The post Which Animals Are <em class="algolia-search-highlight">Nephesh</em> Animals? appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

The post More Evidence That <em class="algolia-search-highlight">Nephesh</em> Animals Were Designed for Relationships with Humans appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

Imago Dei is first introduced in Genesis 1:26, “Let us make mankind in our image . . .” and further described in Genesis 1:27, “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.”

This is the only time in Scripture, and during creation, that God creates in his own image.

What Does “Made in God’s Image” Mean?

Let’s look at Genesis 1:26–27 (emphasis added):

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

This passage reflects the only time in Scripture where part of God’s creation is mentioned as being made in his image. On this basis we conclude that human beings are uniquely created in the likeness of God, our Creator.

This means that each human being, whom God has made in his own image (both male and female), is graciously bestowed with intrinsic dignity from the moment they’re created.

So, how can humans, as a composite of body and spirit, be made similar to someone we can’t see?

Historically, theologically orthodox Christians have held to the belief that humans uniquely bear God’s image. Yet there are different perspectives on the exact meaning of imago Dei.

Understandably, it’s confusing! But it’s incredibly important to dive into this topic, especially because it informs our view of morality. Throughout history, this belief that humans are created in the image of God has shaped societies around the world.

A complete understanding of imago Dei just isn’t possible since we as humans have a limited understanding of God’s nature. But we can get closer to a biblically faithful description of the image of God through careful study of Scripture and God’s creation.

A basic understanding of the doctrine holds that the imago Dei represents how all human beings reflect Godlike qualities. These include our desire to be in relationship and in fellowship with others, our spiritual nature, our ability to think critically, and more.

The Christian and the non-Christian are created in the image of God. Yet, his image has been marred by sin in all of us. By making us in his image, God displays his goodness to all humans.

In What Ways Are Humans Like God?

Humans are like God in our knowledge, awareness, and pursuit of morality

People can display some of God’s attributes, such as knowledge, wisdom, goodness, love, holiness, justice, truthfulness, and more. This is what theologians call the communicable attributes of God, as opposed to God’s incommunicable attributes such as omniscience. However, these attributes in humans differ in degree from those found in God. We’re finite, imperfect, and affected by sin, but in him the same characteristics (and more) are unlimited and perfect.

Humans reflect God in our relationships

The Bible also tells us that the imago Dei gives humans the unique opportunity to be in relationship and to be reconciled—despite our sinful nature—with our holy God. God is a relational being who exists eternally in a joyful relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (the Trinity). God also created us to live in relationship with one another and with him.

Humans image God in our actions

God uniquely gave humanity authority over creation, which we can learn about in Genesis 1:26 (emphasis added):

And because we are image bearers, humans have the important role of ruling over and caring for all that God has created.

The imago Dei is what sets humankind apart from everything else in creation! Bearing his image is what makes humanity God’s crown jewel in his creation. Nowhere else in Scripture are God’s other created works referenced as being made in God’s image.

Now, with this basic framework, let’s dive into the original Hebrew to gain a deeper understanding.

What Does Scripture Say About the Imago Dei?

“Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness” (Genesis 1:26a).

There are only six verses in Scripture that directly refer to human beings as image bearers.

1. Genesis 1:26–27
2. Genesis 5:1
3. Genesis 9:6
4. 1 Corinthians 11:7
5. Colossians 3:10
6. James 3:9

In these verses the Hebrew words for “image” (tselem) and “likeness” (demut) convey the idea of an object similar to or representative of something else, but not identical to it.

The words “image” and “likeness” shouldn’t be understood as referring to two different things, but rather as interchangeable terms. The New Testament Greek word for “image” conveys virtually the same meaning as the Hebrew.

Both languages indicate that humans are created in the likeness of God, but are not identical to God. Therefore, from a biblical perspective, human beings, who bear God’s image, are both alike and distinct from the God who made us.

To be clear, our Creator God is distinctly different from that which he created. As the Creator, he is not limited like we are as humans. He is infinite, eternal, perfect, and so much more. Finite creatures like us are unable to embody these characteristics.

Some of the best features of humankind (such as the ability to love, pursue justice, and be creative) are characteristics that reflect God’s relational, just, and creative qualities.

What a gift it is for humans to reflect the God who made us! What an honor it is to carry the likeness of the Creator of the universe!

Do Men and Women Bear God’s Image Equally?

Yes! Men and women, male and female, are equally made in God’s image.

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them (Genesis 1:27; emphasis added).

When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them “Mankind” when they were created (Genesis 5:1–2).

From these passages we learn that God made man and woman (male and female) in his image. Thus, both men and women equally, yet distinctly, bear God’s image.

One perspective holds that the distinction between males and females is purposeful, as male and female relationships (within marriage) point toward Christ and his relationship with his people, the church. That is, Christ is the bridegroom and the church is his bride.

When a man and woman enter into a marriage covenant (or promise), they represent the covenant between Christ and the church (Genesis 2:24, Ephesians 5:31).

This relationship leads us to believe that God’s intention for marriage was for the union of male and female to mirror the commitment between Christ and the church.

Are marriages between Christian men and women perfect? Far from it. Due to humanity’s sinful state, human relationships are not perfect portrayals of God’s great love for his people (Romans 3:23–24).

But what this means for us—as our relationships imperfectly resemble God’s love for his people—is that we have perfection to look forward to in Christ’s second coming to Earth.

Did Sin Change the Image of God?

Here’s one way to view the fall of mankind in relation to the imago Dei: When sin entered the Garden of Eden, humans were scarred by their sin but not destroyed. Sin marred, but didn’t efface, God’s image in humans. In God’s grace, he chose to redeem his creation rather than wipe it out.

However, sin did change human beings’ relationship with God and one another. In our fallen state, humans are now at enmity with God and with one another. Nevertheless, sin didn’t change the fact that humans are created in the image of God.

Because every human continues to bear the imago Dei, God sees even our marred images as redeemable and restorable. It’s because of the imago Dei that God saw humankind as worthy of redemption. In the triune God’s great act of selfless love (John 3:16), Jesus took our place of punishment for sin on the cross. He also gave us his righteousness, by which we can stand blameless before our holy Creator.

Did our sin change God? No. God remains unchanging (Matthew 24:35; Hebrews 13:8). Sin and evil have no power over God and he is able to use humans, even in our sinful disposition, for his glory and good purposes.

With this in mind, we can be confident that even after Adam and Eve’s fall in the Garden of Eden, all humans (Christian and non-Christian) continue to bear God’s image.

But, sadly, because of our sin all humans are often an incomplete, and even a poor, reflection of his image. 

In his letter to the Colossian church, the apostle Paul explains that as believers in Christ they are also alive with Christ. He urges them to turn away from their sinful ways and to turn toward God, and to “put on the new self which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator” (Colossians 3:9–10).

Paul was reminding the church in Colossae that even though they were sinners, they are made in God’s image and have been raised to life with Christ. The image of God in redeemed sinners is to undergo renewal of the knowledge of God. Paul’s letter to the Colossians at the time of the early church is still relevant to us today.

Furthermore, in James 3:9, author James warns the Jewish Christians about the temptation for us to praise God while also cursing our fellow image bearers.

James is making the point that since human beings are created in God’s likeness, when we speak evil to another image bearer, we’re also speaking evil toward God.

We learn in these postfall Scripture passages that despite humanity’s sinful state, humans continue to reflect God’s image. However, because we still live in a fallen world as sinful human beings, we also look forward to Jesus’s second coming when God will renew and restore the earth.

Are Animals Made in the Image of God?

It’s undeniable that animals share some characteristics with humans. Animals are even capable of having emotions and thoughts.

So, are animals also created in God’s image?

Genesis 1 emphasizes the unique creation of “soulish” animals (Hebrew nephesh). These soulish animals (including birds, mammals, and some reptiles) are able to form emotional bonds, especially with their parents and their young.

Think of a parent animal caring for its offspring, or even sacrificing its own life to save the life of its young. We’ve all seen images of these moments and they can be both heartwarming and heart-wrenching.

Let’s look to the biblical creation account to help us learn more about the relation between humans and animals.

In Genesis 1, the Hebrew word bara is translated as “create” and used only three times.

• When God brings the universe into existence (Genesis 1:1)
• When God creates the nephesh (soulish animals, Genesis 1:21)
• When God creates humans (Genesis 1:27)

In the context of Genesis 1, bara is reserved for God bringing something brand new into existence.

While humanity shares physical qualities with animals, people stand alone in terms of their spiritual nature. Bara, used in Genesis 1:26–27 and Genesis 5:1–2 with reference to humanity’s creation, suggests God’s origination of something brand new.

If humans had a likeness to animals, we would assume that the writer of Genesis would not have used bara to describe how God made humans. Instead, in Genesis 1:27 bara is used three times to explain how God created mankind in his image.

Thus, the Genesis creation account solidifies how human beings alone are made in God’s image. And while humanity is directed to care for the animals, we must be careful not to characterize animals with mankind’s unique image and likeness of God.

How Do We Reflect God’s Image Today?

Christians can rejoice in the fact that we’re made in God’s image. Even though we’re imperfect at reflecting his image to the world, it’s all the more reason why we look to Jesus Christ, God’s Son, as the perfect image of God the Father.

It’s our charge as God’s image bearers to tell other image bearers how they can be reconciled to their Creator. God promises to restore his image in all repentant sinners through the lifelong process of sanctification (transformation into Christlikeness).

And how can each of us as imperfect humans be sanctified? By the grace of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit, we can be born again (renewed) to a God-honoring life, restored in God’s image of righteousness and holiness.

The post What Does “Made in the Image of God” Mean? appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

As Christians, we can expect that what we see in nature (God’s creation) will be in harmony with what we read in Scripture (God’s Word; Psalm 19:1–4, Psalm 19:7, Romans 1:20). So why is there such a vast difference in beliefs about the age of the earth? Let’s explore what the Bible and science have to say on the topic.

Is the Bible a Reliable Source for the Age of the Earth?

While Genesis 1:1 tells us, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth,” it doesn’t say when this monumental event took place. Fortunately, to help us understand his creation, God has revealed himself to us in two significant ways:

1. Special Revelation: The Bible

The Bible is God’s Word, given through the Holy Spirit—guiding human authors so that Scripture reflects both divine truth and human style. Inerrant in its original writings, it is authoritative in all it affirms and, when rightly interpreted, never contradicts the truths revealed in nature. Scripture reveals God’s character, creation, and saving will in Christ, and provides wise guidance for the issues we face in daily life.

2. General Revelation: Nature

In addition to God’s Word, we have the privilege of witnessing his amazing power, creativity, and meticulous order revealed to us in nature. The natural world reflects God’s glory and allows us to understand more about him, including his character attributes (Romans 1:20). Nature stands as evidence of a creator, similar to how a painting in an art gallery is evidence of an artist.

When we consider the age of the earth from a Christian perspective, it’s important to take both of these revelations seriously. Psalm 19:1 says, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.” Psalm 19:4 says of the heavens, “Their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.” Psalm 19:4 says, “The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul.”

These verses, among others, remind us that we can trust both Scripture and nature to discover more about God and his creation, including the earth’s age.

These two forms of revelation—the Bible and creation—can be understood through the “two-books” metaphor. God is the author of both the book of Scripture and the “book” of nature. Through these two sources, we can learn about the power, character, and works of God.

What If the Physical Universe Seems in Conflict with the Bible?

The Christian worldview holds that all truth comes from God. However, conflicts and confusion can arise when there seems to be a disconnect between God’s two books (Scripture and nature). It’s especially common for Christians to sense this disconnect when thinking about the age of the earth.

It’s important to keep in mind that neither of these “books” singularly addresses every detail of life. For example, we can’t observe the human soul scientifically, but we can read about it in Scripture.

Similarly, the Bible doesn’t explicitly say how old the earth is, mention bacteria, or describe galaxies—but we can learn of these things through science.

Each book—Scripture and nature—should encourage and inspire us to explore the other more deeply. It’s through proper examination of both sources that we come to a right understanding of God’s creation. Both books speak the truth because they come from the Source of all truth.

While holding Scripture as our ultimate authority, we can trust that studying the created realm will help us to make sense of our world. Though human interpretation may err, we can know that God’s Word and world are consistently reliable.

Let’s keep this in mind as we dig deeper into how old the earth is according to the Bible. First, let’s explore two prominent viewpoints—young earth and old earth.

Defining Young-Earth vs. Old-Earth Views

Two common creation viewpoints among Christians are young-earth creationism (YEC) and old earth-creationism (OEC). (Evolutionary creationism is another viewpoint that we explore in other articles.)

In general, YEC believes the earth is 6,000 to 10,000 years old and OEC believes the earth is 4.6 billion years old.

This major difference often leads to a lot of confusion and important questions. You might wonder if Christians have always held a young-earth perspective. It’s a common assumption, and it’s understandable to be concerned that an old-earth view might just be a modern attempt to make the Bible fit with science, particularly with evolutionary theories that exclude a creator.

However, Jewish and Christian leaders have been wrestling with the details of the Genesis 1 creation account for centuries.. Prominent figures like Philo (BC 13–AD 50), Clement of Alexandria (AD 150–215), Origen (185–254), and Augustine of Hippo (AD 354–430) noted how difficult it was to determine the true nature of the creation “days” in Genesis.

This long history of discussion brings us to the key questions that Christians are still asking today. These questions deserve careful thought as we seek to understand how old the earth is according to the Bible.

• Does the Bible actually demand a young-earth interpretation?
• How much time transpired between God creating the universe (Genesis 1:1) and God permitting visible light to reach Earth’s surface (Genesis 1:3).
• Why does Genesis use the words “day,” “evening,” and “morning” if the creation periods were longer than 24 hours?
• Why is there no closure of God’s seventh day?
• How much time transpired between God creating Adam and God creating Eve?
• Can’t we just add up the years in the biblical genealogies to figure out the age of the earth?
• If the earth is billions of years old, then does an old-earth view mean that biological evolution must have happened?
• Is the old-earth perspective simply a case of allowing science to trump the Bible?
• And what about death? Doesn’t an old-earth view mean God is responsible for animals dying years ago, long before humanity’s fall into sin?

These are the very questions we need to explore. As we dig into the details in the next section, we’ll unpack what Scripture says and see how the two books of God’s revelation—Scripture and nature—can help us find the answers.

How Old Is the Earth According to the Bible?

The Bible doesn’t give us an exact age for either the universe or Earth. It is important to recognize that God inspired the Bible authors to communicate to all generations of readers. Only during the last century or two have the actual ages of the universe and Earth become issues of interest for Bible readers, just like only during the past 180 years have Bible readers known or cared about dinosaurs, Neanderthals, or molecules. The Bible naturally is silent on issues for which only modern-day readers would have any knowledge. 

As a thought to consider, perhaps God didn’t specify details about atoms, molecules, or the ages of the universe and Earth in Scripture to encourage us to study his creation so that we might know him more.

Case for Old Earth Creationism

Does the Bible Demand a Young-Earth Interpretation?

Not at all. Not only does the Bible not demand we embrace young-earth creationism, a careful, literal reading of all the Bible’s creation texts refutes young-earth creationism. Here are three reasons that explain why a young-earth interpretation is inconsistent with a literal reading of all the Bible’s creation texts.

1. Original Language: Meaning of “Day,” “Evening,” “Morning”

One of the most helpful ways to understand Scripture is to consider the original context and language in which it was written. Let’s consider the word “day” in the Genesis 1 creation account in its original Hebrew.

The Hebrew word for day is yôm. It’s important to understand that nearly all biblical Hebrew nouns have literal definitions. Yôm has four distinct literal definitions:

1. The daylight hours (from sunrise to sundown)
2. Part of the daylight hours 
3. A 24-hour calendar day
4. A long stretch of time finite in duration

Three of these definitions are used in Genesis 1:3–2:4. In Genesis 1:3–5, yôm refers to the daylight hours. In Genesis 1:14, yôm refers to 24-hour calendar days. In Genesis 2:4, yôm refers to the duration of all God’s works of creation, clearly a time period much longer than 24 hours. So, yôm does not inherently imply only 24-hour time windows.

Genesis 1 appends the terms “evening was, morning was” to each of the first six creation days. The Hebrew words for evening and morning are ‘ereb and boqer, which can also be translated as “ending” and “beginning,” respectively. So, no matter which literal definitions of ‘ereb and boqer one chooses, the repeated use of the “evening was, morning was” phrase implies that each of the first six creation days are completed time periods. When it comes to God’s seventh creation day (Genesis 2:1-4), the “evening was, morning was” phrase is missing. This absence implies that God’s seventh day is not yet completed. Both Psalm 95:10–11 and Hebrews 4:1–11 explicitly state that we are still in God’s seventh day, a day that is continuing into the future.

What is God doing during his seventh day? He is resting/ceasing from his work of creation (Genesis 2:2–3) and bringing about his work of redemption (John 5:16–47). God’s time of resting/ceasing from his work of creation explains the fossil record enigma: why we see so much evidence for the appearance of new phyla, classes, orders, and families of life before the creation of the first humans (the six creation days) and no such evidence during the human era (the seventh day). God’s ongoing rest also explains why, unlike astronomers and geologists, field biologists and sociologists see no evidence for creation miracles in their research. Since their research is limited to when God has ceased from his creation work, evidence for creation miracles will be absent from their research findings. The ongoing nature of God’s seventh day establishes that the Genesis creation days must be much longer than 168 hours. An old-earth perspective definitely fits a literal interpretation of the days in Genesis.

2. Contextual Clues

We can also consider the contextual clues we see in Genesis 1 and 2, which describe the creation of Adam and Eve. Genesis 1:27 states that God created man, male and female, during the sixth creation day.

Genesis 2 states that God created Adam first, then later he created Eve and that Adam and Eve were the first humans. Genesis 2 further states that God created Adam outside the Garden of Eden, later placed him in Eden where Adam watched the trees in Eden grow. God then assigned to Adam the task of tending the garden. Anyone familiar with gardening knows that it takes considerable labor and time. Later, God assigned Adam the task of examining the different species of nephesh (soulish) animals in Eden and assigning appropriate names to the different species. Later, God observed that Adam was alone. Though Adam was experiencing diverse relationships with the soulish animals he had named, none were able to relate to him in a completely satisfying and fulfilling way. Then God put Adam into a deep sleep, took part of the man’s side, and made Eve from it. God brought Eve to Adam and Adam exclaimed happa ‘am. This Hebrew word’s most frequent translation is “at long last.” The sequence of events alone — Adam’s placement in Eden, the growth of the trees, the tending of the garden, the naming of the animals, and finally the creation of Eve — points to a sixth day far longer than 24 hours. Adam’s exclamation, best translated ‘at long last,’ fits that reading.

3. Events Before the First Creation Day

In biblical Hebrew verbs by themselves do not specify the duration of actions or the time ordering of actions. However, the verb order relative to the subject of the verb does. The verb order in Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 imply the completed nature of the creation of the universe and the completed nature of the formation of the primordial Earth. Thus, Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 imply an unspecified duration of time transpired between the creation of the universe and the formation of Earth and another unspecified duration of time transpired between the formation of Earth and the events of the first creation day. Thus, Genesis 1:1–3 allow for a lot of time, even billions of years, to transpire between God creating the universe (Genesis 1:1) and God transforming Earth’s atmosphere/clouds to permit visible light to reach Earth’s surface (Genesis 1:3, Job 38:8–9).

4. God Is Constant (and So Are the Laws of Nature)

One of God’s most beautiful promises is his constancy. He is always faithful, always all-knowing, always loving, and always just. He is not fickle like we humans are; we can rely on him to be the same yesterday, today, and forever.

God blessed us by designing his creation to reflect his constant character. In Jeremiah 33, God specifically addresses his faithfulness and the constant continuity he set forth in creation.

He compares his covenant with his people to his covenant with day and night and the fixed laws that govern heaven and earth:

“If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the fixed laws of heaven and earth, then I will reject the descendants of Jacob and David my servant.”

The beauty of this passage is that we know that God’s covenants cannot and will not be broken. His promises to his people stand true.

This promise gives us confidence that we can study the creation around us and know it to be a reliable source of information about God. We don’t have to worry that the laws of nature that exist one day will be different the next.

We can trust that the processes and rules in place at the creation of the earth hold true today. This confidence allows us to use scientific means to understand the world around us and discover answers to questions like “How old is the earth?” As both young-earth and old-earth creationists acknowledge, if the laws of physics indeed are immutable (unchanging) then the ages of the universe and earth must be 13.8 and 4.6 billion years respectively.

Animal Death: Not a Problem Biblically or Scientifically

In Romans 5:12, Paul explains, “Sin entered the world through one man . . . and in this way death came to all people.” Some Christians take this to mean that no death of any kind existed on Earth until after Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit.

However, a closer look at this passage reveals that Adam’s sin brought death to all humans—not to all life. Only one species on Earth can experience sin, namely humans. Paul explicitly stated that Adam’s sin brought death to all people. In 1 Corinthians 15:20–22, Paul again clarifies that Adam’s sin brought death to all humans. 

And when we look at Job 38–41 and Psalm 104, we can see God’s relationship with animal death. These passages show that animal death does not ascribe evil or cruelty to God—it’s simply a part of his creation plan for which Job and the psalmist praise God. These passages declare that God provides prey for lions and ravens so that their young lack not for food. Field biology shows that removing carnivores from an ecosystem ultimately leads to more herbivore death, not less.

Can We Use Genealogies to Determine the Age of the Earth?

Genealogies provide us with details about biblical family lines and make important theological points, especially about whom God will bless and whom God will judge. They can help us understand the connections between multiple biblical characters, and they reveal God’s faithfulness as he fulfills his promises across generations.

Genealogies were primarily intended to relay important family relationships and don’t necessarily outline every generation in the family line.

For example, 1 Chronicles 24 and Ezra 7 outline the genealogy of Aaron. Though each account ends at a different point in the family line, you can see that a middle portion of the Chronicles genealogy is missing from the Ezra account.

Some people might be concerned about this apparent inconsistency, but we have to remember the intention behind the genealogy. Again, it wasn’t to show every single generation that existed in someone’s bloodline. A genealogy highlights prominent figures so that we, as readers of the Scripture, can gain a fuller understanding of God’s work in history and salvation.

Let’s take another Hebrew term into consideration: yalad. Yalad is typically translated as “begat” in our modern English Bibles. Most readers are quick to assume that begat means “bore this child” (i.e., “the parent begat/bore a child”).

However, yalad can be used in multiple ways. It sometimes outlines a direct parent-child relationship, but it also sometimes spans multiple generations—think a great-grandmother and her many great-grandchildren.

Ultimately, there are significant gaps in the genealogies that prevent us from outlining a complete family line. For these reasons, relying on biblical genealogies to determine when God created Adam and Eve or the age of the earth proves unreliable.

What About Biological  Evolution?

While old-earth creationism does hold that Earth is billions of years old, this view doesn’t necessarily imply that humans or animals originated via macroevolution. In fact, the topics of evolution and the age of the earth are separate issues entirely. A 4.6-billion-year-old Earth is far too young for any conceivable natural-process scenario to yield even the simplest living organism.

We at Reasons to Believe do not endorse macroevolution and are skeptical that it can account for either the origin or the history of life on Earth. Our creation view holds that all humans are descended from Adam and Eve who were specially created by God—Adam formed from the dust and given life through God’s breath (Genesis 2:7), and Eve fashioned from Adam’s side (Genesis 2:21–22). Through this unique creative act, humanity was endowed with the image of God (Genesis 1:26–27). In this way, RTB affirms the ex nihilo (out-of-nothing) creation of Adam and Eve. (If you’re curious how we can affirm an ancient earth that’s billions of years old while rejecting macroevolution, you might enjoy our scholars’ thorough explanation in Thinking About Evolution.)

Young-earth creationists believe there were no carnivores previous to Adam’s first sin. They also believe all land animals are descended from the several hundred animal pairs on board Noah’s ark. In each case, they invoke extremely rapid and aggressive “diversification” to explain all the carnivores and land animals existing today. The diversification rates their model requires are orders of magnitude faster than standard evolutionary theory proposes — a striking irony for a framework built on rejecting evolution.

Doesn’t Old-Earth Creationism Place Science as a Higher Authority Than Scripture?

Not at all—the role of science should be to support God’s Word and try to understand his creation. Scripture is, and must be, the ultimate authority in all that it addresses for all Christians. And as we’ve discussed throughout this post, there are many biblical reasons to believe the earth is old.

Scripture doesn’t give us a clear and simple answer to every question that life brings. When it doesn’t, we must examine the full message of the Bible as well as the creation around us to help make sense of what we’re trying to understand. It’s through the lens of the two books (the book of Scripture and the book of nature), both of which are perfectly inerrant, that we can come to a more thorough view and appreciation of God.

Charity in All Things

No matter what, we’ll always have brothers and sisters in Christ who have different views. This is true when it comes to the age of the earth, as well as other biblical teachings and beliefs. Despite holding differing views, we must always remember to prioritize charity in such discussions. Here, for example, is a charitable debate on the age of the earth between a young-earth creationist and an old-earth creationist.

Let’s not forget what we’re called to do in James 1:19b:

Everyone should be quick to listen, 
slow to speak, and slow to become angry.

Too often, discussions on the age of the earth become argumentative and unloving. But Christ has called us to listen attentively and respond with love—even to those we might strongly disagree with.

Continue Learning

As followers of Christ, let’s continue learning about God and loving one another well. May any conversation we have on the age of the earth according to the Bible remind us, ultimately, that God is the Creator of all things and is worthy of our praise and devotion.

To explore this topic in more depth, be sure to check out A Matter of Days, 2nd edition; Navigating Genesis; Rescuing Inerrancy by Hugh Ross.

The post How Old is Earth According to the Bible? appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

My Answer: The Hebrew word for “tail” in this passage, zanab, refers to the hindquarters and the tail of an animal. Note how well the rest of Job 40’s description fits the morphology, behavior, and habitat of the hippopotamus. The hippopotamus has huge hindquarters that it often uses as a weapon to attack other creatures and small boats and canoes that invade its personal space.

Notice, too, the primary theme of Job 39–42. Here, God tells Job and his friends that they have been successful at taming all the nephesh (soulish) animals. However, some of these animals are much more difficult to tame than others. The most difficult to tame are the leviathan (crocodile) and the behemoth (hippopotamus). Dinosaurs are not part of the nephesh.      

God’s primary point here is that it takes a higher being to tame a nephesh animal and some are more difficult to tame than others. Likewise, it takes a higher Being to “tame” a proud human heart and some are more difficult to tame than others. Job came to God for the taming that he needed. His three friends did not. You will find a much more detailed explanation and why the Bible does not mention dinosaurs in my book Hidden Treasures in the Book of Job, chapter 12.

The post Is the Animal in Job with a Tail Like a Cedar Tree a Dinosaur? appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

This counsel in the book of Job may seem odd for modern ears, yet in the context of Job’s lengthy dialogue with his philosopher friends, it’s an exhortation to seek wisdom and understanding from their source, the God of all creation. Here, God uses wild land mammals and birds to dispense wisdom and instill spiritual lessons. In this sense, these creatures serve as professors and pastors. Humans would be wise to heed their counsel—especially those who maintain little or no contact with animals in their habitats. 

Rise of the Nones
The “nones” now constitute a modern-day global phenomenon. This group includes atheists, agnostics, deists, theists, and Christians who are unaffiliated with any kind of organized church or religion. Nones as a percentage of the total human population began to rise noticeably starting at the beginning of the industrial revolution. The growth remained slow, however, until the 1970s. Since the 1970s, the growth has been dramatic and steady. In the US the percentage of adult men who identify as nones has risen from 9% in 1975 to 27% in 2018, and of adult women, from 5% to 20%.¹

The rise of the nones in America is seen across all racial and demographic groups. It has impacted all religious categories. As the authors of a study in Sociological Science document, “Even intense religiosity has eroded in the United States in recent decades.”²

Survey data assembled by Duke University sociologist Simon Brauer shows that “the United States fits closely on the same trajectory of religious decline as European countries, suggesting a shared demographic process as opposed to idiosyncratic change.”³ University of Manchester sociologist David Voas provides supporting evidence for this conclusion. He cites the European Social Survey, which reveals that “each generation in every country surveyed is less religious than the last.”⁴ The trends toward increasing religious nonaffiliation extend to nearly all Western nations and societies.⁵   

Causes of the Rise 
As I have pointed out in my book Hidden Treasures in the Book of Job⁶ and in many of my public lectures, there is an unmistakable correlation between the rise of the nones and increasing urbanization. For the first time in humanity’s history, the majority of humans live in large metropolitan cities. In these cities people have little or no intimate contact with the wild mammals and birds referred to in Job 12:7. Thus, they receive little instruction and teaching from these animals. In this sense, they miss out on animals’ educational and even pastoral influence.

Intimate Contact with Wild Mammals and Birds
God wants all of us to have intimate, rewarding contact with the birds and mammals he created. This can be a challenge, as noted, in the twenty-first century. It is so for me, which is why I’m deliberate about making contact. I’ll briefly describe six such encounters with the hope that you’ll seek opportunities to do the same and learn what the animals can teach you. 

I live in one of the largest metropolitan cities in the world. Greater Los Angeles now has a population approaching 19 million. Fortunately, I live on the edge of the Los Angeles Basin. Our house abuts the San Gabriel Mountains, and a half kilometer (third of a mile) from our home I can access several mountain trails. 

I make it a point to go for a run on one of these mountain trails every morning before breakfast. I also make it a point to engage the wildlife I encounter. I don’t just glance at them and run on. I make eye contact in a manner that communicates I am pleased to meet them and enjoy being in their presence. I believe this was Job’s intended message in Job 12:7. How can the beasts teach and the birds tell unless we pay close attention to them and enjoy their presence and instruction?

On one of my morning runs, I saw a large bobcat under a bush with her juvenile kitten. The next day the bobcat and her kitten were waiting for me by the trail. For the next several days I would spend a few seconds with them at the same location on the trail.

To access the trails by our home, I need to run along a road with poles that string electric power lines. One morning a squirrel chattered as I approached and then kept pace with me along the power line as I ran underneath. This practice went on for six months. 

On another day I saw a large bear from a distance jump over a rise. As I came to the rise, I climbed up to see the bear drinking from the stream below. We made eye contact for several seconds while the bear took a brief bath in the stream.

A fourth brush with wildlife occurred on a mountain trail in Colorado, where I rounded a bend to see a 450-pound bear only 30 feet away. I stopped and made eye contact. The bear slowly walked off the trail, sat down under a tree, and continued to stare at me. The bear seemed very calm and continued to sit while I took several photos (see figure 1). 

Figure 1: Bear Sitting Down and Enjoying My Company
Credit: Hugh Ross 

On a fifth encounter I recalled Psalm 104:26, which can be interpreted as referring to whales playing with ships. My wife and I were in a zodiac (an inflatable boat) in the Gulf of St. Lawrence surrounded by dozens of humpback, fin, minke, and beluga whales. We watched as three humpback whales sped toward our zodiac, seemingly intent on ramming us. At the last minute they dove under our boat, sped away on the opposite side, turned around, and sped back to dive under us again (see figure 2).

Figure 2: Humpback Whales Frolicking with Our Zodiac
Credit: Hugh Ross

Genesis 1 classifies birds and mammals as nephesh creatures. The nephesh are animals that God designed to relate to human beings and to serve and please them. These are the animals we can domesticate as pets and as service animals. Even the wild birds and mammals enjoy entertaining humans they take a liking to. My sixth encounter (figure 3) shows a wild wooly marmot in a remote part of British Columbia’s Selkirk Mountains emerging from his rock shelter to entertain me with his dance routine, which lasted three minutes.

Figure 3: Wooly Marmot’s Entertaining Dance Routine
Credit: Hugh Ross 

Spiritual Lessons from Wild Mammals and Birds  
When Job 12:7 referred to the mammals and birds teaching us, it was not referring to biology. The latter chapters in the book of Job make it clear that nature’s professors teach spiritual lessons.

One obvious spiritual lesson that birds and mammals teach us is this: Just as they were created to relate to and serve and please a higher species, namely humans, so also we humans were created to relate to and serve and please a higher Being, namely God. As God wants to meet us, enjoy our presence, and desires a loving relationship with us, he intends that we also should want to meet the birds and mammals he created for us and to enjoy their presence and desire loving relationships with them.

This “created to relate, serve, and please” lesson applies to humans and nephesh animals of all ages. Scientific studies show that it even applies to humans only 1–2 years of age.⁷

Another spiritual lesson we can learn is pastoral. God designed the birds and mammals to teach us about sin. Our sin causes wild birds and mammals to run away and hide from us instead of coming toward us. Likewise, our sin causes us to run away and hide from God rather than come to him for the fellowship and love he wants to bestow upon us.

When we tame wild birds and mammals, we can train them to do things that their untamed relatives are incapable of doing. Likewise, when we allow ourselves to be “tamed” by God and enter into a relationship with him where we accept his forgiveness of our sin and commit to serve and please him as he directs, we discover that our capacities to achieve and perform are greatly enhanced.

Some birds and mammals are more difficult to tame than others, and the same is true of humans. It is especially difficult to tame birds and mammals that have been abused and damaged by sin. Similarly, it is particularly difficult to tame and gain the trust of a human who has been abused and damaged by sin.

I appreciate the way the book of Job ends. God points out to Job and his friends that they have been able to tame all the different kinds of nephesh animals. While goats are easy to tame, the behemoth is very difficult to tame. However, in all cases, it takes a human being, a higher being, to tame a nephesh animal. Likewise, it takes God, the highest Being, to tame a human being. God commended Job because Job came to God for the humility he needed to submit his life to God and to serve and please him. God rebuked Job’s friends for their failure to come to him for the humility they needed. 

How might we encourage the modern-day nones to learn such spiritual lessons? Christianity teaches that God very much desires to do for each one of us what we desperately need and want but what is impossible for us to do on our own—namely, be reconciled to him. May we all take God up on his incredibly generous offer of a restored relationship and show the nones in our lives how to be reconciled to their Creator. 

Endnotes   

1. Jana Riess, “The ‘Nones’ Are Growing—and Growing More Diverse,” Religion News Service, March 24, 2021. The data was taken from the book, Ryan P. Burge, The Nones: Where They Came From, Who They Are, and Where They Are Going (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2021).
2. David Voas and Mark Chaves, “Even Intense Religiosity Is Declining in the United States,” Sociological Science 5 (November 15, 2018): 706, doi:10.15195/v5.a29.
3. Simon Brauer, “The Surprising Predictable Decline of Religion in the United States,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 57, no. 4 (December 2018): 654, doi:10.1111/jssr.12551.
4. David Voas, “The Rise and Fall of Fuzzy Fidelity in Europe,” European Sociological Review 25, no. 2 (April 2009): 155, doi:10.1093/esr/jcn044.
5. Sarah Wilkins-Laflamme, “Secularization and the Wider Gap in Values and Personal Religiosity between the Religious and Nonreligious,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 55, no. 4 (December 2016): 717–736, doi:10.1111/jssr.12307.
6. Hugh Ross, Hidden Treasures in the Book of Job (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011), 167–168.
7. Rachna B. Reddy et al., “Do Children Help Dogs Spontaneously?” CABI Digital Library: Human–Animal Interactions (January 16, 2023), doi:10.1079/hai.2023.0001; Hugh Ross, “Children and Dogs Are Designed to Help One Another,” Today’s New Reason to Believe (blog), Reasons to Believe, February 27, 2023.

The post Learning Spiritual Lessons from the Animals appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

Ever since the well-publicized Scopes Trial in 1925, evangelical Christians have engaged in vigorous, often heated debates over the age of the universe and Earth. On one side are Christians who are convinced that there is overwhelming, consistent, accurate scientific evidence that the universe is 13.79 billion years old and that Earth is 4.5662 billion years old. On the other side are Christians who are convinced that a literal interpretation of the Bible constrains both the age of the universe and Earth to be less than 10,000 years.

The four most significant factors persuading many Christians that the universe and Earth must be younger than 10,000 years old are:

1. concern that conceding a 4.5662-billion-year age for Earth will enable naturalistic evolutionary processes alone to explain the origin and history of all life;

2. certainty that the only possible literal interpretation of Genesis 1 is that in which the creation days are six consecutive 24-hour periods;

3. belief that there was no animal or human death until after Adam had sinned in the Garden of Eden; and

4. belief that an atheistic bias explains the scientific community’s united-front conclusion that Earth and the universe are billions of years old.

Dual Revelation
Both young-earth and old-earth creationist Christians uphold the biblical doctrine of dual revelation but they apply the doctrine in different ways. I’ve written a full-length book on dual revelation that will be released later this year.¹ In that book I define dual revelation as the doctrine that God has revealed himself and his personal attributes through two wholly reliable and trustworthy expressions: the book of Scripture (the Bible) and the book of nature. I know of no young-earth creationist scholar or leader who would disagree with this definition. The disagreement is over the application of a corollary doctrine—sola Scriptura.

The doctrine of sola Scriptura, codified during the Protestant Reformation, states that the Bible is the supreme authoritative source of information on all the subjects it addresses. The framers of this doctrine understood that for God’s revelation to be clearly authoritative, direct (verbal, propositional) rather than indirect communication is required.

Young-earth creationists interpret sola Scriptura as implying that the Bible is the only completely trustworthy, reliable, inerrant revelation from God. They acknowledge that the book of nature can be a reliable, trustworthy, inerrant revelation but only if it is interpreted through the lens of Scripture. Theologian John Whitcomb and physicist Donald DeYoung wrote that scientists “must grope in darkness apart from God’s special revelation in Scripture.”² Henry Morris II, founder of the Institute for Creation Research, argued that no tool of science can ever yield any reliable information on Earth’s age. He asserted, “The compelling Biblical …direct testimony from the Creator is the only way to know the age of the earth” (italics in original).³

There is a widespread distrust of science and of scientists in the young-earth creationist community. It has been my experience that attempting to persuade young-earth creationists to adopt an old-earth perspective on creation based on overwhelming and consistent scientific evidence that establishes Earth and the universe are billions of years old is a fruitless endeavor. However, while young-earth creationists give little credence to scientific evidence, they have high regard for the trustworthiness of the Bible. They put their faith and trust in the complete reliability of a literally interpreted Bible. Therefore, biblical arguments for the age of the universe and Earth based on literal interpretations of the Bible’s creation texts carry weight and will be considered.

What Does the Bible Say about the Universe’s and Earth’s Age?
1. Unchanging physical laws: According to the Bible, the laws of physics are unchanging. In Jeremiah 33, God, speaking through the prophet, contrasts human wavering with his own immutability by referring to the “laws governing the heavens and Earth” (verse 25). Just as they remain “fixed,” as in constant and unchanging, so does God. Likewise, Ecclesiastes speaks of the monotonous operation of the natural laws, in particular the thermodynamic laws. Paul writes in Romans 8:19–23 that the entire universe is subject to the law of decay, also known as the law of entropy or the second law of thermodynamics, a law that will remain in effect until God’s redemptive purposes for humanity in this physical realm have been fulfilled.

Everything from human digestion to the shining of the Sun, Moon, and stars is extremely sensitive to even the tiniest change in the laws of physics. Young-earth creationism faces an insurmountable challenge for the simple reason that young-earth models critically depend on radically altered laws of physics—laws altered not by a factor of 5 or 10 times, but by a factor of millions to billions at the fall of Adam and/or the flood of Noah. Young-earth creationists need such appeals to explain all the past geological and astrophysical activity that has occurred within a time frame of only 10,000 years or less. However, the Bible and the book of nature⁴ explicitly affirm that the laws of physics have remained unchanged throughout the universe’s history.

To their credit, some young-earth creationists, especially those with science and engineering backgrounds, have acknowledged this problem. The authors of Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth have written that if the laws and constants of physics have not changed in any significant way over the universe’s and Earth’s past, then both the universe and Earth must be billions of years old.⁵ They concede, “Either accelerated radioactive decay accounts for the large daughter isotope residues in a short period of time, or a large amount of decay occurred at conventional rates and the earth is old.”⁶ For this reason, they appeal to vastly accelerated nuclear decay. For example, they assert, “All these products of nuclear decay were indeed produced by nuclear decay! But the amounts of those products we observe are much greater than thousands of years could produce—at today’s rates.”⁷ They add, “A change in the decay constant of the order of 10⁹ may be required, if the accelerated decay is restricted to the one year period of the Genesis Flood. …A one year episode of accelerated decay at the time of the Flood may not be enough. Other episodes during Creation week or during the Fall may also be necessary.”⁸ Again, the dilemma for these concessions is that both the Bible and the book of nature explicitly affirm that there have been no changes in the laws of physics.

2. Animal death before Adam: The New Testament sheds decisive light on what resulted from Adam’s sin. In Romans 5:12, Paul writes, “Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned” (emphasis added). An exhaustive search of Scripture further clarifies that only humans are capable of sin. Only humans make moral and spiritual choices. The death Adam experienced is carefully qualified in the text as being visited on people—with no reference to Earth’s plants or animals (Romans 5:12, 18–19).

According to 1 Corinthians 15:21, the death that “came through a man” came to humans, not to humans and animals. 1 Corinthians 15:22–23 explains, “As in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the first fruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.” According to Genesis 1, God gave Earth’s plants and animals to humans. The only creatures who belong to Christ through acceptance of his redeeming love are the ones made expressly for eternal relationship with him: humans. Only spiritual beings are “made alive” in Christ. Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15 are the only passages in the Bible that explicitly address the death brought by Adam’s sin. Neither provides a compelling reason to suggest that physical death of plants and animals could not have occurred prior to Adam’s sin—or that the physical death of plants and animals necessarily impugns God’s character.

3. Duration of Genesis 1 creation days: In Genesis 1:1–2:4, the Hebrew word yôm, translated “day,” is used with three distinct definitions. Yôm refers to all of the daylight hours in Genesis 1:3–5, to a calendar day of 24 hours in Genesis 1:14, and to the entire time span of God’s creative activity in Genesis 2:4.

Each of the first six creation days is accompanied by the statement “and there was evening, and there was morning” and an ordinal number. This pattern leads to anticipation of an “evening-morning” tag to go along with the seventh day, but it does not appear there. Its omission must be intentional, and it certainly piques the curiosity of a first-time reader. Those familiar with the entire Bible would recognize the seventh day, the day of “rest” or cessation, from references to it in other passages of Scripture, such as Psalm 95:10-11 and Hebrews 4:1-11. In these texts, God’s rest from his “work” of creation still continues, and we’re invited to enter into his rest from working and obey God’s good news. In fact, Hebrews mentions that “today,” the time to repent and turn to the Lord, continues to this day.

Many young-earth creationists assert that Exodus 20:11‘s statement about obeying the Sabbath implies that the creation days in Genesis 1 must be calendar days. However, this claim is based on the assumption that a “Sabbath” can only and will always mean 24 hours. However, Leviticus 25:2–5 declares a year-long Sabbath for agricultural land. In each case, the Sabbath rest for humans and agricultural land serves biological needs and limitations—things not applicable to God.

Hosea 6:1–3 and Zechariah 14:7 show that even a numbered day can refer to a time span longer than 24 hours. Perhaps the clearest indication of this point comes from biblical elaboration in Genesis 2 on the events of the sixth creation day. That was a very full day of activity for Adam—so full it is highly unlikely Adam could have accomplished it all in a single 24-hour day.

Genesis 1 says that God created humans, male and female, on creation day six. According to the details provided in Genesis 2, God created Adam outside the garden and then placed him in the garden, where he introduced Adam to its beauty. Adam observed the trees of Eden growing. God had Adam tend the garden and “watch over it.” Then God noted that Adam was alone and that it was “not good for the man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18). Next, God brought Adam various species of birds and mammals to observe and name. Finally, God put Adam into a sound sleep and created Eve (from a tissue biopsy taken from Adam’s side). During this sequence of events, Adam had time to observe the difference between the world outside of Eden and the world within. He had time to learn the wonderful yet limited satisfaction that comes from gardening. He also had time and opportunity to learn about animal life and how soulish creatures (nephesh, in Hebrew) related to one another as well as to him. Finally, he had time to realize his own aloneness, his lack of a “like” partner.

According to the text, the exclamation that came from Adam’s lips when he first saw Eve was, in Hebrew, “happa‘am.” This expression is translated in Genesis 30:20 as “now at last” and in Genesis 46:30 as “now finally.” The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament translates this term in Genesis 2:23 as “at last.”⁹ The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon translates it in the same passage as “now at length.”¹⁰

Theologian C. John Collins has explained that the wording and structure of Genesis 1:1–3 allow for a significant gap in time between the creation of the universe (Genesis 1:1) and the development of the conditions on Earth described in Genesis 1:2.¹¹ Another time period of unspecified duration is possible between the state of Earth in Genesis 1:2 and the appearance of light on Earth’s surface, described in Genesis 1:3.¹² On this basis, Genesis 1:1–3 would permit, if taken as history, the passage of some billions of years between the creation of the universe and the creation events thereafter. Therefore, Christians who interpret the Genesis 1 creation days as a 144-hour time span could still accept the scientifically established ages of the universe and Earth. They need not reject the astronomical evidence for an ancient universe, nor do they need to accuse astronomers of deceit.

4. Scientists’ atheistic bias: There are more than 12,000 professional research astronomers in the world and about ten times as many professional research geologists. Trying to get this many scientists to unite together to foster a conspiracy about the age of the universe and Earth that they all know is not true defies credulity. To attribute such a conspiracy to a united atheistic bias overlooks the fact that a large percentage of research astronomers and geologists are Bible-believing Christians. The vast majority of these Bible-believing research astronomers and geologists, who publicly identify as born-again Christians, adhere to an old-earth interpretation of Scripture and the book of nature.

The claim that professional research astronomers and geologists have conspired to deceive the public about the ages of the universe and Earth also overlooks the fact that these scientific communities are tolerant of aberrant hypotheses that challenge mainstream scientific theories and thinking. Such tolerance is evident in their peer-reviewed scientific journals. Some of these journals specialize in publishing aberrant hypotheses to challenge scientists adhering to mainstream theories to strengthen and widen the evidence for their theories.

Considering Multiple Creation Texts
The Bible is unique among the books undergirding the world’s major religions in the number and extent of its creation passages. There are over two dozen chapter-length and near-chapter-length creation texts in the Bible. They appear in over 10 of the 66 books that comprise the Old and New Testaments.

The dispute among Christians over creation’s timing results not from interpreting the Bible as truthful, but from failing to integrate all the truth it reveals. Each biblical creation passage must be understood in a way that is both literal and consistent, both internally and externally.

This brief summary presents some of the more significant biblical refutations that the universe and Earth are less than 10,000 years old. For readers desiring to pursue greater depth on what the entire Bible teaches about the age of the universe and Earth, I have written a full-length book, A Matter of Days, 2nd edition.¹³

Christians can be confident that God created a world he intends for us to discover. I would add that he wants us to learn everything we can about the natural realm. Part of that learning involves a constructive integration of all relevant creation texts with the record of nature to gain insight into his timing and purposes for the creation.

Endnotes

1. Hugh Ross, Rescuing Inerrancy: A Scientific Defense (Covina, CA: RTB Press, 2023).
2. John C. Whitcomb and Donald B. DeYoung, The Moon: Its Creation, Form, and Significance (Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books, 1978), 69.
3. Henry M. Morris, “Morris Debates for Young Earth at Wheaton,” Acts and Facts 15, no. 8 (1986): 5.
4. I explain and document the scientific evidence for unchanging laws of physics in Hugh Ross, “New Evidence Further Affirms Biblical Prediction of Unchanging Physics,” Today’s New Reason to Believe (blog), Reasons to Believe, August 9, 2021; and in Hugh Ross, A Matter of Days, 2nd ed. (Covina, CA: RTB Press, 2015), 100–104, 164–166.
5. Larry Vardiman, Andrew A. Snelling, and Eugene F. Chaffin, eds., Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: A Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative, vol. 1 (El Cajon, CA: Institute for Creation Research; St. Joseph, MO: Creation Research Society, 2000): 42–44, 306–307, 312–313, 316–318, 334–337, 374, vol. 2 (El Cajon, CA: Institute for Creation Research; St. Joseph, MO: Creation Research Society, 2005): 736–738.
6. Vardiman, Snelling, and Chaffin, eds., Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, vol. 2:738.
7. Vardiman, Snelling, and Chaffin, eds., Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, vol. 1:337.
8. Vardiman, Snelling, and Chaffin, eds., Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, vol. 1:307.
9. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, vol. 2 (Chicago: Moody, 1980), 730.
10. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, 1906 repr. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997), 822.
11. C. John Collins, Genesis 1–4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological Commentary (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2006), 51; Rodney Whitefield, Reading Genesis One: Comparing Biblical Hebrew with English Translation (San Jose, CA: R. Whitefield Publisher, 2011), 10–11.
12. Collins, Genesis 1–4, 10–11.
13. Ross, A Matter of Days.

The post Does the Bible Affirm Young-Earth Creationism? appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

Wild birds and mammals that have never been abused by humans manifest how God created them for fellowship with humans. According to Genesis 1:21, 24, birds and mammals are nephesh creatures. God endowed the nephesh animals with a desire to emotionally relate to humans and to serve and please us. We tame these animals to become personal pets and domesticate them to perform service for us.

God designed the relationships between humans and nephesh animals to be mutualistic. That is, just as the nephesh animals relate to, serve, and please humans, so, too, God designed humans to relate to nephesh animals and to serve and please them.

Human-Animal Relationship Experiment
The extent and complexity of relationships between humans and nephesh animals has caught the attention of research scientists. The journal Human–Animal Interactions is dedicated to exploring these relationships. A paper published a month ago by an interdisciplinary team led by Duke University’s Rachna Reddy sought to determine whether humans inherently possess the desire to relate to and to serve and please nephesh animals or if these qualities develop over time through training and education.

Reddy’s team conducted experiments on young children and domesticated dogs. They wanted to determine if children—at the youngest age that they are capable of helping dogs—will spontaneously help dogs or if this behavior must be learned through training and education. They studied 97 children ranging in age from 1.7 to 3.1 years old: 51 female, and 46 male. Of these 97 children, 44 had pet dogs at home and 53 did not. An initial study of children in the age range 1.1–1.6 years showed that typically they were overstimulated in the presence of a dog and were unable to discern its needs or to help the dog. Reddy’s team also eliminated children from their study who were allergic to or highly fearful of dogs.

Reddy and her colleagues set up an experiment to determine whether, in a naturalistic encounter with friendly dogs, young children would help dogs to access a desired out-of-reach toy or food treat. They placed each child in an enclosed pen with one of three dogs (figure 2). One of the researchers would accidentally drop a toy or food treat so that it was out of reach for the dog but in reach for the child.

Experiment Results
Of the 236 experiments where the dog showed some visible interest in the toy or food treat, children gave it to the dog in 118 (50%) cases. In the 102 experiments where the dog ignored the toy or food treat, the children gave it to the dog in 27 (26%) cases. Reddy’s team noted slightly more positive outcomes when the dog was highly engaged with the child or when the child had a pet dog at home. They also observed that the children attempted to engage the dog even when the dog was passive. All the children were particularly motivated to give the dog a food treat.

Reddy’s team noted that other experiments demonstrate that the spontaneous help they observed in young children toward animals also operates in reverse. Juvenile chimpanzees have been observed to help their human caretakers access out-of-reach objects that were difficult for the humans to reach.²

Conclusions from the Experiments
The research team concluded that children as young as 1.7–3.1 years old have a well-developed theory of mind and a motivation to behave prosocially toward others. In this case, “others” refers to humans and nephesh animals. Theory of mind is a neuropsychology term that refers to the ability to infer others’ mental states, including emotions, beliefs, goals, desires, and knowledge. Prosocial behavior is another psychological term that refers to the motivation to help others reach goals and fulfill their desires.

As Harvard University psychologist Felix Warneken observed in his studies, young children are precociously prosocial, that is, eager to help others.³ Reddy’s team showed that this eagerness in young children to help extends to dogs and that it is spontaneous. No training is needed.

Personal Observations
It doesn’t take a Harvard psychologist to recognize how profoundly and precociously prosocial young children are. Two of my most cherished memories are when I held each of my sons in my arms just seconds after they were born. Joel’s eyes intently studied every part of my face, head, and neck. His philosopher-artist-introvert personality was evident right away. When I held David right after his birth, he reached out with his hands to feel every part of me that he could. He uttered sounds that melted my heart. He immediately expressed his entertainer-psychologist-extrovert personality.

Today, Joel has a reputation as an animal whisperer. I could see that characteristic in him when he was just five months old. He was in an infant bouncy chair on the living room floor of my cousins’ home on Vancouver Island. Their two Lhasa apso dogs, the first dogs he had ever encountered, almost immediately began to romp with Joel, much to his delight.

Creation Implications
The Bible declares that God created human beings so that they can experience and express fellowship and love. The research by Reddy’s team adds to the accumulating scientific evidence that humans are designed to experience and express fellowship and love with one another, with God, and with the nephesh animals at the highest levels permitted by the laws of physics. Their research affirms the declarations in Genesis 1 that we humans are uniquely created in the image of God.

Endnotes

1. Rachna B. Reddy et al., “Do Children Help Dogs Spontaneously?” CABI Digital Library: Human–Animal Interactions (January 16, 2023), doi:10.1079/hai.2023.0001.
2. Felix Warneken and Michael Tomasello, “Altruistic Helping in Human Infants and Young Chimpanzees,” Science 311, no. 5765 (March 3, 2006): 1301–1303, doi:10.1126/science.1121448.
3. Felix Warneken, “Precocious Prosociality: Why Do Young Children Help?” Child Development Perspectives 9, no. 1 (March 2015): 1–6, doi:10.1111/cdep.12101.

The post Children and Dogs Are Designed to Help One Another appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

Tear Volume Experiments
Eight researchers in Japan led by Kaori Murata conducted a set of experiments on 18 dogs in which they measured the tear volume in the dogs’ eyes under a range of emotional interactions between the dogs and humans the dogs knew.¹ They performed the Schirmer tear test (STT), which measures the volume of teardrops with absorbent paper that’s placed against the dog’s eyeball. After 1 minute the researchers recorded how far up the paper the wetness from the tears had crept.

Among the 18 dogs, Murata’s team found a 10% average increase in tear volume when the dogs, after being separated from their owners for 24 hours, were reunited with them. When Murata and her colleagues performed the same test between the dogs and nonowners that the dogs were familiar with, they did not measure a statistically significant increase in tear volume.

In a separate experiment with 22 dogs, the researchers added the hormone oxytocin directly to the dogs’ eyes. Oxytocin, also known as the love hormone, stimulates the emotions of trust, empathy, and relationship bonding. The addition of oxytocin to the eyes caused even more tears to well up in the dogs’ eyes when they were reunited with their owners. The researchers concluded that an elevation in oxytocin generated by the happy reunion likely caused the extra tears.

Murata’s team anticipated that some scientists might presume the dogs’ eyes reacted to the added oxytocin as an irritant, which generated extra tears to flush it out from the eyes. Hence, in a control experiment, Murata and her colleagues added a substance of similar texture as oxytocin to the dogs’ eyes. In this case, they observed no extra tear production.

In a third set of experiments, 74 humans rated their impressions of 10 photographs of dogs. The human subjects consistently felt greater care and love for the dogs with the moister eyes.

Personal Observations
When I read the research paper, I questioned the claim that dogs only shed tears of joy when they’re reunited with their owners. The researchers stated that they saw no such response when the dogs were greeted by another human that they knew. I reacted because a friend’s dog wells up with tears almost every time I greet the dog.

I think the sample sizes of dogs and humans in Murata’s team’s experiments were too small. I believe there are dogs that have just as strong, or nearly as strong, an emotional bond to a human friend of the owner as they do their owner. In the case of my friend’s dog, my friend says that I am their dog’s best friend. I get their dog’s most exuberant greeting.

Philosophical and Theological Conclusions
In my book Hidden Treasures in the Book of Job,² I describe and explain the biblical doctrines that God created and designed the nephesh (soulish) animals to serve and please humans and to form relationships with humans. Dogs, more than any other nephesh animal, exhibit these characteristics. The research achieved by Murata’s team adds to the weight of scientific evidence for these biblical doctrines. Their research also suggests that additional experiments can be performed on human-dog interactions that could provide yet even more scientific evidence for the nephesh animal-human connection.

As I explain in my book, God designed the nephesh animals not only to help meet humans’ physical and emotional needs but also to teach humans several important spiritual lessons about themselves and about God. One such lesson affirmed by the experiments is that just as dogs express joy when they are reunited in relationship with a higher being, so, too, do humans when they are reunited in relationship with the higher Being. I think I speak for many Christians that when I sense I’m being reunited with my Creator-Savior-God to an extraordinary degree, I express tears of joy.

Endnotes

1. Kaori Murata et al., “Increase of Tear Volume in Dogs after Reunion with Owners Is Mediated by Oxytocin,” Current Biology 32, no. 16 (August 26, 2022): PR869–R870, doi:10.1016/j.cub.2022.07.031.
2. Hugh Ross, Hidden Treasures in the Book of Job: How the Oldest Book in the Bible Answers Today’s Scientific Questions (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011).

The post Dogs, Too, Shed Tears of Joy appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

My answer: The Bible does not give specifics on the size of the Garden of Eden. However, according to Genesis 2, it must have been big enough to contain a large number of diverse nephesh (soulish) animals and small enough that Adam, by himself, could tend it.

The Garden of Eden’s location is where the four named rivers in Genesis 2, the Tigris, Euphrates, Pishon, and Gihon, come close together. Genesis 2 states the sources of these rivers, the land of Asshur, the land of Havilah, and the land of Cush, respectively. Two of these rivers, the Tigris and Euphrates, still flow today. The Pishon and the Gihon dried up soon after the close of the last ice age. All four rivers flow or flowed into the Persian Gulf. They come close together in the southeastern part of today’s Persian Gulf. Presently, this location is about 200 feet below sea level. During most of the last ice age, it was above sea level. The star in the accompanying satellite image below of the Arabian Peninsula shows what I believe to be the likely location of the Garden of Eden.

The post Where Was the Garden of Eden? appeared first on Reasons to Believe.