that brings forth vegetation, that the plants yield seed and that the trees bear fruit. The full natural process of the earth bringing this all about take years. Therefore the use of ‘day’ here does not appear to refer to a 24 hour period, at least for this instance, if read within a literal framework.  

There have been many theories put forward to explain the many apparent conflicts and issues in the creation accounts. As I studied them all those years ago, I found all bar one or two most unsatisfying. The intriguing solution that Alan Hayward introduced me to is known as the Fiat or ‘Divine Fiat’ theory. This interpretation has continued to withstand the scrutiny of my many years of research and study. This approach is also called ‘Days of Proclamation’ by some.

Simply put this proposition argues that the 6 days of creation in Genesis 1 are days when God issued his creative commands or fiats.  That is, when God speaks (i.e. gives His word), what He speaks comes to pass at some time in the future.

In Psalm 33:6,9 we read: “By the word of YHWH were the heavens made, and by the breath of His mouth all their hostsFor He spoke and it was done, He commanded and it stood firm”.

Psalm 148:5 reads:Let them praise the name of the LORD, for he commanded and they were created.”

Also in Hebrews 11:3 we read: “By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which were visible.” and in 2 Peter 3.5 “…by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water”.

God speaks and it must happen.

It appears that from God's point of view, which is very different from ours, creation was virtually completed as soon as he had spoken His word, or uttered his infallible fiats.

The importance of this profound fact cannot be overemphasized. 

In accordance with this principle, Paul was able to say that God  'chose us in him before the foundation of the world’ (Eph 1.4), even though, in literal fact, we did not then exist.

In similar vein, Revelation 13.8 speaks of our names being '(written in the book of life) from the foundation of the world' and of the Lamb of God being slain from the foundation of the world[9]. Not only did God have the crucifixion in mind before or when He created this universe; he also had each of us in His Plan!

Again, God told the prophet Jeremiah, 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.' (Jeremiah 1.5)

It is vital to appreciate that when God declares something it will come to pass; it may takes days or years or thousands, millions or even billions of years but it is as good as done the moment God gives the word.

It is also important to distinguish these ‘word(s) of God’, these fiats or proclamations from fiats or ‘pronunciations of intent‘ uttered by a human being or ruler. We may state or promise something and not always fulfil or live up to our promises but God’s declarations are absolutely certain.

Thus God and His inspired Scripture can speak about future events (at the time of writing) as if they are past because to God they are already a reality. There is therefore a sense in which everything thing has ‘pre-existed’ in the mind of God because all creation has appeared as a direct result of God’s thought and proclamation of it.

Parenthesis in Scripture:

Another fact that impinges on our understanding of Genesis I is this: the writers of the Bible were much given to the use of parentheses. That is to say, they would often insert a secondary thought into the middle of their primary message. Here is an example from the Messianic Writings (New Testament): 

In those days Peter stood up among the brethren (the company of persons was in all about a hundred and twenty), and said, 'Brethren …' (Acts 1.15)

Observe how the main sentence makes perfect sense if we read it on its own, ignoring the bit in brackets. Afterwards we can usefully go back and read the words in the brackets, as a separate but related thought.

As Bullinger said of the first edition of the KJV: “The Edition of 1611 abounded in parentheses. In the subsequent editions there has been an increasing tendency to discard them; and to supply their place by commas; or to ignore them altogether.”

In the original texts of the Bible there were apparently a great many parentheses. Some are marked as such in many modern translations, but many others are not. These parentheses go right back to the creation narrative.

The earliest one marked in the RSV is in Genesis , where a pair of dashes encloses a lengthy parenthesis:
In the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, when no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up -for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was no man to till the ground; but a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground -then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. (Genesis 2.4-7)

The NIV also has a parenthesis in Genesis 2:
A river watering the garden flowed from Eden, and from there it divided; it had four headstreams. The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. (Genesis 2.10-13.)

Genesis 1 Repunctuated:

Using this approach it is possible to re-punctuate Genesis 1 and perhaps gain a new perspective:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (Genesis 1.1.)

The next verse tells us to imagine the curtain rising on an already created planet, but a shapeless and empty one. God’s spirit is about to start fashioning it and then populating it:

The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. (Genesis 1.2)

So here is a repunctuated version of the whole passage up to Genesis 2.3, with the parentheses printed in brackets:

And God said, 'Let there be light.'
(And there was light. And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.)
And there was evening and there was morning, one day. 
And God said, 'Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.'
(And God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven.)
And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
And God said, 'Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.'
(And it was so. God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. )
And God said, 'Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, upon the earth.'
(And it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.)
And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.
And God said, 'Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, and let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.'
(And it was so. And God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth, to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.)
And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.
And God said, 'Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the firmament of the heavens.'
(So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.”)
So the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”;
(and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.)
Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth,'
(So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them, And God blessed them, and God said to them, ' Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.' And God said, ' Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit,' you shall have them for food. And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food,' And it was so. And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.) 
An there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all his work which he had done in creation. (Genesis 1.3 -2.3.)

Another way of presenting this re-punctuation is as below:
God said: "Let there be light":
Narrator said: " and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."
God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Narrator said: "And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."
God said, "Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear:"
Narrator said, "and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth:"
Narrator said, "and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day."
God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years. And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth:"
Narrator said "and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day."
God said, "Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven."
Narrator said, "And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day."
[Note that the narrator talks of God in the 3rd person]
God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind:"
Narrator said, "and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
Narrator said, So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
God said, "Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat:"
Narrator said, "and it was so. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day
[10].
Hopefully, a careful read and reflection on these verses with this approach should see that there is a proclamation or fiat announced by God, followed by a commentary on its impact and fulfilment. With this approach the fulfilment need not be instant and certainly need not be on the same ‘day’ as the announcement.

If this approach and understanding is valid then who were the Fiats uttered to? Most likely the Host of Heaven, that is the angels. Many passages such as Genesis 1:26 where the Creator speaks to those assembled before Him, ‘let us make man in our image’[11].

It would certainly appear from Job 38: 4-7 that it was the angels[12] (called ‘morning stars’ and ‘sons of God’) were present at the creation of the universe.

“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.
Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?[13] (Job 38:4-7)

This ‘fiat’ or ‘proclamation’ approach then is consistent with both the Hebraic principles of foreordaining and parenthesis. With this approach the ‘days’ of creation can be viewed as consecutive literal days (where their length is actually unimportant but could conceivably be 24 hour days).

This approach also then pre-shadows and even foreordains the ‘divine’ week of 7 days with every 7th day (Shabbat/Sabbath) being a day of ‘rest’ or ‘ceasing’.

The Hebrew Bible is also very poetic and intended to be sung or at least spoken out loud in a rhythmic manner (i.e. chanted). Again, this is also consistent with God speaking his proclamations out loud and using some form of melody in the process. The table below may help visualise the poetic structure contained in Genesis 1:

Day 1  Light appears
Day 2                                     Waters are divided
Day 3                                                      Land appears, with vegetation
Day 4                  Lights appear
Day 5                                    Waters bring forth living creatures,
Day 6                                                      Land is populated

This structure also makes use of Hebraic parallelism, that is, repetition at measured intervals. For example, consider Psalm 38:22 Don’t forsake me, Yahweh. My God, don’t be far from me. (WEB). This repetition or parallelism is extremely common and is evident in many ways such as in the Shema (Deut 6:4. 11:13-21) where we are called to love God with all (1) our heart, (2) our soul and (3) our might. This is Hebrew parallelism as the Hebrew understand man to be a single entity and therefore the words heart, soul and might here are just a way to emphasis the call to love call with all of your being.

This approach is explained in greater detail in Hill Roberts article ‘Fiat Days’ (at http://lordibelieve.org/Days.doc ). Like all theories that attempt to reconcile the Biblical creation accounts with our modern understanding it does still leave some questions unanswered but overall seems to satisfactory answer the greatest number and to fit so well with the Hebraic mindset, approach and understanding of God’s ‘modus operandi’.

Given this repetition then, coupled with the prospect that this ‘days’ were all prior to the actual creation itself, we can view the creation of the sun on Day 4 as a reiteration but with more detail of the creation of light on Day 1. This repetition with further detail is used for all three days.

Let us look again at some of the more obvious problems with the traditional, literal readings.

Given that God speaks before the creation unfolds, the order and timing of events need not be identical to the order in which they were first pronounced. Thus for example the fossil record while similar to the order in Genesis 1 is not and need not be the same.  Assuming that all of the creative processes were started in the same order as the proclamations,  but acknowledging that different processes may take differing lengths of time we would then expect some overlap in the various periods of active creation.

Many critics accuse Genesis 2:4-25 as being a second and contradictory creation account. They argue for example, that in Genesis 1 God created the vegetation on the 3rd day and Adam on the 6th, yet in Genesis 2 Adam is created before the Garden of Eden and then placed in it. We also read in Genesis 1 that God created animals on the 5th day and Adam and Eve on the 6th, yet in Genesis 2 we read that after God had created Adam he created the animals to see if one would be a suitable partner for Adam and only then did he create Eve.

When we view Genesis 1 as divine proclamations we no longer see any conflict here as having declared what was to take place the timing and order is left unstated. It seems obvious (especially with the great cosmological understanding of the universe’s evolution that we now have), that the stars and planets need to be formed; and the vegetation on the earth established before many animals were created and all this long before the earth was ready for the arrival of man.

While this approach appeals it does not mean it is the only reasonable answer. The ‘day-age’ or ‘progressive creation’ approach made popular by the Reasons to Believe organisation[14] also finds support within rabbinic sources  including Maimonides and Nachimanides from the middle ages[15].

The renowned physicist and Orthodox Jew, Dr Gerald Schroeder[16] offers another intriguing approach that is based on a relativistic frame of reference such that the creation of the universe is only around 5000 - 6000 years old when viewed from the beginning of time but almost 16 Billion years when viewed from our frame of reference. Dr Schroeder tries to reconcile the young-earth interpretation of the Genesis 1 creation days with scientific measurements of the universe and Earth showing that they are billions of years old.  I believe his use of a different ‘frame of reference’ while plausible seems awkward and unsatisfying and I see nowhere in the Genesis account that calls for a different frame of reference to that of the human author and/or ‘narrator’ of the account. Dr Schroeder’s approach though is certainly worthy of further study[17].

Update: Check out this great article from Dr Schroeder: https://www.aish.com/ci/sam/The-Age-of-the-Universe-One-Reality-Viewed-from-Two-Different-Perspectives.html

Is there any other approach within Judaism that seems consistent with the ‘fiat theory’? The Talmud (Chagiga, Ch. 2) argues that Genesis 1 to the beginning of Genesis 2 is given in parable form, but particularly as a poem with a text and a subtext. This seems very much in agreement with the fiat theory.

It appears that some early Jewish sources (eg. Nachmanides - 13th century Spain) believed that the Bible’s calendar is in two-parts. They argued that in the closing speech that Moses makes to the people, where he states "consider the days of old, the years of the many generations" (Deut. 32:7), Moses was indicating that the ‘days of old' are the Six Days of Genesis and that 'the years of the many generations' is all the time from Adam forward. Again, this understanding finds some harmony with the Fiat Theory in that a distinction is made where the Six Days are measured differently.

So what are the broader implications of the Fiat Theory if it is correct? Firstly, its internal consistency is very strong as it fits so well with the principle that the ‘word of God’, or the breath or plan of God, once expressed will be fulfilled.

Many passages attest to this understanding from those in the TaNaK such as Psalm 33:6 and Psalm 148:5 to a number in the Messianic Writings such as John 1:1, Heb 11:3 and 2 Peter 3:5 as already highlighted.

Further though, it means that science (specifically astronomy and cosmology) and biblical creation are not in serious conflict. We can therefore accept that the scientific understanding that the universe is some 13-15 billion years old may prove to be correct and that man may well have lived on the earth thousands of years earlier than 4000 BCE. It also means we don’t need to reject the great many legitimate scientific tools and methods for measuring time and ages or to stress out as we try to contort the implications of a significantly different speed of light into our understanding of the physical world.

It certainly seems to me that the Fiat Theory carries the lightest burden of proof and offers the greatest degree of freedom as well as very good agreement with much of established science.

It also fits beautifully with the rising paradigm that is Intelligent Design, the new appreciation of the glory of God, which I now wish to introduce and elucidate a little.








[1] This understanding is explained further on in this book
[2] William G. Tifft, “Properties of the Redshift. III. Temporal Variation,” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 382, 1 December 1991, pp. 396–415.
[3] A well known christian author and apologist Chuck Missler is also supportive. See http://www.khouse.org/articles/2002/423/
[4] See ‘A Matter of Days’ by Dr Hugh Ross, 2004, pages 163-166
[5] Brown, Driver, Briggs Hebrew/English Lexicon p 962
[6] I say incredibly because in hindsight it is very unusual to find a mainstream Christian bookshop stocking a book by a Christadelphian, a sect that mainstream Christianity classes as a cult because of their rejection of the deity of Christ. At the time I was ignorant of such so-called heresies and divisions within the body of Messiah.
[7] Ex 6:16-20 (ESV): These are the names of the sons of Levi according to their generations: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, the years of the life of Levi being 137 years. The sons of Gershon: Libni and Shimei, by their clans. The sons of Kohath: Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel, the years of the life of Kohath being 133 years. The sons of Merari: Mahli and Mushi. These are the clans of the Levites according to their generations. Amram took as his wife Jochebed his father's sister, and she bore him Aaron and Moses, the years of the life of Amram being 137 years.
    Num 26:57-59 (ESV): This was the list of the Levites according to their clans: of Gershon, the clan of the Gershonites; of Kohath, the clan of the Kohathites; of Merari, the clan of the Merarites. These are the clans of Levi: the clan of the Libnites, the clan of the Hebronites, the clan of the Mahlites, the clan of the Mushites, the clan of the Korahites. And Kohath was the father of Amram. The name of Amram's wife was Jochebed the daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt. And she bore to Amram Aaron and Moses and Miriam their sister
    1 Chron 6:1-3 (ESV): The sons of Levi: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. The sons of Kohath: Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel. 3  The children of Amram: Aaron, Moses, and Miriam.
[8] WH Green’s article in available from my website www.circumcisedheart.info
[9] And all who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written in the book of life of the Lamb that has been slain
from the foundation of the world. (Rev 13:8)
[10] This arrangement courtesy of G.R. Morton -  http://home.entouch.net/dmd/daysofproclamation.htm 
[11] The best commentary of the ‘us’ texts such as in Gen 1:26 that I have ever heard is a talk given by Sean Finnegan. The Podcast is available from Christianmonothesism.com and a pdf version at http://www.christianmonotheism.com/media/text/Let%20Us%20make%20man.pdf
[12] FF Bruce, New International Bible Commentary p546.
[13] When God or man lays the cornerstone to a ‘building’ of God there is always great rejoicing. For example see Ezra 3:10-11
[15] See Nathan Aviezer’s, In the Beginning: Biblical Creation and Science (Hoboken, NJ: KTAV Publishing House, 1990).
[16] See his 1990 book ‘Genesis and the Big Bang: The Discovery Of Harmony Between Modern Science And The Bible’
[17] I wrote this article/chapter over 2 years ago. Since then I have read a couple of Dr Schroeder’s books and I am very impressed. While I still find the Fiat Theory a better fit to the evidence as I see it, I now feel that Schroder’s approach also has great merit.

2 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Christian Astronomers assess the age of the Universe: http://www.reasons.org/articles/special-edition-tnrtb-astronomers-assess-the-age-of-the-universe

    ReplyDelete