Click here to get this post in PDF

Don’t compromise on the age of the earth – It Won’t Work.

Separating the age of the earth from macro-evolution – you just can’t do it, no matter how hard you try. But Christians, even so-called strong, orthodox, conservative teachers & preachers, like Charles Hodge, 1800’s, & B.B. Warfield, successor to Hodge at Princeton.

So Christians attempt to fit the bible into the box of modern, atheistic science when they try to compromise on the age of the earth. They separate the age of the earth from macro-evolution. If we were simply discussing the “age of the earth” all by itself, there would be no problem. Was it created in 4004 BC or 4006 BC? Does it really make a difference? Those types of questions approach in importance the issue about the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin. But if we’re allegedly off by billions of years, we’re talking about something entirely different.

When we begin discussing billions of years as the age as opposed to a relatively young earth, then we approach heresy. Why? Because there is no scriptural reason to argue that the earth is billions of years old except for macro-evolution. The age of the earth grew exponentially in length of time amongst scientists, not as a result of scientific proof, but as the need grew for enough age (there will never be enough) to explain the preposterous idea of life, cell mechanisms for life, and human brains/souls arising from non-life & bacteria. No need for God, just add time & all is well.

The old-earth geologists have a tacit agreement with the macro-evolutionary biologists. “We’ll keep the earth old for you to prove your evolutionary theories. Heck, we’ll even make it older should you need that.”

The macro-evolutionary biologists know that their theories – abiogenesis, cells accidentally developing membranes & nuclei & DNA & ribosomes & RNA at al, & bacteria developing into humanity – are preposterous . . . unless time was so vast that mistakes in genetic processing – maybe – could result in the beneficial advancement of living things. Of course, that is preposterous too, but apparently “time heals all wounds.”

It’s as if they sat down as a group and said, “Guys, you know how our theories will be ridiculed. What do we do?” I know, says one: “We need time to make it look possible. Who knows a geologist? We need the mystery of time to resolve all these problems. Science will not save us.”

Of course, that didn’t happen. Centuries back, Cosmology, the most speculative of the sciences, came up with all kinds of weird ideas for the origin/development of the universe, all requiring time. Then geology wanted to get in on the act, developing uniformitarianism.

Once they had laid the foundation, Darwin & his devotees found fertile ground for their theories to sprout, full-grown from that ground. Improbable development through mutating genes? No problem. “Think of how old the earth is. It could’ve happened.” “Right . . . ,” say I facetiously.

Now Christians wring their hands, saying, “Maybe Moses got it . . . not wrong but just off a little bit – by about a few billion years or so. Surely there’s a way to reconcile him with modern science? OK, to keep our Christian credentials but still seem respectable to scientists, let’s just say that the age may be a problem, but we also don’t like macro-evolution.”

Huh? The whole point of the age is to justify evolution! Some may think that they can split the baby, but Solomon’s decision was not based on the value of a chopped-up half baby; it was based on the fact that a dead baby and a just result in that situation was impossible. It’s the same with the age of the earth & macro-evolution. They’re joined at the hip; they depend inexorably on each other.

So, today some Christians agree that billions of years are required for bacteria to evolve into animals, birds, fish, even humans, who somehow develop, wait, no, are created – sounds more biblical – into Adam & Eve. “We don’t know how or why God suddenly changed his providential decree of evolution and switched to a miraculous, immediate ‘creation’ of his most majestic of creatures, man in his image, but the bible says it happened, so no matter how nonsensical it may be (So sorry B.B. Warfield & Charles Hodge, with all due respect to your ever perfect opinions – sarcasm intended), we believe it must have happened the way science said, but we sprinkle some miraculous event a few billion years after whatever happened, and, voila, it’s biblical.” Right!? Wrong.

There are times when the church cannot compromise. Yes, it’s a crisis period. Yes, people leave the faith. Yes, the world ridicules us, maybe like it ridiculed Elijah . . . just before he called down fire from heaven to the earth to lick up every bit of the sacrifice and the water he so abundantly spread on and around the sacrifice. The church does not advance by saying, “Well, gee, hate to be unreasonable. Maybe you’re partly right about Baal worship. You are willing to cut yourselves for him. What reasonable person would do that unless there was some validity to the belief?”

By compromising, you will not defeat macro-evolution, you will not stop young people from leaving the faith, you will not uphold the inerrancy of scripture, and you will not appear more respectable to the world. You’ll compromise right up to the time a scientist, probably a non-Christian, proves that macro-evolution is the farce it is. You give credence to one lie – a super old earth, contrary to the express teaching of Genesis – and you will not stop the tide of other lies, like man coming from bacteria – with a soul added – later, like a doll head pasted to a toy soldier’s body. Whom do you trust? Scientists who say, “Trust us.” Or God who says, “Trust my word.”

Yes, I tie together old earth & macro-evolution. Why? Because they are inseparable. That is the way it is, no matter how many nice, respectable people try to say otherwise.