Our understanding of the beginning chapters of the book of Genesis are critical to our understanding of the rest of the Bible and even the gospel itself. The writer of Hebrews states “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it the elders obtained a good testimony. By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.” (Hebrews 11:1-3). Faith in the creation of the universe by God is so important, that it begins the “By faith” statements of Hebrews 11. We cannot misunderstand creation, for if we do, we will misunderstand God’s purpose for that creation, including the redemption of that creation. The Creator of the universe, is also the Redeemer of the universe (John 1:1-3). Pastor Joe Morecraft [1] explains why the creation account must be taken as history.
Genesis 1-2 is a special revelation from God explaining how and why He created the universe. It must be taken as an actual historical account, as relating to the events that actually occurred, for three reasons. (1) Genesis 1-2 stands in close relation to the rest of the book of Genesis. The remainder of the book presupposed the creation account just as the creation account prepares for what follows. (2) The characteristics of Hebrew poetry are lacking; and the marks of historical narrative characterize it. (3) The New Testament and the Old Testament regard specific events mentioned in Genesis 1-3 as actually having taken place: the creation of light by God’s Word (2 Cor. 4:6); the presence of thorns as a sign of the curse in Genesis 3 (Heb. 6:7, 8); the creation of the world by a Divinely-spoken Word (Ps. 33:9); the separation of land and firmament by God’s Word (2 Pet. 3:5); the creation of the universe out of nothing (Heb. 11:3); the creation of the world in six days and a Sabbath (Ex. 20:11); the creation of Eve out of Adam (1 Cor. 11:8). [2]
We must take Genesis 1-2 as a historical account because that is how it is written and because the whole of Scripture affirms the historicity of the passage. Any other view of the creation account is contrary to the Word of God. May God be pleased to sanctify the Church and call her back to a right understanding of creation. Let all people of the world stand in awe of God, like the psalmist.
By the Word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth and all their host. Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him. For He spoke and it was done; He commanded and it stood fast. Psalm 33:6-9
Image via Wikipedia
1. Dr. Joe Morecraft is pastor of Chalcedon Presbyterian Church and a professor at Christ College. His five-volume commentary on the Westminster Larger Catechism in now available from American Vision.
2. Morecraft III, Joseph, Authentic Christianity: An Exposition of the Theology and Ethics of the Westminster Larger Catechism Volume 1, Powder Springs: American Vision Press, p 533.
So Young or Old Earth?
Thank you for visiting the website and commenting. As we are a college committed to the word of God, we believe in 6-day, 24-hour creation, occurring about 6,000 years ago. We believe that this is the only true way of understanding Genesis in its historical context. Day-age, gap, and allegorical theories of interpretation do not do justice to the historical nature of Genesis.
Very interesting! I certainly love and honor the great Archbishop Ussher, who was an Anglican Reformed. As I am also. I respect the Young Earth position I really do, as Ussher, etc. My father (RIP) was scientist, and I simply grew-up with the Old Earth Creation position. Being raised Roman Catholic. But I don’t believe the Holy Scripture talks about the “age” of the earth, strictly speaking. And since even the best of human science seems to indicate that the earth is much older than 6,000 years, I must not see God speaking with two different voices, one creationally, and then one theologically. So like Kline and Ridderbos, and it appears even Calvin, I hold to a somewhat “Framework” position. Note, I am myself one that holds both the D.Phil. and Th.D. (Romans, and NT Studies). I am a semi-retired priest-presbyter, and a Brit. And btw, I am one of those Federal Vision Calvinists! Note, I even read and like Barth!
But best of blessings! 
Thanks for commenting again. I would like to know your view of the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11. When you trace these back, you arrive at the conclusion that the earth is around 6,000 years old.
I am actually a scientist and I believe that science rightly understood points to the fact of a recent creation. I would encourage you to to look at some resources from Answers in Genesis at the following link: http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers#/topic/age-of-the-earth
Science can never contradict Scripture. It must be our highest authority, for it is the revelation of God. It is God-breathed. I would be glad to discuss these things more with you, if you would like.
Yes, I would see some kind of fluidity and gaps in the Genesis genealogies, following other and many scholars, from von Rad on…like John J. Davis, and Gordon Wenham. Note too R.K. Harrison and P.J. Wiseman’s work also. But see David Bryan’s work: ‘A Revaluation of Genesis 4 and 5 in Light of Recent Studies in Genealogical Fluidity.’ Again, the Holy Scripture is the Revelation of God, and this is always spiritual and theological. The doctrine of God only becomes “incarnational” in the birth and doctrine of Christ! “The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” (Matt. 1:1)
Indeed, note, Heb. 1: 1-3. And Christ Jesus is the Last Adam, of God, (Rom. 5 / 1 Cor. 15 … and is Himself the “New Creation” of God (2 Cor. 5:16-17, etc.)