Other Views: Why They Contradict the Bible

by Tim Chaffey

     The purpose of this page is to demonstrate how each of the compromising views of Genesis violate the clear teaching of God's Word.  To illustrate this, I have put together a chart demonstrating some of the numerous problems that each of the views create.  You see, when Genesis is not taken literally then many other Biblical teachings become problematic.  Following the chart will be a detailed explanation of each problem.

Problem / Theory Gap Theory Theistic Evolution Day-Age Theory Progressive Creation Framework Hypothesis
Places death before sin X X X X X
Sun created before earth X X X X X
Satan fell before end of creation week X X X X X
Dinosaurs did not live with man X X X X X
Noah's Flood was not a worldwide catastrophe see below X see below X see below
Plants lived without sun for millions of years     X    
All creation was not "very good" X X X X X
Symbiotic Relationships non-existent X X X X X


     While there are certainly many more problems that each of these views create, both Biblically and scientifically, these examples should be more than enough to prove the point.  Before describing the chart it might be necessary to briefly define each of the different views.  All of these views were developed within the past two centuries in an effort to make the Bible teach that the earth is billions of years old.  Proponents of each view then claim that they believe the Bible and also believe in the evolutionary time scale.

1) The Gap Theory - claims that a huge time gap (perhaps several billion years) exists between Genesis 1: 1 and Genesis 1: 2.  They teach that Satan rebelled prior to Genesis 1: 2 and God destroyed this original creation with the flood of Lucifer.  They claim that Genesis 1: 2 describes the conditions of the world following this flood.  Just a side note here -- why couldn't Noah's flood leave behind all fossils that were supposedly made by the flood of Lucifer?  For a full refutation of the Gap Theory please read Unformed and Unfilled by Weston W. Fields..

2) Theistic Evolution - claims that God used evolution to get us here.  It suffers many of the same problems that each of these views have.  It is not the plain teaching of Scripture and is just the result of people trusting in man's fallible opinions rather than God's inerrant Word.  Psalm 118: 8 declares, "It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man."

3) The Day-Age Theory - claims that each of the days of creation were extremely long periods of time.  Its proponents usually quote the Bible out of context where it says that "a day is like a thousand years."  The rest of the verse in each case states that "a thousand years are like a day."  That just cancels out that argument.  The verses are not even referring to creation.  They are simply teaching that God is not limited by our time.  He is outside of it.

4) Progressive Creation - claims that we got here through a series of trials and errors on God's part.  They say that God created certain animals millions of years ago and then they died out.  Then God created more animals that died out.  Eventually, He got around to making humans.  These people also believe in the Big Bang theory.  

5) Framework Hypothesis - this view is a bit confusing.  Andrew S. Kulikovsky explains it in the Creation Technical Journal (Vol. 16, Issue 1, p. 40).  He wrote that the Framework Hypothesis "takes the Genesis account of Creation as a theological framework rather than a strictly historical, chronological account.  It is important to not that proponents of the framework view do not deny that the people and events alluded to in the Creation account are essentially historical.  It should be obvious, however, that in denying the historical and chronological nature of the account, they have very little basis for this acceptance."

     There have been other attempts to synchronize the Bible's account of creation with the evolutionary viewpoint.  Two of these views have diminished in popularity in the past few decades.  The Revelatory Day view states that God gave Moses a series of visions of His creative work.  These visions lasted for six days.  The obvious problem with this view is that there is absolutely no Scriptural support for it.  The Bible never even hints that this may have been the case so it is based on a lack of evidence.  

     Another view is the Literal-Day-with-Gaps view.  This view states that each of the days of creation were literal days but there were huge gaps of time in between each day.  This view suffers from the same problems as the Day-Age Theory (see chart).

     With that explanation out of the way, let's elaborate on the chart above.  We'll look at each problem from the Bible's point of view.


1) Places Death Before Sin

     This is perhaps the biggest problem created by each of the compromising views.  The Bible makes it very clear that there was absolutely no death before Adam sinned. 

Romans 5: 12 states, "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin..."


1 Corinthians 15: 21 states, "For since by man [Adam] came death, by Man [Jesus] also came the resurrection of the dead."

     Each of these compromising views places death, disease, bloodshed, suffering, and pain before Adam's sin.  However, the Bible teaches that all was "very good" (Gen. 1: 31)when God made it.  Would God have called everything that He had made "very good" if it was full of death and suffering?  Absolutely not!  Death and suffering were not a part of the original creation but only entered because of the Fall of Man.

     Besides the obvious reason (that it contradicts the Bible) the reason that this problem is so severe is because it undermines the very meaning of the atonement.  When Adam sinned the Bible states that God made coats of skins for Adam and Eve.  Here is the first mention of death in the Bible.  God must have killed an animal (quite possibly a lamb - although that is speculation) to make these coats.  This would have served as a graphic portrayal of the consequences of Adam's sin.  Adam would have seen blood being shed in atonement for sin.  However, if death was already all around in the Garden of Eden then death and bloodshed would be nothing new to Adam. 

     Worst of all, the foundations for the gospel are undermined by this idea of death before sin.  Jesus Christ came to earth to die on the cross for our sins.  He was the ultimate sacrifice, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.  But if there was death before sin, what did sin do?  If it was part of the original creation, then why did Jesus need to shed His blood? 

     Some will argue that the above verses only refer to man's death.  Even if that is the case, the compromise views still have many problems in this area.  As a result of Adam's sin, God cursed the ground (Gen. 3: 17, 18) to bring forth thorns and thistles.  Yet, we find thorns and thistles in the fossil record which are allegedly millions of years old.  Why would God curse the ground with thorns if thorns were already in abundance on the earth?  It just does not make sense and it does not line up with God's Word. 


2) The Sun Created Before the Earth

     Because each of these compromising views accept the evolutionary timescale of "billions of years" for the age of the earth and universe, they run into another glaring problem.  The Big Bang theory and each of these theories state that the sun was created or formed before the earth.  However, according to the Bible the earth was made on Day One while the sun was created on Day Four.

     In an attempt to circumvent this problem many compromisers, such as Hugh Ross, state that the Bible only teaches that the earth "appeared" or became visible on the earth on Day Four.  He believes that the sun existed long before the earth.  This is another example of twisting Scripture to fit your own preconceived notions.  It is absolutely essential that one lets the Bible speak for itself rather than trying to fit one's ideas into the Bible.  Why ruin a perfectly good Bible with a stupid and unscientific theory like the Big Bang?

     The people that hold these compromised views will often ask where the light came from on days 1 - 3.  I do not know.  The Bible does not tell us.  However, it does state that there was light.  You do not need the sun for day and night - you need light.  In fact, Revelation 21: 22 - 22: 5 may provide the answer to this question.  It states that in the New Jerusalem there will be no need of the sun because God's glory will illuminate it.  This is the best guess as to where the light came from for days 1 - 3.  Although, the light may have just been a temporary light source.  It is impossible for us to know because God does not tell us.


3) Satan Fell Before the End of the Creation Week

     Once again, the compromising views create another theological dilemma.  The gap theory teaches that Satan fell and led earth in a rebellion against God prior to Gen. 1: 2.  The other theories teach death and suffering prior to the Fall of Man.  They also claim that Satan rebelled prior to the end of the creation week.  This is a problem for the following reasons:

     a)  God stated that everything He had created was "very good" at the end of the sixth day.  We know that Satan was created at some point during the creation week because Exodus 20: 11 states that God made everything in the earth, the sea, and the heavens in six days.  Satan is included in this.  It is likely that Satan was created on the first day just prior to the earth being created.  My guess is that when Genesis 1: 1 states, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" Satan was created during the creation of the heavens.  We know that Job 38: 7 teaches that the angels rejoiced when God laid the foundations of the earth. 

     b)  Ezekiel 28: 12 - 19 tells us that Satan was in Eden and was perfect "till iniquity was found in" him.  How could Satan have been in the Garden of Eden and be perfect if he fell long before the Garden was ever created?

     It just does not make any sense to add man's fallible and ever-changing opinions to the Word of God.  He was there and He ought to know how He created everything.  He told us how He did it.  Who are we to tell God what He did?  How arrogant one must be to behave in such a way!


4) Man did not Live with Dinosaurs

     It is commonly taught that dinosaurs and man did not live together.  Evolutionists claim that dinosaurs died out some 65 million years ago.  Each of these compromising views also teaches this.  However, it can easily be demonstrated that this is not the case. 

     The Bible describes and names two creatures that were most likely dinosaurs.  In the book of Job God tells Job all about the "behemoth" and the "leviathan."  Many study Bibles will include a text note that these were probably the elephant or hippopotamus and the crocodile.  It is important to remember that it is the text of Scripture that is inspired and not the text notes.  These editors were obviously influenced by the evolutionary idea that dinosaurs died out long before man arrived on the screen.

     Any person with an open mind will quickly discover that this is not the case.  The description of the behemoth in Job 40 perfectly fits that of a sauropod dinosaur such as Brachiosaurus.  Would the elephant's tail or hippo's tail remind anyone of a "cedar tree?" (vs. 17)  The leviathan is described as being capable of breathing fire.  When was the last time you saw a crocodile breath fire? 

     In March of 2005, soft tissue from a Tyrannosaurus Rex leg bone was discovered.  Evolutionists are at a loss as to how this could be possible since they allegedly lived 65 million years ago.  This is perfectly consistent with the Biblical teaching that dinosaurs were created on the same day as man.


5) Noah's flood was not a worldwide catastrophe

     The Bible makes it abundantly clear that the flood of Noah's day was a worldwide catastrophe.  Genesis 7: 19, 20 says that "the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered.  The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered."  In case you didn't know, once the water goes above the mountains, a flood ceases to be a local one.  The water will then cover all the earth just as the Bible clearly states.

     The reason this is an issue is because the various compromise theories attempt to say that Noah's flood was a local flood and not a global one.  There is absolutely no Biblical basis for this idea.  The only reason they want to do this is because they have bought into the mistaken ideas of evolutionary geologists of the past 170 years.  Actually, most modern geologists are beginning to admit that only catastrophes could have formed many of the features that we see on our planet today.  They still won't admit to a worldwide flood in Noah's day but they say there were a series of catastrophes.  

     The compromisers are forced to concoct other ideas such as a pre-Adamic flood that was worldwide.  The Gap theorists place this event between Genesis 1: 1 and 1: 2, even though the Bible makes absolutely no mention of it.  Hugh Ross and his fellow progressive creationists would have us believe that the flood of Noah's day was simply a local flood.  Let's look at some of the problems that creates with the rest of the Bible.


6) Plants lived without sun for millions of years

     It doesn't take a genius to figure this one out.  If the day-age theory is true, then plants (created on day three) would have had to live for thousands or millions of years without the sun (created on day four).  As we all know, this is impossible.  

     The Biblical view is that plants were created on day three and the sun on day four.  Could plants survive a day without the sun?  Well, they survive nighttime without the sun all the time.  They could easily go from day three until day four without it.  

     Obviously, creationists do not believe that the earth was without heat or light.  God said "let there be light" and there was.  Also, the Bible mentions the waters that were upon the earth.  Without enough heat the waters would have been ice.  So it is implied that there was sufficient heat and light for these plants to survive for that day.  So where did the light come from?  It is quite possible that God Himself was the light.  The Book of Revelation mentions that in the New Jerusalem there will be no need of the sun because the Lamb will be the light (Rev. 21: 23).


7) All creation was not "very good."

     The Bible makes it abundantly clear that everything was "very good" at the end of the creation week.  Six times throughout Genesis 1 we are told that God saw that what He made was good (verses 4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25).  In verse 21 we are told that everything was "very good."  

     The problem is that if any of these other views are correct then God said that death, disease, bloodshed, suffering, and pain were all "good" and "very good."  This is not the God of the Bible.  The Bible tells us that death is the last enemy that will be destroyed (1 Cor. 15: 26).  As such, it was not part of God's original creation as these other theories must say.  



8)  Symbiotic Relationships non-existent

     There are countless relationships that exist between certain types of creatures in which one could not survive without the other.  For example, certain plants need certain insects for pollination purposes.  These same insects rely on the plant for their food or nectar. 

      If the above theories are correct, then plants were created millions of years before the insects.  As mentioned above, plants must have survived without the sun for quite some time, too.  There are so many other relationships that exist between one type of plant and one type of animal or between two types of animals.  It is preposterous to believe that they survived without each other for millions of years.



   It is never beneficial for a Christian to try to change the clear teaching of God's Word.  Do you honestly believe that you know more than God does?  He was there.  He knows how He made everything and He told us how He made it.  We don't need all of man's stupid opinions and compromises to tell us what He did.  Why should we wreck a perfectly good Bible with a dumb theory like evolution? 

   We believe there are a few reasons that people believe in these compromise views.  First, they are ignorant.  They have been taught by their pastors or Sunday school teachers that it is okay to believe in evolution and the Bible.  What a sad commentary on the state of Christianity today.

   Second, they love the praise of man rather than the praise of God.  We would rather please God by trusting in what He said.  This is especially true when one considers the overwhelming amount of evidence for the "six literal day" position.  Unfortunately, too many Christians are more concerned with what their fellow man thinks of them.  We should be more concerned with what God thinks. 

   It's time for the church to stop destroying its foundations by compromising with the godless theory of evolution.  We need to start rebuilding our foundation by taking an uncompromising stand on God's Word.  Then, and only then, will God bless the church. 


(back to articles)