Systematic
Theology
by Wayne Grudem
Chapter 15
Creation
Part 2
Truth Bible Church
Sunday School
25 Sep 2011
Outline
Some Reminders...
Consideration
The Good
The Bad
The Ugly
The Truth
Application
Reminder
Recall these words from Chapter 12:
“God is infinitely wise and we are not, and it
pleases Him when we have faith to trust His
wisdom even when we do not understand what
He is doing.”
“In fact, as we begin to think true thoughts about
God and creation, thoughts that we learn from
Scripture and from allowing Scripture to guide
us in our observation and interpretation of the
natural world, we begin to think God’s own
thoughts after him!”
Reminder
In Chapter 14 we learned that Jesus
carried out the commands of the Father
and the Holy Spirit was “manifesting
God’s immediate presence in His
creation” as recorded in Genesis 1-3
New Testament teaching on creation:
Matt 19:3-6, John 1:1-3, Col 1:16, 1 Cor
8:6, 11:8-9, Heb 1:2-3
Consideration
With the reminders taken from Chapter 12, take
a moment to consider what would be most
consistent with what was said about God’s
wisdom and the involvement of Jesus and the
Holy Spirit in the act of creation
Would God have used the Word of His mouth and
the Living Word to form all creation in some
manner other than a simple and literal
understanding of Genesis 1-3?
How would the literal, historical and grammatical principals of
biblical hermeneutics apply?
Consideration
Unfortunately Wayne Grudem does not
follow his own well written words “to trust
His wisdom even when we do not understand
what He is doing” when he allows the
philosophy of men through science to dictate
or influence his understanding of Scripture in
regards to Genesis 1-3 and creation
Take note of how complicated things get when
we attempt to eisegete
But all is not lost...
The Good
Grudem presents:
creation ex nihilo
God created everything from nothing
direct creation of Adam and Eve:
“...these texts are so explicit that it would
be very difficult for someone to hold to the
complete truthfulness of Scripture and still
hold that human beings are the result of a
long evolutionary process.” - p. 265
The Good
Grudem presents:
Creation is distinct from God yet always
dependent on God
Transcendent - God is much greater than
creation
Immanent - God is involved in His creation
Materialism - most widely accepted
philosophy of unbelievers, denies the
existence of God altogether, atheism
The Good
Grudem presents:
The clearly atheistic and destructive
influence of evolutionary theory on the
modern history of humanity
Evolutionary theory taken to its logical
conclusion “should lead people to a
profound sense of despair.” - p. 286
Accurately the gap theory (a gap of millions
of years between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 and a
new creation) and theistic evolution as no
biblical merit
The Good
Good Figures to explain some concepts:
God
God
THE
UNIVERSE
Materialism
CREATION
Creation is distinct, yet
always dependent on God
God
THE
UNIVERSE
God
Dualism
CREATION
Pantheism
Deism
The Good
Grudem at least gives a slightly favored
treatment of the young earth view in
some regards
More of this in The Truth slides...
Grudem acknowledges throughout this
chapter his own conflict with coming to a
particular understanding on this issue in
the way he presents each case and his
own difficulty to pick one
The Good
In his discussion of the day age
theory he lists the conflicts between
this theory and Scripture and
describes it as such - p. 299
Unfortunately he favors a modified
version of this theory, that takes us to
The Bad
The Bad
Grudem attempts to somehow reconcile the
faulty claims of “modern science” with what
Scripture clearly teaches:
Presentation of the age of the human race
Gaps in genealogies that somehow drastically
affect the age of the earth,
these gaps are minor and are the exception
the ages of the men are given in these genealogies
Grudem “favors” an old earth/day age view due
to “many kinds of scientific data” pp. 300 & 307
The Bad
Grudem is not alone, the respectable Dr.
Norman Geisler presents similar
arguments in his systematic theology and
also favors an old earth view
Unfortunately these theologians along
with many Christians have been duped by
scientists or brainwashed in school
The Bible gives us 1 Timothy 6:20-21 for
just such an occasion
The Bad
The section on the relationship between
Scripture and modern science is definitely
bad to very bad
The old tired argument used to somehow
show that Christianity is opposed to science
is presented
Galileo and Copernicus were the victims of a false
church bent on control and power
Grudem and others fail to recognize that Roman
Catholicism is NOT Christianity
The RC fails to “rightly divide the word of God”
The Bad
When reconsidering whether a plain
and simple understanding of Scripture
is correct in light of the philosophy of
men, GREAT CARE must be used
Grudem does not understand the
science
Grudem makes a false claim as there
are theologians who still agree with
Ussher
The Bad
When all the facts are rightly
understood... p. 274
Statements 1-7 are false, “possibility” is
unnecessary with good hermeneutics
Statements 1 and 4 should replace
“possibility” with “definitely”
Statements 2, 3 and 6 should be deleted
Statements 5 and 7 are OK, perhaps
The Bad
The history of human ancestry given
demonstrates a lack of understanding of
the scientific data:
homo habilis - 100% human (HSS)
homo erectus - combination of Peking man
(3 teeth and skull fragments) and Java man
(admitted fraud - gibbon skull)
The dates are the wild guesses of
“scientists” (this is not hyperbole)
The Ugly
Both “Old Earth” and “Young Earth”
Theories are valid options for Christians
who believe the Bible today
Not really, the are not equally “valid” while
true, born-again Christians may hold either
view only one of these views is true, and
therefore biblically valid!
This amounts to a serious compromise
The Ugly
“Old Earth” Theories of Creation
It is accurate to use the word “theory”
for these views as they are not biblical
Day-Age
Literary Framework
The Ugly
Day-Age - Each day a very long time
The words of the Hebrew do NOT allow for
this despite Grudem’s or other’s remarks,
more to follow
“...if the current scientific estimate... it
explains how the Bible is consistent with this
fact.”
Is the Bible subject to science? To man’s
logic? Which is the foundation for truth?
The Ugly
Literary Framework - Genesis 1 is just a
literary tool used to frame the activity of
creation
There is some very real merit to the fact that
God created in order first the spaces and
then the objects to fill them
forming and then filling
This can be and should be taken literally and not
simply as a poetic literary tool for allegorizing the
creation account
The Ugly
Grudem makes false statements in an
attempt to “make peace” or lend credibility
to the old earth view
e.g. :
•
“Scripture seems to be more easily understood
to suggest (but not require) a young earth view,
while the observable facts of creation seem
increasingly to favor an old earth view.”
(underline added)
What “facts”?
To be continued...
Next week:
More on The Ugly
The Truth
Application